warmoth stratocaster replacement neck flat vs. tiltback, single radius vs. compound radius

[FluorideInMyWater]

howdy.
so i'm trying to pull the trigger on my replacement neck purchase from warmoth.
i decided to go with the modern tilt-back in order to eliminate some friction points in the strings. the tilt-back will elimate the need for string-trees. i plan to use locking tuners, and get a graphite nut installed. was planning on the 13/32 holes for the locking tuners, and 6150 stainless medium jumbo frets, and then a clear satin-nitro finish for smoothness while sliding my hand up and down the neck (not sure if there is an actual difference between the satin-nitro and the gloss as far as easier playability). i was planning to get a 42mm nut that is what i had on my '89 MIJ strat. and then i was planning to get a 10-16 compound radius.

So a few questions based of of things i came across on other sights
#! related to having a modern-tilt-back. there is a warning on warmoths page:
"The force exerted by the headstock end of the double truss rod is considerable. There must be a minimum 1/8" of wood below the rod end to prevent wood failure in this area. Thinning a neck beyond factory engineered dimensions is not recommended or covered under warranty."
Does this mean it makes it just as susceptible to the old Gibson cracking at headstock problem? i know they use a 2 piece wood construction on the strat tilt-backs like they do on the Gibson les paul replacement necks, which makes the neck joint (name?) stronger than average. but is it just as strong as a straight back? i also heard a few people say that there was some kind of strage "intonation in the upper registers" that they heard and said that it was caused by the double-trussrod construction, and that the vintage modern sounded much better and didn't produce this "weird" sound that these guys were talking about. i'm not even really sure what they were talking about so if you have a modern or modern tilt-back i'd love your in put on strenght and tonality diferences between them and a vintage modern.

#2 i'm unsure about the compound radius. from what i hear it plays faster than a standard 9.5" strat radius. i'd like the compound for more EVH type playing. the EVH wolfgang has a 12-16 compound radius..........and i looked up the radius of the kramer frankenstrat and the "internet" says it was 12-16". warmoth offerrs a 10-16 compound at no additional cost, or a 9.5-14" or a 12-16" for $35 more. anyone play any of these? is a 10 -16" to much of a radius change or would a 9.5-14 or 12 - 16" feel better, or play better, or sound more consistant? i just have zero experiece with this. i'd like to do solo runs up the fret board but i still would like it to feel like a stratocaster for the most part, but i like the idea of it being faster higher up on the fretboard.

#3 does the finish change the playability of the neck? is the clear satin-nitro faster than a clear gloss or is there absolutly zero difference and it's only an aesthetic thing?

thanks guys!

 

[ruscio]

Welcome to the forum!

I don’t have experience with the tiltback necks so I’ll let others weigh in on their experiences. With a strat, though, it doesn’t seem necessary.

The 10”-16” feels just like a strat for chords on the lower frets and then flattens to a shredder radius at the upper frets. I love it. I had a Jackson with 12”-16” that was nice, too, but I haven’t tried a 9.5”-14”. My strong suspicion is that the difference between any pair of these options is so subtle you’d be hard-pressed to notice in a blind test.

I find satin finishes considerably smoother and faster, particularly if there’s much humidity or I’m sweating at all. Warmoth does fantastic gloss and satin but I strongly prefer satin for a neck.

 

[FluorideInMyWater]

Welcome to the forum!

I don’t have experience with the tiltback necks so I’ll let others weigh in on their experiences. With a strat, though, it doesn’t seem necessary.

The 10”-16” feels just like a strat for chords on the lower frets and then flattens to a shredder radius at the upper frets. I love it. I had a Jackson with 12”-16” that was nice, too, but I haven’t tried a 9.5”-14”. My strong suspicion is that the difference between any pair of these options is so subtle you’d be hard-pressed to notice in a blind test.

I find satin finishes considerably smoother and faster, particularly if there’s much humidity or I’m sweating at all. Warmoth does fantastic gloss and satin but I strongly prefer satin for a neck.

i'm in las vegas so there is vast amounts of sweating going on in this household!!!

 

[stratamania]

Per your other thread, I would advise you get a straight headstock, with staggered locking tuners. You then don't need string trees and have less chance of binding in a nut than on a tiltback. You could also use a Fender LSR nut which means a 43mm nut width.

A 10-16 radius, standard thin profile, 43 mm you could almost say is the sweet spot or standard for many people. If you don't have already personal preferences, this is what I would recommend, with an LSR and modern construction. And in satin nitro rather than gloss.


Gibson tiltbacks break as they are made of one piece of wood, and with the angle they use there is a weak spot where the grain runs out. Warmoth tiltbacks use a scarf joint and less of an angle, this means they are stronger and less susceptible to that type of breakage, but again for tremolo use I would only use a tiltback if I was using a Floyd Rose locking nut and tremolo.


Here is a link so you can check out the LSR

https://warmoth.com/lsr

 

[WarmothRules]

As far as the radius. I have a 12-16 radius warmoth and I have 10-16 warmoth. I’ve had other 10-16 radius warmoth necks and I have another non warmoth 12-16 radius guitar. Also as far as non warmoth guitars I have some straight 12 and straight 14 radius necks. For me the most comfortable necks are the 10-16 radius over the 12-16. I can just dig in more and nothing feels awkward. I’m not sure if it’s because the change is more drastic but on 12-16 radius warmoth necks I’ve gotten I haven’t needed them to get leveled. The baritone I just put together 10-16 is getting a plek job on it. Every 10-16 warmoth neck I’ve gotten has needed fretwork. Since I like the 10-16 way more I don’t mind paying for the extra fret work and have decided to go with their standard 10-16 compound every time now going forward.

 

[rauchman]

The way W constructs their Tiltback neck is going to be stronger than anything Gibson currently offers. It is very strong, and wouldn't worry about the neck from a strength perspective. I also have 2 Gibson LP's. One is a 1975 LP Deluxe routed for humbuckers. The construction from this period is very different in this era, as among other things, the neck is a 3pc maple neck with a volute. Traditional and current construction is a 1pc mahogany neck without the volute, which is how my '92 LP Custom is constructed. I watch the 1975 LP fall out of a cheap case and bounce down a flight of metal stairs on the headstock, and aside from chips in the finish, nothing broke. Conversely, while going into a practice session where I slipped on ice and fell while carrying the guitar in a Gibson hard case, the headstock cracked, and has cracked 2 additional times since then. I'd feel very confident in the construction of the W Tiltback neck for strength.

I have 3 W necks, and all are 10-16. I also have a 9.5" Fender, 10" Gibson, 12" Gibson and G&L. My fav all time neck carve that I've so far tried is W's 10-16" with their Wolfgang profile and 43mm nut. The other 2 necks are Standard Thin, but there is a subtle carve difference between the 2. I have size L-XL hands, and it is perfect....for me. Playing down by the nut allows for more chord friendly playing, while up top with the flatter radius allows for easier soloing type stuff, including EVH type playing. Having said that, you can still EVH type playing on a 9.5" radius. I'm not an EVH type player but do like my shredtastic type stuff.

 

[aarontunes]

#1 related to having a modern-tilt-back. there is a warning on warmoths page:
"The force exerted by the headstock end of the double truss rod is considerable. There must be a minimum 1/8" of wood below the rod end to prevent wood failure in this area. Thinning a neck beyond factory engineered dimensions is not recommended or covered under warranty."
Does this mean it makes it just as susceptible to the old Gibson cracking at headstock problem? i know they use a 2 piece wood construction on the strat tilt-backs like they do on the Gibson les paul replacement necks, which makes the neck joint (name?) stronger than average. but is it just as strong as a straight back? i also heard a few people say that there was some kind of strage "intonation in the upper registers" that they heard and said that it was caused by the double-trussrod construction, and that the vintage modern sounded much better and didn't produce this "weird" sound that these guys were talking about. i'm not even really sure what they were talking about so if you have a modern or modern tilt-back i'd love your in put on strenght and tonality diferences between them and a vintage modern.

That statement on the Warmoth site has nothing whatsoever to do with the strength of our tiltback headstocks. It is aimed squarely at people who attempt to reshape our stock neck back contours to be thinner. The construction of our tiltback necks bears almost nothing in common with Gibson's.

As far as the comments about the double truss rod, I have no idea what "strange intonation in the upper registers" might mean. "Intonation" describes an instrument's ability to play in tune throughout all ranges. Assuming the frets are positioned on the neck correctly (ours certainly are) intonation is mostly a matter of proper setup. If some people claim to hear a tonality they don't like on Modern necks, I can't really argue with that. That's why we make single truss rod necks as well. Be aware that all our Tiltback necks are Modern Construction.

#2 i'm unsure about the compound radius. from what i hear it plays faster than a standard 9.5" strat radius. i'd like the compound for more EVH type playing. the EVH wolfgang has a 12-16 compound radius..........and i looked up the radius of the kramer frankenstrat and the "internet" says it was 12-16". warmoth offerrs a 10-16 compound at no additional cost, or a 9.5-14" or a 12-16" for $35 more. anyone play any of these? is a 10 -16" to much of a radius change or would a 9.5-14 or 12 - 16" feel better, or play better, or sound more consistant? i just have zero experiece with this. i'd like to do solo runs up the fret board but i still would like it to feel like a stratocaster for the most part, but i like the idea of it being faster higher up on the fretboard.

None of those radii are any "faster" than any others. It's solely a matter of what you like to feel. If you have no experience and no preference I'd say start with 10-16" because it's no extra charge.

My preference is for 12" straight. Among the compound options my preference is 9.5-14". I find the ones that end at 16" feel flatter than I like. But none of that should matter to you, since you're not me.

#3 does the finish change the playability of the neck? is the clear satin-nitro faster than a clear gloss or is there absolutly zero difference and it's only an aesthetic thing?

Again, no finish is "faster" than any other. It's 100% a matter of how you like your necks to feel and look.

 

[FluorideInMyWater]

As far as the radius. I have a 12-16 radius warmoth and I have 10-16 warmoth. I’ve had other 10-16 radius warmoth necks and I have another non warmoth 12-16 radius guitar. Also as far as non warmoth guitars I have some straight 12 and straight 14 radius necks. For me the most comfortable necks are the 10-16 radius over the 12-16. I can just dig in more and nothing feels awkward. I’m not sure if it’s because the change is more drastic but on 12-16 radius warmoth necks I’ve gotten I haven’t needed them to get leveled. The baritone I just put together 10-16 is getting a plek job on it. Every 10-16 warmoth neck I’ve gotten has needed fretwork. Since I like the 10-16 way more I don’t mind paying for the extra fret work and have decided to go with their standard 10-16 compound every time now going forward.

ok. that is great info. thank you very much for sharing this!!!
are you using a regular straight headstock?
what tuners are you using or do you recommend on the "staggered-locking" side?

 

[FluorideInMyWater]

The way W constructs their Tiltback neck is going to be stronger than anything Gibson currently offers. It is very strong, and wouldn't worry about the neck from a strength perspective. I also have 2 Gibson LP's. One is a 1975 LP Deluxe routed for humbuckers. The construction from this period is very different in this era, as among other things, the neck is a 3pc maple neck with a volute. Traditional and current construction is a 1pc mahogany neck without the volute, which is how my '92 LP Custom is constructed. I watch the 1975 LP fall out of a cheap case and bounce down a flight of metal stairs on the headstock, and aside from chips in the finish, nothing broke. Conversely, while going into a practice session where I slipped on ice and fell while carrying the guitar in a Gibson hard case, the headstock cracked, and has cracked 2 additional times since then. I'd feel very confident in the construction of the W Tiltback neck for strength.

I have 3 W necks, and all are 10-16. I also have a 9.5" Fender, 10" Gibson, 12" Gibson and G&L. My fav all time neck carve that I've so far tried is W's 10-16" with their Wolfgang profile and 43mm nut. The other 2 necks are Standard Thin, but there is a subtle carve difference between the 2. I have size L-XL hands, and it is perfect....for me. Playing down by the nut allows for more chord friendly playing, while up top with the flatter radius allows for easier soloing type stuff, including EVH type playing. Having said that, you can still EVH type playing on a 9.5" radius. I'm not an EVH type player but do like my shredtastic type stuff.

ok, so everyone seems to concur that a 10-16 compound radius is the best way to go.
so on the tilt-back option, are you a yay, or a nay?
do you prefer locking tuners? if so which brand?

 

[FluorideInMyWater]

That statement on the Warmoth site has nothing whatsoever to do with the strength of our tiltback headstocks. It is aimed squarely at people who attempt to reshape our stock neck back contours to be thinner. The construction of our tiltback necks bears almost nothing in common with Gibson's.

As far as the comments about the double truss rod, I have no idea what "strange intonation in the upper registers" might mean. "Intonation" describes an instrument's ability to play in tune throughout all ranges. Assuming the frets are positioned on the neck correctly (ours certainly are) intonation is mostly a matter of proper setup. If some people claim to hear a tonality they don't like on Modern necks, I can't really argue with that. That's why we make single truss rod necks as well. Be aware that all our Tiltback necks are Modern Construction.

i probably was not using the proper terminology......i'm new to all the terms so..........the person's indicated that there was a sort of "strange" or "different or "slightly" off sound to it, that most people didn't notice but that it really bothered these 2 particular guys. maybe "tonality" is what they were talking about.....which you mentioned.

None of those radii are any "faster" than any others. It's solely a matter of what you like to feel. If you have no experience and no preference I'd say start with 10-16" because it's no extra charge.

My preference is for 12" straight. Among the compound options my preference is 9.5-14". I find the ones that end at 16" feel flatter than I like. But none of that should matter to you, since you're not me.



Again, no finish is "faster" than any other. It's 100% a matter of how you like your necks to feel and look.

so if i go with a vintage-modern neck with a single truss-rod, is there a way to avoid string-trees as Stratomania stated above? by using with staggered locking tuners..... or perhaps something else?

 

[FluorideInMyWater]

Per your other thread, I would advise you get a straight headstock, with staggered locking tuners. You then don't need string trees and have less chance of binding in a nut than on a tiltback. You could also use a Fender LSR nut which means a 43mm nut width.

ahh ok! actually.....bummer, it's only for 43mm and only for right-handers. i'm a lefty.
So if i use a graphite nute and staggered locking tuners is that enough to avoid having to use string trees?
i can install roller saddles on my Tremelo....maybe there is a benefit to that.
someone pointed out the vega-trem tremelo.........appears to be locking

Amazon.com

could you use a string-retainer-bar instead of string trees? look like it would provide a friction point equally across all 6 strings at once....?

A 10-16 radius, standard thin profile, 43 mm you could almost say is the sweet spot or standard for many people. If you don't have already personal preferences, this is what I would recommend, with an LSR and modern construction. And in satin nitro rather than gloss.


Gibson tiltbacks break as they are made of one piece of wood, and with the angle they use there is a weak spot where the grain runs out. Warmoth tiltbacks use a scarf joint and less of an angle, this means they are stronger and less susceptible to that type of breakage, but again for tremolo use I would only use a tiltback if I was using a Floyd Rose locking nut and tremolo.


Here is a link so you can check out the LSR

https://warmoth.com/lsr

 

[aarontunes]

i probably was not using the proper terminology......i'm new to all the terms so..........the person's indicated that there was a sort of "strange" or "different or "slightly" off sound to it, that most people didn't notice but that it really bothered these 2 particular guys. maybe "tonality" is what they were talking about.....which you mentioned.

No worries. Some people get really tweaked about the double truss rod thing, mainly those players who prefer vintage specs. Most people don't even think about it, honestly.

Use this video as a guide to decide what you hear:

so if i go with a vintage-modern neck with a single truss-rod, is there a way to avoid string-trees as Stratomania stated above? by using with staggered locking tuners..... or perhaps something else?

Yes, @stratamania is correct: the idea behind staggered tuners is that they negate the need for string trees.

 

[stratamania]

ahh ok! actually.....bummer, it's only for 43mm and only for right-handers. i'm a lefty.
So if i use a graphite nute and staggered locking tuners is that enough to avoid having to use string trees?

A graphite nut and staggered locking tuners are perfectly adequate for avoiding string trees. It is also worth using some sort of lubrication in the nut.

i can install roller saddles on my Tremelo....maybe there is a benefit to that.
someone pointed out the vega-trem tremelo.........appears to be locking

A Vegatrem is a particularly good retrofit option, it is not locking but due to its design, it has eliminated many of the potential issues of more traditional vintage style tremolos.

could you use a string-retainer-bar instead of string trees? look like it would provide a friction point equally across all 6 strings at once....?

No, adding more friction, equal or otherwise, is not eliminating friction. An even worse idea.

There is a good reason to use a string retainer bar when the guitar has a Floyd Rose locking nut, but that is an entirely different use case.

 

[FluorideInMyWater]

man, as if i'm not having a tough enough time, now trying to find good 6-inline staggered locking tuners in LEFT HANDED is a bit of a challenge....ok a real challenge.

on the staggered, is it better to get 3 different sized posts or does 2 do the job.......as far as eliminating the string trees is concerned.?

 

[WarmothRules]

ok. that is great info. thank you very much for sharing this!!!
are you using a regular straight headstock?
what tuners are you using or do you recommend on the "staggered-locking" side?

Straight headstock. I like staggered tuners better but on my last build I have string trees.

 

[WarmothRules]

man, as if i'm not having a tough enough time, now trying to find good 6-inline staggered locking tuners in LEFT HANDED is a bit of a challenge....ok a real challenge.

on the staggered, is it better to get 3 different sized posts or does 2 do the job.......as far as eliminating the string trees is concerned.?

The have gotoh sized staggered tuners on the GFS website right now

 

[FluorideInMyWater]

No worries. Some people get really tweaked about the double truss rod thing, mainly those players who prefer vintage specs. Most people don't even think about it, honestly.

Use this video as a guide to decide what you hear:

Yes, @stratamania is correct: the idea behind staggered tuners is that they negate the need for string trees.

so i've hit another snag with this. perhaps you can help
with regards to the locking tuners....since i'm a lefty i'm having difficulty finding 6-inline staggered locking tuners. finding righties is easy.
question #1. for the staggered should i be looking for 2 or 3 different tuning post sizes?

i found these Gotoh Magnum's that are staggered and have (3) 18.5mm for sting `1-3 and (3) 20mm for string 4-6. with a 10mm or 13/32 hole. it says "small button (tuners) are most fender strats "small-tuners"? i have zero idea.

NEW Gotoh SG381-07 MGT 6 In-Line Set MAGNUM Locking LEFT-HANDED - CHROME | eBay

The SG381 tuning machines feature the accuracy and reliability Gotoh is famous for. They features a 16:1 gear ratio for precise, accurate tuning, and a die-cast enclosure that is permanently sealed and lubricated for years of smooth operation.

www.ebay.com

and these hipshots that have 3 different sizes.........18mm/19mm/20mm. pegs says they are compatibe with 27/64th" and 10mm size holes. 27/64 = 10.7mm.....so i'm not sure which hole size i would pick for this. how much play can there be with locking tuners and headstock hole sizes? a warmoth rep told me that most locking tuners use the "planet waves" 13/32 hole sizes.

NEW Hipshot 6-in-Line STAGGERED LEFT-HANDED Mini Locking Tuning Keys - CHROME | eBay

6 in line treble side tuners (left handed guitars).

www.ebay.com

i'd like to use a hole size that i would potentially swap out tuners if i don't like them but if they have to be spot-on then i'm not sure which size to choose

 

[ragamuffin]

man, as if i'm not having a tough enough time, now trying to find good 6-inline staggered locking tuners in LEFT HANDED is a bit of a challenge....ok a real challenge.

on the staggered, is it better to get 3 different sized posts or does 2 do the job.......as far as eliminating the string trees is concerned.?

Not sure if you have a brand preference but I really like Hipshots. This site offers left handed locking sets: https://sporthitech.com/a/search?type=product&q=hipshot+left+hand

For Hipshot's I've always ordered the Schaller 25/64 tuner ream

 

[FluorideInMyWater]

Not sure if you have a brand preference but I really like Hipshots. This site offers left handed locking sets: https://sporthitech.com/a/search?type=product&q=hipshot+left+hand

For Hipshot's I've always ordered the Schaller 25/64 tuner ream

i'm wondering if those are the same ones i posted above from ebay.........if they are they have 3 size tuning pegs....2 of each. they say they are 10mm or 27/64......which is a bit weird.

are these the "schaller" tuners you were referring to? they don't specify what the post lengths are. i still don't know if i need 2 or 3 different sizes on a vintage/modern neck to avoid using string trees.