#1
Opinions on a Zero fret please?

Thinking of putting one on a guitar but not sure. . . . . . . good, bad?

thanks
#2
nah.
Current Gear:
LTD MH-400 with Gotoh GE1996T (EMG 85/60)
PRS SE Custom 24 (Suhr SSH+/SSV)
Ibanez RG3120 Prestige (Dimarzio Titans)
Squier Vintage Modified 70s Jazz V
Audient iD22 interface
Peavey Revalver 4, UAD Friedman BE100/DS40
Adam S3A monitors
Quote by Anonden
You CAN play anything with anything....but some guitars sound right for some things, and not for others. Single coils sound retarded for metal, though those who are apeshit about harpsichord probably beg to differ.
#4
Quote by lefthandman9876
you cant really put one on a guitar, they go where the nut should go or zomthin like that


You obviously have no idea who I am and what Im capable of . . . . . . . lol !

Seriously though, its on a new build so I can cut the F-board accordingly so thats not a problem.
#5
im lost, what exactly is a zero fret? wouldnt it be like tuning to Eb? or... im lost.
#6
thats a zero fret. Basically a fret where the nut should be and a nut behind just to guide the strings not actually set the height.

(Invalid img)
#9
I think it's a silly idea.

For a start off, there really isn't any disadvantages in not having a zero fret, if a nut is installed properly, then that works great.

If you have a zero fret, then that means an extra fret to deal with, an extra fret to replace if needed and yeah....

What's the point?

It only makes your first note sound fretted and not open, jimi hendrix and a million other guitarists and fans didn't mind it.
My Sig Is Coming Soon
#10
no real benefits, more consistent intonation, only problem is, that fret will last about 1 year before you gotta replace it. its much eeasier to grind nut slots down than an entire fret when setting the action as well. it was a lazy japan thing in the 70s and 80s.

it sucks to level frets with a zero fret as well, it gets in the way, and its gotta be a different height than the others. it helps if its stainless steel, but then again it will only make the fret last another 5 or 6 months. totally bad idea. i only know of one luthier who does that, and hes 78 years old and has done it his whole life on acoustic guitars.
#11
It doesnt have to be a different height to the rest, on that principal the further up the neck you go the frets would have to get lower. It can be the same height as the rest.
#12
Surely your nut is higher than your first fret?

All frets should be level, except the nut/zero fret should be a bit higher to raise the strings off, otherwise they'd be in contact with every fret, all the time.

Right...?
Quote by Liberation
Every time I see your avatar I want to slit your neck with a butterknife. Goddamn Pingu.
#13
If you want to go for a vintagey look, do it.

Actually, now that I think about it, I have a couple '60s guitars (and a bass) with zero frets. They still play just as good as they did new (they are the same height as the other frets, too). I really like it. Based on this fact, I'd say some of the other posters are just barking up the wrong tree.
#14
Quote by loonyguitarist
Surely your nut is higher than your first fret?

All frets should be level, except the nut/zero fret should be a bit higher to raise the strings off, otherwise they'd be in contact with every fret, all the time.

Right...?


Wrong, its only like fretting a note on any other fret. If you fret all the strings at the 5th fret they dont tough the 6th fret do they? its exactly the same with a zero fret, itd be the same as any other fretted position.
#15
Quote by jscustomguitars
Wrong, its only like fretting a note on any other fret. If you fret all the strings at the 5th fret they dont tough the 6th fret do they? its exactly the same with a zero fret, itd be the same as any other fretted position.

But wouldnt you need it to be high enough to have more pressure on it so it works like a fret? So it wont buzz or anything and so the action is still play able? With the bridge the strings are still raised when your fretting so it goes above the others and with a zero fret the same height that wouldn't work. EDIT and the nut would have to be smaller or the same size
Last edited by cfhwarhead at Aug 30, 2008,
#16
Depends how you do it. If you had a relativley sharp breaking angle after the fret it could be the same height. If there wasnt much of a breaking angle then yeah the fret would have to be higher by a touch. . . . .
#17
I have a zero fret on my Brian May signature.

The guitar is great, it's 2 months old and there is already fret wear on the G string.
When you bend it or an adjacent string, you can hear it ping as it pops out of the slot, or more accurately, back in the slot.

Obviously you don't hear it while playing at stage volume.

But as this trough develops, the string length becomes shorter. That's not a problem yet, but it most likely will be.

And the string length between the zero fret and the tuning post clang. This is audible when playing live. Some say this is a benefit to the tone, but I see no logic to that comment, and if I damp the afformentioned string segment with my hand, the clang goes away.

I think a zero fret was utilized because it is easier to install than a nut. I understand cutting a nut correctly can be difficult. On my BM signature the nut merely functions to keep the strings in place, not to provide an end point to string length.

The zero fret also provides another place for strings to get caught, further complicating tuning stability with a floating trem.

I have also heard it said that a zero fret provides better sounding open string chords. I'm not hearing that.

In summary, I see no reason to have a zero fret. I intend to remove the one on this guitar, which by the way is an excellent instrument.
#18
^ it wouldnt work though, it would mess up your scale length :P you could have your nut moved i guess
Quote by Deliriumbassist
Antisocial Behaviour Order. A chav's equivalent of GCSEs.
#19
Quote by jscustomguitars
Anyone know what benefits there are with a zero fret?

It makes the open string sound fretted and it makes it alot easier to install the nut because all the nut needs to do is guide the strings. But this may be sommething you would only want to do on guitars with stainless steel fretwire.
Last edited by 420 FREAK at Nov 15, 2008,
#20
Zero frets are purely for tonal purposes, correct? Surely having the strings breaking over a fret directly after the nut would be detrimental to the strings?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a zero fret a ingenious solution to problem that doesn't exist?
#21
I have no idea what any of that means, but it won't hurt the strings. There is one big disadvantage to having one though: It gets more wear than any other fret, and it wears fast.

As I said before, it's mainly for aesthetic purposes, and MAYBE tonal purposes.

Why the hell did someone bump this, anyway? It's 3 months old. I'm pretty sure TS has already made his mind up.
#22
Just to set the record straight:

According to Vigier, who produce zero frets as a standard feature on their guitars, it allows the strings to be set extremely low, and still not have any fret buzz. The fret itself is made of a hardened alloy so that it won't wear.
Dyer's Eve is awesome, and has an abnormally large penis, which doesn't act as any hinderance to his everyday life despite its freakishly large size.
For unrivaled obedience, user King_ofKumbucha is awarded this spot of honor.