I don't measure spacing when cutting fret slots

axisus

I have read stuff about people flapping over cutting fret slots. All that measure, measure again stuff, or walk off and come back later to check etc. I'm probably a law-breaking heathen, but this is what I did - I have a high quality large format plotter at work. I found a good quality postscript pdf of a Fender neck, drawn accurately to scale. I reduced the line widths to very narrow, printed it off and stuck it onto my fretboard blank with double sided tape, and just cut directly over the lines. Seemed to work OK so I'm doing the same again for guitar no 2.

BigMonka

Good skills!

WezV

Yeah, it works fine.... But seriously, double check a few key measurements anyway, takes seconds.

the bigger issue will be your ability to saw exactly on the line.


the issue is worse when people use domestic printers to do the same. Really worth double checking everything then. But even if the paper changes dimensions slightly, it generally changes it in a way which leaves it proportionately correct.

but none of those drawings or fret calc tools were available when I started building, so I learned the hard way.

SteveRobinson

I sometimes do the same thing (albeit on a smaller scale) with nut slots. I print the compensated spacing on a sticky label, apply it to the nut and cut on the lines.

digitalscream

Surely the easiest and most accurate way to do it - especially if you can ever see yourself making more than one guitar at a given scale length - is to make a jig for it?

That way, you get to test your measurements before ever going near an expensive bit of fretboard wood.

WezV

Yeah but that tends to tie people into the option they have a jig for. 

I do have them for all the common scale lengths. But I am glad I never learned with them as I am happy doing any scale length you can imagine without them.

octatonic

I use a laser cutter to mark out the lines, then use a mitre saw to cut.
They are perfectly accurate.

axisus

WezV said:

the bigger issue will be your ability to saw exactly on the line.

That's the same problem however I mark the line. I had a process for that so all was good.

Gassage

axisus said:

I have read stuff about people flapping over cutting fret slots. All that measure, measure again stuff, or walk off and come back later to check etc. I'm probably a law-breaking heathen, but this is what I did - I have a high quality large format plotter at work. I found a good quality postscript pdf of a Fender neck, drawn accurately to scale. I reduced the line widths to very narrow, printed it off and stuck it onto my fretboard blank with double sided tape, and just cut directly over the lines. Seemed to work OK so I'm doing the same again for guitar no 2.

I''ve made a note.

octatonic

axisus said:

I have read stuff about people flapping over cutting fret slots. All that measure, measure again stuff, or walk off and come back later to check etc. I'm probably a law-breaking heathen, but this is what I did - I have a high quality large format plotter at work. I found a good quality postscript pdf of a Fender neck, drawn accurately to scale. I reduced the line widths to very narrow, printed it off and stuck it onto my fretboard blank with double sided tape, and just cut directly over the lines. Seemed to work OK so I'm doing the same again for guitar no 2.

The question to ask here is how well do your instruments intonate.

Sporky

I do mine with a router.

equalsql

Sporky said:

I do mine with a router.

You like big frets then @Sporky ?

Sporky

It's a 0.58mm bit.

hywelg

Biggest source of error is the paper. Provided you keep it at the same moisture level as the time it was printed it'll be fine. However print it in a nice dry office then take it to a cool damp workshop in winter and you're asking for trouble. Over the length of a neck you could get 1.5-2mm of movement, depending on the way the paper is oriented in the plotter. 

I use an A0 plotter for work  and have problems in winter. I find that along the length of the paper roll it's quite stable but across the width it's very variable. You need to print a dimension line on the printout so you can check before applying it to the neck. 

axisus

hywelg said:

Biggest source of error is the paper. Provided you keep it at the same moisture level as the time it was printed it'll be fine. However print it in a nice dry office then take it to a cool damp workshop in winter and you're asking for trouble. Over the length of a neck you could get 1.5-2mm of movement, depending on the way the paper is oriented in the plotter. 

I use an A0 plotter for work  and have problems in winter. I find that along the length of the paper roll it's quite stable but across the width it's very variable. You need to print a dimension line on the printout so you can check before applying it to the neck. 

I always put an exact 20mm square on any artwork, with a tiny hairline stroke. Easy to check both dimensions 

BigMonka

hywelg said:

Biggest source of error is the paper. Provided you keep it at the same moisture level as the time it was printed it'll be fine. However print it in a nice dry office then take it to a cool damp workshop in winter and you're asking for trouble. Over the length of a neck you could get 1.5-2mm of movement, depending on the way the paper is oriented in the plotter. 

I use an A0 plotter for work  and have problems in winter. I find that along the length of the paper roll it's quite stable but across the width it's very variable. You need to print a dimension line on the printout so you can check before applying it to the neck. 

That's really interesting! I too regularly use an A0 plotter at work but I didn't realise the paper could move so much as we rarely take the paper out of the office environment.