Official Luthiers Forum!

I posted in the tutorial section my way of doing Semi-Hemi fret ends. Check it out, let me know what you think.

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

Did you bind the end of the board? I was wondering if anyone cuts frets with CNC, and how well that works. I get nervous when I see that much wood needing to be removed with that small a bit.

Good tutorial. I did my first frets that way with a flat file. I didn't have the fancy fret file at the time. A couple of bevels at the fret ends, and a quick pull over with some carbide paper, and it looked pretty good. I just held it in a Pony vise.

There is a tutorial in AL, but it's basically what you are doing anyway.

Nice Rod!

That looks a little safer than doing it with the frets installed. I just started #6 and I'm doing a bound board for the first time. I'll give you're method a try. The only thing I would add is to give the ends a touch with a little Dremel buffing wheel......... if you like shiny.

Thanks, Danny

Or hit the whole fretboard on the buffer Now that's shiny

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

No, I didn't bind the end of the board, just the sides.

Do you mean cutting fretslots with CNC? I'm not sure what you're talking about here

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

Yes he does, but I didn't think it worth the $25 entrance fee....others will though and that's just fine.

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

On this topic, I was reading Somogyi's book recently and he mentioned he thought even unbound fretboards should have the semi-hemispherical treatment done instead of sanding a bevel on the ends of the frets. His thought was that the bevel makes it much easier to pull the outside strings off the end of the frets. I've played one guitar where this has been an issue and it's a USA made Hammer P90 Gold Top that I own. I've never seen this be an issue on an acoustic. Seems this is more a function of how of how far the outside strings are from the edge of the fingerboard and the angle of the bevel.......but not beveling the fret ends would be an improvement, just not sure it's necessary. Thoughts?

_________________
Formerly known as Adaboy.......

As I mentioned in the tutorial re: Mr. Somogyi, he's very opinionated and that's great but not everyone has to agree with him.

Mind you, why the heck would anyone take the time to do the semi-hemi's without binding a fretboard. That would honestly look off in my book. Sort of like silk shoes with well worn jeans...

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

Really beautiful Rod.
I also like the rounded end of the fretboard.
I see you still have 2 different tuner colors on there.
Still can't decide?
Ha!

Thoughts? I've thought about the use of space on a fretboard in order to improve my playing. Extra space between the strings for my fingers resulted in fewer muted string mistakes. Yet there is a limit for increasing the fretboard nut width to get more space. Fretboard space is, IMHO, what is at stake here.

Most guitars are "idot proofed" (factories don't want any complaints) which is why I believe we seldom see problems with people rolling strings off the edges. What do I mean? Most guitars have more space than needed between the outside strings and the fretboard edges. Due to this excess space the space wasted by a beveled fret end is not a problem for rolling strings off the edge. This space is often 1/8" between the nut end and center of the outside string. Using a spacing of 0.1" or 0.095 works nicely for most players even with beveled frets. But when semi-himispherical fret ends are used this space can be further reduced (the string moved closer to the edge). I like the space saved by semi-hemispherical fret ends to be moved to between the strings on the interior of the fretboard where it is not wasted.

Thanks for that Rod, I just bought an offset diamond crowning file and a Stewmac fret tang nipper with the intention of trying that style of fret end for my next fretboard.
Cheers!

_________________
The name catgut is confusing. There are two explanations for the mix up.

Catgut is an abbreviation of the word cattle gut. Gut strings are made from sheep or goat intestines, in the past even from horse, mule or donkey intestines.

Otherwise it could be from the word kitgut or kitstring. Kit meant fiddle, not kitten.

Yes, Filippo. Please read my post above. The short answer is that I fully agree with Somogyi when the space saved by using Semi's instead of bevels is put back between the strings. There is no impact if you do not change the string spacing. I improved my playing by wringing all the space I could from the wasted edge space and putting it between the strings where it gave my fingers more room to avoid unwanted muted string mistakes. This could be an advantage for all players in my opinion.

The vast majority of guitars built in the world have "overkill" for space allotted on the fretboard edges. Even factory maker Taylor recongnied this and used 3/32" space (centerline of high E to nut edge) instead of the typical 4/32" used by many (including many custom builders). However, Taylor failed to do it on the bass E which could use the same treatment.

Reading this thread, (and the tutorial) it would be easy to come away with the impression that Sylvan Wells charges $25.00 just to read an article on semi-hemispherical fret ends, although I am sure Rod did not mean to create this impression intentionally.

The $25.00 is a one-time payment which allows access to all the premium articles on his site, there is a helluva lot more on there than just how to shape fret ends.

Nice tute Rod! I have done this with a similar approach...almost all of the players (6 of 7) I showed this to actually prefer the standard beveled frets. Nonetheless, the semi-hemis seem to look cooler in photographs.

_________________
JJ
Napa, CA
http://www.DonohueGuitars.com

does the semi-hemisphere really need to be the full radius of the fret ?

surely you could get more real estate by shaping it more like this (admittedly exaggerated) profile ...

I have to agree that I'm happy to have paid for access.

IMO the goal is good feel, not max real estate. I don't like the feel of the quarter-spherical fret ends (where did this "semi-hemi" thing come from?). Too steep. With the right fretboard width and good string placement at the nut and bridge, pulling the high E off the side isn't an issue, so if that's supposed to be the big advantage, it's a fix for something that ain't broke.

_________________
Howard Klepper
http://www.klepperguitars.com

When all else fails, clean the shop.

Thanks Howard, for both of the points you made. And, the same to Todd for the graphic.
To me, the quarter spherical ends look great, but don't look like they would improve playability.
Great marketing feature, though.
The thought of having to make each fret EXACTLY the right length & getting it placed in EXACTLY the right spot makes me shudder. I admire folks with the patience (and eyesight) to get this detail right.

No, I didn't mean anything by my comment. Other than to point out it can be found on Sylvan's site for a fee. I'm sure there is some good stuff over there, but I'm just a cheep SOB



For me, this is all about the look and feel. They really are smooth and just a nicer feel versus the beveled ends for the thumb. I'm glad Todd decided to give a visual on the "difference" in string platform, or really lack there of.

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

Having goals of both good feel and maximum real estate gets my vote. Minimizing the real estate for edge space and maximizing it for string spacing is a (good) goal that most builders (including factories) appear to ignore. If one throws more real estate on the edge than is needed few players will notice it IMHO. They will notice a poor feel if the fret ends are poorly done and I don't think anyone here is suggesting that. The suggestion is to accomplish both goals. This is regardless of the nut width. In other words, even big nut widths should have the edge space minimized, not "idiot proofed".

For many players, if the high E too close to the edge of the fretboard, or the frets rounded over with a too large radius, its going slide off the fret when they bend the string or do "sideways" vibratos. Its very annoying. For someone with a playing style that does not include these techniques, it might not be such a big problem.

_________________
Rian Gitar og Mandolin

Maybe rounded fret ends is easier to understand, and more accurate

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

A few notes:
- "if the high E is close to the edge of fretboard" - then a mistake has been made by the builder.

- Custom builders should know their customers (players) and take into consideration their specific customer's playing style to determine edge spacing needed. My guess is that this is seldom done. The factories solve this by "idiot proofing" the edge space so they get zero string-roll-off complaints by putting more space there than is needed not only for "many players", but more space than is needed for almost all players in this player's opinion. After all, the factories want zero complaints. Many factories use 1/8" from the center line of the string to the edge of the nut. This is more space than is needed for almost all players. It is an "idiot proofed" amount of space. Many custom builders carry on this same 1/8" tradition when it is a waste of real estate in this writers opinion.

- if 0.030" or 0.040" or so can be shaved off each edge (usually, but not always doable), then a total (2 edges totaled) of 0.60" to 0.80" can be put back between the strings. This is significant and will prevent some muted string mistakes or alternately allow a player to use a smaller nut width if he so desires. I seem to be alone in thinking that this is significant. Yet this space named above is often greater than the change from a 1 11/16" nut to a 1 3/4" nut which people do seen to get excited about.

This may have been discussed previously on the forum, but I have not seen it. If builders reading this are using 1/8" spacing from the string center line to the nut edge, I am wondering: 1. Have you thought this through? 2. Exactly why have you settled on this spacing number?

Ed

Ed,

As I am tooling up for my first build(s), I have thought about this a lot. I have decided that I can tweak the bevel angle a bit on the fret ends and also move the E & e out further, allowing me to get the string spacing of 1 3/4" Taylor neck with a 1 11/16" width at the nut. For my playing style and hand/finger size & shape, this would be ideal.

I may be a complete newbie, but at least you are not alone...

_________________
Finally escaped The Peoples' Republik of Massachusetts; I can smell the freedom in the air!

You're, of course, right Ed. I would think everyone around here takes this into account when planning a commissioned guitar.
Interestingly, most of the folks I have built custom guitars for wanted a wider than 1 3/4" neck.
This is one reason I have never made a drilling jig for bridge pins. The string spacing is a little different on most of my guitars.