Fretless Fender Jap' 51 reissue Precision project - any advice?

[Walker]

I have a lovely 2003 Fender Japanese 51 Reissue Precision, with an original 1971 Fender Telecaster pup that was overwound by the bassdoc. I've fitted with good tapewounds and I get the most amazing woody upright 'thunk' from it - IMHO it's my dream tone for the music we play. I bought it from a BCer many months ago.

To get a little nearer to the upright tone and to get the flexibility a fretless gives (sliding to notes, etc.), I was considering getting it defretted, but it's just too lovely to ruin, just in case I ever want to play it fretted again.

So I'm having a replica (but fretless) maple telecaster headstocked neck made by a well respected local luthier.

He's sourcing wood at the moment and it's going to his workshop this weekend. He's suggested a satin two-pack polyester finish, colour matching the existing neck. The poly is tough enough for a maple fretless fingerboard, although I can only ever imagine using tapewound strings.

Before I hand over my pride and joy - have I missed anything stupid? Is there anything else I should be considering before commissioning this neck?

Thanks very much,

Chris

[philw]

Think about where you want the position markers on the side (and if you decide you want them between the "frets", think again and change your mind).

Phil

[Walker]

Yup, hadn't even thought about that!

That's why I love this place.

I'm going for a lined fingerboard to retain the look of the original as closely as possible - and make it easier for me

So yes, position markers on the frets. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

[mckendrick]

[quote name='Walker' timestamp='1357739041' post='1927512']
I'm going for a lined fingerboard to retain the look of the original as closely as possible - and make it easier for me

So yes, position markers on the frets. Thank you, thank you, thank you!
[/quote]
If you're having a lined board, surely you want the side markers [i]between[/i] the frets as per norm...? If you have a plain board you'd have them [i]on[/i] the fret position. N'est-ce pas?

Maybe it's just me.

[Walker]

[quote name='mckendrick' timestamp='1357841096' post='1929419']
If you're having a lined board, surely you want the side markers [i]between[/i] the frets as per norm...?
[/quote]

I've just done a little research and it looks like you are absolutely right!

On an unlined board, Phil is right. Dropping bass off tomorrow, so just in time!

[philw]

Side dots between the lines on a fretless is often the norm but that doesn't mean it makes sense. It usually happens on mass produced instruments when fretless necks are made on the same production line as fretted necks. The side dots end up between the frets on the fretless necks because that's where they are on the fretted necks. It terms of playing the thing however it makes no sense at all - why would you want your eye drawn to the exact position where you don't want your fingers to fall?

Phil

[Walker]

[quote name='philw' timestamp='1357904484' post='1930249']
...why would you want your eye drawn to the exact position where you don't want your fingers to fall?
[/quote]

That's what I thought TBH, but thought there must be a good reason why it wasnt the norm, not just manufaturing efficiencies!

I've got side dots at the fret position on my unlined upright, so I'll follow that I think. It works for me.

Cheers gents.

Edited January 11, 2013 by Walker