[J Kimble (FLICKOFLASH)]

I perfer super Fat U shape on treble side soft V bass side

Hold your hand out in front of your face make a relaxed C shape

[r akers (wrick)]

Big and fat like my 62 Fender Custom Tele.Never have come across another neck on Fenders or Gibson that felt like this.After three refrets and grinding the finish from playing,still straight as a arrow.

[P Petiniot (Blues4U)]

I have a neck that I feel is the perfect neck for me--It's only on one guitar though.

It's a Robert Cray Sig strat neck that I have on a partscaster. Not too fat, not too skinny, not to wide, not too narrow---It is perfect. I have had other Cray necks that were too fat, too thin as well.

These necks were based on Cray's 61 Hard Tail strat with a full, medium C--

The neck on my DC STudio is my favorite Gibson neck. It is suppose to be a 59 rounded profile I believe--It feels just a tad bit thinner than that but a little fuller than a 60's slim taper---It is perfect as well--

[M Ryan (Malikon)]

thick shouldered 'D' neck. Almost feels like a soft 2x4.

[P Petiniot (Blues4U)]

M Ryan (Malikon), on 04 January 2011 - 08:11 PM, said:

thick shouldered 'D' neck. Almost feels like a soft 2x4.

I have had my hands on a few of those--Many of the U shaped Fender necks were like that. Not even soft shouldered--just 2x4's

[. . (Tightpants)]

The neck on my '77 Deluxe. Fatter than a '60's neck, but slimmer than a '50's neck. Just about perfect.

Interestingly, the neck on my '84 Jackson Rhoads is nearly identical. Found out from Grover Jackson himself that it was intentional, they copied the profile on Randy's Les Paul's neck for his guitars. Kinda cool.

[G Kenyon (Diesel Genny)]

Slim 1960 with slightly flattened back (i.e. wide curavature, slim neck).

[J Hall (Jonny Rocker)]

I really like the 50-60's profile mix on the current SGs and Flying Vs.

[S Sill (Scott Sill)]

G Kenyon (Diesel Genny), on 09 January 2011 - 02:19 PM, said:

Slim 1960 with slightly flattened back (i.e. wide curavature, slim neck).

I second that one.

[m dailey (milod)]

I have kinda mixed emotions.

I like a thin neck from a pretty flat fingerboard to back, and more of a "c" sorta shape.

Back in the early 1970s I really blew it because I had a Hagstrom solidbody 12 I should have kept. The fingerboard was a tad narrow for a 12 - narrower than acoustics I'd been playing, anyway, that seemed about as wide as a classical neck - but pretty thin. I swapped for a Guild version of an SG of that era (S100c) that has a really nice and thin neck.

Although I love the Guild and the SG type body, I've regretted the swap since I wonder what would have happened had I just used the Hag as a 6. I'm guessing the nut was something like 1.75 or a tad more - but it's hard to recall after nearly 40 years.

Anyway, that'll give an idea what I tend to like. But then, I started on a classical guitar and even when playing rock and country with a flat pick, still considered myself more of a fingerstyle player. So...

m

[I Stoddard (Low-B 5-String)]

I love the neck on my '69 - '70 LP Deluxe which I believe is the "60's slim-taper". Whenever I try out a neck whose profile is far away from it, I have a "this feels slow" response. I picked up a Michael Kelly axe one time, and the neck profile felt almost circular, lol. I put it down swiftly and gently. OTOH, I snapped up an Explorer-shaped LTD whose neck felt like lightning (and happened to have a gorgeous spalted maple top on mahogany). PRS necks are reasonably slim, too.

I have to wonder how much of this preference we have is based on impressions of our first axe, or earliest "good" axe, and how much is based on our anatomical/medical/ergonomic issues.

[m dailey (milod)]

I'd agree that a lot has to do with our early experience with first guitars.

But ergonomics have something to do with it too. In fact, I had a "conversation" in the exec forum here with Epi1, Jim R, about a Dot feeling as if the nut were narrower than other Epis. No, same width as proven by measurements.

It just felt narrower because of the geometry of holding the guitar while seated and playing chords in the root position.

So...I'll wager that to an extent, the geometry of one's hold on a give guitar makes any neck shape feel somewhat different to different players. And some of that, too, may come from one's experience with different styles of guitar and habits one developed relatively early.

m

[D Schulteis (Deej)]

Agreed on the first experience making your own personal comfort zone. My first [Gibson] was a 73 SG which I understand was a 61 reissue, without the reissue label... but a very slim neck. My father purchased this for me very early on in the learning guitar days... just after I proved it wasn't just a "phase" and that I'd stick with it.

I didn't play Les Pauls for years, less my Custom (60's neck, that I can tell), due to neck thickness. My Studio has a 59 neck, and is now the guitar of gigging choice - but I used it to play out on and forced myself to it because I didn't want to bring the vintage or custom into bars. I recently tried a Studio that also had a 59 neck spec'd, and I just didn't bond with it enough to pull the trigger. I do understand in recent years, this is the neck on all Studios, but, unfortunately, the 50's reissue tribute is close, but just outside of my comfort zone. I have a 60's on order. The BFG is a 50's rounded, and I am comfortable on it, but I didn't find myself picking it up as much, so it became an alt-tuned guitar for a mere 3 songs a night/practice.

I believe each neck is hand sanded in the factory, leaving some variances to chance, which would explain why one 59 neck was good for me and not another, and why the BFG is more comfortable to me than the 50's tribute, even though they are spec'd with the same neck profile - the BFG and my studio may have gotten just a little more sanding done. Which is why I firmly believe that one must try out a guitar before buying... wish I had that opportunity more often, but alas, smaller town.

I'd say I'm firmly a 60's slim taper person, with the 59 rounded still possibly in my comfort zone.

And also agreed on orientation. If you sit down in a GC and try out a guitar, and then strap it low after buying, it may not work out for you as you might have hoped. I actually don't strap 50's necks as low as slim tapers, as they are easier for me to play up higher on my gut.

[m dailey (milod)]

Deej...

RE: Gibson necks...

HenryJ said yup at one point, each Gibbie neck is hand finished and there will be slight variation. Hey, if the big boss sez you're best off trying several to see what you personally prefer, who am I to suggest otherwise. <grin>

BTW, I never was into wearing a guitar "low." Each shape will be held differently, but for me the best standing setup is to have the guitar roughly held as though in a "classical guitar" sorta position. Golly, Yup, that's how I started playing.

m

[J Luekemeyer (ACELUEK)]

Man, when I go from playing my Jackson RR24M to my Gibson R8, I can tell how fat the neck on the R8 is.. But I like both necks, pefer the thicker R8..

[J Kimble (FLICKOFLASH)]

Fat n Chunky

[m dailey (milod)]

Good grief... that neck is thicker, I think, than my 1950s Harmony H65 archtop electric.

m

[I Stoddard (Low-B 5-String)]

J Kimble (FLICKOFLASH), on 23 March 2011 - 03:36 AM, said:

Fat n Chunky

Wow! At the peghead???? Wow! Definitive.

[r akers (wrick)]

Now that looks like my 62 Tele,super fat and comfortable to play.Hard to switch guitars after playing it as it makes others feel like a chore and I have small hands.Hard to find necks like that anymore,like everything else,a thing of the past.

[G De Blasio (LtKojak)]

I have seven guitars, from 335 copies to acoustic nylon acoustic guitar, and I have no problems whatsoever playing any of them.

I prefer thicker than thinner when it's about necks, but I'm cool with any of them. Picked or fingered. Acoustic or electric.