#1
Hey all. How many of you have played a PRS guitar with a "wide-fat" neck? I've played one with a "wide-thin" neck and it was extremely comfortable; very smooth and fast.

How does the wide-fat neck compare to the thin?

I don't usually like thick necks , Gibson Les Paul and similar necks feel too chunky for me.
#2
its nothin like a flat. remember its wide too. not a ridiculous amount, but i find the width makes way more comfy to play than a les paul
PRS CE22
PRS SE Santana
Fender Spalted Maple Tele
Squier Affinity Tele w.mods
Mesa Boogie Mark IV Combo + 212 Recto Cab
Homemade Ash Bass
BBE Two Timer
DUNLOP Wah
BOSS GE-7
KORG Pitchblack
MXR Dyna Comp

www.myspace.com/shapesofgrey
#3
my strat neck is wider and thicker than my les paul neck... I think I prefer the big one, but the les paul does need a fret dress...
---
#4
Quote by Robfreitag
my strat neck is wider and thicker than my les paul neck... I think I prefer the big one, but the les paul does need a fret dress...



Which Strat and LP do you have?
#5
If the width is the same dimensions as the "wide-thin" that would be no problem. It's the thickness of the neck that interests me.

Another question to add: How do thicker necks affect the tone? Obviously there is more wood against the body so my thoughts would be more sustain..
#6
i have both and it's not as dramatic a difference as some people make it out to be.

it's a slight bit fatter than a gibson 60s neck but nowhere near what a gibson 50s neck is.

it's C shaped.

let me put it this way, i am not at all a fan of gibson 50's necks and i find it quite comfortable.

also, when you say a gibson neck, those necks vary a lot. 50s and 60s are completely different.



i would say the prs wide fat is closest to the 59 neck, but C shaped.
Last edited by gregs1020 at Oct 20, 2011,
#7
Quote by gregs1020
i have both and it's not as dramatic a difference as some people make it out to be.

it's a slight bit wider than a gibson 60s neck but nowhere near what a gibson 50s neck is.

it's C shaped.

let me put it this way, i am not at all a fan of gibson 50's necks and i find it quite comfortable.


Okay, I'm not well educated on the different types of Gibson necks. Is the 50's neck what comes on most standard Gibsons these days (eg. the Les Paul Standard and Traditional Plus)?
#8
ok well this should show you just how slight the difference is.

it's almost more in terms of shape than actual thickness.

the W/F is more C shaped, the W/T is more D shaped.

the TOP one in this pic is the W/F. This is where they meet the body.



Top is W/F, bottom is W/T. at the nut.



it's probably almost impossible to tell from the pics, but the basic jist IMO is more in the shape. as you can see, there isn't a huge obvious difference in sight, but there is a definite difference in feel when you hold them.
#9
Quote by gregs1020
ok well this should show you just how slight the difference is.

it's almost more in terms of shape than actual thickness.

the W/F is more C shaped, the W/T is more D shaped.

the TOP one in this pic is the W/F. This is where they meet the body.



Top is W/F, bottom is W/T. at the nut.



it's probably almost impossible to tell from the pics, but the basic jist IMO is more in the shape. as you can see, there isn't a huge obvious difference in sight, but there is a definite difference in feel when you hold them.


It's not too obvious from the pics but thanks for sharing them anyway! Just out of curiosity, what models are they?
#10
the wide fat is a singlecut hollowbody and the thin is a custom 24.

crappy pic, but here are the girls.

#11
They are amazing! Custom 24 is my dream guitar but very pricey.

I am actually looking to buy a PRS SE and replace the pickups, pots etc. if needed, but I don't like the bird inlays on the SE's and it's hard to come across one with dot inlays. The Tremonti SE has caught my attention but it only comes with a wide-fat neck, so I'll need to track one down and try it out.
#12
Every PRS I've ever owned has been Wide/Fat, except for my SC-58 which is the Pattern neck (new name for Wide/Fat). I love them!! Do go and try one out just to be sure. Note that the differences are quite minor, at least on paper. As Greg stated, the Wide/Fat will be very similar to a Gibson R9/59 neck profile. I used to have a R0/60 and absolutely hated the neck, felt like I was playing a straw.

WIDTH OF THE FRETBOARD AT THE NUT:

Pattern, Wide Fat - 1 11/16"
Pattern Thin, Wide Thin - 1 11/16"
Pattern Regular, Regular - 1 21/32"
12 String - 1 47/64"

WIDTH AT THE BODY

Pattern, Wide Fat - 2 1/4"
Pattern Thin, Wide Thin - 2 1/4"
Pattern Regular, Regular - 2 1/4"
12 String - 2 19/64"

NECK DEPTH AT THE NUT

Pattern, Wide Fat - 27/32"
Pattern Thin, Wide Thin - 25/32"
Pattern Regular, Regular - 27/32"
12 String - 27/32"

FINGERBOARD RADIUS

10" on all guitars except when otherwise stated
11 1/2" on the Santana models and 12 strings

SCALE LENGTH

25" on most models except when otherwise specified
24 1/2" on the SC 58, Santana, Starla, Starla X, Mira X and 245 models
25 1/4" on 513, DC3, and NF3
25 1/2" on 305

======================================================

SE Neck Measurements

WIDTH OF THE FRETBOARD AT THE NUT:

Wide Fat - 1 11/16"
Wide Thin - 1 11/16"

WIDTH AT THE BODY

Wide Fat - 2 1/4"
Wide Thin - 2 1/4"

NECK DEPTH AT THE NUT

Wide Fat - 27/32"
Wide Thin - 25/32"

FINGERBOARD RADIUS

10" on all guitars except when otherwise stated
Torero: 14"

SCALE LENGTH

25" on most models except when otherwise specified
Torero: 25.5"
Mike Mushok Baritone: 27.7"
Last edited by thehikingdude at Oct 21, 2011,
#13
Quote by gregs1020
the wide fat is a singlecut hollowbody and the thin is a custom 24.

crappy pic, but here are the girls.


You rich?

Wide fat is more adapted to chorded play, and wide thin for fast playing.
#14
Quote by gregs1020
the wide fat is a singlecut hollowbody and the thin is a custom 24.

crappy pic, but here are the girls.


Damn Greg, those are quite nice guitars

I have the CE22 with the wide fat nack, and it is super cumfy to play, just got to get the heal knocked down to the original specs and it will be Uber-amazing.
2002 PRS CE22
2013 G&L ASAT Deluxe
2009 Epiphone G-400 (SH-4)
Marshall JCM2000 DSL100
Krank 1980 Jr 20watt
Krank Rev 4x12 (eminence V12)
GFS Greenie/Digitech Bad Monkey
Morley Bad Horsie 2
MXR Smart Gate
#15
Quote by n1ckn1ce
You rich?

hell no. i used to be into old hot rods, for about 25 years. and trust me, guitars are mega-cheap compared to old hot rods.
Quote by Robbgnarly
Damn Greg, those are quite nice guitars

thanks rob, the schb is up on ebay if you're interested.

#16
Quote by gregs1020

thanks rob, the schb is up on ebay if you're interested.


I'd love to, but 3 kids and a wife leaves me pretty broke right now!!

I actually am on the way to the pawn shop to get a loan on my G-400 right now
2002 PRS CE22
2013 G&L ASAT Deluxe
2009 Epiphone G-400 (SH-4)
Marshall JCM2000 DSL100
Krank 1980 Jr 20watt
Krank Rev 4x12 (eminence V12)
GFS Greenie/Digitech Bad Monkey
Morley Bad Horsie 2
MXR Smart Gate
#17
Quote by thehikingdude
Every PRS I've ever owned has been Wide/Fat, except for my SC-58 which is the Pattern neck (new name for Wide/Fat). I love them!! Do go and try one out just to be sure. Note that the differences are quite minor, at least on paper. As Greg stated, the Wide/Fat will be very similar to a Gibson R9/59 neck profile. I used to have a R0/60 and absolutely hated the neck, felt like I was playing a straw.


Is the pattern regular the new wide fat? I thought it was slightly different but the same idea while being a bit thinner. well I guess Im retarded then. but yea W/F all the way, Its really comfy and feels fairly think. out of all my guitars, my Cu24 has the thickest neck.

thickest to thinnest:

PRS Custom 24

Godin Redline

Fender MiM Tele

Gibson Flying V (yea thats right my gibson has the thinnest neck)

Thats all by feel though and the godin and Tele are very close so I could be off on that if I actually measured.

To me the pattern neck feels pretty big compared to what Im used to, Its deff thicker that what im used to but I really like it, and its not quite in Gibson 50s neck territory. Its noticably thinner than the LPC and 57 VOS/RI LPC I played.

never tried the pattern thin neck, and the pattern reg neck doesnt feel wide by any means to me atleast, but I have played ESPs and Gibson LPs that felt like they had really narrow necks (not thin, narrow)
#18
Thanks for the replies. Those dimensions helped a lot too thehikingdude. So the only difference between the wide-fat and wide-thin is 2/32" in thickness.

I am very interested in trying one now and curious to see if it will fit my style of playing, as I use a lot of chord work AND fast licks.
#19
Quote by n1ckn1ce

Wide fat is more adapted to chorded play, and wide thin for fast playing.

That's totally up to the individual. I know a lot of guitar players, myself included, that would disagree.
#20
Quote by thehikingdude
That's totally up to the individual. I know a lot of guitar players, myself included, that would disagree.


And there would be a number of other factors that come into it anyway eg. action, player technique..

This thread has produced some positive answers. Personally I believe the thickness of the neck doesn't make a player play any faster/better but rather the comfort-ability that allows the player to feel immediately right at home, and this appears to be how the majority of posters in this thread feel.
#21
Quote by HeadlessCross
And there would be a number of other factors that come into it anyway eg. action, player technique..

This thread has produced some positive answers. Personally I believe the thickness of the neck doesn't make a player play any faster/better but rather the comfort-ability that allows the player to feel immediately right at home, and this appears to be how the majority of posters in this thread feel.

Exactly!