-
I spent this afternoon at my luthier's workshop to install the ZeroGlide nut I'd bought for my Loar (the uncut ZB-4 model, for Taylors etc; fortunately I realised that my Loar has a much flatter fretboard than Gibson's 12" radius).
Yep. The description and videos make it seem quick & easy, but the 1st time you do this is apparently at least not that quick even for experienced techs. My luthier is a well-known e-guitar builder and tech (who taught his craft in professional schools), but he does have a tendency to be opinionated and not the easiest person to communicate with (or maybe I'm overly careful not to get him to think I try to teach him his craft). It took us a good many words to figure that out we agreed that the ridge in the nut on which the 0 fret rests should be at the exact same height as the fingerboard ...
Originally Posted by sgosnell
Nice surprise: the nut *looks* like some cheap plastic/resin (a bit translucid and perfectly homogenous without any veins) but taking off the excess width on a grinder gave off the unmistakable smell of burnt bone (actually, I was reminded of a visit to the dentist
).
I had some misgivings when he decided to go with the included jumbo fret instead of something closer to the frets on the guitar (which look like the "medium jumbo" fretwire included with the ZeroGlide). I should have insisted on working our way down to find the one that is just too low, but I felt it was already a bit of a deal to convince him to make the nut slots deep enough to get the strings seated tightly enough on the jumbo 0 fret to avoid buzzing when I dig in to get all the acoustic sound I can from the instrument.
Result, and hopefully to a large extent because I'm exhausted and was probably dehydrated (no airco in the workshop nor in my car), but when I tried the instrument after getting home I just couldn't make a barré at the 1st fret, and everything felt harder than when I played yesterday ... despite reducing the action at the saddle which was possible somehow. Holding down the strings at the 3rd fret there does appear to be more clearings over the 1st fret than the approx. 0.2 mm to which I had reduced it.
For the rest, I'm surprised at how much better the higher strings sound. I was somewhat expecting them to sound less bright, like fretted notes on the B & E trebles sound less bright than the open strings. In reality the sound is both clearer and fuller (the jumbo fret could have something to do with that?).
If my barré problem continues I'll need to swap the original nut back in (so much for trying to improve things
), or figure out how to reduce the 0 fret height (that's possible, right?). Of course the rear of the fret sits flush against the nut so a standard crowning file probably won't work (and I presume that simulating wear by filing grooves isn't a great idea either ) The alternative would be to get the 0 fret out (a priori it's glued to the nut only) ... would it be wise to take the entire nut out for that or could I try to remove just the fret to (and how)?
PS: nice guy otherwise. He noticed a couple of uneven frets and said I really needed a planimétrie done (no idea what the English term is, apparently it consists of making the neck perfectly straight and then egalise the height of all frets). I only asked how much time he'd need for that, and presumably because he knows I prefer not have to make the trip twice he offered to guide me through the process and let me save 150€ at the same time.
For that he deserves a referral
chrislutherie – Guitar Repair
-
07-06-2022 05:03 PM
-
Very interesting! The only thing that may help is that nuts’ height is also adjusted with a file, so I can’t see any harm done by trying that: sounds like you have too much action at the 0 fret.
But let’s see what others say.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
How would that help? The top of the 0 fret sits exactly where a standard nut would end, i.e. right over the edge of the fingerboard. That also means that the 0 fret rests on both the nut and the fingerboard. For lowering the nut to have the desired effect I'd also have to take off material from the fingerboard edge ... following the radius as closely as I can. I can see a lot of potential harm in doing that Originally Posted by Eck
-
Ooh yes, I didn’t picture it correct
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
BTW, here's the product page:
Zero Glide Replacement Nut System
-
The easiest, and perhaps only fix is to remove the zero fret and replace it with the correct fret, of the same height as the rest of the frets. Replacing just the fret is a lot easier than fitting the nut. The kit comes with several frets of different sizes, and he didn't throw the rest away, did he? Another possible issue, not seeing the job being done, is that the frets are not standard - the tang isn't centered under the fret, and it matters which way it's installed. That may have been done correctly, I have no idea, but it does matter. I also would not deepen the slots to the level of the fretboard. They are adequate as they come, unless perhaps the smallest provided fret is used. I've never touched the slots, never saw the need.
What he called planimetrie is called a fret level and dress over here. 150 Euros is rather expensive for that, at least where I live. But if the frets aren't perfectly level, you can never get the lowest possible action.
-
How would you suggest to remove the fret? Originally Posted by sgosnell
I don't see that much clearer anymore after a good night's sleep, but I did see part of the problem, or an additional problem. The 0 fret doesn't rest on the fingerboard at all; I can slip a 0.2 mm feeler under it under the 1st and 6th strings, and a 0.3 mm one under the other strings. That suggests that the fret is still at a <16" radius, OR that my fingerboard in fact has less. And that not enough material was taken off the base of the fret.
Strange really, the instruments he builds and complex repairs he does are flawless but this is not the 1st time I'm left to finish or correct set-up work. Almost makes me wonder if my presence distracts... It was hot in the workshop though yesterday; my brain was cooked when I left.
The fret *is* installed in the correct orientation.
Curiously the action at the 1st fret when fretting the 1st string at the 3rd fret is less than 0.2mm, which isn't that bad; the 2nd string has more though (and that's always the trickiest one for me in barrés)
In the schematic drawings on the product pages of the pre-slotted ZeroGlides the slots are shown as cut all the way down to the "ridge" on which the fret comes to rest (called the "first step" in the manual). Can you confirm that this is indeed how the slots are and should be done? It does seem logical if you consider that this part of the nut is basically an extension of the fingerboard...
I thought that much; I have no reference for prices for this, but the idea was I wouldn't pay if I'd be doing the work myself. It seemed a reasonable price for something you probably spend an afternoon on...What he called planimetrie is called a fret level and dress over here. 150 Euros is rather expensive for that, at least where I live.
BTW, do you confirm that a guitar neck should be straight without any relief, even for (acoustic/unplugged) fingerstyle where one really digs in in search of all the sound the box can make?
-
If there is a gap between the fretboard and the bottom of the zero fret, the nut hasn't been properly fitted, and more needs to be taken off the bottom of the nut. It should be sanded down so that the fret fits the fretboard exactly. It's fiddly, but necessary. The instructions explain it.
The nut slots only serve to prevent the strings from moving laterally, so their depth isn't critical. The deeper you make them, the less effect they can have. As long as the string is in solid contact with the zero fret, that's deep enough. Deeper than that doesn't help at all.
IMO, and only my opinion, the neck should be perfectly straight. Relief only raises the action for part of the neck, usually the part where I do most of my playing. It also raises the end of the fretboard, causing fret buzz on the higher frets. My understanding of the physics, which may be flawed, is that a perfectly straight neck, without relief, is the ideal setup, regardless of how hard the strings are plucked. In practice, to allow for slight unevenness in fret height and to prevent backbow, I set a very slight relief in my necks. Just enough so that with the strings fretted at the first and 14th frets (where the neck joins the body, it may be different for different instruments) I can tap the string on any fret and just get a slight ping. I don't really want to be able to get a gauge between the strings and frets. If there is no ping, the string is against a fret, indicating back bow, which is as bad, if not worse than, too much relief. There is a fine line between too much and too little relief. I adjust the truss rods on my guitars rather often, because it takes very little change in humidity and/or temperature to cause either buzzes or higher action. I know not everyone will agree with this, but it's the way I prefer. Some think that more relief allows the string to vibrate without buzzing when plucked hard, but I don't think that's the case. There can't be much excursion near where the string is fretted, and only gradually increases along the string, so there should be sufficient clearance near the center. If there is buzzing when the string is plucked aggressively, then just raise the action slightly at the bridge. Relief won't help, because the action changes along the neck, and gets too low on the high frets, too high on the middle ones.
Probably a lot more than anyone wanted to read, but that's what I believe, from experience gained by trying different ways of doing setups over time. I set my necks as straight as I can get them, but the truss rod nut turns both ways, and everyone else is free to turn it as they like.
Doing your own fret level and dress is worth learning, I think. If he's willing to lend his tools and supervise, you may come out far ahead.
-
It makes sense, of course. Interestingly, the instructions point out that it's necessary for a good-looking fit. That made me chuckle, but I understood what they meant when I saw the (not-yet glued) 0-fret lean towards the fingerboard Originally Posted by sgosnell
I suppose they didn't think it necessary to point out it's also crucial to get the lowest possible action...
Not sure what you mean with "the less effect they can have". It seems logical that filing them down to the fret ridge is going to make the string sit at an angle, resting on the fret and the far edge of the nut slot. Chris also warned that making the slots too deep could cause breakage?!The nut slots only serve to prevent the strings from moving laterally, so their depth isn't critical. The deeper you make them, the less effect they can have. As long as the string is in solid contact with the zero fret, that's deep enough. Deeper than that doesn't help at all.
Straight with the strings off, or straight under tension? Why would the fretboard extension rise when you increase relief? I could visualise how it would sink if you reduce trussrod tension allowing the headstock to be pulled up by string tension. But I can visualise the same thing happening when you tighten the trussrod and more of the string tension is passed on to the neckjoint, causing the entire neck to tilt upwards around that joint?IMO, and only my opinion, the neck should be perfectly straight. Relief only raises the action for part of the neck, usually the part where I do most of my playing. It also raises the end of the fretboard
I've heard explanations why a slight amount of relief is necessary - also on violin and cello fingerboards btw, where it's carved in (I just checked with a fingerboard I had replaced on one of my instruments). I can't remember the details, but it must have had to do with the fact that the string angle at the fret increases the higher the fret you play.My understanding of the physics, which may be flawed, is that a perfectly straight neck, without relief, is the ideal setup, regardless of how hard the strings are plucked.
Of course the carved relief of a bowed instrument fingerboard may not have exactly the same shape as the relief that can be set with a trussrod.
I do know that too much relief will cause back-buzz.
Trying to understand here: why would you get backbow? String tension alone should prevent that, if we're talking about the same thing. And when you remove string tension, a standard single-action trussrod shouldn't do anything to prevent backbow...In practice, to allow for slight unevenness in fret height and to prevent backbow
Heh, let me try, I'll probably be able to make the lowest 2 strings rattle against the fingerboard - if I don't pluck them out of their slots first.but it's the way I prefer. Some think that more relief allows the string to vibrate without buzzing when plucked hard, but I don't think that's the case.
As a side-note: the more experience I get with steel-strung guitars, the more I agree with classical players who claim those strings are not suitable for classical playing. Not because of the reasons they think of (sound signature), but because the average acoustic built to withstand steel string tension needs a a too heavy hand. So heavy in fact, to reach the same acoustic volume as a good classical guitar can reach, that artefacts become inevitable (on frets higher up the fretboard, or even on the fret you're (I am...) playing because of of not applying enough force. (Which btw includes a short but potentially very audible moment when you're lifting a finger).If there is buzzing when the string is plucked aggressively, then just raise the action slightly at the bridge. Relief won't help, because the action changes along the neck, and gets too low on the high frets, too high on the middle ones.
FWIW, classical technique for playing loud, *single* notes with the thumb involves plucking the string slightly upwards, and kind of guiding it along (= the movement is made with the arm). That doesn't work for arpeggios played with the thumb (or even a pick), and that's one reason I need to find a compromise between an even higher action and the different sound of playing arpeggios with thumb & fingers.
Yup. I'd be feeling a lot less depressed now if my borked ZeroGlide install were due to my own errors - and a lot more confident in going in to correct it. With things being how they are I'll probably tap out the ZG nut and reinstall the original one. I've got a neck/support rest coming in tomorrow ... but I may need to use my bed as the workbenchDoing your own fret level and dress is worth learning, I think. If he's willing to lend his tools and supervise, you may come out far ahead.
EDIT and re: the fret level & dress: is it unheard of that a fingerboard is slightly thinner/lower on the bass side than on the treble side? It's hard to measure thickness with the nut on of course (I may be measuring the binding instead) ... but it seems you'd want the bass-side edge to be a bit higher than the treble-side edge.
-
Having the zero fret sit proud not only affects the action, but also the tone. It needs to be solidly against the fretboard, just like all the rest of the frets.
If the nut slots are too deep, the string won't touch them at all, thus making them irrelevant.
I prefer the neck to be perfectly straight under tension, at pitch. But again, my preference is not everyone's, so set your guitar up as you prefer. Think of the neck being a bow, and the strings the bowstrings. If the center bows, the ends have to rise. The truss rod doesn't usually go all the way to the end of the fretboard, but the board can't really recurve enough to allow the portion between the body join and the end to stay flat, unless there is falloff sanded into it. The more relief, the higher the action at the 12th fret needs to be to avoid buzzing on the highest frets. The less bow, the less height needed to clear the end frets. But if the higher action is acceptable, it's fine. Everything is a compromise of some sort, and it's up to you to decide which compromises are acceptable to you.
Archtop guitars are not designed to be played as classical guitars are. The pluck should be across the fretboard, not upward. The string should vibrate mostly across the frets, not into them. That produces the most volume from the lowest action. If you pull the strings up and then release, you may need Freddie Green's action to prevent any buzzes. Sometimes technique must be adapted to the instrument in use. I'm not someone who should be consulted about technique, though. Mine is mediocre at best, but I've learned to get sufficient volume for my purposes on my guitars. I don't play fingerstyle, however, nor do I play a classical guitar.
BTW, the ZeroGlide zero fret is normally held in place with cyanoacrylate adhesive. The easiest way to replace it is to remove the nut, and the fret is then easily removed from it. There should be only a tiny drop of adhesive in a couple of spots. I don't know how your guy did it, though. The installation instructions seem clear enough to me, after some thought and practice. Practice does help. I suppose a bed can work, but a table is better.
-
I had one installed and the playability and tuning was fantastic, however the string spacing was just plain wrong for a Martin. Way too close together.
-
I thought the only purpose of the nut slots here was to act as string spacers, something they should do regardless of how deep they are? Originally Posted by sgosnell
With the difference that bowstrings are usually attached to the 2 ends of the box, whereas on a guitar the strings are attached only to a single end of the neck. That difference is large enough that your metaphor doesn't work for me, sorry.Think of the neck being a bow, and the strings the bowstrings. If the center bows, the ends have to rise.
But I agree, set-up is personal. I have no qualms dialing in a bit more relief after a professional set-up job.
I would guess this applies to all guitars, and I certainly wasn't implying you should pull the string only upwards as bluess players do to get a slapArchtop guitars are not designed to be played as classical guitars are. The pluck should be across the fretboard, not upward. The string should vibrate mostly across the frets, not into them.
(But FWIW, in my experience that kind of plucking gives you a single slap, and no fret buzz afterwards - the strings vibration energy must be absorbed enough during that initial effect, or the plane of vibration diverted.)
The instructions are clear enough even for someone without practice like me, but Chris hardly looked at them. I guess I would have done the same with something that looks like it should be obvious to install/assemblethen easily removed from it. There should be only a tiny drop of adhesive in a couple of spots. I don't know how your guy did it, though. The installation instructions seem clear enough to me, after some thought and practice. Frankly, I would have attempted a diy install if I had had a bit more tools to file (deep) nutslots, take off material from the bottom and sides of the nut ... and a proper horizontal workspace. I've been looking at band sanders with a 5cm or so belt width, but they're either too expensive for a tool I'll probably use once or twice, or still not cheap and not very confidence-inspiring.
I had to buff off some glue residue from the bone so there may have been more of it than strictly necessary. I'll have to hope I can get something behind/under the fret to pry it lose without damage. Soaking nut+fret in ammonia is probably not a good idea?
I took a blank nut because I wanted to maintain the exact same string spacing as in the original nut. Originally Posted by vintagelove
-
Side shots of the installed nut showing that the edges of the 0fret seems to sit
almost correctly on the fingerboard, and that it does seem much too high compared to the 1st fret.
You can also seem something of the space under the 0 fret.
According to GoldTone the model I choose should work with fingerboards
up to 20” radius, but how?! I would expect the 0 fret to take the radius of the “fret ridge” on the
nut to which it is glued
-
The system comes in different string spacing and nut widths. You need to buy the one that fits your guitar. Or you can buy one without slots and cut your own. Originally Posted by vintagelove
Changing to a ZeroGlide system from a standard nut is a lot of work, not a quick and simple job. I won't do it just on a whim, although I did just that the first time. Now I only do it if a nut needs to be replaced. It's worth using, IMO, if you're replacing a nut, but probably not if the nut is already fine.
-
The zero fret should take the radius of the included nut or the fretboard, whichever is flatter. The photos above seem to show a fretboard in need of work, and a jackleg installation of the ZeroGlide nut. The end of the fretboard looks to be rounded over, not sharp and flat on the end. That makes things difficult at best. If material is taken off to make it true, the scale length is no longer correct. Moving the nut or zero fret adversely affects intonation. It's possible to use a shim on the end, but it's far from ideal. If it were mine, I would probably reinstall the original nut, assuming it worked and fit correctly. But it's not my guitar, and I've never seen it.
-
Would you say it's more difficult than making a new standard nut from a comparable blank or pre-cut piece of bone? Originally Posted by sgosnell
FWIW the GoldTone website lists other materials besides bones for the pre-cut versions; haven't seen those for sale on eBay but I suppose it's interesting to know they exist.
-
I think it's a little less work, but not a lot. Cutting nut slots to the exact correct depth is a tedious job. If you get the correct string spacing on the supplied nut, the slots are a snap, because not much needs to be done, and the exact depth isn't critical. The critical part is just sanding the bottom of the nut to the correct depth and angle. That does require some care.
-
I saw that too on the photos and hope it's just the binding. I didn't pay particular attention to this detail when the nut was off, but I do think I would have noticed it if the actual fingerboard edge was rounded. It definitely sat flush against the original nut (no grime build-up there), and the nut was taken out without running a razor blade between it and the fingerboard as suggested in the instructions. Originally Posted by sgosnell
The bottom of the ZG nut indeed doesn't look very pretty at this magnification.
Evidently, with this experience under my belt I'm now questioning my decision to leave the replacement saddle I bought with him, for slimming down to size & weight comparable to the stock saddle before adapting it to the guitar. Annoyingly he's the only independent tech I've been able to find within reasonable distance from me - I'm not going trust an instrument to a vendor in a small-town music store that will send it off who knows how and where.
-
How can that work? If indeed my fingerboard is flatter and the 0 fret takes that radius, how is it going to sit on the nut ridge? Would you need to file down the nut so that only the highest (central) part of that ridge is level with the fretboard? Originally Posted by sgosnell
-
It will be flush in the center, somewhat above at the ends. I wouldn't try to file the nut, I would just live with it. You can get a radius that is close enough - 12", 16", and Fender 9.5". The difference between 12" and 16", at standard nut widths, is slight, and you will rarely see any other radii, other than perhaps 15", which will work well enough with a 16" radius nut. If you're anal, you can make it fit correctly with some sandpaper on the fretboard, it won't require a measurable removal.
-
Originally Posted by sgosnell
Hi, I bought the Martin size. I figured it would be at least in the ballpark. Instead, it was like a squire beginner guitar nut. Like, the smallest string spacing I ever felt small.
-
I don't know much about Martins. The website does list the string spacing for each model. I assume the specs are correct, but I certainly haven't bought all of them. Are you sure they sent the right model? I'm not trying to be a fanboy, and I don't think they're worth the trouble for every situation, but I do think they are useful in some situations.
-
"It" being the 0 fret, so the nut ridge itself is flush with the fretboard in the centre, and somewhat *below* at the edges? Originally Posted by sgosnell
I'm beginning to learn how much effect even slight differences at the nut can have on playability and being able to make a good sounding barré! I've ordered a cheap set of radius gauges (due tomorrow) so I'll be able to see for myself how easy it is to mistake a 20" radius for a 16" (I also realised I could just ask the company...)The difference between 12" and 16", at standard nut widths, is slight, and you will rarely see any other radii, other than perhaps 15", which will work well enough with a 16" radius nut.
The workbench neck support should come in today, so the old nut will go back on (wish me luck getting the ZG off/out!)
No, just OCD (and I do have hemo.... sorry, TMIIf you're anal)
But a propos, I discovered another thing to rectify
... despite marking the nutslot locations using the original nut the high E slot has ended up being too much inwards. I haven't really noticed that while playing yet but since I'm OCD I'm going to want to redo that slot (which is probably going to be like moving a drill hole in a concrete wall over less than its diameter).
-
If you can't visualize the way different nut and fretboard radii work, I'm out. It's too much trouble to try to draw pictures here.
Sometimes it's easier to cut a new nut than to modify a bad one.
-
This point is moot anyway, fortunately. Official fretboard radius is 16", mine might be closer to 17" at the nut according to the gauges I received today.
Got the ZG nut out with a bit of effort (cost me one of my ebony nut blanks), even got the 0 fret off after running a cutter along its base and along the top between the nut slots. It looks like I'm going to be having to take 0.55mm more off the base of that nut (estimated with feeler gauges).
I worked the "medium jumbo" (blue label) 0fret to as close as 17" as possible following the instructions (Chris as a StewMac tool for that), but didn't go any further because it was getting too late to rig up something to file down the nut. I'll probably order something from the A'zon to be certain I have something appropriate. Any tips appreciated on how to get the clearly skewed bottom straight!
So for now I'm back with the original nut. Which is so well made that I didn't even have to use glue to keep it in place.
Reply With Quote
Band-in-a-Box question, backing tracks to tunes
Yesterday, 10:44 PM in Recording & Music Software