EVH guitar neck

Tone Slinger · Post by **Tone Slinger** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:47 am

In regards to Eddie's height , My sister used to buy all the 16 and Tiger Beat magazines from the late 70's into the early 80's. You know how all those mags were for younger girls, they would ask these actors and musicians things like height and weight dimensions along with syrupy questions like "What is your favorite flavor of ice cream", never something like "What kind of amp are you using". I am a magazine freak and kept all of the one's with Van Halen. Two of them had complete fitting sizes for Eddie and Dave. Eddie claimed to be 5'8 and 140 pounds( I'm 5'9 1/2 but claim to be 5'10) I think Ed probably did the same. I don't doubt that his hands are probably about the size of someones a little taller. Dave is a taller, bigger man than brotha Ed. They also listed chest, waist,neck and calf etc. Ha Ha Ha.

rgalpin · Post by **rgalpin** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:47 am

there are shots of ed where you can see how much of the fretboard he can cover because of the size of his hands but he can't be all that tall because i saw DLR in a hotel lobby, back in the day, from just a few feet and he was surprisingly small compared to how he looks in VH shots with ed and michael anthony - this supports the 5'7" idea. which brings me to my point - the one about ME, al franken... i've been using the warmoth conversion necks for years now - they are les paul scale. les paul necks are 24 3/4" i think - whereas strat necks are 25 1/2. the longer neck obviously creates more fingerboard real estate to cover. the difference is enough that after playing the les paul scale for years now, when i get on a strat, i feel like i'm working the deck of aircraft carrier... there is also a big difference in string tension - the smaller neck allows for a higher note with less string tension - the smart thing to do would be to take advantage of that and go to 010's to grab some tone - but alas, the temptation is too great and i went back to 009's for the fun of ultimate squiggly bendage expression at the expense of tone... i'm curious if anyone else out there has experience with the warmoth conversion neck or info about the differences in sound that result from different scale necks...

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:38 pm

a strat scale length sounds different than les paul scale length - little more snap in the notes. observe it some time.

a big part of eds tone is strat scale length. IMNSHO

Mark

rgalpin · Post by **rgalpin** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:02 pm

have you played on a les paul scale neck mounted to a strat style body?

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:10 pm

rgalpin wrote:have you played on a les paul scale neck mounted to a strat style body?

no but i have played a les paul. maybe this part of the reason evh lost some tone - arent his sig guitars les paul scale length?

rgalpin · Post by **rgalpin** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:30 pm

wow!! check this out:

EVH Music Man Signature Guitars
1991 to 1994

Neck
Size Scale: 25" Radius: 10"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Peavey EVH Wolfgang
1995 - Present

Scale: 23 1/2"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

23 1/2 !!!!!!!!!!

GEEEEZZZ!!!

dag folks - that is a huge difference from 25 1/2 strat to 23 1/2 WG. Interesting.

i got that from:
http://www.classicvanhalen.com/bios_evh.shtml

i wonder if that's even accurate?! i played a WG and didn't realize it was that much smaller...

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:35 pm

rgalpin wrote:wow!! check this out:

EVH Music Man Signature Guitars
1991 to 1994

Neck
Size Scale: 25" Radius: 10"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Peavey EVH Wolfgang
1995 - Present

Scale: 23 1/2"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

23 1/2 !!!!!!!!!! GEEEEZZZ!!!

dag folks - that is a huge difference from 25 1/2 strat to 23 1/2 WG. Interesting.

i got that from:
http://www.classicvanhalen.com/bios_evh.shtml

i wonder if that's even accurate?! i played a WG and didn't realize it was that much smaller...

the one i played i realized right away.

rgalpin · Post by **rgalpin** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:45 pm

that's cuz you da man!

Another famous 23 1/2 scale - the Gibson Byrdland, Mr. Nugent's axe of choice.

On that "note:"
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepage ... engths.htm

Norman Blake on scale length: "I'm not a fan of the long scale anymore, and I don't like the dreadnought. The 25.4" scale doesn't make much sense for what I do. I'm not the world's largest person in stature, and I sit down to play, so a dreadnought got to seeming like overkill. Plus I get tired of the lack of snap. It's kind of like stringing up the kitchen table and playing that. I got tired of reaching a little further for everything -- having to punch it real hard to get anything out of it. I like the Gibson 24-3/4" basic scale or the old Martin 00 scale, which is 24.9"."

Scale length vs string gauge: "While some electric guitarists use a shorter scale instrument to achieve less string tension and easier playability, others see it as an opportunity to get a "thicker" tone utilizing heavier gauge strings. For instance, take two identical electric guitar bodies, one fitted with a 25-1/2", and the other with a 24-3/4" scale neck. If you find your technique requires using .009 - .042 gauge strings on the longscale, you'll probably get the same feel utilizing a heavier .010 - .046 gauge set on the short scale instrument, The heavier gauge strings will also have the side-effect of inducing more voltage [current?] in your pickups, resulting in a 'thicker' fundamental note, and more output." -"The Fret!" newsletter, The Twelfth Fret guitar shop, Toronto, Canada

Scale length vs sustain: "Scale length... is measured as the distance between two points: one at the bridge and one at the nut. The points where the strings contact the nut and the bridge define the scale length of the guitar. A longer scale will, to a point, give more sustain. The reason for this is that the tighter a string is stretched, the longer it will sustain, and for a string of any given thickness, the string at the longer scale will have to be tensioned higher than the string at the shorter scale to reach the same pitch. However, a longer scale will make the fret distances longer and make it more difficult to reach the frets. Most guitar scale lengths are between 24 and 26 inches, with the most common being 24-3/4" (Les Paul style) and 25-1/2" (Fender style)." -The Guitar Builder's FAQ (electric guitars section) (c) 1995 Bill Wyza.

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:57 pm

rgalpin wrote:that's cuz you da man!

Another famous 23 1/2 scale - the Gibson Byrdland, Mr. Nugent's axe of choice.

On that "note:"
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepage ... engths.htm

Norman Blake on scale length: "I'm not a fan of the long scale anymore, and I don't like the dreadnought. The 25.4" scale doesn't make much sense for what I do. I'm not the world's largest person in stature, and I sit down to play, so a dreadnought got to seeming like overkill. Plus I get tired of the lack of snap. It's kind of like stringing up the kitchen table and playing that. I got tired of reaching a little further for everything -- having to punch it real hard to get anything out of it. I like the Gibson 24-3/4" basic scale or the old Martin 00 scale, which is 24.9"."

Scale length vs string gauge: "While some electric guitarists use a shorter scale instrument to achieve less string tension and easier playability, others see it as an opportunity to get a "thicker" tone utilizing heavier gauge strings. For instance, take two identical electric guitar bodies, one fitted with a 25-1/2", and the other with a 24-3/4" scale neck. If you find your technique requires using .009 - .042 gauge strings on the longscale, you'll probably get the same feel utilizing a heavier .010 - .046 gauge set on the short scale instrument, The heavier gauge strings will also have the side-effect of inducing more voltage [current?] in your pickups, resulting in a 'thicker' fundamental note, and more output." -"The Fret!" newsletter, The Twelfth Fret guitar shop, Toronto, Canada

Scale length vs sustain: "Scale length... is measured as the distance between two points: one at the bridge and one at the nut. The points where the strings contact the nut and the bridge define the scale length of the guitar. A longer scale will, to a point, give more sustain. The reason for this is that the tighter a string is stretched, the longer it will sustain, and for a string of any given thickness, the string at the longer scale will have to be tensioned higher than the string at the shorter scale to reach the same pitch. However, a longer scale will make the fret distances longer and make it more difficult to reach the frets. Most guitar scale lengths are between 24 and 26 inches, with the most common being 24-3/4" (Les Paul style) and 25-1/2" (Fender style)." -The Guitar Builder's FAQ (electric guitars section) (c) 1995 Bill Wyza.

shiat!

Tone Slinger · Post by **Tone Slinger** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:09 pm

Hello. The EVH Charvel has a 25 1/2 scale length, just like a strat. It also has a 1 5/8 nut width like older strats. The gibson 24 3/4 scale sounds much different. It loses its tuning easier ( 24 3/4 ) as well. To compare a Gibson(24 3/4, tunomatic bridge, glued in neck and mahogany body) to a strat (25 1/2, tremelo bridge, bolt on neck and alder/or ash body) I would conclude that the strat indeed has more " snap " and punch as well as better acoustic dynamic and volume. The 25 1/2 scale in my opinion allows one to dig a little deeper in regards to overall intonation and "feel" . The Gibsons sound to me is much a result of it's 24 3/4 scale length, cause I have had a 88 or 89 " Charvette" guitar by Charvel and it was a strat type guitar with a 24 fret 24 3/4 scale neck and it sounded extremely close to that typical Gibson sound. Just as the frets are a little closer togather the sound also seems a little "squished" , the 24 3/4 scale also to me doesnt seem to like as much distortion either,they(Gibson's) to me sound better at lower to moderate distortion levels, where as a humbucker equiped strat can handle more distortion and not lose as much character. I'm not trying to dog Gibsons and such cause Michael Schenker ( obsession, Stranger's in the night ,are especially great) and Gary Moore ( I love his solo's on Thin Lizzy's "Black Rose" album) have gotten some of the greatest playing and sound out of them of all time. The simple idea of putting a humbucker in a Strat ( lots were doing it at or around the time Eddie was like Robbie Robertson as well as Michael Hampton in P-Funk) improved the sound of Rock. There was a time when I was torn between Gibsons and Strats, But I always end up with my strat type guitars. I like trying to play songs by different artist using both type guitars sorta a/b ing each to see the differance. The strat ( I like a bridge Humbucker and a neck single coil with Floyd Rose) can get all the Hendrix,Trower, SRV sounds that the gibson cant get as well as almost any classic rock sound that is associated with Gibsons. To me the gibsons have a "older" type sound . Im not trying to piss off all of the gibson lover's out there please don't take offense. I'm just saying that to me my best playing as well as a majority of my influences(Uli Roth,EVH.Hendrix,Malmsteen,Lynch) get a wider range of tones than the Gibson's. The scale length of guitar necks is definatley one of the the main contributer's to the sound of a guitar.

Star*Guitar · Post by **Star*Guitar** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 2:26 pm

It never seizes to amaze me how much misinformation is spread on the web and how it is just accepted as gospel without question.

You Wolfgang specs are flat out wrong!!!!!!!!!

I suspect I know why the wrong specs are posted but it is not worth commenting on.

Go to this link and download the PDF manual if you don't believe me.

http://www.peavey.com/search.cfm?c=3&la ... m=Wolfgang.

Neck Specs.

Birdseye maple neck and fingerboard, oil finished.

Duel graphite reinforcements and adjustable torsion rod.

25 1/2 scale length 22 jumbo frets, Dunlop 6105 wire.

10 degree tilt-back headstock with 3/3 tuning machine configuration.

Bolt on contstruction with contoured neck heel.

The Wolfgang Special specs are the same except the neck and fingerboard are hardrock maple. And it does not have the 10 degree tilt-back headstock.

15" fretboard radius

Tone Slinger · Post by **Tone Slinger** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 5:46 pm

Thank's for posting that, very, very few design's stray from the 25 1/2 and 24 3/4 scale length, 'cept most notably PRS. They split the difference.

MARCO · Post by **MARCO** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 10:27 pm

His necks in the early days were 1-11/16" not 1-5/8" like they are now.

rgalpin · Post by **rgalpin** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:22 am

hey sorry - i got that 23 1/2 spec from:
http://www.classicvanhalen.com/bios_evh.shtml

maybe that site is not the most - uh - scientifically accurate resource.

I'm still thinking that the Byrdland is 23 1/2 though - which is pretty weird - it looks like such a big guitar - i've never picked one up.

rockstah · Post by **rockstah** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:24 am

MARCO wrote:His necks in the early days were 1-11/16" not 1-5/8" like they are now.

and strat scale length!