Nut Width

[Mike Sylvia]

I've often wondered, but never asked anyone. Do you find a huge difference in a 1 11/16" but vs 1 3 /4" ? I realize it's only a very small difference, but I do notice it. Is it all in my head?

[Mr. Paul]

Here's a thread summary in advance ... Some folks are hard and fast one way or the other. Others don't notice much of a difference.

I'm a 1 3/4+ guy but can get along with a 1 11/16 if I find the neck profile friendly (full) enough.

[Erithon]

Here we go again
I'd suspect you were trolling us, Mike, but you only have 20 posts and joined us this month so I'm inclined to think you are being genuine. Yes, many of us notice the difference 1/16 of an inch makes when it comes to nut width, string spacing at the nut, and saddle spacing. Do a search for this and you'll find numerous threads discussing the topic.

[Kerbie]

Yep, everybody's answer will be different... and personal. I can not only feel it, I can usually see it from across the room.

It makes a big difference to me, but not to many others.

[Mike Sylvia]

Originally Posted by Erithon

Here we go again
I'd suspect you were trolling us, Mike, but you only have 20 posts and joined us this month so I'm inclined to think you are being genuine. Yes, many of us notice the difference 1/16 of an inch makes when it comes to nut width, string spacing at the nut, and saddle spacing. Do a search for this and you'll find numerous threads discussing the topic.

Yes, I'm being genuine. I find with a 1 11/6" nut, I tend to mute the strings much more then with a 1 3 /4" nut. Just seemed to me that it was all in my mind as the 1 /16" over all 6 strings is next to nothing.

[Osage]

I can absolutely feel the difference although I honestly don't have much of a preference and own guitars with both. Neck carve and string spacing are more important to me than the 1/16" difference at the nut.

[J Patrick]

...if I play a guitar regularly the nut width is not an issue for me...and I have large hands with fingers my band mates have referred to as kielbasas....my current guitars have necks from 1-5/8 to a 2 full inches...I can play them all cleanly but I do prefer 1-11/16 or 1-3/4 inch widths....and there are some things I play that are better suited for certain guitars based on the string spacing....

....it’s a blessing of sorts and allows me to enjoy playing a wider selection of guitars than players who are more particular....likewise I own and play guitars with a wide variety of neck profiles and switch between them easily....

...I suspect that most folks would likely adjust to various nut widths and profiles once they got used to them.....muscle memory is an amazing physical attribute......for many though they just find what feels best to them and stick with that....makes sense

[Mike Sylvia]

I always thought that the nut width determined the string spacing, but I take that's not the case?

I played a few Seagulls the other day that had but width of 1.72" and the string spacing seemed far wider then my Martin at 1 .75" I guess I can't figure how the string spacing can be, or seen to be wider on a narrower neck. Maybe I'm not fully understanding something.

[Rosewood99]

Huge difference. It's not the width itself but the spacing of the strings that makes the big difference. If there was no difference, why would guitars come in different widths?

[Kh1967]

Originally Posted by Kerbie

Yep, everybody's answer will be different... and personal. I can not only feel it, I can usually see it from across the room.

It makes a big difference to me, but not to many others.

I am with Kerbie...to me, it makes a big difference. I have found very few, like very few, 1 3/4" I can get along with. Profile does make a difference, but rarely if ever, am I bothered by 1 11/16".

[jpmist]

Originally Posted by Mike Sylvia

Yes, I'm being genuine. I find with a 1 11/6" nut, I tend to mute the strings much more then with a 1 3 /4" nut. Just seemed to me that it was all in my mind as the 1 /16" over all 6 strings is next to nothing.

Yeah, but if you think of 1/16" as 3% of the total width instead, that gives it a different perspective. 3% narrower can be the difference between playing cleanly and damping a string with the side of your finger.

Absent in this discussion so far is that there's apparently no agreed on standard for string slot spacing. Some manufacturers leave a pretty good gap between the edge and the E strings that might be too generous. Understandably perhaps as some players can press too hard and slip the string over the side of the fretboard.

I just measured mine and my Taylor has 3mm of space between the edge of the nut to both E strings, whereas my Larrivee's leave 2mm. So I'm likely to play less cleanly on the Taylor, but since I usually play up the neck with a capo, that becomes less of an issue as the fretboard widens out higher up.

[Silly Moustache]

Here's the thing with nut widths - and corresponding string spacing at the saddle.

Martin and Gibson really recreated the geometry of guitars in the 1800s and early 1900s.
Before them guitars were essentially the same as in Europe - with small bodies and , well pretty much like what we call 2classical" guitars .. but smaller).

they were largely considered instruments for "ladies" to play in their lounges or "parlours".

Gibson focussed on making guitars like Violins - carved tops etc., and possibly started using steel strings before Martin.

Martin focussed on redesigning the strutting pattern to enable larger bodied guitars to be constructed.

Guitars were mostly considered as fingerstyle guitars, (like classical ones) and given whatv we now consider "wide" fretboards, to facilitate intricate fretting/fingering as you would see used on classical.

Driven more by banjo and mandolin orchestras, guitars were designed in larger sizes with guitars as background instruments.

Bigger orchestra, bigger guitar bodies.

Martin designed guitars in sizes 2 (amateur),1 (standard), 0 (concert), 00 (grand concert) , 000 (Auditorium)

The size 2 had a 1 & 13/16" nut, and all the re4ast had a 1 & 7/8" nut.
The 000 was the only one with what we now regard as "standard" scale (25.4).

Then came Perry Bechtel who was a bit of a nuisance and asked Martin to build him a flat top that he could use in front of his dance band. He was a BANJO player, and wanted a really thin, long neck - hence the"OM".
The guitar was introduced in 1929 and was a commercial failure so discontinued in 1931. The Gibson archtop was better suited for dance bands.

The original dreadnought was introduced in 1931 which had the same neck geometry as the 000, and was also a commercial failure -discontinued in 1934. (People simply weren't ready for such a perfect design!)

Martin decided that they'd turn the Dreadnought into a larger "OM" with a skinny neck and 14 fret neck. This was a "rhythm neck" - no intricate fretting was anticipated, just chording.

The Dreadnought (rhythm guitar) caught on, not with dance bands, but for the burgeoning folk music styles, strumming away behind five string banjos, fiddles and mandolins.

Regardless of the purpose - most bought into the rhythm guitar and used it for strumming, plectrum style and fingerstyle.

Martin , seeing that the OM and Dreadnought were mainly used as strummers, they further reduced the nut width from 1 & 3/4" to 1 & 11/16 in 1939.

The OM wasn't re-introduced until 1990, but other makers were building "OM" style guitars since the '70s, as whilst it was designed as a rhythm guitar, it found favour with fingerstylists, due to it's tonal response being more suited than the dreads for finger picking.

The suitability of differing nt widths depend on your playing style but also on the width of your fingertips, which is why I prefer 1 &13//16"

Hope that helps.




.

[Bridgepin]

I do feel the difference, and I also find it very easy to adjust between the two.

At first I did have to get use to changing between the guitars, but I just keep playing them and in no time it became nothing to deal with.

[Dru Edwards]

Originally Posted by Kerbie

Yep, everybody's answer will be different... and personal. I can not only feel it, I can usually see it from across the room.

It makes a big difference to me, but not to many others.

+1. I can feel it immediately but can adapt to either without issue. Depending on what I'm playing I do prefer one over the other and usually it's 1 3/4".

[bufflehead]

I've been playing actively since 1973, and the muscle memory from 1 11/16" is so ingrained in my hands that I find it cumbersome to play any other width. All my guitars are 1 11/16", and I won't consider 1 3/4" guitars.

I'm also a strummer, primarily, and I feel that the narrower nut is better for strumming while the wider nut widths may be better for fingerstyle.

It helps cure GAS, for sure. Everytime I see a really cool guitar that only comes in a 1 3/4" nut, I pass.