I think this is one of the best discussions of scarf joints, volutes and breake angles I have heard on RU-vid. In particular, the issue of break angle is important. Alan Carruth has demonstrated that once sufficient angle has been achieved to define the ends of the string lengh accurately (insufficient angle means the end point wanders front to back when the string vibrates) and to exert sufficient downward pressure to stop wandering side to side (nuts only), adding more break angle makes no real difference to the in terms of tone or volume.
The angle is not increasing the string tension on the active length of the string. It does however increase the pressure exerted by the strings against the nut. It also increases the bending moment exerted around the nut by the strings. So all in all, there is an optimal angle (has to be computed for every configuration) in terms of minimizing the excessive loading of the headstock while keeping the strings seated in the nut slots.
The headstock angle isnt supposed to increase string tension, its supposed to increase the amount of energy that is transferred from the string via the nut into the timber, improving sustain and volume. The same principle applies at the bridge break angle. As the bridge is attached to the body the effect is way more noticeable than at the headstock..and way more noticeable on acoustic guitars.
Your videos great..I've often thought the term tension was not the right one..there's got to be sone engineering term for the force at the nut that's independent of tension but varies with angle? I'm just guessing :)
Great explanations Chris. One guitar that is notorious for having the headstock break off is the Gibson Les Paul. I really think Gibson should add a volute to the neck of the Les Paul to help protect against headstocks breaking. I have an Ibanez Artist AR300 that is similar to a Les Paul except that it has a double cutaway and a volute. The volute is placed such that it is very comfortable when you are playing right up near the nut. Your hand feels like it found home right where open position lies. Thanks for a great and informative video!
Gibson will only do it the Gibson way even though the world has said it's a bad design. The SG, the Junior the V, the Thunderbird/Firebird and I think the Explorer's have this design flaw. Another issue with 3+3 headstocks is the D and G strings have a sharp angle created when at the tuning machine (this creates tuning instability and they break more frequently). PRS fixed that his guitar design, and Music Man designed basically the perfect headstock (not requiring trees and no sharp angles to the strings).
Makes perfect sense. Good info , procedure. btw. Think that a smaller angle on the headstock also ensures less friction on the nut and therefore better tuning stability. In advance, Happy New Year.
This is actually extremely helpful. I just bought my first neck blank and it seems shorter than I expected, but I didn't really know how the headstock worked anyway. I had seen another luthier make a one-piece neck and thought that would be the strongest way. The guitar I'll be making will be a prototype so it's okay if its first neck isn't its last. I've subscribed. This is something I hope to do and if I plan to sell these things, I want them to be as well made as possible. Now I just have to find another chunk of Honduran Mahogany for the head. :)
One other reason for having a Volute, in my opinion, is one that makes a lot of sense to me, but never seems to be discussed. Having a volute, more than doubles the amount of physical mass that exists directly below the nut. While my ocular muscles sometimes ache from holding back an eye-roll when I hear some people carry on about, "tone," in this instance, I do think that the volute anchors the nut more, and the added rigidity in the neck at that critical point, allows more of the kinetic energy of the vibrating string to remain within the string and not be transferred to the neck. To say a volute drastically helps with "sustain" would probably be giving it too much sonic credit, but I definitely think that some of the higher frequencies would be less represented if you played a guitar with a volute into an oscilloscope, then filed away the volute and remeasured. Massive difference? probably not. But boy, if you are trying to sound smart while trying to sell one of your guitars... you're welcome! :-) Love the videos!
An interesting post on an interesting subject. I agree entirely with the scarf jointing and volute technique. The only guitar I've ever snapped a headstock on had a one-piece mahogany neck, and it snapped exactly where you would predict - directly behind the nut, and at the angle of the short grain. That said, I was interested that you use a headstock angle as shallow as 10 degrees. My feeling is that the angled headstock was imported into the electric guitar from earlier styles of instruments that used gut strings (later, nylon). These strings have lower tensions than metal strings, and so would be more prone to jumping out of the nut slots under vigorous playing unless back angle on the headstock was sufficient to produce a force pulling the strings down onto the nut. This angle was excessive for steel strings, and I think that you have proven that it's perfectly possible to generate the necessary force to anchor the strings of an electric guitar at the nut without resorting to the deep angle of, say, the classical guitar or lute. Leo Fender and others proved this a different way, by keeping the headstock in the same plane as the neck and using string trees as necessary. It still seems odd to me that it has taken luthiers so long to see this. Gibson have recently introduced a high-end version of the Les Paul with a volute. In doing this, they are indirectly acknowledging a design fault that they have stuck with stubbornly for decades, and literally thousands of snapped headstocks.
That is absolutely correct: there is no difference in string tension with different headstock angles. But there may be a difference in the pressure on the nut.
The steeper angle is not there for more string tension but for more pressure in the nut slots. That said I also find PRS headstocks prettier than Gibson's.
+Hindrik Hoekstra I very rarely type a "LOL." Imo, it has become so overused that its impact has been lost. Being somewhat of a "Grammar Nazi", myself, and guilty of paying too much attention to potential irony in the way people say things, you gave me a good belly laugh! [Grin] I'd hazard a guess that, if he'd thought about the comic potential, he'd have used the phrase "Correct Angle." The few YT vids I have done have all been on-the-fly and I seriously doubt he was reading from an off-camera whiteboard. I have a serious problem with the ubiquitous use of the phrase, "I could care less." Doesn't anyone realize the logical disconnect in saying that? Likewise, I have taught everyone who knows me not to ask questions that follow the popular format of, "{Blah, Blah, Blah}, or What?" My reply will always be, "What?" [Big Grin] Jokes aside, I just subbed this channel. My love affair with the guitar goes back to the early 1960s and I greatly appreciate a true craftsman who takes the time to share his knowledge. No doubt, I would love to be able to afford one of his guitars!
Well said Chris. On less angled headstocks the short grain becomes less of a problem. That's why Gibson and those who choose to copy Gibson have problems. 17 degree headstocks have very short grain. Add a huge truss rod adjuster nut to the equation and the problem is compounded. I like laminated necks, I them superior to even scarf joints. plus they can add some very nice detail and or contrasts.
Great video. Now I know why my two guitars with volutes have such strong good necks. Btw, ones an old guild Starfire, the other is an early Ibanez AS73. The scarf joint discussion is informative too. Enjoy your videos a lot.
So basically the strongest neck/headstock of all time would be a multi-piece neck with a scarf joint, volute, and with bottom of the neck spoke wheel truss rod adjustment so you don't have to big chunk of wood taken out near the headstock for traditional truss rod adjustment. Would you ever try this?
It's a very good explanation. But I always think that scarf joints was for reduce the cost making necks, because a good quartershawn of wood has got the right hardness, I think. Cheap guitars rarely have got quartershawn pieces. Thank you. Very interesting
The scarf joint makes sense for the angled headstocks. Having the joint in the neck and not under the volute is a good construction. The worst thing you can do is placing notches together. Every additional notch makes it prone to collapse. The headstock angle is increasing pressure on the nut. At a rather flat angle the strings have it easier to move through the nut slots, but some heavy player might lift a string out of a slot. (adjusted nut. staggered tuners or different way of winding helps...never happened to me)What was the reason you decided against a straight headstock? Some people just want the angled one for looks, what about you? Different feel on the strings for the player or sound of the open strings?
Thank you for the quick reply. You do so many helpful videos. Can't wait for the new year. Is there anything you change based on temperature or humidity during the year? Merry Christmas.
I'm with you on a less sharp angle for a headstock. The argument I've normally heard FOR a greater angle is more to do with break angle than it does string tension.
My necks don't have a real volute but they slidely increase the thikness of the neck between the first fret and the nut. So i get a strong transition to the headstock at the thinest part of the neck without the barriere 'a real volute creates. So for me it feels more comfortable to play at the first fret. And of course I also use a scarf joint to avoid the headstock to snap off.
I wish Fender would use 10 degree angles and we could quit string trees completely, also locking tuners would line the strings up better. And why Gibson has not switched to scarf joints is just strange. Even Epiphones use 13-14 degree headstock vs. some 17 degree Gibsons.... Merry Christmas and thanks for all the videos this year :-) !!
Leo Fender perfected his design later at Music Man. That Music Man 4+2 design is the best in the business. Really compact, strong, no string trees and straight pull.
Fascinating video, concisely explained! I've always wondered about this since I used to have a beautiful 1960's Gibson SG Standard. Like Les Pauls, this guitar has a reputation for neck-snapping at the headstock. My SG had a mahogany neck of course, but it also had a beautifully carved volute - which is a feature I always liked. So I was surprised to learn that many SG's do NOT have a volute... was it cheaper to omit this - who knows? I never had any trouble with it. Now, I have a lovely Samick thinline semi-acoustic. This Korean-built guitar is beautifully put together and features a light mahogany neck, (maybe sapele?), no volute but with a very visible but neat scarf joint which covers the area between frets 2 and 3 - I like being able to see it!
Thank you for uploading. Makes a lot of sense. I don't like the aesthetics of scarf joints, but must admit that the argument of the long grain explains a lot of head breaking, as for the volute which is related. Regarding the angle, it does make a difference indeed: I have a Gibson with a 17 degree angle of which string tension is much higher than with another that is only 14 degrees. I always wondered why, now I have the explanation. Thanks man: great educational vid !
In your scarf joint diagram, it shows the grain running horizontally left to right or visa versa... but, to my mind, if the wood is quartersawn then the grain lines are actually running vertically up and down, along the neck, when looking from the side. I’m not a big scarf joint fan. But I do agree on the volume, and the smaller headstock angle. 10 degrees is plenty.
They go in both directions. Chris' drawing is correct for the grain you describe. A drawing from a top view would satisfy your description but would poorly illustrate the subject. Wood is three dimensional.
I have a couple of videos that show the process. Here is one: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3tKSxhTPXhc.html If you want more, go to my channel home page and click the magnifying glass icon and search for CNC.
An angled headstock is superior for tone but if the guitar falls backward you have a bending moment when the headstock hits the ground. Flat Fender headstocks don't have this. On an acoustic, the thickness of the body keeps this leverage from stressing the headstock and they are much lighter, so less energy is transmitted, but with solid guitars this is one factor leading to increased breakage. Angled back headstocks also don't fit the standard case very well.
+Highline Guitars Great vid...! I just subbed your channel. Your vid took me back to the night a drunk knocked my 1965 Harmony Silhouette off its stand and fractured my headstock. Being young and foolish (I'm much older now... [Grin] ), when I had the chance to try to fix it, I though I'd gotten by with just some white wood glue, the tuners strip screwed in place and some weight on it. Naturally, once I got tired of watching it and walked away, the part farthest from the nut slipped downward a shade and the glue was set by the time I came back. For some reason, Harmony had the grain running at a coss-grain, slight diagonal on the headstock... She is still in storage and I ruined any collectible value by refinishing her, anyway. The irony in it is that I unloaded a 1963 Les Paul Jr. to buy her. Living on a farm in Southern Indiana I had no place I could go back then to have the twist in the neck fixed and I sold it for $125 out of frustration, with original case... You can't live a long, reasonably happy life kicking yourself for every valuable object that has come and gone. I was the right age to have owned all the major #1 Marvel comics (and many that followed) as well as a lot of sought after DC comics. That's just part of life. Be thankful for both what you have and what you've had. Happy memories are priceless. [Smile]
+Larry McCraw Yeah, I think most of us that were lucky enough to have lived through those times has an "It slipped through my fingers" list. [Grin] I have a hard time even considering trying to get inside the head of someone living in an "Investment potential, future value" mindset, as a child or young adult. During my relatively brief sojourn into IT and away from wood-working, one of the independent entrepreneurs I worked for had two young sons (neither a teenager, yet) who would come home from a visit to the nearest major city with the comics they collect and put them directly into the protective sleeve with cardboard backboard (never having viewed anything inside because of how staple lines affect resale value). Our (only) daughter was nearly a 1st anniversary gift (January 1974) and the amount of valuable KISS bits and pieces that she enjoyed so much boggles the mind, for a moment at least. I'm sure we all would like to kick ourselves about *_something_*, but Who The H_ll is going to pay to warehouse everything that passes through their hands? Imo, it devalues the quality of day to day life. Our daughter had $1M worth of fun with her KISS guitar, colorforms and trading cards. The 1980s, when our daughter and two young sons were growing up produced many, many genres spawning their own markets in memorabilia. As someone who understands his good fortune in having cut his teeth during the "Golden Era" in which the guitar transitioned from an acoustic instrument to an amplified acoustic instrument to an en electric instrument worthy of its own niche in the world of musical instruments, I am also filled with deep gratitude that *_MY_* time was a time when our police didn't just tolerate, but supported my right to have band practice right up until what the city ordinance allowed. I am a big fan of technology but there are some things that have to be learned in the physical world and how is some poor kid supposed to understand what Santana is talking about when he is referring to the "Sweet-Spot" on a stage when they've never been allowed to crank what I would consider a practice amp... Hope nothing I said gave the impression of Sour Grapes. If anything, my attitude is more along the lines of remembering a dear friend I know is no longer a part of my Life and nothing I could ever do will change that. As I've said in the comment section of other guitar related discussions: *"I've always felt that women are very like fine guitars. When you are young and first trying to find your way You don't have a _CLUE_ what it is you want Let alone what you really *NEED* ! With Time, Experience and more than a little Luck, You eventually find one you want to take Home and keep Forever. There'll always be the chance, though, If the attraction is Genuine and True That you'll walk in somewhere and notice one You wish that you could play just a time or two...
Great episode Chris! Could you show us your process of CNC machining this type of neck? What steps do you follow & how do you clamp the scarf jointed blank onto the CNC machine?
Of course this begs the question as to why builders use angled head stocks at all. They create more problems than they solve. Not to mention adding to the production time and costs. Leo Fender got it right the first time.
A Gibson style headstock would look very ugly if not angled. The problem is not the angle itself. he problem is the angle made out of one piece mahogany.
The lack of angle and need for string tree is a design flaw of the Fender headstock. The lateral angle of the Gibsons makes them hard to keep in tune and is also a design flaw. Ideally, a PRS style with inward angle of tuning holes and a smaller angle of around 10 degrees for the scarf joint seems ideal to me. Musicman’s design is not bad either.
14 degrees is the point where the tension imbalance is noticeable, when you bend a string it stretches and does not fully return thus it goes flat. Les Pauls are famous for having intonation issues because of it.
Scarf joints allow less than optimal hardness wood to be used. The scarf joints, visually and feel wise (the touch(seams & valute), effectively kills the majik (inspiration). But as many do say, [ Its only *aesthetics ].* inspired creativity. *Unless you understand, perhaps you may in the future, me explaining it further is time wasted. T.Y. for posting this video !
Great video! Playing devil's advocate (it's all preference of the artist of course): Quartersawn lumber doesn't have short grain. Try the Hamer method of center quartersawn piece with two flatsawn sides (ESP's standard). Use some flatsawn and slice it up to use on side, even bookmatch riftsawn to account for stresses. There are plenty of uses for the cutaway excess; truss rod filets, pickup bezels, knobs and tips, etc. Cheers!
Hi just found your channels Really informative ..What are your opinions on the Angled headstock as opposed to Fender Style ..Do you think the strength is an issue. we know Leo's design is more suited for mass production , but on let's say a personal guitar build ..what are the reasons for even going with a scarf neck build .
Hi. Would you still use a 10 degree angle for a bass guitar? Would you want to use, let’s say 13 degrees since bass strings have more tension than guitar strings? Thanks.
I like your videos. Have you tried inserting two splines, at the sides of the truss rod, under the fretboard and under the headstock veneer? That is also a good solution for those who don't like scarf joints.
A Fender headstock does exactly that, exposes short grain from the nut down to the face of the headstock, right at the transition. How come they seem less prone to cracking, what's the physics behind that?
They did and the fans hated it so they stopped doing it. The volute anyway. It's annoying because besides having a fairly sharp angle for their head stocks they also use mahogany. Mahogany as the guy in the video mentions isn't very break resistant when used on a thinner peace of wood like a neck.
@White Straight Male Atheist Sperg hey i agree. The gibson problem is that 17 degree break angle . 12 to 14 is more than enough. A well done scarf, especially with a valute is almost impossible to find. The real key to sound is body wood that " rings" and a good neck to body joint. If the guitar sustains it will be a good one.
Gibson needs to adopt Hamer stressed necks. They build/built them so they're engineered to stay straight. I can't explain it here, but Texas Toast Guitars has a good video about it.
I have an early model Jackson Rhoads guitar and the headstock is broken. I , being new to repairing guitars, used epoxy and Gorilla glue to try to repair the break. How would I successfully repair it? I was thinking about removing the fretboard and separating the scarf joint and rebuilding that part of the guitar? Either that or use a band saw to remove the broken portion of the neck and use a sander and Sharpie to remove it. Trying to maintain the same angles and original neck dimensions.
Two questions if you have a sec. I've tried and tried to get my scarf joint in the neck and not the headstock but it always ends up in the headstock. Do you have a vid showing how you pull that off? Second question: how do you work with it in regards to CNC? Specifically, setting up your stock-since it's no longer a rectangular block of wood.
Tell me how you are doing your scarf joint and I’ll tell you what you are doing wrong. If you visit my channel page and do a search using key words like guitar neck or CNC, you should find a few videos on the subject.
@@HighlineGuitars I think I found it. Just watched the lovely "Carving a Guitar Neck..." from 11/2 - I gather you're not trying to cut a scarf jointed neck in the CNC at all. Just monolithic block of wood. Good to know. I have a Onefinity arriving next week. I am an old dog and this is truly a new trick! Very helpful. Thx
Great video. Makes sense. Would you please explain how you decide where to place the bolts on a neck with heel relief? How do you balance neck stability with playability? Thanks for your videos.
When I draw a plan for a guitar that will have a bolt on neck, I make sure the neck bolt ferrules will sit within the shape of the heel. With 4 to 6 bolts attaching the neck to the body, stability shouldn't be an issue. When I carve an area of heel relief, I make sure to leave about a 1/4" of body wood between the bolt cap and the bottom of the neck heel for strength.
I play G&L guitars. I love the pickups and the trem. But I'd like to have a slightly shorter scale length and some cool fret markers. Can you build me a custom neck for my existing guitar?
The way you're doing the scarf joint there's short grain at the end of the neck. How is that stronger than the scarf joint in the head, especially when there are usually overlapping ears glued to the sides?
@@HighlineGuitars I've seen it where the neck wood goes all the way out to the veneer plate and another piece is glued to the back to complete the head. I know you said there's less glue area that way but there isn't nearly as much strain on the joint. Plus, since the wood is usually only as wide as the base of the neck, a couple of strips get glued to the sides to make the head wide enough. That gives you some more structure where they cross over the scarf joint
I hadn't considered the angle of the head stock would exert more force on the nut. I guess it would be Vector Math where the tension of the string and the angle across the nut determines the force exerted on the nut. Then the assumption being that this may couple more energy to the neck? And give more sustain? (Or less?). Inquiring minds would like to know.
Increasing the angle doesn't exert more force. Think of it this way: let's say you have a magic guitar with an adjustable headstock angle. If the headstock was set to 10° and you tuned the stings as you normally would, suddenly increasing the angle to 15° would pull the strings tighter and out of tune. In order to tune the strings back, you would have to loosen them. Therefore, the force of the strings in tune on the nut at 10° is the same as the strings in tune at 15°.
True, but the steeper angle DOES increase the downward force on the nut. This, I think, is what most guys mean by 'tension'. Not the correct use of the word, but hey, just one more musician misnomer among many, eh...
You are correct. Downward force is the right term. Tension is what happens when you pull the string tight and is measured along the string's length end to end. Therefore, if you lay a loose string (no tension) onto a nut, the only downward force comes from gravity. As you tune the strings, tension is added to gravity thereby increasing downward force. However, if you increase the angle of the headstock from 10° to 17°, the string tension increases, but the strings are pulled way out of tune. To bring the strings back into tune, you have to loosen the strings, which reduces the tension back to what it was when the headstock was at 10°.
The point I think you are missing is that with the same tension (the tension needed to have the guitar in tune) a heavily tilted headstock causes more contact force in the nut grooves. At 0° there is no contact force left and a string is likely to pop out during playing. A larger angle will increase contact force, which most probably has a positive effect on sustain. It doesn't really help tuning stability though, because you want the string to be able to slide in the nut slots and more contact force causes more friction. If 10° gives you the look you need, customers are happy with the strings staying in place and the amount of sustain, I see no reason to change what you are doing.
So 10 degrees is enough angle for 25.5 scale length (my assumption your neck is standard strat scale). What about shorter scale lengths? Have you used it on a Gibson 24.75 ish scale neck?
I'm a bit confused - - your plans on eguitarplans.com (at least the 3 I got) all have 13-degree angles, not 10-degree as you mentioned. You have excellent content btw!
There is one more option .cut down a large tree find a spot where just before where a limb is going sprout and you will have a natural curve to the wood with nonstop grain.. ain't gonna get any stronger than that
It's not strong until you can do like they do at the PRS factory and your neck doesn't break. Take a look at the 3:05 mark in this vid below 🤯 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fdoEIoY_q9M.html
@@HighlineGuitars If its valuted, my fingers drift toward the headstock and once my fingers touch it, my hands pull off in revulsion. # Sometimes upon feeling the un-natural thicknes, I glance at those seams. Unsightly !!
You misrepresented the argument that a greater headstock angle increases string tension. It is not suppose to increase the string tension between bridge and tuner pin, as you presented. The argument is that it increases the downward tension of the string on the nut (not an actual increase in tension of the string itself). Supposedly, that improves energy transfer and therefore sustain, or more ambiguously "tone." I don't know if the theory is correct at all. If it's true, I suspect there is an angle at which any further increase would not bear much increase in energy transfer. I don't even have a guess on what that angle might be. But I do know that you did a poor job of articulating the actual argument, whether or not it proves to be a true or false theory.
