eclecticsynergy
Well-known member
Sadly scarf joints became so associated with cheaper imports over time that some can't acknowledge it's a superior design.
Les Paul with headstock repair value?
- Thread starter man-in-moon
- Start date
NegativeEase
New member
Yeah, I was expecting ICT to drop some deep knowledge on his issue with Scarf joints -or anybody really -other than the traditional opinion of disliking them because they are not traditional (Scarfs originally emerged in cheaper guitars If I'm not mistaken)... as from my experience, they are superior by most measure unless the time to make the neck is your measure for not a good method -which I don't factor that at all.
Leo Fender avoided all of this mess with an even cheaper and more innovative methodology of course -but with some small downsides too.
I'm open to being educated on Scarf joints by anyone with experience. -I don't have a strong opinion either way.
JamesPaul
Well-known member
Now I'm curious what Greeny might have sold for, if the headstock and neck had not been repaired. I seem to recall it being listed on the Maverick Music website for 2 million USD. It was only on there a few weeks. I don't know if someone actually paid that or if Phil just took the listing down.
nexion218
New member
To my knowledge Kirk Wahmmett own that guitar
That particular guitar is worth what it is due to its past owners, not the condition it is in.
ICTGoober
Well-known member
Scarf joints haven't proven themselves superior. They are EQUAL TO, as six of one, half-dozen of the other.
Stop using the word BEST, because there isn't one - it's a fantasy. What exists in the real world is PREFERENCE.
Leo didn't use scarf joints because it was easier - saving production time.
Scarf joints developed because they saved money on wood, and they had plenty of production time.
Stop using the word BEST, because there isn't one - it's a fantasy. What exists in the real world is PREFERENCE.
Leo didn't use scarf joints because it was easier - saving production time.
Scarf joints developed because they saved money on wood, and they had plenty of production time.
Last edited:
nexion218
New member
And I guess this made them ubiqitous on cheaper guitars, which connection eventually gave them their bad reputation.
As a side note/question: I always thought that Fenders have one piece neck and headstock and Leo's way of getting rid of the tilt-back headstock was the straight headstock with staggered tuners, not by using a scarf joint. Or am I misunderstanding something in your post?
GuitarStv
Sock Market Trader
Yeah, but the neck was broken and the bottle of rosewater in the outer pocket of the gig bag was smashed.
: D
Securb
One of Jerry's Kids
Actually, I broke an e string and the pickup selector switch cover broke. My shoulder still hurts sometimes where the switch drove into my shoulder.
ErikH
Well-known member
I've experience one broken headstock, and it was on my Precision Guitar Kits SG Jr. I shared the repair experience here. The break was clean but the crack too small to get any glue in it so I ended up snapping the whole thing off and gluing it back on. Worked out really well and has held strongly since. I took my time with to make it right.
I have an 80's Kramer Baretta with a scarf joint. It's held strong. The neck is from the ESP era. The pre ESP era necks had issues with their scarf joints for a time. Mild proof that any work is as good as how it is done. My Dean ML has a scarf joint as well. No issues with it.
Gibson actually did put volutes on their necks in the 70's. And the purists cried about it. Another of those, "damned if you do, damned if you don't", items for them. If they did a scarf joint on the necks, we'd all hear those same cries. I would think with the Original and Modern series guitars, they could at least put a volute on the Modern series models.
Fender necks are straight because they are not only easier to make, but offer better tuning stability where the strings have less of a break angle left or right coming out of the nut (especially when using the traditional vibrato). The 6 in line tuners offer a straighter path. Staggered tuners didn't become available until years and years later, maybe the 90's? (I could be wrong here).
I have an 80's Kramer Baretta with a scarf joint. It's held strong. The neck is from the ESP era. The pre ESP era necks had issues with their scarf joints for a time. Mild proof that any work is as good as how it is done. My Dean ML has a scarf joint as well. No issues with it.
Gibson actually did put volutes on their necks in the 70's. And the purists cried about it. Another of those, "damned if you do, damned if you don't", items for them. If they did a scarf joint on the necks, we'd all hear those same cries. I would think with the Original and Modern series guitars, they could at least put a volute on the Modern series models.
Fender necks are straight because they are not only easier to make, but offer better tuning stability where the strings have less of a break angle left or right coming out of the nut (especially when using the traditional vibrato). The 6 in line tuners offer a straighter path. Staggered tuners didn't become available until years and years later, maybe the 90's? (I could be wrong here).
NegativeEase
New member
I guess you are addressing a different post, but I used the phrase "superior by most measures". -In that they do no suffer the short grain problems or butt joints of a traditional neck -which is the only reason anyone even cares about this topic -they don't want a classic Gibson broken headstock issue.
Am I wrong in that? I don't think so, but I'm all ears, however I'm guessing you either think this idea of short grain problems is overplayed in general as a reason to choose a scarf joint?
Of course, I didn't imply otherwise -I said he avoided the whole argument entirely with his methodology -and that was Leo's MO on anything related to guitar making that wasn't electronics related. It was brilliant combination of using innovation and smarts with his business acumen as usual -Country, Blues, and Rock didn't require the admirable but traditional techniques of 19th Century luthier artistry to deliver a solid body electric sound and playability -So Leo leveraged that.
NegativeEase
New member
Ha... So is there a neck joint that is standard practice that you would consider running away from upon site?
eclecticsynergy
Well-known member
I believe scarf joints have been used in classical guitar construction for at least 150 years and probably date back much farther than that.
The word luthier originally stood for someone who built lutes. Looking at medieval lutes, most had a headstock that makes the notorious 17° angle on fifties-spec Gibsons look tame by comparison. Some literally look to be nearly 90°. Even with a relatively short scale and gut strings, I think most (or at least most of the ones that survived) must've employed a scarf joint. When the lute evolved into the Spanish guitar this tradition carried over.
Last edited:
eclecticsynergy
Well-known member
Yah, that hadn't occurred to me. I think the oud probably predates the lute - might even have inspired it.
