what about these low saddles?

[blindboygrunt]

A week or so ago del brought up his saddle not having much height . mine is on the lower rather than higher scale of things.I'm not lying awake at night worrying about it , but my curiosity was awake .

I've had a bit of a Google to see the reason for this and haven't really came up with anything.

Every time a low saddle is mentioned in any article/forum post/webpage it leads to an essay about a neck reset .but the test for a neck reset is a straight edge running down the fretboard to the bridge , right? Time and again it shows , in these articles , that the straight edge will be hitting the edge , or 'wall' of the bridge closer to the guitars top than the top edge of the bridge.

But mine , and del's (and I'm sure others') the straight edge hits the top of the bridge.

Can anyone explain a guitar passing the neck reset test but still having a lower saddle ?

[Del Nilppeznaf]

BBG

 

I posted some pics and questions about my saddle over at frets.net.. a community of mainly luthiers. The few replies I received all said it was no big deal...if the action was good and she felt and sounded good..then she is.

 

Most luthiers there and Frank Ford at frets.com... believe a neck reset is inevitable at some point... just how long it will be needed, say on my J35..is not possible to tell.

 

Looking at old guitars where there is Really no saddle...I am not worried about mine..Again i state the saddle on the J35 has been lowered already to achieve optimum action... I was told that one fellow has seen lower saddles on new guitras once set up correctly.

 

Previously I pondered in another thread whether we..maybe not as experienced as some guitar folk... may worry a little too much about saddle height... a good look at Frank Fords site and talking to some fine folk at frets.net has definatley eased my slight concerns.

 

The set angle of the neck will have the impact on how much saddle is required to give the correct angle.. ( EDIT..meant action ) ...I'm assuming even a difference of a slight degree will have a noticeable effect on the required height of the saddle. So though the neck angle is good..each guitar will need a slightly different height of saddle.

 

I think this is correct ?

[BluesKing777]

Here is the saddle from my 37 L-0....

 

The guitar does need a neck reset, but my luthier 'got it going for me' (his words), while I decide how much I want to spend on it! Or leave as is and spend the money on something else.

 

 

But as some of you have heard from my demo tracks, it sounds and plays absolutely wonderfully for my style....

 

So I think your saddle has a ways to go yet.... (No expert here!).

 

 

 

 

 

BluesKing777.

[Del Nilppeznaf]

Yep..there you go..

 

she sounds bloody class BK..so thats it B)

[duluthdan]

To do the straight-edge test doesn't one need a straight edge that is slotted to accommodate the frets? Otherwise what is really happening is that one is using the fret height for "the test" rather than the fingerboard? Just curious. I have one guitar that the straight edge laying across the frets actually clears the bridge by a good 1/8th inch.

[Del Nilppeznaf]

To do the straight-edge test doesn't one need a straight edge that is slotted to accommodate the frets? Otherwise what is really happening is that one is using the fret height for "the test" rather than the fingerboard? Just curious. I have one guitar that the straight edge laying across the frets actually clears the bridge by a good 1/8th inch.

 

In the research I have done Dan, i have never heard it described this way... All i have found says a straight edge along the fingerboard..atop of the frets, in the middle of the board...Ideally..should line up with the top of the bridge... This is how to measure the neck angle and see if it is about correct.

 

how does your guiatr play..and how is the action.. does it have a high saddle? ..i am interested in this topic..like BBG and a few others I would assume.

[Tarrr]

Too little string break angle over the saddle can hurt the guitars volume and tone, plus the strings have more freedom to slip and slide. But, if it ain't broke...

[Sitedrifter]

To do the straight-edge test doesn't one need a straight edge that is slotted to accommodate the frets? Otherwise what is really happening is that one is using the fret height for "the test" rather than the fingerboard? Just curious. I have one guitar that the straight edge laying across the frets actually clears the bridge by a good 1/8th inch.

 

 

http://www.stewmac.com/shop/Tools/Measuring_tools/Notched_Straight_Edge.html

[milod]

Yeah, I'm in the "if it ain't broke" school.

 

An archtop is almost an ideal "lab" for bridge altitude, at least so it seems to me. It's a lot easier to mess up than with filing/sanding a bridge saddle to just turn the adjustment screws on a floating bridge. But...

 

Various components of "setup" are not irrelevant, either.

 

I'm no luthier, but as a picker, assuming the neck is straight and not popping up from it's proper place, the next component is what one uses for strings - and IMHO that depends on how one plays. As a very gentle fingerpicker, I wear much lighter strings than many folks on my fingerpicking AEs. On a cupla big boxes I wear heavier to pound away on for "old time" or "bluegrass" sorts of playing. So the setup must be different too.

 

Next would be the nut, nut height, etc. On some guitars the "zero fret" that's not terribly popular in the U.S. could be used for string height comparison. Then again, it's not found on classical guitars either, so... forget a zero fret and concentrate on proper cut on the nut for playing at the lower frets with a given string size.

 

Then there is the matter of action altitude. IMHO that's a factor again of how one plays and string gauge. I want my AE fingerpicking guitars to have as low an action as possible without significant buzz with a very gentle style. I want my big boxes not to buzz when I'm flatpicking, whether pure strumming or a boom-shush sorta thing, with other pickers and/or singers doing that kinda music.

 

I've a hunch that in some cases of "low saddle," the guitar may have been set up for a gentler kind of picking or perhaps just to lower the action and buzz be ignored.

 

Even so... it seems some folks are convinced heavy strings and medium action is the way to go regardless of style because of how they perceive "tone" to emit from the guitar. Me, I figure style comes first and tone/volume are so subjective that I'm happy if I can play how I'm comfortable. But, you pays your money and takes your choice.

 

m

[Anthony Buckeridge]

Quote: "the test for a neck reset is a straight edge running down the fretboard to the bridge"

 

 

Yes.

 

 

Quote: "Can anyone explain a guitar passing the neck reset test but still having a lower saddle ?"

 

 

Yes.

 

 

Quote: "we..maybe not as experienced as some guitar folk... may worry a little too much about saddle height..."

 

 

Yes.

 

 

Quote: "To do the straight-edge test doesn't one need a straight edge that is slotted to accommodate the frets? Otherwise what is really happening is that one is using the fret height for "the test" rather than the fingerboard?"

 

 

No.

 

 

Quote: "All i have found says a straight edge along the fingerboard..atop of the frets, in the middle of the board...Ideally..should line up with the top of the bridge... This is how to measure the neck angle and see if it is about correct."

 

 

Yes.

 

 

Quote: "Too little string break angle over the saddle can hurt the guitars volume and tone, plus the strings have more freedom to slip and slide."

 

 

 

Yes.

 

But with complete respect.

 

It's all rather, relative and relational to the Instrument.

 

Too much break angle, can also can give rise to its own problems on certain Guitars in particular.

 

 

 

 

The point about a Notched Straight Edge.

 

Is that on Vintage Instruments in particular, that may have a bend, hump or some kind of time and wear induced irregularity in the straightness of the Neck, meaning for instance, one fret is slightly higher than others and causing Playing difficulties. The Notched Straight Edge will quickly reveal to an expert eye the REAL problem.

 

1 or Two Frets Replaced and a Sanding down level of the area, could fix a seemingly perplexing but actually localised problem that otherwise might appear to suggest a Complete Refret was needed. Moving the Notches off the Frets, and placing the straight edge on them, also gives an overview of the whole Fret Straightness. So its can be a versatile and handy tool to use for certain checks.

 

 

 

However, it's worth noting that these Notched Straight Edges, are all made to be as long as the Fretboard they are used to measure.

 

I have 4 different Notched Tools with 8 different Edges. But none are longer than the Fretboard for the Scale Length they are Designed to Gauge.

 

How it would be possible to properly utilise a Notched Straight Edge to do a Neck Reset Test, where one is examining the entire Scale Length of the Instrument from the Nut to the Bridge, where on a Guitar this will commonly be around 25 1/2 ", and the Notched Straight Edge ends right at the termination of the Fingerboard, is a complete mystery to me.

 

For that, I have a number of different Highly Accurate Precision Straight Edges, the most used of which are 21" - 24" Long and these give a Sweeping Overview of the Neck / Body / Bridge relationship as well as a Good Test of the Fret Level and Fretboard Straightness. Although everyone always talks about the importance of Neck Relief. Personally, I always start with a Dead Straight Neck and work from that point.

 

I like Low Action Guitars, Highly Playable Guitars. But believe there is an Optimal Trade Off Point between Impressive Sonic Response and Height of Action. To achieve this, I find taking a Strategic Approach where Basic Geometry is concerned, makes every other Tactical Adjustment thereafter, straight forward. I find a Straight Neck a Great Aid to that end. Tone and Action are related and it's really a question of where a Singular Player finds the Magic. Using Highly Accurate Measuring Tools for me, takes the subjectivity and guess work out of the equation. Which is, if we are really honest, what most people, even experienced ones, go on.

 

I was Heaven Blessed to buy a New Gibson last week. Taking a Straight Edge with me and a Short Steel Rule, showed the Guitar Geometry to be Perfect and Ideal for me in terms of Neck Set Angle, Level Fretwork and Action Height. Everything was Absolutely Spot On.

 

Straight from the Factory.

 

 

 

 

Different Guitars Types are Designed Differently.

 

Problems and Concerns in relation to Saddle Height, often come in reality, because Martin (The largest Volume American Acoustic Guitar Maker) sets its Nut and Saddle Heights deliberately high, to allow scope for later adjustment by the user, to suit their particular individual style.

 

By Direct Comparison then, an Instrument has been already Optimised in the manner I described above, will naturally seem quite low. As when a Neck needs Resetting, because lowering a Saddle is often undertaken to stave off this for as long as possible, anyone that knows this, and seeing a Guitar with a low Saddle can sometimes jump to a false conclusion. Especially if the Instrument as in the case of the Gibson J-35, has a low Saddle simply because of the Design and Fretboard Radius, the Saddle matches. It's a Great Guitar by the way and incredible value for the money. I've played them on several occasions and thought the playability, feel of the neck and sound excellent for the cost.

 

The other things to bear in mind is that many New Gibson Acoustics have an under saddle pickup to transfer vibration. This is all the better achieved SONICALLY with the Bridge Saddle as Supplied by the Manufacturer.

 

Comparing Apples to Oranges, we should rightly note such differences as correct for the Guitar concerned.

 

Provided the Instrument is New.

 

 

 

 

Quote: "it seems some folks are convinced heavy strings and medium action is the way to go regardless of style because of how they perceive "tone" to emit from the guitar."

 

 

 

 

For sure.

 

Some Guitar Tops are driven louder better by Mediums Strings.

 

However, I have found that for Balanced Tonality on Recordings, with High Quality Mic's, as well as for Playability, Light Gauge Strings, Sound Far, Far Better, in the main to my Ears.

 

The point about Heavier Strings is in particular Acoustical Settings, when one has to compete with Banjo's and the like. Sheer Loudness to be able to cut through, is an important factor, for some people.

 

The Deeper Tone also compliments the Trebly Banjos and Mandolins. So they also can be understandably seduced by the Sweetness of a Deeper Tone. But Thicker Tone and Louder Sound in themselves, do not represent the best, most Balanced Sound for all styles of Music.

 

 

 

 

That is the essential, salient, point, and so getting a Well Balanced Sound, to me, is the really important thing.

 

 

 

 

Let me explain by means of Illustration.

 

A friend of mine taught me a good trick some years ago. It's called the Complimentary Micing Method of Recording.

 

Basically, it works like this. If you have a Singer with a thick, deep, Voice, to better balance and counteract that natural tendency, you Record them with a Mic that has a Clear Clean Tone. This helps remove any cloaking muddiness, that could otherwise be introduced by some types of Warm Mic, on such a source.

 

Whereas, say you have a Singer with a Sharp, Clear, Voice and a Hard Tonality. Its worst extremes can be better Balanced by utilising a Warmer Toned Mic, that conveys the essential emotive substance of their Voice, without adding any further "Edginess" to that, already very Crisp Voice. Again its Well Balanced Sound we are really after.

 

Because, some Mics are Edgy in Tone, Some are Warmer, just like Real Voices, but the real point here is to best convey the Emotional Power of the Singer and their Song. That happens when you Faithfully Record the Voice, and by using a Complementary Technique enabling it to be properly translated, accompanied by Well Balanced Tone so you can get a better result.

 

 

 

 

My Pal won a Grammy for his use of this technique on a Well Established Artists Voice. The Album concerned was critically acclaimed for the Freshness, Newness and Youthfulness of the Voice.

 

Here we are not adding Tone by altering E.Q. On the contrary, no E.Q. should be needed at all if you get this right. The Sound comes from the Singer or Instrument, Superbly Intelligent Mic Choice, and last but by no means least, Immaculately Precise Mic Placement, in the Absolute Near Field Sweet Spot for Sonic Impressiveness.

 

But as I say, what it's really all about, is providing a Superior Tonal Balance.

 

I think it works like that for Guitars and Strings too.

 

But is largely dependant on Music.

 

Player and Setting.

 

[duluthdan]

Wow AB, lots of info there. What's your background? Would love to hear your take on the photo below. Guitar plays really well, frets may be a bit high for my taste, action at 12th is 6/64ths. This non- slotted straight edge clears the bridge by an 1/8th of an inch. I really have no issues with this, just curious. It's a loud guitar with light strings on it.

[guitarstrummer]

Wow AB, lots of info there. What's your background? Would love to hear your take on the photo below. Guitar plays really well, frets may be a bit high for my taste, action at 12th is 6/64ths. This non- slotted straight edge clears the bridge by an 1/8th of an inch. I really have no issues with this, just curious. It's a loud guitar with light strings on it.

Dan, what's it look like when you place the ruler on it's edge, just below the bridge? Is there still a slight hump in the center of the top and slightly lower on each side edge? From your photo it looks like the top possibly has dropped but unknown for sure without doing the other ruler test.

[Sitedrifter]

Wow AB, lots of info there. What's your background? Would love to hear your take on the photo below. Guitar plays really well, frets may be a bit high for my taste, action at 12th is 6/64ths. This non- slotted straight edge clears the bridge by an 1/8th of an inch. I really have no issues with this, just curious. It's a loud guitar with light strings on it.

 

 

Looks like my J200 is about the same. Would love to hear if this is normal for the J200 line or anything else that might be causing this.

[duluthdan]

GS, no the top has not dropped. According to my good source, this is exactly how it is supposed to be - and a slotted straight edge would be necessary to do the real test. So, looks like there are differences in thought - that's ok, perhaps its just this particular models geometry. This guitar plays great, very powerful strummer with a pick, holy cow. Just a curious observation, thats all.

[guitarstrummer]

GS, no the top has not dropped. According to my good source, this is exactly how it is supposed to be - and a slotted straight edge would be necessary to do the real test. So, looks like there are differences in thought - that's ok, perhaps its just this particular models geometry. This guitar plays great, very powerful strummer with a pick, holy cow. Just a curious observation, thats all.

Sounds good.

[Del Nilppeznaf]

GS, no the top has not dropped. According to my good source, this is exactly how it is supposed to be - and a slotted straight edge would be necessary to do the real test. So, looks like there are differences in thought - that's ok, perhaps its just this particular models geometry. This guitar plays great, very powerful strummer with a pick, holy cow. Just a curious observation, thats all.

 

Dan

 

the slotted rulers are only long enough to cover the actual finger board...they are not used to do this neck angle test...you need a 21-24 inch rule to do this...so the headstock end is laying on the first fret..running along the finger board..it will then rest on the last frets on the guitar

 

( when i do this with my J35..the straight edge only touches the first and maybe second and last couple of frets)

 

then the end of the rule slides to see where it will sit at the bridge... the slotted rules this is not possible...simply because it is not long enough to cover the full scale of the guitar.

 

If your plays and sounds good... then no sweat..As I say..i think some of us can worry too much about things like this... with out having a proper luthier looking at a particular guitar... it is all relative to that guitar.

 

Anthony B

 

thanks for informative post.

[Del Nilppeznaf]

This is from Frank Fords sight... a guy and site that seems to be well respected universally.

 

If the fingerboard is reasonably straight, end to end, I'll lay a 24" straightedge on top of the frets like this:

I can't use the straightedge if the fingerboard bends because it won't "read" the tops of the frets accurately to give me a sense of the neck angle.

 

 

Now, pushing the straightedge toward the bridge I'd like to see it "land" right on top of the wooden part of the bridge:

This is the way most guitars are built, and if the straightedge lays right on the top of the bridge, and right on top of the frets along the length of the neck, then I know the neck angle is just right.

 

Dan I would be more concerned if your test was showing it was below the bridge... but maybe check the top as GS says...and make sure you are using a straight edge long enough tio cover the full scale of the guiatr...one end should be on the first fret..and one end atop the bridge :)

 

EDIT

 

notice how Frank states..

 

and if the straightedge lays right on the top of the bridge, and right on top of the frets along the length of the neck

 

 

so the rules has to lay right atop of the frets ..... along the length of the neck...

neck relief is relative here also.

 

EDIT

 

lastly...in thuis test Frank states.." If the neck is relatively STRAIGHT ".. I would say to do the test correctly..you would basically have No relief..and the neck would be completely straight.. the correct for me releif of say 0.010" or a piece of papers width is good enough for me ...?

 

I think this is correct :)

[Anthony Buckeridge]

Quote: "Would love to hear your take on the photo below."

 

Quite: "I really have no issues with this."

 

 

 

 

You are happy with the Guitar as it is.

 

It Plays and Sounds Good, so everything is Fine and Dandy.

 

Not every Guitar is Designed or Made, exactly the same as every other one.

 

 

 

 

We are discussing a Guitar.

 

That has been in Manufacture since the early 1930's.

 

A dominate time for F Hole Guitars, Players expect to have a greater degree of Neck Set Angle.

 

Many Gibson Guitars, including the ubiquitous Les Paul Solid, do feature a distinctive degree of Neck Set Angle.

 

Indeed, if we study the History of Gibson Guitars, we see many themes and features, such as Neck Angle to Carved Tops and F Holes.

 

These features are clearly originally derived from Violin Family Instruments, whether it's an Acoustic Guitar with an Arched Top or Arched Back or a Carved Les Paul.

 

 

 

 

Today, my SJ-200 presented with a Straight Edge from the Nut to the Bridge, lands precisely on the top of the Bridge.

 

 

 

 

Does this mean your Guitar is Faulty?

 

Maybe, but not necessarily, unless it is suffering from complete dehydration and things have thus moved.

 

But I don't quite see hump as an obvious option, for someone that brandishes pictures of a Straight Edge and a Stew Mac Ruler?

 

However, please read the Taylor Pdf. at the bottom of this post, if only to ensure you eliminate that possibility after checking thoroughly for it.

 

Perhaps the Instrument was Manufactured with its Neck Set at a Greater Angle or it had a Custom Neck Set to that fashion, deliberately to suit a Player?

 

Possibly there was some kind of a problem at one time and the Neck was Planed and given a Greater Degree of Angle because of it, to AVOID the need of a Neck Re-Set then Re-fretted with High Frets.

 

It's difficult to properly assess a Musical Instrument, you can only see a tiny part of, which is several thousands of miles away, on another Continent altogether. So you will readily understand if I don't proffer an opinion.

 

 

 

However.

 

It's important to realise that.

 

Neck Set Angles on a wide variety of Musical Instruments.

 

Have changed quite dramatically over time, as Players dictate and demand the current Fashion.

 

 

 

Watch this little Movie, made close to my home.

 

 

 

In it, you will observe "The Messiah", Stradivarius Violin, the most valuable Musical Instrument on the Planet, last valued at $20,000,000.

 

Many authentic old Instruments have had their Necks Reset to a slightly increased angle. A graft allows the original scroll to be kept with a Baroque Violin when bringing its Neck into Conformance with Modern Standards.

 

The point of me showing you this, is that there can be Player led Fashions and Taste in Neck Set Angles, that undergo a definite change over time. Stradivarius Violins are not immune to these Fashion Vogues, and thus we should not expect, never to see a Gibson, so Adjusted.

 

 

 

Quote: "the slotted rulers are only long enough to cover the actual finger board...they are not used to do this neck angle test...you need a 21-24 inch rule to do this...so the headstock end is laying on the first fret..running along the finger board..it will then rest on the last frets on the guitar"

 

 

 

Indeed.

 

This is what I commented on earlier.

 

A rational explanation of how an 16 1/2" Tool can cover a 25 1/2" Scale Length?

 

Especially, when the Notched Slots for the Frets, prohibit it from being moved freely to various Fretboard positions.

 

I'm also wondering whether someone simply wanted to avoid the job of a Neck Reset,or whether there were other, Mitigating Factors involved, as discussed earlier?

 

 

 

Quote: "This is from Frank Fords sight... a guy and site that seems to be well respected universally."

 

 

 

Thank you for that excellent picture demonstration.

 

Normally, when there's a repair job that is quite impossible to fix on a Guitar.

 

You will find that Frank Ford already thought of and designed a tool to overcome the problem.

 

There's no better source of Guitar Repair and Maintenance on the Internet, than Frank Fords Frets.Com.

 

 

 

Here's the complete lowdown on Checking Neck Angle from Franks Site.

 

http://www.frets.com/FretsPages/Musician/Guitar/Setup/NeckAngle/neckangle.html

 

 

 

Often Humidity Problems can lead one to think there's a Neck Set Issue when there isn't.

 

Please scroll down to view the diagram, which will demonstrate the manner in which the problem you describe, can occur.

 

http://www.taylorguitars.com/sites/default/files/10_SymptomsofaDryGuitar.pdf

 

 

 

And not all Guitars are designed made, or end up, the same.

 

Enjoy your Fine Guitar.

[Sitedrifter]

I think my J200 with about 3/32" clearance of the bridge is not caused by too dry of a guitar. Why? My Taylor, Yamaha and Gretsch guitars are fine and my relative humidity where the guitars are kept varies from 47-54 percent but no higher or lower and this is tested with a calibrated hygrometer. The thing is, the other three brands have specifications listed on their site about neck angles and how to test but I cannot find anything about J200 neck angle testing on Gibson's site. I emailed them and look forward to what they say. In the meantime, I think the 3/32" is not an issue with the J200s and rather think it is the norm. When there is no clearance (just touches) on J200s may just mean the guitar is starting to show the need for a neck reset. Just another way to look at it since I have not seen any definitive answer from Gibson yet.

[Del Nilppeznaf]

'] I think the 3/32" is not an issue with the J200s and rather think it is the norm. When there is no clearance (just touches) on J200s may just mean the guitar is starting to show the need for a neck reset. Just another way to look at it since I have not seen any definitive answer from Gibson yet.

 

Sorry SD

 

but the information given in this thread from Frank Ford...and Anthony Buckridge is good. For people who know little about guitars..and I am no expert... I tend to listen to people with a lot of experience.

 

What makes you think this is the norm...how many J200's have you worked on ?

 

And to say "Just another way to look at it"..is not a healthy attitude, concerning how guitars are built. i simply reply to your thread so folk visiting this site or those who know little about neck angles and have done no research get the impression its simply one persons opinion over another.

 

This is not the case.

 

I stress that for this test the neck needs to have very little relief..and need to be relatively straight. It could be Gibson set the neck on your guitar like this... but ideally your frets should line up with the top of the bridge...period.

 

i would not worry about it tho... if your guitar plays good then no sweat... Again i would worry more if the bridge was above the fret plane.

 

Good luck with your reply from Gibson with this question ...hmmmmm !!! please let us know if you get one . ;)

[Sitedrifter]

Sorry SD

 

but the information given in this thread from Frank Ford...and Anthony Buckridge is good. For people who know little about guitars..and I am no expert... I tend to listen to people with a lot of experience.

 

What makes you think this is the norm...how many J200's have you worked on ?

 

And to say "Just another way to look at it"..is not a healthy attitude, concerning how guitars are built. i simply reply to your thread so folk visiting this site or those who know little about neck angles and have done no research get the impression its simply one persons opinion over another.

 

This is not the case.

 

I stress that for this test the neck needs to have very little relief..and need to be relatively straight. It could be Gibson set the neck on your guitar like this... but ideally your frets should line up with the top of the bridge...period.

 

i would not worry about it tho... if your guitar plays good then no sweat... Again i would worry more if the bridge was above the fret plane.

 

Good luck with your reply from Gibson with this question ...hmmmmm !!! please let us know if you get one . ;)

 

 

I am trying to be optimistic about my new J200. I went with the norm statement since the guitar is new, my other guitars are fine using the straightedge test and my guitar was just setup by a 5* technician with a great reputation. I would assume the 5* would not have sold it to me the way it is if it were not normal/acceptable for J200s. (again maybe being optimistic) Good thing is, I doubt anyone will take one persons statement in this thread as gospel which is a good thing. I hope I hear from Gibson about this important topic and will post their response (I will get one.. trust me).

[Del Nilppeznaf]

Good for you SD,

 

as stated many times in this thread... every guitar is different and it is all relative to each guitar.

 

People come to this site looking for technical information and such...and it is a great place to learn about acoustic guitars. I have learned so much over my couple of years here... it was from listening to very experienced people and being led to sites such as frets,com

 

It is one of the great things about this place... the advice and information is usually spot on. It is not littered with opinions and false or wrong info. To state that on a J200 if the bridge does indeed line up with the frets then it could be time for a neck reset

 

this is just wrong ( unless there is something really weird about that particular guitar )

 

someone reading that could think its true....

 

no offense meant...but please i think this is a great place to learn... lets keep it that way.

[Sitedrifter]

i think this is a great place to learn... lets keep it that way.

 

agreed! And next time I will add all kinds of disclaimers unless I have first hand authoritative provable knowledge

[Anthony Buckeridge]

Quote: "I would assume the 5* would not have sold it to me the way it is if it were not normal/acceptable for J200s."

 

 

 

Of course.

 

With the uttermost possible respect.

 

Assumption is the Mother and Father of all kinds of Problem Children.

 

Putting your 5* Set Up man completely aside, for I will not disparage anyone, most especially, on so short an acquaintance.

 

When anyone is selling you anything, they gain financially, and have a personal motivation and advantage, for positively affirming and validating a products acceptability.

 

From your writing, as elsewhere, it sounds as if the Instrument is new to you, rather than being brand new from the Factory, as was the Instruments Neck Set Angle and the Test as described in my earlier post.

 

 

 

 

It may be that if there is any difference and discrepancy, the reason lies right there.

 

With a Life Story of Owner Use, and possible changes, of which one may be totally unaware.

 

I know several Instrument Factory Owners, and most problems they seem to encounter are similar.

 

Where unwitting non original owners down a line of such individuals, Assume The Product is Spot On.

 

The Manufacturer Responsible, or everything is as the Manufacturers originally made the Instrument to be.

 

 

 

 

And very often, it simply isn't so!

 

 

 

 

I wish to place on Record, that I personally, have no financial advantage or can gain in any way materially by sharing, the information posted earlier.

 

Others will be in the self same position giving their assistance out of the goodness of their hearts. It's another difference and discrepancy, well worthy of proper note.

 

 

 

 

Quote: "my other guitars are fine using the straightedge test"

 

 

 

Please watch this Movie from 2.30 to the end.

 

Its about Humidity and its Effects. You will find it helps you understand better what I write next.

 

 

 

 

 

Quote: "I think my J200 with about 3/32" clearance of the bridge is not caused by too dry of a guitar. Why? My Taylor, Yamaha and Gretsch guitars are fine."

 

 

 

 

It's not uncommon for there to be half a dozen Guitars in the same room, but only one of them will be detectably sensitive to subtle changes.

 

Often these physical sensibilities can be the result of Changes in Temperature, equally as Humidity. Temperature extremes experienced for a short period can be utterly devastating.

 

Usually, the first few years are the most susceptible period, in a Guitars Life. And can be determining factors in such oddities as have been described. Where an Instrument is taken and left, when transported, can be an environmental minefield.

 

During my life I have done quite a lot of Conducting. Large Orchestra's today have Articulated Lorries fitted with complete environment control of Temperature and Humidity for all the Orchestra's Instruments, On Tour. Humidity here, is always Relative to Temperature. Its Temperature First, then Relative Humidity. The 45% to 55% C. F. Martin describe as optimal is relative to a recommended Temperature approximating 72 degrees. Both figures have genuine significance.

 

Please read the earlier post regarding Temperature and Humidity and the links with diagrams as suggested, as this is a primary factor you should first check out.

 

 

 

 

Quote: "I think the 3/32" is not an issue with the J200s and rather think it is the norm."

 

 

 

 

With respect.

 

This is a judgment, based upon absolutely no evidence whatever.

 

From fully independent, authoritative voices, with nothing whatever to gain, by reinforcing that view.

 

It may well be, and I expect it is the case, that one of the reasons given in earlier posts, fully explain the reason the Neck Set Angle reads as you describe.

 

As long as the Guitar works for you, it may well not be a problem at all to be concerned about, as long as you are happy with everything as it is.

 

 

 

 

The proper Current Factory Neck Set Geometry, and how to test for it has already been fully outlined earlier.

 

In my case the Neck and Bridge appear to be Level and the Top Parallel in a very Level Relationship. Gibson do a lovely job of this.

 

At the Gibson Factory they will test for properly centred String Alignment, and later use a Straight Edge as I described, when they go to fit the bridge.

 

Measuring the distance between the bottom of the Straight Edge to Guitar Top, they then choose a correct to Model Bridge, sized in height precisely and appropriately to fit the difference.

 

Under such circumstances, you should appreciate, that the Guitar will be Manufactured with Proper Geometry as described earlier, for the test as described earlier, repeatedly by both other Fora members and myself.

 

 

 

By watching this Movie, you can see this for yourself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

All Good Luck with your Guitar Playing.

 

"Be not Faithless. But Believing!"

[rar]

Quote: "the test for a neck reset is a straight edge running down the fretboard to the bridge"

 

 

Yes.

I hate to say anything critical of this posting, but I have to add my usual knee-jerk comment to this. People need to know that the vast majority of recent (Gibson and non-Gibson alike) guitars that "fail" the straightedge test do not need a neck reset. The most common cause for failure, by far, is over-humidification. False positives -- i.e., guitars that need a neck reset passing the test -- are also possible.

 

Many common guitar deformations can invalidate the test results, and that's why experts look for those prior to performing the straightedge test. If you don't know how much your Gibson should belly at the bridge, you shouldn't be messing with this test. "A little knowledge ...", as the saying goes.

 

-- Bob R