Nut width and playability

[Steadfastly]

Originally Posted by rogthefrog

Wider nuts are great for fingerstyle. The only disadvantages are they're hard to find and maybe hard to resell.

There are some sites that allow you to find guitars by means of specs including nut width. Maury's guitars offer a view of guitars with different nut widths.

Asking here on the forum of guitars with guitars with certain nut widths gets many responses. (I've done it).

Many manufacturers offer guitars with wider nuts widths. Companies are coming to realize we are not all the same size and they will lose marketing share to others if they don't "broaden" out. (Pun intended)

So, they are not difficult ot find. They are not just for fingerstyle playing. They are also for people with large hands and fingers that find it more difficult to fret cleanly on a narrow neck.

[musicman1951]

I came from classical guitars where 1 7/8 is not considered large. But I broke my left wrist in three places a few years ago and sometimes the extra reach is not my friend.

I prefer 1 3/4 size nut. I can play on anything, but that provides the most comfort.

FYI, I did play on a lovely Martin 000 Koa Authentic with a 1 7/8 nut. Beautiful tone and sustain.

Originally Posted by email4eric

Contrast that with the CEO-7. It also is 1-3/4 but is 2-5/16 at the bridge. The difference is huge in terms of feel. This is a guitar that feels much, much wider fretting although it's the same width at the nut, and only a 1/16 difference at the saddle! How can this be?

Another confusing experience occurs between the J-35 and the 000-15sm. Both ends of the J-35 are a 32nd narrower than the 000-15sm but I'd swear the Gibson is a wider spacing guitar. I cannot reconcile this. I don't have nearly the problem with cramped real estate on the Gibson that I have on the Martin yet the Gibson is narrower.

I've come to the conclusion that string spacing at the saddle must contribute at least as much to the fretting experience as nut width does. I also suspect scale length is contributing in that both the CEO-7 and the J-35 are shorter scale than the standard 000-15sm. Perhaps neck profile is contributing to my experience as well but I don't know how to analyze that.

I'm glad to hear that someone else has the same issues that I sometimes do. For starters, my short-scale CEO-7 felt like it had much higher tension than my long-scale Guild, and there's no logical explanation for that. Moreover, its 1 3/4" nut width was the same as my Waterloo's, but felt miles wider. My Gibson's 1.72" width should feel narrower than the Waterloo, but I can't tell any difference at all. Weirdly, my Guild's 1.68" width feels much narrower than the meager .04" difference netween it and the Gibson would suggest.

Somewere between scale length, neck profile, nut width and saddle spacing, there must be some "perfect" combination that's right for me, but there are just too many variables for me to figure it all out!

[vindibona1]

Originally Posted by smpetty

The last few weeks, I’ve been playing a Santa Cruz D-12 with a 1-7/8” nut and a Webber 000 with a 1-13/16” nut width. I’ve been struck by how much easier it is to play these instruments...
Has anyone else made a switch to wider nut steel string acoustics? Are there any disadvantages to consider, or is it mostly just a fit issue, like clothing or shoe sizes? Also, why are most wide nut guitars 12 fretters?

I’d love to hear other members thoughts and experiences...

Scott

Have you ever purchased a GOOD bicycle? You don't just go into the store and pick out a bike because it's got 700c tires vs 26" tires. You will measure the top tube length, top tube angle, seat tube, handle bar height, shape, etc. A guitar is no different when searching for the right guitar for any individual.

It's all about ergonomics and the combined elements of the neck that allow the fingers to move in the most efficient way. Nut width alone isn't the sole deciding factor. The neck shape and/or depth. Fingerboard radius; all combine together to provide the player with the best experience for that particular player.

With wider nuts, is it about the fatness of your fingers? Then in fact you may indeed need a wider nut with wider string spacing. You're a big guy and may have specific needs that most of us don't. You think Gheorghe Mureșan of the NBA at 7'7 sleeps on a standard sized bed?

Big hands and standard sized fingers? You may need a chunkier, more soft-V style neck which will support a large hand better than a C neck. Me? I'm just 5'9" have slender fingers and hand but wear XL gloves because my overall hand length is long. And because of those considerations my neck of preference is a soft-V neck with a 1 11/16th" nut. I have two Taylors with C necks 1 3/4" nuts but for some things they are just more difficult to play and sometimes more fatiguing.

Bottom line: We shouldn't get hung up on only one aspect of the neck which many of us do. But if your fingers are so wide that the wider nut makes sense, that is the STARTING point for your search. But the other elements of the neck should not be ignored.

good luck

[roylor4]

I will never buy an acoustic with a nut width of under 1.75" again.

That said, neck profile is also a big deal to me and it affects how I interact with the guitar just as much as nut width.

I have been playing a LOT of electric lately. Even with much narrower and slightly different nut widths on the electrics the neck profile has a profound affect. It has made me a cleaner player on my acoustics though.

I would be afraid to try a 13/16th or 7/8th neck, as i am financially unprepared to revamp my current stable.

Originally Posted by vindibona1

Have you ever purchased a GOOD bicycle? You don't just go into the store and pick out a bike because it's got 700c tires vs 26" tires. You will measure the top tube length, top tube angle, seat tube, handle bar height, shape, etc. A guitar is no different when searching for the right guitar for any individual.

Excellent analogy, and a very good point!

[Orfeas]

Yeah, I sold two instruments because of the nut been 1 11/16. I prefer the 1 3/4 width.

[tippy5]

I like 1.725" nutwidths for performance ease. I play more of the 1.750" for melody composition at home.

1 11/16"s I sometimes really love when I borrow a friends guitar. I got a D18 (1970) on loan to me and it is fun to play. It's funny about different scale length and nut widths sometimes dictate what genres and technique changes.

Infact one of the reasons I haven't commissioned a guitar is because I like different string geometries for all the different stuff that erupts.

I play a ton of 1 11/16" strats and PRS electrics. They are so much better than 1.65" nut widths. When you play tighter string spacing you end up playing with your fingers more on an angle which is something i have done on the hundreds of band gigs back in the day. Mando players play with angled fingers. It's all good but a wider nut is great for interesting chords and that is what I usually play the last 5 plus years.

[bil]

OP - I recently took possession of a hand built local luthier OM that I specified as 1 13/16 nut. I’ll never go back to 1 11/16, heck, even my 1 3/4 is feeling a little cramped! I’m amazed at the difference a sixteenth or even an eighth can make!

[Methos1979]

Like many here I prefer 1.75" for fingerstyle playing. That and 2 1/4" minimum spacing, 2 5/16" even better. But I think ultimately we acclimate to whatever we have.

I went and saw Ed Gerhard on Saturday night at his annual Christmas concert and got to go up and check out his guitars and set up at intermission. All this guitars look like they were 1 11/16" nut width and Ed is a big guy. It doesn't seem to bother him any!

[Silly Moustache]

Two important things:

1. It is less about hand size or finger length - more about the width of your fingertips. I have medium small hands and stubby fingers but I also have FFTS (fat (or flat) finger tip syndrome).
I discovered in '99 that thin necks were holding back my playing style when I was offered the opportunity to play a Martin D35-s by the late great Isaac Guillory. This guitar had a 1 & 7/8" nutwidth as per the original dreadnaught design.

2. Guitar designs changed radically in the late '20s to early '30s as they became rhythm instruments. It was thought tat they would be used mainly for chunking out chords and not intricate fretting as one would do with fingerstyle or the still emerging flat-picking style.

The Martin 12 fret designs (including the original dread) had either 1 &13/16" or 1 &7/8" nut widths with corresponding string spacing at the saddle.

This is what I now play.

You want 14 frets for playing closed chords above the 7th fret, use a thin neck, but it won't suit all for intricate stuff ... some, but not all.

[rogthefrog]

Originally Posted by Steadfastly

There are some sites that allow you to find guitars by means of specs including nut width. Maury's guitars offer a view of guitars with different nut widths.

Asking here on the forum of guitars with guitars with certain nut widths gets many responses. (I've done it).

Many manufacturers offer guitars with wider nuts widths. Companies are coming to realize we are not all the same size and they will lose marketing share to others if they don't "broaden" out. (Pun intended)

So, they are not difficult ot find. They are not just for fingerstyle playing. They are also for people with large hands and fingers that find it more difficult to fret cleanly on a narrow neck.

I didn't say they're just for fingerstyle, only that they're great for it.

And the percentage of steel string guitars available with anything over 1 3/4" width is extremely small, so that counts as hard to find in my book. The odds of the average bloke walking into Guitar Center and finding more than a couple 1 7/8" or even 1 13/16" nuts are pretty low. The vast majority is 1 11/16 or 1 3/4". Much to my chagrin.

[TokyoNeko]

I prefer 1 23/32", which is the nut width for both my EIR guitars. My mahogany Pono has a 1 3/4" nut width, which I can adjust to fairly quickly, but I definitely feel the difference. I can even handle 1 11/16", but this by far is my least favorite.

As mentioned already, it's a "fit" thing.