Don't bend.....or else get fret wear....

[John A.]

You don't have to get mad and try to disprove the fact that nickel frets get eroded by the strings and ss frets don't. It's a preference that some like the sound of nickel and some don't care. I get my necks from warmoth and I simply select ss as the option. No ocd involved. I like that they don't wear at all and have a slinky feel to the bends. I do find them brighter and thinner but I simply adjust with the eq. I do my own fret jobs which are tedious and I don't want that corrupted after a few months of playing. It's my preference..

No one disputes that frets wear, and that harder metals wear more slowly than softer ones under abrasion. What some here are disputing is whether that video is providing any realistic, actionable information about how fast frets wear.

No one disputes that stainless steel frets are a good choice for some people. People are just noting that they prefer the sound of nickel silver, and that they don't perceive nickel silver fret wear to be enough of a problem to be worth the compromise in sound (to their tastes) that comes from stainless steel. I actually have no opinion on the sound of the material because I've never had stainless steel frets. The luthiers I dealt with for refrets don't use it, so it's moot in any event.

I do my own fret leveling and crowning, too. I guess it can be tedious, but in general I like fixing stuff, so it doesn't bother me. I fix my own bicycle, and used to string my own tennis rackets, too. My guitars have only needed leveling every few years, not every few months. I suspect if you're having to do it more frequently than that, you're either playing a hell of a lot more than I am, pressing a lot harder, and bending strings a lot harder than I do (which would surprise me given that you're an organist ...), or you perceive the need for fretwork differently from many other people. I don't know what the diagnosis for that is.

[jzucker]

You don't have to get mad and try to disprove the fact that nickel frets get eroded by the strings and ss frets don't. It's a preference that some like the sound of nickel and some don't care. I get my necks from warmoth and I simply select ss as the option. No ocd involved. I like that they don't wear at all and have a slinky feel to the bends. I do find them brighter and thinner but I simply adjust with the eq. I do my own fret jobs which are tedious and I don't want that corrupted after a few months of playing. It's my preference..

This is a discussion group, right? I'm just offering my opinion. Just because it differs from yours doesn't mean I'm getting mad and trying to disprove things. As far as I'm concerned, the video didn't prove anything. It's just clickbait.

[Bobby Timmons]

^ I understand your stance, like I said in my post that you replied to. Wear on nickel frets doesn't have to be proven, it's a fact.

No one disputes that frets wear, and that harder metals wear more slowly than softer ones under abrasion. What some here are disputing is whether that video is providing any realistic, actionable information about how fast frets wear.

I think we'd all agree that it varies and that there probably won't be any evidence of the rate of wear beyond anecdotal. Guys going, yeah I had a refret after 2 years, another going yea I had one after 10 years, another going yea I don't need em.

No one disputes that stainless steel frets are a good choice for some people. People are just noting that they prefer the sound of nickel silver, and that they don't perceive nickel silver fret wear to be enough of a problem to be worth the compromise in sound (to their tastes) that comes from stainless steel. I actually have no opinion on the sound of the material because I've never had stainless steel frets. The luthiers I dealt with for refrets don't use it, so it's moot in any event.

My point is you'd never need refrets if you'd use ss. It's less $ and less damage to your guitar. I completely understand the just play it mentality but some people don't want to be all inefficient with their resources. What if you spent 10k on a custom guitar? Would you want it to have frets that wear down and will become uneven, then you'll have to have a luthier hack up the neck to put in more frets that will just wear down again? Or you could just have frets that will stay in the same condition indefinitely

I do my own fret leveling and crowning, too. I guess it can be tedious, but in general I like fixing stuff, so it doesn't bother me. I fix my own bicycle, and used to string my own tennis rackets, too. My guitars have only needed leveling every few years, not every few months. I suspect if you're having to do it more frequently than that, you're either playing a hell of a lot more than I am, pressing a lot harder, and bending strings a lot harder than I do (which would surprise me given that you're an organist ...), or you perceive the need for fretwork differently from many other people. I don't know what the diagnosis for that is.

I like working on things too, but I don't do all that work for there to be marks in my frets after a few months. I didn't say they require a level after a few months. Further I don't like the rough feeling of the string eroding the fret when I bend the string.

[John A.]

I think we'd all agree that it varies and that there probably won't be any evidence of the rate of wear beyond anecdotal. Guys going, yeah I had a refret after 2 years, another going yea I had one after 10 years, another going yea I don't need em.

There could be such evidence if someone were to gather it in a well controlled fashion (unlike the video). But data is actually the plural of anecdote, and anecdotal reporting of fret durability is in fact informative.

My point is you'd never need refrets if you'd use ss.

At the rate I’m refretting guitars, I’ll probably need to do it with N/S either. If my guitars had S/S frets to being with maybe they wouldn’t have needed it in even longer. But maybe I wouldn’t have bought them in the first place because I didn’t like the sound. We all can posit scenarios …

It's less $ and less damage to your guitar. I completely understand the just play it mentality but some people don't want to be all inefficient with their resources. What if you spent 10k on a custom guitar? Would you want it to have frets that wear down and will become uneven, then you'll have to have a luthier hack up the neck to put in more frets that will just wear down again? Or you could just have frets that will stay in the same condition indefinitely

Right, because people paying 10 grand for a guitar are chasing value and efficiency… and luthiers just "hack" necks.

I like working on things too, but I don't do all that work for there to be marks in my frets after a few months. I didn't say they require a level after a few months. Further I don't like the rough feeling of the string eroding the fret when I bend the string.

How much playing are you doing? That much wear in "few months" (caution: anecdote alert) seems anomalous based on my observations.

[Bobby Timmons]

Ok?? Why are you all contentious? Fine, you can use nickel all you like, noone is stopping you. I've already posted several times that I get the just play it mindset because nickel comes stock and sounds good. I'll reply to your points, but I don't understand why you're being all argumentative. Some of the points are just common knowledge that you're making into points of contention for some reason..

There could be such evidence if someone were to gather it in a well controlled fashion (unlike the video). But data is actually the plural of anecdote, and anecdotal reporting of fret durability is in fact informative.

I know.

At the rate I’m refretting guitars, I’ll probably need to do it with N/S either. If my guitars had S/S frets to being with maybe they wouldn’t have needed it in even longer. But maybe I wouldn’t have bought them in the first place because I didn’t like the sound. We all can posit scenarios.

It isn't that unreasonable of a scenario to posit that you'd never have to worry about fret maintenance with ss while you do with nickel. It's a simple fact. If you like nickel and the possible erosion that you'll face with it, fine.

Right, because people paying 10 grand for a guitar are chasing value and efficiency… and luthiers just "hack" necks.

Refretting is necessarily a destructive process. It's something I wouldn't want to plan on doing, or at least more than once.

How much playing are you doing? That much wear in "few months" (caution: anecdote alert) seems anomalous based on my observations.

I get custom warmoth strat necks for about $300, then I spend 2 days doing a fret job on them. My time and money are valuable. I don't want to spend them only to have to go back and mess with the neck again when I could avoid doing the maintenance at all for life and have them perform more to my liking. I don't play enough to need refrets with nickel, but I do notice marks and dips in the frets with nickel. Plus, they feel all rough to me and I can feel the string eroding the nickel when I bend. The steel string is harder than the nickel fret so it will by definition erode the fret. The video literally shows this process.

[fep]

I've never had to do a fret job because of wear, and I bend, a lot. I've had some of my guitars for over 40 years. I don't know what material my frets are made of, they're stock, Fender, Squire, Eastman, Yamaha, Takemine, Ibanez, Godin, Epiphone. I only use roundwound strings. I tried flatwound and didn't like the tone.

[supersoul]

Will strings wear out faster with stainless steel frets?

If two metals are rubbing together, the softer one is going to be the one that wears away.

[RJVB]

But data is actually the plural of anecdote

Most (or rather all, I'd hope) scientists will tell you that the plural of anecdote is not data (with one exception because the result of a carefully set up experiment with a sample number of 1 is indeed anecdotal).

I get custom warmoth strat necks for about $300, then I spend 2 days doing a fret job on them. My time and money are valuable.

Exactly. How much would you bill those 2 days, or how much would you earn from your normal professional occupation for that same number of hours?
You seem to get getting a lot of those necks which suggests that either the SS frets don't last you that much longer OR you change guitars very frequently (OR you're the buy guy for an orphanage or other place that eats instruments). Either way, it seems you'd be cheaper off just dressing/levelling the warmoth frets where necessary and getting a new neck if fret replacement becomes necessary.

[KingKong]

I can't stand nickel frets for this reason, I can feel the string sawing away at the fret when I bend. I only use stainless steel frets. I can't understand why anyone would think nickel frets are adequate.

Same for me dude, man that feeling of a string moving over a nickel fret, like nails on a chalk board. First thing I do when I get a guitar is rip the frets off and stick stainless steel ones on, its just not acceptable any other way!

Did out some youtube videos of the great players and you can clearly tell which ones use nickel and steel, and mannnn the tone difference too! It's been proven that due to its place on the periodic table of the elements, the electrons in stainless steel resonate more with the music.

Was it Miles Davis or Charlie Parker ( I can't remember ) who famously would refuse to play with a guitarist who had nickel frets?

[ruger9]

I can't stand nickel frets for this reason, I can feel the string sawing away at the fret when I bend. I only use stainless steel frets. I can't understand why anyone would think nickel frets are adequate.

While I wouldn't go as far as to say "nickel frets aren't adequate", I CAN say with certainly, for me, I prefer stainless steel frets AT ALL TIMES, and if I had the money and patience to have ALL my guitars re-fretted with SS (whether they needed it or not), I would. Stainless steel is simply the "better mousetrap" when it comes to frets... better durability, glass-like smooth bending, better feel/sliding.

[RJVB]

It's been proven that due to its place on the periodic table of the elements, the electrons in stainless steel resonate more with the music.

Oh yeah, can you cite the scientific publication that quantifies the difference?

[John A.]

Most (or rather all, I'd hope) scientists will tell you that the plural of anecdote is not data (with one exception because the result of a carefully set up experiment with a sample number of 1 is indeed anecdotal).
.

Nope. This is a notorious example of people getting the quote and idea wrong. Google "plural of anecdote" for the origins of the expression (or read this)

[Bobby Timmons]

You seem to get getting a lot of those necks which suggests that either the SS frets don't last you that much longer OR you change guitars very frequently (OR you're the buy guy for an orphanage or other place that eats instruments).

I'm a tech-y assembler guy, not builder. I learned guitar teching on a bunch of Squiers and Epis then got rid of them and now have 4 swimming pool strats with the ss frets. That's enough to mess around with swapping around loaded pickguards that I make and setting them up for jazz or rock for fun since it's my 2nd instrument after keys. I was focusing on guitar for several years but decided to go back to keys.

Either way, it seems you'd be cheaper off just dressing/levelling the warmoth frets where necessary and getting a new neck if fret replacement becomes necessary.

Why either way? Ss don't wear at all and I actively prefer the feel so that's what I get/got. I never have to deal with fret replacement or wear with ss.

Same for me dude, man that feeling of a string moving over a nickel fret, like nails on a chalk board. First thing I do when I get a guitar is rip the frets off and stick stainless steel ones on, its just not acceptable any other way!

Dig out some youtube videos of the great players and you can clearly tell which ones use nickel and steel, and mannnn the tone difference too! It's been proven that due to its place on the periodic table of the elements, the electrons in stainless steel resonate more with the music.

Was it Miles Davis or Charlie Parker ( I can't remember ) who famously would refuse to play with a guitarist who had nickel frets?

It's gonna be ok monkey boy. I know your last special-ed thread went down in flames but the important thing is to move forward. I never said all that, did I? I said it's what I prefer to play, and since I like getting custom warmoths with an option for ss, there is literally no hassle. Is that ok with you?

While I wouldn't go as far as to say "nickel frets aren't adequate", I CAN say with certainly, for me, I prefer stainless steel frets AT ALL TIMES, and if I had the money and patience to have ALL my guitars re-fretted with SS (whether they needed it or not), I would. Stainless steel is simply the "better mousetrap" when it comes to frets... better durability, glass-like smooth bending, better feel/sliding.

See, ruger agrees with me. It works better for us, and I have a choice when getting my custom warmoth necks, so why wouldn't I? Is it still a free country?

[RJVB]

Nope. This is a notorious example of people getting the quote and idea wrong.

I wasn't getting a quote wrong, and I have be a scientist long enough to know when I'll just have to disagree with the rest.

Then again this thread is about bending ...

[John A.]

I wasn't getting a quote wrong, and I have be a scientist long enough to know when I'll just have to disagree with the rest.

Then again this thread is about bending ...

You are indeed getting the quote wrong, as are a great many other people. It started out pre-internet as "the plural of anecdote is data", coined by a political scientist named Ray Wolfinger, with the underlying thought being "don't dismiss anecdote because it's where investigation begins; small numbers of anecdotes develop into large sets of data". It has since morphed into its opposite via the classic internet nonsensification of everything.

[RJVB]

You are indeed getting the quote wrong

Didn't I set the context explicitly to empirical science and so what makes you think I was quoting a political scientist?! (I know you probably mean "scholar of political sciences" -whatever those are- but in my experience any scientist who puts on a political hat gets a bit too happy to bend truths.)

[John A.]

Didn't I set the context explicitly to empirical science and so what makes you think I was quoting a political scientist?! (I know you probably mean "scholar of political sciences" -whatever those are- but in my experience any scientist who puts on a political hat gets a bit too happy to bend truths.)

Oy vey. There is an aphorism "the plural of anecdote is data" that was coined by a specific person. That person was a professor of political science (the branch of it that focuses on statistics and data analytics, such as polling, and correlations between voting and other indicators). That aphorism circulated in data science circles for a long time pre internet, sometimes attributed, sometimes not.

However, on the internet the expression has been inverted by idiots who smugly dismiss anecdotes as meaningless. There are also idiots on the internet who exaggerate the value of anecdotes. Not many people seemed to be able to grasp the nuances of the relationship between anecdotes (i.e. individual data points) and larger sets of more organized information. I leave it you to sort yourself into the appropriate bin.

[RJVB]

I should really ignore this, but to leave a final contribution with the same degree of pleasantness: anyone who's not an idiot knows that the plural of anecdote is not data has to be understood as no amount of anecdotal evidence becomes necessarily a collection of meaningful data.

[Bobby Timmons]

Anecdotal implies isolated instances not gathered or interpreted scientifically. So you can have a bunch of random personal experiences that aren't assessed in a way that's going to be representative of the population and that's anecdotal. But you can still have personal experiences or personal testimony from others and if it's gathered and interpreted in a scientific way intending to discover the true characteristics of the population then it's not anecdotal.

[JohanAbrandt]

Nice! Do you happen to know the alloy that's used?

15% tin, 1% iron, 0.1% titanium and the rest is copper

[RJVB]

15% tin, 1% iron, 0.1% titanium and the rest is copper

Those are the gold EVO frets? Don't they also exist in a non-gold version (and does that have a similar composition)?

[JohanAbrandt]

Those are the gold EVO frets? Don't they also exist in a non-gold version (and does that have a similar composition)?

Jescar makes fretwire in nickel silver, stainless steel, and the alloy they call evogold. Evogold fretwire will have the same composition, kind of by definition.

There is no evo silver afaik

[RJVB]

if it's gathered and interpreted in a scientific way intending to discover the true characteristics of the population then it's not anecdotal.

Gathering that way means you're in a controlled experiment, where you either know that all potentially relevant/of-impact (but not of-interest) variables are not changing, or you measure those too. In the latter case the analysis required for interpretation of the observables is going to be a lot more complex and you may not be able to get any conclusive results.

I've been involved in several data-driven studies where a very generic question (or set of questions) was the basis (= seen as an excuse, by those who don't like this kind of approach) for gathering lots of data with the idea that this would allow generating more specific questions leading to hypotheses that could be tested using the data already collected. Sometimes this works, more often it just leads to making more big databases in hope some day someone will have all the resources required to "do something with all that".

Medical case studies are a good example where this tends to lead to interesting observations that can then be studied in detail - like if flu vaccination indeed offers protection against dementia and how. There is rather overwhelming evidence that it does but as long as there has been no controlled study one cannot exclude the possibility that the effect is a bogus side-effect. For example, however unlikely it seems it still could be that the "brain physiology" that makes someone get a vaccination against a rarely fatal disease also is simply less susceptible to degrade to a demential state. Or, maybe it's the rare cases of coming down with a really severe flu that lead to dementia down the road, which would mean that the vaccine is nothing more than an insurance equivalent to avoiding the flu by other means, instead of being an active potion.

Occasionally apparently well set-up experiments lead to anecdotal conclusions. I remember a study on the perception of light polarisation in (homing) pigeons; probably on if they could perceive the direction of polarisation as that could be used as a compass allowing them to orient (there are more exotic hypotheses about that even, like the use of smell to recognise local odours including from human cooking....). The study used skinner boxes and found the pigeons could indeed distinguish whatever aspect of polarised light was being studied. Except that no one could reproduce the result, until colleagues from the lab where I was then doing my PhD discovered that the pigeons instead reacted to a side-effect of the stimulus. Differently polarised stimuli produced a different light/shadow reflection patterns on the walls of the empirical chamber, something the animals had no problem detecting with their visual system (which is very different from ours).

[RJVB]

Guitar Hardware School: Frets II - Materials — Haze Guitars

[CliffR]

I've had all my fretboards re-done with mithril and it's out of this world!