Preferred fingerboard radius with Slim C?
-
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 2:16 pm
Preferred fingerboard radius with Slim C?
I am in the process of ordering a Fallout and wondered if people had a view on whether a 9.5 or 12" radius would be preferable. I'm neither a shredder nor exclusively a chorder, although I do have fairly small hands. I was thinking that the combo of Slim C (1 5/8 nut) with the flatter fingerboard would be a good blend, but welcome additional thoughts. The guitars with which I have most experience are a Rickenbacker 330 and a made in Japan Epiphone Sheraton from 1980 (sort of a poor man's ES-335). Both have pretty comfortable necks from my perspective, but I don't know what the radius is of either (I am guessing the Rick is no more than 10 and the Epi is 10 or 12).
-
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:44 pm
Re: Preferred fingerboard radius with Slim C?
It's all really just personal preference. For example, Yngwie plays on a neck that is way thicker and rounder fingerboard than say an Ibanez or Jackson super-thin necks and 18" fingerboards that most shredders prefer, and Gilmour plays large bends on a really round fingerboard that most bendy types don't prefer.
I have a modern classic, which is a slim c but a 1/16th of an inch wider at the nut, in a 9.5. I don't like the 9.5 because the action has to be set higher than I like it to get even just a whole step without fretting-out or buzzing, and I have to go a bit higher for 2 and 2.5 step bends. I'm going to re-radius the board when I get a chance. Oddly enough, the higher action doesn't bother me for lead work, it's the chording, and I could live with it, but I'm not going to.
You just need to figure out what works for you, as I don't think the difference in radius feel between 9.5 and 12 (at the same string height) would be as noticeable as say, the difference between 7.5 and 9.5 would be.
I have a modern classic, which is a slim c but a 1/16th of an inch wider at the nut, in a 9.5. I don't like the 9.5 because the action has to be set higher than I like it to get even just a whole step without fretting-out or buzzing, and I have to go a bit higher for 2 and 2.5 step bends. I'm going to re-radius the board when I get a chance. Oddly enough, the higher action doesn't bother me for lead work, it's the chording, and I could live with it, but I'm not going to.
You just need to figure out what works for you, as I don't think the difference in radius feel between 9.5 and 12 (at the same string height) would be as noticeable as say, the difference between 7.5 and 9.5 would be.
-
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:44 pm
Re: Preferred fingerboard radius with Slim C?
Sorry, but a rounder radius being great for smaller hands (unless he's a month 1 beginner attempting barre chords) is about as substantive as thin and flat necks are great for shredding, but yeah, it replicates a vintage Fender for feel and playability, for sure, but I've seen 9-year-olds with smaller than average hands for their age on a 16" radius that had no problems at all. If you don't mind highish action to clear your bends and prefer a rounder fingerboard, then go with a rounder radius. Again, it's such a personal preference that you need to try different radiuses with similar neck profiles to see which you prefer if you don't want to guesstimate.
-
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 2:16 pm
Re: Preferred fingerboard radius with Slim C?
Thanks. My experience has been in the 9.5 to 12 realm on electrics (and obviously flatter with accoustics). I was really just wondering if there's a relationship between neck thickness, nut width and radius - for example, having smallish hands I prefer the Slim C/Modern C to the Classic C, and wondered if a slimmer neck profile gave one a little more latitude to go flatter on the fingerboard without sacrificing playability.
-
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:44 pm
Re: Preferred fingerboard radius with Slim C?
You need to define how a flat fingerboard sacrifices playability. Traditional classical guitars have thick and wide necks with no radius on the fingerboard, and banjos have thin and narrow necks with no radius (most, anyway) - basically polar opposites in terms of neck width and thickness, but both have a completely flat board. Conversely, violins and cellos etc., are really round, around a 2.5" radius. The fingerboard design for all of these instruments was developed to accommodate the picking/bowing hand and not the fingering hand. I don't believe the difference in thickness between a slim and classic neck is substantial enough to influence one's preference in fingerboard radius.kdl6769 wrote:Thanks. My experience has been in the 9.5 to 12 realm on electrics (and obviously flatter with accoustics). I was really just wondering if there's a relationship between neck thickness, nut width and radius - for example, having smallish hands I prefer the Slim C/Modern C to the Classic C, and wondered if a slimmer neck profile gave one a little more latitude to go flatter on the fingerboard without sacrificing playability.
-
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 6:34 am
Re: Preferred fingerboard radius with Slim C?
I have a Bluesboy 90 with a Slim C and 12" radius and I love it. It was one of the first 12s I purchased and I was a little tentative about getting it but I now prefer it over 9.5s. Also have a Fallout with a 12 and Classic C. Love that one too.
I'm surprised G&L went to 9.5s on the 2016s.
I'm surprised G&L went to 9.5s on the 2016s.