Why is that optimal? Hopefully not just because "it's common knowledge."
Indisputably wrong. My bass has all the frets identical, and is extremely playable. You're welcome to try it out.
The fact that there's relief on the neck prevents back buzz.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Zero fret question
- Thread starter Mahataru
- Start date
The fact that there's relief on the neck prevents back buzz.
Common knowledge, conventional wisdom, standards of practice, call it whatever you want. All I know is that these are commonly applied concepts used by folks a whole lot smarter than I.
Riis
Hopkins
Commercial User
I never used a zero fret on any of my builds, but I always set the action at the first fret at the same height as the second fret with the first fret fretted (say that three times fast). So basically, my nut slots are cut to just about the same height as the frets themselves, and my basses don't buzz at all. It simply makes sense to me that a zero fret that is the same fret wire as the other frets would work just fine, as long as the bass is set up properly. That being said, I wouldn't level the zero fret when doing the initial fret dressing because it is in constant contact with the strings, and will wear faster than the rest of the frets.
With evidence against it, and in absence of evidence in its favor, I call it mythology.
Here's the response from the man himself, Mike Tobias. I asked solely about zero fret height but did not request any corroborating evidence although I'm sure it does exist.
"by the time milling and dressing are done it works out to about .010 taller than the rest of the frets
Best regards,
Michael Tobias
MTD (Michael Tobias Design LLC)
3 Lauren Ct
Kingston, NY 12401 USA
845.246.0670
[email protected]
www.mtdbass.com"
AFAIK, he builds pretty nice basses so I'll go with his answer.
Riis
Understood that that is evidence that a higher 0 fret is done--not evidence that it is needed.
I'll let him know. Personally, I don't think he realizes how much time he could save by milling / dressing as he does the other 24.
Riis
Sarcasm aside,
What I would want to know from Mr. Tobias is not just what he does, but why, and whether he has tested the alternative. Maybe he has, maybe not.
For a hundred years, people laid in frets by the rule of 18, and just threw their hands up over the fact that instruments played out of tune beyond a fifth fret. (Using the rule of 18 results with a 1% placement inaccuracy with each successive fret, which compounds.) Finally they figured out that the number was wrong. Until that time no one questioned, they just followed what they were taught. The rule of 18 was common knowledge, conventional wisdom, standards of practice.
Write him and ask. He answered my query in short order; he may be able to cite a reference. Then again, any credible builder may provide the same accommodation.
Pilot,
All your explanations sound very logical.
I would like to ask you a couple of questions:
1. What is the lowest action you can achieve on the 17th fret without buzzing?
2. Could you achieve the same action (from question number 1), without buzzing, when you have your neck perfectly straight?
The reason for the questions was because when level the zero fret, I couldn't achieve the question number 2.
Thank you.
Exactly . I slot the nut to be no higher than any other fret and the string height is 3-4 /64 " at 30th fret and almost on the fret at #1. Very little relief and no buzz anywhere.
I'm not an engineer or a luthier, just a wood worker and a hobbyist, but I do have an honest question. If a zero fret is the same height as the rest of the frets, what is it doing when playing an open string? Every explanation I've read or heard for a zero fret is that you have a permanently fretted open note, so that every note sounds consistent on the instrument. If the zero fret is the same height as the rest of the frets, doesn't that mean it never makes contact with the string when it's played open?
Corey, you're misunderstanding how a zero fret works. Although there is a nut, its slots are cut deeper, and it only functions to set the spacing of the strings. The strings all rest solidly on the zero fret, all the time.
In regards to the argument about the correct height for the zero fret, I use a taller fretwire and trim it down to 0.010" above the height of the other frets. Personal experience has shown me that if I trim them down to even with the other frets, the bass will be too sensitive to buzzing on the first fret when played open. I believe the reason why is that the extra height of the zero fret (or the nut on a non-zero fret neck) acts as the first little bit of the relief curve. Because wood thickens at the transition to the headstock, the section of the neck between the nut and the 2nd fret isn't capable of pulling up into that slight curve. So we cheat it by "jacking up" the zero fret or nut.
In regards to the argument about the correct height for the zero fret, I use a taller fretwire and trim it down to 0.010" above the height of the other frets. Personal experience has shown me that if I trim them down to even with the other frets, the bass will be too sensitive to buzzing on the first fret when played open. I believe the reason why is that the extra height of the zero fret (or the nut on a non-zero fret neck) acts as the first little bit of the relief curve. Because wood thickens at the transition to the headstock, the section of the neck between the nut and the 2nd fret isn't capable of pulling up into that slight curve. So we cheat it by "jacking up" the zero fret or nut.
This is what I assumed, based on everything I've read about previously. That's what I was expressing, I don't understand the argument for a zero fret that's level with the first fret and what that would accomplish.
Regarding #2:
If the neck is set perfectly straight, then all frets would have to be progressively taller as they approached the nut or zero fret. The standard bass guitar neck is designed for level frets. A truss rod is therefore employed to maintain the correct amount of neck relief to accommodate the clearance needed by the vibrating strings playing any note on the neck (including open notes).
Having the nut or zero fret height set taller than the rest of the frets attempts to solve the clearance problem by requiring the string to be pressed further toward the fretboard when fretting a note. Unfortunately, once a note is fretted, everything behind the fretted note is essentially meaningless. The only real change would be the amount the string is stretched while fretted (except for the open note). This stretching causes the same intonation issues as extremely high action because, in fact, the action has been raised by the tall nut or zero fret. The angle of the string between any fretted note and bridge saddle doesn't actually change due to nut or zero fret height. Once again, only progressively heightened frets or correct neck relief can solve the string angle and clearance problem without causing intonation issues. Intonation will vary directly with action height regardless of where the height comes from (nut or bridge saddle). There is no way around that. Well... Unless the fret positions themselves are varied to compensate, I suppose.
To sum up... A tall nut or zero fret will effectively raise the action of the instrument and cause intonation issues. A level nut or zero fret combined with a proper instrument setup will result in low action and good intonation. If an open note rattles with a level nut or zero fret, the instrument requires a truss rod adjustment, bridge saddle height adjustment, fret leveling, or a combination of these.
So, are you saying that most of bass guitars/electric guitars in the world have intonation problem, since the nut slots are generally taller than the frets?
I don't have any intonation issues on my bass that I referred before.
Also, I don't have any relief (if there is, it will be very tiny) on my bass neck, I adjust the truss rod to have a straight neck with the strings on.
I don't understand the point of having relief on a neck. In my opinion, you will never achieve a low action if you have a relief, especially around middle of the neck.
Many companies that mass produce instruments use pre-cut nuts that only see speedy, "close enough" setups. This is partly due to the fact that the stores where the instruments will be sold will have variances in their environments (room temperature and humidity, mostly). And with these variances, an instrument has to be able to be removed from the box, tuned to pitch, and played without buzzing. Extensive, luthier-grade setups take longer, require technicians with higher skill levels, and would be mostly wasted on an instrument being shipped to a different environment. Many retailers offer free or discounted initial setups on stringed instrument purchased from their stores for this very reason.
Check out the stickies in the Hardware Setup and Repair forum on this site. There should be an amount of neck relief dialed in. A perfectly straight neck is improperly adjusted. The only time a straight neck would be totally acceptable would be if the frets were progressively raised toward the nut to compensate for the vibrating strings' clearance needs or the action was unnecessarily high. This is a matter of math, not opinion.
If your nut is cut high and your neck is perfectly straight, consider filing the nut down to level and performing a complete setup. In theory (without knowing the particulars of your instrument) your action should get a little lower and your intonation should get a slight bit better across all notes.
Also note that all stringed instruments which produce notes by pressing on the string to subdivide its length (fretted or not) will, because of their design, have very slight intonation errors no matter what. This is because pressing the string into the fret or fingerboard stretches the length of the string. The higher the action (from the nut or bridge), the more pronounced the effect. In a perfect world - assuming we could all strum, pluck, etc. the string such as to cause it to only vibrate side-to-side (parallel with the fretboard), necks could be straight and saddle height could be the same as the frets, resulting in a perfectly flat, absolute lowest action, and extremely close intonation. I say close because the thickness of the string will work against its own harmonic intonation. Hence, the reason why many pianos receive stretch tuning.
That is why I have my zero fret (or nut) taller than the other frets.
This is not my opinion, I tried your way before and no matter what I did, I couldn't get a low action without the string buzzing in multiple locations along the fretboard.
Just in case you wondering I levelled my fretboard correctly. I tried the setup before polishing the frets - same result. I even once tried, using flat fretboard (infinite radius, to make sure that the problem is not the radius) - same result.
I might not be a brilliant Mathematician nor an expert on stringed instrument setups/building, but think about this,
- I have perfectly straight neck
- My zero fret is slightly taller than my other frets
- My bridge saddles is adjusted so that my string is parallel with the fret board (which is straight, so I have the same action along the neck)
- All fret slots were cut in the correct position
- My scale length is correctly measured.
Again, I could be an idiot, but I don't see how could I not get a very low action with no buzz (well, maybe very minor) and correct intonation.
In fact, I found that it is the most comfortable setup for me. Somebody commissioned me to build him a guitar, he loves that set up more than his other "branded" guitars, which were set up the "correct" way.
Last edited:
I'll say it again:
The practical reason why we Luthiers leave the zero fret/nut a little bit higher is because it works. Years of experience. I've built and set up hundreds of basses with zero frets. I tried cutting them level, and had too many problems. And yes, I know how to set the relief and action correctly.
The technical reason why this extra height is needed is because, when you loosen the truss rod, the neck doesn't go into the exact theoretical curve that's needed for string clearance. Its curvature is imperfect. The part of the neck around the nut and the first fret is stiffer than the middle of the neck, because of the volute on the back as it transitions to the headstock. So it doesn't bend into the perfect curve. If you measure the actual relief curve of a neck carefully, you'll find that there's a flat spot in the curve around the 1st-2nd fret area. Along that desired clearance curve, the 1st and sometimes 2nd fret are effectively high, in relation to a equal-height zero fret. Raising the zero fret/nut compensates for that. It corrects the curve. So, the first zone of the relief curve is mechanically built into the neck, regardless of how the truss rod is set.
When you press the string down at the first fret, then you are moving down past the flat spot into the real relief curve, where the neck actually begins to curve. So, there's clearance over the 2nd fret, and no buzz. Same on down the neck. The problem zone is that first fret buzzing when you play the string open.
If you cut the zero fret level with the other frets down the neck, you'd have to slightly lower the first fret to keep it from buzzing. That's what I had to do when I tried it. It's more practical to take the relief out of the neck, level all the frets except for the zero fret, and then trim the zero fret to be slightly higher. When you string it up and set the relief, the overall curve ends up closer to what it needs to be.
The raised zero fret/nut is a correction for the uneven stiffness and bending of the neck.
The practical reason why we Luthiers leave the zero fret/nut a little bit higher is because it works. Years of experience. I've built and set up hundreds of basses with zero frets. I tried cutting them level, and had too many problems. And yes, I know how to set the relief and action correctly.
The technical reason why this extra height is needed is because, when you loosen the truss rod, the neck doesn't go into the exact theoretical curve that's needed for string clearance. Its curvature is imperfect. The part of the neck around the nut and the first fret is stiffer than the middle of the neck, because of the volute on the back as it transitions to the headstock. So it doesn't bend into the perfect curve. If you measure the actual relief curve of a neck carefully, you'll find that there's a flat spot in the curve around the 1st-2nd fret area. Along that desired clearance curve, the 1st and sometimes 2nd fret are effectively high, in relation to a equal-height zero fret. Raising the zero fret/nut compensates for that. It corrects the curve. So, the first zone of the relief curve is mechanically built into the neck, regardless of how the truss rod is set.
When you press the string down at the first fret, then you are moving down past the flat spot into the real relief curve, where the neck actually begins to curve. So, there's clearance over the 2nd fret, and no buzz. Same on down the neck. The problem zone is that first fret buzzing when you play the string open.
If you cut the zero fret level with the other frets down the neck, you'd have to slightly lower the first fret to keep it from buzzing. That's what I had to do when I tried it. It's more practical to take the relief out of the neck, level all the frets except for the zero fret, and then trim the zero fret to be slightly higher. When you string it up and set the relief, the overall curve ends up closer to what it needs to be.
The raised zero fret/nut is a correction for the uneven stiffness and bending of the neck.
Last edited:
True, but a compensated nut and fret spacing would mitigate the difference.
On the 'raised zero fret' issue, a valid reason for a higher zero fret would be reason to have the 1st fret higher than the 2nd, etc, up the board, but it's not needed.
Then again it could be due to the relative lack of neck flexy there, as Bruce mentioned.
Edit: great explanation there, while I was typing.
