Members nirjraina Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 Just getting started in the world of fingerstyle guitar. I have smallish hands but i still find myself wishing i had more room (right hand in particular) when playing fingerstyle on my dreadnought, 1 11/16". Just wondering whether ill get over it with a bit of practice, or is it worth it to try and find something with a wider neck?
Members DonK Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 Originally posted by nirjraina Just getting started in the world of fingerstyle guitar. I have smallish hands but i still find myself wishing i had more room (right hand in particular) when playing fingerstyle on my dreadnought, 1 11/16".Just wondering whether ill get over it with a bit of practice, or is it worth it to try and find something with a wider neck? I like 1 3/4 - my Taylor has it and so does my Tacoma - but don't find it a necessity for fingerstyle. I've got a Line 6 Variax though that feels like 1.65"; whatever possessed Line 6 to make an acoustic modeling guitar with such tight string spacing is beyond me. My fingers are pretty big, but 1 11/16 works okay.
Members nirjraina Posted January 9, 2006 Author Members Posted January 9, 2006 I guess the 2nd problem would be finding something in my price range which is $600. Ive noticed that the wider neck is normally not offered on entry level models. Any recommendations for a less than 600 solid top with a 1 3/4" neck?..thanks !
Members Dave W. Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 I am dealing with a similar situation. I have a 1 7/8" that is great for finger-spacing, but a bear to get the thumb up over the top to the sixth string. I have a 1 3/4" that is still good for finger-spacing, but the neck is unusually fat (thick) and makes the thumb bit difficult. Then I have an old Tele that is close to 1 5/8" and thin. I could thumb the fifth string with ease, but have a hard time getting my fingers between the strings, particularly at the saddle end. Bottom line is to go out and play a bunch, find something that fits well, and try to get as close as possible in your price range. $600 covers a lot of good guitars, it is just hard to tell from nut width alone what will feel right. I have found that detailed specs for many guitars are hard to come by, and the neck shape thing is about impossible without playing one. Look at smaller bodied guitars, OM, 000 "folk" etc. Often they are designed with fingerstyle in mind and fit that style better than the run of the mill dreads. Dave
Members DonK Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 Originally posted by nirjraina I guess the 2nd problem would be finding something in my price range which is $600. Ive noticed that the wider neck is normally not offered on entry level models.Any recommendations for a less than 600 solid top with a 1 3/4" neck?..thanks ! For dreadnoughts, 1 3/4" is standard on Seagull and Tacoma; you can get one of these new or used within your budget.
Members Cldplytkmn Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 you can get into some all solid wood guitars used for 6 bills... larrivee being one of them... their L and OM 03s sport 1 3/4 inch neck width
Members nirjraina Posted January 9, 2006 Author Members Posted January 9, 2006 I know this is a bit shallow but the seagull guitars dont look that great to my eye. Ill go play one though..if it sounds good enough and the spacing is right i should be able to get over this Yeah i know its a bit unreasonable to have a great looking guitar with the specs i need for 600..but a guy can dream cant he!
Members Dave W. Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 Originally posted by nirjraina I know this is a bit shallow but the seagull guitars dont look that great to my eye. Ill go play one though..if it sounds good enough and the spacing is right i should be able to get over this Yeah i know its a bit unreasonable to have a great looking guitar with the specs i need for 600..but a guy can dream cant he! I can't get past that new age headstock either, glad I am not the only one.
Members nirjraina Posted January 9, 2006 Author Members Posted January 9, 2006 http://ssl3.adhost.com/americanmusic/merchant.cfm?step=4&pid=34558# wow this Larrivee is freakin beautiful..i love the simplicity and the absence of an ugly pickguard covering up the wood. The back and sides are mahogany though..would this lead to a mellower/darker sound than normal?
Members kwakatak Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 It all comes down to personal preference, but mostly folks who play fingerstyle prefer smaller bodied-guitars (OM, 000, 00 or even parlor/0 size) with a wider fretboard and wider string spacing at the nut and saddle. There are all different schools of fingerstyle and different preferences for tonewoods. Some folks like to play fingerpicking or acoustic blues and tend to prefer maple or mahogany back and sides with a spruce top or an all-mahogany guitar. Some oher folks like to play Celtic, jazz or classically-oriented fingertstyle and graitate toward rosewood back & sides with spruce or cedar tops. Other folks just like the sound of mahogany back/sides and spruce tops so that they can fit in better with an ensemble and cut through the clutter. That's not to say that dreads aren't useful for fingerstyle but from experience I've found them to be rather cumbersome when attempting fast paced music with alternating bass line like the blues for example. The excessive bass can easily run away from you and overwhelm the higher strings. Classical music does not seem to work well for me either with a dread because of the relatively narrow string spacing. OTOH, for playing music where notes ring for extended period and interreact (like Celtic) the acoustic properties of the dread (particularly with rosewood back/sides) seem to be well-suited here. Even then, I personally find it easier to play with the guitar on my left thigh like a classical so that I can let my left wrist relax. So to answer your questions: Will you get used to it? Yes, but once you find a guitar that's easier to play you'll be GASing for it. That's where I am. While it could potentially be expensive it is worth it to try all different sorts of guitars.
Members kwakatak Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 Forgot to mention that I love the Larriv
Members DonK Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 Originally posted by Dave W. I can't get past that new age headstock either, glad I am not the only one. Mea culpa...I had an SM6 and liked it, but that headstock killed me. It just gives the guitar an unbalanced look or something.
Members bsman Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 While I understand the aesthetic objections to the Seagull headstock, I think it's important to point out that there are functional advantages of this design over the standard (e.g. Martin) design. Specifically, the Seagull design allows the tuning pegs to be inline with the string slots on the nut, providing essentially a straightline string path which (at least in theory) should provide much better tuning stability. Disclaimer: my acoustics are Tacoma, so I don't know for sure if the straight-line configuration of Seagulls actually accomplishes this. It would be interesting to find someone who owns both S&P and Seagull guitars to see if the Seagulls differ siginificantly in this respect.
Members Dave W. Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 I was watching this Larrivee OM5 on Ebay yesterday:http://cgi.ebay.com/1994-Larrivee-OM5-Fishman-pickup-MINT_W0QQitemZ7378634393QQcategoryZ2385QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem The seller set the reserve at $700 and it went for $770. It looked pretty much like what I am looking for, but I held off bidding because I have never played a Larrivee neck, and at 12 years old I have to wonder how much progress it has made towards needing a neck re-set. If I could have seen it in person it seemed like a pretty good deal for a quality guitar. My paranoia over the neck re-set may be overstated. Link dosen't seem to work, Item number: 7378634393
Members catdaddy Posted January 9, 2006 Members Posted January 9, 2006 Originally posted by bsman While I understand the aesthetic objections to the Seagull headstock, I think it's important to point out that there are functional advantages of this design over the standard (e.g. Martin) design. Specifically, the Seagull design allows the tuning pegs to be inline with the string slots on the nut, providing essentially a straightline string path which (at least in theory) should provide much better tuning stability. Disclaimer: my acoustics are Tacoma, so I don't know for sure if the straight-line configuration of Seagulls actually accomplishes this. It would be interesting to find someone who owns both S&P and Seagull guitars to see if the Seagulls differ siginificantly in this respect. I own a Seagull S6 Cedar and an S&P Pro Rosewood. First let me say this about the nut width. The S&P has a 1 & 3/4 inch nut width. The Seagull nut width is slightly wider (I've forgotten the exact measurement..sorry). The tuning stability of both guitars is very good. No significant difference. Aesthetically I much prefer the look of the S&P headstock. One more thing, the neck on the Seagull is much chunkier than the S&P. Although I find both necks comfortable to play. Hope that helps to illuminate the issue somewhat.
Members JasmineTea Posted January 10, 2006 Members Posted January 10, 2006 Originally posted by nirjraina Just wondering whether ill get over it with a bit of practice, or is it worth it to try and find something with a wider neck? I had a custom nut made for my 1-11/16 guitar that spreads the strings out wider, gives the fingers a little more room without going to the 1-3/4 width. Works great, cost about $50.
Members riffmeister Posted January 10, 2006 Members Posted January 10, 2006 Originally posted by nirjraina Just getting started in the world of fingerstyle guitar. I have smallish hands but i still find myself wishing i had more room (right hand in particular) when playing fingerstyle on my dreadnought, 1 11/16". Try a wider neck...you are the only one who can answer for sure about the width. For me, I definitely prefer a 1 3/4" width....for fingerstyle, for everything.
Members SlowFingers Posted January 10, 2006 Members Posted January 10, 2006 You can get a Larrivee OM-03 model for the price range you are looking at. May not find one right away, but it can be done. Another option is a Seagull. Mine is a little wider than 1 3/4". I actually like it for fingerstyle better than my Larrivee OM.Here is one that should fit the bill at a great price.
Members nirjraina Posted January 10, 2006 Author Members Posted January 10, 2006 Sweet...thanks for all the great advice guys! Gonna head out and try and play all these guitars this weekend!
Members bsman Posted January 10, 2006 Members Posted January 10, 2006 Originally posted by catdaddy The S&P has a 1 & 3/4 inch nut width. The Seagull nut width is slightly wider (I've forgotten the exact measurement..sorry). I believe the width at the nut on seagull guitars is 1.8"
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.