software

So pretty much heres my plan:

I'm going to raise the floyd rose bridge but bring the truss rod back more, giving it maybe a gibson like feel. That what I can get more quot;digquot; when I palm mute on the bridge and I think it will also help the action?

Does this theory sound like it will work, or is it just a helpless attempt? I think it could drastically change the entire feel of the instrument for the better.

But I'm looking for input before I got to all the trouble so please, advice?

The truss rod only bends/bows the neck in the middle doesn't it??? If you are planning to raise the bridge and then change the angle of the neck, I don't think thats possible...

Adam, adjust that truss rod to .010 at the 7th fret, low E string, while holding the string down at the 1st and 14th fret. You are adjusting the relief of the neck.

The truss rod adjustment has nothing to do with action, unless you consider action the combination of bridge height, relief, intonation, the overall feel of the guitar the action. I think of action mostly as bridge height.

You better do some more reading on thei internet about the above terms, action, bridge height, relief, and so on. You are gonna make yourself an expensive piece of kindling. Put the truss nut wrench down and walk away from the Jackson.

Start with something like this. from : localhost/www.icepoint.com/guitar/Setti...tric guitar/

I'm not talking an intense about of truss rod change, I'm thinking in my head a way I can raise the floating tremolo and angle the neck back more, there for the strings will get lower as they get closer to the nut. Therefore lower action, similar to how a Gibson has the action set.

The reason I was considering this is because I find my hand straining for some reason the way the V rests against me, along with my wrist on the bridge palm muting, for some reason my attack is choking I guess you could say.

Maybe I'm talking nonsense but it was a thought.

to accomplish what you have in mind youamp;#180;d have to shim the neck to increase the neck angle. The problem is that the floyd posts probably wonamp;#180;t be long enough. but you probably wonamp;#180;t destroy anything trying it out. but the truss rod is NOT the way to set this. a slip of wood or paper in the neck pocket is.

Action = the height of the strings realtive to teh fretboard... is not a product of design, but of workmanship.

Neck angle = the angle of the neck relative to the plane of the body, what you seem to want to change.

The action is good as it is now. But I wanted to raise the Floyd Rose up a litlte bit because with my playing style keeping a good palm muting rythym like Battery for example is difficult. I woke up this morning and played it to a T, yesterday I was having some problems.

Either way, yea I agree your idea of a angle of wood underneath the neck would probably be more affective to what I want to do. But if I screwed that up mmm, it would knock the whole thing out of wack.

This was all just a consideration, obviously its not that good of an idea . I just was curious to see how it would feel? Anybody tried to do this before?

Hey Adam,

Are you asking if anyone has shimmed a neck?

Is the issue that you find hard strumming is hitting the high frets?

Adjusting neck angle will pull the string further from the higher frets (shim the front) or closer to the upper frets (shim the back). Like the other settings we have talked about here, there is a process for this:

from : localhost/using a straight-edge, the plane of the fretboard should line up with the top of the bridge, at the bottom of the saddle. Like any spec, it is adjustable a bit either way.

I am not sure here if you are talking about a comfort issue?

The strings don't buzz anymore on the 22nd fret, thats no longer a problem I already fixed a bend in my truss rod so it won't anymore. I was just debating on if I can raise the floyd rose so I can get more chunk in my palm muting and adjust the neck backwards a tad so that way they will counter each other and I'll still have a low fret action, indeed it would be higher near the higher frets. But not drastically, where its unplayable. I've almost decided against it. Its alot of work, and I suppose things could go wrong.

Next thing I need to work on is the pickup height to get the best squeal out of my distortion. It kind of chokes itself out on the thicker strings. I think it has more to do with my technique really. But still a pickup height adjustment could help (any suggestion there?)

wixedmords thank you for the very helpful links, very intersting stuff in this. I do believe I should raise my action on both my Stratocaster and my RR3. Very interesting read.

Good luck Adam.

Zerb brought up the neck angle. I knew there was something I was missing in my first post, couldn't remember.

Edit: Zerb AND Shred.

Sounds to me like you need a TOM bridge on a gibson style neck angel and not a floyd. You will never get that quot;angledquot; feel in the action out of a floyd equipped guitar. It's not even the same on my Jackson DKMGT with a tune-omatic. It's closer...but it's still not the same.

Precisely why I keep going back to Gibson (and now my Hamer Standard which is the same sort of design)...that feel makes for easier quot;chugga chuggaquot; at the bridge, good low action for chording, but not so sloppy feeling in the upper registers for lead playing. Easier to play where ya need it to, makes ya work a bit more where it's best to.


Originally Posted by JeffBSounds to me like you need a TOM bridge on a gibson style neck angel and not a floyd. You will never get that quot;angledquot; feel in the action out of a floyd equipped guitar. It's not even the same on my Jackson DKMGT with a tune-omatic. It's closer...but it's still not the same.

Precisely why I keep going back to Gibson (and now my Hamer Standard which is the same sort of design)...that feel makes for easier quot;chugga chuggaquot; at the bridge, good low action for chording, but not so sloppy feeling in the upper registers for lead playing. Easier to play where ya need it to, makes ya work a bit more where it's best to.

Wa la! You said what I've been trying to in one post! Yea thats one thing I do like about the Gibsons, thats about the only thing. I'm sure you know about my wanting to do a custom shop jeff, dude what was the range for your customs that you bought from them?

Because the pics I've seen of your stuff, look awsome. Link to a place where I could order it too.


Originally Posted by JeffBSounds to me like you need a TOM bridge on a gibson style neck angel and not a floyd. You will never get that quot;angledquot; feel in the action out of a floyd equipped guitar. It's not even the same on my Jackson DKMGT with a tune-omatic. It's closer...but it's still not the same.

Precisely why I keep going back to Gibson (and now my Hamer Standard which is the same sort of design)...that feel makes for easier quot;chugga chuggaquot; at the bridge, good low action for chording, but not so sloppy feeling in the upper registers for lead playing. Easier to play where ya need it to, makes ya work a bit more where it's best to.

I beg to differ, this is the whole reason I prefer San Dimas and Early Ontario Jacksons to today´s offerings, the non recessed Floyd sits high enough off the body to float and put the picking hand up higher.

BTW, it´s the reason Vai´s green meanie had that sheet of plastic, to raise his arm up to that height, just as it´s the reason he sort of quot;inventedquot; the recess rout

I've play on floyd roses on regular guitars as well, and I got enough chunk in my palm mutes no doubt. But this is a V, and since I brought up batter, hetfield also played a Explorer which also had the non-strat like body design.

The top part of the V catches my fore arm, and I have to angle my wrist to try to get a good palm mute out of it which makes my pick harder to dig into.

On a regular strat like body design there is no problem, nothing holds my arm back and I can palm mute till I die. On a San Dimas there would be no problem. So its really not so much the Floyd Rose, its the fact that I can't adjust myself to palm mute with such a radical body design as in comparison as I could to a contoured stratocaster design.

Hence the reason I want my next guitar to be a strat like body. San dimas has been a model I have been looking at, but I'd like to get something that has a neck-thru construction for better sustain.

Zerb..I agree with you..the non recessed Floyds are def better...but I've yet to find one that feels like a Gibson/TOM with their inherent neck angle...otherwise I'd own it as Floyds and Strat bridges give me fits

Adam. I got my Hamer Standard Custom through Willcutt guitars (It was $2K.

It doesn't have the Les Paul sound..but it does have the Gibson sound...nothing sounds like a Paula that I've experienced yet. Tonally the Standard Custom falls right between an Explorer and a Les Paul. It's got slightly more complex mids and brightness/bite than an Explorer due to the maple cap, but doesn't have the low end nor quite the sustain of a Paula due to less mass and the design of the neck joint. Neck angles/headstock angles, etc are all just like a Gibson instrument: Exactly why I went with it. EDIT: I should note that the sustain is very very good though for what it is..best I've experienced in a non-paula.

I would prefer to have the added low end beef of the Paula (and that extra bit of sustain),....always have...but the Hamer def has got it where it counts everywhere else. Just need to get some better pups in it, as the 59s do not suit my tastes/needs in this particular axe.


Originally Posted by AdamSo pretty much heres my plan:

I'm going to raise the floyd rose bridge but bring the truss rod back more, giving it maybe a gibson like feel. That what I can get more quot;digquot; when I palm mute on the bridge and I think it will also help the action?

Does this theory sound like it will work, or is it just a helpless attempt? I think it could drastically change the entire feel of the instrument for the better.

But I'm looking for input before I got to all the trouble so please, advice?

That's absolutely the right thing to do, if you have too much relief in the neck
If your frets are in OK condition then you only need about .010quot; dip in the neck around the 7th and 8th frets.

The string has to break from the neck at a minimum angle of about 35 minutes of arc. If you have too much relief and you've tried to get the action lower by lowering the bridge this margin will become progressively eroded as you go up the neck causing the strings to choke on the higher frets. Is that what's been happening?

They aren't choking up anymore, I've already made that adjustment a few weeks ago to fix my neck with the current bridge height it has now. The neck is now nearly perfectly aligned to the body with a good action considering I did it with little knowledge of what I'm doing (except for the good SD advisors here).

This is all just theory, I figured if I raise the bridge I can more easily lay my wrist to the bridge for palm muting there fore I can dig and have more of a control. Because with my V right now its sloppy sometimes because I can't get my fore arm over the body comfortably and lay my wrist and palm mute the rythym I want to.

So I figured I would raise the bridge (which raises the action) then pull the neck back to counter act the action therefore lowering it and pulling the neck back towards me. Which reminds me of a Gibson SG like neck ya know?

So its all a theory on how to get more chug out of the RR.

Well as someone who deals with a lot of clueless players it's nice to see someone who has a good understanding of the guitars geometry!


Originally Posted by octavedoctorWell as someone who deals with a lot of clueless players it's nice to see someone who has a good understanding of the guitars geometry!

Surely your not suggesting I know what I'm doing.

But I'll drink to that, cheers.