Are Warmoth "Screamin' Deals" Necks Factory Seconds?

[Chuck H]

Nice! It doesn't surprise me that it's a linseed oil product since linseed oil has loooong been the "correct" thing to use for gun stocks. That's why I used it when I had to finish one. If I had to do it again I'd use Daly's Teak oil

[Steve A.]

"Fret sprout" is when the ends of frets poke out from the wood in the neck or fretboard. High (or proud) frets are when the fret pops up from the fretboard for one reason or another.

For fret sprout you can use a mill file to remove the excess metal and then use a fret end dressing file to round the ends. While StewMac sells a fret end dressing file (#1175) for $14.67 plus $9.99 s/h you can make your own with a Nicholson 02375N 5×1/4" Tungsten Point File for $7.60 from Amazon by smoothing and rounding the edges with a grinder. What makes both files special is their very fine double cut teeth. BTW the StewMac has one edge rounded with the other edge flat so if you hold it wrong it can cut tiny little divots in the edge of your fretboard. Ouch!

https://www.amazon.com/Nicholson-023.../dp/B007C6OKB0

Either one of these files comes in handy with most Gibson guitars selling new for under $1000 at least since the 2013 model year. The 2013 and 2014 LPJ's utilized new production techniques to meet the desired price point and my unconfirmed theory*** is that they started pressing in pre-dressed frets using CNC technology. If you look at the side view of the frets they are rounded but looking from the top down they are bluntly square. If you read the user reviews for these models at the Gibson site the blunt fret ends are a big complaint. I picked up used 2013 LPJ's for as low as* $399 so it doesn't bother me to spend 45 minutes doing the job that Gibson skipped doing at the factory to keep the price down.

The subject of gluing in frets is a different matter. Besides holding the frets in place I find that it really improves the tone and sustain as the vibrations from the string are better transferred to the neck and eventually to the body. Here is what Erick Coleman has to say about it with the picture showing the bone nut test:

Super glue your frets for better tone! | stewmac.com





Here is a TGP thread about gluing frets (I prefer using Titebond nee Frankin Luquid Hide Glue myself):

https://www.thegearpage.net/board/in...or-not.513217/

BTW one of the posts from 2009 mentions that all 5 necks he got from AllParts had the frets glued in. To me it sounds like a very economical way for them to prevent costly returns.
Steve A.

*** Rather than pay workers to manually level frets, Gibson has been using Plek machines to level frets on all of their production line guitars according to reports I have read. This is not the same $400 Plek job you might have done at a luthier's shop but just a quick'n'dirty way for Gibson to get the frets level. In many cases it looks like they don't bother to recrown the frets after leveling them even on $2,000 Les Pauls.

As for the square end frets on most of the recent Gibson guitars selling for under $1000 I think that they have to be that way to be pressed in with machines using CNC technology — if they came to a rounded bullet end I don't think they would press in properly. And with CNC technology the frets can be cut and dressed before being pressed into the fretboard.

This is all speculation on my part but I could even imagine them pressing the frets onto the fretboard before gluing it to the neck. With computer technology everything can be done with a precision unheard of not too many years ago. The most recent video I could find showing the Gibson production line was from 2011 and I suspect that they have made changes on building their entry level guitars, possibly learned from Asian factories.

There are some YouTube videos showing a luthier pre-dressing frets using a special Dremel rig he made before pressing them into a neck he was refretting. Here are two from the guy...

https://youtu.be/moxUw3Ke2Q0

https://youtu.be/JdjPd5kiDgk

[d. spree]

I have found them overpriced. Have had great success and a good choice of profiles etc with Mighty Mite necks

[bob p]

The Mighty Mite web site is just awful. There's no way to figure out what kind of necks they offer without clicking on every neck and reading it's specs.

Their necks might be OK for some people, but they're a C shape, just like the Fender necks that I don't want. Unfortunately for me those C necks could be *FREE* to me and I still couldn't use them.

At least W gives you more selection options, including customization options, and more importantly custom neck profiles that Mighty Mite doesn't offer... but you pay for that.

[bob p]

PartsCaster Update

Just in case anyone's interested in my slow-motion story about a parts-caster build:

PartsCaster Update:

I decided to go with a W* neck, volunteering my wallet to be a guinea pig in a guitar building experiment. Like Chuck suggested, it's probably a good idea to look for a custom-order / oddball type of neck that's out of the ordinary types that you see on the "Screamin' Deals" page to minimize your chances of getting some kind of production line reject. This doesn't give any guarantees of course, but it seems like a reasonable idea.

I have sort of oddball likes when it comes to necks, as I started off playing bass on those 70s Fender U-shaped necks, so I like a fistfull of neck on a guitar. Short of a mid-50s Gibson no guitar neck is ever fat enough for me. So this project was going to require an oddball / custom order type of neck anyway. It seemed like a custom order was inevitable, but to avoid spending $$$$ on a partscaster I decided to try to limit my wants to as few oddball features as possible, focusing only on things were mainstream, or as middle of the road as possible, and only deviating from mainstream where I really had do, in the hopes that I could find something off the shelf.

My basic criteria were basic variations on the standard low-cost options: Maple neck, fatback profile, rosewood fretboard, standard 1-11/16 nut, 10-16 compound radius. Everything else was negotiable.

After watching for a while I found a few necks come up, some with regular rock maple, some with roasted maple. Because this neck was going to go onto a brown Strat body, either one would work well. Being old school I prefer a uniformly dark fingerboard over one that has color streaks, so I had to wait a while until something good came up that didn't cost an arm and a leg. I ended up paying a little extra for a roasted maple neck so I wouldn't have to bother with constant refinishing, as my plans for this guitar are to start with as fat a neck as possible and sand it down in increments if I decide that I want to change it's shape. I also opted to pay a little more for a dark rosewood fingerboard, but those were my only options. I opted for a Schaller-type tuner ream because I wanted to try Fender locking tuners. And I went with 6100 SS frets, because big frets and fat necks don't scare me.

Here's what it looked like before I ordered it:



It took 2 weeks from the time that I ordered it to get it in-hand. One week for the tuner reaming and fretwork, one week for shipping. It finally arrived today. I haven't had a chance to do anything with it yet, but the preliminary inspection looks pretty good. Out of the box the fretwork looks very neat, the unmounted neck passes the metal straightedge test and there are no sharp fret ends. Finish sanding is ultra smooth. I had originally thought about burnishing it with 400 and then 1000 grit, but out of the box it feels just fine. There's only one insignificant problem -- someone dinged the back of the neck during handling, but because it's at the heel, the micro-ding is going to be tucked away into the body's pocket, so nobody will ever see it. My first impression is that the W* gets a thumbs-up.

More to follow if anyone is interested in vicariously experiencing my slow-motion build-up.

[dmartn149]

More to follow if anyone is interested in vicariously experiencing my slow-motion build-up.

I'm interested. I put one together a while back out of low cost parts and some parts I already had. I think it came out pretty good.

[Chuck H]

Finish sanding is ultra smooth. I had originally thought about burnishing it with 400 and then 1000 grit, but out of the box it feels just fine.

I like 'em smooth enough to clean (after oiling) and rough enough that there's some surface tension mitigation. Feels velvety smooth and fast. To that end I finish sand with 220. Fine enough that you don't see sanding strokes and coarse enough that the neck doesn't feel polished.

At this point my strat neck IS polished though. Years of handling have buffed it to a shiny gloss. But it still never feels sticky. I can't say enough about tung oil for this application.

And I'll be following along. What are your pickup plans? Stock arrangement or humbucker in the bridge? I saw one that was definitely coloring outside the lines with a pair of p90's. Seemed like a good idea to me.

[bob p]

And I'll be following along.

This is the boring hijack part:

I think I remember you saying that you liked the W* "59" profile, which is a 59 LP type of neck.

I don't know if this has been a problem for you, Chuck, but I thought I'd ask about your experience -- as I've gotten older I've had more problems with left hand (fingerboard) cramping and the solution for me has been baseball bat necks. For the longest time I thought it was just me, but the more I've talked about it the more I've found that it's a common problem as guys get older. I just can't play for very long on a skinny neck before the cramping starts.

The modern thin C necks really bother me. I've been really happy with the Indo G&L necks, which are more comfortable for me than modern Fenders. I was totally happy with those, but all hell broke loose when I bought a jumbo archtop back in November. It was one of those big 1930s guitars that are so big that you don't really hold them, you ride them, if you know what I mean. The neck is fine, it's a fairly meaty C, but I had to change my entire playing style to accommodate that big 17 x 3-1/2 body, and the long scale neck which puts the headstock out pretty far away. Without realizing it I put a huge strain on my neck, shoulder and left wrist while trying to do lower position jazzy chords. By accommodating with poor wrist positioning (continuous hard flexing with a far away nut) I kept straining my neck, left shoulder, and extensor tendons without realizing it until all of a sudden it was really bad.

I developed a really bad case of tennis elbow that has kept a guitar out of my hands for months. It was so bad that the pain would wake me up at night. I couldn't even pick up a cup of coffee or pour a gallon of milk with my left hand for a couple of months, I had to get treated with steroids, etc., so I've been sidelined as a one-armed bandit since November. I was supposed to be totally sidelined for 6 months. After a 3+ months of total off-time started feeling better and I've tried "cheating" by playing for short periods, and I've found that the best solution for me has been going back to a solidbody instead of a thick hollowbody (solid bodies are just so much easier to wrap my body around and the neck/shoulder/arm/hand geometry is so much better). Opening my grip by playing my baseball bat Gibsons has made things a lot better too. This has taken a lot of the strain off of my left arm/elbow. I hate to think about it, but I may never be able to go back to playing a giant jazzbox, so it's back to solidbodies for now.

What are your pickup plans? Stock arrangement or humbucker in the bridge? I saw one that was definitely coloring outside the lines with a pair of p90's. Seemed like a good idea to me.

Back to the build:

I've already got the fat-neck covered with an LP/PAF and an LP/P90, so now I'm building myself a baseball bat necked Strat. The good news is that I'm using an American Strat body that is already routed for HSS, so if I decide to change between SSS and HSS all that will be required is a loaded pickguard swap. The body came with SSS so I'll be starting off there.

[Chuck H]

Well I can only speak for my own experience and preferences, but you DID ask...

I would be perfectly comfortable on a boat neck or any other fat profile. But I much prefer that there's still a taper to the neck and none of the fatter profiles offer that except for the 59. My own neck is just a tad fatter than the current "59" but I bought it over twenty years ago. I have no idea what their dimensions were at that time or if my neck was a second because of this. It's basically a 59 that's just noticeably fatter. Maybe 1/32" at the nut and the 12 fret. So the taper is still there. I fell in love with it the moment I touched it and I've been a fan of fatter necks since. I'm basically a rock player that dabbles in other genres like blues, metal and always lean toward the pop side so there's always the possibility of mixing it up with something else. I "like" jazz, but never invested in it. And I tend to be a thumb hanger, so I'd have to unlearn a bunch of bad habits to go that direction. I think I use the taper on stage to feel my position and that's why I like it. There's really not a lot of reasons to want more thickness on one position than another other than that. So that choice is yours. I picked the 59 because it's thicker than the thin ones and has a taper. As to thin necks...

When I was gigging I needed a guitar that had a locking trem and a HSS pickup lineup because there's not much a guitar like that won't do. Limited in some ways, but versatile in a real way. So I bought an Ibanez RG540. That guitar has the "wizard" neck. It's wide enough that there was still some neck in my hand, and I got use to it but never preferred it and I abandoned it once I got my Carvin DC400. Which had a neck profile sort of between the standard Strat neck and the Warmoth 59. I'm just "ok" with the standard Strat" neck profile. I've played so many of them that it's at least familiar, but I'll take a fatter neck any time. I've played enough boat necks to know I like them better even without the taper. So I guess that would be my priorities.

I'm wicked sorry for your playing fatigue/discomfort. I don't have that, yet. It's happened, sure. It's not common but I don't play much anymore either.

I had a recent issue with nerve impingement that reduced information exchange between my brain and my left arm. That's getting better now, but the neck issue isn't the sort that's going away. So it'll happen again and again. I'll lose a little motor control and feeling each time. But I haven't mentioned it because The Dude has a much harder story about overcoming paralytic circumstances and he gigs regularly and happily. Basically, none of us have room to complain about anything, ever again Then there's the ideal that you play for love and it works when you do. Regardless of physical limitations. So I won't be Steve Vai. So what.?. I'll be Chuck then instead. Django and Tony showed us all that physical impairment and musicianship don't have to be at odds.

Going with the standard three SC pickups still has out of the box options. I have my strat rigged with series pickup options and a phase invert for the middle pickup and I love it. I don't do any "chicken picken" so I did away with the bridge/middle option to achieve this. I use a master volume and master tone with the parallel/series switch mounted in the rear pot hole and a pull pot on the tone for the middle pickup phase. I DO have a humbucker in the bridge, but I've done this wiring for others with three singles and it's just great. I think I could even live without a bridge humbucker with this wiring.

[bob p]

Thanks for the finishing tips. I think I'll go with the oil rather than the burnishing. It's a lot less effort and it sounds like it'll get me to the endpoint that I want.

About that elbow thing, I consider myself lucky. I've been playing for over 40 years and I've never had any sort of guitar related injury. When my time finally came it was caused by poor decision making on my part, and now I know better. The only reason that I've mentioned the problem is because I'm trying to work toward a solution to avoid the problem again, and luckily that might just amount to finding a guitar that's a better fit. I have to consider how lucky I am to live in a time where I can buy a custom profile bolt-on neck that should effectively solve my problem. In the old days finding the right guitar involved a lot fewer choices and a lot more hunting, but today the solution can be as simple as a neck swap.

[bob p]

Going with the standard three SC pickups still has out of the box options. I have my strat rigged with series pickup options and a phase invert for the middle pickup and I love it. I don't do any "chicken picken" so I did away with the bridge/middle option to achieve this. I use a master volume and master tone with the parallel/series switch mounted in the rear pot hole and a pull pot on the tone for the middle pickup phase. I DO have a humbucker in the bridge, but I've done this wiring for others with three singles and it's just great. I think I could even live without a bridge humbucker with this wiring.

One of the problems that I've found with strats is that the bridge is just too shrill unless it's connected to a tone pot. So I'm not a big fan of the bridge pup, though I do use it in combination with the middle. but most of the time I find myself at the other end of the switch on a strat. I've actually given some thought to not even having a bridge SC, which means I might as well try HSS. Another thing that's bothered me on my Strats is the treble loss with volume pot reduction. So I'll be putting in a bright cap, as well as trying a few other things. your wiring scheme sounds interesting. Almost like a Red Special.

[Dave H]

One of the problems that I've found with strats is that the bridge is just too shrill unless it's connected to a tone pot.

I feel the same about the bridge pickup. I use a Super Switch (Ultra Switch) and wire it so the bottom tone pot only works in position 1 (bridge) and the middle tone pot only works in positions 2 to 5 with no interaction between switch positions. The bottom tone pot is always on 5 to take the edge of the bridge.

[bob p]

The W* Profile

I've taken some measurements on my W* compound radius neck, and I'm going to post some details that I wish that I could have gotten before placing my order:

---

Nut slot is cut flat, not arched.

Fret and Radius Measurements:

1st -- 10"
3rd -- 12"
14th -- 14"
21/22 -- 16"

Some of my preliminary observations:

At the nut / 1st fret the 10" radius is close enough to the Strat 9.5" radius that you can get away with using a flat-bottom Strat nut.

The 10" radius is only there for the cowboy chords. The transition from 10" to 12" is fast -- from 1st to 3rd. As soon as you get to the 3rd fret you're looking at a 12" LP type of radius.

The radius transitions more gradually between 12" and 14" over an 11-fret span between the 3rd and 14th.

It only gets really flat above the 14th, where it transitions from 14" to 16" when you're pretty high -- 14th on up to 21/22.

---

I couldn't find this information anywhere else so I thought I'd post it.

[Chuck H]

Those numbers don't mean anything to me without researching the actual distances, not numbers of frets. Because the compound radius concept only works, physically, if the graduation from 10" to 16" radius is a straight cone. Anything other than a straight cone would make it impossible to set up the guitar with a low action. Pretty sure W* knows this too Don't worry about it

[bob p]

sure, fret-to-fret distance is what matters if you want to draw the cone. knowing the fret locations makes it easy enough to convert those numbers into distance by grabbing a strat and a ruler, or looking at a fret distance table. i didn't intend it as a means of telling someone how to set the bridge, which should be flatter than any of those numbers because of the cone.

i posted the numbers because i think the fret numbers by themselves are enough to help someone figure out what the neck is going to feel like in the different "zones".