Headstock Pitch

[duluthdan]

Mildly curious about the headstock pitch here on a 1950s Gibby - was this a pretty standard design? Would seem to me to be a design approach to giving the midrange strings one helluva bark. Are most 50s like this?

[j45nick]

I believe the Gibson acoustic headstock angle stayed at 17 degrees until around 1965, when it was reduced to 14 degrees. To the best of my knowledge, all are now at 17 degrees again.

 

With its non-tapered headstock, the guitar you are showing here appears to be about 1955 or later.

[zombywoof]

Gibson settled on the 17 degree headstock pitch in the late 1920s and all their guitars were designed this way. While a 14 to 15 degree headstock pitch is what was considered normal (I think Martins have a 15 degree pitch), Gibson probably believed that the sharper break angle over the nut increased tension which in turn increased sustain. I always figured Gibson reduced the headstock angle as they thought it was the cause of the growing number of headstock breaks that seemed to be popping up (primarily with the electric guitars) in the 1960s. The real villian, however, was more than likely the combination of the skinny 1960s necks and large cutout for the truss rod adjustment which weakened the scarf joint.

 

I want to say Gibson returned to the 17 degree angle sometime in the early 1980s.

[Hogeye]

Gibson settled on the 17 degree headstock pitch in the late 1920s and all their guitars were designed this way. While a 14 to 15 degree headstock pitch is what was considered normal (I think Martins have a 15 degree pitch), Gibson probably believed that the sharper break angle over the nut increased tension which in turn increased sustain. I always figured Gibson reduced the headstock angle as they thought it was the cause of the growing number of headstock breaks that seemed to be popping up (primarily with the electric guitars) in the 1960s. The real villian, however, was more than likely the combination of the skinny 1960s necks and large cutout for the truss rod adjustment which weakened the scarf joint.

 

I want to say Gibson returned to the 17 degree angle sometime in the early 1980s.

Scarf joint? Where and what is it?

[modoc_333]

Scarf joint? Where and what is it?

 

 

 

I think he mis-spoke. Gibsons don't have scarf joints. he meant the area behind the nut where a scarf joint would be.

[j45nick]

I think he mis-spoke. Gibsons don't have scarf joints. he meant the area behind the nut where a scarf joint would be.

 

 

Interestingly, Martin used to join the headstock to the neck with a beautirful, intricate bird's-beak joint. They now replicate the appearance of that joint with the carved "volute" on the back of the headstock/neck transition, but it's a one-piece neck, like Gibson's.

 

I once had an 1870's Martin on which the glue in the joint had failed, resulting in the separation of the neck and headstock. It was a simple matter to clean it up and glue it back together. The fit was perfect.

 

I understand why they dropped this joint--it must have been tedious to fit perfectly in the days before gap-filling adhesives. What I don't know is when they stopped using it.

 

Anyone out there know? Tom Barnwell (tpbiii), with your vast knowledge about (and huge collection of) vintage guitars?

[zombywoof]

I think he mis-spoke. Gibsons don't have scarf joints. he meant the area behind the nut where a scarf joint would be.

 

 

You are correct, I tend to use the phrase generically to describe that region of the guitar. Had Gibson used a scarf joint it would probably have reduced breakage.