Evtim Djerekarov

What kind of executable is that, and why are you posting it here? Mods...?!?

Can you post some sound samples of it? I'm very curious about how it sounds.

I have refretted about 20-30 guitars till now(not much, but not too few), and I think I have some experience with various successful, and not-as-successful methods. The rosewood and ebony fingerboards are very likely to be quite fragile, and if you just remove the frets with the end nippers, it is very likely that you'll end up with quite many chipped pieces of wood. If the frets, that you are removing, have been glued in, the situation will be yet worse. For that reason, it is very handy to have a 20-30 watts oldering iron (it is sufficient, too much power is not necessary, and may overheat the wood) , and some solder near you, and heat the frets *WHILE* removing them. Even if the frets have not been glued in, you'll observed much less damage to the board when heating the frets. There's not much use of heating the whole fret, and then, when it is too hot, to remove it, thus unnecessarily burning the wood. Instead, you may hold the end nippers in one hand, ant the soldering iron in the other, and heat the fret at a given spot for a few seconds before you use the nippers there. For better heat transfer, you may apply a little solder on the fret before lifting it with the nippers there(the solder is applied very easily on the fret, because the fret surface of a recently-played guitar is free of oxidations, and is very shiny). Also, avoid touching the fret with the nippers while you're heating it, because you'll transfer too much heat to the nippers, and the fret will likely be unable to reach the desired temperature. Lift the fret just after the fret is well heated at the spot. The soldering iron must be one step "ahead" of the nippers. Avoid the binding or inlays with the soldering iron, though. I have not refretted quality maple boards where the lacquer can be burned, if you are not careful. I have read that it is good to cut the laquer along both edges of the fret, in order to avoid chipping off finish, and also chipping off wood, together with the finish, when removing the old frets(because on many maple boards, finish is applied after the frets have been installed). I have never used a press, but only a small rubber hammer(of quite hard rubber, but not plastic). The most common problem is that the fret can not be held well by the channel, and the ends are sticking out, because of the elasticity of the fret. I'm not fond of gluing the frets in with any kind of super-glues, epoxies and other types of glue. I think that gluing the frets in is one of the worst things one can do. Instead, one can glue in a thin veener in the channel, made of hardwood, and then cut a new channel there. Also, it can be tried to apply some kind of hard glue in the channels, so that it make the channels narrower. My experience has shown that most guitars come with fret-slots, wide about 0.52 - 0.57mm. Maybe this works quite well with fretting press, when the fret is pre-shaped to the exact raduis, but i have found this width too unsecure for hammering frets(after hammering, you may slightly lift the end of the fret with your nail!). I'm talking about frets with 0.5mm wide base. This channel width may or may not fit 0.6mm-base-frets well. I have found, that for a secure grip of the fret, I almost always have to recut the channel to about 0.46-0.50mm width. It is also dependent on the wood. Some boards are more elastic, and are more likely to let the frets out, while others are hard, and do not have such problems. It is, most likely, a matter of experimentation, but it is also important not to cut the channels too narrow, because you may break the wood under the channel, and also achievean undesired backbow of the neck. This was what I wanted to say, the rest of the process is well documented everywhere. I think that proper radiusing, and good fretting minimizes the need of leveling, and restricts it to some areas ot the neck. To level frets, i do not use a big leveling file/sanding block. Instead I use three small rectangular pieces of wood(square cross-section of about 1cm x 1cm). The first one is the shortest, and is used for the high frets, which are closer to one another. The second is longer, and the third is.... yet longer, and is used for the first positions. The idea is, that every block has about 1cm long patch of sanding paper at the middle of one side of it. It has the same sandpaper, but with the paper side up all along the ends of the same side(to keep the whole surface level). Imagine three frets. The ends of the block(with the flipped sandpaper) step on the two outmost frets, while the middle of the block(with the abrasive side of the sandpaper facing the fret) is over the fret between them. First, you check (with an un-sandpapered side of the block) the given three frets. If the middle one is higher, the board will not be able to step on the outer two frets, and will flip-flop over the middle one. If the middle one is lower, there will be a strip of light between the fret crown, and the board. This way, you can sand off only those frets, that are higher, and, what is better - only those areas of the fret, that are higher. Of course, this method can not as easily solve a really uneven refret, and you may find yourself sanding many frets. For these occasions, maybe the long fils/block is more appropriate. The process of crowning frets, and polishing is well covered back throughout the topic. I also have some questions for the experts: What channel width have you found most appropriate: 1. For hammer refrets. 2. For press refrets. (if possible, for different types of wood) Also, can you describe in detail a hammering technique that leads to best results(fret accepting exactly the fboard radius while hammering it in, without unnecessary deformations). Greetings, Evtim

A handsander I mean. I guess the most even(but time-consuming) effort will be when using a longer block with a sandpaper glued on it. The lenght of the block ensures that the surface will be reasonably even. It can be held horizontally(the axis of the neck), and vertically(across the body). The direction should be swapped while sanding.

Be careful with the sandpaper. If you have a sanding machine - use it. The finish should be sanded off gradually, and the wood must slowly begin to show up all over the surface you're sanding. It is incorrect to completely sand off the finish at one spot, and then at another. The whole surface should be sanded at once, using a block, not using much force to push it down. This way, you will not end up with uneven surfaces.

Hi, I am writing a calculator, that computes the pitch of each string, fretted at each fret. The inputs from the user are : - Number of strings - Scale length(theoretical scale length, 3 times the distance between fret 7 and fret 19) - Length of non-vibrating part of each string(from nut to tuners, etc.) - String gauge and type for each string - Desired open tuning(for example regular EBGDAE for guitar or DGAE for bass) - Nut string spacing(distance between the 2 outmost strings) - Nut string height - Bridge string spacing - Height of strings over fretboard at 12-th fret - Heigth of frets - Bridge setback - Nut setforward The calculator computes the note at each fret and inaccuracy (in cents, 2 digits of accuracy), and displays a chart. By tweaking "Bridge setback" and "Nut setforward", one can find the best possible compensation for the relevant string. It is also possible to manually set fret positions(and not let the program precompute them, acoording to the scale length). I'm having some problems, though. - I'm only familiar with metal strings. I don't know which materials are most often used in nylon/gut strings for guitar and bass. - The elasticity modulus of high carbon steel, that string cores and plain steel strings are made of, is about 200-205 GPa. This value yields pretty good result with metal strings, but I'm totally unaware of the elasticity modulus of nylon/gut/silk strings, which should be significantly less. The string tension charts provide info only about string unit mass(mass per unit length), and tension for a given pitch, at a given scale length. - When comparing to given data, I'm almost always getting a frequency, a little higher than specified. The reason for this is the fact, that when a string's length is increased, in effect of its tension, its diameter and unit mass become slightly decreased, and this shifts the pitch up slightly. Does this mean, that the diameter of the string is higher than the stated gauge, when the string is not under tension? With metal strings, the difference is usually less than 0.5 cents, but with nylon strings(if their elasticity modulus is significantly less than steel's modulus) the difference is in the range of 1-2 cemitones, which is obviously incorrect. - The gauge of wound strings is always given, but not the diameter of the core of the string, which is important for string stretch calculations. Can you help me out with the weak spots, and tell me some info from your personal experience with strings.

In fact, I saw a guitar, with a handmade tremolo. It was really cute! The tremolo base was laser-cut from a 5mm steel sheet, filed and nickel-plated, and was oval-shaped. The tremolo stepped on two standard tremolo pylons. The saddles were very beautiful, and were made of ebony. There was a piece of fretwire fretted on every saddle, at the place where the string left the saddle. The part, where the springs are attached to the tremolo, and the strings are inserted, was made of a metal block, screwed to the tremolo base.

There is a curious fact in the test results. Both LP and Explorer have short 627mm scale lengths, while the chipboard guitar has a standard strat 647/649mm scale. The chipboard guitar should sound quite brighter and more twangy for that reason(like a strat), but it doesn't. Does that mean that chipboard absorbs more treble? If you, Pete and your friend, happen to be bored for another night, it will also be interesting to build a chipboard neck for the guitar .

A friend of mine repainted his guitar, and I'm going to tell you about what he did. I'm living in Bulgaria, where you cam find primarily spray cans, sandpaper, primers, but not exotic things like sealers. Most people here seal the wood with super glue . The materials needed are a can or two of acryllic primer some spray cans of acryllic lacquer(2 usually), and one can of transparent acryllic finish, about a meter of 60, 220, 400 and 600(wet) gritt sandpaper, and some polishing compound. Also a block of wood or rubber for sanding, and protective equipment, and of course a dust-free room. First, the old paint is removed with the 60 gritt paper, with a sanding machine. Then, if the surface is perfect(no holes from hits), the acryllic primer is applied. After a day or two, it is sanded smooth with the 220 gritt paper, the guitar and the room is cleaned from dust, and the first 2-3 coats of pain are applied(one coat is 2 consequent sprayings). The minimum time betweeen 2 coats is about half an hour. Then the guitar is left for 2 days, and the paint is then sanded again for a mat look(all the surface must be ideal, the primer below must not show up, nor there should be shiny spots left from the lacquer). After cleaning, the second 2-3 coats must be applied, and, after drying again sanded with the 220, or even 400 or 600 wet sandpaper. By that time, the surface must be perfectly mat, without imperfections. If you sand it too much, and the primer shows up, additional coats will be needed. The next stage is to apply the transparent finish. It is critical not to allow any leaks ond drips here. After applying the lacquer, the guitar must dry for at least a week. After it has dried, it is polished with the polishing compound. Here a spray can coasts about $2, a meter of sandpaper is about $0.5, and polishing compound is about $3-4. This makes a total of about $10-15 for the job. (Needless to say that the average salary here is about $120). If you have any suggestions or improvements to the procedure, feel free....

For a long time, I have tried to make the first few frets of many electric guitars sound in tune, but, in practice there are always strings that sound a little higher in pitch, and compromises must be done when choosing the distance between the first fret and the nut. I don't know why, on most guitars, the distance between fret1 and the nut is a little longer than it should be. This leads to higher pitched notes on the first frets, accurate 12-th fret(when we do the intonation correctly), and lower pitched notes after the 12th fret. This led me to the idea, that movable saddles can be made at the nut, just as there are saddles on the bridge. This would make the guitar play almost perfectly in tune, as each string will have its ideal distance between fret1 and its corresponding nut saddle. Furthermore, this "device" may be made in such a way, that the height of the saddles(or the height of their base), may be adjustable too, so that one can tweak the string height at the nut. What do you think? Will it affect the tone of the guitar much?