12 Fret

[brilama]

What is the benefit of a 12 fret?

Thank you in advance.

[Deliberate1]

I own a few 12 fret 000's. Wile others will surely give you more illuminating explanations, I will tell you that it is not just the number for frets, but everything that goes along with that features.

The 12 fret guitars I have are a bit shorter scale, in the 25" range, which I find more comfortable to play. The bridge on a 12 fret is placed in the sweet spot of the guitar body which, to some ears, gives the voice a different timbre. A 12 fret guitar is currently being built for me with a cutaway and fret board extension, which will give me back some of the range that is lost when one uses that design. Hope this helps.
David

[mesabgM4]

Certain 12-frets are built with the neck shifted toward the body instead of the body being elongated. I have one of these types and find it extremely comfortable for my technique.

[Rudy4]

Originally Posted by brilama

What is the benefit of a 12 fret?

Thank you in advance.

Depending on design, a 12 fret can bring the "cowboy chord" positions somewhat closer so a 12 fret guitar can feel a bit more comfortable to play. In reality it's whatever you get used to.

I use a capo a lot of the time, often as high as the seventh fret, so that makes a 12 fret guitar pretty useless for me. I require the extra reral estate of a 14 fret guitar. YMMV, of course.

[JackC1]

Supposedly they sound different, but I've only had a 12fret parlor (my only parlor) so I don't know it that's really the case.

Besides that, they may be a little easier to play because your fretting hand is a little closer to your body.

However, the big disadvantage is access to the upper frets.. they're extremely difficult. This was the reason why I sold mine.

[jaymarsch]

I have a deep body 12 fret grand concert. It is a 25.4 scale length and a cutaway so upper frets are easily accessible and the deep body gives it a full, balanced sound. I also have a 12 fret short scale parlor that is really fun to play. So many variables come into play that the main difference to me is that my arm has a shorter reach on a 12 fret than my 14 fretters so it can be more comfortable to play depending on how you hold it.
Many folks think that a 12 fret is always short scale, but that isn’t the case.
Like everything else related to guitars, the only way that you can know if they are what you’re looking for is if you can get your hands on a bunch and play them.
Best,
Jayne

[zoopeda]

Fatter trebles, looser base, bigger dynamic range and volume.

[Guitars44me]

Originally Posted by zoopeda

Fatter trebles, looser base, bigger dynamic range and volume.

I second zoopeda

I find 12 frets to almost always have a Fatter, Warmer, and richer TONE than similar 14 frets. No matter what the scale length. Not sure about looser bass, but they tend to have plenty of it, for whatever size.

They tend to be LOUDER too….

There are physics involved in the bridge placement closer to the widest part of the body.

Think about classical guitars. Made to fill a concert hall without amplifying. Almost always 12 frets to the body.

Want upper fret access? The cutaway has been invented.

All my faves are now 12 fret cutaways with 25” scale

And all sound great, even tuned down to D!

Happy picking

Paul

[sinistral]

Originally Posted by mesabgM4

Certain 12-frets are built with the neck shifted toward the body instead of the body being elongated. I have one of these types and find it extremely comfortable for my technique.

Exactly. This is a common misunderstanding about 12-fret guitars. When Martin created their 14-fret models, they mainly squared off the upper bout to expose two more frets. The bridges moved slightly—only a few 16ths of an inch—so the reach is very similar between a 12-fret and 14-fret version of the same size, in many sizes closer than the difference between an OM and a 000. And the bridges aren’t materially closer to the center of the lower bout.

On the other hand, Gibson shifted the neck and bridge forward or back to create 12-, 13- and 14-fret versions. As a result, the reach on a 12-fret Gibson is noticeably shorter than on a 14-fret Gibson of the same size—basically the distance of the last two frets, or about an inch. The reach is appreciably shorter, and the bridge is noticeably closer to the center of the lower bout. When people cite those features to describe 12-fret guitars, they are really describing guitars that follow the Gibson approach.

Richard Hoover explains the difference in this article. In addition, several extremely knowledgeable luthiers (John Arnold, Bruce Sexauer, Howard Klepper) discuss 12-fret geometry here. They attribute the difference in tone (in the case of Martins) to the extra length of the body more than anything else.

[blindboyjimi]

Originally Posted by sinistral

Exactly. This is a common misunderstanding about 12-fret guitars. When Martin created their 14-fret models, they mainly squared off the upper bout to expose two more frets. The bridges moved slightly—only a few 16ths of an inch—so the reach is very similar between a 12-fret and 14-fret version of the same size, in many sizes closer than the difference between an OM and a 000. And the bridges aren’t materially closer to the center of the lower bout.

On the other hand, Gibson shifted the neck and bridge forward or back to create 12-, 13- and 14-fret versions. As a result, the reach on a 12-fret Gibson is noticeably shorter than on a 14-fret Gibson of the same size—basically the distance of the last two frets, or about an inch. The reach is appreciably shorter, and the bridge is noticeably closer to the center of the lower bout. When people cite those features to describe 12-fret guitars, they are really describing guitars that follow the Gibson approach.

Richard Hoover explains the difference in this article. In addition, several extremely knowledgeable luthiers (John Arnold, Bruce Sexauer, Howard Klepper) discuss 12-fret geometry here. They attribute the difference in tone (in the case of Martins) to the extra length of the body more than anything else.

Very succinct. I have both the "Gibson type" and the "Martin type". My favorite guitar is my Martin 12 fret made the "Gibson way". I really prefer the less reach. Tonally, on the Gibson style, I do feel the bridge more toward the middle of the lower bout gives complexity, and the additional volume of the air cavity on the Martin style add a roundness, fullness, and voluptuousness to the tone and a reason people call them grand pianos. Back in the day, Martin 0, and 00 12 frets were 24.9" scale and the 000-12 was 25.4" scale, while the Gibsons were usually 24.75" scale. Nowadays, luthiers are happy to mix vintage traits with modern ones to get a specific tone.

[roscoe2311]

Originally Posted by sinistral

Exactly. This is a common misunderstanding about 12-fret guitars. When Martin created their 14-fret models, they mainly squared off the upper bout to expose two more frets. The bridges moved slightly—only a few 16ths of an inch—so the reach is very similar between a 12-fret and 14-fret version of the same size, in many sizes closer than the difference between an OM and a 000. And the bridges aren’t materially closer to the center of the lower bout.

On the other hand, Gibson shifted the neck and bridge forward or back to create 12-, 13- and 14-fret versions. As a result, the reach on a 12-fret Gibson is noticeably shorter than on a 14-fret Gibson of the same size—basically the distance of the last two frets, or about an inch. The reach is appreciably shorter, and the bridge is noticeably closer to the center of the lower bout. When people cite those features to describe 12-fret guitars, they are really describing guitars that follow the Gibson approach.

Richard Hoover explains the difference in this article. In addition, several extremely knowledgeable luthiers (John Arnold, Bruce Sexauer, Howard Klepper) discuss 12-fret geometry here. They attribute the difference in tone (in the case of Martins) to the extra length of the body more than anything else.

It's funny how many sales people I've seen comment on the bridge being in the "sweet spot" on a Martin style 12 fretter despite the bridge not really being in a different spot at all!

[Silly Moustache]

Whilst I no longer play Martin six strings, they designed and built arguably the finest flat top designs from the mid/late 1800s until the 1930s.

They determined body sizes, fretboard widths and scale lengths depending on what they thought would be the audience size of a performer (without amplification of course.
The body sizes went from size 2 (Amateur):
1 & 13/16" nut width, 24.5" scale 12" wide lower bout.

to size 000 (Auditorium):
1 & 7/8" nut width, 25.4" scale 15" wide lower bout.

With the Size "0" (Concert) and size "00" (Grand Concert) in between (both with 1 & 7/8" nut widths to 2 & 5/16" string spacing, and with 24.9" scales.

(details taken from my 1924 Martin catalogue).

from 1931 they offered a 12 fret dreadnought, which was a very fine design but commercially unsuccesful, possibly as no-one could think such a large instrument was necessary.

I believe that these developments from the European "classical" guitar, and were most likely designed for fingerstyle playing.

In my humble opinion these were the most visually and tonally well balanced designs to date.

In 1930 they modified the 000 to make the "OM" with thin rhythm neck 14 frets proud -primarily for tenor banjo players in dance bands.
As the 000/OM was unsuccessful, they discontinued it in 1933, and tried the same trick on the Dreadnought which was equally unsuccessful for dance band musicians, but found favour with the burgeoning folk and country players.

These 14 fret designs effectively signalled a "change of use" of the flat top guitar from fingerstyle and melody to rhythm style backing other soloing instruments such as fiddle, banjo and mandolin.

Martin have (finally!) re-introduced 12 fret 012-28 and 0012-28 models (to compete with Eastman? but brands like Collings, Eastman and others have beat them to it.

As my style evolved from simple strumming to more melodic with running bass lines and in chord melodic lines, I found the thin and shallow rhythm necks of 14 fret Martin guitars simply too restricting, and finally found Collings 12 fret dreads and a 000, which provides me with the balance (tonally and physically) to achieve what I need.

The 12 fret designs are more ergonomic in many ways.

[guitarman001]

Originally Posted by mesabgM4

Certain 12-frets are built with the neck shifted toward the body instead of the body being elongated. I have one of these types and find it extremely comfortable for my technique.

Larrivee 12 frets do this and sound heavenly.

Tbh I don't see the point of a 12 fret without doing this.

[guitarman001]

Btw I think it's incorrect to say the tone is better. It's just different. 12 fret sounds breather, more guts. But 14 frets has more harmonic definition in the upper register, a bit sharper and strums better. They're just different.

[lowrider]

Originally Posted by guitarman001

Btw I think it's incorrect to say the tone is better. It's just different. 12 fret sounds breather, more guts. But 14 frets has more harmonic definition in the upper register, a bit sharper and strums better. They're just different.

That's probably the best definition.

I have a CS Martin 0000-18 12fret. Martin, historically, never made a 0000 12 fret do unlike the smaller ones, this is made from the 14 fret 0000. The bridge was moved back about a half inch and the body was extended about a half inch. It has a really ''gutsy'' tone.

I never cared for the David Bromberg style 0000 or M-36. To me, it sounds like a 000 with me playing. The 0000 sounds more like a dread. I can play up to the 17th fret on the B and e strings. With practice, I could probably reach more but I haven't had to.



Funny thing, I recently sold it and I missed it as soon as I put it in the box. Luckily the buyer didn't like it. I was thrilled to get it back!