Fretless boards: harder than CA or Epoxy, but still manageable? Does it exist?

[Dirk Diggler]

Have you tried a Spar Poly?
Many, many coats of Poly have always worked well for me, but takes a lot of time and effort.

It sounds to me with the cracking that it's just not bonding with the fingerboard.

Did you use anything to clean the board before coating it?

Good luck,
Dirk

 

[Rabidhamster]

Hmm I’m afraid I’d need to see pics of that one. Strings wearing through a coating and gouging a board due to aggressive play or too low of action looks different than the coating cracking and the wood punking down under moderate fretting pressure.

Is it possible 6 people have dropped something on their fretboard with sufficient force to dent the wood?

Pics pics pics pics

 

[micguy]

So these players are crushing the fretboard material so drastically that the CA becomes unsupported and cracks?

What kind of death grip are they using? Pressure adequate to stop the string at the fingerboard is all that is required.

NB I am not denying your opinion of the wood quality, but playing style must also be a contributing factor here.

It may have absolutely nothing to do with playing style. CA is generally very hard, but also very brittle. Wood, when exposed to different levels of moisture, moves. If the CA is on top of the wood, and not in between the fibers, gluing them together, it'll fail without ever playing the instrument due to humidity cycling from Winter to Summer.

You probably don't need a harder material - you need a tougher material - one which can move a bit, and not crack. Ebonol is one such material - it's made from wood fibers glued together, and I doubt that the fibers they use are all ebony - it's more likely paper pulp stuff - the wood fibers in ebonol are not the magic, and I doubt that here the quality of the wood under the glue is the issue. With the right glue, you can also do what with a wood fingerboard - you glue the fibers together. But, to do that, you don't want glue that builds a layer on top - you need glue that sinks deep into the wood, and bonds the fibers together. Fast CA that's gel like in its consistency will never do that - it forms a layer on top, which will inevitably break off and/or crack. You need a glue that's thin, so it sinks in, and that sets slowly, so it has a chance to sink in. When I've done fingerboards, I used 24 hour epoxy, thinned with alcohol - it took a long time to cure, but when it did, it was tough, and bonded to the fingerboard.

I may be wrong, but my guess is this has nothing to do with the players' technique or the wood that their fingerboards are made of. It's more likely, given that you have multiple people with the same issue, that you're using the wrong glue. My ebonol fingerboard is most likely made with "crap" wood fibers, and it's holding up like a champ.

 

[drumvsbass]

This is sad. But likely true. When I was still at the music store, pretty much every fretless that came from factory had flats. Except one Fender that came in with rounds... I deduced why. Board looked like trash in about a month.
I have an '87 BB300 that I had turned into a fretless in '93, has had the same (nickel) rounds on it since '04. The unfinished board is marked, but after a recent cleaning, the board was dirtier than it was worn.

 

[charlie monroe]

I may be wrong, but my guess is this has nothing to do with the players' technique or the wood that their fingerboards are made of.

So is there some unknown third factor that is causing the fingerboard to need treatment in the first place?

You got carried away there, I think.

 

[arbiterusa]

Maybe you dont have to deal with recent <1000$ basses on a regular basis...

Yeah. I play nothing else. And I hammer them hard. Roundwound strings. Multiple gigs per week. Indian Rosewood boards. Uncoated, I might add.

Never seen anything like what you describe.

But hey, if that's what's going on they need new fingerboards, of something to your liking, since none of the usual treatments are working. I'd suggest Richlite, personally. I use it on builds as its something I'll just never have to worry about.

 

[micguy]

So is there some unknown third factor that is causing the fingerboard to need treatment in the first place?

Rounds on a "soft" (not ridiculously hard) wood without treatment, yes, you'll get dents - the fibers are not glued together well - wood naturally is a composite material made of cellulose fibers and lignin - a "glue" of sorts, but we often add our own glue, because on a fretless, lignin isn't tough enough. With ebony, the fibers are closer together, meaning the lignin doesn't have to span big gaps, and hence that wood is tougher than rosewood.

But rounds on ebonol, which is definitely not made with fancy wood fibers, are just fine - mine has gone about 6 years without a hint of dents - ebonol is garden variety wood fibers with the right glue holding them together, and infused throughout the wood fibers. The key here is....the right glue - deep penetration into the fibers is probably more important than absolute hardness.

 

[DiabolusInMusic]

Has epoxy been giving the same issue? It seems we are just talking about CA here.

 

[Eddie LeBlanc]

I have heard that woods coming from China have some issues. Seems the curing process maybe rushed and many times not holding up well in many applications.

This maybe a problem with the manufacturer's selection of material and origin of that material.

 

[brianrost]

There must be a lot of kinds of "rosewood" out there with significant differences in hardness. What are they using on Asian basses these days? I've had a B.C. Rich fretless with an uncoated rosewood board that never showed appreciable wear requiring dressing, even after a decade of playingwith rounds.

But I've also played a friend's Englehardt DB that literally had ruts in the rosewood fingerboard from his rockabilly slapping...with nylon strings!!! As you fretted a note, you could feel the string roll into the rut! He told me he was replacing boards about once a year. He didn't want ebony because it would change the tone too much...

 

[Allegrus]

A harder material isn't going to fix 'soft' fretboard problem ... the fretboard is the SUPPORTING material for the coating, no matter what you use. The only way that you fix this problem is if you make your coating material so thick, that the fretboard support function is rendered irrelevant.

If you customers are coming in pissed off, that's NOT on you. They should have been more diligent when purchasing their bass ... or be less heavy handed when playing it. The best you can do is set the expectation that the quality of your work depends on the factors determined by the materials of the bass.

 

[okcrum]

One possibility is using a wood hardener that can get into the pores and stiffen the wood underneath the top coat.

 

[dkelley]

no one is "blaming" them for manufacturers' practices --- you took a leap! who is responsible for believing manufacturers? i always thought it was "buyer beware." someone has to be responsible for their ignorance. those customers are responsible for what they believe --- 'if they drink the kool-aid, they suffer the trip'.

instrument makers are selling 'looks'. functionality, in and of itself, is not that expensive. who wouldn't want to know that?

What? someone here, I forget who, specifically suggested that he should be, or asked if he has been, educating his customers about what fingerboard material they should be getting on their fretless basses.

Hence, the OP's response is completely correct - no, he should not be educating them on what to buy, because they trust that the instruments they buy are properly designed. He however must now go and tell them, well, the manufacturers are actually screwing them over with cheap woods that apparently aren't proper dense hardwood (rosewood or other), and then try to solve the problem in his own previous treatments applied to the basses that in his past experiences have worked fine, but now don't appear to be.

So you're supposed to be able to tell that a $700 bass, or a $500 or $1000 bass, is, in your opinion, sold for looks, not functionality, and that it is ignorant to assume anything else? what???

I totally get his point - didn't you?

 

[sotua]

It goes like this: a guy comes with his recently bought Sire/Marcus Miller fretless * because "I did such a great job" on his friend's (cheap) fretless 5 years ago. I CA the fingerboard. The guy comes back 4 months later with deep grooves in the board. The CA has cracked from the too soft wood beneath it. Buzz and deadspots. He's pissed off. And I would be too, were I in his shoes.

So. Anything harder than CA and Epoxy, before I throw the towel and tell them "the only solution is either to buy a more expensive bass or have me perform a $500 board replacement?"

If that is the case, you need to refuse the job outright, as you can't guarantee it will work. "I'm sorry, but your bass has a <soft wood here> fingerboard which really doesn't lend itself to fretless, even with epoxy. I can't take your money if I can't guarantee it's going to last for <reasonable fretless expectation>."

 

[dkelley]

I also doubt they’re using fingerboard wood on their fretless basses that isn’t bring used for their fretted models.

fingerboard wood on fretted models doesn't matter much - it gets very little pressure compared to fretless, gets ZERO string vibration, and yes it gets bend scrapes but again most of that pressure is against the frets, not the wood. And most importantly, no matter what happens to the wood between the frets, the sound isn't affected at all - and playability only changes, doesn't degrade (Some folks go out of their way to have scalloped frets )

 

[dkelley]

They should have been more diligent when purchasing their bass ... or be less heavy handed when playing it. The best you can do is set the expectation that the quality of your work depends on the factors determined by the materials of the bass.

How? If you buy a $700 fretless bass, are you going to think, ah, this will be a piece of junk in 5 years??? of course not. you think they built it properly.

I've owned $200 fretless basses that lasted for years without treatment. I've had expensive fretlesses that ended up with mild abrasions but still sounded and played great after many years. My main fretless (converted from fretted) was an Ibanez musician (old 70s one) with ebony board, and it lasted for years and years and years of hard playing daily, professionally, without issues until the end, when I'd finally worn some audible wear issues into the board. it was untreated.

Treating a good board should be fine, as noted.

treating a terrible board will not go well, it seems.

Question is really - why is there such junk wood going into fretless basses these days? OR is the OP actually having issues with the product he's using, or the application method?

You can't educate the public to not buy sire, yamaha, etc fretless basses - which should be just great. You also can't educate them not to play hard, or to use rounds - I slapped on fretless with rounds my entire career - only minor visible marks, nothing audible until, as noted, many many years on an untreaded ebony board, and even then it would have been repairable (but I just sold it instead).

It's gotta be an issue with wood, or the specific application or material being applied.

I'm really interested to hear a viable solution here! Great thread, OP!

 

[dkelley]

If that is the case, you need to refuse the job outright, as you can't guarantee it will work. "I'm sorry, but your bass has a <soft wood here> fingerboard which really doesn't lend itself to fretless, even with epoxy. I can't take your money if I can't guarantee it's going to last for <reasonable fretless expectation>."

but how's he to know in advance? you're asking the impossible

 

[40Hz]

fingerboard wood on fretted models doesn't matter much - it gets very little pressure compared to fretless, gets ZERO string vibration, and yes it gets bend scrapes but again most of that pressure is against the frets, not the wood. And most importantly, no matter what happens to the wood between the frets, the sound isn't affected at all - and playability only changes, doesn't degrade (Some folks go out of their way to have scalloped frets )

Agree. It’s never been an issue with any fretless I’ve played. Even on those with some wear.

 

[dkelley]

This is sad. But likely true. When I was still at the music store, pretty much every fretless that came from factory had flats. Except one Fender that came in with rounds... I deduced why. Board looked like trash in about a month.
I have an '87 BB300 that I had turned into a fretless in '93, has had the same (nickel) rounds on it since '04. The unfinished board is marked, but after a recent cleaning, the board was dirtier than it was worn.

totally, that's exactly my observations too

 

[India_Sierra]

I can’t see the likes of big players like Schecter, LTD and Yamaha putting their reputations on the line by deliberately going with some inferior replacement or grade of rosewood. That makes zero sense.

They may not know there is an issue with the wood. At their lower orders, I doubt there is all that much inspection of the woods used in the builds. They'll take what they get from the supplier and CNC it into something they can sell. Far away from the top end stuff where someone will be inspecting each piece of wood to make sure it fits their parameters for tone, weight, stability and appearance.

That's if there is an issue with the wood, and I am not inclined to doubt the experience of the OP without evidence. It wouldn't be the first time in the history of manufacturing that something was mass produced and then later found to be flawed in some fashion. I am thinking back to the rubbish steel Mercedes Benz used to use around the turn of the Millenium when their star started to wane - it was cheap rubbish, reputedly manufactured in Brazil. There were plenty of £100,000 cars made out of it which rusted like a cheap old Volkswagen after a couple of years. Mercedes certainly didn't make those cars knowing they were going to be pockmarked with rust after just a couple of years!