Nut Width measurement

[lowrider]

Originally Posted by paulzoom

Depends on the guitar. I do have occasional slippage on one guitar that I had it done to. My point was that it is not always an ideal solution though it happpened to work out well for you.

Of course it depends on how much you want or need it widened.

Paul, check your Gibson. I'm pretty sure that they are 1.725 with 1.5 string spacing.

[Rosewood99]

Originally Posted by lowrider

Paul, check your Gibson. I'm pretty sure that they are 1.725 with 1.5 string spacing.

Yes, it is. But what does that have to do with anything? That wasn't the guitar I had the nut redone with.

[lowrider]

Neither is mine. It’s Martin’s set-up

[Rosewood99]

Originally Posted by lowrider

Neither is mine. It’s Martin’s set-up

I still don't get the point of your original response quoting my post. Why should I check my Gibson? And what does having a Martin have to do with anything?

[mikethebook]

I'm opening this up again, still figuring out the right guitar and nut width for me. Most people suggest that a wider nut like 45mm is better for fingerstyle playing, and i can't argue with that. But what happens when you find you need to fret with E string with your thumb? A wider nut works against that. A 43mm nut will be easier in those circumstances. So what do you fingerstyle players who use your thumb in this way, choose as a nut width? I find it interesting that nearly all Taylor guitars use a 43mm nut and they are often used for fingerstyle playing.

[jaymarsch]

Originally Posted by mikethebook

I'm opening this up again, still figuring out the right guitar and nut width for me. Most people suggest that a wider nut like 45mm is better for fingerstyle playing, and i can't argue with that. But what happens when you find you need to fret with E string with your thumb? A wider nut works against that. A 43mm nut will be easier in those circumstances. So what do you fingerstyle players who use your thumb in this way, choose as a nut width? I find it interesting that nearly all Taylor guitars use a 43mm nut and they are often used for fingerstyle playing.

Since these things are so much about personal feel and ergonomics, I can just share with you my own experiences. I have found that just taking into consideration nut width and string spacing is only part of the equation. I have had to take into consideration scale length and neck shape as well. I have stopped wrapping my thumb since I started having some mild arthritis so I had to create different chords and work arounds - even at 1 and 11/16th nut width. I have recently discovered that my ideal is a nut width of 1 and 23/32nds with a 25" scale length. I can play both my 25.4" scale guitars with their 1 and 3/4ths and 1 and 1/11/16ths nut widths but my hands fatigue more quickly. I am fortunate that I can trade off.

I mention all of this just to say that dialing in what might work best for you is a process and there are trade offs. As you say, maybe long term 1 and 3/4ths is the way to go and then figure out the work around for not doing the thumb wrap. I think that may be better than a narrower nut width which affects a lot of things. On the other hand, many folks like to cheat the string spacing so the low E string is near the edge so thumb wrapping is easier. Technique is also at play since some folks over torque their thumb and add more pressure than is necessary, so another variable. What is your preferred spacing at the saddle? 2 and 1/4 or do you like a bit more room there? All these things play a role, though small, it can add up to a significant difference in feel. I hope that this is somewhat helpful

Best,
Jayne

[mikethebook]

Thanks for your interesting input. Eight years ago when I gave up the guitar I had a very nice Alister Atkin OM with a 45mm nut and 57mm at the bridge, a scale length of 24.9". I wish I hadn't let it go now. A new one costs about £2,800 and my budget right now is just over a tenth of that!! I have aged a bit since then with various health issues so I really wouldn't know what my requirements are now. I'm not sure I really knew what they were then. I just took the plunge and bought the guitar from Alister stipulating OOO measurements. The only way to find out what my requirements are now is to play a lot of guitars or at least a selection and in the remote place I live there isn't a decent guitar shop for 300 difficult miles. It just isn't possible and with the low budget I have I can't really stipulate string spacing etc.

I'm leaning towards getting back the Eastman PCH1-OM I tried that, with its 43mm nut when it was advertised by Eastman as 45mm, caused this thread. Though a budget guitar it is very nice and with some much lighter strings on I think I could live with it very well until I can discern what my requirements are in the meantime saving up for an all-solid guitar, maybe the next Eastman up and in the hope that I can get back into playing and that muscle and tendon problems don't get in the way. That's the best solution i can see.

[Silly Moustache]

Originally Posted by mikethebook

It's an Eastman PCH1-OM and I did get the specs on-line at both Eastman's website and the website of the on-line shop I bought it from. Trouble is Eastman quote 1.75" when i measure it as 1 11/16th just under 43mm. That's what's frustrating me. I expected to be buying a guitar with the wider nut for fingerpicking.

Ah! There's your problem!

Been there, done tht. Bought a stunning Eastman Parlo(u)r "ltd" advertised as having a 1 & 13/16" nut width.
it had a 1 & 11/16" nut.
It went back but with sadness as it sounded great.

Sadly whilst Eastman make very good instruments their specs are "variable" - I'd say, stick out for what you want, although, an OM was designed as a rhythm box so that's where the thin neck started.

What about a 12 fret 000 ?

[mikethebook]

Thanks, Silly Moustache. I don't have that choice unless I go to another on-line guitar shop and it would probably be way over my budget anyway. I think a 14-fret OOO/OM is the way I want to go and I like the fact the Eastman has the short scale of the OOO. Besides, I love the service I get from this shop and 43mm to begin with may not be such a bad idea until I see how serious I am about playing again and whether my hands/fingers are up to it.

[Malcolm Kindnes]

Originally Posted by mikethebook

I'm opening this up again, still figuring out the right guitar and nut width for me. Most people suggest that a wider nut like 45mm is better for fingerstyle playing, and i can't argue with that. But what happens when you find you need to fret with E string with your thumb? A wider nut works against that. A 43mm nut will be easier in those circumstances. So what do you fingerstyle players who use your thumb in this way, choose as a nut width? I find it interesting that nearly all Taylor guitars use a 43mm nut and they are often used for fingerstyle playing.

Hi Mike,
These things are all very personal unfortunately, and you will get all sorts of opinions on this.
I play fingerstyle almost exclusively, have played on and off for well over 50 years, and always use a wide nut and a chunky neck. I fret the bottom E with my thumb with no problems on a guitar with a 1 7/8 nut and a chunky neck.
I find I get hand cramps on a skinny neck, and if you think about it this makes perfect sense, as your hand has to grasp a smaller radius.
Also, string spacing at the saddle, I like 2 3/8 but this is hard to find in a factory made guitar. I also like a long scale, so I accept I am a little different from average, however whenever someone else plays my guitar they invariably like it and don't notice that the specs would be wildly different from what they normally play.
Another factor is consistency. Basically there isn't much in the guitar world. Certainly high end guitars with hand carved necks vary hugely, but even CNC necks vary a lot. I have owned four Collings guitars over the years, two each of the same model and all the necks were slightly different, and I believe they are CNC produced.
Now, this doesn't seem to matter to a lot of people but to some of us it can be a deal breaker. My best advice is, if the guitar feels good to play then keep it, otherwise change it straight away because you will never progress on an instrument which is uncomfortable to play.
I hope this helps

[Malcolm Kindnes]

I agree with Silly Moustache, a 12fret 000 is the way to go.
They can be expensive, I have a 0002h Collings which is an expensive guitar, but I also have a Recording King 000 which was a tenth of the price of the Collings and sounds great.

[Mike Sylvia]

Ok, time to chime in here.

First of all, the but width is measured at the nut. Strong spacing is generally 1.75" E to E on center.
Secondly, if you are having trouble fretting it that the string height is too high, nothing to do with the nut width.

I'll make this easy for you. Send the guitar back, order a new one, the Ibanez AC240 is awesome, I own one. Have it shipped to me, and I will do a complete set up at no charge, and ship it to you. You'll be set to go. If you want a particular set of strings order those as well, and I'll replace them. I you ALL my work. Doesn't get easier than that.

[therbulus]

Originally Posted by mikethebook

Thanks for your interesting input. Eight years ago when I gave up the guitar I had a very nice Alister Atkin OM with a 45mm nut and 57mm at the bridge, a scale length of 24.9". I wish I hadn't let it go now. A new one costs about £2,800 and my budget right now is just over a tenth of that!! I have aged a bit since then with various health issues so I really wouldn't know what my requirements are now. I'm not sure I really knew what they were then. I just took the plunge and bought the guitar from Alister stipulating OOO measurements. The only way to find out what my requirements are now is to play a lot of guitars or at least a selection and in the remote place I live there isn't a decent guitar shop for 300 difficult miles. It just isn't possible and with the low budget I have I can't really stipulate string spacing etc.

I'm leaning towards getting back the Eastman PCH1-OM I tried that, with its 43mm nut when it was advertised by Eastman as 45mm, caused this thread. Though a budget guitar it is very nice and with some much lighter strings on I think I could live with it very well until I can discern what my requirements are in the meantime saving up for an all-solid guitar, maybe the next Eastman up and in the hope that I can get back into playing and that muscle and tendon problems don't get in the way. That's the best solution i can see.

"Getting back"? Did you return it?

[Paddy1951]

Originally Posted by Athens

The more important questions is how does the guitar feel? If your fingers feel cramped and it's uncomfortable to play then you should consider returning it.



If you like the way it feels then the actual nut width is irrelevant.



I prefer 1 3/4" and wider, but every once in a while I run into one that feels good to me even though it's narrower.

Yes! This. Don't get caught up in the numbers.

Even if the nut is the measurement your going for. That doesn't always guarantee a level of comfort.

Personally, I think the whole nut measurement thing has been over emphasized. It is a combination of neck shape or carve and nutwidth and string spacing and how you play.

[robj144]

It's the width of the nut, not the fretboard.

That's why it's called nut width and not fretboard width.