Refret/Binding question

[Kevin James]

What is the best way to do a re-fret on a vintage guitar with neck binding? The guitar in question is the 67 SG Special I just acquired (See my project thread). It has already been refreted once long ago and the nibs are totally gone and the frets are just to the edge of the rosewood board and do NOT cover over the binding. It needs another refret now. Here's a pic of the frets/binding as they are now

I have taken the guitar to 2 separate luthiers in my area. Neither of them recommend doing the frets the same way the previous job was done because the string can "fall off" the side of the fret too easily. Both guys had their own different take on how they would do it.

The first guy said he would remove the binding altogether and replace with new binding including full nibs. Not sure I like that idea at all.

The second guy said he would not touch the original binding and he would fret OVER the binding. Is this the recommended route to go?

Sorry, just not sure what the best way to go is so when in doubt I figure this is the place to ask.

 

[MojoMonster]

If it has historical value and came with nibs, I'd get nibs back.

If not, the second guy is probably cheaper and quicker.
He'd use something like this to create the binding overhang on the frets.

Fretting over the binding is normal and would help with the fret out on your E strings.

MM

 

[Kevin James]

If it has historical value and came with nibs, I'd get nibs back.

If not, the second guy is probably cheaper and quicker.
He'd use something like this to create the binding overhang on the frets.

Fretting over the binding is normal and would help with the fret out on your E strings.

MM

Well, its an issues guitar, HORRIBLE refin with varnish, removed tuners with poorly plugged holes removed Maestro with poorly plugged holes. So this is a player piece.

Getting nibs back would mean replacing the binding all together, right? Wouldn't removing the original binding reduce the value more than fretting over the original binding?

I guess what I'm curriouse to findout is both Roman and BCR Greg's oppinions on this and what they would do if it the guitar was in their shops respectively as they seem to be the two go to guys here (I say "seem to be" because I'm still a noob here so I haven't had any interaction with either of them but they are who everybody recomends it seems).

 

[monsterwalley]

I would think that a refret overhanging the binding would be better to keep it's value than ripping the original binding off.

 

[greenhorn]

I think it depends on what you want to spend as well.

Personally, I'd just fret over the exhisting binding. Faster, easier, and cheaper.

If its already a player with some wrong things no sense in spending the extra to fix the binding to have nibs.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Ayrton]

You will want to go over the binding in this case.

 

[David Collins]

Rebuilding nibs makes no sense in terms of value or preservation in a case like this, and would actually be more invasive and destructive of original materials than just fretting it standard.

Go with option #2. Standard refret, over the binding.

 

[LeftyRighty]

Rebuilding nibs makes no sense in terms of value or preservation in a case like this, and would actually be more invasive and destructive of original materials than just fretting it standard.

Go with option #2. Standard refret, over the binding.

+1. there is no need to pull the binding. Fretting over the end of the old binding would be the way I would go too. it will also be cheaper than option one. But I have to add that the four ffets pictured don't look that bad. Are you sure you could just get away with a re-level and crown? Or perhaps a partial refret?

 

[Kevin James]

+1. there is no need to pull the binding. Fretting over the end of the old binding would be the way I would go too. it will also be cheaper than option one. But I have to add that the four ffets pictured don't look that bad. Are you sure you could just get away with a re-level and crown? Or perhaps a partial refret?

They are low enogh to where any kind of bends are difficult.

My luthier is the one that recomended a refret to me after playing it. It was on my mind already but I had not mentioned it to him yet, he is the one that brought it up which confirmed to me IMO that I was right about it. He told me the frets are pretty much dead. I don't think he's just trying to make a buck off it or anything like that. He has proven his honesty to me with things like that. He is the same one that told me on my 64 JR that if it were his guitar he would leave the frets alone unless its a main player (it isn't but I'd play it more if it played better).

.

 

[LeftyRighty]

They are low enogh to where any kind of bends are difficult.

My luthier is the one that recomended a refret to me after playing it. It was on my mind already but I had not mentioned it to him yet, he is the one that brought it up which confirmed to me IMO that I was right about it. He told me the frets are pretty much dead. I don't think he's just trying to make a buck off it or anything like that. He has proven his honesty to me with things like that. He is the same one that told me on my 64 JR that if it were his guitar he would leave the frets alone unless its a main player (it isn't but I'd play it more if it played better).

.

fair enough, sometimes it's hard to tell from a photo.