Wider Fretboard Guitars?

Schnozz

G&L are great because although the neck profiles are wide, they're rounded so you have decent support for your thumb, whereas I hate thin necks - They make me cramp up while playing rhythm.

mark123

All the epiphone dots i've owned have had wide necks 

goldtop

The Lynch 'Kamikaze' signature guitar I had was great - a 7-string width at the nut, but with just 6 strings. Rare and spendy though.

Perhaps a local luthier could do a nut swap/etc on a cheaper 7-string guitar?

guitarjack66

chrisj1602 said:

A quick Google shows a new Affinity has a 42mm nut width, but some older results show 41mm, have you measured yours?

I just picked an Epiphone Les Paul as a random alternative and that is listed as 43mm, so maybe something more Gibson style might feel easier, with the flatter fretboard too.

It was a chinese made one from 2005 so may have fitted in with your old style being thinner theory.

guitarjack66

Balrog68 said:

Realistically the difference in nut width in guitars is not that much..only a couple of millimetres, unless you move to a classical guitar which has already been mentioned. My classical guitar is 51mm wide at the nut.
I don`t know how experienced you are as a player but correct posture, positioning and technique will have a massive effect on your ability to progress. You may find that changing the angle of the guitar on your lap or the angle of the neck might enable you to make the chords etc, without catching the other strings and muting or buzzing.

    

Only about 18 months into my journey but,with respect,I have 3 acoustics and play them every day and understand what feels wide or thin to me and what doesnt. My favourite acoustic neck is an old Squier jumbo,very cheap but comfortable. Les Paul juniors were also mentioned to me by my local tech.

steamabacus

John Etheridge likes a wide fretboard and his Fret King signature model has a 45mm nut width. I'm not sure if they are still in production (released 4 or 5 years ago). Sort of like an ES335 ...

carlos

goldtop said:

The Lynch 'Kamikaze' signature guitar I had was great - a 7-string width at the nut, but with just 6 strings. Rare and spendy though.

Perhaps a local luthier could do a nut swap/etc on a cheaper 7-string guitar?

Cleartone conversions?

carlos

Balrog68 said:

Realistically the difference in nut width in guitars is not that much..only a couple of millimetres, unless you move to a classical guitar which has already been mentioned. My classical guitar is 51mm wide at the nut.
I don`t know how experienced you are as a player but correct posture, positioning and technique will have a massive effect on your ability to progress. You may find that changing the angle of the guitar on your lap or the angle of the neck might enable you to make the chords etc, without catching the other strings and muting or buzzing.

    

That's the correct answer that no one wants to hear. Nut width isn't even a factor unless the space between strings changes, too. Even then it's an extra mm or two divided by 5 string gaps.

Otherwise all it's doing is adding width outside the E strings. Good for stopping strings from slipping off the fretboard but irrelevant for fingering chords. 

Bigsby

Teacherphil said:

I have a 2014 Gibson SG with a wide neck. I love it.

2014 Gibsons have the normal neck width  - but they have fret-over-binding, so it feels as if you've got more width (the binding Gibson USA use is pretty thick - some usable fret gets removed to create the nibs). 

2015 Gibson USA models had wider necks as others have mentioned (same string spacing), and the 'High Performance' models of 2016-2018 ranges also had wider necks (called 'soloist' by Gibson), but the extra width was about half way between the regular width and the 2015 range. All of those models also feature fret-over-binding, so feel spacious. 

My own experience of Gibsons is that anything with fret-over-binding gives me noticeably more 'wiggle room' with finger vibrato on the 'e' strings, whereas I always end up hitting the nibs at some point or other on Gibson USA bound necks (I may just be a bit clumsy!). Gibson Custom Shop is in between, due to the thinner binding, and I'm pretty safe on those too, regardless of the nibs.  

liamon

My MIM Tele deluxe (2005ish) has quite a wide fretboard. 

Basher

Some of the Eastman electrics such as the T386 semi have a 1-3/4" (44.5mm) nut width, which is wide for an electric. TBH, that's what puts me off them.

They're hardly budget guitars but not quite in the Gibson price bracket. Obviously better value used.

  

Teacherphil

https://www.gak.co.uk/en/gibson-2014-sg-standard-walnut/91099

This is the 2014 model I have. It may just be the binding but the neck is miles wider than my 2005 SG classic, 2017 firebird and les paul tribute T gold top.

guitarjack66

I think fretboard and neck shape are very important but very rarely are they mentioned in reviews or specs. Everybody's hands and fingers are different and the same guitars can feel totally different to many different people.

proggy

I bought a Squier Affinity Tele years ago and had exactly the same problem, due to my big fingers. I got rid of it after a few weeks.
Fender Telecasters, Mexican, Japanese or USA have wider necks and I've never had a problem with any of them.
If you like Telecasters and want a nice chunky neck for not too much money, try a Fender Baja Tele, there's still quite a few of them around.

Rocky1991

Gibson USA sg specials (the ones with humbuckers and dot markers) are wide 

pintspiller

The Partington Gordon-Smiths are wide and flat (6-string and 12-string guitars used same neck I believe), not sure of the Auden ones. It was very racey, despite the girth.

I bought an early-70s SG Special a year later think it would be a great backup for the GS, but it had an overly narrow fingerboard in contrast and rarely got played.

TINMAN82

Most of the Gibson USA standard (not reissue) models I’ve tried including Les Paul, SG, Firebird and Flying Vs have comfortable string spacing at the nut (it’s string spacing rather than nut width that counts really). I had a Memphis 335 that was tight and nut string spacing measured significantly less than my LP. But overall Gibson is roomier than Fender in my experience, even the more modern Fenders with 42.8mm nuts.

My Martin 000 is 1 3/4 at the nut but I agree that’s a bit wide for an electric unless you’re mainly a fingerstyle player. 

Kebabkid

Not cheap but the Tyler Strats have wide and full necks. James Tyler based it on his '59 Strat, which is funny as Steve Lukather's signature EBMM Luke's are based on his '59 Strat and that's like comparing Laurel & Hardy - the Luke's are very, very thin

WezV

i played around with nut width on my early guitars... I made 6 string electrics with everything from 38-50mm

the 50mm one had standard string spacing.  it was on odd request from a mate so we gave it a go after much convincing. He wanted more room for bending the outer strings apparently.  He later admitted it was a bit too wide.   Was building for another mate at the time who wanted 46mm.  That was more manageable.

38mm was still quite playable, but fret end bevels were left steeper and string spacing took things quite close to the edge near the nut... it became a more standard width as you went down the fretboard.  the wider string spacing meant it wasn't too cramped, but not ideal

These days i still like things a wider wider, and have settled around 43-44mm as standard. 

guitarjack66

Are string spacings a standard size or can the differ? Is it dependent on the nut width or entirely independent of it?