software

Hey, anyone know how big Gibsons' quot;50's neckquot; is compared to a PRS wide-fat neck? I have a chance to buy a beautiful LP, but it's like 50 miles away, so I wanna know if it's worth trying before I drive out there.

Just played a '50s neck' 56ri Les Paul this lunchtime.

It's a fat C shape neck, one of the fattest you'll come across. You definitely know you've got a lump of wood in your hands. I like fat necks, but I'd personally want to gig one just to make sure it wasn't too unwieldy or fatiguing, in the same way ultra thin necks are.

It's definitely bigger and fuller than PRS wide-fat.

I'd say it would suit player with large hands and/or long fingers. My friend, who has smaller hands than me, played the same guitar I did and couldn't handle the neck size.

The PRS McCarty neck is almost identical to the 50's or 59 profile. The difference is that the McCarty has a slight V moving towards the nut. I've measured them before with a mm ruler and the measurement is just about equal on the 1st fret and 12th, but the shape is just slighty different. They're both the perfect necks IMO. Once you're used to those profiles, you realize how nice they both are.

Yep, I just took a thin strip of paper, and wrapped it around my 2000 McCarty wide/fat and my 2001 LP Std. 50's neck. The 1'st fret and 12th fret, measured around the back of the neck are identical. The only difference is the shape of the neck carve, which is a little more like the bottom of a boat, on the McCarty. It's an intriguing subject, since they're both the most perfect necks in my hands.


Originally Posted by GearjoneserYep, I just took a thin strip of paper, and wrapped it around my 2000 McCarty wide/fat and my 2001 LP Std. 50's neck. The 1'st fret and 12th fret, measured around the back of the neck are identical. The only difference is the shape of the neck carve, which is a little more like the bottom of a boat, on the McCarty. It's an intriguing subject, since they're both the most perfect necks in my hands.

I'm assuming the Wide/fat necks on McCarties are the same shape as those of the other PRS guitars, right? A PRS Wide/Fat neck on a CU or CE model PRS fits my hands perfectly

How does the '50s neck compare to an SG Standard's neck? I've never really felt comfortable with LPs, so I really don't have much experience. I'm just curious.


Originally Posted by Hot _GritsJust played a '50s neck' 56ri Les Paul this lunchtime.

It's a fat C shape neck, one of the fattest you'll come across. You definitely know you've got a lump of wood in your hands. I like fat necks, but I'd personally want to gig one just to make sure it wasn't too unwieldy or fatiguing, in the same way ultra thin necks are.

It's definitely bigger and fuller than PRS wide-fat.

I'd say it would suit player with large hands and/or long fingers. My friend, who has smaller hands than me, played the same guitar I did and couldn't handle the neck size.

A word of caution here. Gibson's Custom Historic RI necks are fatter than the current quot;50'squot; LP Standard necks. Gibson still sizes their necks by hand. I have found that the pre 2002 LP Standards have bigger necks than the current 50's Standard necks. The wide fat on my PRS is even bigger. If this is a new LP you may be disappointed with the neck size. You should physically try it before making a decision.


Originally Posted by slightly_rudeA word of caution here. Gibson's Custom Historic RI necks are fatter than the current quot;50'squot; LP Standard necks. Gibson still sizes their necks by hand. I have found that the pre 2002 LP Standards have bigger necks than the current 50's Standard necks. If this is new LP you may be disappointed with the neck size. You should physically try it before making a decision. 1. The Historic necks are generally much beefier than the 50s necks. The 50s necks are on the bigger end, for sure, but the first time I played a Historic, I said quot;woahquot; when I felt the neck for the first time. The Historic necks are very different from most of the stuff out there.


Originally Posted by Falstaff 1. The Historic necks are generally much beefier than the 50s necks. The 50s necks are on the bigger end, for sure, but the first time I played a Historic, I said quot;woahquot; when I felt the neck for the first time. The Historic necks are very different from most of the stuff out there.

2.

5o's necks on the current Standards are very similar to the McCarty necks. Both of which I liked on my Standard amp; McCarty (sold both though, oddly enough), but if I had to choose I take the Gibson neck..just felt a bit better in my hands. YMMV.

SG necks are more similar to the Gibson quot;60s profilequot; neck. Not as fat/deep and flatter on the back.


Originally Posted by JeffBSG necks are more similar to the Gibson quot;60s profilequot; neck. Not as fat/deep and flatter on the back.

I thought the '61RI had the '60s profile. My Standard does seem wide as you get down around the 12th fret.

I think the McCarty neck carve is just a slight bit more V'd than the wide/fat CE22/24, but it's so ergonomically perfect for me, I like it a lot. Like I said, it's actual measurement at the 1st and 12th fret are equal on the LP Std 50's and PRS wide/fat.

On an SG, the regular SG Std with the fullsize pickguard is a 50's neck that is pretty much the same as a LP 50's neck. The 61 Reissue SG with the small teardrop pickguard has the 60's slim taper, which is the same as the LP 60's slim taper.

I'm pretty sure the LP Classic 60 neck is similar, only it doesn't taper down towards the nut, it's just fairly thin across the whole back of the neck.

So, if you like a PRS, it's a good chance you'll like the new 50's neck. Cool.