Gibson ES-175 - First string slips out of the nut

[ptchristopher3]

Wow. This has gotten firey.

It all strikes me as civil and well-considered opinion. Agreeing on everything is no fun.

[Stringswinger]

Hi string,

To some, a deeply compromised string spacing due to the manufacturer actively making a mess of the guitar is not a solution.

To others it all works just fine.

Some play great on a 1 5/8 nut, others are cramped even on a 1 3/4 nut.

This case gets messy because it is designed as 1 11/16, but in practice needs to be setup like 1 5/8 by the time you accommodate the nibs, “rolled binding”, and ill-advised deeply rounded fret ends.

For some it is a real problem, for others not.

In my opinion, it is frustrating to some because an otherwise great guitar gets compromised through sloppiness.

Chris

Chris,

I am sure you are a fine luthier and this forum is lucky to have the benefit of your freely shared knowledge. And you are quite correct in stating that what is fine for some, is not OK for others.

But suggesting that the OP needs a new, nut, a refret and a rebind of the neck along with some paint work is akin to a guy bring a motorcycle in to a shop that runs poorly due to the carb being too rich and having the mechanic suggest a new carb and a valve job, instead of merely turning the mixture screw.

The solution for the OP is not sending the guitar back to the US and dealing with a major customs/tax hassle, nor is it sending the guitar to a luthier for a thousand Euros worth of work.

The solution is trying the Joe D. fix first. If that works (and it probably will), the OP can then get a new nut, or wait until a refret is called for and get a new nut then. If that does not solve the problem, a refret and binding/tinting job can be considered and CME can be asked for a partial refund to offset those costs.

This thread has become the proverbial mountain made out of a molehill.

[sgosnell]

The binding on the treble side of the fretboard looks rather wavy, too. That's about as bad as I've ever seen binding done. I might expect that on something that cost a couple of hundred dollars, but for what Gibson charges, even at the greatly reduced price from CME, it's just inexcusable.

[ptchristopher3]

Hi String,

I understand.

I do think it is nutty to do all that work on a new guitar. I think Rene asked about costs, presumably to illustrate how absurd it would be.

I think you are right that the OP should decide if they can live with about a 35 mm center-to-center spacing.

If the OP can not, the cans of worms get opened via shipping and BTW issues, or high costs to fix.

I do not think anyone is particularly lucky for any single person’s input, my own in this case is no special blessing to the forum - just my opinion. It is fun to kick it all around and explore the possibilities. Most often a player’s view and inputs seems far more useful than a technician mentioning the details.

I guess the only troubling input is the rare occasion of an ostensible pro presenting some bizarre tech view.

Anyway, onward and sideward.

Chris

[oldane]

The solution is trying the Joe D. fix first. .......

This thread has become the proverbial mountain made out of a molehill.

That depends on whether a narrower strring spacing is acceptable or not. We have all seen the frowning which have been sent in the direction of the narrow Gibson necks from the late 1960s so some obviously are not comfortable with such a narrow string spacing. Now, I think one could adapt to pretty much anything, but if you order a guitar with 1 11/16" nut width you don't expect it to arrive with a narrower string spacing, less needing it to have work done for it to have that unwanted narrower spacing. I ordered my last four guitars with 1.75" nut width for a reason - though I can play a Fender neck if necessary.

[vinnyv1k]

IMO as long as the trussrod works and the neck is straight a new nut will make it play perfect. Easy fix. You can try the baking soda trick but IMO the string needs to move a far amount that would cause unequal string spacing. A new nut is a fairy cheap repair and then let the sweet notes begin. Joe's off set nut slotting wasn't as severe. Remember it was my guitar at 1st. When I sent him the guitar the 1st thing I told him was to replace the nut. He chose a McGyver fix which worked fine for him. Me I would spend the $75 for a perfect Frank Ford bone nut. What works for you is what needs to be done. Good advice just helps with what is right for you.
It is not brain surgery just a badly notched nut.

[deacon Mark]

Make the best of the situation. If the frets have too much bevel, send it for new frets with a competent tech. I am sure CME will be happy to pick up the tab or partially pay for the re-fret.

There are some benefits to be had with a re-fret. 1) You can choose the fret wire and size that you like. 2) No nibs! 3) The es-175 will probably play much better.

I don't think a good re-fret hurts the resale. Sending it back is expensive for all involved. I don't know how much a re-fret costs where you are but it will certainly be lower than sending it back. Get a new nut at the same time.

It looks like a really nice ES-175 that you have got save the frets. This deal won't come around again. I would urge you not to allow initial disappointment get to you because the solution is there if you look for it.

What's the big deal about keeping a new guitar pristine for resale anyway? If you play it enough, it will require new frets in about a year or two. Re-fret it now to make it YOUR guitar.

You need new frets on your guitar in a year or 2 wow? You must play an amazing amount of time each day. Granted i have more than one guitar but my most played guitar is 25 years old and still has same original frets. I am generally not hard on guitars but it could explain why i am such hack player. I don’t play enough.

[Max405]

"A new nut is a fairy cheap repair and then let the sweet notes begin. Joe's off set nut slotting wasn't as severe. Remember it was my guitar at 1st. When I sent him the guitar the 1st thing I told him was to replace the nut. He chose a McGyver fix which worked fine for him. Me I would spend the $75 for a perfect Frank Ford bone nut. What works for you is what needs to be done. Good advice just helps with what is right for you.
It is not brain surgery just a badly notched nut.

Oh boy.. I'm never gonna live that one down.
So I guess I shouldn't mention the clothes pins and paper clips that I cobbled together to make a 3rd pickup on the guitar.. (I'm Kidding)

[vinnyv1k]

Oh boy.. I'm never gonna live that one down.
So I guess I shouldn't mention the clothes pins and paper clips that I cobbled together to make a 3rd pickup on the guitar.. (I'm Kidding)

Don't forget the tooth brush strapped to the tailpiece and the duct tape bro :-) V

[vinnyv1k]

Kidding aside a nut replacement does have some risk of chipping the neck lacquer. I am just lucky to have Frank Ford so it is is never a risk for me. A experienced luthier is a must for a perfect job.

[teeps]

Aren't the fret ends supposed to extend over the binding? As >Fig. 2 here< .
Why not take it up with the seller? Is it under warranty?

[rio]

Aren't the fret ends supposed to extend over the binding? As >Fig. 2 here< .
Why not take it up with the seller? Is it under warranty?

It looks like that is a “feature” that is on some Les Paul. And I quote “feature” because so many other guitar makers do this by default. Unless it has been refretted - they started binding nibs sometime in the 50s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[LtKojak]

When I see the incredibly sloppy job done, I just can't help it to think that those coming from CME are actually Chibsons.

Why? Well, just to name a detail, the nut cut and the fretwork are supposedly made by the Plek machine. And I can tell you for a fact that I have personally witnessed in many occasions, that that machine does NOT sloppy work in any circumstance.

I think people buying these guitars are getting ripped off big time here. I'll allow to anybody call me a cynic or even a conspiracy theorist all they want. Nevertheless, the collection of bad workmanship examples just in the past six months in this very forum alone, makes up for a ton of evidence to build a compelling case.

[bob77362]

The HP models are doing the extended frets, with no nibs. My 335 had a few nibs with large enough gaps that the high E would get affected with vibrato. Mask and filling with crazy glue fixed it.

[teeps]

It looks like that is a “feature” that is on some Les Paul. And I quote “feature” because so many other guitar makers do this by default. Unless it has been refretted - they started binding nibs sometime in the 50s.

Yes, but IMO there should be either fret overhang or nibs. To me the pictures indicate that the frets were cut too short.

[ptchristopher3]

Like some inexplicably revered Gibson features, the nibs are an artifact of manufacture.

Finishing a fret end is a little time consuming, and really worth doing well.

Far easier in manufacture to first fret the fingerboard, then apply a binding over the flush-cut fret ends.

The binding is applied at fret-top height, the scraped down between the frets.

This is far easier than the way it is otherwise done, with the fret installed after and over the binding. Then carefully beveled and VERY slightly relieved on the edges of the bevel.

The Gibson method has some noted downsides: grabby gaps, split binding when the neck and FB shrink in dry conditions, and disciples who want to preserve this expedient artifact during a re-fret.

But it gets worse,...

If the beveled/rounded end of the fret is contained to the nib, the upper edge of the nib becomes a sharp edge of very soft ABS plastic. This often makes for an eventual mess as strings and even fingers catch the edges and bend the upper part of the nib slightly away from the flush-cut fret end.

So the tapered ended of the fret needs to be extended inward to keep the top surface of the nib fairly square (and lower) where it meets the flush-cut fret. You end up with no clean 30 degree bevel (or other bevel angle depending on your luthier) but rather a deep tapering of the fret well inboard of the edge of the FB.

Despite all this, people don robes and chant to the mighty nibs.

(I swear this is the origin of the UK expression, “his nibs”.)

EDIT: Forgot to add the always advisable, “In my opinion”.

Chris

[John A.]

[QUOTE=ptchristopher3;837849]Like some inexplicably revered Gibson features, the nibs are an artifact of manufacture.

Finishing a fret end is a little time consuming, and really worth doing well.

Far easier in manufacture to first fret the fingerboard, then apply a binding over the flush-cut fret ends.

The binding is applied at fret-top height, the scraped down between the frets.

This is far easier than the way it is otherwise done, with the fret installed after and over the binding. Then carefully beveled and VERY slightly relieved on the edges of the bevel.
[QUOTE/]

Wait, it's cheaper to make a guitar with nibs than without? I don't know much about guitar manufacture, so it's not surprising that I didn't know that, but it seems counter-intuitive to me. I would have thought the extra time spent cutting away extra binding would be expensive, with a lot of potential for screwing it up and having to re-do it all.

John (call me nibless)

[ptchristopher3]

Hi John,

To niblessly fret a bound FB you need to cut each fret tang under the fret crown so that the tang ends short of the binding and the crown overhangs.

Then you press (or hammer if old school) each fret into a finished edge FB. That is a soft ABS plastic finished binding edge.

Now you cut each fret crown to length at the edges of the soft finished fragile binding.

Now you bevel the fret ends.

Now you relieve the sharp edges of the bevels.

This is visibly automated (well fixtured anyway) in most manufactured guitars. And noticeably hand-done (and incredibly well) in most small scale shop-built guitars.

************

The Gibson nib method is to install the frets on the unbound FB and end up with a flush cut fret even with the edge of the FB.

Binding is then applied, then scraped away to FB height between the frets. On many Gibsons you can see the artifacts of hand scraping. (I looked at a Richlite FB and noticed no scraping artifacts at all, so they may have a better method that is now used.)

Now the soft and easily shaped nibs are finished along with the unfortunate habit of extending a tapered end of each fret well inboard. You NEVER want to taper the ends of frets inboard of the bevel, yet there it is on endless Gibsons.

This workflow at Gibson is older than I am and I have no idea about the economic aspects, at the time of the decision, to go to this unusual, but seemingly far more streamlined, method.

I also have no inside info if Gibson could now do a nibless fret at similar or lower cost.

But an analysis of the steps involved (in my opinion) is that yes it is easier to make a nibbed bound FB in a production environment.

And for a new build by hand, it would certainly be faster and easier to make a nibbed bound FB.

I am pretty fast at fret end finishing, but it still seems to take quite a bit of time.

In short answer to your question: In my opinion it is far faster and easier to scrape ABS binding flush with an FB between frets than to undercut fret tangs and do the extra finish work on the ends required over binding.

Chris

[ptchristopher3]

It is entirely possible that Gibson now carries on the nibs as part of the brand identity and not as an intentional way to deliver an inferior product more cheaply.

They may very well characterize it as a superior product delivered at the unique cost of an unusual workflow.

I would make a sort of fart sound in response.

Chris

[John A.]

It is entirely possible that Gibson now carries on the nibs as part of the brand identity and not as an intentional way to deliver an inferior product more cheaply.

They may very well characterize it as a superior product delivered at the unique cost of an unusual workflow.

I would make a sort of fart sound in response.

Chris

And taunt them a second time, I hope.

John

[ptchristopher3]

Well taunting Gibson is fairly useless I think.

They make a product and some love it.

But consider the OP, who buys a product with a very reasonable expectation that he is getting a very fine guitar.

Now he has the shipping cost and time, the local BTW complication ( I assume he is in the EU), and a guitar that in my opinion falls short of even a midrange attention to detail and fitness for its purpose in a very critical area.

But to repeat: In fairness to CME and even Gibson, what are they supposed to do when these guitars are so valued $$$$$ and revered? Change things? That would seem odd.

I have no idea what the solution is. Vinny can buy and return and score a stable that he loves. Not so easy to do in far flung places.

**************

And none of this is new. Back around 1979, 1980 etc. Gibson hired session and jazz player
extraordinaire Mike Elliott to tour and do truly great demo evenings.

Mike Elliott (guitarist) - Wikipedia

I had the thrill/horror of spending A good 12 hours with him beating a pile of brand new Gibson guitars into remotely playable condition for the evening.

Things were filed, cut, sanded, thrown away, the CA flowed, epithets were aired, serious consideration of a career in dairy aisle grocery management came to mind repeatedly.

It was every bit the mess then that it is now. And the premium prices and inexplicable durable caché were the same.

Bindings cracked, nibs grabbed. And those polyethylene “Protector” cases slid against each other ensuring many impacts.

Good times.

[ptchristopher3]

Wow could that guy demo a guitar or 20.

[deacon Mark]

Hi John,

To niblessly fret a bound FB you need to cut each fret tang under the fret crown so that the tang ends short of the binding and the crown overhangs.

The you press (or hammer if old school) each fret into a finished edge FB. That is a soft ABS plastic finished binding edge.

Now you cut each fret crown to length at the edges of the soft finished fragile binding.

Now you bevel the fret ends.

Now you relieve the sharp edges of the bevels.

This is visibly automated in most manufactured guitars. And noticeably hand-done (and incredibly well) in most small scale shop-built guitars.

************

The Gibson nib method is to install the frets on the unbound FB and end up with a flush cut fret even with the edge of the FB.

Binding is then applied, then scraped away to FB height between the frets. On many Gibsons you can see the artifacts of hand scraping. (I looked at a Richlite FB and noticed no scraping artifacts at all, so they may have a better method that is now used.)

Now the soft and easily shaped nibs are finished along with the unfortunate extension of the tapered end onto the frets.

This workflow at Gibson is older than I am and I have no idea about the economic aspects, at the time of the decision, to go to this unusual, but seemingly far more streamlined, method.

I also have no inside info if Gibson could now do a nibless fret at similar or lower cost.

But an analysis of the steps involved (in my opinion) is that yes it is easier to make a nibbed bound FB in a production environment.

And for a new build by hand, it would certainly be faster and easier to make a nibbed bound FB.

I am pretty fast at fret end finishing, but it still seems to take quite a bit of time.

In short answer to your question: In my opinion it is far faster and easier to scrape ABS binding flush with an FB between frets than to undercut fret tangs and do the extra finish work on the ends required over binding.

Chris

Much harder to nip the tangs for me for sure. It has been better since i bought a new Summitt Fret tang tool. Much better than the old Stew mack one. Worth every penny of the $140 i think i paid for it with cutting options.

[ptchristopher3]

Hey John,

Check out a quote from the Gibson USA website regarding their new amazing frets installed OVER binding!!!

******

[Gibson sez] >>>>While it’s true that undercut, fret over binding is more work and somewhat more costly, most players find the additional useable fret surface area a welcome addition that makes a fingerboard just that much more playable.

*****

No, seriously they actually say this.

So I guess they would not claim (as I idiotically postulated) that the nibs cost more.

When they say “undercut” they refer to nibless.

Chris

[ptchristopher3]

John,

Click the link on post #61 above to see the full amazing info from Gibson!

Thanks teeps for the link.