Any plans for a set-neck Anderson?

[chesterb]

Just curious. Would love to see one.

thanks

[GaryMcT]

Have you tried an Atom? Not set neck, but you wouldn't know it if you didn't look.

[tom]

how would it be different/better?

[bruce]

Less screws..?? Lighter weight??

[GaryMcT]

cricket cricket

[chesterb]

Perhaps you could enlighten me Tom.

[GaryMcT]

Try the Atom. It'll make you not care if it's bolt-on or not. I've never played a set neck guitar that I like better than an Atom.

[Janine Doubly]

When the first Atom arrived in this area, I did an extensive Atom vs. other set neck guitars taste test and aside from Don Grosh's Set Neck guitar (a fine instrument, but twice the price), the Atom killed all the others in every respect; playability, sheer forcefulness of tone, sustain, x factor, clarity, weight, balance and upper fret accessability. It equaled Don's Set Neck in tone and X factor, but it is the better design ergonomically. The other guitars used in the evaluation were two Gibson Historic Pauls (57 Gold Top, 56 Gold Top w/P-90's), early PRS McCarty Gold Top Prototype and Don's Set Neck. Believe me, I wanted to be convinced that a Set Neck design is in every way superior to Tom's Atom design, but frankly, it is not. Tom's design is superior. I really don't know how to better it, plus the benefits of a removable neck make me wonder why we would want a glued in neck unless we could be given a guarantee that a set neck guitar will NEVER have a neck issue.

[olectric]

When the first Atom arrived in this area, I did an extensive Atom vs. other set neck guitars taste test and aside from Don Grosh's Set Neck guitar (a fine instrument, but twice the price), the Atom killed all the others in every respect; playability, sheer forcefulness of tone, sustain, x factor, clarity, weight, balance and upper fret accessability. It equaled Don's Set Neck in tone and X factor, but it is the better design ergonomically. The other guitars used in the evaluation were two Gibson Historic Pauls (57 Gold Top, 56 Gold Top w/P-90's), early PRS McCarty Gold Top Prototype and Don's Set Neck. Believe me, I wanted to be convinced that a Set Neck design is in every way superior to Tom's Atom design, but frankly, it is not. Tom's design is superior. I really don't know how to better it, plus the benefits of a removable neck make me wonder why we would want a glued in neck unless we could be given a guarantee that a set neck guitar will NEVER have a neck issue.

This is exactly what the guys did at Mass St. Music when they had my Atom there--tested it against a bunch of LPs, some older Gretsches, and a Grosh set-neck. Atom won every category mentioned above (except price, of course, with that $4k Grosh), even sustain (over LPs!!!). Tom hath doneth it with this one.

[tom]

chester, i'm not sure what you are asking. my comment was not a glib one. when people say "set neck", i honestly don't know what that means in terms of sound. there are so many factors that contribute to the sound of a guitar, that i can't tell you exactly what a glued in neck does differently that a bolted on one. we have certainly seen that the traditional fender style neck joint acts differently than our wedggie does. the goal in this guitar was to have a neck that will absolutely not move, transfer vibration from neck to body as good as it can, and be servicable. i am very happy with the results. i just don't see a reason to glue the neck on. there are many acoustic builders that have abandoned the "set neck", collings being the most notable.

[Janine Doubly]

To add to Tom's statements...There is actually more wood to wood contact on Tom's "Wedgie" (I love that!) neck to body joint than most "set neck" designs. In our repair shop, we see enough L** P***s to know that the "tenon" style neck joint has more glue globbed into the neck joint to compensate for sloppy tolerances that its hard to say that there is any real "wood to wood" solid transfer of sound happening, except for around the "tongue" part of the fingerboard and parts of the heel of the neck. Per square centimeter of wood to wood contact, keeping in mind that Tom's "wedgie" (I can't stop saying that) operates in multiple planes, I am willing to bet Tom's neck joint surpasses all in ACTUAL wood to wood contact, especially under string tension and the fact that there are two very strong bolts compressing the joint together. Even the best of classic Dovetail jointed acoustic guitars can't compete with this. From a guitar lifespan viewpoint, being able to remove a neck without using steam, solvents, etc. is such a Godsend from a repair perspective, its a wonder gluing necks has lasted as long as it has. And when you are done removing a bolted neck, you don't have to do any "touch up" finish work.

[chesterb]

Thanks for your responses, especially tom. Just one more question you referred to the "wedggie" is this just the atom design or all of your guitars?

thanks

[Dave K]

I'd like to know who decided on calling the joint the "wedgie"? :eek:
I like the term "A-lock neck joint" so much better.
Is there a story behind it, kinda like "one time at band camp......" ? :D

[GaryMcT]

I'm curious if a Cobra with an Atom neck joint (if that's even possible) would give the ability to have something that sounds closer to an Atom, but with a Floyd Rose trem.

If that were possible (or if an Atom could be made to take a Floyd), I don't think you'd be able to find a finer hard rock guitar (to my ears, hands, and eyes).

[sylvanshine]

Patience Gary, patience. ;) ;) nudge nudge

[GaryMcT]

Patience Gary, patience. ;) ;) nudge nudge

Hmmm, do you know something that I don't? :)

[tom]

sounds like lots of speculation going on here. we don't offer cobra's with floyds. i called the joint a wedgie, roy came up with the very impressive A-Lock name.

[GaryMcT]

Ah crud, sorry about that. Didn't realize the Cobra wasn't available with a Floyd.