Original Tele Fretwire

[Comrade Paul]

I'm doing a tele finish from a custom kit and and as part of it i upgraded and got the US made maple neck. Got the neck and the frets on it are small, noticibly smaller than the fretwire on my strat and SG guitars. The manufacturer says this is the original speck for the '59 tele and I don't doubt that, but was wondering how this smaller fret impacts the sound and playing? Seems a smaller fret gives you less life, was hoping it provides compensation in other areas. I'm not hung up on exactly matching the '59 tele, just want a good tele sound and a good guitar that will last for me and my son.

Any help on this appreciated!

Paul

[StratBluesRock]

They are vintage sized. You may or may not like them, I for one, far and away prefer jumbo sized frets.

[Telemarkman]

Forget about the sound - it's not the sound of the frets you're hearing. If it was, all vintage spec Teles (AVRI's and MIM Classics) would sound inferior compared to modern Teles with larger frets ... Or they would sound better. No, IMO sound is due to other factors.

Playing OTOH is another matter. In fact it's a matter of taste, mostly based on habit I'd say.

But of course a smaller fret wears faster - but that's a problem you'll have to adress when it eventually occurs - not at the present moment.

[Comrade Paul]

Well, the first neck they sent was wrong - rosewood (with jumbo frets). was planning a blonde finish so requested the original order maple neck and I got one - with the micro frets and the tuner holes too small for the tuners they previously sent. Thinking about just keeping the original rosewood and doing a natural finish. Have a beautiful one piece ash body anyway.

Thanks for the help. While I love the blonde tranditional look, I'm more interested in a good working telecaster and don't want to wait for company to drill out tuner holes. They've been very good in returning stuff and staying in contact, but figure I will cut my losses and go with what I think is the better neck. The swamp ash body looks awesome anyway. The company is BYO Guitar and overall I've been very happy with the product and price on the custom telecaster, just a little klugeyness on the neck order. I do recommend them for anyone looking for a quality US made build. I received a single piece swamp ash body and nice rosewood neck, with Wilkinson compensated 3 bridge and Wilkinson PUPs. Through stringing. Wish I could quote you the tuners, but they look ok. Neck body fit is extremely tight. Everything else fits good as far as I can tell yet. All for $450. I'm not by any means a tele buff, but if anyone wants to know I'll tell you how it works when I'm done.

[max_twang]

Vintage sized frets do wear faster. On the other hand, they have a different feel and make it easier to chord.

Some people say they choke out when you bend strings. I've never found that to be a problem. Choking out may also related to the smaller, vintage 7.5" fingerboard radius -- though some people will disagree with this.

[Comrade Paul]

thanks for the response. I thought there might be some positives. I'll hold off on my decision and ponder what you've said. Since I have all jumbo frets now it might be fun to have something else. decisons!

[Telemarkman]

Originally Posted by max_twang

Some people say they choke out when you bend strings. I've never found that to be a problem. Choking out may also related to the smaller, vintage 7.5" fingerboard radius -- though some people will disagree with this.

Choking/fretting out won't happen on a totally flat fretboard. The smaller the radius, the easier it will fret out. This is pure physics and has nothing to do with fret size. It is important that the curvation of the saddles follow the curvation of the fretboard though. But you can't have an equally low action on a smaller radius fretboard as on a flatter one. The difference between a 7.25" radius and a 9.5" radius is marginal though.

[bterry]

Originally Posted by Telemarkman

Choking/fretting out won't happen on a totally flat fretboard. The smaller the radius, the easier it will fret out. This is pure physics and has nothing to do with fret size. It is important that the curvation of the saddles follow the curvation of the fretboard though. But you can't have an equally low action on a smaller radius fretboard as on a flatter one. The difference between a 7.25" radius and a 9.5" radius is marginal though.

Agreed, and technique is the antidote to any fretting out you may incur from smaller frets. The setup, as mentioned above, is the other factor, as well as string height.

I've always used vintage frets, the larger ones can be 'easier' to bend on, but try sliding your fingers up and down the neck or sliding around on chords...either way, it requires a technique adjustment, depending on your preferences.

[BackNtheSaddle]

Larger frets force you to play with a lighter touch. A lighter touch allows you to play faster.

There is a learning curve. But, IMHO, it's worth it.

All my guitars have MJ frets or larger. I can't play the smaller ones any longer.

And, I love the feel (or the lack of feeling the fretboard) of larger wire when I play.

YMMV

Sent from my iPhone using TDPRI

[old goat]

I've got an old strat with the vintage frets, 7..25" board. No problems with action or fretting out. As far as the physics go fretting out would only occur if you're bending one of the middle strings towards either edge of the board, which I don't find myself doing. All my guitars have different necks and frets--I guess I've never paid much attention to the differences.. Good bluegrass players can play acoustics a whole lot faster than I can dream of playing an electric. If you can't play fast, or if you fret out, or can't barre, or whatever, it's probably not the fault of the neck or the frets.

[Telemarkman]

Originally Posted by old goat

As far as the physics go fretting out would only occur if you're bending one of the middle strings towards either edge of the board,

Try bending the B-string 3-4 steps towards the middle of the neck on a 7.25" radius board with an extremely low acton ...

[Comrade Paul]

Ok, so I decided to keep the maple fretboard neck with the vintage frets. I don't play fast but I do tend to push too hard on some of my open notes putting them out of tune. I used to think it was bad intonation but no, thanks to this forum, I know now its just bad technique... (How you play an open 'F' without some of the fingers squeezing in the middle of the fret gap?) My admiration for good guitarists just keeps going up.

Thanks again for all the good comments

[BackNtheSaddle]

IMHO, that may be more difficult with the shorter frets.

In fact, you may end up pushing harder to fret the note (chord), which may or may not cause it to go sharp. But, pushing HARDER to fret is not the right way to play :)

You know best what works best for you, though. You might wanna go to GC and play something with vintage frets, to be sure they are what you want.

[xtrajerry]

Now that you know why your chords sound off it's not that difficult to improve your technique. I'd also suggest doing a search on tempered tuning,

I learned how to play with guitars that had the action set as low as possible. Wanted to feel the fretboard when I played a note. That was fine until I got a Hot Rod with jumbo frets. Once I understood what was going on changing my approach was pretty natural.

[jmiles]

"But of course a smaller fret wears faster"
"Vintage sized frets do wear faster."

Ah! An interesting topic. True today, but not true in the past! I have an 1880s 6-string banjo. Used in Minstrel bands, no doubt. There are divots worn into it's Ebony board. But the original frets are just fine. Why? Different alloys. I have always played old instruments. Old Martins, Gibsons, Vegas, Bacon and Day's, Coles, etc.. The fretboards were all worn, but the frets were just fine! Sometime in the late Fifties, or early Sixties, fretwire manufacturers changed to a much softer alloy. Thus the wear! I can only think,,,, "Follow the money!" Here's a pic of my '57 Strat neck. Worn to hell and back. Refinished at least once with a brush. The frets? Original, and "just fine!"

[Telemarkman]

Originally Posted by jmiles

"But of course a smaller fret wears faster"
"Vintage sized frets do wear faster."

Ah! An interesting topic. True today, but not true in the past!

Yeah, but since we're speaking of guitars today ...

[jmiles]

Yeah, Mark,,,, we are. Just a bit of history from an old, old player. Wish they'd go back to the old alloy though! I play bender guitars, and get grooves worn from the benders. Ruins the frets.

[Comrade Paul]

Ok, I'm going to consciously try to push down only as much as needed and improve my technique. Good stuff. I did notice i have a much lighter touch on my bar chords. I'll post a picture in a couple weeks to let you see how it looks. I'm afraid I'm not much of a perfectionist for the look of a guitar. It should set up and play well, but looks...meh! A guitar is like a living room, you need it to look lived in to relax with it. Cheers boys!

[spankdplank]

FWIW, my two fastest and favorite teles are old ones, 7.25 radius with vintage sized frets. Neither chokes on bends. I always have one with me when I gig, and usually one guitar with modern frets and a flatter radius. When ever I switch to the modern fret board, it seems slower, as if the bigger frets were speed bumps.

[JazzDreams]

This is an interesting thread for me as I'm just starting to search out my first tele. Now clearly I'll have to go play different neck and fret configurations. But how would the vintage frets compare to the neck on, say, my '70 ish Epiphone Texan acoustic?