660/12 set up questions

j_michael · Post by **j_michael** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 1:24 pm

Hello Everyone,
I need some advice regarding the set-up of my new 660/12. Beautiful guitar with a wonderful tone! My guitar tech did a set-up and we disagree on the guitar's action. I feel the string height is much too high as he set it up. It's too difficult to fret. My tech says that's the way Ric 12 strings have to be set up? You can see the obvious upbow with the naked eye. I have a 330/6 I set-up myself. It has an almost dead straight neck, no fret buzzes, and near perfect intonation. I'm using factory spec Ric strings on my 660/12. I also read here where John Hall commented that the Ric necks should be adjusted fairly straight? Any input or advice would be greatly appreciated! Thank you.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 1:39 pm

Did you ask your tech why he says that? My own 660-12 was set up by Dave's (where I got it) and when I got it home I readjusted it even lower with no probs.

The string tension on my 660-12 has always seemed a tiny bit high; I assume that this is a design characteristic. But the action comes down nice and low and the neck is virtually straight. Loosen up those rods!

adam_swapp · Post by **adam_swapp** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 2:45 pm

John,

Are you referring to the action or the neck relief? The bow in the neck is the neck relief; As the term is commonly used, the action is distance between the frets and the strings (typically at the 12th fret). The two are related, to be sure, but the terms aren't synonymous. To answer your question, though: I am suspect of your tech's position. More to the point, it sounds like you know more about it than he does.

In a nutshell, adjust the neck as straight as you can get it, and set the strings as low as you can without buzzing. You might also check the nut relief. If the strings are hard to fret, it's often because the strings are too high at the nut.

Paul,

How would guitar design affect string tension? Is it not a function of string gauge and scale length?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 3:23 pm

Adam: absolutely a function of string gauge and scale length! But I can't get over the feeling that my 660-12 feels more "tightly strung" (I know it is! It's a 12!) than my 6 stringers, all of which feel a bit different, even within model and make. So perhaps design was too broad and vague a word to use, considering the connotations it brings to mind, as you point out.

However in this case, what I think gives me this impression, is exactly the thing you point out--the nut not being cut deeply enough. I'm one of those 12-string players who spend a fair amount of time close to home, so to speak, and if the nut is too high it makes that first position a bear.

Maybe John's and mine have the same nut batch. Thank gosh not the same tech, though.

dale_fortune · Post by **dale_fortune** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:27 pm

One thing that affects the tension of the strings is the total length from tuner post to where the ball end attaches at the tail piece. The longer the strings the softer the tension will feel. Plus you have to figure in the string guage as heavier strings require more tension to bring them up to standard 440/A pitch. These are the basic physics of tensile strength of guitar strings.

johnashfield · Post by **johnashfield** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:07 am

I don't know if this relates, but I tried a trapeze instead of the "R" for about 2 days, and the string tension was noticably tighter with the trapeze. Plus I found it more awkward to string than the "R".

This was on a 360/12.

j_michael · Post by **j_michael** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:25 am

Hello All,
Thanks for helping me with this issue. Yes, I'm actually referring to neck relief. Sorry about that. I feel that my 660/12 has too much relief that's easily seen by sighting the neck (the neck is pulling up towards the pull of the strings). Therefore, wouldn't you need to "tighten" (turn clockwise) the truss rods to straighten out the neck a bit? It's not that difficult to fret down near the nut, but the higher you go up the neck it gets much worse. The bridge seems to be set at a proper height. Please let me know if my thinking on this issue is on the right track?

adam_swapp · Post by **adam_swapp** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 8:56 am

John,

You might want to do a sanity check on the current relief. Fret at the first and 17th frets (a capo at the first fret makes this easier). Check the clearance between the top of the 7th fret and the underside of the low E. It should be .010" or less (as much less as you can get it without buzzing). For a rough guide, that's about the thickness of a business card.

wolfgang · Post by **wolfgang** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 11:09 am

"One thing that affects the tension of the strings is the total length from tuner post to where the ball end attaches at the tail piece."
This is not true, isn't it?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 11:22 am

Seems correct to me:

When you tension a string, you tension the entire string from tuner to tailpiece anchoring point. The nut and bridge are for alignment and scale length. The string, when brought up to pitch (or down) slides through both the nut and the the bridge.

Hence roller bridges and also the clamping type nut found on Floyd Rose type vibratos