Most of my guitars have the Fender American Standard neck contour, which is like the Warmoth standard thin. I’ve also got a Clapton-soft V on my tele and another strat with a Wizard profile. Plus, I got my '72 Les Paul Deluxe with the slim taper…
I like having multiple types of necks to play on. I find it makes me play differently when I pick up different guitars. My Wizard neck makes me want to start tapping like crazy, but playing my V takes me to the americana/country arena.
I’m agnostic. I’ve got several guitars, and the neck profiles range around a bit. If pressed I might say I prefer the necks with a thin carve, but sometimes I pull out the chunkier (although probably not all that chunky by WordMan’s standards) and enjoy the thicker profile. It’s all good.
WordMan, are there any general guidelines for which Strat, Tele, Les Paul, etc had thin vs chunky necks? Did they all start chunky in the 50’s and evolve from there? What lines of guitars evolve their neck profile across which years? If I see a blurb about, say, a “60s Neck Strat”, what would I expect? Or a “50’s Les Paul”? You get the idea – are there any generalizations to be made?
Oh lordie, yes. Let me do a quick mental dump and let’s see what sense we can make of it:
There are no Laws or Rules for necks, really - they were hand carved for most of the years in question, so each one varied. However, it is relevant to discuss trends.
Guitars in the 30’s tended to have a heavy V neck with a wide fingerboard. Those Gibsons and Stellas and Kays in the old B&W photos of Black Bluesmen had baseball bats/ well almost triangular baseball bat necks.
1940’s - really, really big, but much rounder. Big in part because of the war - they had to leave the metal tension rods out because the metal wasn’t available.
1950’s - really big - both Fender and Gibson introduced electric guitars with fairly large necks. Some like the '57 Fender Strat, were known for having a soft-but-obvious V profile in the neck; Les Pauls were known for having a chunky neck
1960’s - intro of the Slim Profile neck - Fender was getting slimmer by the end of the 50’s and Gibson began marketing the Slim Profile neck around '60 or '61 I think
1970’s and 80’s - the trend to heavy guitars with slim fast necks in the 70’s paves the way for EVH and SuperStrats with wide-thin, almost classical-profile necks for shredding and hair metal.
1990’s - Today - a huge retro movement takes us back to the 30’s - 50’s profiles, but not at the expense of thinner necks, just alongside. A golden age, frankly, of variety in neck profiles across all types and qualities of guitars.
Both Gibson and Fender have “branded” years to = specific neck profiles. So Gibson Historic Les Paul Reissues - also called VOS for Vintage Original Spec - have different designations - one for each year from 1952, when the Les Paul was first introduced, to 1960, when the Les Paul as we know it was discontinued and the SG shape was introduced. An “R9” - a Gibson Custom Shop Historic/VOS 1959 Les Paul Sunburst - has a medium-chunky neck with a bit of a D profile, i.e., with a bit of shoulder vs. a round C or a V. An R8, in addition to being a plaintop guitar (i.e., the maple is not as figured as on an R9) has an even bigger neck vs. an R9. An R7, in addition to being a Goldtop, has a big neck, but a different profile vs. the R8. A specialty music store that moves a ton of Gibsons via the internet just got Gibson to design a"'55 Profile"that they are marketing as part of their wrap-tailpiece not-quite-reissues (these guitars never really existed back then).
As for Fender - they have specific-year reissues, too and each features a different neck carve. So a Custom Shop '51 Nocaster (so named because it just said Fender on the headstock while they were waiting for the renamed Telecaster decals to arrive) has a very big neck, the biggest Fender was making - coupled with the fact that the guitar was very well made and this limited run has a great reputation and will likely be very collectible down the road. I love to have the scratch to just buy one and have it around. Fenders other models follow the general trends I outline chronologically above: so if they have a '62 Relic model, it is a safe bet it with have a medium-to-slim profile, certainly not chunky. Their '57 has a soft V in it, etc…
What’s interested is that these “branded carves” don’t necessarily reflect reality. Yes, the '50’s Les Pauls had chunkier necks vs. the '60’s Slim Profiles, but not nearly as big and big-shouldered as the R8’s and R9’s. If you surf the Les Paul Forum in the Vintage Section that is one of the biggest beefs by the cork sniffers over there - that the neck carves just aren’t right vs. the real deal. I have a '57 Les Paul Special and kinda agree - it is a handful but in that deceptively-doesn’t-feel-big sorta way; and it is neutral-to-very-soft-V, i.e., the opposite of having shoulders / a D profile.
All for now - does that help?
Good lord - I am a hopeless geek.
That’s why we love you; you make the rest of us look normal. 
(I’m only teasing; there’s nothing on this green earth could make me look normal.)
Immensely, thank you. I’m totally bookmarking your post, if only so I can read the guitar-porn flyers and understand what they’re trying to sell me.
So THAT’s what the R means. I was looking at Les Pauls and I couldn’t figure it out, they all looked the same to me.
… because the pictures were all head on.
Update: No idea where my freaking calipers are. They’re not in my tool chest. Which means someone probably borrowed them.
Really interesting question. I would class myself as Polytheistic - I wouldn’t want my steel string acoustic or my Tele to have the same neck as my classicals, and I would find a classical with a Tele/steel string kind of neck to be utterly useless.
(At the Montréal Guitar Show this year, I got to play a classical made by Linda Manzer for Pat Metheny. It was a beautifully crafted instrument with neck that was about 1 5/8ths and, while I totally understand its appeal to a jazz/rock player, I hated that axe.)
I care far more about the width of the neck than the profile. I don’t like to go any narrower than 1 3/4s, and even at that, there are some classical pieces that just won’t transfer over to steel string or electric. 2 inches on all my classicals - that’s just a requirement. My 8-string has a 1 3/4 neck, and as a result it isn’t as useful a guitar as the Tele - there’s just not enough room to spread the strings apart like I’d like. It’s my most collectible guitar and my least useful. There. I said it out loud. You still can’t have it, though…
It has been really interesting switching between a 64 cm and 65 cm scale length, too. It doesn’t take me much time at all to switch between electric, steelie and small-scale classical. Switching between the two classicals has been really odd, though I’m getting used to it. I didn’t go for a fan-fret on the Baritone, partly because I’ll be switching between the two guitars in the same concert, sometimes in the same set, and I just don’t know if I could get my fingers around the fan-fret/straight fret difference in time.
I prefer a D-profile on the neck, but I’ve played slim line necks as well and not hated them. The one thing I just don’t like is a V-profile - I was looking after a friend’s Martin for a year while he was in Japan, and the neck profile on that just forced me into a thumb-wrap, whether I liked the idea or not. (I almost never thumb wrap, mostly because my thumb’s too short. I’ll occasionally slip the low F# into a D chord, but that Bruce Cockburn thing where he thumbs the low G in a C chord is just beyond me.)
I find Breau-barres (Breau barres are my nickname for when you play two adjacent strings at the same fret with the tip of any finger while leaving the strings on either side free to be played open, or with a lower fingered note. Can be done with 1, 2, 3 or 4.) difficult on the classical, much easier on the steelie, Tele or 8-string, but ‘5 o’clock bells’ sounds so much better on the classical so I live with it.
For me, the acid test on a classical is the Villa-Lobos 4th Prelude. Third phrase of the opening, the melody goes F#-E-D-C on the fifth, B-G hammer to the A on the sixth and hold it for a whole bar while the chord which follows goes A F natural, C, B, E using the open fifth string for the repeated chords. (1) - 0, (2) - 0, (3) - 5 with the fourth finger, (4) - 3 with the first finger, (5) - 0, (6) - 5 with the third finger.
He wanted to hear the A of the melody sustained all the way through the bar and the chords diminishing so that the melody A could be heard over the chords. If the strings are too close together, you’re either going to clam the open A with 3 or with 1, or you’ll accidentally bump the sixth string with the right hand thumb and cut off the melody A. (2:23 in this link for how beautifully Julian Bream does it.) If I can’t play that passage without clams, I’m not going to like that guitar.
Long, rambling and incoherent, even for me.
Nah - basically makes sense: you’re a classical guy and prefer neck profiles that favor that basic playing posture, but are okay with non-classical necks unless they are too narrow. Got it.
Yeah, neck width has as much of an influence on feel as depth. I prefer 1 3/4" but can make due with 1 11/16" - narrower than that is a non-starter.
Oh - and while I get that “Breau-barres” is an *homage *to Lenny Breau who used the technique - aren’t they just a double-stop? Just want to make sure I am not missing a distinction. I use double-stops as needed randomly in my playing - sometimes jamming a finger over two strings just gets it done. 
I think the distinction Le Ministre is making is that his Breau barres involve the tip of the finger rather than the flat of the last joint, so that the adjacent higher strings are not fretted or muted. Most rockers play double stops with the flat of the finger, which has the additional effect of muting other strings. He’s talking about fretting two strings with his fingertip, which would require a narrow neck or fat fingers.
Ah, got it. I do both, but yeah, tend to favor ones that involve muting given all the crunch in my tone…
I am solidly in the Indifferent “don’t care” camp. I’ve played Gretsch, Gibson, and Fenderelectrics. I’ve played Epiphone and Aria 12 string acoustics, my Takamine 6 string dreadnought, classical guitars, and who knows what else. All the necks were different, even among the same brand and models sometimes.
If it sounds good, it’s a good one. If it sounds like ass, no playability or action will fix that.
http://www.fuzzhugger.com/pipe-amp.html
Someone pointed me at these. Apparently, they sound good for practice amps. The concept’s funny enough that it’s worth sharing.
Edit: Timeout resulted in a duplicate post.
On the Acoustic Guitar Forum: restoration of a 40’s small-bodied Martin acoustic…
Haven’t posted in this thread in a while…
I’m still chugging away with my weekly guitar lessons. I’ve gotten fairly good at a few Foreigner songs (Blue Morning, Blue Day; Double Vision; Hot Blooded; Head Games), and am now working on Sweet’s Fox on the Run.
I’m starting to think about upgrading my guitar. I have an Epi Les Paul Special II, which came as part of a starter set. It’s not a horrible guitar, and I like the feel of a LP. but the low E has a buzz which several adjustments haven’t been able to entirely conquer. So, I’m thinking about upgrading to a better LP-type model. Any thoughts on what I should be looking at, assuming that I don’t want to spend a fortune?
What do you think? G.A.S. enablement is my specialty.
What is your price point? Does it have to be Gibson or one of Gibson’s lines like Epiphone? Any non-typical Les Paul features you would be interested in, e.g., a whammy bar or single coil pickups? Any particular finishes or looks you prefer?
Details, man.
Price point: I’d like to stay under $500.
Doesn’t have to be a Gibson (I suspect that the price point probably precludes a lot of Gibson LPs).
I don’t need a whammy (I think that’d just complicate my life at this stage :-). I’m not wedded to humbuckers.
I like the sunburst finish that I have now, but I’m not wedded to it, either – in fact, I think I’d like something a little brighter-looking (like a red).
I’d check out a local Guitar Center and try a number of Gibson-layout guitars within that price point, including Epiphones, Ibanez, PRS, etc. I can’t point you to a specific model, because at that price point quality and wood-quality can vary a lot so you need to play a few.
PM sent about a guitar I have.
Makes sense…I appreciate the advice. Looks like I may need to spend an afternoon at Guitar Center – darn!