Low action: Set-necks have a big disadvantage

[Marcelo1281734115]

I am pretty much a beginner guitarist, picking up a guitar again a few months ago after giving it up 30 years ago. I am pretty good at tinkering with stuff though, seeing how they work and I have a knack improving what I take apart. I went a few months ago and payed $50 bucks for a tech to set up a 1997 Epi Les Paul Standard I had just bought to get me to start playing guitar again. Later, I found a couple of fire-sales and I picked up a Peavey Strat and an Ibanez SG. I did not want to pay another $50 to set up each latter 2 guitars (which would have been more than what I paid for each of these guitars), so I decided to start tinkering with all their neck's settings to see how low an action I could get, and if I screwed up the guitar, I wasn't losing much as these guitars were cheap. As a result, I learned how to set up a guitar in no-time and I am pretty darn good at it. I later used my newly-gained knowledge to set up the Les Paul too.

 

I learned a great deal by tinkering with the Peavey Strat, it is a tinkerer's dream. I got the string clearance to be a fantastic 1/32" string clearance at the 12th fret. This guitar has a bolt-on neck, and it has a hex key hole at the neck plate so that you can adjust the neck up or down at the point where the neck meets the body, and you can also adjust the truss rod at the headpiece like most guitars. The two neck adjustment points allowed me to set the neck very straight, so I could get this very low action.

 

The Ibanez SG is also a bolt-on, but they did not give you the hex key adjustment at the neck plate. But once I removed the neck and installed folded paper as a shim in order to raise the neck in the way I wanted to, I was also able to lower the guitar's action to 1/32" too.

 

When I tried to set up the 1997 Epi Les Paul and its set-neck, and I can only get a 2/32" clearance at the 12th fret. That is as low as it will go. I tried setting both the relief on the neck back-and-forth and the bridge up-and-down, but 2/32" is all I can get before a lot of horrible buzzing starts. If I could adjust the neck at the neck-body joint, I feel that I can get the action to be as low as the cheap guitars. When I asked the tech who originally set it up to get the action to be lower, he told me that I would need to remove frets 15 and up and plane the fretboard down and replace the frets, when, had the guitar had a bolt-on neck instead, the fix would have been so simple, WTF?

 

People prefer the set-necks for sustain and better looks, but I think that this can limit greatly the playability of the guitar. Wood settles over the years and with a set-neck, you are at a major disadvantage in having a guitar's wood settling unfavourably, leaving you with a piece of unplayable junk. I think that I rather have a bolt-on so that I can easliy adjust for a low action. Anyhow, here is my question to the experts out there. Is there an easy way to adjust the neck at the neck-joint to get the Les Paul to have lower action?

[vomer]

If your tech is telling you that you need to remove fretboard wood then it sounds as if you have a warp in the body-end of the neck, an upbow, that isn't being removed by normal trussrod adjustment. You say you have reduced the relief, i.e. flattened the neck, with the truss rod, have you then tested it with a straightedge? Is there an upbow at the end, or could it be (not wanting to question the skill of your tech) that there are high or uneven frets rather than a warped neck?

[Marcelo1281734115]

He took a long straight-edge and he told me that the neck was "not bad" and that he had seen a lot of Gibsons that were a lot worse. I don't have a straight edge that long, but the clearance at fret 21 is about the same as the 12th fret (on my other guitars, the clearance increases by about 1/64" when going from the 12th fret to the 21st fret, so my upbow is about 1/64 at the 21st fret). I also use the 6th string to see if it is straight from frets 1 to 12 and this is straight, with no relief at fret 5, the halfway point. I can pull the headpiece back forcing the neck backwards and I can see the neck straighten and the action becomes temporarily lower until I let go.

 

I figure that if I could put a bit of pressure and bend the neck slightly backwards and use heat, moisture or whatever, I could get the slight upbow to disappear, but I don't know how to do this. The previous owner of the guitar stored the guitar for many years in its Epi hard case and I noticed that the neck is supported at fret 10 by the case and the body has a gap underneath, so gravity and the weight of the body of the guitar may have bowed the neck outwards at the neck joint from being stored in that position.

[Steven Lister]

When I tried to set up the 1997 Epi Les Paul and its set-neck' date=' and I can only get a 2/32" clearance at the 12th fret. That is as low as it will go. ..... Anyhow, here is my question to the experts out there. Is there an easy way to adjust the neck at the neck-joint to get the Les Paul to have lower action?[/quote']

No. As you pointed out, the neck joint is set/glued to the body, so there is no variance/adjustment at the joint.

Epi/Gibson spec. is 2/32" treble side and 3/32" bass side.

Most LPs can be lowered up to about 1/64" more than spec by truss rod/bridge adjustment. Any more than that usually requires special nut/fret/fretboard work and may not even be possible depending upon the instrument.

 

LPs are not shredder guitars for that very reason. Not everyone likes super-low action anyway. But it is a consideration when buying a guitar to suit your playing style. In other words, its not really a disadvantage but rather a trade-off for the tone/sustain gained by a set neck.

 

WELCOME to the forum!

 

Hit every BLUE NOTE baaaby..., I'm going to play on:-"

[MarxBros]

While I like low action and have never had any issue getting a set neck as low as I want it, there is such a thing as too low making playing actually harder and not easier.

 

Also, your shimming and tilting the neck in the pocket of a bolt on guitar tends to kill sustain as you are effectively decoulping the neck from the body to a certain degree.

[Marcelo1281734115]

I have 2/32" on the bass and 2/32" on the treble side right now. I might be able to lower the treble side some more via the bridge, but it is the bass side that I want to reduce and the fret buzz gets to be too much.

 

What is funny is that I still have the the shipping list that came with this guitar when it was new, and on the flyer, Epiphone brags about how every guitar is manually set by a technician when it leaves the factory. The technician that setup this guitar at the factory handwrote 4/32" on the treble and 6/32 on the bass side, which would make this guitar impossible to play by just about everyone. That is double the spec!

[Ron G]

I'm trying to understand the geometry difference between changing the neck angle versus lowering the bridge. It seems to me that the effect would be the same. Can somebody explain it to me, please?

[Marcelo1281734115]

The neck angle you refer to in set-neck guitars is the adjustment at the truss rod nut located at the headstock. This adjustment does NOT adjust the entire neck, it adjusts about haf of the neck near the headstock and lets it curve up a bit like a banana, this curve is called "relief".

 

Usually when an old guitar settles, it leaves you with a hockey stick shape, the neck is the shaft of the hockey stick and the high frets near and on the body make up the blade. On a set-neck, you can adjust the shaft portion and make sure it is straight or have a slight bend at the upper end of the shaft (near the headstock), but you cannot do anything to adjust the blade portion of the hockey stick on these guitars (unless you remove the frets and shave the fretboard down so that it makes a straight line with the shaft of the hockey stick).

[Steven Lister]

The technician that setup this guitar at the factory handwrote 4/32" on the treble and 6/32 on the bass side' date=' which would make this guitar impossible to play by just about everyone. That is double the spec![/quote']

Since 4/64 and 6/64 is how Epi/Gibson lists spec, the tech. likely typo-ed the card.

 

Ron - the angle change at the neck joint would tilt the neck thereby closing the gap between string and fret at the bridge end w/o changing the gap at the nut end. This could eliminate buzz in the higher frets.

 

Raising/lowering the bridge changes the string angle and hence the gaps at both the nut end and the bridge end of the neck.

 

Hit every BLUE NOTE baaaby..., I'm going to play on:-"

[Ron G]

Ron - the angle change at the neck joint would tilt the neck thereby closing the gap between string and fret at the bridge end w/o changing the gap at the nut end. This could eliminate buzz in the higher frets.

 

Raising/lowering the bridge changes the string angle and hence the gaps at both the nut end and the bridge end of the neck.

Steven, this does not make any logical sense to me. I still maintain that the effect would be the same. Think about it.

 

As for Marcelo's answer. That makes some sense to me but won't the "hockey stick" effect differ upon how deeply set the neck is? It seems to me that a Strat neck and a SG neck would have about equal "straightness factors".

[generation zero]

All these improper fractions are really making me batty, considering my woodworking background. 4/32? Really? How about... 1/8? LOL...

 

And really, wether you call it 2/32 or 1/16, I can't imagine wanting action any lower than that on the bass side anyway. Of course you get fret buzz if you go lower... The string needs room to vibrate, LOL!

[Marcelo1281734115]

For a bolt-on neck like a Strat, you can adjust the slope at which the neck meets the body. If you slope the neck outwards, you might want to reduce some relief at the headstock or the headstock (the nut) will be too far outward (and this will raise the action too much). Later, by raising the bridge, you raise the action slightly at the first fret, but you are raising it a lot at the 21st fret. Again it all depends where the fret buzz is coming from, this is where you give it a little more string clearance to resolve the buzz. You need to pick your adjustments depending on your problem.

 

Solving buzz all depends where the fret buzz is coming from, so the more adjustments you have, the better it is. The set-neck like a Epi Les Paul Standard and most Gibsons, the neck is glued into the body and there is no adjustment there. It seems that the high-end guitars are tend to have a set-neck, except for Fender Strats which are all bolt-on. For SG's all Gibsons are set-neck and the high end Epi SG G400 is also set-neck, but Epi also makes a lower version called the 310 that has a bolt-on neck instead.

[Marcelo1281734115]

All these improper fractions are really making me batty' date=' considering my woodworking background. 4/32? Really? How about... 1/8? LOL...

 

And really, wether you call it 2/32 or 1/16, I can't imagine wanting action any lower than that on the bass side anyway. Of course you get fret buzz if you go lower... The string needs room to vibrate, LOL!

[/quote']

 

It seems that most pros that fix guitars in Norht America measure action in 1/32 increments. I have a little steel ruler that I use for this and I just count the 1/32's I see when I am adjusting the guitar. Europeans use the metric system (ie, millimeters).

 

The reasons I want to get my action to 1/32 are several. First, I am perfectionist and getting the action to be this low is a personal challenge for me. Second, you cannot reduce the action to be this low if the guitar is bad, so this reinforces that I made a good purchase. Third, by having a low action like 1/32 means that you can later raise the action to more normal levels and you will be assured that you will not have issues like fret buzz because you gave yourself more slack to avoid problems. Fourth, the wood in a guitar moves around over time, so if it performs well at 1/32 action, then you will probably only need to adjust the bridge a bit everytime you notice buzz and this might keep you going for years, instead of having to take it to a tech every few months your wood shifts and he charges you $50 to reset it everytime, which can add up to a lot of money.

 

I aksed my dad who used to be a carpenter and he told me to loosen the strings and put some weight on the neck to force the neck back down and keep this slight pressure for 3 to 4 days. He says it might straighten the wood.

[bug music]

I'm trying to understand the geometry difference between changing the neck angle versus lowering the bridge. It seems to me that the effect would be the same. Can somebody explain it to me' date=' please?[/quote']

 

Ron, you're right that under most circumstances both adjustments accomplish the same thing. But if you're looking for seriously low "shredder type" action reducing the neck angle can sometimes help "easily" get that little extra bit lower. I say easily, because the same thing can be accomplished on a set neck, but it is a lot more work.

 

I'm not really great at explaining things in writing but I'll give it a shot...

First you have to assume that you have a neck (and fretwork) that will play buzz free with very little or no relief, otherwise this little extra adjustment is a moot point. When you reduce the neck angle you are in effect raising the nut, while lowering the last few frets (the ones over the body). If you have a straight neck with no buzzes on the lower frets, changing that angle can help reduce fret buzz above the 12th fret.

 

You can accomplish almost the same thing on a set neck by shimming the nut slightly and dressing the last 4 or 5 frets lower to give them some "fallaway" in other words make the last few frets each get successively lower as they approach the heel of the neck.

 

Hopefully I said that right. It's not an adjustment most folks would need, but it can make a very small difference. Hopefully this helps.

 

- Jay

[MarxBros]

 

Ron' date=' you're right that under most circumstances both adjustments accomplish the same thing. But if you're looking for seriously low "shredder type" action reducing the neck angle can sometimes help "easily" get that little extra bit lower. I say easily, because the same thing can be accomplished on a set neck, but it is a lot more work.

 

I'm not really great at explaining things in writing but I'll give it a shot...

First you have to assume that you have a neck (and fretwork) that will play buzz free with very little or no relief, otherwise this little extra adjustment is a moot point. When you reduce the neck angle you are in effect raising the nut, while lowering the last few frets (the ones over the body). If you have a straight neck with no buzzes on the lower frets, changing that angle can help reduce fret buzz above the 12th fret.

 

You can accomplish almost the same thing on a set neck by shimming the nut slightly and dressing the last 4 or 5 frets lower to give them some "fallaway" in other words make the last few frets each get successively lower as they approach the heel of the neck.

 

Hopefully I said that right. It's not an adjustment most folks would need, but it can make a very small difference. Hopefully this helps.

 

- Jay [/quote']Shimming the nut will only help on open strings, there is no good reason to shim a nut to get lower action, that's backwards basically.

[generation zero]

 

Ron' date=' you're right that under most circumstances both adjustments accomplish the same thing. But if you're looking for seriously low "shredder type" action reducing the neck angle can sometimes help "easily" get that little extra bit lower. I say easily, because the same thing can be accomplished on a set neck, but it is a lot more work.

 

I'm not really great at explaining things in writing but I'll give it a shot...

First you have to assume that you have a neck (and fretwork) that will play buzz free with very little or no relief, otherwise this little extra adjustment is a moot point. When you reduce the neck angle you are in effect raising the nut, while lowering the last few frets (the ones over the body). If you have a straight neck with no buzzes on the lower frets, changing that angle can help reduce fret buzz above the 12th fret.

 

You can accomplish almost the same thing on a set neck by shimming the nut slightly and dressing the last 4 or 5 frets lower to give them some "fallaway" in other words make the last few frets each get successively lower as they approach the heel of the neck.

 

Hopefully I said that right. It's not an adjustment most folks would need, but it can make a very small difference. Hopefully this helps.

 

- Jay [/quote']

Hmm... Any time I needed the action lower on my strats, I angled the neck opposite of what you're saying... In effect, lowering the nut. This brought the higher frets closer to the strings, this lowering the action. I don't see how angling the neck in the opposite direction could also result in lower action... Unless you're talking about lowering the bridge further as well, in which case I suppose it would facilitate lower action eventually, but the act of angling the neck as you describe does not in itself create lower action, correct?

[bug music]

Shimming the nut will only help on open strings' date=' there is no good reason to shim a nut to get lower action, that's backwards basically.[/quote']

 

Mostly that is correct, but it will also change the angle of the "string-bridge" line in relation to the fingerboard line. Under most circumstances it won't make a difference but the OP is talking about getting very close to the 12th fret here. Raising the nut a couple of thousandths will make a noticeable difference 24.75 inches away at the 12th fret, allowing him some more room to lower the bridge. Remember he is not talking about normally low action, he basically wants the "string-bridge" lint to be parallel to the fingerboard all the way up the neck. That's not going to happen if the nut end is slightly lower. Again sorry if I'm not explaining it the best.

 

- Jay

[bug music]

Hmm... Any time I needed the action lower on my strats' date=' I angled the neck opposite of what you're saying... In effect, lowering the nut. This brought the higher frets closer to the strings, this lowering the action. I don't see how angling the neck in the opposite direction could also result in lower action... Unless you're talking about lowering the bridge further as well, in which case I suppose it would facilitate lower action eventually, but the act of angling the neck as you describe does not in itself create lower action, correct?

[/quote']

Sorry slow typist here. That's exactly what I mean, changing the angle and lowering the bridge.

 

You are absolutely correct, increasing the angle will sometimes let you get lower action if you have more relief in your neck. Remember relief is only from the nut to where the neck meets the body. So if you have more relief. lowering the nut end and raising the heel may be optimal for that situation. The way I read the OP was he wants a dead straight neck with the strings parallel to the fingerboard all the way up. Maybe I misunderstood him though.

 

- Jay

[rafaelh]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding some of what's been said here, as usual, and my undrestanding of the purpose of a truss rod as it has been explained to me might also been misunderstood. But the truss has basically one purpose and that is to counter the pull of the strings. It is not intended for string heigh or intonation adjustments...although it does affect them. The "Micro-Tilt" adjustmen found on some guitars is to further align the neck with the body and also not intended as a means to adjust the action. Once the neck is set, adjustments to the action and what not is done via the saddles, bridge or nut.

 

I like a low action myself, but have never experience some of the issues mentioned here. Most of the times when I do have some difficulty setting a low action is due to different finger board radiuses....guess there's a point where you have gone as far as possible.

 

Only advantage I see with bolt on necks is being able to replace either the body or the neck if one gets damaged. From a manufactures point I guess they require less labor and again if one gets damaged it's cheaper and easier to just replace the neck or the body instead of the whole guitar.

 

Some folks debate that set necks are tonally better, but my old ears can't tell any difference...either one's the same to me.

 

Anyhow just my 2 pennies worth, and like I said earlier probably totally missunderstood everything :) .

[rafaelh]

Sorry slow typist here.

 

LOL...when I started typing Marcelo's was the last post.

[Nic]

All these improper fractions are really making me batty' date=' considering my woodworking background. 4/32? Really? How about... 1/8? LOL...

 

And really, wether you call it 2/32 or 1/16, I can't imagine wanting action any lower than that on the bass side anyway. Of course you get fret buzz if you go lower... The string needs room to vibrate, LOL!

[/quote']

Thank you. Please reduce your fractions.

[Ron G]

Raf, thanks for bringing sense and logic back into this discussion!

 

To Nic: I wanted to reduce my fractions but I'm a half-wit.

[TWANG]

Marx hinted at this. but that F company talks about 'free air'. .distance between string and board..

more there is more tone.. you cut your action down to practically zero.. (and let's not even talk about how perfect your fret work

has to be AND STAY for that to work).. and you wind up with less tone.

 

super fast action isn't for playing fast, it's for weak fingers.

 

want faster action, take off those .008s and put .011s on there for three months.

then go back to your light guages.. gosh oh golly suddenly you're three times faster, wonder how that happened?

 

Even if you achieve super fast action, you have to modify your attack.. dynamics go right out the window, cause the second you really dig

in you're going to deaden the sustain and get noise as well.

 

Someday, gibson will invent a guitar which doesn't require action, or tuning.

You'll simply have super slinky strings all of the same guage, laying right across the frets.

electro mechanical action will tell the guitars brain what pitch to create, fretted or bent.

the pickups probably will be the frets, all scratchiness digitalized out.

tuning pegs will only be there to adjust the amount of tension you like on the strings.

your robot dog will play it just as well as you and everyone will be a virtuoso in two months flat.

 

Hopefully, I'll be dead by then.

 

TWANG

[bug music]

Raf' date=' thanks for bringing sense and logic back into this discussion!

 

[/quote']

 

You're right man ! Sorry I did get sucked in, we are talking insanely low action here. All I was trying to say was if the OP expects to get the action to basically 1/2 the recommended specs, he's never going to get it unless the neck angle is optimal.

 

I also find that having a nut cut from unicorn tusk tends to help too.

See, I said I wasn't good at explaining things.

 

- Jay

[generation zero]

Marx hinted at this. but that F company talks about 'free air'. .distance between string and board..

more there is more tone.. you cut your action down to practically zero.. (and let's not even talk about how perfect your fret work

has to be AND STAY for that to work).. and you wind up with less tone.

 

super fast action isn't for playing fast' date=' it's for weak fingers.

 

want faster action, take off those .008s and put .011s on there for three months.

then go back to your light guages.. gosh oh golly suddenly you're three times faster, wonder how that happened?

 

Even if you achieve super fast action, you have to modify your attack.. dynamics go right out the window, cause the second you really dig

in you're going to deaden the sustain and get noise as well.

 

Someday, gibson will invent a guitar which doesn't require action, or tuning.

You'll simply have super slinky strings all of the same guage, laying right across the frets.

electro mechanical action will tell the guitars brain what pitch to create, fretted or bent.

the pickups probably will be the frets, all scratchiness digitalized out.

tuning pegs will only be there to adjust the amount of tension you like on the strings.

your robot dog will play it just as well as you and everyone will be a virtuoso in two months flat.

 

Hopefully, I'll be dead by then.

 

TWANG

[/quote']

 

This post wins the thread.