Official Luthiers Forum!

Does the Evo wire wear out strings faster due to the increased hardness? I searched and found conflicting reports. Even if it did it seems like the increased stability of intonation would be worth it.

What are your experiences, thoughts, musings?

-j

Just some ramblings.

I do not think the frets are ever soft enough to make a difference from one kind to another regarding the wear from compressing the string onto the hard surface. On the other hand, wear from abrasion depends upon how rough the fret surface is.

So, supposing that you do not polish up the frets really well, then the harder frets may keep the rough surface a bit longer and therefore cause a bit more wear.

It becomes a stretch to guess which kind of fret might actually gain a rough surface from use.

I've had EVO on my daily player for about 4 years now. I play out weekly and usually practice daily so they see a fair bit of use. The strings go dead and I change them in about the same amount of time as always. I have not noticed any signs of fret wear on the strings. On the other hand, the EVO does show signs of minor string wear on the frets. I change strings every 3 to 5 weeks or as soon as they start getting harder to tune.

_________________
Steve Smith
"Music is what feelings sound like"

No matter what I would rather the strings wear then the frets wear. Evo wire has been my choice for quite a while.
Tom

_________________
A person who has never made a mistake has never made anything!!!

Straight answer - no.

The counter arguments you've likely heard are simply a rationalization some have understandably come up with to explain why harder more durable frets haven't been used all along (truth is there just wasn't previously enough demand to justify changing the status quo, and conventional nickel/copper alloys were generally accepted as "good enough"). That, and in some cases objection to change stems simply from clinging to tradition and all its sacred mojo.

There are actually good reasons why one may prefer traditional nickel wire. String wear however, is not among these good reasons, just a misguided rationalized explanation.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

I would be very interested to know the reasons.

_________________
The name catgut is confusing. There are two explanations for the mix up.

Catgut is an abbreviation of the word cattle gut. Gut strings are made from sheep or goat intestines, in the past even from horse, mule or donkey intestines.

Otherwise it could be from the word kitgut or kitstring. Kit meant fiddle, not kitten.

In my entire career, I've never heard that term. And I can't for the life of me figure out what it means. Either a guitar is intonated or it's not. How would changing the fret material change the intonation? It sounds like a marketing term that one of the "experts" on one of the player's forums used to make himself sound smart.

To your question of string wear. If they are smooth and polished I can't believe that there would be any adverse difference in string wear. In fact, I might argue just the opposite. Because the nickle frets are softer, they will develop dents and scratches easier. Those will potentially cut into the strings more than a harder, highly polished fret will. That said, one would have to be grinding the heck out of a string to make any difference at all. I've never seen a string break because of fret wear. And even if it did, a $.25 string is a lot cheaper than a fret job.

Polished fret wire is not going to cause string wear.

I would note that stiff wire be it Evo or other is a little more difficult to install and its best (in my view) to have it pre-contoured to match the FB.

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

I don't believe you're thinking this through. No disrespect intended.

Changing the fret material doesn't have any effect when the frets are new but certainly is a valid concept over the life of the fret. John LeVan, author for Premier Guitar writes "Every time you press your strings against the frets, the friction between them subtly changes the shape of the frets, causing them to wear out. Over time, this metal-against-metal contact can lead to string rattle and intonation issues."

Article here: http://www.premierguitar.com/articles/U ... _Fret_Wear

So the hardness of a fret material determines how stable it is, thus "stability of intonation". If fret material is soft it would be unstable. Relative hardness in materials matter since the harder material will always wear the softer more quickly. Perhaps the term I used isn't in the standard lexicon but that has nothing to do with it being a valid concept. Let's keep open minds okay?

-j

I should have started my reply as you, more wisely, did. Because I intended no disrespect at all. (at least not toward you)
I do agree with your reasoning of the wear causing problems. One would have to have more sensitive ears than mine to hear intonation problems from a dented fret, but that's not to say it isn't possible.
Sorry to have implied that your concept wasn't valid. I was being influenced by the various player's forums. Where someone reads that a concept is FACT and then present it as such. When in reality, they've been duped by some fancy marketing of a concept. I find some of those guys very challenging. Even though I've made my living as a guitar builder for 15 years, I don't understand anything about guitars because they read about something in the interwebs. That's not to say that I know everything about guitars. FAR from it. But I know enough to know that soaking a guitar in snake oil for a week is probably not a good idea.
Again, sorry if you took any ill intent from my post. Thinking and typing are not two of my forte'.

No worries, I'm really not offended at all. I think the internet doesn't do us justice. Socrates said "The written word is not truth but the semblance of truth." And in that it can be gleaned that we're all at a loss to communicate effectively in writing versus face to face.

I too share your frustration with those who are easily influenced by marketing propaganda. They are convinced of things because there was a glossy photograph. Me being rather Pyrric in my outlook tend to lose patience with those types as well. I can see perhaps that my writing the original post was not perfectly clear as well. I'm short on lutherie experience and long on being good with science and Physics. We are all just perpetually learning, no matter our level of experience.

Frankly, I'm happy that a person like yourself with fifteen years of Lutherie is even communicating with me, so thank you. In the scheme of things, I'm certainly the student here.

-j

We're all students here. (or at least we all SHOULD be students) For if we stop learning, well, what's the point.
Be well, Paul

For using traditional fret wire? There really aren't many reasons for me personally, but I can think of several others may have.

For large manufacturers, cost is a big one. A dollar or two per guitar may not mean mean much to the small builder, but if the purchasing department of a large manufacturer that buys a freight container at a time sees costs go up 30% for stainless or perhaps double for EVO, that's a big cost in terms of total annual budget, and without enough demand to justify it on a broad scale.

There's also ease of manufacturing. I recall a quote from Bob Taylor years back regarding the softer wire they used as simply being more cooperative with their fast-paced manufacturing. Harder wires would have required changes in tooling and procedure to get them reliably and uniformly seated, whereas softer wires would just mush in to place and stay there. Again, not a problem for most of us, but we're not worried about stopping and retooling a line that spits out hundreds of fretted necks a day.

Then there's the issue of market demand. For every thousand guitars sold today, from student to boutique, I doubt there will even be 100 that will see enough playing to wear the frets significantly in the first 10 years of ownership. The small percentage who do play a lot can upgrade to a harder wire when it comes time for their first refret - an aftermarket option for the relatively small numbers of owners who would benefit, while the wear rate of nickel wire is acceptable for most players.

Then there's the issue of wear not being the only reason frets may need leveling and dressing. I would say we see as many or more cases that need leveling not because of wear, but rather other distortions along the neck. Nearly every Fender ever made needs the kickup at the upper frets leveled out after settling a few years under tension, and this would be much more a pain if they came factory equipped with stainless or EVO. If frets have a good chance at needing leveling after manufacture anyway, whether they suffer any wear or not, then any benefits from stainless or EVO are effectively wiped out. So I'm actually glad factory instruments don't use harder wire, because it would typically go to waste and often need (a much more difficult) dressing in short time anyway.

Then of course there's the fact that stainless and EVO wires still wear, just at a bit slower rate (we have one client who can blow through a set of stainless frets in under a year, which is better than the 6 months it took him to destroy a set of nickel frets). So it's not as though it's a perfect permanent solution, just a sliding of the scale toward less frequent service, but at a higher cost when service is eventually needed.

For small or high end builders who build on a smaller scale (cost less of a concern), focus on quality of installation more than speed (ease of installation less concern), with more intentional construction for stability and better seasoned woods (board shifting and warping less concern), and cater to clients who are more serious players and log more hours on the frets (increased wear resistance brings meaningful benefit), I don't think many of these arguments in favor of nickel wire apply as much. In a larger context of nickel being the default for manufacturing though, I think it does make a lot of sense.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

David, you and Hesh have greatly increased my awareness of all things fret-related through these discussions, and I want to offer a big thank you to both of you.

You mentioned stainless steel frets and EVO frets. Do you have a preference, or are they both good options in your eyes?

+1 for sure. And it's information that I have been applying to improve my fret jobs!

_________________
Steve Smith
"Music is what feelings sound like"

Thanks James and Steve! I'm not entirely sure in my leanings between EVO and stainless, but more often than not it comes down to an aesthetic choice. Testing is ongoing though - I have one (hopefully) final revision I want to make on my wear simulation tester, then it's back to running a few million more cycles on a few dozen samples. I hope to have some more definitive answers on comparitive wear rates, but any summary is still a few months out.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

Great post David Thank you!

I found working on SS frets rather sucky -- However I do not have diamond files. Is there an up charge at your shop for an Evo or SS fret job?

_________________
Ken Cierp

http://www.kennethmichaelguitars.com/

Couple of things: First regarding LeVan's article and assertion that fret wear impacts intonation and can result in buzzing he's right.

However as someone who stands there at the triage bench discussing over and over again with client after client why they may need a fret dress or refret it is WAY more common to have the client complaint be buzzing or rattling what ever you wish to call it than intonation issues....

Again LeVan is correct but the value that I hope to add here is that in the real world of genuine customer issues buzzing and rattling is far more commonly expressed as the issue over anyone's perception that the absence of a clean fret crown is impacting intonation negatively.

Next Dave is much more of the mind to subscribe to the scientific method than I often am. We have had a running debate for some years now that I am likely on the wrong end of but I still believe that I can hear a difference between stainless (and/or EVO) and nickel silver wire. Although Dave completely proved his point with an electric guitar that I could not determine which frets were which material I still believe that the differences are more noticeable with high-end acoustic instruments.

Four of mine were fretted with EVO and I believe that I can hear a difference even with EVO which may not be that unusual because EVO is very hard wire compared to nickel silver.

Now I may be nuts, likely am.... but what if I am nuts and I am wrong but the perception persists that I can hear a difference. More specifically what if your clients are nuts like me too and believe, rightly or wrongly that they perceive a difference in fret wires? You can argue with them, try to show them facts but none really exist when it comes to our "perceptions" and how subjective this all is or you can accept what I have come to accept and that is somewhere around half of acoustic players feel as I do and the other half agree with Dave.

By the way players make a difference as well. A few years ago I did a fret dress on an instrument that had been my primary player for 37 years.... It did not have any divots and the fret dress was done as maintenance not because of any issues and my goal was simply a very level fret plane.

On the other hand we have clients who have worn out stainless in a year or less..... As such even though we can talk about wire in isolation all that we wish who's beating on the thing can make a difference as well.

Back to LeVan's assertions though right as he is in a practical way of speaking I would far rather have a dollar for every time a client complained of rattling or buzzing from fret divots than a $10 bill for every time a client complains about intonation issues resulting from the condition of the frets.

Sometimes perceptions rightly or wrongly remain the reality that one must deal with....

Good thread!

No up charge for stainless at our shop Ken. Some shops do though and we are aware of this but find it unnecessary for the tools and methods that we use - bring it on we can take it.....

I will say though as an older or "vintage" guy.... nipping off stainless fret ends can be a bit painful toward the end of the job for me personally. A bit of arthritis here and using my nippers on stainless seems to aggravate it a tad.

Stainless jumbo wire is not by any means my idea of a good time..... but we get through it, next.

I hear pneumatic fret nippers are all the rage with us silver surfers.

_________________
The name catgut is confusing. There are two explanations for the mix up.

Catgut is an abbreviation of the word cattle gut. Gut strings are made from sheep or goat intestines, in the past even from horse, mule or donkey intestines.

Otherwise it could be from the word kitgut or kitstring. Kit meant fiddle, not kitten.

This is a great thread. I'm fascinated every time I get on this board and the amount of knowledge.

I have a hard time with a comparison of an electric guitar to an acoustic. Unless the electric was unplugged there's too many limitations: pickups, amps, cords,... I equate it to recording a human voice, it never has the same qualities as in person. Technology just can't do it.

I'm vaguely curious about the difference in sound with various fret types but it isn't a deciding factor. So if you told me ol' fashioned nickle sounded a teensy bit better I'd probably still side with EVO because buzz and intonation are more important to me. I wear out frets and beat up a guitar. I use the fingerboard and top percussively sometimes hammering on full chords while smacking the top with my strumming thumb, like when I play a piano part on a guitar (think David Bowie's _Changes_). As frets wear my ability to get good response diminishes. Stainless would require me to buy even more tools and for the low production I have planned it doesn't make sense.

Over at Lutherie.net Hostetler (sp?) says installing EVO is a dream compared to any other type of wire.

On another forum David Collins talks about the Vickers scale and (roughly) nickel is around 200, Evo 250, and stainless 300.

Hesh, have you tried using cheater bars on your end nippers? A mechanical advantage can make your hands feel much better.

By the way, I play classical. I ruin the treble sides of the frets (nylon strings) first. That is where I play the most. The frets get dished out just from pressing hard, and certainly the nylon is much softer than the fret.

I want it.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

Regarding tone (even though I know this is not the focus of this thread) here's my take.

I may be tarred and feathered for saying this in a community of acousti-centric aficionados, but if there were any tonal effect I feel that the plugged in electric guitar would be the most ideal environment for differences to be noticable. It simply obscures less and reveals more of the spectrum, especially in the upper harmonics. A stiff solid chassis absorbs and dampens far less than an acoustic instrument, and pickups sense and reveal an awful lot of detail that never makes it through to the observable tone on an acoustic guitar.

In a very crude example with completely made up numbers, say fret material A dampens frequency X at 2% greater rate than fret material B. Would this small change be more likely noticeable on an acoustic instrument which already dampens frequency X at a fairly high rate and amplifies it relatively inefficiently, or a solid chassis with much less internal damping of frequency X and more efficiently amplifies that frequency range? I admit this is conjecture, but I believe it is reasonable theory that if there is any direct change affected by fret wire, that a solid body electric guitar would reveal it to a greater extent than an acoustic.

For this reason I've chosen to use solid bodies for the focus of my testing. With the one case I refretted with nickel wire, save for six randomly selected frets of stainless of the same size, I've yet to find anyone able to identify any changes when the tests are carried out blind, with real time transitions. I've done a good many partial refrets with stainless on acoustics as well and never been able to detect any tonal change at the transition, but these were less controlled and certainly less randomized comparisons, so I haven't considered them to be ideal tests.

Still, if anyone hesitates and is worried about it, I don't try to talk them in to stainless or EVO. I'll gather data and present it, then it's their choice, and if they want to stay with nickel for whatever reason that's just fine with me.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

I appreciate your sharing. I think tone is a part of it and important to some. Thanks.

-j