Classical guitar neck angle geometry
I have always wondered about the Hauser and Torres type designs in that they are true flat tops and have a zero neck angle. If a negative neck angle was built in the fingerboard of a flat top, the FB extension would have to bend down to meet the top and create fingerboard flatness issues.
This flat top/zero angle neck situation can result in a low saddle and less than optimum string break angle. I have reviewed blueprints for Ramirez, Hauser and Torres and they all illustrate a low saddle height indicating this was normal for the design.
After the guitar has aged and there is a slight increase in neck relief this can become even more troublesome. Kenny Hill advocates a double action truss rod for classical guitars just for this reason.
Does anyone out there know if other builders are shooting for a slightly higher saddle by using wedges of wood under the fingerboard or tapering the fingerboard (thinner at the nut and thicker at the last fret)? If this taper was 1-2 degrees it might be quite helpful.
I would think that it would be a delicate balance to taper the fingerboard though....too thin at the nut and the overall neck stiffness goes down adding too much neck relief. On the other hand too thick at the nut and an increasing thickness to the last fret may over stiffen the neck and not allow for much relief.
I have built many Hausers and have been very happy with the sound and playability. However, a prominent player in the area gave me his opinion that my saddle heights were to low and he prefers to see a slightly higher saddle for future adjustments and better sound transmission due to higher string break angles.
I wonder about the same issue with true flat top acoustics as well such a s the 0 and 00 body Martins.
Thanks,
Dave
This flat top/zero angle neck situation can result in a low saddle and less than optimum string break angle. I have reviewed blueprints for Ramirez, Hauser and Torres and they all illustrate a low saddle height indicating this was normal for the design.
After the guitar has aged and there is a slight increase in neck relief this can become even more troublesome. Kenny Hill advocates a double action truss rod for classical guitars just for this reason.
Does anyone out there know if other builders are shooting for a slightly higher saddle by using wedges of wood under the fingerboard or tapering the fingerboard (thinner at the nut and thicker at the last fret)? If this taper was 1-2 degrees it might be quite helpful.
I would think that it would be a delicate balance to taper the fingerboard though....too thin at the nut and the overall neck stiffness goes down adding too much neck relief. On the other hand too thick at the nut and an increasing thickness to the last fret may over stiffen the neck and not allow for much relief.
I have built many Hausers and have been very happy with the sound and playability. However, a prominent player in the area gave me his opinion that my saddle heights were to low and he prefers to see a slightly higher saddle for future adjustments and better sound transmission due to higher string break angles.
I wonder about the same issue with true flat top acoustics as well such a s the 0 and 00 body Martins.
Thanks,
Dave
Views: 2208
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Tim Mace on
-
Cumpiano's website discusses this in more detail possibly than you'll find here.Basically nylon have the 0-neg and steel string uses a pos angle.That's all I know and you seem to know anyway. Planing the fingerboard is key
to compensating for bridge height on classicals.Where or how it's planed is discussed also.
© 2024 Created by Frank Ford.
Powered by
