Guitar Setup Question - Valid unexpected modification?

[HomeRec]

I have a very old but solid guitar that I've been playing for nearly many many years. I bought it used, so it's even older than that. Now in all that time, I never really had the guitar set up. Yes, I know, that's bad. However, it played fine, and being my first guitar, I didn't have any problems with it.

A few months back, I brought the guitar in for setup for the first time. The tech adjusted the electronics and the mechanical parts, but didn't do anything radical that I could see, and maintained the feel of the guitar. I was happy with the results.

Just recently, however, one of my frets developed a severe dent that caused one of the notes to just plain not work. I brought it to a different tech, and he said that he could take care of the problem, but he really pushed the fact that it needed a setup. I figured this was a standard part of taking care of the fret, and that the setup would be more simple adjustments.

Well, I was wrong. Everything about the guitar was changed, including the string heights and the feel of the guitar. Most notably, the brass nut on the guitar, whose appearance I had grown used to over nearly two decades of playing, was milled down into a new shape. This specifically was something that really shocked me. The tech explained that this was a fairly standard and necessary part of a setup, and the reasons behind what he did - something about allowing for better intonation and clearance. He even showed me guitars with a similarly-shaped nut. However, the fact remains that I had grown very used to the old nut style, and I was unhappy that such a modification was done without my permission.

I'm not a guitar tech, and have no idea if this is a standard part of a guitar's setup. Is milling down a nut and altering its shape standard, or is a setup usually limited to adjusting the hardware as it is? If it is standard, is it something that a tech would normally just do, or something that they would consult the guitar owner on first? Obviously, there's nothing that can be done at this point - the "damage" is done, and putting a new nut on the guitar really wouldn't solve anything - modified or not, it's still the original hardware, though now of course it's been changed.

The tech has years of experience, but his attitude seemed to be more "I'll set up the guitar the way it should be set up" rather than the other tech's attitude of "I'll keep the guitar the way it is now." I really don't know which, if either, is more valid. I just know that I'm very unhappy that a guitar I've gotten used to over many years has been suddenly, unexpectedly, irrevocably changed without permission. Even if it's "for the best", I think that I would rather have left things the way they were, as it's a very old guitar with, up until this recent setup, all of the hardware as-is from the date of manufacture.

 

[Light]

Adjusting the nut SLOTS is a normal part of a setup. There are some, including some of the best repair folks around, who believe that the top of the nut shouldn't be more than half way up the string, because they believe it reduces sustain. I think their delusional, personally, and it makes the strings more likely to pop out of the nut. I have a particular aversion to sloppily made nuts, and I hate it when people don't finish them (a nut should be neat, clean, and shinny - it just doesn't look professional if you don't do it right), but I'm not going to do anything about it unless I've talked to you about it.

By the way, that divot in the fret wasn't "all of a sudden." It's been developing for years - you just didn't notice it. Fixing that required more than just a set up, but still should not have required more than adjusting the nut slots.

All that being said, I haven't seen the guitar, so I really have no idea if it was the right thing to do or not. He probably should have made sure you understood the job better (we sure as hell do), but that doesn't mean it was the wrong thing to do.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

 

[Thurgood]

Good advice.

 

[CMunch]

"I'll set up the guitar the way it should be set up"

Correct attitude unless you gave him specific preference instructions.

 

[legionserial]

Personally I'm of the opinion that if someone is going to do modifications or repairs to anything for you, be it a guitar, a car, or some building work, or whatever, they should probably give you a runthrough of exactly what they're going to do beforehand.

Saying that, if they didn't, I'd ask.

 

[apl]

What Light said.

The second guy probably raised the action enough to clear the fret above the dent. That would dramatically alter the feel of the guitar. The feel is not really affected by the nut shape, but the not slots do need to be the right depth relative to the fret tops.

You probably need a few worn frets replaced, then a fret level, crown, and polish and a setup. A setup usually involves installing new strings, setting string height above the fingerboard (action), neck curve (truss rod), and string length (intonation).

 

[apl]

There are some, including some of the best repair folks around, who believe that the top of the nut shouldn't be more than half way up the string, because they believe it reduces sustain.

Would they extend that argument to say that Floyd and other locking nuts effectively eliminate any possibility of sustain?

 

[HomeRec]

What Light said.

The second guy probably raised the action enough to clear the fret above the dent. That would dramatically alter the feel of the guitar. The feel is not really affected by the nut shape, but the not slots do need to be the right depth relative to the fret tops.

You probably need a few worn frets replaced, then a fret level, crown, and polish and a setup. A setup usually involves installing new strings, setting string height above the fingerboard (action), neck curve (truss rod), and string length (intonation).

He actually filled in the dent with an epoxy as a temporary measure, in lieu of a very expensive re-fret that I can't afford right now (+$100 to what I paid). The rest seemed to be "this needs to be set properly (to my specs)" work. He admitted when I picked up the guitar that he had really wanted to do a setup because he noticed a number of things that he felt were wrong. Of course, not knowing this, I just assumed that it was needed as part of filling in the dent.

As to the nut, what he did was take the height down and taper/round the portion facing the headstock. Prior to the setup, to the best of my recollection, it was more square - which is why the appearance of the guitar seems strange now.

As to informing me what would need to be done, he said that that's what (something) the nut (can't remember the term) entailed, and apologized after the fact for not explaining it more clearly - it had been one of ten or so things he whipped through when mentioning what was covered in setup. Of course, I had no idea what I should be asking. I know that, for someone who's been playing for 20 years, my knowledge of guitar tech and statistics is probably embarrassingly bad. But then, I've only ever had the one guitar, and haven't really needed to go too deep into it.

 

[philboyd studge]

It's best to let the tech know as much information as possible up front. For instance, you may want that nut to look the same because you've been looking at it for a long time while you're playing. Also, action preferences and string guages vary greatly from player to player.

 

[HomeRec]

It's best to let the tech know as much information as possible up front. For instance, you may want that nut to look the same because you've been looking at it for a long time while you're playing. Also, action preferences and string guages vary greatly from player to player.

That makes sense now, but at the time I had no way of knowing that he'd be doing anything that extreme to the nut in the first place - I honestly just thought it would be some minor re-calibrations, mostly in the service of compensating for the patch of the fret. It really was a "I'm going to set this up the way it should be" thing, and I had no idea what that way was, or what it entailed.

I suppose it can be said that it's my own fault for not asking, but I really didn't know what to ask, and only the one other setup to go by, which was done completely differently, with no major modifications to the appearance of the guitar apart from a good cleaning and new strings.

 

[Lt. Bob]

personally I think you may be focusing too much on the appearance of that nut.
What's FAR more important is how it plays now. Does it play better? If it does, then it's a good thing.
If it doean't, then it's a bad thing. It all really comes down to that.

And that idea of filling a dent in a fret with epoxy is gonna be a VERY temporary solution. I can't imagine that'll stay there very long.

 

[CMunch]

Surely changing the one fret and dressing it to match the others even though they are worn would have been a cheaper and easier temporary solution than having to fill and shape a hollow.Practical and techy seemed to avoid each other like the plague these days.

 

[apl]

Surely changing the one fret and dressing it to match the others even though they are worn would have been a cheaper and easier temporary solution than having to fill and shape a hollow.

It would seem so.

 

[ch2os7]

good stuff

This was a very interesting thread. Good stuff to know BEFORE hand. Thanks to all you guys who know about this stuff.

 

[Light]

He actually filled in the dent with an epoxy as a temporary measure, in lieu of a very expensive re-fret that I can't afford right now (+$100 to what I paid).

Yeah, don't take any guitar back to that guy - ever. That is never an appropriate repair.



Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

 

[Light]

Surely changing the one fret and dressing it to match the others even though they are worn would have been a cheaper and easier temporary solution than having to fill and shape a hollow.Practical and techy seemed to avoid each other like the plague these days.

Partial refrets are almost never a good idea. You end up grinding the new fret down to the height of the worn frets, at which point you are just going to have to do the whole thing over again next time. Much better, if you need a refret, to just bite the bullet and do it. They're expensive, but the improvement is well worth it, and if you've gone 20+ years without needing one, you probably won't need another any time soon.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

 

[dgatwood]

*shrugs* I'd think that whether a full refret is needed would depend on how you use the guitar and on whether the fret failure was caused by something else wrong (e.g. a botched setup ).

I'd generally expect the frets towards the top to get more wear than the frets near the body. If 75% of your frets have most of their life left in them, it might make sense to file four or five frets down to the same level and be done with it. If more than a handful of frets are badly worn, then yeah, refretting the whole thing is probably your best bet.

Filling a fret with epoxy, however, is a hack no matter how you look at it.... If you're going to hack it, at least fill the fret with solder or something.

 

[muttley600]

Adjusting the nut SLOTS is a normal part of a setup. There are some, including some of the best repair folks around, who believe that the top of the nut shouldn't be more than half way up the string, because they believe it reduces sustain. I think their delusional, personally, and it makes the strings more likely to pop out of the nut. I have a particular aversion to sloppily made nuts, and I hate it when people don't finish them (a nut should be neat, clean, and shinny - it just doesn't look professional if you don't do it right), but I'm not going to do anything about it unless I've talked to you about it.

By the way, that divot in the fret wasn't "all of a sudden." It's been developing for years - you just didn't notice it. Fixing that required more than just a set up, but still should not have required more than adjusting the nut slots.

All that being said, I haven't seen the guitar, so I really have no idea if it was the right thing to do or not. He probably should have made sure you understood the job better (we sure as hell do), but that doesn't mean it was the wrong thing to do.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

I'm one of those guys that likes no more than half the string in the nut slot although it has nothing to do with incorrect claims about sustain. Who did you hear that one from? I do it because I have seen many deep slots even on new nuts which are too deep and result in buzzing and chocking especially when players are inclined to change string gauge as they are often prone to do. The plain strings I drop in a bit deeper. Many other makers do this that I know of including, Benedetto, Proulx, Moll, the list is endless. Another reason I do it is because like you I hate to see sloppy attention to detail and a nut that is cut wrong is as you say really irritating.

He actually filled in the dent with an epoxy as a temporary measure, in lieu of a very expensive re-fret that I can't afford right now (+$100 to what I paid). The rest seemed to be "this needs to be set properly (to my specs)" work. He admitted when I picked up the guitar that he had really wanted to do a setup because he noticed a number of things that he felt were wrong. Of course, not knowing this, I just assumed that it was needed as part of filling in the dent.

I'm afraid that is just not going to help. There are only two ways to deal with the dented fret. Stone all the others down to the same level or refret either the dented fret and other similarly low frets or re fret. Anything thing else might get you through a gig or two but thats about it. Sort of like using stockings for a broken fan belt. It might get you home but you need to get it fixed when you do.

As to the nut, what he did was take the height down and taper/round the portion facing the headstock. Prior to the setup, to the best of my recollection, it was more square - which is why the appearance of the guitar seems strange now.

As to informing me what would need to be done, he said that that's what (something) the nut (can't remember the term) entailed, and apologized after the fact for not explaining it more clearly - it had been one of ten or so things he whipped through when mentioning what was covered in setup. Of course, I had no idea what I should be asking. I know that, for someone who's been playing for 20 years, my knowledge of guitar tech and statistics is probably embarrassingly bad. But then, I've only ever had the one guitar, and haven't really needed to go too deep into it.

Frankly, that is a pretty standard nut shape and if done correctly would not change the feel of the set up for the worse. Whether he should or shouldn't do that is down to how well you communicate with him and vice versa. I hand out a check list of setup tasks to every customer that includes about 50 items that I examine and correct as required. That includes nut shape slot and cut. If for example you said to me not to touch the nut I would explain the possible implications involved to cover myself and inform you of the possible outcomes in terms of rattles buzzes, intonation issues and action. Having said all that you can set nut slots in a tall square nut and still minimise possible problems.

 

[muttley600]

Partial refrets are almost never a good idea. You end up grinding the new fret down to the height of the worn frets, at which point you are just going to have to do the whole thing over again next time. Much better, if you need a refret, to just bite the bullet and do it. They're expensive, but the improvement is well worth it, and if you've gone 20+ years without needing one, you probably won't need another any time soon.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

I'd agree up to a point. Selective fret replacement can be done but it is often nearly as much work as ripping them all out and doing the whole board as most of guys are setup and practised at doing complete refrets. Doing just one is often fiddly and as light says you can sometimes end up chasing the low spot down the finger board. I'll do it necks that are either good vintage and the replacement doesn't match any of the newer fret wires or if the thing is pretty good all over and I know I can get there without causing headaches for myself.

 

[CMunch]

Partial refrets are almost never a good idea. You end up grinding the new fret down to the height of the worn frets, at which point you are just going to have to do the whole thing over again next time. Much better, if you need a refret, to just bite the bullet and do it. They're expensive, but the improvement is well worth it, and if you've gone 20+ years without needing one, you probably won't need another any time soon.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

Fuckin knew it

Book yourself a couple of weeks holiday in the real world dude,you could use the break.