Fret Nibs question

[edh]

When refreting a guitar with nibs does the luthier keep the nibs or does he file them down? What is the correct way? If he files the nibs on refretting does this affect the value of the quitar?


thanks for any info.

edh

P.S. sorry if this is a stupid question.

[Patrick2]

When refreting a guitar with nibs does the luthier keep the nibs or does he file them down? What is the correct way? If he files the nibs on refretting does this affect the value of the quitar?


thanks for any info.

edh

P.S. sorry if this is a stupid question.

There are luthiers skilled enough to keep the nibs and make it appear that the guitar never had a refret. But, it's a royal pain in the ass to do it. I had it done twice. Both times, the tech was *less than happy* about having to do it. Most techs will ask the customer if they want the original look. If so, it will require new binding and most, if not all of the time, a neck re-fin. But, almost all the time, the customer will have the luthier eliminate the nibs and fret the finger board over the binding, all the way to the end (edge) of the fret board. No nibs.

[Patrick2]

Oh . . forgot the other part of the question regarding resale value. Unless the guitar is a very vintage iconic guitar in all original condition . . (think of a real and original '59 burst) . . a refret will hard, if at all affect resale value. But, a refret on an all original '59 burst in otherwise all original condition could affect the resale value by as much as $10 Grand!! . . Or more!!

[Broyale]

What was the purpose of fret nibs? I like the look of them, but what was the reason companies like Gibson started doing that?

[Archie]

What was the purpose of fret nibs? I like the look of them, but what was the reason companies like Gibson started doing that?

I could be wrong but its always referred to as the hight of 'luthery' (is there such a word?) and perhaps its real application serves more as a marketing gimmick.

I mean if it can be done on mass produced items, is it then really that hard? Or are we just supposed to believe it is in order to bestow more praise on the people doing it?

They have no purpose as far as I know, except to annoy your guitar tech and make your guitar (more often than not) look bad, when they crack. I might also make it easier for companies who do it, to not have to make the ends of the frets as neat.

Gibson have stopped doing it on most of their models now but I suspect it will be marketed as 'Old work luthier'y' when it appears on their more expensive instruments. You'll pay accordingly and feel like you have a better product for it.

You wont, you'll have just payed more and built in further costs down the road.

[oldane]

As far as I can fugure, they serve no functional purpose for the player and they are a potential source of problems (cracked nibs and/or binding if the fingerboard shrinks a little which it often does). I have never ever missed them. I have one guitar with nibs and they will shurely be gone after the first refret.

[nickyboy]

When I had my es335 refretted some years back. I asked for the nibs to be taken away and asked for less of a roll off on the fret ends...I hate it when it feels like the top E is slipping off the fretboard.

[GuyBoden]

I googled them, so these are nibs.

[Patrick2]

Not withstanding the ever present and totally unnecessary snideness in ArchtopHeaven's post . . I'd agree with almost all of what he said. Oldane said pretty much the same thing . . much more concisely . . and totally devoid of any snide sarcasm. Oldane is always a gentleman. Others could and should be guided by his example. But, I digress.

As this topic has come up quite a few times in the past, it's been noted that fret board binding was done purely for aesthetic reasons . . and no, ArchtopHeaven, it wasn't to elicit praise for the craftspeople doing it. It was to further beautify an already beautiful instrument. And, IMO, it certainly does do that.

It is considerably more difficult and time consuming . . and it requires more skill, patience and attention to detail, for a craftsperson to achieve a seamless joining of the fret end and the binding . . than it does to make a bare fret end look good at the edge of a fret board. When done correctly, a fret nib should be nothing more than an extension of the fret to the end (edge) of the fret board. If a string would *feel* the seam . . it was poorly done.

After the frets are installed in the fret slots . . extending to the very edge of the fret board, the binding is installed at a height similar to the top of the frets. So, it will extend higher than the fret board in the space between the frets. That portion of the higher binding needs to be scraped and filed down to an equally undetectable seam, at the same height of the top of the fret board. This filing and scraping needs to be meticulous and leave no file marks on the binding and/or the fret board.

Many of the top rated master luthiers have gotten away from doing the nibs and have chosen to extend the frets over the binding. They claim that there is "more useable fret area" and that's the reason they do it. That's just bull-s**t. They do it that was because it's much easier and much less time consuming. Another reason . . and a more plausible one, is that in the event that the guitar would need to be refretted, it can be done much easier and a good refret would be totally undectable as having ever been done. That makes good sense.

[oldane]

Oldane said pretty much the same thing . . much more concisely . . and totally devoid of any snide sarcasm. Oldane is always a gentleman. Others could and should be guided by his example.

Thank you, Patrick - and let me quote Charlie Parkers response after a very enthusiastic applause: "Thank you, thank you, but ordinary applause will do."

[Archie]

Not withstanding the ever present and totally unnecessary snideness in ArchtopHeaven's post . . I'd agree with almost all of what he said. Oldane said pretty much the same thing . . much more concisely . . and totally devoid of any snide sarcasm. Oldane is always a gentleman. Others could and should be guided by his example. But, I digress.

As this topic has come up quite a few times in the past, it's been noted that fret board binding was done purely for aesthetic reasons . . and no, ArchtopHeaven, it wasn't to elicit praise for the craftspeople doing it. It was to further beautify an already beautiful instrument. And, IMO, it certainly does do that.

It is considerably more difficult and time consuming . . and it requires more skill, patience and attention to detail, for a craftsperson to achieve a seamless joining of the fret end and the binding . . than it does to make a bare fret end look good at the edge of a fret board. When done correctly, a fret nib should be nothing more than an extension of the fret to the end (edge) of the fret board. If a string would *feel* the seam . . it was poorly done.

After the frets are installed in the fret slots . . extending to the very edge of the fret board, the binding is installed at a height similar to the top of the frets. So, it will extend higher than the fret board in the space between the frets. That portion of the higher binding needs to be scraped and filed down to an equally undetectable seam, at the same height of the top of the fret board. This filing and scraping needs to be meticulous and leave no file marks on the binding and/or the fret board.

Many of the top rated master luthiers have gotten away from doing the nibs and have chosen to extend the frets over the binding. They claim that there is "more useable fret area" and that's the reason they do it. That's just bull-s**t. They do it that was because it's much easier and much less time consuming. Another reason . . and a more plausible one, is that in the event that the guitar would need to be refretted, it can be done much easier and a good refret would be totally undectable as having ever been done. That makes good sense.

But I've started learning Snide Guitar. Gotta keep me chops up :-))

[Gilpy]

[QUOTE=

"Many of the top rated master luthiers have gotten away from doing the nibs and have chosen to extend the frets over the binding. They claim that there is "more useable fret area" and that's the reason they do it. That's just bull-s**t."




Actually, depending on how much the fret ends are tapered, a fret job that goes over the binding can increase the useable area of the fretboard by as much as 1/16". This doesn't matter much to a trad jazz or acoustic player, but if you bend notes or use up-and-down finger vibrato it's helpful.

Also as the guitar ages the binding nibs can separate from the metal of the fret, causing a crack that the string can get hung up on. I've had this happen.

I don't mind binding nibs and they look nice, but never worry about losing them during a refret.

[Archie]

[QUOTE=Gilpy;494912][QUOTE=

"Many of the top rated master luthiers have gotten away from doing the nibs and have chosen to extend the frets over the binding. They claim that there is "more useable fret area" and that's the reason they do it. That's just bull-s**t."

Actually, depending on how much the fret ends are tapered, a fret job that goes over the binding can increase the useable area of the fretboard by as much as 1/16". This doesn't matter much to a trad jazz or acoustic player, but if you bend notes or use up-and-down finger vibrato it's helpful.

Also as the guitar ages the binding nibs can separate from the metal of the fret, causing a crack that the string can get hung up on. I've had this happen.

I don't mind binding nibs and they look nice, but never worry about losing them during a refret.[/QUOTE]



Who ever said that 'BS' statement is being a little unfair.

Fret nibs as you rightly said often come away from the fret and your string gets stuck in them. Totally ruins your confidence in the guitar and decreases the amount of fret space you have.

On the other hand, if it is a little bit of Marketing BS to get you connived to move away from it, its at least better than the marketing BS that convinces you its worth paying extra for :-)

[nickyboy]

In some cases there's a lot to be said for a guitar repair person/luthier imparting their preferences on a guitar...It's wise to make a point of requesting how you actually want it to feel. That's why I made a point of asking for the frets not to be too shallow at the ends so the high E strings doesn't feel like it's slipping off the edge of the fretboard.

Regarding archtopheaven's post...I guess binding is in essence purely decorative, and you kinda pay for the extra work involved. I like the binding vibe but on a guitar that I intend to gig and use as a tool, I can't say I want the nibs.

I've just looked up at my Gretsch 6120 sslvo hanging above my PC monitor ... it has binding but no nibs. As it's a Setzer model - I wonder if that was his preference or just cost cutting.

My 88 es335 really needed a refret and I used a guy called Jonathan Kinkade in Bristol. He was pretty cool in that he listened to my going on about how I wanted it to feel etc. This is going back a good 10 years but the guitar still feels great. I wanted high frets so I get "purchase" on the strings and he mentioned the binding would be liable to crack and had already cracked in a few places...so off with the nibs. I have no qualms about it.

Nibs or no nibs - when refret time comes I'm happy to go nibless! :-)

Weirdly, I have a Fender Nocaster that has really teeny vintage frets and a horrid camber of 7.25 or something. Usually I wouldn't even consider a neck like that but it plays like a dream. I can only put that down to it being a well built neck.

[Archie]

In some cases there's a lot to be said for a guitar repair person/luthier imparting their preferences on a guitar...It's wise to make a point of requesting how you actually want it to feel. That's why I made a point of asking for the frets not to be too shallow at the ends so the high E strings doesn't feel like it's slipping off the edge of the fretboard.

Regarding archtopheaven's post...I guess binding is in essence purely decorative, and you kinda pay for the extra work involved. I like the binding vibe but on a guitar that I intend to gig and use as a tool, I can't say I want the nibs.

I've just looked up at my Gretsch 6120 sslvo hanging above my PC monitor ... it has binding but no nibs. As it's a Setzer model - I wonder if that was his preference or just cost cutting.

My 88 es335 really needed a refret and I used a guy called Jonathan Kinkade in Bristol. He was pretty cool in that he listened to my going on about how I wanted it to feel etc. This is going back a good 10 years but the guitar still feels great. I wanted high frets so I get "purchase" on the strings and he mentioned the binding would be liable to crack and had already cracked in a few places...so off with the nibs. I have no qualms about it.

Nibs or no nibs - when refret time comes I'm happy to go nibless! :-)

Weirdly, I have a Fender Nocaster that has really teeny vintage frets and a horrid camber of 7.25 or something. Usually I wouldn't even consider a neck like that but it plays like a dream. I can only put that down to it being a well built neck.

I haven't quite worked out why but I like fat frets that aren't too high. Is it because I like the string to make contact with the fretboard quickly?

I also like fat frets because it seems with thin ones, its harder to get a clean tone/connection?
Yes its surprising some of the things I dont know about the instrument I've been playing for 20 years lol
Still I supose JP could have said the same.

In regards to your G'BS its rare for the Japanese to do fret nibs. Could just be that they didn't want to do it. if he plays what they are making then his wont have them either I guess. They did do them on my D'aquisto though, thankfully they haven't cracked and its going on 13 years old.

[vinnyv1k]

I like fret nibs. They make the fret ends feel much smoother on the fretboard. They do look quite ugly when they crack though. Any respectable luthier can do a fret job with the fret ends feeling quite smooth though. My luthier charges a extra $100 to keep the nibs but I would think you would have to use the exact same size fret wire as original. When I need new frets I usually go with a fatter fret than the standard Gibson/Heritage medium fret wire.

[Archie]

I like fret nibs. They make the fret ends feel much smoother on the fretboard. They do look quite ugly when they crack though. Any respectable luthier can do a fret job with the fret ends feeling quite smooth though. My luthier charges a extra $100 to keep the nibs but I would think you would have to use the exact same size fret wire as original. When I need new frets I usually go with a fatter fret than the standard Gibson/Heritage medium fret wire.

I would have agreed with you on that being their only plus, till I acquired some guitars where the fret work was so good, I never felt them. That is to say they never interrupted my playing. Sure bad fret work will but good work, you shouldn't feel it at all.

[Patrick2]

[QUOTE=Gilpy;494912]

Actually, depending on how much the fret ends are tapered, a fret job that goes over the binding can increase the useable area of the fretboard by as much as 1/16". [/B]This doesn't matter much to a trad jazz or acoustic player, but if you bend notes or use up-and-down finger vibrato it's helpful.

Also as the guitar ages the binding nibs can separate from the metal of the fret, causing a crack that the string can get hung up on. I've had this happen.

I don't mind binding nibs and they look nice, but never worry about losing them during a refret.

What you say is true. But, the same would apply to nibs . . "depending upon how much the nib ends are tapered"

If a nib isn't tapered excessively . . but a fret end is . . then the useable area of the fret with the nib end would be greater. Would it not?

[Longways to Go]

Nibs Suck!

[Danny W.]

I much prefer the feel and look of nibs to fret ends. Have never had a string get caught in one, either.

Danny W.

[Archie]

[QUOTE=Patrick2;495031]Are you sure this Les Paul is a Gibson? I've never seen trapezoids with the corners rounded like that on a Gibson. Also, the binding material looks a bit . . weird.?.?

By the way, I'm not opposed to removing the nibs on a refret. I'm opposed to have a new guitar built without binding and nibs.

Here's what a Gibson Les Paul's trapezoids are supposed to look like. This is my 2002 R9. The nib ends are perfectly shaped and finished.

QUOTE]

Gibson.com: Les Paul Less+ 2015

Not to jump on my wagon again but you should see the bottom end Les Pauls that have been coming out in the last 15 years. Its not been pretty.

[jazzbow]

Are you sure this Les Paul is a Gibson? I've never seen trapezoids with the corners rounded like that on a Gibson. Also, the binding material looks a bit . . weird.?.?

Just checked the source, oh dear, the gear page. I only saw nibs.


I have this tho'. A 1980 ES335 that was bought new and left in its case under the bed.

Of interest is the factory fret dress, nice shaping.

Soz for the previous ambiguous nib snafu!

[Patrick2]

Just checked the source, oh dear, the gear page. I only saw nibs.


I have this tho'. A 1980 ES335 that was bought new and left in its case under the bed.

Of interest is the factory fret dress, nice shaping.

Soz for the previous ambiguous nib snafu!

While it's difficult (impossible?) to be certain of any totally accurate assessments based upon a photo showing only 4 frets, I think you're far to much of a knowledgeable *guitarfixeruperoligst* to believe that there wasn't some serious post manufacture fret filing done on this guitar. The center of the frets, as I'm seeing them, seem to be far more shallow . . as in filed down quite a bit more than they are at the edge radius of the board. If that guitar was purchased new, then stored in a case under a bed, then the owner needs to look under his bed and get those little people with the fret files the hell outta there.

The nib shaping is indeed well done. But, the frets seem in despertate need of a crowning. Some of those 4 actually seem to be flat. I'm also troubled by the file marks left behind on the rosewood board and the edges of the binding. That sucks! Also, the pick guard looks like it's from a much older guitar than a 1980 . . and check out the oxidation on the screw. Most of the early 1980s 335s were blonds . . with the Shaw pups. They were wonderful guitars, most having impeccable attention to detail in fit and finish . . . . and are still selling at a bargain price for what they actually are. But, check out the top, where the PG is screwed in. I see no blond wood. It appears to be all binding. Is that right for that era? One other observation . . that sure does look like a BRW fingerboard . . doesn't it? Was Gibson using BRW boards in the '80s?

I wish I could see a full shot of that guitar.

[vinlander]

I play heavy gauge and don't bend much, I must be from the bygone age

[plasticpigeon]

I think a good instrument maker or restorer should keep the nibs if they were there in the first place. It shows skill, pride and attention to detail. I have an old Hofner that had fret ends like razor blades. That would never be a problem with nibs. I also know at least one player that prefers the feel with nibs. They look nice too in my opinion.