|
Post by sigmadel on Oct 22, 2013 13:27:55 GMT
As above do you prefer the neck of your guitar to be bound or unbound , I'm in the later I prefer it unbound but wondered what the general opinion was . I've never really seen the need for it TBH . Us it just for aesthetics or does it have a more usefull function ?
|
|
Wild Violet
Artist / Performer
Posts: 3,556
My main instrument is: Symonds OM-14
|
Post by Wild Violet on Oct 22, 2013 13:42:38 GMT
I don't know about function but I hate bound necks. I refused to buy a D-35 because I knew it would drive me nuts.
|
|
leoroberts
C.O.G.
Posts: 24,532
My main instrument is: probably needing new strings
|
Post by leoroberts on Oct 22, 2013 13:45:44 GMT
Can I 'fess up and say that I have no idea what a bound neck is and, therefore, no idea whether I would want one (or, indeed, already have one) on any of my guitars ...
|
|
Martin
Administrator
Posts: 11,881
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"http://mandocello.org/lytebox/images/adirondack.jpg","color":""}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 0a530b
Mini-Profile Text Color: 4f3517
|
Post by Martin on Oct 22, 2013 13:45:52 GMT
Well, it can maybe stop potentially sharp fret ends hurting your wee fingers I like some bound necks - for instance, if it's tastefully done in a nice wood, it can look pretty cool. I really don't like plastic binding. Traditional or not, it looks naff to me.
|
|
ocarolan
Global Moderator
CURMUDGEONLY OLD GIT (leader - to join, just ask!)
Posts: 33,952
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"c0cfe1"}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 182a3f
Mini-Profile Text Color: 733a1c
|
Post by ocarolan on Oct 22, 2013 13:47:40 GMT
No real preference - done properly, both look good and, more importantly, with properly finished fret ends, should feel good. Definitely don't like the look of very white neck binding. A bound neck will be a little more costly to refret.
Keith
|
|
davewhite
Luthier / Guitar Maker
Luthier
Aemulor et ambitiosior
Posts: 3,544
|
Post by davewhite on Oct 22, 2013 14:41:25 GMT
Can I 'fess up and say that I have no idea what a bound neck is and, therefore, no idea whether I would want one (or, indeed, already have one) on any of my guitars ... Trust me you do have one Well a bound fingerboard anyway, I'm not sure what a bound neck is.
|
|
davewhite
Luthier / Guitar Maker
Luthier
Aemulor et ambitiosior
Posts: 3,544
|
Post by davewhite on Oct 22, 2013 14:53:16 GMT
I've always done them mainly because I like the look and have always used purflings to match the side purflings I use. There's no real structural benefits and if the fret ends aren't properly dressed you will feel them with both a bound and unbound fingerboard. The biggest benefit to me is that I can use laminated fingerboards - mahogany or walnut on the bottom and a harder wood as the visible face of the fingerboard with the binding matching the outer wood (or contrasting) and hiding the lamination from view. This makes a lighter and more resonant fingerboard and doubles the use of scarce woods like ebony used as the outer surface. This is the only "doubling" that makes sense to me, for all of the others - tops, sides and backs you use twice as much scarce precious wood for structural/sonic benefits that can be achieved in other ways in my view. If doubled backs and sides were made from veneer cuts of wood - a very efficient use of scarce wood - then back and side doubling/laminating would make more sense but from what I've seen most builders use two normal thickness sets and thin them down.
|
|
|
Post by sigmadel on Oct 22, 2013 15:30:57 GMT
Can I 'fess up and say that I have no idea what a bound neck is and, therefore, no idea whether I would want one (or, indeed, already have one) on any of my guitars ... Trust me you do have one Well a bound fingerboard anyway, I'm not sure what a bound neck is. Yes sorry Dave it sounds like hanging your guitar :-) I did of course mean finger boards . I like the way you explain the way they can be used too as that makes sense rather than using a slab of Ebony or Rosewood and I know that certain Fenders of I think the late 60s refer to capped and slab boards so that makes sense . Martin and Keith I'm with you on the white binding thing I think it looks mince .
|
|
|
Post by earwighoney on Oct 22, 2013 15:37:24 GMT
I've always done them mainly because I like the look and have always used purflings to match the side purflings I use. There's no real structural benefits and if the fret ends aren't properly dressed you will feel them with both a bound and unbound fingerboard. The biggest benefit to me is that I can use laminated fingerboards - mahogany or walnut on the bottom and a harder wood as the visible face of the fingerboard with the binding matching the outer wood (or contrasting) and hiding the lamination from view. This makes a lighter and more resonant fingerboard and doubles the use of scarce woods like ebony used as the outer surface. This is the only "doubling" that makes sense to me, for all of the others - tops, sides and backs you use twice as much scarce precious wood for structural/sonic benefits that can be achieved in other ways in my view. If doubled backs and sides were made from veneer cuts of wood - a very efficient use of scarce wood - then back and side doubling/laminating would make more sense but from what I've seen most builders use two normal thickness sets and thin them down. Thanks for this reply Dave, it was very interesting. Great point about laminated fingerboards; I hope it's something which gains popularity.
|
|
davewhite
Luthier / Guitar Maker
Luthier
Aemulor et ambitiosior
Posts: 3,544
|
Post by davewhite on Oct 22, 2013 16:02:12 GMT
Great point about laminated fingerboards; I hope it's something which gains popularity. Shubbs, I used to think that I'd finally "invented" something with these but then Colin Symonds pointed out to me that they used the same technique on guitar fingerboards in the 17th and 18th century
|
|
|
Post by grayn on Oct 22, 2013 16:49:20 GMT
I thought all binding on guitars was originally there to protect from knocks.
|
|
davewhite
Luthier / Guitar Maker
Luthier
Aemulor et ambitiosior
Posts: 3,544
|
Post by davewhite on Oct 22, 2013 17:45:36 GMT
I thought all binding on guitars was originally there to protect from knocks. On the body, yes plus it helps seal the exposed end grain of the top and back. The neck is a more solid construction than the box.
|
|
Wild Violet
Artist / Performer
Posts: 3,556
My main instrument is: Symonds OM-14
|
Post by Wild Violet on Oct 22, 2013 18:31:22 GMT
I guess I don't mind necks bound in a nice wood. It's that white/yellow/ivory plastic that drives me nuts.
|
|
stringdriventhing
C.O.G.
Posts: 1,859
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"101011"}
Mini-Profile Name Color: E61921
Mini-Profile Text Color: e6ce19
|
Post by stringdriventhing on Oct 22, 2013 23:22:41 GMT
My old guitar had white plastic binding which went a horrible yellow colour eventually. When I got it refretted chunks of it fell off and had to be filled in with white filler :-( Not an attractive look.
I don't mind nice wood binding on a guitar fretboard though.
|
|
|
Post by paganskins on Oct 23, 2013 8:49:23 GMT
I guess I don't mind necks bound in a nice wood. It's that white/yellow/ivory plastic that drives me nuts. Probably unbound but I tend to view it on a case by case basis. My gibson advanced jumbo suits plastic binding on the neck as it's a semi-accurate reissue of a 30s model. Historically I've not been keen on wood binding, preferring a more trad plastic/celluloid in keeping with the more trad looking guitars I favoured (Les Pauls etc). However my tastes seem to be changing to more contemporary style acoustics with wood binding.
|
|