Quote:
Originally Posted by Ned Milburn
Frank, come on.... I think it is quite clear what the "growing nut slot" John is referring to.
1) Why would the nut need to come out other than the requirement for alteration - specifically shimming its bottom to make it taller to accommodate newer higher frets? Let me know if there is something I am missing.
2) If the nut needs to be altered, ivory or otherwise, I think most if not all of my clients would choose to have a new well-made bone nut installed rather than have the original nut altered AND some original wood cut away AND have some wood fill inserted to fill in the "growing nut slot".
3) I consider nut and saddle to be replaceable items, just like frets, strings, and tuners - to be replaced when necessary.
Hence, I still cannot think that on a vintage Martin the best way to deal with a stubborn nut is to cut away some wood, however, little, and fill in the gap with wood fill.
Rather, I'd prefer to get some LEGAL ivory (legal ivory does exist, does it not?) for those connoisseurs of ivory who wish to pay more for it, or just replace with a good quality bone blank.
|
First, despite the fact that I repeatedly state that my TEN THOUSANDTHS wide cut is a ONE TIME ONLY event to remove an original embedded nut to avoid breaking same, there seems to be an insistence that it has to be redone at every nut removal. I have NEVER, repeat NEVER cut so much that wood fill behind the nut is required. I don't fill that space most of the time because it is so small as to be unnoticed.
So, NO I don't see a growing nut slot since, once again THERE'S NO CIRCUMSTANCE under which I would need to recut behind that nut OR ANY REPLACEMENT that wasn't potted in place. SO THERE'S NO GROWTH in the slot for that reason.
Now I have seen nut slots where the bottom has been chewed to bits from repeated gluing and removal, but that's a different issue. I believe most of us agree that gluing the nut to the end of the board is sufficient.
To answer -
#1: It is my preference to spend a bit of time to level and prep a fingerboard before refretting, and to accommodate doing the best possible job, removal of the nut is standard procedure. New frets may require shimming the nut higher, but not always. Now, you may think that the only reason for refretting is to replace frets because of wear. You would be wrong.
The main reason for much of our fret work is to correct minor problems with the neck's straightness, relief, etc. It's sometimes known (at Martin, for example) as "straightening the fingerboard."
#2 Seems like complete nonsense. Of course there's no point in relieving behind the nut to avoid cracking the back corner if the object is to replace it. Thus, no reason to discuss filling with wood, or whatever. If I do the relief cut and later replace the nut, The new nut fills the space neatly, needs no filler, and looks exactly the same size and shape as an original. That is, unless you think people can or do judge the difference between .230 and .240 by eye.
#3 I hope we all agree that nuts and saddles are replaceable.
While we're still flagellating this deceased equine, please take a little detour over to this page on Gryphon's inventory, where in photo #19 you can see a very nice closeup of the small kerf behind the nut - no filler, and it hasn't grown yet so far as I've noticed:
http://www.gryphonstrings.com/instpix/43877/index.php
Is it really all that objectionable?