Official Luthiers Forum!

Post of the year, so far.

In my experience when I go to 7/64" many players will find the high E too close to the edge. At 3/32" or less as you suggest, most players will. What is so great about having more room between the strings but less room at the outside, or about having steeper fret ends? If a player asks for it, she can have it; most don't like it.

When you find yourself alone in thinking something is significant, you may be the lone person who has it figured out correctly, but you have good reason to think again.

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

When all else fails, clean the shop.

Howard, would it not be reasonable to assume that when you go to 7/64" or less, the reason why your clients don't like it is because you are using a conventional 30 degree bevel on the fret ends ? This would of course increase the likelihood of string slippage off of the fret ends.

But maybe, just maybe, if it were possible to gain the extra few thou which Ed is talking about and still have the frets feeling good, and maybe, if the fretboard taper were to be increased slightly to allow for extra width further down the board, then there could be a bright new dawn in playability ?

As we say in Scotland, "the proof of the pudding is the preeing o't" so as I was intending to refret one of my guitars next week anyway, I will incorporate a new nut, Ed Haney style, do the frets in semi-hemispherical fashion, and see what the end result plays like.


btw, .....Ouch ....

I would like to point out that when viewed from the top (instead of profile view), it is indeed semi/hemi spherical Just saying...

Uuhh, not really.

When viewed from the top, the fret end can be described as semicircular, but definitely not semi/hemi spherical ...

Howard,

Your experience is different than mine. The factory maker, Taylor, makes about 40,000 or 50,000 guitars per year and they use 3/32" (.094") spacing from center of high e string to the edge of the nut. I would expect their owners to be complaining on the Internet if most players found this too close. I recognize that that does not negate your experience.

When fretting a note, especially bass notes, if one looks at the clearance between the fretting finger and the adjacent string, very little space is left. If one adds 10, 12 or even 15 thousands to this clearance space the percentage increase is significant, allowing for a reduction of muted sting mistakes, especially for large-fingered people. This is what is so great to me. I get this without having to increase my nut width. Some players like the feel of a 1 3/4" nut but do not like 1 13/16". I can get a 1 13/16" string spacing on a 1 3/4" nut if wanted.

I am not trying to sell you. Folks that are happy with 1/8" or more edge space and think that is needed by most players is fine.

Ed

Just wanted to point out that while 40,000-50,000 guitars a year is a lot to put out without much complaint of strings sliding off the edge of the fret, Taylor is well over the 100,000 per year mark at this point. I think Bob Taylor said that they average a guitar every 23 minutes of production time. Insane.

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

Seeing as there is no official word for a quarter of a sphere, the terms "quarter sphere" and "semi sphere" have been used in the past to describe it. A semicircle is 2 dimensional, but the end of a fret is definitely 3 dimensional.

You are correct, need to differentiate plane and solid geometry. So it should be "quarter sphere" or "semi sphere".

Hemi, demi, semi, sheminy, jiminy.
Does somebody not understand what we are looking at, or is this not just argueing semantics? (uh-oh, I do hope I have used the correct word!!)
Perhaps we should start a new Nit-Pickin' section in the forum, no? to include Parabolic bracing, compound radius fret boards, tantallones etc..
Is it constructive to agrue definitions or the correct usage of descriptive terms, as long as what we are talking about is understood or commonly used, even if not actually perfect?
Or am I missing something? Maybe just not so clever I suppose.
in advance!

_________________
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.

Right, back to the topic. It seems more aesthetics than anything else.

Is it just me, or am I the only one more interested in whether these fret ends represent something that players will prefer over what we call them? The precise geometric vocabulary seems to have taken priority over what we should be discussing. How about a compromise...they're rounded...not tapered...let's move on!

I've concluded, based on a relatively small sampling, that most players prefer the tapered. I believe that Howard came to a similar conclusion with probably a larger player population. I'm not planning to force or convince potential clients that rounded are better but only show that I am capable of doing same should they be interested.

On the topic of the distance of the edge of the FB to the E and e strings...about half of my player sampling likes the 1/8" distance and half prefer something slightly shorter.

So what is the experience of others? Has anyone actually convinced players that rounded are better...how did you sell the benefits? Did they go through a learning curve...and how long did it take until they became enamored with the new style?

Then we'll have some real useful info IMO!

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

Good discussion. I have been a member of the slavish 1/8" crowd and, to be honest, just hadn't given it any thought. Thanks to Ed for bringing it up. Another good detail to consider.

As far as the semi-hemispherical ends go, I have recently started to not fully round off the ends but leave part of it flat. It still looks and feels good after polishing but leaves a few more thou of the full fret available. Looks like I was already headed in the right direction.

_________________
Steve Smith
"Music is what feelings sound like"

I spent a lot of time setting up the cnc to address as much of the shaping of the frets as possible. Fret slots are cut with a cnc using a .023” end mill. They are all cut to an exact length to create a faux bound fretboard.

viewtopic.php?f=10106&t=26579

This pictures a holding fixture that is used in lieu of a fret nipper to do two things: 1. Create a very flat "nipped" surface of each fret, 2. Create a fret tang that is the exact length required for each fret slot…not to help the frets line up but rather, to maximize the amount of slot/tang area for an optimized grab

I made another similar fixture that holds the nipped frets upside down and facilitates the machining of the fret ends as well as establishing the exact length of each fret after bending to a 10” radius. This may seem very elaborate but the upside is that any shape can be programmed for the fret end….and I’ve tried many. I can shape the base of each fret end to have small rounded corners which would be very difficult to achieve another way. The downside is that when you pre-shape the fret wire, placement of each fret into the fretboard becomes critical. It is quite difficult to line them up such that looking down the fretboard doesn’t reveal even subtle imperfections in the line up. I made an edge tool that helps align the frets as they are installed. This got me 99% of the way there but using the tool requires some craftsmanship. I prefer to endow my tooling with craftsmanship so as to eliminate the need for it in my hands. This idea will need some revision but I can see it will work with more effort.

If one can place frets perfectly and avoid any serious sanding of the edge of the fretboard after the frets are installed, then the upside is that the fret ends can have any shape, be perfectly consistent from fret to fret, and can be fully polished prior to installation. On my last guitar I had to sand a little on the fretboard edge and that forced a little reshaping of a few fret ends. Not too bad as a concept but it can be improved.

Having done many shapes I can say that I don’t like playing a semi-spherical shape as well as a typical 30 degree bevel. With semi-spherical ends there is a pervasive "nub" feel as the hand slides past which drives me to distraction. I settled on a shape that starts with the 30 degree bevel and shaped it to have a little more edge rounding than the illustration Todd published. I play a lot of lead and like this shape best. As far as bending the string off the fret end and expecting the shape to have a profound effect on how that goes, I would respectfully suggest bending the string in the other direction.

_________________
I read Emerson on the can. A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...true...but a consistent reading of Emerson has its uses nevertheless.

StuMusic

I am using 1/8" from the edge of the string to the edge of the neck, not centre to centre, which means the low E string is a bit more offset. And yes I have given it some thought and settled on what feels right as my standard set-up. I have been requested to use as much as .140", and as little as .100" clearance, some players really know what they want.
Traditionally the fretboard flares out a bit more than the strings path, the 12th or 14th fret (depending on the body style) should be the same width as the bridge string spacing. Again, some (rare) players require more space there, as it is much easier to fret out in the middle of the strings' length where tension is the lowest.
I think those preferences are technique dependent. For example, some players like to use the left hand thumb to fret bass notes Jimi style (I do) and with too little clearance it is easy to fret out on the low E string, especially with light strings. A player who uses a lot of pull-offs will find it easy to fret out as well with too little clearance on the outer strings.
Finally I bevel the edges of the fretboard very slightly, following the fret bevel, so semi-hemispherical frets are a non starter for me. Same reason: if you play with the left hand thumb a lot, a sharp fretboard edge is extremely annoying.

_________________
Laurent Brondel
West Paris, Maine - USA
http://www.laurentbrondel.com/

It would appear to me to be totally feasible to install semi-hemispherical frets and subsequently bevel the edge of the fretboard in between the frets.

Time-consuming, perhaps, but eminently do-able.

Do-able, sure. But too much real estate would be lost I would think: the semi-hesmispherical frets have to stop .010" to .020" before the edge, itself losing perhaps .020". Whereas with bevelled frets, the bevel follows the bevelled edge.

_________________
Laurent Brondel
West Paris, Maine - USA
http://www.laurentbrondel.com/

Wow, what an interesting discussion this has turned into.

Hey, just wanted to let those who are interested know that I posted a tutorial in the tutorial section on my way of making rounded (semi-hemispherical) fret ends.

I think I'll ask the question of beveled fret end or rounded fret end on the Acoustic guitar forum to see what the players 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

Good idea, Rod. I'm actually surprised at the lack of experience or feedback with rounded fret ends here from the builder section. Could it be that this feature is a solution to a non-existent problem?

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

Right-on Rodney! Now that's a nice straight forward approach I can appreciate!

I will try this method for sure!

I love the look of these rounded fret ends. As far as having less than 1/8th goes, I don't know. Maybe for others, it's a non-issue, but for me, I like having that extra real estate less my vibrato-folly gets the best of me. On my last guitar, I bevelled and rounded the corners, as Filippo mentioned and I love the feel. My fret boards are slightly bevelled as well. I think I went the standard 5/32 for big E spacing to the Edge and I have a large string spacing (the nut being 1'' 27/32) and I have no problembs wrapping my thumb around to grab some notes on the A string...

_________________
I'd like to be able to prove, just for once, that money wouldn't make me happy...

In fact, string setback further up the neck is much more important to most players than at the nut. Certainly, many factories use a 12-fret fingerboard width that is equal to their string spacing at the saddle, but generally I think this is excessive for most players (someone called it "idiot proof"). You need more setback up the neck, but most don't require that much more. It was one of the first specs I changed on my own guitars, because I don't like the excessive setback on the necks of my Martins.

The different taper rates defined by different nut and saddle string spacing ratios mean that there are no good rules-of-thumb for fretboard taper -- it needs to be reverse calculated given the player's preferred setback up the neck. The calculator for fretboard taper and string setback that I just posted here http://www.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=30835 was spawned by attempts to reduce the normally excessive setback in a calculated way and is helping me design fret board specs for players' requirements.

Real estate, B.S., shape em so it feels good.

Remember...
"if the feelin ain't right, sooner or latter it'll drive you crazy"
~ Crosby Stills Nash and Young


Real estate.. my ask.


blessings
Padma

_________________
.

Audiences and dispensations on Thursdays ~ by appointment only.


.

Here are my deep-seated thoughts on this, as a player...

I prefer as vertical a fret-end as possible, and a semi-hemi treatment can be a great way to do this.

I am *very* concerned with wanting all the distance I can get between the E strings and the edges of the fingerboard...more so on the high E...although I like good space on both. Addressing this with the fret edge finish is a good start. Most fret-edges do lose too much for me with anything but a very vertical (or semi-hemi) finish.

...but this is only the beginning of the conversation with me...

Rather than give you the "inset" numbers I like, however, I prefer to just give full set-up...because it also involves the overall width of the fingerboard/neck at the 12th fret.

Lay these numbers out, and I think you'll be surprised:

1) Overall nut width = 1-13/16"
2) E-to-E nut spacing, center to center = 1-1/2"
3) Bridge spacing = 2-1/4"
4) Overall width of 'board @ 12th fret = 2-5/16"


The biggest surprise may be the 12th fret width, especially vs. the bridge spacing...I like a wiiiide number there, and I have never seen any builder use a 12th fret width wider than the bridge spacing...but that's exactly what I want.

The other surprise is that the nut-spacing is about middle of the road for a narrower 1-3/4" nut. Well, these are the numbers I like, and they give a certain symmetry to the strings in relation to the edges of the fingerboard...all up and down the board.

Place the bridge (and the nut) so that the E-string centers are equidistant to the edges of the fingerboard, and with the above numbers you've got my "inset"...and that inset will get even a little deeper as one goes up the neck.

So that's one crazy-man's perspective on this....hard-won information that *I* think makes a guitar more playable (and it does, at least for me!)...greater possibilities in attacking the high E string, side-to-side vibrato, just a more comfortable overall feel....again, IMO.

I believe that the overall 12th fret width should be, at the very least, the equal of the bridge spacing. Some guitars are built this way, but not a lot of them.

...and if a few builders would take the chance on my wild concept that a wider-than-bridge-spacing overall-12th-fret-width is not only possible but *desirable,* well, then more players would get a chance to try this configuration. I predict that many, many players would love the way this feels.

Okay, hope this gives folks something to think about...

_________________
LP

LarryPattis.com
AmericanGuitarMasters.com

I did exactly this on #2 and it's a dream to play.

I do the same thing Filippo describes. My fret edge file is angled at 15 degrees, so a bit steeper initial angle than Filippo's. To make filing the rounded fret end easier & prevent scratches in the fingerboard, I filed about .040" off the edges of the SM diamond fret file & smoothed the filed surfaces out to a nice finish.
Now I can file a nicely rounded end without leaving any marks in the fingerboard... While minimizing the lost real estate issue.
As Larry Pattis mentions, the edge distance at the nut is not as important as it is further up the neck.