Author Topic: Headstock angle question.  (Read 6724 times)

birdie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 432
  • Trying hard to be the person my dog thinks I am.
    • View Profile
Headstock angle question.
« on: December 31, 2010, 10:10:16 AM »
Hi guys! Can any body tell me what the headstock angle are on your basses?
No one I know has one.Some would seem to have no angle at all,and some just very slight. Assuming this from looking at all your pics.
Have never owned one, but looking at those.......hmmm!
Here to all having a new and improved year ;D
Fleet Guitars

weekend warrior

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #1 on: December 31, 2010, 10:55:04 AM »
They started out with no angle at all,all the way up to around early 1975 from then on the pitch gradually became more extreme.
Life is like a big fan.And sometimes the CACA hits it!

Lightyear

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2190
  • Hey! You damn kids get off my *@%*~&# lawn!
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #2 on: December 31, 2010, 12:43:01 PM »
I seem to recall reading that it's a fairly mild angle - something like 4 to 7 degrees.  You might try looking at Ric's site under history - there might be some info there.


chromium

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2316
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #3 on: December 31, 2010, 01:18:42 PM »
I seem to recall reading that it's a fairly mild angle - something like 4 to 7 degrees.  You might try looking at Ric's site under history - there might be some info there.

Yep - I just looked at my 78 4001 and there's an angle, but its verrrry slight.

Electro Dale

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #4 on: December 31, 2010, 04:56:23 PM »
Late 50s the 4000 Bass had a 4 degree PH angle.  This continued except in the early through late/mid 60s when the neck thickness was slimmed down leaving vey little wood at the area below the top nut.  This weakened the neck causing the PH to pull upward decreasing the PH angle over a period of time to almost flat with the fingerboard.   This is why Maccas Bass has a Zero Fret with a tall top nut behind it.  When his Bass came through the shop in the summer of 1976, we replaced the HS pickup and pickguard. He left very specific instructions not to change or adjust the neck or string height, he likes it on the high side.  We had to replace the nut behind the Zero fret because someone in the final assembly dept. stole it, drilled a hole in it and put it on their key chain.
So to answer this question: From 1957 through the late 1960s there was a 4 degree PH angle, then the neck shape was changed along with the PH angle to 3 degrees.
This continued on through the 1970s, after that I have no knowledge but a simple guess would be back to 4 or 5 degrees.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2011, 10:23:19 AM by Electro Dale »

Bert

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
    • View Profile
    • My website
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #5 on: December 31, 2010, 06:05:04 PM »
[lots of indepth knowledge]

I like humour and find the strangest/absurdest things funny. For me it is funny to see Dale talking about Rickenbackers with a newby status.
'68 4001|'73 4001 MG|'73 4001 AZG (PW refin)|'75 4000 MG|'79 4001 JG FL|'81 4001S AZG|'86 4003 MID/BT|'86 4003 Shadow|'86 4003S JG|'88 4003s Blackstar|'89 4003 Grey/BT FL|'96 4003S/8 FG|'98 4003S/5 JG| 05 650D|06 4004 CII BBR||B-115|RB 30||?

Lightyear

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2190
  • Hey! You damn kids get off my *@%*~&# lawn!
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #6 on: December 31, 2010, 07:04:51 PM »
So how much angle is really required?  It seems to me that less of an angle would be better than the Gibson "rapid snap" severe angle design.

Electro Dale

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #7 on: December 31, 2010, 07:49:27 PM »
I like humour and find the strangest/absurdest things funny. For me it is funny to see Dale talking about Rickenbackers with a newby status.
My experience comes from my time working in the Rickenbacker Factory woodshop. I worked there from 1972 through 1976, when I left I opened my own small guitar shop in Tustin about 5 miles from the Rick Factory on Kilson Drive. I had 4 other guys that worked for me who I also taught to build electric guitars. 2 of those fellows went on to work for the Fender Custom Shop and become Master Builders: Mark Kendrick and Alan Hamel.  I also worked for Gibson, Fender, Martin and Guild as a warranty repair station until we moved to Oregon in 1983, the move caused me to give up my warranty status because there were already established ones in the Portland area.    I 1st started doing guitar work and repairs in 1965 when I was 17 years old. I took a job at Rickenbacker because I wanted to learn guitar construction.  I was also personal friends with many of the So. Calif. legends of guitar manufacturing from Leo Fender to Paul Barth, "Doc" Kauffman was a very close friend of mine up until his death.    This is my Labor of Love and I have been very fortunate to learn this trade.

Electro Dale

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #8 on: December 31, 2010, 07:54:36 PM »
So how much angle is really required?  It seems to me that less of an angle would be better than the Gibson "rapid snap" severe angle design.
Because Rickenbackers are Hard Maple they are much stronger than the Mahogany that is used by Gibson.  Another thing that helps is the lesser of a PH angle keeps the grain of the neck and PH consistant where the 13 degree angle on a Gibson allows for the grain to run off before it reaches the end of the neck making it weaker.
A 4 or 5 degree PH angle will work fine, you could even go farther if you'd like but I'd stay with the lesser PH angle.

ilan

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3895
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #9 on: January 01, 2011, 02:12:32 AM »
He left very specific instructions not to change or adjust the neck or string height, he likes it on the high side.
I remember you saying that in the RRF, so when he showed me his '63 Hofner I expected it to have a high action, but in fact it was medium/low. I guess he changed his preference over the years.
The guy who bought the same bass twice — first in 1977 and again in 2023

Electro Dale

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #10 on: January 01, 2011, 10:34:28 AM »
I remember you saying that in the RRF, so when he showed me his '63 Hofner I expected it to have a high action, but in fact it was medium/low. I guess he changed his preference over the years.
Hofner is a short scale totally different Bass than the long 33&1/2 inch scale Rick.  I've never met the man nor his Hofner, but I did go to the Beatle concerts at the Hollywood Bowl and Dodger Stadium in the 1960s, so all I can do is quote the information that came to the main office when the Bass was brought from the L.A. Forum to be repaired and this info was handed down from F.C. Hall to Charles Malyszka the person in charge of artist relations and customer service.  Charles and I went to grade and high school together and played in various bands from 1964 through the present days.  There is a very interesting and funny story that goes with the Bass and how it arrived and was given back to Paul, if anyone is interested I'll write details :)

nofi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2954
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #11 on: January 01, 2011, 01:46:07 PM »
'newbie' status means late to the party, not a lack of knowledge. ish!  :rolleyes:
"life is a blur of republicans and meat"- zippy the pinhead

Dave W

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 22237
  • Got time to breathe, got time for music
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #12 on: January 01, 2011, 02:09:26 PM »
Because Rickenbackers are Hard Maple they are much stronger than the Mahogany that is used by Gibson.  Another thing that helps is the lesser of a PH angle keeps the grain of the neck and PH consistant where the 13 degree angle on a Gibson allows for the grain to run off before it reaches the end of the neck making it weaker.
A 4 or 5 degree PH angle will work fine, you could even go farther if you'd like but I'd stay with the lesser PH angle.


I measured my last 4003, IIRC it had an 8 degree angle.

13 degrees is not nearly enough for Les Paul traditionalists. They insist on a 17 degree angle, and I think most of the guitars have returned to that, damn the consequences. The 90s-to-early 00s LP basses only had a 10 degree angle, though.

gearHed289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4434
    • View Profile
    • Book of faces...
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #13 on: January 01, 2011, 02:16:26 PM »
There is a very interesting and funny story that goes with the Bass and how it arrived and was given back to Paul, if anyone is interested I'll write details :)

Details please!  ;)

Highlander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12542
  • There Ken be only one...
    • View Profile
Re: Headstock angle question.
« Reply #14 on: January 01, 2011, 03:25:30 PM »
Just knew I didn't have to ask... ;D
The random mind of a Silver Surfer...
If research was easy, it wouldn't need doing...
Staring at that event horizon is a dirty job, but someone has to do it; something's going to come back out of it one day...