Jump to content

Fret Slot Templates 26.5" And 27"


demonx

Recommended Posts

I couldn't find a template for 26.5" scale commercially, so I made one out of 1/8" thick MDF. I used an inlay saw to start all the slots, then widened them slightly with tiny files so they fit tight to the Stew-Mac registration pin. Finally, I used some thin epoxy along the edge. It took me a few hours, but worked OK.

SuperStrat%2B13-07-2011%2B10-27-02%2BPM.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't find a template for 26.5" scale commercially, so I made one out of 1/8" thick MDF. I used an inlay saw to start all the slots, then widened them slightly with tiny files so they fit tight to the Stew-Mac registration pin. Finally, I used some thin epoxy along the edge. It took me a few hours, but worked OK.

SuperStrat%2B13-07-2011%2B10-27-02%2BPM.JPG

+1 to that.

I had to make my 25 & 30 inch myself. Used some 6mm aluminium plat plate & cut it to fit.

Its not that hard. give it a try, I rekon you will be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok. So If you don't want to make them yourself.

LMI has a 27" template

and I believe the 670 millimeters template = 26.3779528in which is pretty close to 26.5

Fretfind is your friend

Also if you have a 34" base scale template you can move the nut to the 3rd fret (26.98746 to bridge) and I believe that to be very close to a 27" scale. But don't hold me to it....

edit: Duh however none of this helps you as you want a StewMac system... sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rad:

Using the bass template like that is pure genius. I wouldn't have thought of that!

I'll measure it up later when I'm in the workshop but I reckon you're spot on.. I've got a bass 34" hanging on the wall.

I knew I wouldn't regret asking this here!

Thanks heaps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RAD:

while checking out your fretfind link the thought occured to me that if I used the 34" in that method then I'd only get 21 frets and have to manually workout the last 3 or 4, BUT, then I applied the same logic using the 34" and checked the data on the site and I can use a 25.5" scale and add a fret at the beginning and still get extremely close to 27"

Thanks for the site. It's very very helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RAD:

while checking out your fretfind link the thought occured to me that if I used the 34" in that method then I'd only get 21 frets and have to manually workout the last 3 or 4, BUT, then I applied the same logic using the 34" and checked the data on the site and I can use a 25.5" scale and add a fret at the beginning and still get extremely close to 27"

Thanks for the site. It's very very helpful.

I am not sure about adding a fret to the beginning of the 25.5" scale so you are on your own there.

Just remember to check your measurements 10 times.... Check ALL the measurements for every fret before starting. Also I have never tested it. I also can't find the source that I read it at.

And compensate on bridge placement. So if you are running 26.985" scale make sure you put the bridge where the saddles are able to compensate.

I hope that is enough of a disclaimer that if you "hose it" you don't blame me!

I use a radial arm saw for fretting and have a pin located for both the Stewmac and LMI templates. This way I am not trying to figure out crazy ways to do stuff.

One other thought was to make your own mitre box for the LMI templates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the lmi temps and wondered if they'd fit the stewmac box.

I've never ordered from lmi. I once requested a shipping total from them and it's because of that I've stayed clear of them. It was for one five dollar length of plastic binding and they wanted forty bucks to post it!

I've used your fretfind site to do the math, it seems that a 27" scale is simply a 25.5" with extra fret at the start and a 26.5" is a 25.5" with extra fret at the start. Im hoping it's really that simple!

Before I cut the board I'll do some more checking into it but it looks right on fretfind.

I wish I had a 26.5 and 27 in front of me to lay the other scales over the top of

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One job I intend on doing once I get my hands on a CNC is to make fret templates with "universal" scales, ie. those catering for basses where the shorter lengths double for guitars, etc. To be perfectly honest, I feel that this whole hangup on maintaining 25.5" and 24.625" is fine for repros, but somewhat limits creativity for people's own designs. Maybe I'll just box everybody's heads by using 810mm on the build after my current 860mm instrument. :D

The magic number is approximately 1.05947, so if you multiply 25.5 by that to "add" another fret you get a 27.01" scale.

Ta-da.

Add five more and you get 34.03953". Good enough to make a "29 fret Fender" universal template offering a base 34" over the full 29 and a 25.4704" scale from the fifth onwards. A 35" scale gives you a reasonable approximation of a non-compensated Gibson "scale" at the sixth fret, or at least a value that sits midway between the "accepted" values.

Edited by Prostheta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully I can paste this in okay:

	"Fender bass"	Long scale bass	Strat/Tele	Generic "Gibson" scale	
In mm In mm In mm In mm
34,00 863,60 35,00 889,00 25,50 647,70 24,75 628,65
1 32,09 815,13 33,04 839,10 24,07 611,35 23,36 593,37
2 30,29 769,38 31,18 792,01 22,72 577,04 22,05 560,06
3 28,59 726,20 29,43 747,56 21,44 544,65 20,81 528,63
4 26,99 685,44 27,78 705,60 20,24 514,08 19,64 498,96
5 25,47 646,97 26,22 666,00 19,10 485,23 18,54 470,96
6 24,04 610,66 24,75 628,62 18,03 457,99 17,50 444,52
7 22,69 576,38 23,36 593,34 17,02 432,29 16,52 419,57
8 21,42 544,03 22,05 560,03 16,06 408,03 15,59 396,02
9 20,22 513,50 20,81 528,60 15,16 385,12 14,72 373,80
10 19,08 484,68 19,64 498,93 14,31 363,51 13,89 352,82
11 18,01 457,48 18,54 470,93 13,51 343,11 13,11 333,02
12 17,00 431,80 17,50 444,50 12,75 323,85 12,38 314,33
13 16,05 407,56 16,52 419,55 12,03 305,67 11,68 296,68
14 15,15 384,69 15,59 396,00 11,36 288,52 11,02 280,03
15 14,30 363,10 14,72 373,78 10,72 272,32 10,41 264,31
16 13,49 342,72 13,89 352,80 10,12 257,04 9,82 249,48
17 12,74 323,48 13,11 333,00 9,55 242,61 9,27 235,48
18 12,02 305,33 12,37 314,31 9,02 229,00 8,75 222,26
19 11,35 288,19 11,68 296,67 8,51 216,14 8,26 209,79
20 10,71 272,02 11,02 280,02 8,03 204,01 7,80 198,01
21 10,11 256,75 10,41 264,30 7,58 192,56 7,36 186,90
22 9,54 242,34 9,82 249,47 7,16 181,75 6,95 176,41
23 9,01 228,74 9,27 235,47 6,75 171,55 6,56 166,51
24 8,50 215,90 8,75 222,25 6,38 161,93 6,19 157,16
25 8,02 203,78 8,26 209,78 6,02 152,84 5,84 148,34
26 7,57 192,35 7,80 198,00 5,68 144,26 5,51 140,02
27 7,15 181,55 7,36 186,89 5,36 136,16 5,20 132,16
28 6,75 171,36 6,94 176,40 5,06 128,52 4,91 124,74
29 6,37 161,74 6,56 166,50 4,78 121,31 4,64 117,74
30 6,01 152,66 6,19 157,15 4,51 114,50 4,38 111,13
31 5,67 144,10 5,84 148,33 4,25 108,07 4,13 104,89
32 5,35 136,01 5,51 140,01 4,02 102,01 3,90 99,01
[/code]

[b]Excel[/b]lent. Here is my spreadsheet based on the magic number 1.05946309435929 which - at 14 decimal places - should be sufficient for our needs. As you can see from the parallel examples, a "true" 25.5" scale compared to one derived from a 34" scale only deviates by 0.19mm over two octaves (34.5% of a fretsaw's kerf for comparison) with a 0.112% deviation in overall scale length. The Gibson "scale" of 24.75" or whatever people want to call it can be derived from the 35" scale again with a spectacular yawning gulf-like deviation of 0.01mm over 24 frets....an error margin of 0.0064% with an overall scale length margin of 0.03mm or 0.0048%

:D

I think that is sufficient justification for throwing out the idea of having "single" scale length templates. The numbers don't lie.

For your 27" scale, it is sufficient to take this from a 34" scale from the 4th fret. 26.5" (which I have used before) doesn't fall near either of the "standard" divisions however a close approximation of 26.22" is found from the 5th fret of a 35" scale.

I hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Hey RAD...

I know you've been pretty busy working out other stuff with your CNC, but I'd still be keen on these templates! The build where I was going to use this scale is still on the back burner while I get other stuff done, so I'm still interested in buying them if you get the chance to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey RAD...

I know you've been pretty busy working out other stuff with your CNC, but I'd still be keen on these templates! The build where I was going to use this scale is still on the back burner while I get other stuff done, so I'm still interested in buying them if you get the chance to play.

PM me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a template but on a slight tangeant....

I've got a theory for you guys to shoot holes in:

Using a square, draw a right angle on a rather large sheet of paper.

The horizontal should be at the top of the sheet and the vertical 5 or 6 inches in from the edge.

Now using the horizontal line as the nut location, mark the vertical line for fret locations based on any scale length you choose. A StewMac tmplate would be very handy for this step. At the bottom of the horizontal line make a mark for that scale length.

On the horizontal line at the top of the page, make a mark as far away as you can-4 feet should be a good distance for this I would think.

Now draw a line from each mark you made on the vertical line to that point on the horizontal line. Extend those lines through the other side of your horizontal some few inches as well.

Now again using a square, you can measure between the top horizontal line (nut) and the bottom line (bridge-scale length) and sliding left or right of the vertical you made, and mark out any new scale length you want. Still using your square draw another vertical line from that point. Every point it crosses the lines you made (from your original fret locations and the vanishing point) will mark the locations for your frets on this new scale length.

Of course, an accurate angle and precise markings and lines are required for the most accurate locations, but If what I remember about geometry and drafting is true this should work.

I'm sorry I don't have the resources to illustrate an example at hand.

Now can anywone find errors in this theory?

SR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, yes and no. That is not literally what I was attempting to describe, but it is another way (probably better way) of accurately illustrating the same principal. In fact it likely has less chance of error if one was to use this to mark out fret placements on a new scale length. Mine would show lines from the fret placements converging on a vanishing point, like a drawing lesson for rendering a building in perspective. The point of the layout is one can mark fret locations without taking 24 measurements....however precision in making the layout is everybit as important as the precision required to make those individual measurements.

SR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...