Neck profile on a 2007 SL-3

[Jem]

Hi Guys,

Just a quick question for anyone who's got an SL-3 to hand and could do a quick measurement for me to compare some figures...

I've always thought of my SL-3 as a bit chunky on the neck, totally against what I remembered my old Model-6 Charvel was like, and the other week I finally got a chance to get my hands on a Model 6 again (first time in 20 years... kinda like hens teeth around here!) and I was amazed at how fast and thin the neck was, proving my memory hadn't totally failed me

So I took out my micrometer and took a couple of measurements on my SL3 - behind 3rd fret, I'm seeing a depth of 21.75mm (0.850 inches) and behind 12th fret I'm seeing a depth of 23.35mm (0.920 inches). Both of which seem quite a long way over any figures I can find around here for Jackson soloist necks, but I haven't found definitives on what the depth "should" be on an SL-3. I've just read various pages talking about the great, fast, thin neck. Did it vary year on year? Mine's a 2007 if it's any help.

Now I've played the old 6 again, I'm kinda itching to get that profile and wondering whether I should:
(a) go speak to a luthier and get a re-profile done on the SL-3 neck - don't like this option much as the guitar is pretty much mint at the moment and not sure how good a finish could be obtained...
(b) bite the bullet and buy the first 6 I can find
(c) pretend I haven't played the 6 again and keep telling myself it's not chunky, it's well rounded
(d) keep saving and go for an SL-1 (what's its profile like in comparison to a Charvel 6?)

Being in Northern Ireland, we've got no dealerships of Jackson within 100 miles (Ok, so there's a place in Belfast has Pro-series dealership, but I'm thinking that's just gonna be Jap dinkys for the most part) so trying these things out is a bit hit-or-miss as I scour secondhand listings.

[Jem]

Is there really nobody out there with an SL-3 who could help? I didn't think they were that rare....

[DonP]

Sorry, but the rosewood fretboard, MOTO sharkies and lack of binding never turned me on, so I've never messed with an SL3 much.

Reshaping the neck on the SL3 would kill the value.

I'd dump it and try getting a Model 6 or a 650XL. I have a couple and the neck is nice and thin.

Word of caution: My Model 5FX and 550XL have fatter neck, maybe similar to your SL3. Stay away from these.

[Jem]

Thanks for the reply Don, I understand... at the time money was too tight for the full-fat USA Soloist and a great deal came up on the SL3. I thought, from the spec, it'd be pretty darn close to my old Model 6 so snapped it up. As it had been so long between owning the 6 and the new SL3, and I had been playing bass & acoustic for those 20 years, I thought the neck was a bit fatter, but wasn't sure if it was just my hands gettin' old . Aside from that, it plays beautifully.

It's a bit of a curse that I managed to get my hands on a 6 again as it's now got me thinking about a change. I picked up a Les Paul Custom Classic in the local guitar store last week, heck, even it had a faster neck than the Jackson!

I guess I'm just trying to get an idea as to whether mine's some kinda weird freak guitar or if all SL3's are this chunky, I can't find anyone saying they are anything but "fast"...

The only instrument I've ever traded of any significance was my Model 6, and it's been the only instrument I've ever really missed, so I'm kinda loathe to sell the SL3, I'd prefer to just acquire something else as well

[Rich#6]

didn't like the sl3 that I've played. dump it. If you think it's chunky compared to a LP wow something odd there.

[pro-fusion]

That must be an odd one. The SL3s I've played in stores all have what I would characterize as "average" Jackson necks--quite similar to Model 6 necks. It's important to remember that the necks on Japanese Charvel/Jacksons were hand-shaped, and thus there is quite a bit of variety.

[DonP]

I have a DK2 neck around the 2003 time frame that is very fat. I think the Japan factory was fubaring the profile around those years for many models.

[Devotee]

A friend of mine has an SL3 - it's a no-frills shred machine, built like a tank. The neck profile is indeed more rounded than the 'Speed' profile you usually find on King Vs and Warriors, etc. for sure. I definitely wouldn't call it 'chunky' though.

[Jem]

Thanks guys for all the responses. So as they were hand carved, I guess that mine must be a bad one. Would be good if Anyone has one that they could compare measurements on, but at the end of the day, I guess it doesn't matter much... I agree with the built-like-a-tank description though, 5 years and several gigs later it's still perfect aside from 1 tiny ding it got sitting on its stand with an errant kid running round the house. It also holds tune perfectly, rarely needs tweaked.

The LP Custom Classic I tried had the 60's thin taper neck on it, must be about 0.050 - 0.100 thinner all the way up and a more comfortable profile, more D shape than the U of the Jackson.

I'm thinking that what I may do is go for an LP (been thinking about one for a while for the more Bluesy numbers anyway) then get shot of the SL3 and wait for a decent 6 or 650xl to turn up. Few and far between, but I knows what I likes

[DonP]

but at the end of the day, I guess it doesn't matter much...

Exactly. Your neck is what it is, knowing that other people have thinner necks or the same thickness on their SL3's isn't going to do much for your situation.

[toejam]

I've always thought of my SL-3 as a bit chunky on the neck, totally against what I remembered my old Model-6 Charvel was like, and the other week I finally got a chance to get my hands on a Model 6 again (first time in 20 years... kinda like hens teeth around here!) and I was amazed at how fast and thin the neck was, proving my memory hadn't totally failed me

Fast and thin? That saying always cracks me up. How does a thin neck make someone play faster? It doesn't. It's a technique you must learn. You can learn to play fast on any neck profile. A thinner neck will just usually cause fatigue quicker and make your hand cramp up.

[VanHoosen]

Fast and thin? That saying always cracks me up. How does a thin neck make someone play faster? It doesn't. It's a technique you must learn. You can learn to play fast on any neck profile. A thinner neck will just usually cause fatigue quicker and make your hand cramp up.

I've recently been able to verify first hand that this is very true! The RR5 I just picked up by far has the thickest neck profile I've ever played. Has it slowed me down? According to my metronome, no, not at all. But that's just me. I've personally never been able to bond with the flat and thin feel of Ibanez style necks. If you're going to hold wood in your hand for multiple hours a day, it may as well have some girth to it.

[Jem]

Fast and thin? That saying always cracks me up. How does a thin neck make someone play faster? It doesn't. It's a technique you must learn. You can learn to play fast on any neck profile. A thinner neck will just usually cause fatigue quicker and make your hand cramp up.

When I played the 6, I found I could run up and down the fingerboard with greater ease and accuracy than I could on my SL3. Given that I have played my SL3 for 5 years and had only just picked up a 6 for the first time in 20 years, it was kinda surprising.

So, in my mind that makes the fingerboard 'faster'. Maybe 'more comfortable for my hand shape' is a more appropriate term, kinda loses the snappiness of 'faster' though

And the shallower depth of the neck makes it 'thinner'... 'slimmer'? If you want to use other words, be my guest, I'm just trying to convey that I found the model 6's neck profile to be more comfortable and easier to play on, for me, than the SL3

[toejam]

Thinner/slimmer doesn't mean faster, but if it feels better and works for you, go for it. The Model 6, and some other Model series, from what I remember, actually had two different neck profiles depending on year. I had an '87 Model 6 and '88 Model 5A whose neck profiles were about the same, similar to the feel of my '02 Carvin SC90, which is very similar to the "speed neck" Jackson used on the KV1, KV2, and that's about the thinnest I can comfortably use these days. I can't remember if the other Model series profile was thicker or thinner, but others here have noted at least two different ones over the years.

[toejam]

I've recently been able to verify first hand that this is very true! The RR5 I just picked up by far has the thickest neck profile I've ever played. Has it slowed me down? According to my metronome, no, not at all. But that's just me. I've personally never been able to bond with the flat and thin feel of Ibanez style necks. If you're going to hold wood in your hand for multiple hours a day, it may as well have some girth to it.

Exactly. I still play my '94 Dinky HX once in awhile, but that Ibanez-like profile is just too thin for me these days for extended periods of time.