Conference napalm::guitar

    Martin used to make a steel string guitar that was shaped like a
    classical - wide neck, joined at the 12th fret, etc.  A friend of mine
    owned one but I can't remember the model number.  D-35S, maybe? 
    Sounded like steel, played like nylon, except for the callouses, of
    course.  I don't know if they still make it; this was back in the 
    mid-70s. 
    
    Dave

    Guild d28s,,  Pretty substantail neck..
    
    Ibanez Performance Series, again, a decent sized neck...
    
    Some of the Gibson Dreadnaughts as well..
    (Bring your own cash..)
    

re: .1

That's the Martin D*S model (D-18S, D-28S, D35S) Where does that hyphen go 
anyway?))  

re: .0

Isn't 1 3/4" the standard width?  

I have the same problem so I play a D-35S.  That's as wide as steel-stringers 
get without going custom, to my knowledge.

What bothers me as much as the width is the neck thickness.  The trend is 
toward thin necks and I hate it.  It puts my thumb in a bad inclination
and causes strain.  A friend of mine has a '67 D-28S with a big fat neck that
feels great to me.  It also sounds magnificent.  


Bob

    The dreadnaught series (from Martin, anyway) has a 1 11/16" wide neck.
    For a wider neck look at the Martin OM-28 - it's got 1 3/4". Great for
    fingerpicking. (Only 1/16" difference - but you notice it.)
    
    (Numbers above from a 1985 Guitar Player article by Eric Schoenberg on
    the OM series that I have a reprint of.)

My Ramirez classical has a finger board that is 2 1/8"
at the nut. Now this, I think, is excessive - especially
if the guitar is to be strung with steel. That's why I
surmised that 1 3/4" should be about right. I would be
interested in hearing from anyone that has fingerpicked
on the Martin om-28 which sounds like an ideal instrument
for my needs  -  or any other guitar for that matter which
approximates this configuration.

I remember the Martin, but I;m not sure of the model number. I thought they 
called it a 'folk-picker' or some such name. Last time I saw on in a music 
store was in '78. 'Course, I haven't looked for one, either. It was a great 
guitar, andd easy to play [I have the same problem as you - classical 
guitarist, like folk music, want the steel sound, but can't get my fingers 
nto them narrow boards]. But the price of that thang was reeeeeeediculous. 
Back then, they were looking for near $1k. If you could find a new one 
today, I shudder to think what it would cost. If you find something, post 
it in here, as I'm curious. 

leo

    
    I've played classical guitar for a long time (15+ years) and I
    currently play classical, steel string acoustic, and electric.
    My recommendation would be to get used to the narrow neck,
    unless you want to spend a lot of money.
    
    The classical guitar sized neck on a steel string acoustic is
    not standard and will probably cost you. I also played a martin
    a long time ago that had a wide neck. I believe it was a custom
    order.
    
    I've found I have gotten used to the different neck sizes with
    time and lots of practice.
    
    Bob

    Takamine has a guitar in their natural series that has steel strings
    and a 1 7/8" (at the nut) neck.  I can't remember the model number.
    It's styled similar to a classical (including a slotted head), but
    braced for steel strings.
    
    Taylor offers custom neck widths, and I believe their custom shop 
    prices are a bit cheaper than Martin's.
    
    Jim

    RE .5

    I don't know how widely available the OM-28 is these days; back when
    they were first made, there were only 265 made between 1930 and 1933.
    Martin starting making them again in 1977 in response to requests from
    The Music Emporium (Cambridge, MA), and that's where I got my custom
    OM-28 a couple of years ago following a tip from Eric Schoenberg that
    he was getting a couple in. The Music Emporium also carries non-custom
    copies. No advice outside of the Eastern MA area other than contact
    Martin if you're interested in OMs and see who carries them.

    It's a great-sounding fingerpicking guitar, with a very balanced sound
    low-to-high (not bass-heavy like dreadnaughts), and also sounds good
    for bluegrass flatpicking leads. The strings are a bit wide-spaced for
    fast flatpicking, but practice should compensate. (I hope.)

    If you can find a copy of Guitar Player from March 1985, that's where
    the article on the OM series can be found.

    Taylors, from what I've seen are pretty expensive, but I don't
    know how that would compare to a martin custom.
    
    

    i second the vote for a martin OM-28.  I play classical as well and
    finger pick an OM-28.  When you come over from Frankfurt, you might
    stop by, show me your Ramirez and I'll show you my OM.  With what you
    have determined that FMV for the Ramirez is, I would guess you could 
    buy the Martin. (not mine, a new one) regards, jt

    RE: Martin neck widths
    
    As previously indicated, standard width at the nut for Martin guitars
    with 14 frets clear of the body is 1 11/16".  This includes all 
    current "production" models (D, M, J, and OOO series).  
    
    O and OO sized guitars have 12 fret necks and are wider at the nut.
    The original 12 fret dreadnaughts with slotted pegheads (e.g. D-28S) 
    also have a wider nut, as does the OM.  To my knowledge, none of these
    guitars are currently in regular production, but Martin does list them
    on their price list and will build them on a special order basis.
    
    Jim

I don't know if the Martin D-%%S models are currently in production, but they 
have been in recent history - at least in the sixties and seventies.

My D-35S has a width just a hair under 1 15/16.  I don't know if they were 
aiming for 1 7/8 or 1 15/16.  It's closer to the latter.

The width at the bridge end is actually wider than standard classical specs.
I had to make a special saddle to pinch the strings in to a manageable
width for flatpicking.  It might have been custom-built for the original 
owner.  I kinda doubt that, though.  It's a mid-seventies model and that was
a time when Martin got pretty slack with some of their measurements.  I wish I 
had a dollar for every seventies dreadnaught that had to have the saddle 
moved to set the intonation.

Something else to consider is the scale length.  The 00- (and 0- ?) Martins
have a shorter scale length.  This is more comfortable for fingerpicking
but, all other things equal, sacrifices a tiny bit of sustain - theoretically.
It also gives the strings a little more slack, which I like for fingerpicking
but bothers me for flatpicking.

D-%%S and practically all other models have normal scale length.


Bob

I share the comments of note .9: 

I am playing a Martin OM-45 after having a D-35 for years and I think I 
have found the perfect guitar for me: 14 fret neck, but slightly smaller 
than a D-model. I had to get used to the slightly wider neck, but now, this 
is no problem - you get used to the new feeling. The sound is very balanced 
and surprisingly full for this size body. Excellent for both finger- and 
flatpicking. Another advantage: the OM body size is very comfortable for 
people like me who are not 6 feet tall... D-models always feel a bit too 
big...  Never even seen an OM-28 though - maybe an old Martin OM-28 would 
even be nicer than a new OM-45...?

Felix.

    I checked out an acoustic in a music store the other day,around about
    the size of the OM Martins...it was made by Hohner,and was designed by
    George Gruhn.I loved the sound of it,less bassy than D-size guitars,
    and loud and clear on the treble side.
    	14 fret neck,and very tasteful looking,but narrower string width
    than the previous replies indicate.
    	Only about $500,I would have gone for it if I hadn't just bought
    a new mandolin !
    
    			Jim.