Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
- Thread starter mi_canuck
- Start date
danglybanger
ReelItInologist
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
In general, whichever one you want; try them out.
Also in general, if you're a thumb "over the top" Stallone kinda guy, that seems to be who V shapes are meant for... For thumbs behind the neck, a flatter neck will kill your hand less fast...
As for radius, if you want more comfortable chording go smaller, but a wider range of bending is possible on larger radius... If you want even more comfortable chording with better bending characteristics, use lighter strings.
In general, whichever one you want; try them out.
Also in general, if you're a thumb "over the top" Stallone kinda guy, that seems to be who V shapes are meant for... For thumbs behind the neck, a flatter neck will kill your hand less fast...
As for radius, if you want more comfortable chording go smaller, but a wider range of bending is possible on larger radius... If you want even more comfortable chording with better bending characteristics, use lighter strings.
j9fd3s
New member
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
small fingers here, i like my C radius american standard. its a FAT neck too, in every dimension. guitar needs to be high up, you cant monkey grip it
i have been playing this one the longest, so go try out some different ones, your results may vary
small fingers here, i like my C radius american standard. its a FAT neck too, in every dimension. guitar needs to be high up, you cant monkey grip it
i have been playing this one the longest, so go try out some different ones, your results may vary
lex666
New member
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
I usually find fender c shaped necks very comfortable... for a short time I had a strat with a V shaped neck and found it veyr uncomfortable to play. My hand would cramp up much faster than on a c shaped neck... That V shaped neck was quickly returned.
I usually find fender c shaped necks very comfortable... for a short time I had a strat with a V shaped neck and found it veyr uncomfortable to play. My hand would cramp up much faster than on a c shaped neck... That V shaped neck was quickly returned.
Bludave
New member
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
A Fender is a good choice for someone with smaller hands. The nut width (1 5/8") is narrow, yet the string spacing is comfortable. The Fingerboard radius is likely going to be judged by the type of player you are. I personally like the 9.5" radius as it chords well and gives me enough to bend anytime and anywhere I want. The 7.25" is also good for me, bt a lot of people feel you need to run the action to high to eliminate the notes from choking out when bending. The fingerboard is higher in the center of the neck. As far as neck shapes go I lean towards the "V". It just feels right for me, but this is a very personal thing. What you need to do is go play a variety of Fenders and see what feels best to you. The Clapton Strats have a soft "V", the SRV have more of a "C" shape so that should at least point you in the direction you want to go.
A Fender is a good choice for someone with smaller hands. The nut width (1 5/8") is narrow, yet the string spacing is comfortable. The Fingerboard radius is likely going to be judged by the type of player you are. I personally like the 9.5" radius as it chords well and gives me enough to bend anytime and anywhere I want. The 7.25" is also good for me, bt a lot of people feel you need to run the action to high to eliminate the notes from choking out when bending. The fingerboard is higher in the center of the neck. As far as neck shapes go I lean towards the "V". It just feels right for me, but this is a very personal thing. What you need to do is go play a variety of Fenders and see what feels best to you. The Clapton Strats have a soft "V", the SRV have more of a "C" shape so that should at least point you in the direction you want to go.
uOpt
Something Cool
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
This is not a matter of finger or hand size.
The best indicator of whether you'll like a V neck, other than playing it of course, is where you rest you thumb while playing.
If you tend to enclose the neck with the hand for full contact or almost full contact you pretty much need a deep V neck.
The more your thumb goes into hiding the more you need a D-ish neck.
The upper side of a V neck is a large rest area for parts of your thumb that is not the palm. A round block of wood on the upper corner such as in D and C neck and intended for use as a rest for the thumb palm.
This is not a matter of finger or hand size.
The best indicator of whether you'll like a V neck, other than playing it of course, is where you rest you thumb while playing.
If you tend to enclose the neck with the hand for full contact or almost full contact you pretty much need a deep V neck.
The more your thumb goes into hiding the more you need a D-ish neck.
The upper side of a V neck is a large rest area for parts of your thumb that is not the palm. A round block of wood on the upper corner such as in D and C neck and intended for use as a rest for the thumb palm.
mi_canuck
New member
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
Thanks for all the info...
Another question somewhat related... Which guitars (doesn't have to be Fenders) have really narrow necks (ie. across the fretboard, not depth of neck). Noticed Mustangs and Jaguars and some Strats have 1.65" neck widths (at nut). Gibsons seem to be more near 1 11/16 (1.6875) or even 1.695". Any other guitars out there that have 1.65" necks or narrower, like 1.625 (1 5/8) or maybe a bit narrower? (obviously i'm sure there's a practical limit)
cheers
Thanks for all the info...
Another question somewhat related... Which guitars (doesn't have to be Fenders) have really narrow necks (ie. across the fretboard, not depth of neck). Noticed Mustangs and Jaguars and some Strats have 1.65" neck widths (at nut). Gibsons seem to be more near 1 11/16 (1.6875) or even 1.695". Any other guitars out there that have 1.65" necks or narrower, like 1.625 (1 5/8) or maybe a bit narrower? (obviously i'm sure there's a practical limit)
cheers
Last edited:
PFDarkside
of the Forum
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
Also if you go to the Warmoth site you can see different profiles, the SRV and Clapton profiles are somewhere in between V and C as uOpt mentioned. You'll see it's a bit offset with more wood on the 'upper' shoulder and less on the lower, for comfort playing thumb over.
Strangely enough, I switch, so I prefer a flat back profile.
Also if you go to the Warmoth site you can see different profiles, the SRV and Clapton profiles are somewhere in between V and C as uOpt mentioned. You'll see it's a bit offset with more wood on the 'upper' shoulder and less on the lower, for comfort playing thumb over.
Strangely enough, I switch, so I prefer a flat back profile.
uOpt
Something Cool
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
I already figured that my perfect neck shape is probably a trapezoid. The angled flat shoulders of a V neck to rest the thumb on normally and to dig into when bending. But a flat back just wide enough to support the thumb for barre. And thick enough to support hours of play and good tone.
I already figured that my perfect neck shape is probably a trapezoid. The angled flat shoulders of a V neck to rest the thumb on normally and to dig into when bending. But a flat back just wide enough to support the thumb for barre. And thick enough to support hours of play and good tone.
Robert Delahunt
Showmasterologist
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
I have shortish fingers. However, I own both a Lite Ash Stratocaster (9.5" radius, half way between a soft V neck and a modern C) and a Schecter C-1 Classic (Les Paul thick neck, 16" radius). Both feel fine to my fingers. My advice: practice, practice, practice. That way your hands get used to the guitar. I read the same thing from an interview of John Fogerty (sp?) in Guitar Player. It's all about practice. It's not about what is perfect.
Now, sure, some things will feel more natural to your hand than others, so go try out a bunch of different guitars. But once you finally decide (after asking your hands what they think), buy the guitar, and then spend as much time as you humanly can practicing on it.
I've been through many guitars looking for "the one", and what I found after I stopped searching and wasting money switching guitars was that it's about practice, not about the right size for your hand. You can adapt to anything you want.
For example, I used to think wide string spread for my big sausage fingers. I tried that. But I can play a Fender "close" string spread just fine. I used to think that short fingers (i.e. not long) meant get 24.75" scale or smaller. But I play two 25.5" scale guitars just fine.
Last, but not least: practice slowly, with determination, focusing on your hands, and practice everything starting at the first fret. It's harder, sure, but once you can do it "the hard way", playing it at the proper fret will be much easier.
Good luck!
I have shortish fingers. However, I own both a Lite Ash Stratocaster (9.5" radius, half way between a soft V neck and a modern C) and a Schecter C-1 Classic (Les Paul thick neck, 16" radius). Both feel fine to my fingers. My advice: practice, practice, practice. That way your hands get used to the guitar. I read the same thing from an interview of John Fogerty (sp?) in Guitar Player. It's all about practice. It's not about what is perfect.
Now, sure, some things will feel more natural to your hand than others, so go try out a bunch of different guitars. But once you finally decide (after asking your hands what they think), buy the guitar, and then spend as much time as you humanly can practicing on it.
I've been through many guitars looking for "the one", and what I found after I stopped searching and wasting money switching guitars was that it's about practice, not about the right size for your hand. You can adapt to anything you want.
For example, I used to think wide string spread for my big sausage fingers. I tried that. But I can play a Fender "close" string spread just fine. I used to think that short fingers (i.e. not long) meant get 24.75" scale or smaller. But I play two 25.5" scale guitars just fine.
Last, but not least: practice slowly, with determination, focusing on your hands, and practice everything starting at the first fret. It's harder, sure, but once you can do it "the hard way", playing it at the proper fret will be much easier.
Good luck!
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
i'm a big guy with large hands and i have had wrist and muscle trouble over the years on some necks.... my Les Paul almost did me in... i was going for an operation at one point but backed out and changed guitars on doctors advice...
i found that super thin Jackson necks were all i could play... the 2 i own are super flat 16 inch radius with paper thin necks... i used them for a while but they are not the best... i then found that the thickness of the neck was not the real issue it was the shape of said neck
I have to say i love V shaped Fenders... the Clapton and some of the other V models they offer i love!!! i can't go wrong with them.. i'm a thumbs over the top player....
oddly for cost reasons i have many cheaper Fenders.... my Fenders are 1 American Standard strat, and various MIM Standard Strats and a Tele.... all with C shapes.. my 1988 American Standard has a C shape but it is thicker then the MIM C shaped necks... that 88 is the one of the best necks i have for comfort...
but when it comes down to it i love the V shape!!!
Nut width is a different comfort issue... i love the 1 5/8ths thin feel but with my larger hands i have a harder time freting even D chords.. i stick to 1 11/16th nut widths but oneday i would love to try a V 1 5/8th neck
i'm a big guy with large hands and i have had wrist and muscle trouble over the years on some necks.... my Les Paul almost did me in... i was going for an operation at one point but backed out and changed guitars on doctors advice...
i found that super thin Jackson necks were all i could play... the 2 i own are super flat 16 inch radius with paper thin necks... i used them for a while but they are not the best... i then found that the thickness of the neck was not the real issue it was the shape of said neck
I have to say i love V shaped Fenders... the Clapton and some of the other V models they offer i love!!! i can't go wrong with them.. i'm a thumbs over the top player....
oddly for cost reasons i have many cheaper Fenders.... my Fenders are 1 American Standard strat, and various MIM Standard Strats and a Tele.... all with C shapes.. my 1988 American Standard has a C shape but it is thicker then the MIM C shaped necks... that 88 is the one of the best necks i have for comfort...
but when it comes down to it i love the V shape!!!
Nut width is a different comfort issue... i love the 1 5/8ths thin feel but with my larger hands i have a harder time freting even D chords.. i stick to 1 11/16th nut widths but oneday i would love to try a V 1 5/8th neck
Robert Delahunt
Showmasterologist
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
I don't want to be rude or sound insulting, but I don't think it was the guitars at all. I think it was your technique. Look at the classical guitar scene. Players of all hand sizes and shapes have been using the same basic neck shape for forever in that field: flat fretboard radius and thick neck. I used to own one myself. It never gave me problems because at that time in my life I was worshipping Segovia's technique and trying to play with perfect technique.
I had started a lot of threads on here about all of this, only to find that, as I went back to the basics and fixed the problems in my technique, my problems with my hands went away.
Not trying to call you a liar, but I disagree 100%. I think guitar players everywhere are done a disservice when someone tells them it's the guitar and not their technique. I've played electric bass and even upright string bass, and viola, before, and it's always been about technique. I've also played piano (had a junior recital at college level, playing difficult stuff), and it was still about technique.
And there's violin players like Itzhak Perlman. His hands are almost bigger than the violin, and he has short, stubby sausage links for fingers. On that small an instrument, you'd think it would make a huge difference. Yet he's arguably the best living violinist. Go figure.
To each their own, and I'm happy you didn't need surgery (that would suck). But I cannot agree with you.
I don't want to be rude or sound insulting, but I don't think it was the guitars at all. I think it was your technique. Look at the classical guitar scene. Players of all hand sizes and shapes have been using the same basic neck shape for forever in that field: flat fretboard radius and thick neck. I used to own one myself. It never gave me problems because at that time in my life I was worshipping Segovia's technique and trying to play with perfect technique.
I had started a lot of threads on here about all of this, only to find that, as I went back to the basics and fixed the problems in my technique, my problems with my hands went away.
Not trying to call you a liar, but I disagree 100%. I think guitar players everywhere are done a disservice when someone tells them it's the guitar and not their technique. I've played electric bass and even upright string bass, and viola, before, and it's always been about technique. I've also played piano (had a junior recital at college level, playing difficult stuff), and it was still about technique.
And there's violin players like Itzhak Perlman. His hands are almost bigger than the violin, and he has short, stubby sausage links for fingers. On that small an instrument, you'd think it would make a huge difference. Yet he's arguably the best living violinist. Go figure.
To each their own, and I'm happy you didn't need surgery (that would suck). But I cannot agree with you.
uOpt
Something Cool
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
I already wrote how I think you can somewhat predict which neck shape you like.
Nut width I think is mostly hand size dependent and whether you do barre with the last element on the ring finger and similar gags.
When it comes to fretboard radius I think it's not hand dependent. It's dependent on what you are used to. Myself, I learned classical guitar first, so a flat fretboard is normal and I have no problems bringing down barre chords on anything short of a 0.012" string gauge 12-string first fret. I like flat. Actually I have more difficulties with my right hand on extremely flat boards, because the D and G strings don't stick out enough to reliably hit with the pick, together.
People who want to use less force for chording prefer a smaller radius.
None of this explains why e.g. Dave Gilmour (probably) uses 7.5". I think this has to do with the ability to enclose the whole neck comfortably with the hand. Sometimes the more round, the more like a circle, probably feels natural.
I already wrote how I think you can somewhat predict which neck shape you like.
Nut width I think is mostly hand size dependent and whether you do barre with the last element on the ring finger and similar gags.
When it comes to fretboard radius I think it's not hand dependent. It's dependent on what you are used to. Myself, I learned classical guitar first, so a flat fretboard is normal and I have no problems bringing down barre chords on anything short of a 0.012" string gauge 12-string first fret. I like flat. Actually I have more difficulties with my right hand on extremely flat boards, because the D and G strings don't stick out enough to reliably hit with the pick, together.
People who want to use less force for chording prefer a smaller radius.
None of this explains why e.g. Dave Gilmour (probably) uses 7.5". I think this has to do with the ability to enclose the whole neck comfortably with the hand. Sometimes the more round, the more like a circle, probably feels natural.
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
i'm sure it was the way i have to hold that LP is a key part of why that neck hurt my hands... it was a baseball bat neck and even thicker then most stock Gibsons ever where as that guitar's neck was completely removed and rebuilt from scratch.... with a huge new thick fingerboard that forces the bridge to be raised pretty high off the face of the guitar... i was fighting that neck every inch of the way.... it was too thick for me to wrap my thumb around like i'm used to... i've never been comfortable on it...
for me a different guitar was the key to comfort.... not me changing my way of playing on the same guitar... no matter what i do i can't find real comfort on that guitar and within a 1/2 hour of playing the thing the pain in my wrist returns...
most repeatative stress injurys come from forcing your body to do long hours at something your body is not comfortable with... just because 1000's of classical guitarists use the same or simular neck on their guitars does not mean i can... i've never had any great success with a classical guitar either but it never hurt my wrist like that LP... i took classical leasons in highschool and my old classical is in the basement with 20 years layers of dust...
so me trying to fight to use a guitar just because everyone else does is lame... i had a great doctor and he even had me bring the guitar to his office... medically he said find an axe that does not hurt to use... that being said i did... the easy way to fix an issue
it's like saying i should wear "these" shoes because everyone else does... not made for me.... why fight it
i'm sure it was the way i have to hold that LP is a key part of why that neck hurt my hands... it was a baseball bat neck and even thicker then most stock Gibsons ever where as that guitar's neck was completely removed and rebuilt from scratch.... with a huge new thick fingerboard that forces the bridge to be raised pretty high off the face of the guitar... i was fighting that neck every inch of the way.... it was too thick for me to wrap my thumb around like i'm used to... i've never been comfortable on it...
for me a different guitar was the key to comfort.... not me changing my way of playing on the same guitar... no matter what i do i can't find real comfort on that guitar and within a 1/2 hour of playing the thing the pain in my wrist returns...
most repeatative stress injurys come from forcing your body to do long hours at something your body is not comfortable with... just because 1000's of classical guitarists use the same or simular neck on their guitars does not mean i can... i've never had any great success with a classical guitar either but it never hurt my wrist like that LP... i took classical leasons in highschool and my old classical is in the basement with 20 years layers of dust...
so me trying to fight to use a guitar just because everyone else does is lame... i had a great doctor and he even had me bring the guitar to his office... medically he said find an axe that does not hurt to use... that being said i did... the easy way to fix an issue
it's like saying i should wear "these" shoes because everyone else does... not made for me.... why fight it
Last edited:
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
Not all classical necks are the same, either. I used to tech for a classical guitarist, and did a lot of work on his students' guitars, which ranged from cheap Yamahas to Ramirez. There's also short and long scale and different thicknesses for the neck, some with a noticeable flat spot on the back of the neck, sort of a bigger version of a shredder neck.
That said, the Yamaha Pacificas have a narrower neck and a nice C shape, and if you can find a 300 series or higher used you'll have a good guitar.
Not all classical necks are the same, either. I used to tech for a classical guitarist, and did a lot of work on his students' guitars, which ranged from cheap Yamahas to Ramirez. There's also short and long scale and different thicknesses for the neck, some with a noticeable flat spot on the back of the neck, sort of a bigger version of a shredder neck.
That said, the Yamaha Pacificas have a narrower neck and a nice C shape, and if you can find a 300 series or higher used you'll have a good guitar.
Petrovsk Mizinski
New member
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
Completely on topic, in terms of Fender's I really like the 12 inch radius boards they offer, like on the MIM Deluxe Players model, very comfy.
In terms of what I really like, I like as flat as possible, 14 inch radiuses and above if possible, and in terms of neck size, I like super thin, but I think the neck's on some the current MIJ Jackson's are nice (not too thick, not too thin).
Completely on topic, in terms of Fender's I really like the 12 inch radius boards they offer, like on the MIM Deluxe Players model, very comfy.
In terms of what I really like, I like as flat as possible, 14 inch radiuses and above if possible, and in terms of neck size, I like super thin, but I think the neck's on some the current MIJ Jackson's are nice (not too thick, not too thin).
mi_canuck
New member
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
came across a strat with a decent that I seemed to like at my local used guitar shop...
was a made in the USA model... SN was E347272.... any way to decipher what model year and neck that might have had? (it had those lace sensors in it, fwiw )
thnx
came across a strat with a decent that I seemed to like at my local used guitar shop...
was a made in the USA model... SN was E347272.... any way to decipher what model year and neck that might have had? (it had those lace sensors in it, fwiw )
thnx
Last edited:
veryhungrycaterpilla
New member
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
As a physical therapist that has done hand therapy and have been trained at a professional and post-professional level in ergonomics, it is many factors. It is technique AND the instrument AND anatomy and what you are playing and other factors that need to be analyzed by a trained professional (much preferablly one with ergonomics training and/or specializes in the treatment of "art injuries").
Susceptibility to injury is an individual thing. Making untrained medical/therapy generalizations and assumptions like you are stating is dangerous stuff.
As a physical therapist that has done hand therapy and have been trained at a professional and post-professional level in ergonomics, it is many factors. It is technique AND the instrument AND anatomy and what you are playing and other factors that need to be analyzed by a trained professional (much preferablly one with ergonomics training and/or specializes in the treatment of "art injuries").
Susceptibility to injury is an individual thing. Making untrained medical/therapy generalizations and assumptions like you are stating is dangerous stuff.
Last edited:
Robert Delahunt
Showmasterologist
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
Cool. Please prove your credentials by telling me your name, your certifications, and where you practice. Not to be rude, and I don't think you're lying, but anyone can jump on a forum and claim this, and we'd have no way whatsoever of proving it.
What I am suggesting is that people need to listen to their bodies as they play and do whatever it takes to minimize or eliminate pain. In fact, this is what I was told by a licensed physical therapist. But he explained it on the medical side of things by telling me why I have pain and how I can fix it. What I learned afterwards was that he was telling me what I already knew, but just wasn't obeying. It's about technique. If your technique is improper, you will hurt yourself, and you will need to see a therapist.
If the person has proper technique and is paying attention while they practice, they won't need your services. However, if they're like 99% of the people I've seen, including how I used to be, who don't pay attention and don't bother to learn proper technique, they'll need you to tell them. I'm glad that you're out there telling them.
Technique is guitarists teaching other guitarists how to prevent injury and how to maximize their playing. Physical therapy is a medical person telling the guitarist why he's hurting himself and how he can fix it.
Very respectfully....
Cool. Please prove your credentials by telling me your name, your certifications, and where you practice. Not to be rude, and I don't think you're lying, but anyone can jump on a forum and claim this, and we'd have no way whatsoever of proving it.
What I am suggesting is that people need to listen to their bodies as they play and do whatever it takes to minimize or eliminate pain. In fact, this is what I was told by a licensed physical therapist. But he explained it on the medical side of things by telling me why I have pain and how I can fix it. What I learned afterwards was that he was telling me what I already knew, but just wasn't obeying. It's about technique. If your technique is improper, you will hurt yourself, and you will need to see a therapist.
If the person has proper technique and is paying attention while they practice, they won't need your services. However, if they're like 99% of the people I've seen, including how I used to be, who don't pay attention and don't bother to learn proper technique, they'll need you to tell them. I'm glad that you're out there telling them.
Technique is guitarists teaching other guitarists how to prevent injury and how to maximize their playing. Physical therapy is a medical person telling the guitarist why he's hurting himself and how he can fix it.
Very respectfully....
Last edited:
ratherdashing
Kablamminator
Re: Fender: V-neck vs C-neck, fingerboard radius, etc...
Are you freakin' serious? Asking for credentials because someone disagrees with you? Get a life. This is stupid even by your standards.
Your definition of "respectfully" is pretty messed up.
Are you freakin' serious? Asking for credentials because someone disagrees with you? Get a life. This is stupid even by your standards.
Your definition of "respectfully" is pretty messed up.
