Nut Width and Guitar Scale

[JMW01]

Over the years, I have been fortunate enough to have several guitars with various nut widths and scale lengths. Some were notably easier for me to play than others. I started thinking about why and came to this conclusion:
-- On a short scale guitar, I prefer a 1.75 nut width because 1.68 feels a bit too crowded.
-- On a long scale guitar, I prefer a 1.68 nut width because 1.75 feels a bit too big.

I know that everyone is physically different, and this is just my opinion, but has anyone else noticed that they prefer different nut widths on guitars with different scale lengths?


Thanks!

[Silly Moustache]

I subscribe that the fretboard dimension of pre 1934 designs are far better and easier to use for more most more complex styles.
From the OM on guitars changed their role from solo instruments to rhythm instruments to replace tenor banjos in jazz/dance bands.

Typically they "killed" one or two strings in order to play chord progressions, and so preferred skinny necks like their banjos.

[roylor4]

Well, for me, 1&11/16ths always feels to close/cramped regardless of scale length - especially on an acoustic. I will never own another acoustic with a narrower than 1.75" nut width.

Electrics are another story since I mostly use Barre chords, power chords and triad.

Regardless of whether it's on an electric or acoustic I tend to prefer thick-ish to chunky necks.

[Everton FC]

Originally Posted by JMW01

Over the years, I have been fortunate enough to have several guitars with various nut widths and scale lengths. Some were notably easier for me to play than others. I started thinking about why and came to this conclusion:
-- On a short scale guitar, I prefer a 1.75 nut width because 1.68 feels a bit too crowded.
-- On a long scale guitar, I prefer a 1.68 nut width because 1.75 feels a bit too big.

I know that everyone is physically different, and this is just my opinion, but has anyone else noticed that they prefer different nut widths on guitars with different scale lengths?


Thanks!

Small hands, here. Narrow nut and short scale, when I can find one, is ideal for me. I am about to purchase a Seagull Entourage Mini-Jumbo - shorter scale, 1.72 nut width. Somewhat in between 1,68 and 1.75. Funny, my S&P Songsmith Concert Hall has the same scale and nut size, but the flatter neck seems less comfortable than the baseball-bat neck on my old Yamaha. I also liked the feel of the neck on my Seagull Entourage Rustic (Dread), over the S&P. Didn't seem as flat. The Yamaha has a 1.75 nut width, and a longer scale than the other two, so go figure! But, generally speaking... Short scale/narrow nut for me.

[Erithon]

Originally Posted by JMW01

Over the years, I have been fortunate enough to have several guitars with various nut widths and scale lengths. Some were notably easier for me to play than others. I started thinking about why and came to this conclusion:
-- On a short scale guitar, I prefer a 1.75 nut width because 1.68 feels a bit too crowded.
-- On a long scale guitar, I prefer a 1.68 nut width because 1.75 feels a bit too big.

I know that everyone is physically different, and this is just my opinion, but has anyone else noticed that they prefer different nut widths on guitars with different scale lengths?


Thanks!

I've never noticed or developed a preference that changes according to scale length. Neck shape and profile, now that can make a difference. I generally prefer 1-13/16," but a chunky neck on 1-3/4" is acceptable (though still not preferred) while a shallow neck on 1-3/4" is a no go for me.

[ripdotcom]

I am very dissapointed that I have so much difficulty with 1-11/16 on any guitar. This has unfortunately kept me away from a couple of my favorites (Vintage 0-15,0-18 and others) I have had at least 10 unbelievable guitars I had to pass on down the line because the nut,saddle spacing, neck width just wasnt enough or asnt right. I can fake it for a bit but i always start muting the D or G depending on what im playing. A lot of people are simply versatile and it does not seem to affect them at all. As for me, I will stop fooling myself. As for hort or long scale, doesnt matter, 1-11/16 is simply too small.

[DukeX]

1 3/4 or larger on all acoustic guitars for me. Scale makes no difference.

[rokdog49]

Small hands equals shorter scale and narrower nut with a modified "C" profile on the neck. Easy to play for me but too cramped for the average citizen.
At the end of the day, I can play anything that's reasonable.

[Eldergreene]

For me, the gauge of strings used greatly affects what feels 'right' - ie, regular acoustic strung 11 - 50, 1.75" feels spot-on - go up to mediums, eg on a reso, then a little wider nut feels similarly right, but on electric with 10 - 46s, 1 11/16" is the ticket; ( this is in relation to c25"-scale instruments )
& I have to take issue with Mr Moustache's contention that pre-1934 neck-widths were somehow 'better' - ultimately, what's 'better' is whatever works for the individual, & is far too subjective for such a generalisation - those wide-necked Collings would kill my fretting hand..

[John K]

All this is highly individual. My 1965 J45 with 1 9/16" nut works fine with fingerstyle for me. Heck, it feels roomy after a session on my mandolin..

[jaymarsch]

For me, I can handle anything from 1 and 11/16 to 1 and 3/4 with any scale length between 24.75 and 25.4. But 1 and 23/32 with a 25" scale length and a low profile neck is my sweet spot in terms of neck specs.

I have a 00 that is a long scale and 1 and 11/16. It is also a 14 fretter. It has a low neck profile and I can do fine on it.

I have a larger guitar that is 14 fret and 1 and 25/32 with a 25.6 scale length and it is just over the limit as to what is comfortable for me.

I have a 12 fret grand concert size with 1 and 3/4 and 25.4 scale and it feels good but it tapers wider as you go up the neck and gets a bit more difficult to fret for me.

To some folks, all this is transparent and they don't even notice the changes but with an old hand injury and some mild arthritis, I am more sensitive to the nuances of neck specs.

Best,
Jayne

[robj144]

I'm a little confused to how you connect width and length. To me, they are completely independent.

[lar]

I assume you are associating width and length because short scale equates to lower string tension. Thus, with a higher amplitude of vibration of the string, it is more likely that the strings will contact fretted fingers. And for this reason you want a wider nut with a short scale? Makes sense to me, I see this effect going back and forth between a nylon and steel string guitar. 1.72" nut on a steel string is easier to play than 1.9 on a nylon (and not because of the larger diameter of the nylon strings, because of the string tension).

Regarding nut width: I would say that if you are comfortable within a range of nut widths, get the wider nut within that range. It may mean a very slight stretch (maybe not even noticeable), but that's better than not being able to play it cleanly at all. It also opens up the option to play non-standard tunings, and standard tuning with a capo (both with lower string tensions).

Interesting that we often use lower tension tunings, but I not aware of any tunings that are actually higher in tension than the standard tuning. Higher tension may not be good for the guitar or the strings anyway.

[Birdbrain]

Originally Posted by robj144

I'm a little confused to how you connect width and length. To me, they are completely independent.

It's easy enough to adopt the mental shorthand - there's that word! - of "small hands need small scales and nuts (please, let's only talk in these terms among fellow guitarists). That's what I believed for decades, but recently I've gained appreciation for the 1.8 neck on my best Seagull. It helps make me abetter, cleaner player. I though I was inherently sloppy, but my fat fingertips weren't fitting the space provided. Now I can fingerpick, slowly and simply, as never before.

I need short scales because I have short fingers. But my palms are wide enough to span a wider nut width, too. That's my own formula, and I guess it will lock me into these old-school 'gulls for quite a while.

[justonwo]

I’ve never thought of these two things as connected really. I can’t play anything less than 1 3/4” - unless we’re taking electric. Scale length is more about tonal preference for me. I prefer the tone of longer scale guitars, in general (there are exceptions), even though a smaller scale is ever so slightly easier to play. Both of these parameters are very important to me.