Pattern vs Pattern thin

srmd22

New Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
97
I feel like there is a difference based on my past experiences, but was looking at this diagram, and it seems the difference is a lot smaller then my perception of it - the only difference appears to be 2/32 of an inch, or 1.6mm in thickness at the nut. Seems like it should not be a major factor - it's not like, say the difference between a skinny 0.83 in Fender C and a 0.99 in nocaster, for example. Not sure how that extrapolates along the rest of then neck. I have been ruling out some options based on preference for the Pattern profile, but I wonder if that is really necessary. I do prefer guitar necks that are a bit on the thicker side, generally, and I don't like really skinny (or narrow) ones. I did play a CE24 at a store a couple of months back, and thought the neck was nice but maybe a bit too thin for my taste. I assumed it was a Pattern Thin. My new 408 has a Pattern, and I love it. I guess that translates to about 0.84 inches, which is kind of thin, actually - my sweetspot has been around .88 to .92 at the nut. But the 408 feels perfectly comfy to me. I worry that the PT, at around .78 in would feel too thin for my tastes, these days. Any thoughts?

neck-carves-jpg.6478
 
Small measurement differences can feel dramatically different to your hands while playing. I loved Pattern Regular at first, but have over the years migrated more to Pattern (and old W/F) and now Pattern Vintage, which feels perfect to me. I tried a beautiful WL model at my local dealer recently and couldn’t get on at all with the pattern thin neck. But I’m not a shredder either :)

Best advice is to try to play the different neck carves at a local dealer if possible to tell.
 
They feel very different to me despite the minuscule difference in specs. My fav is the PT

Small measurement differences can feel dramatically different to your hands while playing. I loved Pattern Regular at first, but have over the years migrated more to Pattern (and old W/F) and now Pattern Vintage, which feels perfect to me. I tried a beautiful WL model at my local dealer recently and couldn’t get on at all with the pattern thin neck. But I’m not a shredder either :)

Best advice is to try to play the different neck carves at a local dealer if possible to tell.

Yah, so it is not just in my head. Glad I asked. It has been awhile since I owned a PT profile, so I was wondering if I was must remembering wrong.
 
The small difference in depth gets spread out across the circumference of the backshape, so it is bigger all around, not just deeper.

1/16" is a big difference in backshape depth as well as in nut width. For example, the thin necks are great for speed playing for me, but they don't support my hand well enough for chords.

It also depends on the shape itself. .84 with a more C shape will feel bigger than .84 with more of a V shape.
 
I don't enjoy playing a neck that is under .840 I have found, so a WT or PT is a no way for me, regardless of woods and other attractive features it may have. I sold a KILLER Suhr because it started at .810. Showing the specs as 32nds of an inch is misleading, IMO. I really feels like a much bigger deal than a 16th of an inch, the difference feels more like an 8th all around between PT and P.

I really like the first fret to be .88 or bigger. I have 3 guitars that are .93 at the first fret and they feel outstanding.
 
I feel a much more noticeable difference between Pattern and Pattern Thin, than between Pattern, Pattern Vintage, and Pattern Regular for some reason.

Nonetheless, I’ve owned all of the recent PRS carves, and have no problem with any of them. My new fave is the PV, but if I like the sound of a given PRS, the neck doesn’t deter me if it’s PT.
 
I don't enjoy playing a neck that is under .840 I have found, so a WT or PT is a no way for me, regardless of woods and other attractive features it may have. I sold a KILLER Suhr because it started at .810. Showing the specs as 32nds of an inch is misleading, IMO. I really feels like a much bigger deal than a 16th of an inch, the difference feels more like an 8th all around between PT and P.

I really like the first fret to be .88 or bigger. I have 3 guitars that are .93 at the first fret and they feel outstanding.

This is my experience too - I prefer .88 at the first fret, but I can live with the pattern at .84, and other similar fenders etc. I definitely prefer the feel of the necks on my guitars which have beefier specs. This includes my nocaster, which is pretty much an inch from the nut to the 12th fret. It feels funny when I pick it up after playing a thinner neck, but I adapt almost immediately, and it is super comfy. I just have to remember not to squeeze as hard for chords - especially bar chords - or my hand gets tired. Guess I was just re-affirming my experiences in the context of the PRS profile choices.
 
I started out only liking paper-thin necks. I played ibanez wizard and telecaster modern necks for decades. I got used to wide fat on a SC245. Now I find i don't really care about profile. I play all of them. Wizards, pattern thin, thin tele, pattern regular, tele boat neck, wide fat, pattern vintage. And 7-string.
 
I've never played a PRS neck I didn't like. Come to think of it, I've never even seen a PRS I didn't like.
 
After playing a Santana and DGT constantly over the past few years, I just cannot do a Pattern/Thin ...there isn't enough meat on the neck for me.
 
Back
Top