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 ... What Does It Do?
- Thread starter Sternodox
- Start date
Just a minute there, buddy. This is TB; there has to be a best!
I own 3 basses. All are Sandbergs with zero frets, and I like that they add to the consistency of tone in those instruments. My base of comparison is of course a very tiny % of all bases ever made, so I am open to the idea that my experience of consistent tone with these 3 instruments is by chance, and not caused by zero frets. Mine are also all "Masterpiece" level aged, which entails heat and vibration treatment that also is at least correlated with the tonal consistency and may contribute to causing what I experience: Every note on every fret-string combination is consistent. Of course, you have to like that tone, and taking into account string choice, electronics/amplification chain, and pick choice - I do. As most of you know, there are a lot of variables to fiddle with.
Last edited:
Ok, that's kind of cool. I wouldn't be compelled to try a zero nut just for the sake of itself, but with something like this, I'd certainly give it a shot on one of my basses.
This is a little off-topic for the thread, but: Scarf joints are a technique used when crafting an instrument with a tiltback headstock. They do conserve wood in this case, as you'd need a much thicker blank to create a Fender style neck with a tilt, but the primary purpose is really strength. An angled headstock without a scarf joint has a pretty weak point where the fingerboard ends and the headstock begins, which is further exacerbated by the fact that usually there's also a truss rod access there (which further reduces the wood thickness). This is the reason why Gibson headstocks are notorious for breaking off.
To compensate, you can either have a volute (which adds weight at the end of the neck) or a scarf joint (which changes the grain orientation and adds a strong glue joint). My Gibson SB-350 has a volute, whereas my old Elrick had a scarf joint... as well as a zero fret.
This is correct. A scarf joint creates a structural mechanism that is stronger than the wood on its own.
This image demonstrates it best:
Invalid Link Removed
Interesting discussion and I agree, but there are neck joints and there are neck joints. As pertains to Turner basses, I'm of the opinion that his main reason for using the type of joint he used was to save on material cost. Considering the prices for his Electroline basses ($3K+) he could have gone about it in an elegant way, instead. Which could have been a multi-piece neck with a nicely carved volute. Or at least a different type joint than what comes standard on many budget bases. To wit:
Inexpensive Ibanez Mezzo, scarf joint used soley to save cost, which adds no support for the angled headstock.
Turner Electroline scarf joint, closer to the headstock, adds some support. No volute. Functional but unatractive, and not what one would expect on an expensive boutique bass IMO.
Here's a Lakland Skyline semi-hollow. A Michael Tobias design with budget, wood-saving scarf joint, but with a thoughtful included volute. Not the greatest looking arrangement, but the volute is nice and it's a Skyline, afterall. Located away from the headstock, this joint offers no extra support for the angled headstock. The volute takes care of that.
By contrast, the premium-built USA Lakland semi-hollow. Note the elegant Tobias-type scarf joint and volute. No attempt so save wood costs here, but it's what is expected in both function and aesthetics for a bass costing ~ 3X as much as its import budget cousin. Is the scarf joint even necessary?....maybe not but USA Laklands are first class builds, so you get it anyway.
Edit: oops, Lakland pic not loading
Last edited:
The strength of a scarf joint really comes more from the realignment of grain in the joint as per @Lonnybass 's description above. Where the joint is located along the neck doesn't really matter much and doesn't impact the increased strength of the design. The other reason to do them is to reduce wastage. This is both a cost-saving measure as well as ethical/conservational. The volute is a nice thing to add to the strength there in the joint, especially with a headstock TR access, but volutes are also for thumb reference. An ideal volute when just touched by your thumb, will align your index finger to the first fret.Interesting discussion and I agree, but there are neck joints and there are neck joints. As pertains to Turner basses, I'm of the opinion that his main reason for using the type of joint he used was to save on material cost. Considering the prices for his Electroline basses ($3K+) he could have gone about it in an elegant way, instead. Which could have been a multi-piece neck with a nicely carved volute. Or at least a different type joint than what comes standard on many budget bases. To wit:
Inexpensive Ibanez Mezzo, scarf joint used soley to save cost, which adds no support for the angled headstock.
View attachment 5422905
Turner Electroline scarf joint, closer to the headstock, adds some support. No volute. Functional but unatractive, and not what one would expect on an expensive boutique bass IMO.
View attachment 5422929
Here's a Lakland Skyline semi-hollow. A Michael Tobias design with budget, wood-saving scarf joint, but with a thoughtful included volute. Not the greatest looking arrangement, but the volute is nice and it's a Skyline, afterall. Located away from the headstock, this joint offers no extra support for the angled headstock. The volute takes care of that.
View attachment 5422934
By contrast, the premium-built USA Lakland semi-hollow. Note the elegant Tobias-type scarf joint and volute. No attempt so save wood costs here, but it's what is expected in both function and aesthetics for a bass costing ~ 3X as much as its import budget cousin. Is the scarf joint even necessary?....maybe not but USA Laklands are first class builds, so you get it anyway.
Edit: oops, Lakland pic not loading
One of the reasons that Gibson's like to explode when they fall is due to the overly large break angle they use in their designs, which exacerbates the grain runout issue explained above. Another is that mahogany (all of them) is comparatively brittle say to hard maple (25% lower modulus of rupture and modulus of elasticity). Case in point, I've repaired many Les Pauls and SGs, but I don't think I've ever repaired a Ripper headstock or even seen one broken.
Oh, come on. To us small builders, going with a Zero fret doesn't really add anything to the cost. And we don't charge extra for a zero fret. The decision to use a zero fret on a particular model bass is for technical reasons.
@Bruce Johnson, I saw in one of your posts in a different thread a few weeks ago how fret calculators and fret jigs should have the nut position half a fret slot farther away from the bridge than a zero fret position. That explains why many notes at the first fret are a few cents sharp when the open note is in tune. Did I understand you correctly?
Edit - half a fret SLOT
Edit - half a fret SLOT
Last edited:
Well, I explained about that on the thread about my fret slotting saw. If you make up a fingerboard for a bass to use a conventional nut, the end of the fingerboard that the nut will seat against needs to be right on the "zero" line. If you use your fret slotting saw to mark the line where you are going to cut off the end of the fingerboard, then you should offset the saw 0.011" to the left, toward the headstock. The saw slot is normally 0.023", and 0.011" is half the width of the slot. That's a fine detail in building a bass.
But I don't think that's what you are referring to here. If notes are going a little sharp at the first fret, when they are in tune played open, that indicates that the nut slot is too high. You are pressing the string down farther than needed to touch the first fret. That stretches the string and makes it ring sharp. Trim the nut slot down to the correct height to fix it.
A nut slot that's too high will make the first fret note too sharp, the second fret note a little bit sharp, and then the rest will be nearly correct.
@Bruce Johnson : Do you have insight with a zero fret being used with a Buzz Feiten tuning system? Would the zero fret negate it?
The Feiten System requires a specially-cut nut with offsets on (I think) two of the strings. To do a Zero fret, you'd have to inset a wider brass or stainless bar and file the offset spots into it. A little bit of work, but it could be done.
