Official Luthiers Forum!

I know this must seem like a crazy question to those in the know, but if a cantilevered fingerboard / neck is stiff enough not to pull w string tension... is a truss rod needed? Maybe the two things aren’t even related...
Seems to be a lot of variables that gone this kind of thing....
Just have an itch and need to scratch it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Yes,

It's not worth the risk.

Not related. There's no stress on a cantilevered extension. It only needs to be stiff enough to support finger pressure and not damp out the string vibration too badly when playing high notes. String tension is supported between the heel and headstock like on any other neck.

But it is possible to make a neck that doesn't need a truss rod, by making it really thick (not so comfortable for the player), or using a carbon fiber D tube or similar reinforcement. Adjustability makes setup a lot easier, though.

How would being cantilevered prevent it from flexing with string tension?

There are those who support non adjustable necks, but I'm all for adjustability.

Even if your neck is stiff enough to not flex under tension, setting up a guitar for a particular players style is easier with a truss rod, and doing fret work is easier with a two way rod. Not everyone needs the same amount of relief...

I agree. The answer is yes.

_________________
It's not what you don't know that hurts you, it's what you do know that's wrong.

They really aren't, at least not in the way that you seem to be linking them.

Ok. I’m simply trying to understand what happens w the CLN
I understand what everyone is saying

So does a CLN require a headstock end trussrod access? Or. Does one simply make the adjustment from a “tunnel “ underneath the fingerboard support area?

I’m sorry if I’m asking things that have been discussed, but I can’t seem to find a real tutorial on the topic...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

So does a CLN require a headstock end trussrod access? Or. Does one simply make the adjustment from a “tunnel “ underneath the fingerboard support area?

Mine access through a channel under the fretboard on the body end.

M



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro[/quote]

I have done a bolt on neck wth a tongue under the fingerboard extension, and put the truss rod access in a trough in the tongue. I did not use a hole in the upper face brace, but I should have. I now make sure to put in that hole; it’s pretty important. I can get to that particular truss rod nut without the hole, but it is not easy. If you plan it right, you don’t need headstock access, and I prefer soundhole access for aesthetic reasons.

Y’all know any online tutorials for this kind of thing? I thought Tom b may , but it’s not there
I don’t mind paying for a class(online)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

But if the FB is lifted off the soundboard wouldn’t a sound hole access place the TR too low?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I think you are assuming that the wood supporting the fingerboard extension is exposed and "above deck," like on an archtop. If that is what you want to build, then maybe having headstock access is the way to go. I am talking about something different, where the wood supporting the fingerboard sits "below deck" and the fingerboard is flush to the top. If you build what I am talking about, you can put a hole in the upper face brace, and have a channel in the wood supporting the fingerboard extension, all leading to the truss rod nut, which sticks out from the neck heel (and into the wood supporting the fingerboard extension) by about an inch or so. What I'm talking about cantilevers the fingerboard extension, but hides it and allows it to look like a traditional flat top guitar.