larryp58 Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 My SongBird Deluxe's first 5 or 6 frets are deeply grooved and worn. I'm about to take it to a luthier to have it re-fretted. Would you re-fret the whole fingerboard or just the ones that are worn? Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Player Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Morning Larry.... My thought is that if only the first 5 or 6 need it, just have that done. It's what I did on my Taylor a few years ago. I am by no means just playing cowboy chords, but as with most guitars, the first 5 frets or so get most of the wear. My Taylor is 16 years old and has only had the first 5 frets redone. Someday, when needed I will have all redone, but why pay for something that does not need replacement. As they say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" You will love having the new frets there though when you do get it done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksdaddy Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 My credo is to always take the least intrusive method, so a partial refret is probably all that is needed. Fret wire is fairly easy to match. Unlike the old German guitar for which I had to make my own frets from scratch. Actually you might discuss levelling and recrowning too. I'm not claiming that to be a substitute for a refret but the Strat I recently purchased had some significant wear in the first 6 or 7 frets, the frets were never crowned properly in Fullerton in 1983 to begin with, and the 11th and 12th frets were a tish high, so I levelled and recrowned them all rather than refret. It's labor intensive but still less intrusive than a refret. The deciding factor will be how fussy you are about fret height, as you will lose maybe ten thousandths off the height, maybe more, maybe less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drathbun Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 I would take it to the luthier and explain you want a partial refret but ask his opinion. If the fingerboard is level and your playing action good, then the replacement of the worn frets is all that is called for. If there are issues with fretboard leveling, pitting etc, then it is a good time to take them all off and relevel / refret. I did that to one of my guitars but it was 40 years old not 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 The fun thing about a refret job, is YOU get to choose the size and shape of the new frets.....I have acoustic guitars with the little square frets from the early days, and one with JUMBO frets......like a bass guitar....lol....both are fun and interesting to play....I think I like a medium width fret , tall, for ease of play...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larryp58 Posted June 10, 2009 Author Share Posted June 10, 2009 Thanks guys! My initial thoughts were concerning the frets that will not be changed. Would the height be a major concern. But changing the worn ones, and re-crowning the rest seems to be the better option. That was my initial thoughts, just wanted to get a second opinion! Thanks, guys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drathbun Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Thanks guys! My initial thoughts were concerning the frets that will not be changed. Would the height be a major concern. But changing the worn ones' date=' and re-crowning the rest seems to be the better option. That was my initial thoughts, just wanted to get a second opinion! Thanks, guys![/quote'] No luthier worth his salt would refret just the worn frets and not ensure the entire length of frets new and old were levelled properly and the guitar was setup and played properly. So you should have no issues about a difference in height between new and old frets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brians356 Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Do you like the height of frets 6-14? If they have never been leveled (or only minimally) and you like the height of the frets, then I would replace 1-5 and have the whole thing leveled as sparingly as possible. If frets 6 and higher are getting low, possibly from having been leveled one or more times previously, then I would probably go for a more extensive refret, probably stopping at the body joint, or wherever the frets are still pristine. So the issue is not just whether frets 6-? are properly shaped (no divots) but also whether they are the height you prefer or can live with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brians356 Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Re: Leveling to "remove" worn spots, rather than replacing worn frets: I recently leveled my 100% original '75 Telecaster deep enough to get past some heavily worn spots in the lower frets. It came out fine, and the action is true with the frets all the same height (it had never been leveled before, it was factory fresh), but I don't like the low fret height I created. I feel my fingertips banging against the wood and it's just not comfortable. So whereas the original frets were ~.040" tall, now they are ~.028 and too low. If I had it to do over again I would have replaced frets 1-5 and done the least leveling I could get away with. Incidentally, I use Stew-Mac's radiused wooden sanding blocks for leveling. I love 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.