I've had a Schecter Model T that has ebony blocks on a maple neck/fingerboard for two years now. Absolutely no issues.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Ebony block inlays in maple fretboard - is the density difference a problem?
- Thread starter Alan i guess
- Start date
I've had a Schecter Model T that has ebony blocks on a maple neck/fingerboard for two years now. Absolutely no issues.
Nobody is denying that they will contribute 'something'. The question is whether that amount is significant or necessary.
I bet you can find instruments with necks a lot slimmer than your favourite basses, without any structural problems. It's ok that you prefer it that way, but the justification is unnecessary and, well, wrong
the justification is unnecessary and, well, wrong
I never said anything about "structural problems", I just talked about stiffness being greater. I also didn't talk about significant or not - I gave you a number. It's not "right" or "wrong", it's....16%.
Engineers and Physicists (I'm both) don't often argue "significance", we spend our effort calculating or measuring what the effect is, and then decide if we want to take advantage of it. If you don't think 16% is something you want to take advantage of, it's not right or wrong, it's just your choice.
Last edited:
You mean the blocks might make my neck unstable?
When a neck is rigid *enough* already... you can add all you want and it won't mean it's any better.
Engineers use physics to decide when it's enough, and not waste resources going beyond
But I think you knew that.
I'm curious, did you calculate assuming a rectangular cross section or did you factor the curve of the back of the neck as well as the radius of the fingerboard? Adding inlays does not necessarily thin the neck and depending on material and method could have little to no effect on the stiffness or strength. If all factors are not considered in the equation then the math will give a false indication. Any engineer or physicist would concede to that. Anyway fade to black.
The law of diminishing returns doesn't mean that something won't improve as you go further - it just means it improves more slowly. Better is still better, but it is also a multiple variable thing - as it gets stiffer (which is good in this case) it'll get heavier, and that may or may not be OK. Where you stop when Engineering something is not some simply definable "enough" point, where up to that point it's beneficial, and beyond that, it's wasteful - it's never that simple. The decision is also very different if you work for Fodera (performance is important) than it is if you work for Glarry (where cost is clearly important).
Maybe I should repeat my earlier question: Are you trying to say that a properly done inlay will have the same impact as simply making a beam thinner? Because that seems silly, especially since (just like frets) inlays are done on the side that's under compression. And if that's not what you're saying, then why keep throwing out the (arguably, a little arbitrary and meaningless in this context) 16% number?
Also - at the end of the day, you're right - it's a choice. But when it's pretty clear that the choice has no practical impact (there are probably tens of thousands of necks, if not hundreds of thousands, with block inlays, that are perfectly fine), why even make the argument? And then claim that your point is fair because you're not addressing significance? It just strikes me as poking at people for the sake of poking at them. Sorry if this comes off as rude but I don't get it.
Something like this old Hofner I guess.. The block just goes all the way out to the edge of the board and can be seen from the side. Not my guitar, just a screenshot
