Nut cut flat or angled

[segovia123]

Hi

Is there any functional benefit to having a nut slanted as opposed to being flat?

[FwL]

On a properly cut nut the bass strings should sit with about half their diameter in the slot. If that nut were flat across the top the bass strings would be buried in the slots.

The point to this is to avoid undue friction that can lead to the strings binding at the nut.
.
.

He's not talking about the nut slots, but the base of the nut.

There are two options on Martins, which I think is what the OP is asking about. The traditional configuration has the face of headstock starting right at the end of the fretboard and the base of the nut matches that angle. On many newer Martin models the plane of the neck/fretboard joint continues on for the width of nut base and the headstock angle starts after that. The nut on the angle of the headstock looks much better to my traditional eye, but I don't believe there is any significant functional difference.

GE's, Authentics, and a few Limited edition guitars use the traditional nut on the angle, while most everything else uses the nut on the flat.

[Alan Carruth]

It probably makes no difference at all to the sound so long as the nut is well fitted to the slot.

[Turp]

I should all post if possible. I quite honestly have not run across this before.

[kydave]

Originally Posted by Turp

I should all post if possible. I quite honestly have not run across this before.

Say what?

Todd, if his assumption is correct which is the way I read the OP, echoes my sentiments - the bottom of the nut angled as is the headstock is traditional and looks "right" to me. The new lower series Martins set the bottom of the nut on a parallel with the fingerboard, which doesn't look right.

Alan is correct in that neither matter functionally if set properly.

Originally Posted by kydave

...The new lower series Martins set the bottom of the nut on a parallel with the fingerboard, which doesn't look right...

Virtually everything below the GE Series uses the nut on the flat now.

[kydave]

Ooops! I just looked at my D-28... Didn't realize they'd changed them since the '70s.

When did they change 'em?

Dave, it's not a well documented change. Sometime in the 90's I think.

[00-28]

Originally Posted by kydave

Ooops! I just looked at my D-28... Didn't realize they'd changed them since the '70s.

When did they change 'em?

Which of your D-28's are angled, the 70 and the Authentic? My 66 D12-20, 79 OM-42, 2010 00-28 (custom ordered with angled nut) and 1916 mandolin have angled nuts. Only my 2002 D-18DC has a flat nut. Todd says change was sometime in the 90's, he usually right.

.............Mike

[John Arnold]

The change happened around 1992 or 1993. I remember, because it created trouble for repairmen. The ones on the flat are harder to remove. The other functional difference is that with the flat bottom nuts, the plane of the peghead face is slightly higher, which reduces the string break angle across the nut.

[redir]

The flat ones are harder to remove?

I think it looks cool so that's the only reason why I do it.

[Ned Milburn]

Originally Posted by John Arnold

The change happened around 1992 or 1993. I remember, because it created trouble for repairmen. The ones on the flat are harder to remove. The other functional difference is that with the flat bottom nuts, the plane of the peghead face is slightly higher, which reduces the string break angle across the nut.

Strange.... I've never found any difference in nut removal. Tight fitting glued-in nuts are hard to remove.

Headstock angle can make any difference in nut bottom negligible. A non-issue IMO. Plus, even just different tuners (tuner post hole location) can make up more break angle than a flat bottomed or angle bottomed nut could ever make.

[John Arnold]

My reference was to Martins, which all have the same headstock angle. Of course tuners vary, but that was not the point of my comment. Everything else being equal (which is essentially true on CNC Martin necks), the string break angle is less on Martins with a flat bottom nut.
Removing an angled bottom nut is as simple as placing a block against the fingerboard side and tapping on it with a small hammer. The flat bottom Martin nuts that are set deeply will bind when tapping them in this manner. It is possible to damage the overlay (or at least damage the finish) if the same removal technique is used.
My usual approach is to tap on it just until the glue joint is broken loose, then tap it back down into place. this relieves the binding. The nut can then be driven out the side using a punch. Martin nuts are often slightly thicker on one end, so driving the nut out toward the thick end is a little easier.

[Ned Milburn]

Originally Posted by John Arnold

My reference was to Martins, which all have the same headstock angle. Of course tuners vary, but that was not the point of my comment. Everything else being equal (which is essentially true on CNC Martin necks), the string break angle is less on Martins with a flat bottom nut.
Removing an angled bottom nut is as simple as placing a block against the fingerboard side and tapping on it with a small hammer. The flat bottom Martin nuts that are set deeply will bind when tapping them in this manner. It is possible to damage the overlay (or at least damage the finish) if the same removal technique is used.
My usual approach is to tap on it just until the glue joint is broken loose, then tap it back down into place. this relieves the binding. The nut can then be driven out the side using a punch. Martin nuts are often slightly thicker on one end, so driving the nut out toward the thick end is a little easier.

Agreed with all but that I haven't had more trouble removing flat bottomed nuts. That's all. I expect you've removed more guitar nuts than I have, and so hence I put due value on your experience, too. ;-)