Comparison between old and new nut widths..

shackleton · Post by **shackleton** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 7:40 am

I guess ill wait until then. They are about 60 miles from me.

beatlefreak · Post by **beatlefreak** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 9:45 am

As far as I know, they don't have a retail outlet. You'll have to order online at their website.

shackleton · Post by **shackleton** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 10:05 am

I am sending the guitar back. The neck is too thick and too narrow to be a good 12. Its about 1/16 narrower and at least 1/16 thicker than my 1996 360/12. Guess I should have got a 660. Any one know when they changed the necks or have 620's always had a narrow neck?

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 11:04 am

They have never changed the necks in this dimension. 620s should have the same nut width as a 360. They are both CNC shaped and hand-sanded. A sixteenth is a huge difference where twelve-string necks are concerned. Did you measure this with a caliper or is it estimated/subjective? You're saying that the neck on your 620/12 measures 1 9/16" at the nut.

The 660/12 neck at the nut is actually a full 1/8" wider than either the 620/12 or the 360/12. It is nominally 1 3/4" wide--much like many wider acoustic fretboards. Talk about a difference! Some like 'em, some don't.

johnashfield · Post by **johnashfield** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:05 pm

At the confluence this summer I played every 12 string I could get my hands on, and what made the biggest difference in playing (IMO) was the neck radius.

In fact my 12 string is now in the hands of Paul W...

Have great holidays everyone!

shackleton · Post by **shackleton** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 7:32 am

I have a 1997 360/12 that has a 1/16 or more wider neck than a 1992 that my friend bought. I could post a pick if needed.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 7:57 am

Just to prove a point?

BobKat · Post by **BobKat** » Sun Feb 18, 2007 4:20 pm

The fingerboard radius is indeed very important on a 12-string. I find the old 7.5 radius to be much more comfortable. As a matter of fact I like it better even on 6-strings. The hand "falls" naturally to the curve, I find.

belmondo · Post by **belmondo** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:06 am

how difficult is the changing of the nut for an average person (like me)? or must it be done by a luthier?

jdogric12 · Post by **jdogric12** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:46 am

It's like changing oil in your car. Worth the fee to have someone else do it.

beatlefreak · Post by **beatlefreak** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:09 am

The nut is just held in place with a drop of glue. It can be easily freed with a tap on a block of wood held against it.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 2:33 pm

Changing a nut is no sweat. But if it's unslotted, slotting is an art and does require specialized files.

henry5 · Post by **henry5** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 1:31 am

Without wishing to sidetrack too much, I think fingerboard radius is massively important on any instrument. The reason I prefer the playability of my old Ric basses to my 4001CS, despite it having the thinnest neck, is because the CS radius is much flatter, which feels much less natural and comfortable to me.

emjayw · Post by **emjayw** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:11 am

Very good point, Shaun. My '05 360/12 "feels" much more curved and natural to my hand than an '86 620/12 I've owned. The 360 neck is just much easier to play double-barre chords on than the flatter necked 620. You just have to pick 'em up and "feel" the neck before you plunk down your money. My all-time favorite neck is a 7.25 radius on a MIJ 50's Tele I own. Flat necks belong on classical guitars!

beatlefreak · Post by **beatlefreak** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 2:50 pm

The 360/12 and the 620/12 both have exactly the same crown radius of 10", according to the RIC website. The 360/12C63 has a smaller crown radius of 7.25".