[LUTE] Re: Fret thickness
Using nylon frets is simply due to budgetary contraints... With nylon strings, gut frets wear off quickly and I can't afford to replace them like I would want to. The nylon frets last for ages, and I really had no problem with loose knots. When a fret does come loose, it's basically free to replace it. I am using fishing line. This might also be more knot-friendly. On 21.08.19 13:51, Martin Shepherd wrote: It depends on the action - if it's very low you might need continually decreasing fret sizes, if it's higher you might even be able to have all frets the same size. A very thick double fret would be more difficult to persuade to form a single surface - I think the thinner frets probably bed down quicker. I can't imagine wanting to use nylon for frets - they're slippery in the other dimension too. M On 21/08/2019 13:10, Tristan von Neumann wrote: That's odd. Using nylon of the same roll should therefore not work, but miraculously did... I thought the different placement and angle is sufficient to create no buzz when the fret is thinner (=lower). What your reason for thinner double frets being necessary? Double frets also have double the friction and don't slip. (that's the reason why I changed - with nylon, I want nylon frets, otherwise I'll be changing too often) On 21.08.19 09:53, Martin Shepherd wrote: Interesting. I think it was almost universal to have double frets on lutes in the past, and as Tristan has discovered, it is necessary to use thinner frets than you would for single frets. Dowland talks about using the same size fret for pairs of frets, but of course his strings varied in size, so he could easily have achieved a smooth progression of sizes. A bunch of strings sold as "for the great meanes" would have had considerable variation in size. Even in the early 20th century, strings were still being classified by the number of guts which were used to make them, rather than a specific diameter. Martin On 21/08/2019 05:17, Tristan von Neumann wrote: I am using double frets on my lute for a while now. I tried different thicknesses until there was no buzz. But I found that playing somehow wasn't really comfortable, especially on the first fret (1 mm). Then I tried the fretting instructions from A Varietie of Lute Lessons. Lo and behold, it's working perfectly, though Dowland is using the thin treble strings for the high fret, which in my case are .45 mm Nylon. The frets are grouped in two equally thick frets (except 7, which is only one, my lute neck is not long enough for an 8th fret, it's already on the soundboard). This is somehow surprising. Other instructions from various sites always recommend a little more thickness. Well - whatever works, I'm happy now. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[LUTE] Re: Fret thickness
It depends on the action - if it's very low you might need continually decreasing fret sizes, if it's higher you might even be able to have all frets the same size. A very thick double fret would be more difficult to persuade to form a single surface - I think the thinner frets probably bed down quicker. I can't imagine wanting to use nylon for frets - they're slippery in the other dimension too. M On 21/08/2019 13:10, Tristan von Neumann wrote: That's odd. Using nylon of the same roll should therefore not work, but miraculously did... I thought the different placement and angle is sufficient to create no buzz when the fret is thinner (=lower). What your reason for thinner double frets being necessary? Double frets also have double the friction and don't slip. (that's the reason why I changed - with nylon, I want nylon frets, otherwise I'll be changing too often) On 21.08.19 09:53, Martin Shepherd wrote: Interesting. I think it was almost universal to have double frets on lutes in the past, and as Tristan has discovered, it is necessary to use thinner frets than you would for single frets. Dowland talks about using the same size fret for pairs of frets, but of course his strings varied in size, so he could easily have achieved a smooth progression of sizes. A bunch of strings sold as "for the great meanes" would have had considerable variation in size. Even in the early 20th century, strings were still being classified by the number of guts which were used to make them, rather than a specific diameter. Martin On 21/08/2019 05:17, Tristan von Neumann wrote: I am using double frets on my lute for a while now. I tried different thicknesses until there was no buzz. But I found that playing somehow wasn't really comfortable, especially on the first fret (1 mm). Then I tried the fretting instructions from A Varietie of Lute Lessons. Lo and behold, it's working perfectly, though Dowland is using the thin treble strings for the high fret, which in my case are .45 mm Nylon. The frets are grouped in two equally thick frets (except 7, which is only one, my lute neck is not long enough for an 8th fret, it's already on the soundboard). This is somehow surprising. Other instructions from various sites always recommend a little more thickness. Well - whatever works, I'm happy now. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[LUTE] Re: Fret thickness
That's odd. Using nylon of the same roll should therefore not work, but miraculously did... I thought the different placement and angle is sufficient to create no buzz when the fret is thinner (=lower). What your reason for thinner double frets being necessary? Double frets also have double the friction and don't slip. (that's the reason why I changed - with nylon, I want nylon frets, otherwise I'll be changing too often) On 21.08.19 09:53, Martin Shepherd wrote: Interesting. I think it was almost universal to have double frets on lutes in the past, and as Tristan has discovered, it is necessary to use thinner frets than you would for single frets. Dowland talks about using the same size fret for pairs of frets, but of course his strings varied in size, so he could easily have achieved a smooth progression of sizes. A bunch of strings sold as "for the great meanes" would have had considerable variation in size. Even in the early 20th century, strings were still being classified by the number of guts which were used to make them, rather than a specific diameter. Martin On 21/08/2019 05:17, Tristan von Neumann wrote: I am using double frets on my lute for a while now. I tried different thicknesses until there was no buzz. But I found that playing somehow wasn't really comfortable, especially on the first fret (1 mm). Then I tried the fretting instructions from A Varietie of Lute Lessons. Lo and behold, it's working perfectly, though Dowland is using the thin treble strings for the high fret, which in my case are .45 mm Nylon. The frets are grouped in two equally thick frets (except 7, which is only one, my lute neck is not long enough for an 8th fret, it's already on the soundboard). This is somehow surprising. Other instructions from various sites always recommend a little more thickness. Well - whatever works, I'm happy now. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[LUTE] Re: Fret thickness
Interesting. I think it was almost universal to have double frets on lutes in the past, and as Tristan has discovered, it is necessary to use thinner frets than you would for single frets. Dowland talks about using the same size fret for pairs of frets, but of course his strings varied in size, so he could easily have achieved a smooth progression of sizes. A bunch of strings sold as "for the great meanes" would have had considerable variation in size. Even in the early 20th century, strings were still being classified by the number of guts which were used to make them, rather than a specific diameter. Martin On 21/08/2019 05:17, Tristan von Neumann wrote: I am using double frets on my lute for a while now. I tried different thicknesses until there was no buzz. But I found that playing somehow wasn't really comfortable, especially on the first fret (1 mm). Then I tried the fretting instructions from A Varietie of Lute Lessons. Lo and behold, it's working perfectly, though Dowland is using the thin treble strings for the high fret, which in my case are .45 mm Nylon. The frets are grouped in two equally thick frets (except 7, which is only one, my lute neck is not long enough for an 8th fret, it's already on the soundboard). This is somehow surprising. Other instructions from various sites always recommend a little more thickness. Well - whatever works, I'm happy now. To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
