One more nut width talk

[musicman1951]

Originally Posted by whvick

I am sure you get sick of beating this to death, but I keep wondering why I can tell so much difference in just a mm or two difference?

I wonder the same thing. It seems like such a small difference, but it feels like a rather large difference in terms of comfort. If I'm only strumming chords I'm fine either way.

I have placed it under the list of things I no longer worry about. I know what works for me and it simplifies things when shopping.

[WAYTALL]

You can definitely tell the difference when you play a B7 on a narrower but. At least my fat fingers can.

[Jim in TC]

I was at the local shop a while back (before Covid) and played a used Eastman, just because I had heard so many good things about the brand. Not sure now the model, but it was a small (maybe even parlor) size. I immediately liked the "feel" and asked the tech there about what might be going on. It had 1 13/16" (~46.04mm) nut and that silly mm was more noticeable than I would have imagined. Next thing you know I am ordering an Emerald with a custom nut width; went up to 46.5mm. Delivered last week, it is joy to play.

[handers]

I have found that my 1-7/8" nut Froggy H12c with a string spacing at saddle of 2-1/4" and string scale 25/1" is ideal for my hands. But in that sentence are at least 4 variables (not counting my hands).

Nut width: 1-7/8" Try to find a guitar or two with that to try. I remember during my discussions with Michael Millard about this H12c build in 2000 I was intrigued by a wider nut bc I was used to playing classical guitars, which have an even wider nut. I happened upon a guitar with 1-7/8" nut and aftr playing it, I immediately contacted Michel and said "this is it"! There are not many to try.

The H12 is a 12 fret to body, which puts the bridge in the middle of lower bout. I feel as if this guitar and these architectures can make the string tension feel softer. More responsive top architecture makes the attack necessary somewhat softer.

Saddle string distance of 2-1/4" is good for my fingerstyle approach. I have other wonderful guitars with more lovely voices that do not play as well and hence don't sound as good. Their string spacing is more narrow.

Scale length of 25.1" also plays a part in string tension and comfort fretting complex pieces. A longer scale will have higher tension accounting for strings and pitch. If you are looking for greater playability, shorter scale may contribute to this. There are other trade-offs in tone with shorter scale which can be accommodated somewhat for with string selection.

The distance of strings on the neck from the edge of the neck is also variable. Given a consistent string spacing on the neck, if the neck is slightly less wide, the 6th string is more likely to fall off the edge when fretting. Larry Pattis has posted about this in years past if you search his posts about string distance and neck architecture, you find interesting discussions of these variables.

The architecture of fretting strings across a neck is a 3-dimensional set of variables that must include string tension. Then the neck shape is important and each player can have different preferences of neck shape. Our hands are all different. Neck shape may be one way to accommodate for our personal dimensional differences.

My perspective is that it is not just one variable like nut width that must be considered when planning the ideal feel and tone for a guitar. Thats my current perspective. Might not fit your needs.

[takamineGD93]

Yes, I feel every mm and less. I feel directly that eastman ED1 and Ed2 isn't the 44,5 mm they claim.

Yamaha 720 and 820 12-strings have 1 13/16 neck (46mm and a great candidate for converting), the recording king I just bought to convert in to a 6-string has 49 mm nut.

String spacing at the sadle is more important if you are finger picking, and more so for me if I wan't to use a thumbpick

[Larry Pattis]

Originally Posted by handers

<<snip>>

The distance of strings on the neck from the edge of the neck is also variable. Given a consistent string spacing on the neck, if the neck is slightly less wide, the 6th string is more likely to fall off the edge when fretting. Larry Pattis has posted about this in years past if you search his posts about string distance and neck architecture, you find interesting discussions of these variables.

The architecture of fretting strings across a neck is a 3-dimensional set of variables that must include string tension. Then the neck shape is important and each player can have different preferences of neck shape. Our hands are all different. Neck shape may be one way to accommodate for our personal dimensional differences.

My perspective is that it is not just one variable like nut width that must be considered when planning the ideal feel and tone for a guitar. Thats my current perspective. Might not fit your needs.

There are three variables on neck/bridge measurement issues for any guitar build that cannot *easily* be changed/modified once the guitar is built.

They are; overall nut width, the taper of the fingerboard (usually looking at the overall 12th or 14th fret width of the fingerboard), and the E-to-e string spacing at the bridge.

The string spacing at the nut can indeed be modified, but within certain obvious limits. I have seen an entire 1/16" of difference in E-to-e nut spacing on 1-3/4" nut guitars. This is a huge difference.

Small changes do indeed make large differences under the fingers.

Likewise, a 1-3/4" overall nut width can be paired with any number of bridge spacing measurements...and there are generally two neck-taper (12 or 14 fret) measurements that get paired with any bridge spacing; that is, usually the bridge spacing gets matched to either the 12th or 14th fret overall fingerboard width.

As an example, a guitar with a 2-1/4" bridge spacing can have that same number either at the 12th or 14th fret on the fingerboard. One f'board obviously is tapered wider (the 12th fret match), and this can be preferred by players who "work" the high e string with vibrato. If the bridge-placement is correct (centered, or slightly over towards the bass side!) on the top, the player can benefit from more distance from the outer strings (especially the high e) to the edge of the fingerboard.

These latter bridge & taper details don't matter too much close to the nut, but they come into play as one plays higher up the neck.

In the classical guitar building world, the "standards" for building always have a wider taper to the fingerboard; that is, more distance between the E strings and the edges of the fingerboard. The steel-string world is bound closer in tradition to narrower tapering fingerboards.

So it goes.