| Author | Message | ||
| 88persuader
Advanced Member Username: 88persuader Post Number: 260 Registered: 5-2004 |
I guess this question should go to the actual Alembic builders but here it is anyway. Is it really much harder to build a neck through guitar/bass then a set neck? Seems to me building a set neck bass like Alembic's entry level basses (As if any Alembic is "entry level") is just as much work as a neck through. It has to be straight, set up perfectly, notched, set into a body perfectly, made solid as a rock, etc, etc. A neck through starts with a longer set of wood but then is machined from top to bottom and the body is attached or built around it in a different fashion. I don't KNOW but it seems to me thinking about it that creating a beautiful set neck would be just as much work. I have to assume set necks are easier to make to keep the cost of the entry level line down. Any thoughts? Can anyone explain this to me? | ||
| haddimudd
Intermediate Member Username: haddimudd Post Number: 194 Registered: 6-2002 |
I am by no means a knowledgeable person in this matter. I can only assume that the cost saving aspect in this matter lies less in the construction of the neck but rather the body which needs to be built up from more pieces when you consider neck-through. I am not sure if this is really the case. Just throwing my guess... Hartmut | ||
| davehouck
Moderator Username: davehouck Post Number: 4722 Registered: 5-2002 |
Raymond; you may recall this previous thread, but in case you don't, it may help answer your question. Go here and then follow the link there to a previous thread that talks about neck and headstock construction. | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 344 Registered: 9-2005 |
Huh? Neck and headstock construction? I'm confused... that doesn't seem to address the question raised by 88persuader -although I read through the thread, and it was interesting... at least the parts I understood. That said, I'm actually a little curious about the answer to the question 88persuader posed. But... in addition, to that... I must ask, at this point, for someone (or someones) to educate me... what precisely, is a "volute", and what precisely is a "scarf joint?" I've seen these terms used, but it would be easier for me to grasp if there were an example, preferably a picture. Thanks, and I look forward to getting educated and seeing the answers to these questions! | ||
| bob
Senior Member Username: bob Post Number: 813 Registered: 11-2002 |
The point is that while it may seem not so difficult to glue the wings on a through neck, it is actually much more labor intensive to construct the headstock for these. The end of the neck is cut off at an angle, starting right around where the nut will be, and then another piece is glued on to become the peghead. After that come several layers of laminates to increase the strength. "Scarf joint" generally refers to a technique in which two pieces of stuff are glued together at a shallow angle (rather than just butted end to end), allowing for a larger gluing surface, and extra strength due to the overlapping of the two pieces. Here's a picture of the volute on a recent COTM. The volute is that bump on the back of the neck, roughly under the nut. This is just extra wood left in place to increase the strength. | ||
| lbpesq
Senior Member Username: lbpesq Post Number: 2028 Registered: 7-2004 |
"Volute" - New Jerseyeese meaning a lovable wise guy, as in "You big Volute, you" Scarf Joint: What Isadora Duncan was smoking just before her death. Bill, tgo | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 345 Registered: 9-2005 |
Waitasecond... you're saying... the peghead... the neck laminates in the peghead... are actually physically separate from those in the neck, and glued on to the neck? Like, if I had a "glue-undo" ray, and aimed it at an Alembic peghead, it would just completely melt off the neck? I'm assuming I'm misunderstanding what you've said, bob. So let me ask again. Consider my custom neck-thru in progress. There is one ebony laminate in the center. I THOUGHT it ran all the way up into the tip/end of the headstock/peghead. Are you saying that's not so, and it only runs up to the nut or so, and then another piece of ebony is glued to that "neck piece" of ebony? Thanks, Mark | ||
| 88persuader
Advanced Member Username: 88persuader Post Number: 261 Registered: 5-2004 |
I don't know The 8 string king ... that's what it sounds like to me. The the peg head isn't physically a single piece with the neck, it's attached. Perhaps this can be seen looking at photos in the factory to customer section of the forum? | ||
| tbrannon
Advanced Member Username: tbrannon Post Number: 297 Registered: 11-2004 |
EDIT- post deleted because I was wrong =) See posts below for the correct information. (Message edited by tbrannon on January 17, 2007) | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 1224 Registered: 6-2002 |
It had me wondering too - remember Steve's beheaded Europe/Series bass? It has ebony laminates and still the peghead broke off pretty cleanly at the scarf joint. So the peghead is a separate piece - probably sawn off the main neck, and then glued on again, at an angle, with the scarf joint. On my set-neck Epic, I can't tell if there's a joint, because the wings would cover up a joint between the central laminates and the peghead if there is one. Couple of reasons I could imagine: -1- You need a bigger chunk of wood if you want to have an integral peghead. -2- If there's a mishap when shaping the peghead, you would have to chuck the entire neck. -3- If you drop the bass on an integral peghead, it impacts the whole bass, and the damage could more easily be beyond repair. (Message edited by adriaan on January 17, 2007) | ||
| jacko
Senior Member Username: jacko Post Number: 997 Registered: 10-2002 |
Sorry toby but bob is absolutely right. the headstock is glued to the neck using a scarf joint. the reason you can't see the joint is because the outer wings of the headstock are glued on afterwards. if you take a look at my FTC thread you'll see it happening. I believe this is done to give an easily repairable joint should the instrument be dropped.(wouldn't like to ever find out though). Graeme | ||
| keith_h
Senior Member Username: keith_h Post Number: 671 Registered: 2-2005 |
The scarf also reduces the amount of wood that would be required to carve the angled headstock from one piece of wood. Keith | ||
| pace
Advanced Member Username: pace Post Number: 299 Registered: 4-2004 |
On my neck through you can actually see the scarf joint. I ordered my Essence SC 6 with a guitar-sized Crown headstock. At it's most narrow spot (strings 2 & 5) the headstock is about the same width as the nut; so the outer wings, while present in the wider sections of the headstock, do not mask the scarf joint. Having 10 headstock veneers is not only pretty, but also nessacary | ||
| cozmik_cowboy
Member Username: cozmik_cowboy Post Number: 80 Registered: 10-2006 |
Yes, Mark, a scarf joint means that the headstock is glued on - you cut the neck blank at an angle, then reverse the HS piece & glue it back on. Thus, the HS would angle back, and the surface that was the cut now would extend the neck surface. So, the ebony on your headstock will be from the same piece as on your neck, but it will be cut & glued back to itself. The link in Dave's post has a picture of a classical under construction that shows this process clearly. They then add the "wings" for HS width, and multiple laminates for strength. A volute is a thickening of the neck at the HS, like the "dart" on old Martins or the second picture down in this thread. It is needed because carving from a single piece is actually weaker than the scarf joint. Peter (Message edited by Cozmik_Cowboy on January 17, 2007) (Message edited by Cozmik_Cowboy on January 17, 2007) | ||
| tbrannon
Advanced Member Username: tbrannon Post Number: 298 Registered: 11-2004 |
Well there you go~ I learned something today- Now that I see it, it makes perfect sense and I actually remember seeing it before and reading about it. Total brain fart on my behalf. Mark- sorry for misleading you- I really thought I knew what I was talking about- It's certainly not the first time I've been wrong. =) EDIT- It also would have been helpful if I had correctly read Bob's post. I sort of scanned it and then saw Mark's question. Bob hit the nail on the head, but I failed to grasp what he was saying when I replied. (Message edited by tbrannon on January 17, 2007) (Message edited by tbrannon on January 17, 2007) | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 346 Registered: 9-2005 |
Thank you for your responses, fellow club-members, I appreciate them all... and I now know something significant that I did not know before. Bob, I initially didn't fully grasp your explaination, although I went to the link and instantly "got" what a "volute" was the moment I saw the picture and integrated it to your description. I'm sometimes bad about intuiting undefined terms... for the same reason I totally vegged and didn't fully grasp (the second part of) Bill's witty and humourous post. But this afternoon/now, the obvious suddenly hit me... the "scarf" joint is like... a SCARF... hiding the "Frankenstein neck-line" of this point... and then it all made sense. And then I re-read the previous posts and links as well as the new ones. Hey Pete, thanks, your post was perfect for me as it explicitly made it all clear with no room for uncertainly/having to make assumptions. And Toby, I caught your post earlier before you edited it, but appreciate your sharing your thoughts within the context of your knowledge as well. Interesting... My Europa has the outer Flame maple laminates go all the way up from the body into the headstock; they are continuous pieces of wood on either/both sides; this is, however, a unique custom feature that cost extra (a LOT extra, now). It begs the question -and I'm curious at this point- if the inner 11 laminates of my neck are also this way or not. Based on this thread, I'd have to assume they're probably not... that only the 2 outer laminates which were specified to be continous wood... were continous. I'll have to ask 'em some time. Okay, I get the reasoning: it's cheaper/wastes less wood, and it facilitates/is more conducive to easier repairs... but... IS IT STRONGER, OR WEAKER THAN (the alternative) OF (having/being) CONTINUOUS PIECES OF WOOD? (Or, is there NO DIFFERENCE, or is it BETTER in SOME WAYS and WORSE in OTHER WAYS?) Any thoughts on that, gang? I have to say I found this kind of shocking. I always assumed the pegheads and necks were continous wood, and it just rubs me the wrong way intuitively; it seems to me like it would have to be weaker, and like somehow the quality of sound would be less. But I lack detailed technical expertise in the specifics and nuances of the building specifics and intricacies in this area, so it is just as likely these feelings/impressions are arbitrary and without a basis in reality. I'd certainly like to know which is the case. 88persuader, I hope you aren't getting irritated that I've sort of (by which I mean totally) usurped your thread. I'm also still interested in the original question which I've perhaps distracted people away from, the comparison between the costs/labor of set necks and neck-throughs. Thanks again for taking the time to educate me, folks! | ||
| 88persuader
Advanced Member Username: 88persuader Post Number: 264 Registered: 5-2004 |
No problem 8 string king. This thread is interesting. | ||
| flaxattack
Senior Member Username: flaxattack Post Number: 1357 Registered: 4-2004 |
set necks are a bit harder to make than neck throughs here is the reason per val on a set neck- the angle at which the neck is joined to the body has to be exact or its kaput. so the neck needs to be machined properly and so does the body- this was one of the reasons my tribute took a bit longer as it was the first one obviously on standard models they know the angle but it requires more time to do | ||
| 88persuader
Advanced Member Username: 88persuader Post Number: 265 Registered: 5-2004 |
Well Flax ... if it's harder to make set necks why don't they make them all neck through? Wouldn't it be more cost effective? They could make the body wings out of cheaper simple wood and use the same "lower end" electronics to keep the cost down. If set necks are harder to make I don't understand why they bother making them ... especially on the cheaper basses? I'm sure THEY know why they do but "I'm" a little confused. | ||
| cozmik_cowboy
Member Username: cozmik_cowboy Post Number: 81 Registered: 10-2006 |
Mark, if you glue 2 pieces of wood together, then try to break them apart, I can pretty much promise you won't split the seam - you'll break the wood next to it. The glue joint is stronger than the wood is. Also, a long piece of wood (like for instance, oh, I don't know - say a guitar neck) follows the long fibers of the grain of the wood. To break it you have to break all the fibers. In a scarf joint, this orientation goes up to the joint, then changes direction so you have the same longitudinal strength in the headstock. In a one-piece construction, the carving takes the headstock across the grain - to break it all you have to do is separate the fibers fron each other - much easier to do. It's the same reason you can split a log with one good whack of your ax, but to chop it to length takes repeated blows. This weakness in the HS can be largely offset by volutes and laminations, but the core of a scarf joint construction is inherently stronger than one-piece. Raymond, I'm with you - given the much larger blank needed to carve a one-piece neck, plus the fact that it would seem harder to carve it than to slice and glue, plus it would seem to me (as you said earlier)to be harder to align a set neck, why do they cost less? And why do them at all? A scarf joint would work on a set neck (can you say Gibson?) And you could even go belt-and-suspenders and get the best of both - IIRC, the old Martins had a scarf joint with a volute. Peter | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 347 Registered: 9-2005 |
Interesting. Thanks for the additional post, Peter. It's good to know this procedure makes the peghead/neck connection even stronger -and why. And it seems to make the original question even more curious. If it's harder to do the set-necks, why are they charging less for them? I'm really extra curious now. Very interesting post. Thanks again, all. | ||
| byoung
Senior Member Username: byoung Post Number: 489 Registered: 12-2004 |
My guess is that set necks are more expensive to build tooling for, etc., but are cheaper in the long run. It is hard to "get everything right" at first, but then you can turn them out with less cost. Bradley | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 349 Registered: 9-2005 |
Hmmm. That seems like a/the reasonable theory, Occam's razor and all. Confirmation, anyone? | ||
| mica
Moderator Username: mica Post Number: 4006 Registered: 6-2000 |
The short version is: set necks take less labor to make. about 20-30 hours compared with 50 plus on a neck through. The medium version is that you can make the whole body for a set neck, sand it on the abrasive planer and it's the final thickness. For a neck through, you need to leave the body slightly thicker than the final size, then hand sand everything to get it to fit well. The long version: maybe I'll write a book someday. Why make set necks at all? They happen to sound different from neck throughs. Add that to the fact they can be a little less expensive, and it's rason enough I think. Mark, don't worry about us charging less for something that is harder to do, we'll only make that mistake once. The bottom line is that the labor is the biggest expense. The more time it takes the higher the price, that simple. | ||
| the_8_string_king
Advanced Member Username: the_8_string_king Post Number: 350 Registered: 9-2005 |
And there we have it! Thanks, Mica! | ||
| 88persuader
Advanced Member Username: 88persuader Post Number: 267 Registered: 5-2004 |
Yes thank you Mica ... it's nice to get the inside scoop! | ||
| southpaw
Intermediate Member Username: southpaw Post Number: 130 Registered: 12-2004 |
Like many people here, I own Alembics with set neck and neck through, both sound fantastic and both sustain forever. Set neck basses are not entry or lower level Alembics, just a different flavor,with all the Alembic quality. The consensus here seems to be a neck through bass with ebony lams is the king of Alembic necks, hopefully I will find out someday. | ||
| cozmik_cowboy
Member Username: cozmik_cowboy Post Number: 82 Registered: 10-2006 |
Thanks for explaination on why set-necks, Mica - but why do you not do scarf joints on them? Just curious.... Peter | ||
| jags
Member Username: jags Post Number: 100 Registered: 12-2006 |
of course the headstock,or part of it is attached. how else can you get a bevel on your headstock? i understand not all have bevelled headstocks,but my anniversary is,and you can tell,in the side ot the headstock between the veneersthere is a fine joint line running perfectly straight,and logically the top is just glue on,its just another loveable laminate |
