Wich neck has a thinner profile? V63 or C64

marc61 · Post by **marc61** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 2:35 pm

Of course I jest...this is what I do best...It was more like the discussion of one of the finest WB's ever produced hardly comes up without a pic for drooling purposes.

jps · Post by **jps** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:47 pm

sloop_john_b · Post by **sloop_john_b** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:49 pm

Am I invited to the party?

jps · Post by **jps** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:52 pm

But of course!

ken_j · Post by **ken_j** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:00 am

My former '91 V63 had a very thin neck compared to a friends late '90s V63 and all the other later ones I've handled. The '91 was about the same as the only C64 I have played.

rickaddict · Post by **rickaddict** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 4:36 am

Yeah...that's a tough question. My 98 v63 has a neck that is the same width across the fretboard as my '03 C64S. The two necks are very close in girth measurements, but as Andy mentioned above...my C64S neck is flatter. It is shaped like this [ whereas the v63 is shaped like this (. So the C64S is thinner front to back. I personally don't find a [ shaped neck to be as comfortable as a ( shaped neck as my I tend to wrap my hand around the neck and my palm is round!

But as Ted mentioned these necks vary. Generally the earlier v63's have smaller necks than the newer ones. And the C64's also vary. I've only played a couple C64's, but they were both quite different. My 2003 C64S has the aforementioned [ shaped neck, and the 2006 C64SJG that I recently played at the CME has a ( shaped neck. So I don't know what to tell you!

Is front to back thickness all that you care about or is the overall girth of the neck more important? Is the neck's shape important; ie [ vs. ( ?

I guess ideally you'd want to try before you buy, and choose an earlier v63 over a later one.