LP Neck Profiles

Jacques_nasi

Ok correct me if I'm wrong, but through 1950's and 1960's the neck profiles on Les Paul's were different. As far as I have it goes something like this:

1950 - Fat neck
1959 - Thinner neck
1960 - Thinnest neck

If so, lets see who prefers what? I myself prefer the 60's thin neck, and I think that's the profile found on the Vintage V100 single cutaway guitars, I have girly hands and find this the best. I asked a salesperson at marshall music about an Epi LP std Plus top, and he informed me they are based on the 59' necks, which was reasonably comfortable. Then I played a bit on a Gibson LP Goldtop and that neck was just way to fat for me, so I suppose thats an earlier 50's neck.

ezietsman

Jacques_nasi wrote: Ok correct me if I'm wrong, but through 1950's and 1960's the neck profiles on Les Paul's were different. As far as I have it goes something like this:

1950 - Fat neck
1959 - Thinner neck
1960 - Thinnest neck

If so, lets see who prefers what? I myself prefer the 60's thin neck, and I think that's the profile found on the Vintage V100 single cutaway guitars, I have girly hands and find this the best. I asked a salesperson at marshall music about an Epi LP std Plus top, and he informed me they are based on the 59' necks, which was reasonably comfortable. Then I played a bit on a Gibson LP Goldtop and that neck was just way to fat for me, so I suppose thats an earlier 50's neck.

The 1958 and earlier - Very Fat
1959 - Fat
> 1960 - Thin

I've only played one 1958 necked LP and it felt fat, I was used to a really thin neck then so not sure what it would feel like now. I guess I like the fatter necks, even though my hands aren't very big.

AlanRatcliffe

The fatter the better for me. .870" at first fret with a soft V profile is ideal - that's somewhere between a '58 and '59.

MikeM

Out of the Gibson RIs, the '58 has the fattest neck <3

singemonkey

I've never played the pre-'59 profile (there were no Les Pauls in 1950 ?). But my Gibson Deluxe has a thin, '60 type profile, while my Tokai LS150 has a '59 type profile. The Tokai neck is definitely more comfortable for extended playing. I also find it much easier to fret the 6th string with my thumb on that guitar.

I would not mind at all trying an LP with a very fat neck. The way my Tokai feels a lot like an acoustic neck really works for me. Fatter might be even better still. Or it may not be.

I wonder how much it depends on whether you play predominantly with your thumb over the top. Fast players who play with thumb behind the neck seem to prefer thinner necks.

AlanRatcliffe

From Member " Blauserk " at the Les Paul forum (measurements of modern Gibsons he has checked):

0.900 - 1.020 - 2003 '54 LP GT (single p-90--Dave’s)
0.920 - ??!?? - 2003 '57 LP RI ebony
0.920 - 1.040 - 2001 '57 LP GT Aged
0.920 - 1.015 - 2001 '57 LP Black Beaut.
0.885 - 0.975 - 2001 '59 LP RI -Darkburst
0.905 - 0.995 - 2000 '59 LP RI -CherrySb
0.908 - 1.005 - 2000 '59 LP RI -Black
0.908 - 1.015 - 2000 '59 LP RI -Lemon
0.883 - 1.003 - 2000 '59 LP RI -Flamey
0.885 - 0.998 - 1999 '59 LP RI -Quilt
0.895 - 0.995 - 1998 '57 LP Goldtop Reissue
0.880 - 0.985 - 1999 '59 ES-335 Hist.
0.850 - ??!?? - 2003 '54 Oxblood (Wildwood)
0.840 - ??!?? - 2003 '54 Flametop Stinger '60 slim taper (MM)
0.850 - ??!?? - 2003 Rossington SG (3d fret)
0.870 - ??!?? - 2004 Historic SG/LP ‘61 RI (3d fret)

Bear in mind that there was quite a bit of tolerance in the '50s (and still is, but a lot less), because of hand sanding, etc.).

tonerider

I have found it easier to do vibrato on a Les Paul with a slightly fatter neck and I think the rear profile of the neck has a lot to do with the feel of the instrument. Back profiles are sometimes refered to as shallow C, medium C, deep C, D, deep V, flat V, shallow-wide etc etc.

My ideal profile is where there is a little more meat on the upper side where the back of the thumb rests and a little less mass where the fingers curve around to the fretboard. Just look at the natural curvature of your hand from your index finger back to your thumb and you'll get what I mean.

Off course most of us aren't going to be reshaping necks on expensive Gibson guitars, but it's easy to do on cheaper bolt-on guitars.

PeachyDragon

Alan Ratcliffe wrote: The fatter the better for me. .870" at first fret with a soft V profile is ideal - that's somewhere between a '58 and '59.

So you consider a 22 mm neck depth a fat neck?

AlanRatcliffe

PeachyDragon wrote: So you consider a 22 mm neck depth a fat neck?

Just right for me - especially with the taller 6105 frets I prefer these days, but a lot of people find it fairly fat. ? I'm comfy on that but can play on anything from 21 to a full 25.4 boat neck.

As a comparison, a standard modern Fender is about .8" (20.3 mm) and an Ibanez Wizard II is .75" (19 mm). See what a difference 1 mm makes?

PeachyDragon

I've been measuring all my guitars left right and centre lately so I
can get ready for my custom guitar build. I have to say that it's astounding how
close most guitars are... yet, I can jam my 1,5 cm thick cellphone between my
thumb and the guitar neck and still play fine.

I'm guessing that's just me. I'm tall and have fairly large hands.
So for my guitar I'm going to start with the Baseball neck the Red Special has.
Roughly 30 mm depth and see how that feels. I can always go smaller afterwards.

It's all down to preference I guess.