In this video, I will talk about guitar neck volutes and ask you the viewer for your thoughts. If you would like to help support this channel, visit my RU-vid merchandise store and buy a t-shirt or a guitar plan: / highlineguitars
I would have to agree. I’m a carpenter but I have not ever built a guitar. Although I do own a couple. Depending on the material being used and given that the headstock may be joined at the weaker point on a neck! Anything that adds to the strength or gives additional support has to be of a benefit.
I like volutes. Feels like something's missing if it's not there. Got a Schecter C-8 SLS and the neck is very thin (20mm if I recall correctly). Not having a volute there would be a disaster waiting to happen.
Alot of people are confused when they see a volute on a guitar for he first time, but I have been playing Carvin guitars for years and am used to them. Don't even notice them anymore.
Thank you for discussing this, I appreciate your experience and viewpoints! I am building my first guitar, and I did put a volute on it. One of my factory-built guitars has a volute, which I like for both the aesthetic and strength features, and it does not impede my playing. I tend to like as much strength as possible when I am building something; I want it to be able to withstand hard use and/or the occasional mishap, and I want it to last. I agree that- as long as it is positioned and crafted correctly- it is not obtrusive when playing the instrument. I see no downside.
I have had a dozen or so guitar / ukulele / banjo (s) over the years and never broken or cracked a headstock. None of my stringed instruments has had a valute. I am not against valutes, I just have never purchased a stringed instrument that had one. It's important to know: my insruments do not travel. I do not preform publically. That greatly reduces the risk of damage.
As a player, I’ve never even thought about it, and couldn’t tell you which of my guitars have a volute and which don’t. I guess that means I’m not bothered. As a newbie builder, I think that they make quite a nice transition from neck to headstock, but prefer something relatively subtle, not like the “ice cream scoop” you showed in the video 😂 As for whether a volute is needed to add strength, I don’t know. I’ve never broken a neck at the headstock end. I’d quite like to see a Mythbusters-like objective experiment about it, though …
I think for thinner necks that are going to have a locking nut, a veloute is preferable. Early Ibanez RG's for example had non-laminate wizard necks with no veloute and were notorious for cracking where the locking nut is bolted to the neck.
I agree with you, if it's added tastefully, it's a good thing. if positioned properly it really shouldn't become encumbered to your playing and in fact feel nice even when it's there. to me, they only start to look bad when they're excessive 🤟
Thanks for the video! I had an ESP with a volute and it was great. Playing chords on first 3 frets feels great and gives support. Volute might help to make a thinner neck from mahogany without being afraid of breaking it.
As a player, I've never been hindered by a carved headstock transition, and even if I'm playing weird chords around the first fret I tend to have my thumb under the fret rather than any closer to the nut- I'm not sure what I'd need to play for one to get in the way. I've got guitars and basses both with and without, and haven't yet snapped a headstock. I agree that the very pronounced carved transitions can look a little ridiculous, but also like the look of some of the subtle ones where the cylinder of the neck tapers into the plane of the rear of the headstock without the need for the dramatic flare some folks go for.
I own a late 70's Gibson 'The' Paul which is all Walnut. The guitar has a volute and the headstock angle is less than a Les Paul and I appreciate both of these features . Also the body is contoured back and front which makes the guitar very comfortable. The neck is definitely on the chunky side and yet the volute is very reassuring and feels comfortable to me as I play.
I've never had the pleasure of using an instrument with them. None of my ukes, guitars and basses - or any I have used - have had this. I'd like to try one. I think they look good and the science behind the added strength seems beyond much doubt.
As a player, I find most volutes get in the way, especially if you're playing lots of weird chords at the top of the neck that involve the first fret. You also have to account for the neck profile and scale length which may require slightly different hand positions -- like using a 25.5" guitar do play a simple Open C requires larger stretches in the top frets as compared to a 24.75" neck. Usually the hand needs to be angled up more as a result to stretch the fingers father, so a volute of any size may intrude, especially with a thicker profile neck. I own a full sized 2018 KLOS Hybrid Deluxe that has a CF body and wood neck with CF stiffening rods. It has a zero degree headstock with a good break angle and tuning stability. It's super strong, and there aren't any volutes getting in the way of my hand's ability to position any which way. If every guitar were made like their neck, including their very small headstock design, this discussion wouldn't even be needed! Their original Kickstarter pages from 2018 and prior (they have had many campaigns for different models) explain a lot about their design process. I am all for minimal volutes (like yours) and scarf joints where there are neck angles that require the added strength. I'm also all for moving truss rod access elsewhere on the bottom of the neck as long as strings don't need to be removed to make the adjustments and it's not on the fretboard itself -- like a side access is great. Anything that helps improve guitar design is game in my book, but it cannot interfere with playability -- after all, it's pointless to have a strong guitar if you can't play the darn thing! I have wondered if there might be a way to use CF to help strengthen angled necks. In other words, picture neck stiffening rods that curve/angle at the top and extends into the neck. Yes, it's true wood would have to be routed out of the headstock, but I think the CF would to more good than harm in this case. It would also help guitars with neck dive since the headstock would be lighter being that the wood's mass would be replaced with lighter, stronger CF. I would love to see you experiment with this idea. Please give it a try!
i have volute on my guitars because the way i make scarf joints. they come naturally for my instruments and in a way it would be harder not to make them. also, adds some perceived prestige in a way.
As a player, I'm in favor of the volute on acoustics. I once had a broken headstock on an expensive classical guitar I had when I was a teen. Actually I found it broken in my bedroom, where there was house cleaning that day and probably it fell off on the ground. I would not buy an expensive Gibson style guitar for the same reason. I don't like the angled headstock on electrics because it's fragile, prefer the Fender style non angled headstock.
The angle of the head on an LP is made that way to give a stable break angle where the strings go over the nut. Fender chose not to have an extreme break angle at the nut. But the sacrifice is they need string trees to keep the strings in stable contact with the nut and to keep them from popping out when a string is extremely bent. A glued scarf on the head of an LP would solve their breakage problems , but they just refuse to do it. Many Gibson fans ,they claim, Just wouldn't buy a les Paul if the neck and head were different from the classic design. I believe Gibson should build a line of Les Paul guitars with scarf jointed heads and market them as an authentic Gibson Les Pail that won't break off. If the don't sell they can discontinue them . If they do sell, Gibson will have evolved their design for the better.
@@TheHumbuckerboy It is nice that you have an opinion...But unfortunately for you, it does not coincide with reality. When Gibson did incorporate volutes in their models through the 70s, Statistically it did not reduce the incidence of headstock fractures at all. One statistic that did change was that sales of new guitars went down. The buying public wants the original design as fragile as that is. All the volute accomplished was that the headstock breaks were just a little bit easier to repair. The design change that would absolutely make a difference is a scarf jointed head. But Les Paul buyers will stop buying Gibson Les Pauls altogether if Gibson decided to do that. Selling guitars that don't break is not what Gibson is in business for. They are in business to sell a dream and anything that interferes with the authenticity of that dream is doomed to marketing realities.
@@williardbillmore5713 Where did you learn of these statistics ? I hadn't heard anything like that from any other source before. Personally I wouldn't buy one of the very expensive Les Paul reissues simply because of the headstock/neck vulnerability issue.
@@TheHumbuckerboy I've been following it all along...I'm 70 and I used to get Guitar Player magazine back in the day. So save yourself a bundle , get yourself a Hondo "Paul" and make some worry free, great music. Hondos have a scarf joint headstock on a mahogany neck and they sound and play great
I feel that volutes are a necessity on the majority of guitars, especially those with an angled headstock. They help prevent accidental breaks to the headstock (think the Gibson phenomena) and as you said they can be done in a non-intrusive and creative way to add a little extra character. There may be instances in which a volume is not necessary but as an amateur builder I can’t say exactly what those are yet. Me personally, I like ‘‘em and plan to include them on all my personal builds.
Volutes have proven to be ineffective at preventing head stock breaks. Gibson built guitars with volutes from 1969 to 1981. During that decade head stock breaks were just as common as before and since.
I generally sculpt a volutes on my necks. They look attractive, but also add some volume at is the weakest part of the neck. Especially when using a conventional truss rod. I have considered using a spoke wheel truss rod in order to eliminate the need for a volute I also use a conservative head stock angle 💜💜💜💜💜💜 Sarah
Excellent episode as always Chris! Thanks for sharing your knowledge and talent with the world, it is very much appreciated. I can't tell you how many times I have searched your channel when I've run into a problem while doing one of my builds.
As a player, i like to volute. Any time that i'm playing that traditional F barre chord , my thumb from my fretting hand rests behind the volute, on that slope towards the headstock. It gives the chord this incredible stability. I don't know how else to say it Then if sometimes i like to skip the volute, i'll just drop the barre form, and use the thumb on the bass notes, over the neck. For me, the volute is a good thing to have. You can opt out of it, by changing your playing style a bit. If you have to comp in F for a long time, the volute is your best friend. It's weird , but this whole volute thing connects you to the guitar tradition, you will see that the guitar has a LOT of history, thought and effort put into it. It's the instrument for every person. It's cool to see those inventions, even in a modern guitar you've just bought. I think the volute was meant to be more, than just a thickener of the neck. It is also a tool to help the player.
Is there a story to be told that explains why the word 'volute' changed meaning in lutherie from violins to guitars?
Год назад
Playwise - matters duck all. From perspective of build quality and durability I would choose icecream scoop any time over a neck that shatters from small bump. Besides it is on the back so even if it was not esthetically pleasing it would matter ziltch.
I am not a builder, just a player. That said, I have been playing since the early eighties and the only two guitars I have ever owned with volutes are my Schecter Damien and a cheapo Luna 12 string. I have been playing the Schecter for a couple of years now and I really like the feel of the volute on this guitar. As a matter of fact, I consider it to be one of the reasons that I bought it over a Jackson I was looking at. The Luna is another story though. The neck on the Luna 12 string is considerably thicker and wider and since I have smaller hands on top of that, the volute area makes it a little more difficult for me to play in the first position/cowboy chord area. The Schecter neck is so comfortable in comparison since it has a much more manageable profile for my smaller hands so, although I do like the volute on one guitar, I can't say I love them in general. My advice would be to try it before you buy it lol.
As a player: I don’t care whether it’s there or not, although aesthetically I do like it most of the time. As a builder: I’ve only built 5 necks but they all have volutes and it’s actually more fun to do than a boring smooth transition.
Y'know, until today I never knew what that headstock heel was called (except just that), and why I couldn't use the particular capos I wanted (like the Glider and the Picker's Pal), but because it's there for a reason, yeah I can dig it. Just have to use a clamp capo like an Axis or G7th Nashville
I'm a fan of volutes, the way they look and feel to me when playing. The strength argument makes sense when talking about highly angled headstocks, especially with truss rod access up that end and the many examples of Gibson breaks. But - I'd need to know more, say with break angles shallower than Gibson (eg PRS) or where the truss rod access is at the heel, whether there is more need with a scarf joint (or less), laminate neck vs one piece etc etc.
I agree that it makes sense to increase strength in the area but it’s not my thing. Early on I settled for the sleek (non voluted) versions for my playing style and can’t get used to volutes anymore, they just disturb my fretting hand.
About half of my guitars have a volute. I don’t shred on my guitars at the nut so it doesn’t impede playability in my opinion. I’ve only built a couple guitars but they both had a volute.
There is also a ‘valute’ kind of thing going on the neck where it meets the body. To me it is so strange that most of the time with bolt ons and set necks there is some excessive wood there on the neck. I dont see the point in that. Neckthrough necks dont have that, they are smooth leveled. My English is not that good but I think you know what I am talking about. Hope you can make a video about that too and explain to use where it comes from and if it has benefits. One time I saw a guitar builder who talked about it. He said it has no benefit and that he never builds necks with that extra wood. He makes it smooth like the rest of the neck all the way to the body. He said that one time a manufacturer made this neck and since then others just copied without asking themselves why. I cannot find that video of that builder anymore
Short answer...yes. why? Just 'cuz. I like the way it looks and if it adds strength, great, but I'd put one on either way. Position is important and in the wrong location, it does interfere with playing but can give position reference if located correctly. I use it, in part, to make my guitars more distinctive.
A functional design, intended to strengthen an acknowledged weakness, that does not detract from the overall aesthetic of an instrument is fine in my opinion. I have guitars with and without volutes; in playing them I never really notice. I have had a Les Paul-style guitar suffer a neck crack precisely where such a volute may have spared such an indignity. Alas, live and learn.
well i add a diamond volute to my acoustics just a little twist and love carving them i think it shows craftsmanship with a ebony back strap surrounding the volute maes it stand out
Seems to me that if you start with vertical grain on your neck, its shear strength alone would make risk of the standard broken headstock minimal. If I'm buying a guitar with a solid color neck, so I can't see how the neck is built, I probably want a volute as an additional assurance. As a builder, I alway make laminate necks, always try to orient the grain right, and still build in a volute because it does not detract from the play of the guitar and it adds some piece of mind while the volute itself is mostly made out of the process of sanding the thickness of the headstock with an oscillating spindle sander anyway. When I didn't have the sander, I carved by hand, but its just so easy, looks cool, says "modern" and it doesn't really matter if it is overbuilding the neck. On the other hand I'm pretty damn aggressive in carving out thin necks and heels but I'm also relying on the grain orientation and construction and the magic power of the 2 way truss rod. Necks don't bust in middle or the heel without really really trying
I like volutes just for the feel. Seems like it is good insurance considering how clumsy I am and having once broken a headstock. On a side note, you realize that the majority of commenters online ARE Cliff Clavens. Except for smarter people who watch quality content like yours.
I never thought about it before, so I went back and looked at my guitars. I have none with the greatly exaggerated feature that you showed at the beginning, but all my Fender style guitars have a subtle volute at the headstock. It turns out I have two other guitars with no volute. I've played them all without ever noticing the presence or absence. But when I hold them and think about it, I have to say there is a level of comfort. That subtle tactile clue that says you are at the nut, without ever have to look down at your hand position, is kind of nice. So, not a big deal, but I have to side with "Yea".
I only have one guitar with a volute at the headstock. Its a Schecter and it happens to be my favorite. The volute does not interfere with my playing and if it reinforces the headstock then great. My Fender 12 string does not have a volute and it anything needs it then that does. I understand that the angle of the headstock also affects the strength of the headstock which is why Gibson Les Pauls tend to break more than some others. My question is how does a increased headstock angle improve the playing of a guitar? Fender inline 6 has very little angle at all but they are considered one of the best by some.
I'm a luthier and a guitar player as well as others ... I like volutes ... they don't interfere with playing if you're holding your fingering hand properly...unless some luthier went overboard and fashioned one that goes underneath the first fret area.. and that does happen.. I'd be more concerned about neck shape than a volute when it comes playing comfort.. because that part of your hand doesn't touch the neck in that area usually. If it does then you should be working on your holding technique
Not an issue on my fender guitars, no volute needed. I am a noob "builder", with only a few electric guitars under my belt. I have just started trying set necks with angled headstocks. I have gone straight to scarf joints on the theory that this will reduce short grain weakness, and may try adding volutes on one-piece necks. As for playing, I have played guitars with and without. I am not the least bothered either way. Just my opinion, but I think a lot of amateur players expend way to much mental energy on gear minutiae. Shut up and play yer guitar....
I like volutes as a player. They’re a nice kind of stop when I grab the guitar off the wall, and when I slide my hand up to the low frets. They also feel substantial. That said, they really don’t make the neck-to-headstock area or joint any stronger. I’ve seen them break from a drop before. If Ted Woodford says they don’t help, I’m inclined to agree.
I had to do a test a while back for a customer who wasn't sure about the whole volute thing. I made two necks out of Mahogany. One with and one without a volute. The one with a volute handled my weight (150lbs) no problem. The one without a volute snapped instantly.
Unfortunately, more wood on a fulcrum literally has to add strength. I don't remember exactly when Ted was talking volutes, but I know there was context and what he said made some sense. Likely I the direction of volutes being built in for aesthetics, rather than engineered to add strength. If the grain is cut too short length wise, it wouldnt do much. However, one designed specifically to add an inch of grain over the stress point would do quite a bit. It's a tension system, therefore support helps. The argument is over whether the grain is long enough to do anything. The biggest takeaway is that someone who has that big of a grudge either way obviously never cut their teeth on whatever they have available. If a volute causes you that many issues to play to the point of internet wars, that's on that individual. This topic would be well explored by wooden bow builders, as the hard science is far better explored than the unfortunate hearsay culture guitars exist in due to mystique and Ill defined bounds that allow anyone to pretend to know what wood does. I of course am not digging at Ted, the man is a master, more the average billy bob that has strong opinions and slow wit. In closing, a volute designed to be functional will be functional. Especially a scabbed in piece glued up well diversifying the grain structure at a failure point, even more if made of stronger wood than the cheese we call mahogany.
@@HighlineGuitars were those tested under string tension? I’m not doubting your test results, but I have a feeling that it wasn’t quite the same as a guitar falling over while strung to pitch. The other person commenting here makes a good point, regarding construction techniques used to build them. Ted mentioned something about how a volute doesn’t necessarily make the headstock stronger when subjected to the typical circumstances in which they break, but rather will help ensure a cleaner break that’s easier to repair. I’ve seen snapped two headstocks in my life, one with a volute, and one without. Both happened in the same way, a guitar leaning against an amp that was knocked over.
I dislike volutes as a player, as they get in the way of some hand positions. I think truss rods should be reversed so they are adjusted towards the bridge and don't weaken the headstock. If the neck/headstock needs strengthening, than I think a carbon rod or plate is a better solution. Recently, I've been wondering if removing the neck/headstock joint and angle altogether is possible by flipping the Tuners upside down, and threading the strings directly through the Headstock to achieve the right break angle out of the Nut. Yes, it probably would look strange, until someone designed a way for it to look cool.
you've just described Steinberger tuners. They simply have a hole at the top to out the string in and some kind of worm gear that pulls it in. You can also get staggered height tuners to achieve more break angle with the longer strings on flat Fender-style headstocks. This removes the need for a string retainer.
The volute gets in the way of my playing. When im doing open chords, my thumb is resting right where the volute would be. Depending on size and placement, the volute is very bothersome. It's a deal breaker for me.
Guys, l don’t know with you but personally l don’t feel that a volute interferes with the playability of a guitar in any thinkable way. I own guitars with and without volutes and l don’t even notice the presence or absence of it. From an esthetical point of view it depends on how it is shaped, but generally l like them.
I don't know if it really makes a difference if you make your neck out of one piece of wood since the grain orientation makes the headstock weak anyway maybe it does, however I do think they look real nice, I like how ESP does it.
Meh. Never really been a problem, but Bob Benedetto has a point. I tend to get a bit sideways playing a B7 chord, so a fender neck is a smoother change
The thing is volutes don’t add strength. Gibsons with volutes break the same amount as those without. It doesn’t really address the fundamental issue that causes the breakage and it doesn’t add strength. If you like them that’s fine. Aesthetically it mimics the V joint which then Martin began to mimic with their head joints and subsequently retained the triangle volute. Structurally, on a one piece neck, it adds nothing to the strength.
I like the look and feel of the volutes on the guitars I've got which have them - and also like the look and feel of the guitars I've got which don't have them... so, that's not very helpful, is it? The burning question is: does the volute affect the tone? And is it worth having special wood for the tone volute? (I'll get my coat...)
Volutes are not an effective solution to Gibson headstocks breaking off... *Gibson tried putting volutes on their LPs through the 70s and it did not effect the incidence of headstock breaks for the entire decade they were included. It only made them slightly easier to repair.* The problem is the severe angle of the head in relation to the neck that leaves end grain along the entire head surface because the neck and head are made form one continuous piece of wood, usually mahogany.. Gibson puts a black veneer over the face of the head to hide the unattractive end grain on the head face.. The head doesn't "break of" so much as it splits off.Coupled with the void right there at the truss rod cavity, what remains is not much to break and the wood just splits partially from being loaded by the string tension. A relatively mild trauma to the head will easily induce the split. The only real solution is a glued scarf joint so the grain in the head can be parallel to the head's surfaces without easy to split end grain running across the head at that angle. But Gibson stubbornly won't do that because inexpensive guitars use that building technique and the erroneous theory that one piece of wood sounds better seems to prevail among Gibson customers and builders alike. If you own a Gibson Les Paul it is not a question of if the head will break off, but only a question of when. They are that fragile. Guitars built with the exact same woods and the exact same dimensions as an LP, but are built with a glued scarf joint , never break off like a Gibson will.
I do believe that volutes are essential where tilt-back headstocks are concerned. While I do not have the skills to build a neck, much less a guitar; I have repaired quite a few headstock/neck breaks on acoustics and electrics. And since I use a backstrap overlay almost exclusively for such repairs, I'll make sure to carve a volute into the overlay. Here's one example: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-E7tBbQV9A-k.html
I make volute when I make the thinnest neck and worry about the wood's robustness under the toss rod. Once I made a very comfortable neck but I made a mistake with placing of toss rod. So now I make all necks with little volute
as far as im concerned a scarf joint is a wat better option than a volute, volute was put there by gibson to try reinforce the headstock to try strengthen a notorious weak point in their builds, stupid thinking that scarf joints are a cheap option when spanish guitars have been using them for a few hundred years and lets face it gibson have been making guitars with spanish in the name for a long time, so if its a back angled headstock, scarf it, or pay 4k plus for a guitar thats headstock will fall off if you sneeze in its direction
Are there alternative ways to strengthen the angle? E.g. is it possible to manipulate carbon fiber rods so they follow the angle and still keep their strength? Great channel b.t.w. Good presentation, interesting topics.
It's not possible to manipulate the rods. You could, however, have rods custom-made to suit your needs. That would be neither cheap nor necessary unless your design really needs it.
Do not use volute on my angle headstock because the truss rod is on the heel on mine... And scarf joint is great. :) But I like volute, even if I do not do it on my guitars. :)
Sorry for the completely unrelated question, but I want to ask you if you do anything to the guitar's finish after you've buffed out the clear coat? Do you wax it or use any of the new high tech ceramic car finish protectants?
Dear Chris, Can I reshape my neck shape of Yamaha Pacifica?? Maybe you might know that the pacfica's have chunky neck profile. C shaped i guess. I more like the Fender type necks specially on those Squire Affinity neck. Would it destabilize it? I have small hands so its hard for me to feel comfortable on chunky necks, and I can work on wood carving, so can I??
Personally I feel and a thick C shape neck I don't even notice the volute but I do notice them on a thin D shape neck, but it doesn't really bug me.. I have guitars with and without volutes, so I am for a volute.
The guitar you showed in the video does not have the severely angled headstock like a Les Paul has. The guitar neck you showed was more like a fender where the head is straight with the neck. Fender style necks never break off at the headstock because 1. they are almost always made from maple, a much stronger wood that mahogany and 2.there is no real angle to the headstock .
I'm not personally a fan of valutes. Gibson puts them on their guitars because their headstock angles are too extreme which is honestly a bit ridiculous. I dont like valutes because number one people think they're there for aesthetic value and I'm not personally a fan of how they look and also they get in the way of my playing.
