DjangoBooks.com

DG-255 vs.DG-250's neck

Does anyone know if the neck on the DG-255 is any thicker than the neck on the DG-250? I've had the 250 for about a year and I really like it but I wish it had a little bit fatter neck . I'm talking about thickness not width any info would be appreciated.
«1

Comments

  • lmntrylmntry Portland , Oregon✭✭✭✭
    Posts: 92
    Unfortunately the 255's neck is every bit as thin (if not thinner) than the 250. :? Very disappointing....I've owned 2)Gitane D 500 D holes , and the necks were pretty good on those.

    I currently own a Gitane John Jorgenson model......now this has a
    GREAT neck...nice and full.....and the tone.. :lol: :lol:


    David
  • ScotsmanScotsman MinnesotaNew
    Posts: 31
    lmntry wrote:
    Unfortunately the 255's neck is every bit as thin (if not thinner) than the 250. :? Very disappointing....I've owned 2)Gitane D 500 D holes , and the necks were pretty good on those.

    I currently own a Gitane John Jorgenson model......now this has a
    GREAT neck...nice and full.....and the tone.. :lol: :lol:


    David
    Thanks David , Yeh its to bad that they choose such a thin neck, other than that I'm really happy with the DG-250 after the usual queaks that are needed.
  • vincevince Davis & San Francisco, CANew
    Posts: 133
    I have a total beginner question... and a question a former electric guitarist would ask. Why are thin necks bad? Is it simply because it makes sweep picking more difficult? It seems that I still struggle to get my middle finger to cover to strings on some chords. I can't imagine doing it with more distance between the strings.

    V
    I don't know whether I'll ever be an excellent player if I keep practicing, but I'm absolutely sure I won't be if I stop.
  • JackJack western Massachusetts✭✭✭✭
    Posts: 1,911
    vince wrote:
    I have a total beginner question... and a question a former electric guitarist would ask. Why are thin necks bad? Is it simply because it makes sweep picking more difficult? It seems that I still struggle to get my middle finger to cover to strings on some chords. I can't imagine doing it with more distance between the strings.

    V

    Vince,

    They're talking about the thickness between the fingerboard and the back of the neck, not the width of the fingerboard...so it's not a question of string spacing, but of having a nice bit of neck in your hand. I once owned a 250, and with my hands (long fingers, kind of large) the thin neck meant I was always getting in my own way-if you make a loose fist you'll get an idea of what chording was like with that guitar.

    Best,
    Jack.
  • TenorClefTenorClef UKNew
    Posts: 150
    Ok so by this argument all you guys who complain about the thickness or lack of it in the guitar necks of these type of guitars have hands built like gorillas or am i missing something here? :D As for me i have short fingers and i find the thinner necks perfect for comping.

    I totally get why necks on the original SelMacs were built like tree trunks, no truss rods hence the need for a thicker stable neck, but the obvious use of truss rods makes life a lot easier for us guitarists with shorter/standard size hands.
    Currently-Gitane 250M
    Previously-Gitane 255
    Previously- Gitane D500
  • SoulShadeSoulShade NW Ohio, USANew
    Posts: 56
    TenorClef wrote:
    Ok so by this argument all you guys who complain about the thickness or lack of it in the guitar necks of these type of guitars have hands built like gorillas or am i missing something here?

    You're missing something.

    It's not just a structural issue, it's a practical one. For many thicker necks are easier to play from the stanpoint of leverage. They aren't as hard on the fingers/wrist/arm. This is especially true for those with chronic pain issues associated with playing.
    An instruments tone/sustain can also benefit from a thicker neck. -s
  • ViejoVatoViejoVato New
    Posts: 80
    cheers everybody ....
    This is really a matter of choice from a musician's point of view... I agree with Soulshade about leverage and tone/sustain. A thicker neck should produce more sustain and possible a bit better tone ... but ... by how much verses the tradeoff that some of us live with which is small or short fingers.
    I have played a standard G250 for almost 2 years now and I had a guitar made by Michael Collins and never thought about the thichness being an issue until i took delivery .. it was a beaytifulk guita but I could barely get around for an Ami6 grip.... so I sadly sold that guitar to Gerry Brown in NC.
    Michael is making another one for DFSW this year:
    www.dfsw.net
    And I took profile markings of my gitane to get the neck as close to what is comfortable to me.
    So for me the tradeoff in a bit of reduced tone/sustain is more than made up for in playability....

    cheers,
    miller
    "I don't know where I'm going but I'm on my way"
    my granny 'Meme' Foster circa 1998 at age 102
    Django Jerry Jam - home grown GJ & Dead Ahead pickin'
    http://www.DjangoJerryJam.com
  • Bob HoloBob Holo Moderator
    Posts: 1,243
    This is an interesting thread. I never thought I'd hear anyone say that thin necks are comfortable... fast, yes - but comfortable?

    I own two GJ guitars - one has a very thin but sort of wide neck. It is very comfortable for short periods of time, but, it is uncomfortable to play for long periods of time. I rarely notice this because, with rare exceptions - I just don't play that long as I'm not a pro. However on songs like Daphne and Swing 42 where there are a lot of quick changes between chords that have a lot of stretch to them... it just kills. There are three or four songs that share that basic progression and I love those songs, but I hate playing them with a big jam group on the thin/wide necked guitar because comping through two sets of 8 solos is just masochistic. I still get a righteous forearm burn playing them on my guitar that has a thicker narrower neck, but it is more of a healthy "weightlifting" burn whereas the thin necked guitar gives me a wrist-tendon-pain thing. I've always assumed it is because of the difference in leverage of the hand gripping something thinner.

    So - I'm out in the shop.. with access to a ruler. My hand is (I think) fairly small/stubby and measures 7.25" from the tip of the middle finger to the line where the palm of my hand meets my wrist. Is that a small hand? Oh, and I'm not sure I agree that thicker necks are worse for small hands - I have an easier time doing thumbovers on my thick/narrow neck because when I grip the thick/narrow neck and stretch out to do a thumbover - the top edge of the fretboard nestles in the thumb joint - but on the thin/wide neck, the edge of the fretboard hits about a half centimeter into the pad of my thumb... so I have to roll my wrist to get the top edge of the fretboard to nestle in the thumb joint - which steals some of the range of my fingers which now have an awkward stretch getting around the bottom edge of the fretboard.
    You get one chance to enjoy this day, but if you're doing it right, that's enough.
  • JackJack western Massachusetts✭✭✭✭
    Posts: 1,911
    Hi Bob,

    I just broke out the ruler: my hand is just over 8 inches using your reference points. The fingerboard width really does make a difference-when I had a narrower one, I had [i]too [/i]much thumb-it was covering three strings! One other thing to keep in mind is how your fingers are angled to the strings. Often you'll see people so focussed on getting the thumb into play that the rest of the hand is too 'upright' when it should be at more of an angle. For instance, if I'm playing a G6/9 with this fingering:

    ---5--------3rd finger
    ---5--------3rd finger
    ---4--------index
    ---5--------2nd finger
    ---5--------2nd finger
    ---3--------thumb

    my 2nd (middle) finger is pointing more or less at the suprasternal notch or a little lower:
    [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/40/SSNa.JPG/180px-SSNa.JPG[/img]
    getting the angle right can really make the difference.

    Best,
    Jack.


    [quote="Bob Holo"]
    So - I'm out in the shop.. with access to a ruler. My hand is (I think) fairly small/stubby and measures 7.25" from the tip of the middle finger to the line where the palm of my hand meets my wrist. Is that a small hand? Oh, and I'm not sure I agree that thicker necks are worse for small hands - I have an easier time doing thumbovers on my thick/narrow neck because when I grip the thick/narrow neck and stretch out to do a thumbover - the top edge of the fretboard nestles in the thumb joint - but on the thin/wide neck, the edge of the fretboard hits about a half centimeter into the pad of my thumb... so I have to roll my wrist to get the top edge of the fretboard to nestle in the thumb joint - which steals some of the range of my fingers which now have an awkward stretch getting around the bottom edge of the fretboard.[/quote]
  • Colin PerryColin Perry Montreal, QCNew
    Posts: 115
    I did an album a couple of years ago where we borrowed a 1925 L-5 for all the acoustic rhythm tracks. That was the best sounding and playing guitar I have ever laid my hands on. The neck was thick at the nut, and like a baseball bat by the time you got to the 7th fret. I also used to have a slingerland nitehawk, which was similar to the one Robert Normann is pictured with, which had an almost identical neck profile. It's all a matter of taste of course, but I have yet to see a neck that was too thick for me. (And believe me, I'm sure my fingers are as short and stubby as anyone's out there.)
Sign In or Register to comment.
Home  |  Forum  |  Blog  |  Contact  |  206-528-9873
The Premier Gypsy Jazz Marketplace
DjangoBooks.com
USD CAD GBP EUR AUD
USD CAD GBP EUR AUD
Banner Adverts
Sell Your Guitar
© 2019 DjangoBooks.com, all rights reserved worldwide.
Software: Kryptronic eCommerce, Copyright 1999-2019 Kryptronic, Inc. Exec Time: 0.041799 Seconds Memory Usage: 3.449112 Megabytes
Kryptronic