Vintage Guilds and neck problems.......

[charliea]

I've worked with a lot of wood over the years, and every piece I've seen will bend if subjected to enough force. Over a period of time this bend will become a "set". The deformation isn't linear over time. Most of the bending will occur early-on, after which the wood will stabilize, or deform at a much slower rate. A lot of things will affect this process including type of wood, rigidity of structure, force applied, temperature, humidity, on and on. Manufacturer and era are only a couple of the many factors involved. Guitars are wooden structures that bend and take a set. Whether the resulting geometry is "ideal" is a personal judgment. If it's not ideal, it needs to be changed. On a Guild acoustic you can lower the saddle, shave the bridge if lowering reduces string break too much and, possibly, adjust the nut. If these adjustment don't suffice, or don't last, a neck reset is indicated but only, I believe, as a last resort. A reset simply isn't necessary or even wise just because you aren't happy with the existing geometry.

 

[wontox]

The way I play I need a fairly high action- more than 1/4" at the 12th fret or I'll get buzzing everywhere. I don't play much above the 9th fret so I almost never have high action issues with guitars. Banjos either- clawhammer players are notorious for playing with high action- 5/16 is low, 3/8 about right and I can play well with a hlf in at the 12th fret.


I can't imagine playing with the action so high, not of course that you don't do well with it. Why does the action need to be so high for your style, do you bang that hard with a pick? I also can't imagine not using frets below (I see that you would say 'above') the ninth, to me it would be like playing with half the piano keyboard. With my action at 1/8 or 3/16 at the twelfth, and twelve gauge strings, I can't make the strings buzz unless I whang far too hard with a pick. I've seen some old bluegrass pickers play with nearly impossibly high action on old Martins; I always assumed they were resigned to the lousy playability that came with these aged instruments that were built without a truss rod. I had old Silvertones, etc. as a kid that had this unremedial type of high action, and it was all I knew until I met up with some better far more playable guitars later in life, which really facilitated much better playing/ use of almost the entire fretboard on my part.
Wontox

 

[Taylor Martin Guild]

One more thing to add here.
Most of the Guilds that we see that are in need of a neck re-set, are for sale. They are for sale because they need a neck re-set!
Ebay is where you peddle your stuff that needs work.
It has the largest viewer rate in the world and people are hoping that someone will buy the guitar not knowing anything about neck re-sets.
It often works.
Then we see the guitar back on Ebay again.

By the way.
I have a friend that owns a beautiful 70's Martin D-41.
I was looking at it last week and it is in need of a re-set.
He called Martin and they told him to sent it to them.
Luckily, he has a warranty.

 

[12 string]

Good comments and insights here, TMG.

I just reread the original post which started this thang. We kinda hung this on '70s Guilds but the OP clearly specifies "1976-2001" as the suspect timespan.

Ain't buyin' it.

Not.at.all.

Absofreakinlutely, the guitars with problems go to market, keepers are kept. A lack of loving care can result in neglect and abuse especially in regard to improper stringing, tuning, and protection from extremes of temperture and humidity, rough handling, yada yada. Maybe some guitars will have problems just because stuff happens. And from all this there may be neck problems!?!?!?!?!?? :shock: :shock: :shock: !!!!!!!!!! I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, shocked.

No one on this board has told a story even remotely like that of the onewilyfool.

Please forgive the rant.

I'm feeling much better now.

12 strang

 

[taabru45]

Well Strang, My 77 F50R may have had the saddle lowered a little to improve the action....and the 80 F512R Just had the bridge shaved a little, but still no need for any other work on either of them....I guess these 2 were the exceptions during that period :roll: :lol: Steffan

 

[12 string]

You've certainly got a pair, Steffan . :wink: :wink:

' Strang

 

[taabru45]

Yep, sometimes I have to turn sideways to walk through a door... :lol: :lol: Steffan

 

[West R Lee]

Good comments and insights here, TMG.

I just reread the original post which started this thang. We kinda hung this on '70s Guilds but the OP clearly specifies "1976-2001" as the suspect timespan.

Ain't buyin' it.

Not.at.all.

Absofreakinlutely, the guitars with problems go to market, keepers are kept. A lack of loving care can result in neglect and abuse especially in regard to improper stringing, tuning, and protection from extremes of temperture and humidity, rough handling, yada yada. Maybe some guitars will have problems just because stuff happens. And from all this there may be neck problems!?!?!?!?!?? :shock: :shock: :shock: !!!!!!!!!! I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, shocked.

No one on this board has told a story even remotely like that of the onewilyfool.

Please forgive the rant.

I'm feeling much better now.

12 strang

I'm with you there Strang.....it would seem to imply that there is something wrong with Westerly built guitars....sacrilege.....pure sacrilege! :shock:

West

 

[12 string]

I should be so lucky, Steffan!

 

[12 string]

[quote="12 string":35egkwms]Good comments and insights here, TMG.

I just reread the original post which started this thang. We kinda hung this on '70s Guilds but the OP clearly specifies "1976-2001" as the suspect timespan.

Ain't buyin' it.

Not.at.all.

Absofreakinlutely, the guitars with problems go to market, keepers are kept. A lack of loving care can result in neglect and abuse especially in regard to improper stringing, tuning, and protection from extremes of temperture and humidity, rough handling, yada yada. Maybe some guitars will have problems just because stuff happens. And from all this there may be neck problems!?!?!?!?!?? :shock: :shock: :shock: !!!!!!!!!! I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, shocked.

No one on this board has told a story even remotely like that of the onewilyfool.

Please forgive the rant.

I'm feeling much better now.

12 strang

I'm with you there Strang.....it would seem to imply that there is something wrong with Westerly built guitars....sacrilege.....pure sacrilege! :shock:

West[/quote:35egkwms]

Sacrilege indeed, West, but more than that, it just ain't so!

 

[12 string]

Yep, sometimes I have to turn sideways to walk through a door... :lol: :lol: Steffan

I don't think I have a sideways anymore!

' Strang

 

[Jeff]

Neck sets are a good thing. The F20 & the CO both needed necksets when I bought them.

The CO1, after all the unknowns were solved, was pretty much a non event, $125 I think is what Brady finally charged me. Bolt on necks do have some advantages. Straight as an arrow now, nice tall saddle, plays great. Someone once told me: "50 years from now there's going to be a lot of happy owners when all these Taylor guitars need neck sets".

The F20, when the wife gave it to me was a sad bowl of berries, virtually unplayable, cowboy chords would stretch it out of tune. What one would expect from a 50 year old guitar selling new for $100.

It was a gift, I liked the way it sounded well enough to dump twice the selling price into fixing it. Probably the best guitar money I've spent. Plays like an electric all the way up, far as you can reach, no buzz, no dead spots. Fun guitar & worth every penny to fix it.

I've seen a few Westerly's needing some serious adjustment before bringing much pleasure, ... still having regrets over a DV72 here local. Dang shame, guitar was near mint except the neck angle was beyond shaving the saddle. Would have ended up being a real expensive guitar. On the other hand, West's DV72 is perfect.

Guitars that sit around for years, unplayed, in cases, in back closets & under beds don't seem to hold up as well as those played regularly. Nicest guitars I see are in the hands of guys that play them, like the boatload of Westerlies here that are not for sale.

 

[onewilyfool]

No offense to the OP of this thread, but this is just the thing I was talking about in my post here. From the photos, it looks like this guitar has virtually NO saddle left, and the action is quite high. The new owner of this guitar thinks he needs a setup, but from his pics, I would say he needs a neck reset. This is typical of the 20 Guilds I've been looking at......sorry, but I would have passed on this guitar, unless the seller had agreed to allow for neck reset costs.....

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=19556

 

[12 string]

Maybe what you're saying about this instrument is true, maybe it isn't. Those pictures neither prove nor disprove a thing.

 

[shepke]

It's hard to tell exactly from the pic, but for my money there's still a good amount of saddle left here to work with, and from my experience with these insturments a decent setup would do just fine. This is fairly typical of what I was saying above about a number of Guilds I've owned and worked on, and I'm willing to bet that the neck on that guitar (given a little care) will stay pretty much where it is now for many years to come.

 

[onewilyfool]

Well, again, my eyes aren't what they used to be, but from that pic, it looks like just a sliver of saddle showing. Like zero saddle at the E strings to about 1/16" at the center of the saddle. This would not allow for optimum string break in my opinion, and although we don't have a shot from the sides, the shot of the strings I do see, appears to be high. I guess if they shave the bridge, sawcut grooves behind the saddle for the strings, etc. It could be made playable. But I feel unless there is 1/8" min of exposed saddle, and 3/32" from bottom of E strings to top of 12th fret, I will pass. By the way, a lot of people don't know or understand this.....to lower 1/32" at the 12th fret, you need to lower 2/32" or 1/16" at the Saddle. 12th fret is half way between the nut and saddle. So low saddles like the on in the post, can NOT be lowered anymore without altering the architecture of the guitar......

 

[wontox]

To make the modifications to lower the strings, it's not necessary to make saw cuts in bridge. I effectively belt-sanded about an eighth inch of thickness from the front of that big thick bridge on my D 40 before shaving the saddle; of course one needs to re-ream the bridge pin holes after that mod as well and I don't think there's a problem with altering the architecture...if this fix works for a number of years, it's worth it compared to the high cost of a professional neck reset—it's a wooden instrument with a fixed bridge instead of a 'Tuneomatic'.

My old acoustic Vox and lots of the old Gibson Country Westerns came with adjustable bridges, and though lots of folks thought they weren't conducive to tone, I find instruments with metal adjustable saddles sound entirely comparable to similar instruments with the wooden fixed bridge and saddle mod, at least the Gibsons. Maybe even a bit better tone in my mind because of the hard, sharp edged metal saddle. AND you can easily adjust the action with a screwdriver. My forty-some year-old Vox Country Western with the zero fret, metal adjustable saddle and bolt-on neck has the action of a Strat, but doesn't buzz unless you really whang at it. If you want higher action, for hard flatpicking, you just adjust it up.

You're right in theory about the reduction in depth at the saddle affecting the height by 1/2 at the twelfth, but for some reason, on my D 40, it seems to lower the strings more than that obvious equation. Depends on the lineal condition of the neck, I guess. Your desire for at least 3/16" from the top to the 12th fret to the bottom of the e strings, well that's about as high as I'd ever want, any higher makes it tough to play barres or much of anything, frankly, past the ninth. I know some bluegrass guys don't go that far south anyway, but I find an awful lot of playing down there.

Wontox

 

[shepke]

Are we looking at the same picture?

 

[adorshki]

Are we looking at the same picture?

Not as far as I can tell.....BTW Shepke thanks for your input, you've got a lot more experience with 'em than I do so I humbly bow to that experience. I still stick by everything I said, BUT it seems a couple of folks have mixed up the check for a straight neck with the check for good neck angle. Am I wrong in thinking that measurement should be made with the straightedge aligned only along the tops 14th-22nd frets, ie, a 24" straightedge is NOT the right way to check this?? After all, THAT's where the caving is going to occur whether the neck's straight or not, right?

 

[Dr. Spivey]

Are we looking at the same picture?

Not as far as I can tell.....BTW Shepke thanks for your input, you've got a lot more experience with 'em than I do so I humbly bow to that experience. I still stick by everything I said, BUT it seems a couple of folks have mixed up the check for a straight neck with the check for good neck angle. Am I wrong in thinking that measurement should be made with the straightedge aligned only along the tops 14th-22nd frets, ie, a 24" straightedge is NOT the right way to check this?? After all, THAT's where the caving is going to occur whether the neck's straight or not, right?

Here's how it's done: http://frets.com/FRETSPages/Musician/Guitar/Setup/NeckAngle/neckangle.html

This is the best explanation I've seen.