Thomas & Ginex Fret Refinishing Kit

[kahuna]

I agree that it's flat and does not radius. You have to radius by feel, I got lucky doing that twice. I would never use it on a really expensive guitar but for the low end and mid level guitars where you can't justify paying for a level or a shop full of expensive tools...it does the job very well. Also, I really don't get why they tell you to do it with the strings on and tuned to pitch. I had better results with the strings off. For 20 bucks you can get 4 or 5 unplayable guitars playable again. For me it's worth it.

[kahuna]

As I understand it, with the T&G "system", the sandpaper also hits the fret-board surface when using their fret re-crowning sanding block. If that's really so, then I find it a very silly system.

That's true, it does hit the fretboard when you "re-crown". I'd tape off maple necks for sure, but it worked fine on the two rosewood board guitars I did as the fretboards were inrough shape too.

[GregP]

There's no experiment needed. With the strings at the same pitch, across the same scale length, the tension will be almost identical. It might be "intuitive" to think that this isn't the case, but I assure you that it is. The kinds of changes you're intuiting would take changes in height to an absurd level, one that might not even be possible with the length of commercially-available strings.

If you increase the height of the strings you in effect change the lenght of the string from point a to point b thats a fact, it's basic geometry, and therefore there is change in tension on the neck. So use the kit, frankly it's your guitar and not mine. But if you screw up your frets dont blame me.

Good Luck

woodenspoke

Well, as I already said-- the kit itself doesn't seem so great, so I won't be using it. But you already admitted that you don't have a degree in physics, so you are missing some very fundamental points here.

Tension is not dependent on length, which is why this is a matter of physics and not of geometry. You can have a distance from point a to point b of 20, and on another object a distance from point x to point y of 40, twice as long. But you can still have a tensionable object (in this case, a guitar string) set to the same tension no matter what the distance is. Furthermore, in this specific case, you can prove that the tension hasn't changed by the very thing you're asked to do-- tune the string. The string MUST be a specific tension across a specific distance in order to ring the right note. The specific distance (from nut to bridge) hasn't really changed. In order for the strings to produce the same note (tuning to pitch), they MUST by the laws of physics, be under the EXACT SAME amount of tension. ;-) Not only that, but the part whose distance has changed (from nut to tuning post) has the same tension, too, because tension gets distributed equally across the string. What DOES change is the amount of 'material' (eg. the physical string itself) across which tension gets distributed. This becomes a factor in string-bending techniques, etc... but in a static model like this one, that's a moot point. Now, the tension MUST get distributed in a slightly different way as the "jack" gets taller because it's load-bearing. Imagine that jack being 2 feet tall... it's not likely going to even stand properly, nevermind cause a neck to have the same amount of bend; however, in the case of this kit, it wouldn't be a factor because it's only what... a centimetre tall? It's not an influence at all.

No need to get upset. You had a valid theory. It seems intuitive to many people that things like headstock angle or in this case nut height, are things that affect tension. But they are not. There's nothing wrong with your perfectly reasonable conclusion, but it's the wrong one. I just happen to be the person telling you that it's not the "lifting the strings" idea that makes this kit less than perfect. To me, it's the other things mentioned already-- particularly the way the frets are "crowned" by the little device. It actually seems to just round off the frets and not truly crown them at all.

Greg

[Woodenspoke]

There's no experiment needed. With the strings at the same pitch, across the same scale length, the tension will be almost identical. It might be "intuitive" to think that this isn't the case, but I assure you that it is. The kinds of changes you're intuiting would take changes in height to an absurd level, one that might not even be possible with the length of commercially-available strings.

If you increase the height of the strings you in effect change the length of the string from point a to point b thats a fact, it's basic geometry, and therefore there is change in tension on the neck. So use the kit, frankly it's your guitar and not mine. But if you screw up your frets dont blame me.

Good Luck

Woodenspoke

Well, as I already said-- the kit itself doesn't seem so great, so I won't be using it. But you already admitted that you don't have a degree in physics, so you are missing some very fundamental points here.

Tension is not dependent on length, which is why this is a matter of physics and not of geometry. You can have a distance from point a to point b of 20, and on another object a distance from point x to point y of 40, twice as long. But you can still have a tensionable object (in this case, a guitar string) set to the same tension no matter what the distance is. Furthermore, in this specific case, you can prove that the tension hasn't changed by the very thing you're asked to do-- tune the string. The string MUST be a specific tension across a specific distance in order to ring the right note. The specific distance (from nut to bridge) hasn't really changed. In order for the strings to produce the same note (tuning to pitch), they MUST by the laws of physics, be under the EXACT SAME amount of tension. ;-) Not only that, but the part whose distance has changed (from nut to tuning post) has the same tension, too, because tension gets distributed equally across the string. What DOES change is the amount of 'material' (eg. the physical string itself) across which tension gets distributed. This becomes a factor in string-bending techniques, etc... but in a static model like this one, that's a moot point. Now, the tension MUST get distributed in a slightly different way as the "jack" gets taller because it's load-bearing. Imagine that jack being 2 feet tall... it's not likely going to even stand properly, nevermind cause a neck to have the same amount of bend; however, in the case of this kit, it wouldn't be a factor because it's only what... a centimetre tall? It's not an influence at all.

No need to get upset. You had a valid theory. It seems intuitive to many people that things like headstock angle or in this case nut height, are things that affect tension. But they are not. There's nothing wrong with your perfectly reasonable conclusion, but it's the wrong one. I just happen to be the person telling you that it's not the "lifting the strings" idea that makes this kit less than perfect. To me, it's the other things mentioned already-- particularly the way the frets are "crowned" by the little device. It actually seems to just round off the frets and not truly crown them at all.

Greg

I just built myself a neck jig based on the Stumac model, costs over $120 in materials. I have hundreds of dollars in fret tooling most of which was bought from Stumac including a straight edge leveling bar radius blocks files,etc.. etc. I made the jig because it was they proper way to work on a neck. The basics of the jig is to place the neck into the position it would normally be in when it is at tension without the strings attached. I am more interested now in making my guitars play better.

Lets call it this great fret leveler kit which we all agree is not worth the money "The Ronco fret fixer" and have some Aussie sell it on American TV (no offense to our Aussie members).

Until we get a physics professor to end this stand off I stand by my statement.

woodenspoke

[GregP]

Your statement "a kit with that riser is no substitute for a real neck jig" is fine by me.

[kahuna]

Man, I don't get the snotty attitude from some closed minded guy that refuses to even try the kit. I don't think it was designed for someone like you who has hundreds of dollars invested in fret leveling tools. Open your mind a little guy, if your too cheap to drop 20 bucks to evaluate the kit fairly, why beat the crap out of something you've never even tried? Worked fine on 2 beat up low end guitars for me...to me it paid for itself by making 1 guitar destined for landfill playable again.

Here's an easy breakdown for you, no physics required.

DON'T Use this kit on a 1959 Les Paul.

DO Use this kit on a 1997 Squier Strat.

[soapbarstrat]

But that's just it ; it's a screwy system if it's off limits for high end guitars. Decent fretting tools work on economy as well as top-of-the-line guitars.

I can't believe you think $20.00 for an aluminum plate and a few pieces of cloth backed abrasive is anything close to a good deal. *Especially* when you didn't even do it with the strings on. You could have used any decent flat block and $3.00 worth of sandpaper to do the same thing. Oh, you need those two bumps on the one side of the plate ? Ok, epoxy two shafts from some old pens onto a freakin' block then. There's your special speed-bump fret-crowning block. But you can do that same kind of quicky fret crowning with sandpaper backed by your finger.

[kahuna]

But that's just it ; it's a screwy system if it's off limits for high end guitars. Decent fretting tools work on economy as well as top-of-the-line guitars.

I can't believe you think $20.00 for an aluminum plate and a few pieces of cloth backed abrasive is anything close to a good deal. *Especially* when you didn't even do it with the strings on. You could have used any decent flat block and $3.00 worth of sandpaper to do the same thing. Oh, you need those two bumps on the one side of the plate ? Ok, epoxy two shafts from some old pens onto a freakin' block then. There's your special speed-bump fret-crowning block. But you can do that same kind of quicky fret crowning with sandpaper backed by your finger.

I give up, it's just not worth arguing with a group of closed minded know it alls.

[Woodenspoke]

kahuna the only snotty nosed idiot here is you if you are defending this kit, which only purpose is to take a few bucks out of some poor unsuspecting saps wallet and possibly do more damage than good to his instrument. But you must be an expert right? So it worked for a few garbage guitars you own, but its not the point.

I dont tout my skills as other do I was pointing out how someone with knowledge would properly work on a fret booard and yes its not cheap if you want to do it properly and it takes skill. Soapbarstrat has hundreds of fret jobs under his belt and twice the tooling I do, but he is kind enough to just point to a review thats says the same thing I have been saying all along.

Maybe all this forum is able to handle is one line replys, so here it is "dont buy this kit"

kahuna so you spent the money but you can also use it to finish your furniture, scale fish, scrape your toes, remove corns on the bottom of your feet and most of all sand down your attitude problem. Maybe your money would have been better spent learning more about Luthery like buy a book on the subject.

Its obvious you were the targeted buyer for this kit.

Woodenspoke

[rhoads56]

wow, guess what i just did.....

... a fret level for a guy who bought this kit, and it didnt work. He damaged his lacquered fretboard in the process. I charged him $300 to get it all sweet again. I PERSONALLY LOVE THIS KIT!! He will be back in twelve months for a full refret, cause he took way too much off the frets trying to get it 'right'. Then i'll be able to bill him another $400 for the refret too!! WOO HOO!!! Ben, i know you visit this forum (you told me to post your probs in this thread), so why dont you actually join the forum, and pipe up with a review Come on buddy!!

Woodenspoke, i said it to you before, and i'll say it again. It is pointless arguing in here (yes, i always do anyway) because people here are out to PROVE their way is BETTER than a PROFESSIONAL, and will argue to get their point across so they dont LOOK LIKE AN IDIOT because they dont have the QUALITY CONTROL, have a hidden AGENDA, or simply want to FEEL SPECIAL.

[kahuna]

Woodenspoke, you're clearly just looking for a fight and are never wrong, so best of luck to you guy.

And rhodes, if the dummy didn't tape off his maple fretboard, he really isn't too sharp and deserves to have to deal with the likes of you. Listen, this is not my way, nor have I ever said it's better than the traditional way. Once again, this kit works fine on cheaper guitars where you can't justify paying someone like you 100-150 bucks or buying your own tools for 200-300 bucks. If you follow the instructions and don't want to pay a know it all like you to fleece him and then laugh at him on your "I'm better than the rest of the world" forum, the kit will work fine. In retrospect you can create this kit yourself fairly easy for 10 or so bucks, or you can save time and buy it for 20...big difference.

Edited May 22, 2007 by kahuna

[GregP]

It's right there in his signature line, dumbass. Perry doesn't have any need to hide from anyone or anything.

[kahuna]

It's right there in his signature line, dumbass. Perry doesn't have any need to hide from anyone or anything.

Man what a forum of hostile gosh darn guys.

Edited May 22, 2007 by kahuna

[GregP]

It's as simple as, you reap what you sow, no? I was fine with whatever your opinion was until YOU started getting hostile. As I said, you reap what you sow.

[kahuna]

It's as simple as, you reap what you sow, no? I was fine with whatever your opinion was until YOU started getting hostile. As I said, you reap what you sow.

A heckler and a philosopher...you've used your time well

[soapbarstrat]

Ok, that's clever. Use foul language in an attempt to get the thread locked before Ben has any chance of telling his side of the story.

[kahuna]

Ok, that's clever. Use foul language in an attempt to get the thread locked before Ben has any chance of telling his side of the story.

If you think that was too harsh, I edited the word for just you. Listen, everyone is entitled to their opinion. How boring is a group of people judging something they have never even seen let alone tried. So far, of the people in this thread who have actually tried this kit, ONE, ME, it has worked well for me in the application I purchased it for. Does anyone else even notice that the guys that have not even tried this kit and feel the need to make it sound like satin's evil wand are likely luthiers or guitar repairmen? Gee, can you spell vested interest in seeing tools like this fail? As for Ben's opinion, well the kit didn't booger his guitar. Ben boogered his guitar by not using common sense and not reading the instructions, seriously, if you gave a blind man a running chainsaw and he cut off his arm...would it be fair to blame the chainsaw??? Our hero Ben would have likely done the same damage with traditional tools, let's at least try and be honest here.

And soapbarstrat, since you posted a bad review here's a good one Review

Edited May 22, 2007 by kahuna

[Mattia]

Seriously, Kahuna, this has nothing to do with vested interest in anything. Ever notice how all the professionals here are more than willing to share their dearly earned knowledge and very limited time with anyone who will care to listen? Even the suppliers - like StewMac - quite frequently publish a lot of info that makes it easy for folks to 'roll their own' versions of their tools for less, but it doesn't stop them doing it.

Thing is, a good decription/review of how a kit is put together, and what it's composed of, is generally enough to determine whether it's a) worth the money suitable for the job. A good tool for fretwork should be applicable to a '59 flametop and chinese squier equally, because the essentials are the same. I don't know where you're getting your 200 dollar figures, honestly; for a good fret level, all you need is a flat piece of something (bar stock, angle iron, whatever), which can range anywhere from free to cheap to expensive-because-its-from-stewmac. Me, I use a mill file. Cheap. Hardware store. Also doubles as a fret beveller. Then there's a fret crowning file, the only really specialized tool, and a flush cutter. I also have a nipper, but that's because I like bound fretboards, but for reworking existing guitars, only the recrowning tool is a must.

Other than that...sandpaper's all you need. Overall, probably cost you as much as two of these kits (if even that much) and will allow a proper fretjob, including a good recrown, instead of merely an overly complicated, expensive-for-what-you-get way to do a fret level with a dubious amount of polishing. And one that'll work for all guitars, regardless of vintage, and regardless of the state of the fretboard. I've yet to see anyone call it 'satans evil wand', or even imply anything to that effect, but like Soapbarstrat said already upthread, if you want this kit, go get a scrap of metal and some sandpaper from your local hardware store. It's cheaper, and will give you the exact same results. I'm not going to waste money on a solution that has every indication of being too expensive for what little it has to offer, certainly not for review purposes. This is a building/modding forum, and this kit looks like its marketed as a 'quick and easy' solution for players without a serious interest in learning about setups, guitar repair, etc. So why bother looking into it any further?

[rhoads56]

So far, of the people in this thread who have actually tried this kit, ONE, ME, it has worked well for me in the application I purchased it for. Does anyone else even notice that the guys that have not even tried this kit and feel the need to make it sound like satin's evil wand are likely luthiers or guitar repairmen?

Yeah, the guys who have seen all this crap before, like pipe cleaners for nut files, and god knows how many other DODGY items people "invent" to make a buck on ebay/etc

For the record, i have SEEN the kit, nbot used it. I could instantly tell what rubbish it is. But i guess you and i have differing points of view when it comes to quality work...

Gee, can you spell vested interest in seeing tools like this fail?

Ok, this one is for you:

IF YOU ARE A PROJECT GUITAR MEMBER, PLEASE DONT COME TO ME FOR HELP. I can count on TWO FINGERS how many people have ACTUALLY visited me, to purchase something, or hire my services, since December 2002. Vested interest??? ***? We are TELLING people this item is CRAP, so they go buy the GOOD gear, from somewhere else. No-one here has attempted to sell anyone anything.

As for Ben's opinion, well the kit didn't booger his guitar. Ben boogered his guitar by not using common sense and not reading the instructions, seriously, if you gave a blind man a running chainsaw and he cut off his arm...would it be fair to blame the chainsaw???

You have no clue on this point, no clue at all. When you know HOW the guitar was damaged, then you can comment.

Now, who are you, and what vested interest do YOU have??? New poster... shouting about the benefits of a system that is obviously flawed.... only posts are here in this very thread...

[kahuna]

Mattia, this is a 20 dollar kit that is targeted at people who want to do quickey fret levels on cheap guitars IMHO. For that it works fine and is decent value to me. No argument is going to change the improvement to this near death Seagull acoustic guitar sitting in front of me. The thing was completely unplayable, now it plays great, not a buzz anywhere. Was it worth 20 bucks to me for that alone, yep. If I throw the kit out today it paid for itself on one guitar. I will probably move up to more traditional tools, and this kit will have given me the confidence to do so. Could I have gone out to Home Depot and pretty much bought everything in the kit, likely...but I still think the kit is decent value.

Perry, at no point have I claimed this kit was a replacement for traditional tools or have I touted it as top quality. I've said on numerous occasions it's decent for leveling frets on cheap guitars, which is what I bought it for as I've picked up a number of throwaway guitars to practice various repairs on (haven't destroyed one yet).

As for Ben, no don't get all high and mighty on me here Perry, your post clearly stated he took too much off, he would have done that with ANY tools and you know that. Common sense dictates, just by looking at the tool, you'd want to mask off any fretboard you don't want sanded. What kills me, is you went ahead and charged Ben 300 bucks and are now laughing at him that he;ll be back in 12 months for a fret job. If I'm Ben, I'd be asking you why you didn't offer up this info before you charged me 300 bucks for a temporary repair?!?! Could you not have done a re-fret and fretboard re-fin for under 400 bucks?

LOL, and I was waiting for one of you guys to ask me the paranoid question of who I was and what I was up to. Just a guy who bought the kit and it worked for me. I did a search to read up on the kit, found some good and some bad. Google "Thomas Ginex", this thread comes up number 5 or 6. Look at my first post, it's answering the guys original question of opinions on the kit, I gave him mine. The kit worked for me, because I have a decent knowledge of guitar repair (still learning) & I use common sense. If you have no common sense and shave of 75% of the fret material with any tools, you can't blame the tools.

And Perry old boy, if you think it's acceptable to mock your customers on a forum and hope more people booger their guitars with kits like this so they can give you more money...then why would you ever think I would welcome help from someone like you?!?!

[Woodenspoke]

For once I feel like I got off easy on this post, relief at last.

Woodenspoke

[rhoads56]

double post

[rhoads56]

Mattia, this is a 20 dollar kit that is targeted at people who want to do quickey fret levels on cheap guitars IMHO. For that it works fine and is decent value to me. No argument is going to change the improvement to this near death Seagull acoustic guitar sitting in front of me. The thing was completely unplayable, now it plays great, not a buzz anywhere. Was it worth 20 bucks to me for that alone, yep. If I throw the kit out today it paid for itself on one guitar. I will probably move up to more traditional tools, and this kit will have given me the confidence to do so. Could I have gone out to Home Depot and pretty much bought everything in the kit, likely...but I still think the kit is decent value.

Perry, at no point have I claimed this kit was a replacement for traditional tools or have I touted it as top quality. I've said on numerous occasions it's decent for leveling frets on cheap guitars, which is what I bought it for as I've picked up a number of throwaway guitars to practice various repairs on (haven't destroyed one yet).

As for Ben, no don't get all high and mighty on me here Perry, your post clearly stated he took too much off, he would have done that with ANY tools and you know that. Common sense dictates, just by looking at the tool, you'd want to mask off any fretboard you don't want sanded. What kills me, is you went ahead and charged Ben 300 bucks and are now laughing at him that he;ll be back in 12 months for a fret job. If I'm Ben, I'd be asking you why you didn't offer up this info before you charged me 300 bucks for a temporary repair?!?! Could you not have done a re-fret and fretboard re-fin for under 400 bucks?

LOL, and I was waiting for one of you guys to ask me the paranoid question of who I was and what I was up to. Just a guy who bought the kit and it worked for me. I did a search to read up on the kit, found some good and some bad. Google "Thomas Ginex", this thread comes up number 5 or 6. Look at my first post, it's answering the guys original question of opinions on the kit, I gave him mine. The kit worked for me, because I have a decent knowledge of guitar repair (still learning) & I use common sense. If you have no common sense and shave of 75% of the fret material with any tools, you can't blame the tools.

And Perry old boy, if you think it's acceptable to mock your customers on a forum and hope more people booger their guitars with kits like this so they can give you more money...then why would you ever think I would welcome help from someone like you?!?!

For starters, it didnt LEVEL the frets. It just shaved the low spots lower, and the higher spots down the same amount. Eg: it just replicated the wave that was already there. They were still uneven, and not level, so he kept going.... and going. When it came to me, i could see exactly WHY it wasnt working. Its a flawed product. Yes, im sure its perfect for guitars that should already be in the trash. Yes, it is a cheap product.

Ben is a VERY good friend of mine (we were joking on msn about the original post i made, BEFORE i clicked 'reply'... he encouraged me to do so), and the $300 he spent included refinishing and repairing damage done BY THE TOOLS, levelling and recrowning the frets (they were in a bad way), and cutting the nut down to suit.... and not in anyway to do with a lack of masking the maple to prevent sanding the lacquer. For the record, $300 here, IN AUSTRALIA is less than the price of two single coil seymour duncans. Not that i have to justify myself to some unknown, anonymous, faceless internet poster, who wont justify his relationship with the company who's products are in question. (funny that he questioned me on the same thing, yet refuses to answer to anyone else...)

[soapbarstrat]

Even the guy who wrote that last review mentions the need to have "an open mind ". This kit involves spiritual forces that my small brain just can't understand. Seems like it would be more relevant to have "an open wallet".

Edited May 23, 2007 by soapbarstrat

[kahuna]

For starters, it didnt LEVEL the frets. It just shaved the low spots lower, and the higher spots down the same amount. Eg: it just replicated the wave that was already there. They were still uneven, and not level, so he kept going.... and going. When it came to me, i could see exactly WHY it wasnt working. Its a flawed product. Yes, im sure its perfect for guitars that should already be in the trash. Yes, it is a cheap product.

Ben is a VERY good friend of mine (we were joking on msn about the original post i made, BEFORE i clicked 'reply'... he encouraged me to do so), and the $300 he spent included refinishing and repairing damage done BY THE TOOLS, levelling and recrowning the frets (they were in a bad way), and cutting the nut down to suit.... and not in anyway to do with a lack of masking the maple to prevent sanding the lacquer. For the record, $300 here, IN AUSTRALIA is less than the price of two single coil seymour duncans. Not that i have to justify myself to some unknown, anonymous, faceless internet poster, who wont justify his relationship with the company who's products are in question. (funny that he questioned me on the same thing, yet refuses to answer to anyone else...)

Well apples and oranges Perry, it made the frets on my Seagull (not a crap guitar BTW, a well made North American product) level. True enough, it's far from automatic and I admit I may have gotten lucky on 2 guitars...but I stand by that it worked for the application I purchased it for.

Fair enough, you and Ben are friends, and you're giving him a friendly dig, it's just not obvious to people who don't know you both and it really looked like you're making fun of a customer (absolute death to a business in my books).

Anonymous, faceless internet poster? Congratulations big guy, you've just described 99.999% of the posters on this, and every bulletin board on the net. My relationship with the company? Easy there agent Mulder, no conspiracy theory here no matter how deep you look. I fully explained myself in the post you quoted in it's entirety but obviously did not read. Nor do I have to justify myself to you, a faceless, quite possible anonymous Internet poster from the other side of the world