I doubt if the resonance frequency of the material itself really matters. The rod or tube is touching the wood at multiple spots along its length, breaking it up into a complex system.
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.
Graphite vs. Titanium neck reinforcement
- Thread starter Killed_by_Death
- Start date
I can just see all of these people hitting their Ti rods with acoustic resonance hammers making sure they are tuned to 40hz. yeah, no
Of course it does affect it ... if you have a stiffer neck, it's harder for your truss rod to do it's job. If you had an infinitely stiff neck, no truss rod would be able to adjust it.
The truss rod is there to counteract the forces of the strings. With a stiffer neck, as the neck counteracts more of the string tension itself, the truss rod has to do LESS work - it's not harder for the truss rod to do its thing, it's easier. My "hot rod" necks never need more than a half turn on the truss rod from slack, and I like a very straight (.006" relief) neck.
Right ... and that can only happen if you DON'T have a super stiff neck. Maybe the argument here is that the neck itself is so stiff, you don't need to counteract the string tension with the truss rod ... which goes back to my point previously ... you lose some ability to adjust your string height with the truss rod on reinforced necks.
I'm of the camp that you NEED that adjustability, because the instrument does 'breathe'.
I've never had any issues setting relief or action with a Ti reinforced neck, or a roasted neck.
The topic is "Does the type of reinforcement affect the timbre?", not whether reinforcement is just marketing gimmick.
For a really thin neck, I think it's almost necessary & I've noticed a huge difference vs. necks of the same profile that are NOT reinforced.
The topic is "Does the type of reinforcement affect the timbre?", not whether reinforcement is just marketing gimmick.
For a really thin neck, I think it's almost necessary & I've noticed a huge difference vs. necks of the same profile that are NOT reinforced.
^^ True, I have gotten off topic here.
and sure, hot rodding a neck does affect timbre, but how much no one could tell and likely not in a predictable way.
and sure, hot rodding a neck does affect timbre, but how much no one could tell and likely not in a predictable way.
Both my neck through builds were multi-piece laminate, using 1/8" x 3/8" CF rods. I'll probably never know how much difference they made to overall neck stiffness. I was worried they'd be TOO stiff, but they adjust just fine under normal DA truss rod pressure. I look at them as cheap insurance that does no harm. I put them 1/8" either side of the truss rod, so it didn't really affect neck thickness. One of them has been done for three years now, it's very stable so far, no more than tiny seasonal adjustments, which is better than my other wood necks without CF rods. I'm going to keep using them, but not for any elusive tone improvements.
Tiatnium feels like kind of an odd choice. I used to be pretty into racing bikes, and carbon and titanium hit at roughly the same time at the high end of the market (late 80s). My recollection is that titanium is a total PITA to work with. It's hard on tools, and I believe it had to be oxygen free when it was welded (not my area of expertise, but like they had special torches that would blow an inert gas around the weld or something). The one property I wonder about a little with titanum is that I think it expanded a lot with temp changes, which makes me wonder how suitable it is in a neck.
Graphite strikes me as fairly similar to carbon fiber. It's properties were highly dependent on how you used it. Depending on the density and orientation of fibers, it could be stiff or flexible, and it tended to be fairly damping of small vibrations even if it wasn't flexing. Ultimately, in bikes, Carbon won out. There are still titanium bikes out there, but pretty much every major manufacturer has a carbon line from the mid range on up. Not sure how any of that translates into a bass neck. Although modulus and moses made graphite necked basses, and the ones I played struck me as very snappy sounding
Graphite strikes me as fairly similar to carbon fiber. It's properties were highly dependent on how you used it. Depending on the density and orientation of fibers, it could be stiff or flexible, and it tended to be fairly damping of small vibrations even if it wasn't flexing. Ultimately, in bikes, Carbon won out. There are still titanium bikes out there, but pretty much every major manufacturer has a carbon line from the mid range on up. Not sure how any of that translates into a bass neck. Although modulus and moses made graphite necked basses, and the ones I played struck me as very snappy sounding
It replaces brass & bronze fittings on offshore oil rigs, because it's also non-ferrous, but lower-mass than brass & bronze. The less top-heavy those vessels are, the better.
Recently noticed that Kiesel is offering stainless frets, dual-action truss rods, AND carbon-fiber reinforcement:
unfortunately they call those bars "rods"
unfortunately they call those bars "rods"
Off but on point. My Dave Maize ABG had the truss rod damaged by an overzealous undertrained guitar repairman. Ultimately it needed the fret bd removed and head plate. While it was open having the broken truss rod replaced the new Excellent tech offered to put parallel bars of graphite in the neck.
I mentioned could they be angled either their whole length closer at the back of the neck than under the fretboard or tapered closer gradually widest at body.
Well without adding any weight two bars can’t bend at all if they aren’t parallel.
So my experience is before and after. It’s been stable for years! It rings. It sustains. It projects and is louder in all frequencies.
I mentioned could they be angled either their whole length closer at the back of the neck than under the fretboard or tapered closer gradually widest at body.
Well without adding any weight two bars can’t bend at all if they aren’t parallel.
So my experience is before and after. It’s been stable for years! It rings. It sustains. It projects and is louder in all frequencies.
Based on my experience with my Steinberger neck, which doesn't move in any normal temperature range, and is impervious to humidity, I'd think CF rods would be superior to titanium, which expands and contracts with temperature changes. It's always hard to sift fact from hype, but two builds in, I'll swear by CF rods for a stable neck.
I equate a truss rod to a beam in construction.
We have a horizontal member that is in sheer / bending stress.
There seems to be little discussion of the shape other than rod or bar (usually round).
Wouldn't using a shape like an "I" be stiffer than a round tube all things being equal?
We have a horizontal member that is in sheer / bending stress.
There seems to be little discussion of the shape other than rod or bar (usually round).
Wouldn't using a shape like an "I" be stiffer than a round tube all things being equal?
A T shape would be stiffer in theory, maybe too stiff? Unless the relief is effectively cast in place (like a Steinberger), you need enough flexibility left for for minor adjustments. I tried bending the CF rods along the vertical axis by hand, that stuff is incredibly tough.
Sorry, I know you said this 6 months ago, but this is just blatant misinformation. I have set up literally hundreds of basses with reinforced necks. I have never had one (with a properly functioning truss rod) that was unable to be adjusted within the customer's desired neck relief.
If your nut is cut properly, and your neck relief is set within reasonable tolerances, the string height is dependent on saddle adjustment. So, I am not even sure what you are talking about.
Also not true. If you have too much bow in a neck, it is easier for the truss rob to do it's job in a properly reinforced neck, because the reinforcement is assisting the truss rod in returning the neck back to it's factory set relief. The same is true if the neck is too convex. The reinforcement bars/rods are set in a way that they actually want to rest at proper relief. As such they actually assist the truss rod in returning to it's proper relief specs.
The only time the reinforcement would work against the truss rod is if you were trying to go from proper neck relief, to an abnormal neck relief. The reinforcement rods/bars do NOT want to be too convex, or too concave. The reinforcement only fights you, if you are trying to push the reinforcement rods/bars into an unnatural position (which you shouldn't be doing).
Nobody plays a neck that is too convex. But, you will occasionally run into a player that likes a stupid amount of bow in their neck. Those are the only players that may find reinforcement bars work against them, because properly set reinforcement will encourage a bowed neck to return to a more common relief spec.
The goal is pretty simple.
A neck needs to be at a certain relief to play nicely. The reinforcement (materials stronger than wood) simply assist the wood in staying close to that desired relief.
In addition, not counting the rarities (Rickenbacker, Alembic, etc.) most necks just have the truss running right down the center of the neck. This does little to counter warping. When you put reinforcement down both sides of the truss rod, it brings stability across the width neck, and does counteract warping.
I have no horse in this race. In fact, most of my basses just have stardard "old school" neck design. But, I can say, I have seen a lot of warped necks in my life....and I can't recall any of them having neck reinforcement.
I've seen dual truss rod Rickenbacker and Alembics brutally warped, from the long term effects of having two truss rods improperly adjusted. But, I've never seen a reinforced neck that was warped beyond repair.
