Necks, r8 or r9?

[Lefty69]

I have been looking into buying an r9 and was wondering about neck thickness. I have an r8 which has a nice thick neck, I have read that the
59 has a thinner neck. Has anyone compared the two? I'm actually hoping
that it is thinner. I have a mid 90's standard that has the thin neck and
I love it. Dropping this kind of cash I just don't want to get the same thick
neck as the r8. Thanks for any info..

 

[Jimmi]

If you like the 90s standard you need to think more about an r0.

 

[THDNUT]

I have a CR8 and three R9s. The necks on the R9s are just SLIGHTLY thinner than the CR8. I don't have a micrometer so I can't measure them for you. I also have a custom shop '60 LP Special that has a slightly thicker neck than the CR8. My G0 has a the thinnest neck of all my historics. I play them all interchangeably with no problems. I don't understand all the fuss about neck thickness. I have average size hands and I adapt to all my LPs within a few seconds after picking each one up.

 

[Sct13]

Neck thickness for me seems to be a bigger deal the older I get.....

I love the meaty ones because they "Report" back to me, the thinner ones are speedy....

I do not adjust well between songs during a set however, my hand will feel more tired going from the shanks to an R8.

 

[SteveC]

The difference in neck thickness between an R8 and an R9 is not that big. But, in general, the necks on the R9's that I have played (and owned) are thinner than those on R8's that I have played. But, that difference is a "who cares", IMHO. There are also some R9's that have been reported to have thicker necks than some R8's.

You really need to play 'em to find how they feel to you.

And, you need to try going back & forth between an R9 and a Tele during the set

I always hold my breath for the first couple of bars - ya never know what's gonna happen.

 

[duck2k]

My R9 has a thinner neck profile, and my R0 is even thinner (not by much). Of the four Historics I own, these two get more play and gig time than my R7, and R8.

 

[Sct13]

The difference in neck thickness between an R8 and an R9 is not that big. But, in general, the necks on the R9's that I have played (and owned) are thinner than those on R8's that I have played. But, that difference is a "who cares", IMHO. There are also some R9's that have been reported to have thicker necks than some R8's.

You really need to play 'em to find how they feel to you.

And, you need to try going back & forth between an R9 and a Tele during the set

I always hold my breath for the first couple of bars - ya never know what's gonna happen.

I do but its a Strat....super thin.....only two songs...and I do hold my breath......

 

[lunchbox]

If you like the 90s standard you need to think more about an r0.

No. My 1991 Standard has almost exactly the same profile as every R9 that I've ever tried.

I like the R9/'59 profile best.

 

[blackie2]

My R8 is no different than the Traditional I had before.

 

[Jimmi]

No. My 1991 Standard has almost exactly the same profile as every R9 that I've ever tried.

I like the R9/'59 profile best.

Early 90s standards, as do most of the 70s and 80s do, have a neck based on a 1960 taper. They are more close to the r0 neck (and there are different profiles of those) than the standard r9 neck at least up until 2012. There is a slightly different profile this year. In my experience, the R8 and r9 necks run thicker than real 50s guitars anyway. As a rule, they just did not make them like the thick shouldered R8 and r9 necks. There is a thread in the other forum in the vintage section by Kim where he compares the specs of 40 or so bursts and no year runs on average anywhere close to what Gibson has been putting out as a '58-59 neck.

Anyway, I have a good friend with a 1992 standard, and the neck is very close to the r0 or a g0.

 

[strat1701]

it's all about the shoulders to me. I can't play a guitar that has wide shoulders no matter what the depth is. R8's just do not have enough shoulder off them, they split my hands. SOME R9's have their shoulders rolled, but I know not all of them do. I like a medium R9 the best I think. Slim 60s is too shallow and while the shoulders are rolled it feels like it splits my hands because its shallow. Like an Ibanez wizard neck. That's MY .02....YMMV...

 

[Sct13]

Early 90s standards, as do most of the 70s and 80s do, have a neck based on a 1960 taper. They are more close to the r0 neck (and there are different profiles of those) than the standard r9 neck at least up until 2012. There is a slightly different profile this year. In my experience, the R8 and r9 necks run thicker than real 50s guitars anyway. As a rule, they just did not make them like the thick shouldered R8 and r9 necks. There is a thread in the other forum in the vintage section by Kim where he compares the specs of 40 or so bursts and no year runs on average anywhere close to what Gibson has been putting out as a '58-59 neck.

Anyway, I have a good friend with a 1992 standard, and the neck is very close to the r0 or a g0.

Can you link that post?

 

[Jimmi]

Can you link that post?

BOTB Facts of The Burst in US Units - Les Paul Forum
Here you go!

Notice that the necks are not as different from year to year as you expect (though it is weighted toward 1959s). Most average around 0.9 at the 12th fret....also interesting is they run just under 9lbs on average.

 

[Lefty69]

I have a CR8 and three R9s. The necks on the R9s are just SLIGHTLY thinner than the CR8. I don't have a micrometer so I can't measure them for you. I also have a custom shop '60 LP Special that has a slightly thicker neck than the CR8. My G0 has a the thinnest neck of all my historics. I play them all interchangeably with no problems. I don't understand all the fuss about neck thickness. I have average size hands and I adapt to all my LPs within a few seconds after picking each one up.

Don't get me wrong, I love the cr8 neck. I just find that the thin neck on my mid 90's standard is faster for solos etc. So really I want a thinner neck so that I can have the option of one or the other depending on which type of music I feel like jamming. Sounds like it will be hard to find a left handed G0, its hard enough finding a lefty r9 with a nice top. Thanks for the info everyone.

 

[CRobbins]

The neck on my R9 suits me just right.

 

[paintguy]

I have had R9's, a R8 and 68' Reissue as of late. The R8 is definitely bigger than any of my ex R9's.

 

[nicolasrivera]

R8's have big resonant tone monster necks while R9's just have necks...

 

[winexprt]

I have been looking into buying an r9 and was wondering about neck thickness. I have an r8 which has a nice thick neck, I have read that the
59 has a thinner neck. Has anyone compared the two? I'm actually hoping
that it is thinner. I have a mid 90's standard that has the thin neck and
I love it. Dropping this kind of cash I just don't want to get the same thick
neck as the r8. Thanks for any info..

I consider the neck on my 2013 R8 to be absolute perfection...for me.

It's not "thick" by any means, nor is it thin; it just fits perfectly in my average sized hands.

People have to realize: the necks on the '13 R8's are not the R8 necks of several years past.

 

[gvon]

I concur with strat1701. It's the shoulders that make the big difference for me.I'm looking for a historic or CC or Artist model Les Paul with smaller shoulders,maybe almost a slight v neck.Anyone with advice on that?

 

[nicolasrivera]

I concur with strat1701. It's the shoulders that make the big difference for me.I'm looking for a historic or CC or Artist model Les Paul with smaller shoulders,maybe almost a slight v neck.Anyone with advice on that?

you will love the 1955 reissues then.....