Official Luthiers Forum!

Owned and operated by Lance Kragenbrink
It is currently Fri Aug 22, 2025 1:02 pm


All times are UTC - 5 hours


Forum rules


Be nice, no cussin and enjoy!




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:45 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:50 am
Posts: 942
Location: Ellicott City, Md - USA
First name: John
Last Name: A
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
Hi -

I was about to glue my bridge when I decided to measure the position of my saddle against the nut and saw that using the fret rule - it is 653mm. My finger board is slotted for 650. Why is this ?!!!!???? I can just use the mm side of the fret rule to measure - but it is annoying because now the fret locations are all for 653 on that ruler, and I needed a fret ruler for 650mm or 25 21/32" arggh !!

is everybody's IBEX like this ? you can test by making marks on the wall a the nut location and the saddle location - then measure beteen the marks using the mm side of the ruler.

_________________
It's this new idea from recent decades that everyone gets a participation award. - MUX


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:54 pm 
Offline
Cocobolo
Cocobolo

Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:52 am
Posts: 133
State: PA
Country: USA
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
I'm not familiar with this product, but it seems that it might have 3 mm compensation built into the nut-to-saddle dimension. 2 or 3-mm compensation is pretty much standard for a 650 scale; thus, 653 mm would be a desirable nut-to-saddle dimension. Just verify that your 12th fret is located at 325 mm, and all is OK.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:07 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:50 am
Posts: 942
Location: Ellicott City, Md - USA
First name: John
Last Name: A
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
But when I line up the frets part of the ruler to my 650 slotted finger board - all is fine till about the 12th fret then the ruler goes a little more and more further south of the slotted board fret location. My 650 slotted board is from stew mac. Due to my fretboard being slotted like this - then should I stick to 650mm ?
Cumpiano as well measures 25 21/32 which is 650mm, not 653.

So I am not understanding compensation - my classical is 650mm from nut to saddle. why would the fret ruler want me to make it 653 ?

_________________
It's this new idea from recent decades that everyone gets a participation award. - MUX


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 9:01 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 12, 2005 5:46 am
Posts: 2997
Location: United States
John, I don't have one of those, but 3mm is a typical amount of compensation for a 650 mm scale. The saddle is typically set back 3mm or so to compensate for string stretch while fretting.
So if you can look at other 650 mm scale lentgth instruments, they will more than likely have their saddle at 653 mm.

_________________
Jim Watts
http://jameswattsguitars.com


Last edited by Jim Watts on Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 9:12 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:55 am
Posts: 566
First name: Bob
Last Name: Shanklin
City: Windsor
State: ON
Country: Canada
John,

If you look at the saddle end of your Ibex fret rule, it tells you that the compensation is included in the saddle locations. If you look a little further to the left, it also tells you that the string length dimensions next to the scale lengths symbols, do not include comp.

Bob


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 9:44 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:50 am
Posts: 942
Location: Ellicott City, Md - USA
First name: John
Last Name: A
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
But why do the fret locations not match up with my stew mac 650 scale length fingerboard? My current classical (Sanchis) is 650 between nut and saddle.

_________________
It's this new idea from recent decades that everyone gets a participation award. - MUX


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:43 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:05 pm
Posts: 1567
Location: San Jose, CA
First name: Dave
Last Name: Fifield
City: San Jose
State: CA
Zip/Postal Code: 95124
Country: USA
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
I recall reading another OLF thread a few months ago where this very question was raised. If I recall correctly, the general concensus was that the old IBEX rule has frets in the wrong positions and the newer Stewmac template is correct.
I'd do an archive search for this thread if I were you.

Cheers,
Dave F.

_________________
Cambrian Guitars

"There goes Mister Tic-Tac out the back with some bric-brac from the knick-knack rack"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:49 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:55 am
Posts: 566
First name: Bob
Last Name: Shanklin
City: Windsor
State: ON
Country: Canada
The 25.34 scales line up on both Ibex and StewMac, but on the StewMac, the other steel string scale is 24.9, while the Ibex is 24.84, so they don't line up.

Bob


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 12:04 am 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:55 am
Posts: 566
First name: Bob
Last Name: Shanklin
City: Windsor
State: ON
Country: Canada
I just checked the Ibex classical scale and it states it is 25 21/32" which is 651.66875mm. I checked between various frets with a digital vernier, and the distances are accurate, according to StewMac's fret position calculator.

Bob


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 2:46 am 
Offline
Koa
Koa

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:01 pm
Posts: 1887
Location: UK
Certainly my old version is inaccurate, at least it is on the mm scale. Out by 2 mm's over the length, checked against two high quality rules.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 3:45 am 
Offline
Cocobolo
Cocobolo
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:27 am
Posts: 161
Location: Portugal
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
The Courtnall book advises to add 2mm to the saddle position to compensate for depressing of the strings. If one uses the exact 650mm it could be noticed (slightly out of tune especially the notes after the 12th fret).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 4:09 am 
Offline
Brazilian Rosewood
Brazilian Rosewood
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:59 pm
Posts: 2103
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Country: Romania
Focus: Build
Status: Professional
3mm sounds way too much to me, the high trebles will be noticeably flat. 2mm is the best compromise for nylon strings, but if you use carbon strings again they will be flat. I am very happy with how I do it, a slightly slanted saddle. The high E comp is just 1mm, which with different saddles can accommodate both carbon and nylon. The bass end is moved back by an additional 1-1.25mm.

_________________
Build log


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 6:51 am 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:50 am
Posts: 942
Location: Ellicott City, Md - USA
First name: John
Last Name: A
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
so on mine - instead of putting the saddle back at 650 - I will go down two mm and set it at 652 ? I just want to confirm before I glue it. Thanks

- Cumpiano/Natelson does not mention an extra 2 mm -I guess it is something minor that they skipped

_________________
It's this new idea from recent decades that everyone gets a participation award. - MUX


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 7:43 am 
Offline
Brazilian Rosewood
Brazilian Rosewood
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:59 pm
Posts: 2103
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Country: Romania
Focus: Build
Status: Professional
Yes, 652mm measuring from the nut. It is not minor at all, without compensation all upper positions will be noticeably sharp.

_________________
Build log


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 8:12 am 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:44 am
Posts: 5588
First name: colin
Last Name: north
Country: Scotland.
Focus: Build
Status: Semi-pro
John A wrote:
- Cumpiano/Natelson does not mention an extra 2 mm -I guess it is something minor that they skipped

In my copy compensation is indexed on on pgs 9 and 39, quoting 0.10" for classical of scale length 25.6" in the layout section.

_________________
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 4:09 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:50 am
Posts: 942
Location: Ellicott City, Md - USA
First name: John
Last Name: A
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
Colin North wrote:
John A wrote:
- Cumpiano/Natelson does not mention an extra 2 mm -I guess it is something minor that they skipped

In my copy compensation is indexed on on pgs 9 and 39, quoting 0.10" for classical of scale length 25.6" in the layout section.



got it - that explains why in the chapter about placing the saddle position - he mentions it is 25.7" for the classical.

I guess I will just use the mm ruler side of my IBEX ruller and then measure 652 from the nut. Why would they make a nonstandard size of 651 ? ugh...

_________________
It's this new idea from recent decades that everyone gets a participation award. - MUX


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:42 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 8:47 am
Posts: 1244
Location: Montreal, Canada
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
FWIW, I use the old Ibex fret rule as well and I have absolutely no issues with it's compensation. All the classicals I've made with it have totally acceptable intonation.

_________________
Alain Moisan
Former full time builder of Acoustics, Classicals and Flamencos.
(Now building just for fun!)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:27 am 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:44 am
Posts: 5588
First name: colin
Last Name: north
Country: Scotland.
Focus: Build
Status: Semi-pro
John A wrote:
Colin North wrote:
John A wrote:
- Cumpiano/Natelson does not mention an extra 2 mm -I guess it is something minor that they skipped

In my copy compensation is indexed on on pgs 9 and 39, quoting 0.10" for classical of scale length 25.6" in the layout section.



got it - that explains why in the chapter about placing the saddle position - he mentions it is 25.7" for the classical.

I guess I will just use the mm ruler side of my IBEX ruller and then measure 652 from the nut. Why would they make a nonstandard size of 651 ? ugh...

At 650.24mm, 26.6 inches is pretty close to standard.
Maybe just easier than writing 25.590551181102363 inches!!
Also I noticed that 26.7 inches converts to 652.7799999999999 mm, pretty close to 653 mm.

_________________
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 7:07 am 
Offline
Koa
Koa
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:50 am
Posts: 942
Location: Ellicott City, Md - USA
First name: John
Last Name: A
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
I understand the above - but I do not understand how the frets would be off than the locations for a standard 650 scale, unless it was for a different scale.

_________________
It's this new idea from recent decades that everyone gets a participation award. - MUX


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:40 am 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:44 am
Posts: 5588
First name: colin
Last Name: north
Country: Scotland.
Focus: Build
Status: Semi-pro
John A wrote:
I understand the above - but I do not understand how the frets would be off than the locations for a standard 650 scale, unless it was for a different scale.

Sorry, can't help you there idunno

_________________
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 12:06 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 8:47 am
Posts: 1244
Location: Montreal, Canada
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
Filippo Morelli wrote:
Here's what Waddy Thomson said back in February 2011 ...

I have one of the old IBEX rules, and the "standard classical scale" is some wierd scale that is more than 650, and the compensation is too much for the scale, but it works fine. I used it on my first few, and it came out just fine. Intonation was perfectly good. That's a classical. Don't know about the other scales.

from ... http://luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopi ... 01&t=31033

Filippo


I mesured on the rule and what Waddy said is correct. The scale seems to be more around 651-652 (the 12th fret mesures short of 326ish). So 653 mm would be a correctly compensated saddle for that scale.

Like I said (and as Waddy said), there is not intonation issue with this scale.

_________________
Alain Moisan
Former full time builder of Acoustics, Classicals and Flamencos.
(Now building just for fun!)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2011 11:18 pm 
Offline
Koa
Koa

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:54 pm
Posts: 713
Location: United States
First name: nick
Last Name: fullerton
City: Vallejo
State: ca
Zip/Postal Code: 94590
Country: usa
Focus: Build
Status: Amateur
Seems to me that if you used a stewmac slotted board you'd want to use one of their fret rulers instead of the Ibex.

_________________
"Preoccupation with an effect gives it power and enhances the error"
from "Your Owner's Manual" by Burt Hotchkiss.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 9:08 am 
Offline
Contributing Member
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 7:05 am
Posts: 9191
Location: United States
First name: Waddy
Last Name: Thomson
City: Charlotte
State: NC
Focus: Build
Status: Semi-pro
If you use the IBEX, use it to place the frets and the bridge, and all will be fine. If you use it for one or the other, and use a different fret placement method, or a different compensation, you'll be off. It is a perfectly good rule, and intonation on my guitars that I used it on has been very good. I now use efret and compensate about 1mm to the front of the saddle, and use a double compensated saddle, a la David LaPlante.

_________________
Waddy

Photobucket Build Album Library

Sound Clips of most of my guitars


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
phpBB customization services by 2by2host.com