String height

[pullchord]

What are the proper string heights and are they measured from the top of the fret or the fretboard? I usually start with the high "E", getting it to where it's not so low that when I bend it, the "B" string doesn't try to slide under my fingertips. I set my low "E" as low as possible without getting buzz or 'snapping' when I pick it hard. Then, I try to get the other 4 strings to match the fretboard curvature by holding the guitar sideways at eye level and looking across the tops of the strings. With the low "E" closest to me, I look at the high "E". Then, slowly rotating the guitar away from me I watch to see the high "E" disappear behind the "B" string. All remaining strings should still be visible. If the "B" string 'disappears' behind the "G", then I know I have to raise the "B" string height a tad. Continuing the rotation, I look for the "G" to disappear behind the "D", and so forth. This way I know I have a consistent "curve" of al the strings over the fretboard. Sounds wierd, but works for me.

[surfoverb]

I set the high E where you want and then just measure from the bottom of the string to the top of the 12th fret with a capo on the first fret (this takes the nut out of the equation) If all strings measure exactly the same distance from the bottom of the string to the top of the fret then your radius will follow the radius of the fretboard. After that adjust to taste. A lot of people flatten the radius by raising the B and E strings but I just keep mine the same radius as the neck. (my action is pretty high so I don't fret out)

Your eybeall way accomplishes the same thing, and as always whatever works, works.

[Togman]

There is no such thing as a proper string height. What ever works for you or suits your style of playing is the 'proper' height for you. Some people prefer a low action, others prefer high, neither is right nor wrong. If you are happy with your setup then stick with it.

[KevinB]

I agree with Togman - there is no "proper" string height.

Fender's setup guide is a good starting point though...

Players with a light touch can get away with lower action; others need higher action to avoid rattles. First, check tuning. Using a 6" (150 mm) ruler, measure the distance between bottom of strings and top of the 17th fret. Adjust bridge saddles to the height according to the chart, then re-tune. Experiment with the height until the desired sound and feel is achieved.

Neck Radius........String Height
........................Bass Side...........Treble Side
.
7.25".................5/64" (2 mm)......4/64" (1.6 mm)
9.5" to 12".........4/64" (1.6 mm)....4/64" (1.6 mm)
15" to 17"..........4/64" (1.6 mm)....3/64" (1.2 mm)

[mellecaster]

Originally Posted by Togman

There is no such thing as a proper string height. What ever works for you or suits your style of playing is the 'proper' height for you. Some people prefer a low action, others prefer high, neither is right nor wrong. If you are happy with your setup then stick with it.

Well-Stated Togman !

[beep.click]

Originally Posted by pullchord

What are the proper string heights and are they measured from the top of the fret or the fretboard?

Typically, when people talk about string height measurements, they're talking about the gap between the top of a fret and the bottom of a string.

Now, the question remains -- WHICH fret? If you read enough of this stuff, you'll find some folks measuring at the 12th, the 17th, etc. And "relief" is often calculated around the 7th or 8th fret.

"Proper?" Beats me. I just try to get myself happy.

[Floyd Tatum]

Beep.Click, I don't have the answer to your question about which fret.

But I have a question about setup tools:

In their Setup Guide, Fender has a list of required tools. Since I just bought my first tele, I've been assembling these tools, and trying to learn how to set up my guitar. One of the tools they recommend is a 6" ruler like this:

6" (150 mm) ruler (with 1/32" and 1/64" increments) (0.5 mm increments)

To be useful, the 1/32 & 1/64 increments would have to be at the 'squared-off' end of the ruler.

I've looked for a metal 6" ruler like that, that has both 1/32 & 1/64 increments at the business end, but the best I can find is a ruler with 1/32" increments at the business end.

I Googled, and found a specialty scientific instruments web site in Australia that looks like it sells them. Has anyone found such a ruler at a more local type of establishment. In particular, any suggestions of where to find such a ruler in Toronto, Canada?

Do I really need those 1/64" increments, or can I get by with the 1/32 ones?

Thanks,
Richard

[jgillard]

you can get by with 1/32 as 1/32 is just 2/64. So right in the middle of 0/32 & 1/32 is 1/64.

[MickM]

Originally Posted by Floyd Tatum

Beep.Click, I don't have the answer to your question about which fret.

But I have a question about setup tools:

In their Setup Guide, Fender has a list of required tools. Since I just bought my first tele, I've been assembling these tools, and trying to learn how to set up my guitar. One of the tools they recommend is a 6" ruler like this:

6" (150 mm) ruler (with 1/32" and 1/64" increments) (0.5 mm increments)

To be useful, the 1/32 & 1/64 increments would have to be at the 'squared-off' end of the ruler.

I've looked for a metal 6" ruler like that, that has both 1/32 & 1/64 increments at the business end, but the best I can find is a ruler with 1/32" increments at the business end.

I Googled, and found a specialty scientific instruments web site in Australia that looks like it sells them. Has anyone found such a ruler at a more local type of establishment. In particular, any suggestions of where to find such a ruler in Toronto, Canada?

Do I really need those 1/64" increments, or can I get by with the 1/32 ones?

Thanks,
Richard

You should be able to get a 6 inch "ruler" (properly called a 6 inch scale) graduated in 8ths, 16ths, 32nds, and 64ths at any decent hardware store. A few brand names are General (budget priced, pkgd in yellow and black at ACE or True Value) or Starrett or Lufkin or Browne and Sharpe which are more $ and sold where ever machinist tools are sold.

Also, anybody know when using the lowest common denominator went out of style?

[lonewolf]

PULLCHORD's method of setting his action and radius is actually very good. He is choosing the action that works for him, instead of some arbitrary measurement, and insuring that the radius is good also. The only thing I can add to that, is to recommend that one should remove the nut from the picture while doing as he described. That removes any error that could be introduced, due to poor action at the nut. This can easily be done by putting a capo on the strings, to fret all 6 strings at the first fret. Then after adjusting everything the way you like it at the bridge, the action at the first fret when the capo is removed, is the action at the nut. If it is too high the nut slots will need to be re-cut, which is not an easy task without a little practice, and a good set of nut files.
Gene Warner
repairman

[KevinB]

StewMac as usual has the (slightly overpriced, but very useful) answer!

[Floyd Tatum]

Originally Posted by jgillard

you can get by with 1/32 as 1/32 is just 2/64. So right in the middle of 0/32 & 1/32 is 1/64.

Wow! That's pretty amazing, the way you figured that out like that!



But seriously,... I just meant, in practice, does it work ok to 'eyeball' the 64ths?

[Floyd Tatum]

Originally Posted by MickM

You should be able to get a 6 inch "ruler" (properly called a 6 inch scale) graduated in 8ths, 16ths, 32nds, and 64ths at any decent hardware store. A few brand names are General (budget priced, pkgd in yellow and black at ACE or True Value) or Starrett or Lufkin or Browne and Sharpe which are more $ and sold where ever machinist tools are sold.

Also, anybody know when using the lowest common denominator went out of style?

Well, thanks. Scale, huh?

Real sorry about using those numerators.

Here in Toronto, Canada, we don't have either of those stores you mentioned, but thanks for the brand name suggestions. I looked in Canadian Tire, Canada's largest hardware chain store, and couldn't find one with 64ths, only 32nds. But I might check some other stores, and maybe a store that sells machinist tools.

[Floyd Tatum]

Originally Posted by KevinB

StewMac as usual has the (slightly overpriced, but very useful) answer!

Thanks, Kevin, I'll check that out.

[fendorst]

But seriously,... I just meant, in practice, does it work ok to 'eyeball' the 64ths?[/quote]

Yes. You're not supposed to setup your guitar by eye anyway. How high a pickup looks, how far back a saddle looks, how low the strings look, how straight the neck looks, etc.

Setup guides and measurements are merely general recommendations on starting points. They put you in a ballpark from which you can zero in on what works best for your particular guitar. If the recommendation is 3/64", sure, just measure and eyeball what appears to be halfway between 1/32" and 2/32". That's just a starting point.

After you measure and set up everything by eye, play the guitar. Then let feeling and sound be your guide. Adjust until strings don't buzz, you can bend them easily, they all feel and sound evenly balanced, etc. It won't matter if you actually wind up 1/128" or 1/64" or 1/32" different from the original recommendation. Some guys like strings way high, some way low. If it doesn't buzz, feels comfortable, sounds balanced, etc., it doesn't matter what it looks like or what the final measurements actually turn out to be.

Basically, when it feels and sounds good to you, you're done.

[jgillard]

You can definitely eyeball the 64ths. I use the ruler I got at canadian tire that has the 32nds on it. it's "close enough".

[ChicknPickn]

Not trying to hijack the thread, but I have a question that I think is in line with the OP's. With regard to Fender's suggestion that one can achieve a height of 1/16" at the 17th fret, I just have to ask how many people find they can do that AND be virtually buzz-free.

I have to say that, while I generally don't prefer an action that low, I have been curious enough to try it on all my Fender and Fender-style guitars. Maybe I have a low tolerance for fret buzz in my instruments, but on only one of my Teles could I take the action down that low and still be acceptably buzz free.

I do my own nut and fret work, and in a couple of cases, I did find that I had one or more high frets. I did the old grind 'n polish and it helped, but, still, that 1/16 height was too noisy for me. At around 3/32 at fret 17 (high E), I'm okay. At the low E, it's more like 1/8. I tend to hit that string hard and often, and I don't like to hear it rattle. The necks in question have a 9.5" radius. All these observations were made playing acoustically - - I never hear the buzz or rattle through the amp.

Anyone else find this to be true, or do I just have a bunch of lame guitars? Should every guitar's action be able to go this low, or is that rarely seen?

[rob500]

Rulers don't work very well for me. What I do is use a 1/16" allen wrench. It is very easy to hold the long end of the wrench and slip the short end under each string and pass it over the top of the fret. If the string moves it's too low - if it doesn't it's too high. Then I just make fine adjustments (maybe a 1/4 turn at the bridge) to get the desired sound.

Bob

[old goat]

I second the allen wrench idea. they are available in sets with 1/64th increments, if you want to be compulsive. I've also used stacked feeler gauges. 64ths with a ruler are tough to see without magnification, especially on the low strings where it's hard to see the bottom of the string. Better yet, get it roughly there and adjust to preference by feel and ear. It's not the space shuttle you know--oh wait--I've never heard of a tele exploding.

[gitlvr]

Originally Posted by ChicknPickn

Not trying to hijack the thread, but I have a question that I think is in line with the OP's. With regard to Fender's suggestion that one can achieve a height of 1/16" at the 17th fret, I just have to ask how many people find they can do that AND be virtually buzz-free.

I have to say that, while I generally don't prefer an action that low, I have been curious enough to try it on all my Fender and Fender-style guitars. Maybe I have a low tolerance for fret buzz in my instruments, but on only one of my Teles could I take the action down that low and still be acceptably buzz free.

I do my own nut and fret work, and in a couple of cases, I did find that I had one or more high frets. I did the old grind 'n polish and it helped, but, still, that 1/16 height was too noisy for me. At around 3/32 at fret 17 (high E), I'm okay. At the low E, it's more like 1/8. I tend to hit that string hard and often, and I don't like to hear it rattle. The necks in question have a 9.5" radius. All these observations were made playing acoustically - - I never hear the buzz or rattle through the amp.

Anyone else find this to be true, or do I just have a bunch of lame guitars? Should every guitar's action be able to go this low, or is that rarely seen?

You are not alone. I (must) play like you, because I have the same problem. However, I routinely set up other's guitars to play much lower, with no complaints and repeat work. Everyone's playing style is different, and therefore everone's minimum height off the frets is different.