Fret marker differences

[Richard Katz]

My Luscomb banjo (20 frets) has fret markers at the 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 12th, 14th, and 17th frets.
My S.S. Stewart Special Thoroughbred (22) has fret markers at the 5th, 7th, 10th, 14th, and 17th frets.
Is there a reason for this difference? I find the Luscomb fret markings are a more logical placement (my opinion only). Thanks for any input.

[Brian Kimerer]

My Fairbanks & Cole A-scale (Circa 1890) has markers at 3, 5, 7, 9 12, and 17. Plus, it has a large diamond marker between fret 19 and the pot. The markers at the 5th and 9th are larger than the ones at the 3rd and 7th. 

This it quite different from my modern banjos (Bart Reiter  3, 5, 7, 10, 12, 15, 17, 22) (Goldtone 3, 5, 7, 10, 12, 15, 17, 19). Someone told me that older banjos were often marked at the 9th fret like my F&C, but the later custom was to mark the 10th instead.

[Trapdoor2]

Go here (thanks Joel!) for a contemporary article:

http://www.banjothimble.com/Fret_Markings.html

I have found very little consistency in the 9/10 marker from maker to maker...and often I find markers in 'decorative' locations rather than anything else.

[Steve Harrison]

Hi Richard, just a guess, but it may be that the early banjo makers were copying the way in which guitar fret-boards have a 9th fret marker rather than a 10th. I have an early James Pardoe banjo which is marked at the 9th. It can be a bit off putting at first if you use the fret markers to help navigate the fret board....Steve.

[Richard Katz]

Thanks for the replies. I just found it odd that Stewart marked the 14th fret and not the 12th. I was not clear if there was a reason for this or that it really wasn't important. The fret markers seem to be at odd intervals.

[Jody Stecher]

Having read the article on Stewart's opinions I find it baffling that he found the minor seventh more significant than the octave.  That said, I have played banjos, guitars, mandolins, etc, with no fingerboard markings at all and never had trouble locating the right fret. At least fingerboards are still not controlled by idiotic computer programs that move the inlays and side dots to a "better" position (like the eleventh and sixth fret for instance) as my spell "corrector" has just done, changing "fingerboard" to "fiberboard" about 30 seconds *after* I typed it.

Trapdoor2 said:

Go here (thanks Joel!) for a contemporary article:

http://www.banjothimble.com/Fret_Markings.html

I have found very little consistency in the 9/10 marker from maker to maker...and often I find markers in 'decorative' locations rather than anything else.

[Trapdoor2]

I have often thought that Armstrong wrote that article as a 'discovery' piece. 'Discovery' in that he had to search out meaning in the positions that weren't readily apparent (such as the m7).

I think I recall that my Stewart banjeaurines do not have the 12th fret marked.

I have one or two banjos with no markings...but above the 7th fret, I'm pretty much lost until I've played the instrument a good bit. I have one with the usual side markers but no fiberboard markers...and I often find myself lost on it...I'm trained to look for the fjiord markers.

Damn that spellchecker!

[Brian Kimerer]

Of all the "fret" markings I have ever seen, this fretless Fairbanks has my favorite (flush frets). I have yet to find the logic behind the staggered markings, but I really like them.

[Trapdoor2]

I love that. I call those 'logarithmic' frets (though they really ain't).

Actually it does have a logical basis. The frets only lie under the strings where commonly used notes are to be found. So, if only two strings have 'useful' notes at a given fret, the fret only extends under two strings. If there are three useful notes, the fret goes under three. Common barre positions get a fret all the way across. IIRC, this system was first outlined in the 1860 Buckley book...and was pretty much gone by the mid 1880's when raised frets became more popular. The above pix are from Dobson's 1877 "New School For The Banjo"

[Jody Stecher]

This only works if the player's repertoire is restricted  to the major key of the open bass string. For the purpose of this discussion let's call it C although the pitch was likely lower when this banjo was built. According to this short-sighted ("short sounded"? ) system it is not useful to play in C minor, which would require an E flat on the bass string,  or to play any piece which has a Trio (third part) which modulates to F major and therefore needs a B flat.  Playing music in D major or even playing any piece in C major which moves to a D or D7 chord is not a "useful" thing according to this system. Even playing in G major is a considered suspicious. Why would anyone want to play an F sharp on the bass string? it asks.  And if the player moves to "elevated bass" tuning new problems and restrictions arise. Basically the player is assumed to want to play nothing but Mary Had A Little Lamb and Jingle Bells, both in C major.

Trapdoor2 said:

I love that. I call those 'logarithmic' frets (though they really ain't).

Actually it does have a logical basis. The frets only lie under the strings where commonly used notes are to be found. So, if only two strings have 'useful' notes at a given fret, the fret only extends under two strings. If there are three useful notes, the fret goes under three. Common barre positions get a fret all the way across. IIRC, this system was first outlined in the 1860 Buckley book...and was pretty much gone by the mid 1880's when raised frets became more popular.

[Trapdoor2]

Geez. Didn't you read the manual? Don't the words "commonly" or "useful" have enough ambiguity for you? Nothing in the system says you can't work outside of it. It doesn't keep the player from playing other notes, it really was just a system of marking the fretboard...much like the later 'dots'.

It didn't hang around very long once raised frets became common.

I used paint-striping tape to do one on my first fretless 'early banjo'. I thought it was beneficial while the tape lasted. Worked my way thru Briggs and Buckley on the system and then went to a naked fingerboard when I felt comfortable with it.

[Jody Stecher]

I have seen instruments like this with raised frets. One was a tamburitza from Serbia or Croatia. I can't recall the other.  It worked great…..in one key.

Trapdoor2 said:

Geez. Didn't you read the manual? Don't the words "commonly" or "useful" have enough ambiguity for you? Nothing in the system says you can't work outside of it. It doesn't keep the player from playing other notes, it really was just a system of marking the fretboard...much like the later 'dots'.

It didn't hang around very long once raised frets became common.

I used paint-striping tape to do one on my first fretless 'early banjo'. I thought it was beneficial while the tape lasted. Worked my way thru Briggs and Buckley on the system and then went to a naked fingerboard when I felt comfortable with it.

[Brian Kimerer]

I think it looks really cool. Thanks for posting the article. I will read it later. Gotta hit the sack now so I can get to the day job tomorrow.