Why are less new guitars 7.25?

[sciuri]

I grew up on a cheap Gibson, so maybe 9.5" feels slightly more second nature, but I enjoy both. I like having different radii available. I use different techniques, and I end up playing or writing different things. Between 9.5" vs 7.25", maybe the chubby parts of my fingers are in the wrong places, but there are things I can play with greater ease or clarity on a 9.5" neck than I can on a 7.25" neck. I can fake-shred more easily on a 12" or greater neck.

Like some have mentioned above, my guess is that Fender is trying to cater to the majority of players, including attracting Gibson 12" radius players through a compromise.

Similarly, I've wondered why so many new Fenders and Squiers have narrow tall frets, which are my least favorite. I imagine there was some focus group or market analysis that occurred that showed that most people preferred narrow tall. Or perhaps they accidentally over-committed to purchasing 10 years worth of narrow tall fret wire and have to use it all up.

I'm guessing the same has occurred for 7.25" vs 9.5", where the majority of players in their market analysis actually preferred the 9.5" radius.

[bessieboporbach]

I mostly play jazz. My main electric guitars are a Hofner (12"), a Vintera Jag (7.25"), and a Charvel with a Floyd Rose (compound 10"-16"). I also recently spent a couple of years playing a CV Jazzmaster (9.5") every day before more or less retiring it.

While I'm aware that they are different and can perceive the differences, particularly between the 7.25" Jaguar and the others, by and large I don't feel that my technique or approach is affected by the differences at all. I play the same mediocre stuff on all of them.

The only slight exception is that the high register on the Charvel feels unnatural to me. Is that because of the flat radius, or the Floyd (which I otherwise quite like), the Strat shape, the scale length, the string spacing, or some quirk of the setup? I don't know.

At the seventh fret they all feel more or less the same to me.

To make a long story short, in my experience fretboard radius is not much of a factor in the playing experience. Certainly not as much as scale length, string gauge, neck finish (!), or a pile of other factors to do with setup.

[rank]

The main reason I prefer 9.5 is that I have a Gibson and switching between the Gibson and the Fenders is less jarring with a 9.5 radius Fender neck, than with my 7.25 Fender, which I don’t play as often as a result.

This is exactly why I enjoy different radius. When I switch guitars, I enjoy them feeling different. It makes me play the instrument differently. My approach to the instrument shifts somewhat. Don't get me wrong, I am a shitty musician on any instrument, but it has led to me making different musical choices when playing different guitars. It may seem silly & may be all in my head but if it works for me, why question it?

[ThePearDream]

Yeah, as others touched on, it's just how the instrument has evolved.

There have been three major ownership changes since Fender started making guitars, and the only connection between the original, and FMIC is a chain of legal documents. FMIC is a big business and they make decisions that are good for their bottom line. They spout off any marketing bs they think will work. The ad copy that Larry had quoted earlier, was basically a generic description of a guitar neck with a few extra adjectives.

Rounded back, slim at the nut, but it widens toward the heel. You can play chords and single notes! A human cleaned up the sharp fret ends, and it has a finish!

I have contempt for your grandpa, sure, but I also have contempt for Fender, who will tell you in one blurb that- well, here, I'll quote them, I love quoting Fender's corporate bullshit:

"Delivering both comfort and speed, the American Professional II Deep “C” neck profile is slim at the nut and fills out gradually as it approaches the neck joint to create a natural feel that’s perfect for chording and single note playing alike. The hand-rolled fingerboard edges and Super-Natural satin finish provide a supremely comfortable feel."

OK, cool. If you take that at face value, though, why would Fender make anything other than those necks, if they feel so strongly about them?

Because it's all just bullshit that the marketing department cooked up. That's from the American Professional Strat, which replaced some other Strat, and why would you buy the new Professional instead of the used whatever it was?

The snake oil rubbed hand finish is why.

Add in changing player tastes, musical trends, manufacturing/technology advancement, proliferation of bad info in the old days, etc. and here we are.

---

Personally, I like 7.25 up through 12 just fine. I'd probably be fine with something flatter too, but have never owned any, besides a few Warmoth compound radius necks. The actual difference between 7.25 and 9.5 radii, across the width of a guitar fretboard, creates a ~0.5 mm maximum height difference at the edges. Fret size and back profile are much bigger factors.

FWIW, a flatter radius neck can always be re-radiused to a rounder radius, if/when it's being refretted. It's a relatively simple operation for somebody with the tools to do it.

[mashastrat]

Yeah, as others touched on, it's just how the instrument has evolved.

There have been three major ownership changes since Fender started making guitars, and the only connection between the original, and FMIC is a chain of legal documents. FMIC is a big business and they make decisions that are good for their bottom line. They spout off any marketing bs they think will work. The ad copy that Larry had quoted earlier, was basically a generic description of a guitar neck with a few extra adjectives.

Rounded back, slim at the nut, but it widens toward the heel. You can play chords and single notes! A human cleaned up the sharp fret ends, and it has a finish!

I have contempt for your grandpa, sure, but I also have contempt for Fender, who will tell you in one blurb that- well, here, I'll quote them, I love quoting Fender's corporate bullshit:

"Delivering both comfort and speed, the American Professional II Deep “C” neck profile is slim at the nut and fills out gradually as it approaches the neck joint to create a natural feel that’s perfect for chording and single note playing alike. The hand-rolled fingerboard edges and Super-Natural satin finish provide a supremely comfortable feel."

OK, cool. If you take that at face value, though, why would Fender make anything other than those necks, if they feel so strongly about them?

Because it's all just bullshit that the marketing department cooked up. That's from the American Professional Strat, which replaced some other Strat, and why would you buy the new Professional instead of the used whatever it was?

The snake oil rubbed hand finish is why.

Add in changing player tastes, musical trends, manufacturing/technology advancement, proliferation of bad info in the old days, etc. and here we are.

---

Personally, I like 7.25 up through 12 just fine. I'd probably be fine with something flatter too, but have never owned any, besides a few Warmoth compound radius necks. The actual difference between 7.25 and 9.5 radii, across the width of a guitar fretboard, creates a ~0.5 mm maximum height difference at the edges. Fret size and back profile are much bigger factors.

FWIW, a flatter radius neck can always be re-radiused to a rounder radius, if/when it's being refretted. It's a relatively simple operation for somebody with the tools to do it.

7.25” necks have only a 0.5mm edge height difference from the centre of the neck than a 9.5”?. I thought the difference would’ve been larger.

[mashastrat]

Does anyone have radius measurement tool that the can provide a photograph of 9.5” side or measuring tool on a 7.25” neck to show how the difference looks to eye?

[ThePearDream]

7.25” necks have only a 0.5mm edge height difference from the centre of the neck than a 9.5”?. I thought the difference would’ve been larger.

Surprising right? That's at the heel too. At the nut end, it's more like 0.25mm.

*edit.
drew it up in CAD

[mashastrat]

7.25” necks have only a 0.5mm edge height difference from the centre of the neck than a 9.5”?. I thought the difference would’ve been larger.

Surprising right? That's at the heel too. At the nut end, it's more like 0.25mm.

*edit.
drew it up in CAD

Okay yeah it’s surprising what impressions different guitars make on you..

[mashastrat]

Was 7.25” the only option 50’s-80’s and is why it’s associated with many of the old iconic players?

For instance David Gilmour and that 7.25 maple & black Stratocaster, does his custom shop version come with his setup.

Fender claims 7.25 makes it up a third of its production.

So when did 9.5” appear? Just in the 80’s during the ‘SuperStrat’ period, or did Fender make anything else than 7.25” radius in mass quantity sooner?

Does anyone know what radius a neck Uni-Vox hi-flier any phase guitar has?

[DesmondWafers]

I believe the Tele deluxe was the first (12"?) conscious radius deviation, but it should be noted that most guitars of the vintage era are not consistent when it comes to radius. There are certainly old 50s and 60s Fenders with radii that come closer to 9.5" than 7.25". Even today, listed radius by no means matches what the actual radius is, although it's far more consistent than it used to be. The only way to be sure is to buy a set of radius gauges.

[mashastrat]

I believe the Tele deluxe was the first (12"?) conscious radius deviation, but it should be noted that most guitars of the vintage era are not consistent when it comes to radius. There are certainly old 50s and 60s Fenders with radii that come closer to 9.5" than 7.25". Even today, listed radius by no means matches what the actual radius is, although it's far more consistent than it used to be. The only way to be sure is to buy a set of radius gauges.

The 70’s Telecaster deluxe? What about the Seymour Duncan ‘Telegib’



It initially had a slab rosewood neck, this is a non Fender item custom thing I assume is 12”.

[MattK]

This is what Fender said in 1972:

"Single piece hard rock maple neck with flat radius and wide frets"
compared to the Custom in the same catalogue:

"NECK: Detachable hard rock maple
Curved rosewood fingerboard (optional maple)"
I absolutely love "Fender thick-skin® high-gloss finish" as a selling point.

[mashastrat]

This is what Fender said in 1972:

"Single piece hard rock maple neck with flat radius and wide frets"
compared to the Custom in the same catalogue:

"NECK: Detachable hard rock maple
Curved rosewood fingerboard (optional maple)"
I absolutely love "Fender thick-skin® high-gloss finish" as a selling point.

“The thick bridge designed for maximum sustain”

Thickness was the attraction.

12”?… Les Paul thick

[Futuron]

Glad they mentioned the 2 strap buttons, I was unsold prior to that

[Futuron]

drew it up in CAD

This is a great image, would you mind adding 12" to it?