• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

Nibs, can someone give me a history lesson?

grimlyflick

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
1,275
Firstly I have a few questions on the fretboard nibs. Why did Gibson choose to have the nibs as opposed to the fret going to the edge of the binding? Was this a cost/manufacturing decision or just considered to be the right way to do it. If considered easier and cheaper why then do Epiphones and other copies not have them?

Secondly I’ve just had my old Classic re-fretted, I’ve always been keen to lose the nibs in the process and now I have the guitar back I love the way the guitar feels and plays. The other thing this has highlighted is where a luthier gives his full attention to doing as good a job as possible to your guitar, whatever is rolling off the standard USA production line unfortunately does not get the same care and attention. My Classic’s fretboard is now as smooth as, no sanding or file marks on the fretboard or binding, my Standard unfortunately feels poor now in comparison. Before anyone thinks I’m bringing up the Gibson QC debate I have to say I thought my Standard was great before.

Maybe this is just a indication of where the money goes when you buy a custom shop Gibson, Eggle Macon, Knaggs or Nik Huber? Also none of these high end guitars have nibs so I struggling to see the point of them.

Someone please educate me.

On top of all this my Standard is due a fret dress, but I’m considering going the whole hog and having that re-fretted too.

Hmmm. :hmm
 

AJCR

Member
Joined
May 2, 2018
Messages
124
What do other brands have to do with it?? AFAIK there is no industry wise standard on 'top end specs required'.


Nibs......well, maybe a long time in the past when they were first done there were no accurate undertang nippers in existence. So binding the fretboard was only possible with the use of nibs. Or maybe it wasn't and they chose to go that route.
Nibs are what Gibson uses to integrate frets into the binding edge........because thats what they choose to use and have used since, well almost forever. There is no other requirement or justification needed. If you like it, great, if you don't.....well they won't care and you only have your own likes to guide you on how you want to 1. spend your money in the first place, and 2. choose to upgrade your guitars.

QC on the other hand is an aspect where you can be more objective.....and Gibson has for a while been skimping on this aspect.
Plus the choice of thicker binding on the fretboard too brings the interface closer to the string. Older gibsons never suffered from the binding and string interfering with each other.
 

grimlyflick

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
1,275
What do other brands have to do with it?? AFAIK there is no industry wise standard on 'top end specs required'.

Apologies if my comparison caused a little confusion, my reference to Gibson Custom Shop, Eggle, Knaggs and Huber was mean’t mostly in regards to the level of finish on a 4-6k singlecut, not the use of nibs.

Nibs are what Gibson uses to integrate frets into the binding edge........because thats what they choose to use and have used since, well almost forever. There is no other requirement or justification needed. If you like it, great, if you don't.....well they won't care and you only have your own likes to guide you on how you want to 1. spend your money in the first place, and 2. choose to upgrade your guitars.

I am aware of what Gibson use nibs for, I have been using Les Paul as my main instrument for 20+ years. I am not looking for justification for how I choose to set my guitars up or where to spend my money, just asking a question to satisfy my curiousity and possibly learn something. This is a forum afterall, where people come to share knowledge.

Plus the choice of thicker binding on the fretboard too brings the interface closer to the string. Older gibsons never suffered from the binding and string interfering with each other.

Good point on the thicker binding, my Standard is a 2016 so compared to my Classic the playing area between the binding is almost 2mm smaller, which sounds small but makes a significant difference if you are as ham fisted as myself.

So back to the original question, can anyone shed some light on what the actual rationale historically behind Gibson’s use of the nibs?
 

Bob Womack

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
2,189
Gibson was considered a luxury instrument and the nibs were considered a luxury appointment. In a way, they've been trapped in a price category by their own style because creating those nibs is far more manual labor intensive and therefore expensive than fretting without the nibs. The binding has to be set higher and then finished and then cut and scraped down to fingerboard level between the frets.

The action work of a luthier/tech reminds me of an old carpenter's joke: The grizzled old carpenter on the crew with the muscular arms goes over to the fresh-cheeked youngest carpenter and says, "I'll bet I can drive a nail further with one stroke than you can with four!" All spit and vinegar, the young carpenter takes the bet. Old carpenter hands him a nail and says, "Go ahead!" Young guy takes four whacks and sets his nail flush with the surface of the board. He steps back proud, expecting the old guy to produce a new nail. Instead, old guy swings once and whacks young guy's flush nail and countersinks it, winning the bet by smarts rather than muscle. When I joined my first carpentry crew that joke was played on me. I didn't bet, but I played along.

Guitar manufacturers simply can't afford to put the attention into the fretboard that an independent luthier can. It is exactly at this place that the economies of scale fail, even with the Plek machine. Besides that, the fingerboard wood changes after the guitar leaves the factory. A refret costs $300-450. During a refret, a good lutheir/tech takes a guitar fingerboard that has settled into shape and can use a plane to level it. He can afford to spend the time to make the frets more consistent than the factory can. He drives the nail further. But, if you wanted that quality of action, the cost of his attention would have to be factored into the cost of the guitar and that is prohibitive in a competitive retail environment.

As a result, I take my good guitars to my luthier/tech as soon as I buy them and get a setup. It always takes them a step further. More on my website, HERE.

Bob
 

AJCR

Member
Joined
May 2, 2018
Messages
124
I am aware of what Gibson use nibs for, I have been using Les Paul as my main instrument for 20+ years. I am not looking for justification for how I choose to set my guitars up or where to spend my money, just asking a question to satisfy my curiousity and possibly learn something. This is a forum afterall, where people come to share knowledge.

This is what I said to this......did you skip over this bit in your reading??

Nibs......well, maybe a long time in the past when they were first done there were no accurate undertang nippers in existence. So binding the fretboard was only possible with the use of nibs. Or maybe it wasn't and they chose to go that route.

 

grimlyflick

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
1,275
This is what I said to this......did you skip over this bit in your reading??

Nibs......well, maybe a long time in the past when they were first done there were no accurate undertang nippers in existence. So binding the fretboard was only possible with the use of nibs. Or maybe it wasn't and they chose to go that route.


I’m really sorry I’m struggling to see your point. I read the above paragraph in your 1st reply and quoted it in mine, so obviously didn’t skip over it. Bob has kindly answered my question, so since you seem to be spoiling for some kind of argument I think we’d best leave it it there.
:salude
 

AJCR

Member
Joined
May 2, 2018
Messages
124
I gave you the two options in the first post......so if you can't see that then you are being obtuse.......inadvertantly or deliberately I can't tell. I can only assume you have a bone to pick with somebody and it just happens to be me this time.
As I can see no point to wanting to correct your continually contradictory nature maybe you should think twice about posting when you are feeling this way. Saves wasting people's time.
 

grimlyflick

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
1,275
Your reply just proves my point. I politely asked a question with no agenda other than just wishing to satisfy my own curiousity.

Bob kindly answered my question. I don’t wish to continue being attacked on a public forum of which I have been a member for 15 years in which time I have never had my behaviour or nature questioned.

Let it go now please, I won”t be posting again.
:salude
 

El Gringo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
5,655
Gibson was considered a luxury instrument and the nibs were considered a luxury appointment. In a way, they've been trapped in a price category by their own style because creating those nibs is far more manual labor intensive and therefore expensive than fretting without the nibs. The binding has to be set higher and then finished and then cut and scraped down to fingerboard level between the frets.

The action work of a luthier/tech reminds me of an old carpenter's joke: The grizzled old carpenter on the crew with the muscular arms goes over to the fresh-cheeked youngest carpenter and says, "I'll bet I can drive a nail further with one stroke than you can with four!" All spit and vinegar, the young carpenter takes the bet. Old carpenter hands him a nail and says, "Go ahead!" Young guy takes four whacks and sets his nail flush with the surface of the board. He steps back proud, expecting the old guy to produce a new nail. Instead, old guy swings once and whacks young guy's flush nail and countersinks it, winning the bet by smarts rather than muscle. When I joined my first carpentry crew that joke was played on me. I didn't bet, but I played along.

Guitar manufacturers simply can't afford to put the attention into the fretboard that an independent luthier can. It is exactly at this place that the economies of scale fail, even with the Plek machine. Besides that, the fingerboard wood changes after the guitar leaves the factory. A refret costs $300-450. During a refret, a good lutheir/tech takes a guitar fingerboard that has settled into shape and can use a plane to level it. He can afford to spend the time to make the frets more consistent than the factory can. He drives the nail further. But, if you wanted that quality of action, the cost of his attention would have to be factored into the cost of the guitar and that is prohibitive in a competitive retail environment.

As a result, I take my good guitars to my luthier/tech as soon as I buy them and get a setup. It always takes them a step further. More on my website, HERE.

Bob
Thank You very kindly for posting this most informative and most helpful knowledge on our favorite instruments .
 

El Gringo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
5,655
Your reply just proves my point. I politely asked a question with no agenda other than just wishing to satisfy my own curiousity.

Bob kindly answered my question. I don’t wish to continue being attacked on a public forum of which I have been a member for 15 years in which time I have never had my behaviour or nature questioned.

Let it go now please, I won”t be posting again.
:salude
You are good and please continue to post . Bob's Post was very informative .
 
Top