FluorideInMyWater
Junior Member
- Messages
- 70
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!
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!