Archtop Set Up

[bborzell]

This thread started out questioning the notion (and cost of) a perfect setup. Where it got a bit off track, in my view, was the acceptance of the premise that repairs of components should reasonably be included in the commonly understood concept of "setup".

Any guitar that needs parts refinished or replaced is being repaired. If the cost to address the fret problems is added to a typical setup charge, then +/- $200 is not at all unreasonable. That same charge for work that involves adjusting and tweaking existing components would be excessive, in my view.

[cjm]

... and you've still got...your guitar skills.

Oh, way to rub it in. Here I am, enjoyin' the hell out of things and you bring up something ugly like that.

Now, I'm depressed.

[cjm]

This thread started out questioning the notion (and cost of) a perfect setup. Where it got a bit off track, in my view, was the acceptance of the premise that repairs of components should reasonably be included in the commonly understood concept of "setup".

Any guitar that needs parts refinished or replaced is being repaired. If the cost to address the fret problems is added to a typical setup charge, then +/- $200 is not at all unreasonable. That same charge for work that involves adjusting and tweaking existing components would be excessive, in my view.

Well, no...actually it started because the tech said a "perfect" setup could not be done without repair...the OP thought the guitar was pretty good after an "imperfect" setup...and questioned whether other people have "overhauls" done to permit a "perfect" setup..."perfect" being in the opinion of the luthier performing the setup and offering to perform an "overhaul."

[bborzell]

Well, no...actually it started because the tech said a "perfect" setup could not be done without repair...the OP thought the guitar was pretty good after an "imperfect" setup...and questioned whether other people have "overhauls" done to permit a "perfect" setup..."perfect" being in the opinion of the luthier performing the setup and offering to perform an "overhaul."

That kinda makes my point. A setup is a setup. Repair is repair. Adding repair to a setup is not creating a new class of work to be called "perfect setup". It's simply pointing that the guitar needs to be repaired in order to be setup.

[Patrick2]

This thread started out questioning the notion (and cost of) a perfect setup. Where it got a bit off track, in my view, was the acceptance of the premise that repairs of components should reasonably be included in the commonly understood concept of "setup".

Any guitar that needs parts refinished or replaced is being repaired. If the cost to address the fret problems is added to a typical setup charge, then +/- $200 is not at all unreasonable. That same charge for work that involves adjusting and tweaking existing components would be excessive, in my view.

I guess I didn't see anywhere in the thread where anyone expected repairs to be included in the typical cost of a set up as performend by a competent and respected luthier. Typical set ups usually run somewhere between $50 and $100, depending upon where you are and the tech you use. None of can accurately know what this tech Audric saw as needing his attention, so none of us can say for certain that the tech is running the tab up on the OP just to make more money. If fact, I was surprised to see the OP post that concern/statement.

I believe that it is the responsibility of any tech worth his salt to point out any issues or areas of concern that he might find on the guitar, prior to doing any work at all. I'm a little concerned that this highly regarded tech would even do the set up with loose and/or uneven frets.

I guess I'm of the opinion that there is correct . . . and there is incorrect. Loose and/or un level irregular frets is incorrect and needs to be corrected. Now, with that being said . . there is also acceptable and unacceptable . . and those conditions will vary from player to player. To some, the current condition of the guitar in question would be acceptable. To me. . . . not.

[cjm]

That kinda makes my point. A setup is a setup. Repair is repair. Adding repair to a setup is not creating a new class of work to be called "perfect setup". It's simply pointing that the guitar needs to be repaired in order to be setup.

The point I am making is that Freddie Green, for example, would not have benefited from repairs necessary "in order to be setup" if those repairs involved leveling frets to the nth degree with a plek machine...whereas Jim Hall might well benefit from such precision. Frets that would not premit setting action below 1/8th of an inch might already be perfectly level to a Freddie Green style player, and worse than a quarter mile of bad road to some one like Jim Hall.

The definition of proper setup, and indeed, the determination of repairs necessary to perform a setup, needs to be the guitarist's definition and determination, not the tech's.

[bborzell]

I guess I didn't see anywhere in the thread where anyone expected repairs to be included in the typical cost of a set up as performend by a competent and respected luthier. Typical set ups usually run somewhere between $50 and $100, depending upon where you are and the tech you use. None of can accurately know what this tech Audric saw as needing his attention, so none of us can say for certain that the tech is running the tab up on the OP just to make more money. If fact, I was surprised to see the OP post that concern/statement.

I believe that it is the responsibility of any tech worth his salt to point out any issues or areas of concern that he might find on the guitar, prior to doing any work at all. I'm a little concerned that this highly regarded tech would even do the set up with loose and/or uneven frets.

I guess I'm of the opinion that there is correct . . . and there is incorrect. Loose and/or un level irregular frets is incorrect and needs to be corrected. Now, with that being said . . there is also acceptable and unacceptable . . and those conditions will vary from player to player. To some, the current condition of the guitar in question would be acceptable. To me. . . . not.

It seems to me that the driver of the discussion is the definition of setup. The OP suggests that his tech says that he needed repairs in order to have a perfect setup. Mixing the concepts is what complicates things, in my view.

I think the opening post established the possibility that a complete (or perfect) setup might include repairs. My only point is that the two activities are generally considered separate. That is why techs typically post defined prices for setups; because they have a prescribed set of things to do that they can articulate upfront. Anything needed beyond that which is understood to be done for the price of a setup becomes a repair.

It's the notion of a "perfect" setup that confuses the terms and is misleading, I believe.

[Patrick2]

I'm pretty much in agreement with both cjm and bborzell . . (by the way, I served with a fellow USMC Recon named Wayne Borzell from Erie, PA) However, here's where I go in a slightly different direction; I believe that a guitar must first be brought to a certain level of "correctness" . . then adjusted to the player's preference. If frets are not as level as they can be . . then that needs to be corrected. If frets are loose, even if in the 19th position on the 6th string and will never be played . . . then that needs to be corrected. If Freddy Green type players want the action to be 1/2" off of the fret board, then give it to them . . . after the guitar is brought to correctness. If Jim Hall type players want the action to be 2/64" from the fret board . . . then who cares. They're just going to be playing 1 or 2 note every other bar anyway

bborzell . . . I agree that a set up is a set up and repairs shouldn't be included in the price.

Sometimes, the financial constraints causes a player to tell his tech . . . "just get it to where I can get through a gig with it." I understand that too. That's why it's so important to find a good tech and develope a strong relationship with him. Most techs, in that situation will fix the damn thing anyway and tell the player . . . "see me when ya got it".

[morroben]

Stricktly speaking, you are of course right.

The problem is that many guitar technicians have the idea of one and only "perfect setup" and applies that to every guitar passing through their hands. A couple of years ago, I brought an acoustic archtop which I use for rhythm playing and thus have set up with high action and a bit of relief, to a repair shop for a tuner replacement. The technician was a nice guy. He apparently found my preferred setup all wrong and - free of charge and without asking - lowered the action to about 1½ mm and straghtened the neck completely. He proudly handed the guitar over to me with the words "now it plays with no effort". I had to explain very politely to him (after all he did it with the best of intentions) about the needs for the kind of playing I was doing with that guitar, why his "perfect setup" didn't work for that, and that big sound and dynamic range was my first priority, not comfort. I must admit, though, that big band rhythm guitar style is very much an anacronism, and even good repair men may not get across a guitar set up job for that more than a few times in his professional life, so they should be excused. That leaves a responsability with us, the players, to tell the technician beforehand exacly what we like and want and why.

Well, bringing the guitar back to my preferred setup when I got it home was not a big job. But I think this case illustrates why people may say that there are no "perfect setup" - understood as the one and only perfect way of setting up all guitars for all purposes.

If the issue at hand is that every setup your tech does is exactly the same, then you need to find a new tech. Any setup I do for an experienced player involves discussing their needs and preferences. Obviously, if a beginner just bought a guitar off craigslist and wants it setup, I'll probably need to make that more of a generic setup. The beginning player will not yet know their personal preferences. But for an experienced player, I always discuss things before I start my work. The other folks at the shop know to take a phone number if I'm not around when the guitar is dropped off so that I can call and talk to the player about what their needs are.
Your point about techs not handling jazz guitar setups often is probably a valid one in many areas. Around here, in addition to several seasoned jazz players, we have a university and a community college with jazz programs, so it's not that uncommon to deal with those setup needs.

[bborzell]

I'm pretty much in agreement with both cjm and bborzell . . (by the way, I served with a fellow USMC Recon named Wayne Borzell from Erie, PA) However, here's where I go in a slightly different direction; I believe that a guitar must first be brought to a certain level of "correctness" . . then adjusted to the player's preference. If frets are not as level as they can be . . then that needs to be corrected. If frets are loose, even if they are on in the 19th on the 6th string and will never be played . . . then that needs to be corrected. If Freddy Green type players want the action to be 1/2" off of the fret board, then give it to them . . . after the guitar is brought to correctness. If Jim Hall type players want the action to be 2/64" from the fret board . . . then who cares. They're just going to be playing 1 or 2 note every other bar anyway

bborzell . . . I agree that a set up is a set up and repairs shouldn't be included in the price.

Sometimes, the financial constraints causes a player to tell his tech . . . "just get it to where I can get through a gig with it." I understand that too. That's why it's so important to find a good tech and develope a strong relationship with him. Most techs, in that situation will fix the damn thing anyway and tell the player . . . "see me when ya got it".

+1

My ID is a combination of the 1st letter of my first name an the 1st 7 letters of my last name. I wonder if Wayne's family passed through Ellis Island and got their last name "Americanized" by one of the immigration clerks?

I know that my mother had that happen to her. They changed the spelling for her but left her mother's spelling intact.

[bluewaterpig]

Again, as I said before, a tech (mine in this case) is using the term perfect setup as meaning that he's able to adjust the action as high or as low as I want without running into any fret problems. That is having the ability to perform the perfect setup, the actual "perfect" part comes from matching the players request.

I asked for him to set my guitar up with the action as low as possible because that's how I like it.


And for whoever said that most guitar techs are not skilled players, that is absolutely not the general case.

[cjm]

I asked for him to set my guitar up with the action as low as possible because that's how I like it.

That wasn't mentioned earlier, and it changes things a bit. That's not something implicit in a discussion of setup because a lot of jazz players avoid low action height as something not desirable. Some do, some don't, but if you asked for the lowest possible action and your tech told you fret work was required to get it lower, then what possible point was there to your original question posted here?

And for whoever said that most guitar techs are not skilled players, that is absolutely not the general case.

I said it, and after you've lived a bit longer and met more guitar techs perhaps we can revisit the idea that most guitar techs are great players.

[bluewaterpig]

CJM, I would definitely think that most jazz players prefer lower action because they tend to play quick runs.

My original question was do people tend to go all the way with their setups and get total overhauls. I never understand why people ask "what's the point to your question". If you don't understand my question, don't post in this thread and save your time.

And I never said anything about techs being great players, you did.

[Kuz]

Personally, I feel life is too short to play a guitar that is not set up to it's ultimate performance (be it tone or playability). Just knowing me, it would also be in the back of my mind..... "well, this guitar could even play better....."

[cjm]

CJM, I would definitely think that most jazz players prefer lower action because they tend to play quick runs.

You might think that, but you would be wrong. A low action definitely assists in gliss picking, but that's not what most single note soloing is about.

Some jazzers like a low action, but some of the players with the greatest speed and cleanest articulation prefer actions set quite a bit higher. The higher action and heavier strings than rockers use give them "bounce" and is an aid to speed.

And I never said anything about techs being great players, you did.

No you said, "skilled." Some are, most aren't.

[bluewaterpig]

Exactly, you're saying "some" like it high. Some jazz players probably like their action extremely high, I'm sure they're out there. I'm talking about most. Most jazz guitarists prefer low action.

And I think it's an extremely bold claim for you to say that most guitar technicians aren't skilled players.

[cjm]

Exactly, you're saying "some" like it high. Some jazz players probably like their action extremely high, I'm sure they're out there. I'm talking about most. Most jazz guitarists prefer low action.

And I think it's an extremely bold claim for you to say that most guitar technicians aren't skilled players.

[gcb]

That leaves a responsability with us, the players, to tell the technician
beforehand exacly what we like and want and why.

I second this.

In my case, I have a preferred string height at the nut, based on a preferred fret height, etc.

The same experience that Oldane had, happened to me:years ago I brought a new ES165 for setup. the tech straightened the neck and rectified fret height to impress me with the low action he achieved. Frets ended being too low to my taste to a point of no return without refretting. I finally sold that guitar.

Today I do my own setups except for few valuable guitars I have. When I turn them to the tech I am very specific on what I want in terms of fret height, individual string height at the nut, at twelve fret, and relief.

I regard setup as a cooperative undertaking between player and tech.

.

[gcb]

That leaves a responsability with us, the players, to tell the technician
beforehand exacly what we like and want and why.

I second this.


Years ago I brought a new ES165 for setup. The tech straightened the neck and rectified fret height expecting to impress me with the low action he achieved. Frets ended being too low to my taste to a point of no return without refretting. I finally sold that guitar.

Today I do my own setups except for few valuable guitars I have. When I turn them to the tech I am very specific on what I want in terms of fret height, individual string height at the nut, at twelve fret, and relief.

I regard setup as a cooperative undertaking between player and tech.

.

[Gramps]

Morroben,
You stated, "The "no such thing as a perfect setup" comes up every once in a while. I always find it annoying. It's kind of a safe argument, I suppose. A human made the guitar, I'm a human doing a setup, and a human is going to play it. Humans aren't perfect, and we have humans at every step of the process. So yeah, nothing's perfect. And it's also true that the "perfect" setup is different for everyone."

Just for the record only the last sentance of your statement has anything to do with my comment that there is no perfect setup. Sorry to irritate you but get over it.

I've known great players who have super high action (that would cripple me) but that is what they like and it works for them. I also know great players who insist that the action is as low as possable without buzzing and that is what works for them. So, you tell me, which of these players setups are "perfect"?

Now lets look at if from a manufacturer's point of view. Assuming that the frets are level, properly crowned and polished, what is the perfect setup. Do they set their setup specs for the player who wants higher action or lower action? There is no perfect setup.

[morroben]

Just for the record only the last sentence of your statement has anything to do with my comment that there is no perfect setup. Sorry to irritate you but get over it.

I've known great players who have super high action (that would cripple me) but that is what they like and it works for them. I also know great players who insist that the action is as low as possible without buzzing and that is what works for them. So, you tell me, which of these players setups are "perfect"?

Now lets look at if from a manufacturer's point of view. Assuming that the frets are level, properly crowned and polished, what is the perfect setup. Do they set their setup specs for the player who wants higher action or lower action? There is no perfect setup.

First off, try to avoid telling people to "get over it". I don't come to this forum for people to be rude to me.
Secondly, you weren't the first or only person to mention the "no perfect setup" theory. As I said, that comment comes up often. I was responding to the idea in general.
Your post earlier, as well as this one, indicate that you feel a good setup varies from player to player...how is this different than what I said?

If the issue at hand is that every setup your tech does is exactly the same, then you need to find a new tech. Any setup I do for an experienced player involves discussing their needs and preferences. Obviously, if a beginner just bought a guitar off craigslist and wants it setup, I'll probably need to make that more of a generic setup. The beginning player will not yet know their personal preferences. But for an experienced player, I always discuss things before I start my work. The other folks at the shop know to take a phone number if I'm not around when the guitar is dropped off so that I can call and talk to the player about what their needs are.

Now to answer your questions...

I've known great players who have super high action (that would cripple me) but that is what they like and it works for them. I also know great players who insist that the action is as low as possible without buzzing and that is what works for them. So, you tell me, which of these players setups are "perfect"?

Both...had you read my posts before telling me to "get over it", you would notice that I already addressed this.

Now lets look at if from a manufacturer's point of view. Assuming that the frets are level, properly crowned and polished, what is the perfect setup. Do they set their setup specs for the player who wants higher action or lower action?

Much of my early experience was in a factory. We set up those guitars to be fairly average players that most people will be comfortable with, even though there are no specifics for a certain players' preference. This is certainly not a perfect setup, since we don't know who's playing the guitar, and can't ask them the necessary questions before beginning work.

[Gramps]

You're the one who stated "the "no such thing as a perfect setup" comes up every once in a while. I always find it annoying."

If my accurate statement annoyes you, you have to get over it. I'm not being rude but I am standing up to you stating that my comment was annoying. (those were your words)

I stand by my original statment about no one perfect setup and in the last paragraph of your last post you agreed.

[morroben]

You're the one who stated "the "no such thing as a perfect setup" comes up every once in a while. I always find it annoying."

If my accurate statement annoyes you, you have to get over it. I'm not being rude but I am standing up to you stating that my comment was annoying. (those were your words)

I stand by my original statment about no one perfect setup and in the last paragraph of your last post you agreed.

I'm not going to get into a pissing match with someone who can't read. There is a perfect setup for every player/guitar combination. Once I discuss the player's needs and preferences, I can give them a "perfect setup"...at least as perfect as a fallible human can perform. Feel free to bring one of your guitars by my shop, we can discuss your needs, and I'll be happy to give your guitar a perfect setup. On the house.

[Kojo27]

Check this out: I have a 1969 Ibanez Concord dreadnought - one of those "lawsuit" copies of a Gibson Dove. Pure plywood, but one of the best-playing guitars, and one with tons of sentimental value.

I'd always used 12s on it, but one day decided to go to light tops, medium bottoms. 12-56, or "Bluegrass" gauge. This tad of extra tension warped the neck!

I sent it to a famous Kentucky luthier/shop owner/tech to the stars -- and he said the neck was weak, dried out, that the slightly heavier strings had pulled the bridge up, had brought the top up with it, and it needed a new saddle and nut. And a fret job, and some planing to the neck to fix a slight hump. The special frets would strengthen the neck, he said, but I'd still have to stick to 12-52, because "these cheap old imports won't handle anything heavier than that."

(Bull crap - we had a Yamaha FG-335 we used to keep heavy gauge on, 14-58, and it's still fine)

But the cost, for fixing that Ibanez my dad paid $125 in 1969? $840. But the guy promised it would play "super."

It hasn't been played since.

[Patrick2]

Check this out: I have a 1969 Ibanez Concord dreadnought - one of those "lawsuit" copies of a Gibson Dove. Pure plywood, but one of the best-playing guitars, and one with tons of sentimental value.

I'd always used 12s on it, but one day decided to go to light tops, medium bottoms. 12-56, or "Bluegrass" gauge. This tad of extra tension warped the neck!

I sent it to a famous Kentucky luthier/shop owner/tech to the stars -- and he said the neck was weak, dried out, that the slightly heavier strings had pulled the bridge up, had brought the top up with it, and it needed a new saddle and nut. And a fret job, and some planing to the neck to fix a slight hump. The special frets would strengthen the neck, he said, but I'd still have to stick to 12-52, because "these cheap old imports won't handle anything heavier than that."

(Bull crap - we had a Yamaha FG-335 we used to keep heavy gauge on, 14-58, and it's still fine)

But the cost, for fixing that Ibanez my dad paid $125 in 1969? $840. But the guy promised it would play "super."

It hasn't been played since.

So, Kojo27 . . . your post is not clear (to me) as to whether the $840 was an invoice amount you paid . . . or a quote you walked away from. "It hasn't been played since" is also confusing. Was it not played since, because you chose to not have the work done? Or was the work done poorly?