Leveling the fingerboard/no trussrod

[mlbex]

I've recently acquired a Bozeman 1987 Flatiron Performer A with a bent neck. I like the sound of it, but it's hard to play around the 5-7th frets. The neck is pulled up about 1/16 of an inch.

My local luthier says that to fix it he has to pull off the fingerboard, level everything and replace the frets, and he wants about $500.

I have some questions:

Is it likely to have a long and happy life after this is done (assume reasonable treatment, no overheating, etc), or will the original 'problem' reassert itself and the neck warp again? (note the word "likely", not "for sure")

Is there a less expensive way to do this?

Can anything reasonable be done to make it stronger or more stable than it was before?

Note that I don't care much about the finish looking perfect -- I could leave the finish a bit rough or try to fix it myself. I'm most interested in sound and playability (now it sounds great but is hard to play, and I can't fix the playability issues with a setup)

Thanks
Mike

[Paul Hostetter]

I of course can't see this little beast to be 100% certain, but I doubt I would ever remove the fingerboard. I would simply plane and true the board in place and then refret it. This way you are working with the wood - all of it - as it is now, after all this settling, rather than changing something and risking further change. If it's been around since '87, it's stabilized. Getting it all playable should be a fairly permanent solution to this situation.

[sunburst]

I, like Paul, can't see the instrument to make a judgement, and, indeed, it might be possible to plane the fingerboard and fix the problem, but if the fingerboard did have to come off, inserting a carbon fiber rod and/or gluing the board back on with hide glue would stiffen and likely help stabilize the neck.

[Paul Hostetter]

The Performer A has an adjustable trussrod in it, which is another reason why I wasn't inclined to think about removing the board. The typical skinny Gibson neck doesn't have much more room in it for other stuff. They often had rather low neck angles, and I've had pretty good luck getting a number of them to play well once they're as relaxed and twisted as they're gonna get.

[Antlurz]

Not that my opinion is worth more than the virtual ink this is written with, http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif but I think the advice given, ....in the order is was given... is perfect.

Ron

[mlbex]

This particular Performer A either doesn't have a trussrod, or no one can find it. There is definately not a trussrod cover on the headstock. Is it possible there is some other way to adjust the trussrod? Some guitars have an Allen bolt in the sound hole, but that seems farfetched with an F-hole mandolin.

Do I just own an oddball? If so, maybe it's worth reparing just because it's strange.

[Paul Hostetter]

Yikes. I'd have to say it was a real oddball if it didn't have a rod. You might want to examine the heelblock with a mirror and a light, as it is possible to do bolt-ons and trussrods adjustments in f-hole instruments via the endpin hole. Seems rather a longshot. If this one has no adjustable trussrod, that's a first in my book. How much does the neck flex when the strings are slack vs up to tension?

http://www.folkofthewood.com/Images6/flatironperformera00601020.jpg

[mlbex]

It looks just like your pictures, except that the top finish is black, there's no purfling in the wood on the back and sides, and there is no trussrod cover on the headstock. My back and sides might be walnut; they do not look like rosewood or maple.

I cannot observe any neck movement when I tension the strings, but I'm "measuring" with my eyeballs. Also, it does not have the fleur-de-lis inlay; it simply has "The Flatiron".

Is yours (in the pictures) a "Performer" model?

[Paul Hostetter]

It's not "mine" it's just a photo from someone's website. That's a typical Performer A. I think what you have is not a Performer A, but a Festival A. The body and neck are mahogany. I don't know what, if anything, might be inside reinforcing the neck.

http://www.folkofthewood.com/Images6/flatironfestivala.jpg

[mlbex]

I must really have an oddball. I thought you nailed it with these pix until I saw the back and sides -- mine look more like walnut, they are definately not mahogany or rosewood. They could be maple, but I don't think so -- the grains are too dark.

Other than that, this one is the spitting image.

Whatever's inside reinforcing the neck didn't work... :=(

I always thought the festival A was fancier than the performer A, in the same way that a festival F is fancier than a performer F. Based on that, if I had to guess, I would have said that the first set was a festival A and the second a performer A.

From the look of your pix, the first set looks like the better mandolin, leading me to believe that a) I have a festival A, and b) the performer A is the better (read: more expensive) mandolin.


I'm thoroughly confused now, but a quick web search confirmed your results.

[Paul Hostetter]

There are many details (time = $$) that separate them: pearl logo vs spray-painted, rosewood board vs ebony, binding around the top, the lack of a trussrod, and so on. The parts are all machined on the same machines though. As with the renowned Gibson of Kalamazoo, anything is possible. Got any decent photos of your sides and back you could post? I find it really unlikely that one could confuse maple with any other possible wood, but ya never know.

How much does the neck flex when the strings are slack vs up to tension?

[PaulD]

Are you sure it's an '87? The early Flatirons didn't have adjustable truss rods... could it be early '80s? I don't know when they started adding them or how the mid/late '80s Festival and Performer lines compared. The first two digits of the serial number will indicate the year.

pd

[mlbex]

I'll have to take photos and look up the serial number when I get home. It will be tonight at the earliest; most likely later. (the serial number will be easy; the pix will take longer.)

I was told it was an '87 Performer A. I liked it so I bought it. At the time, I thought the Festival A was equipped with all the fancy stuff (truss rod, inlay, binding, etc), and the Performer A was the no-frills model. Well I definately got the no frills model, but I guess it's called a Festival A.

Is there a Flatiron serial number lookup table posted somewhere? I'd like to look it up.

I don't believe I'm confused about the wood. It does not look like maple to me, it looks like walnut. I just allowed as how I might be wrong, mostly because the second set of pictures looks so much like mine in every other respect.

As far as the neck flexing, I do not observe any difference with the strings tensioned or loose. I laid a flat edge against the frets with the strings loosened, then again with them under full tension, and I did not observe any change.

BTW thanks for all the info.

[Paul Hostetter]

I just allowed as how I might be wrong, mostly because the second set of pictures looks so much like mine in every other respect.

Usually any confusion between walnut and mahogany can be resolved by comparing the unfinished inside surface with the colored and glossed outside, which usually has a darker filler in the grain.

As far as the neck flexing, I do not observe any difference with the strings tensioned or loose. I laid a flat edge against the frets with the strings loosened, then again with them under full tension, and I did not observe any change.

This speaks favorably for the simple plane and refret.

[PaulD]

I don't know of a lookup table, but I think the first 2 digits were the year on all Flatirons up through the late '90s... maybe through the end of production. My Flatiron Pancake is S/N 8105960, built in 1981. It has no truss rod, but the later models did. I don't know how the flat top details compare to the archtop details. I defer to any knowledge Paul H. has regarding these instruments as he's obviously worked on them for years... I was just suggesting the age factor as one possible reason there's no truss rod. I think some of their production had reinforced necks but not adjustable truss rods.

pd

[Paul Hostetter]

I just remembered I have one of the army-navy Flatirons sans trussrod, an early one. It's doing fine. I think the absence of the rod was a production cost-cutting thing seen on the lower models, though it seems penny-wise and pound-foolish to me. I'm certainly no authority on these things, but have had quite few few drift across my bench over the years.

[PaulD]

The A/N (Pancake) Flatirons were designed for light gauge strings, so I'm sure Steve Carlson decided they didn't need the added cost and weight of a trussrod. By '82 or '83 they apparently had a sticker by the neck block that specified the string gauges, but my '81 never had that (I bought it new). I'm guessing he had some early instruments fold up with heavy gauge strings so he decided to put that sticker in there. It is a lightly built but great sounding little instrument.

I think the first Flatirons I was aware of with truss rods were about '84 or '85, but I don't know when they started selling archtops. Even if your knowledge is limited, I'm sure you've seen more Flatirons come across your bench than I've seen up close in my lifetime! http://www.mandolincafe.net/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Paul Doubek

[Paul Hostetter]

All I've ever had on mine is J-74s. It would be nice if there was a good Flatiron of Montana information site.

[mlbex]

Is it a Performer or a Festival A? It's both.

The label says "Model: Festival A" and later, "Performer Series". Anyway, it looks like the second series of pictures (the black face model). The serial number is 87100815.

I (think I've) attached a picture of the back and sides. They might be maple with dark finish. They don't show up in the preview mode, but they are in the "browse" box.

[Tom C]

Ive never seen a Flatiron with anything other than maple.