Official Luthiers Forum!
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Nut Comp Procedure
http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=15426		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Billy T [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:38 am ]
Post subject: 
    I've never really seen this discussed on this forum and I'm not really sure who or any does it a all. If anybody would like to pony up the specific info I for one would be very interested!

Thanks!
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:59 am ]
Post subject: 
I would be interested in that too.  Do you move the whole nut forward a bit then comp it from there?
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:35 am ]
Post subject: 
Typically the saddle is the point of compensation as the nut is the Zero point of the scale. It is just more intuitive for most to intonate at the saddle. That said there are good times to intonate at the nut. It just takes a bit more thinking to work on both the positive and negative side of the scales base zero than it does to maintain the scale zero at the same place for all strings and make the adjustments needed by a general saddle compensation that give the room needed to intonate each string at the saddle.

Now I could see where intonating the nut would be very helpful for a preexisting saddle compensation that is a bit a rye on the short side
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:57 am ]
Post subject: 
How about on a classical, Michael?  I have seen some with compensated G string at the nut.  What did you do on yours?
Author:  SniderMike [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:16 am ]
Post subject: 
I've seen it done several different ways. One way is to move the entire nut
forward by a small, compromised amount. Another is to to use "shims"
or little nut extenders of a different size for each string that sit on top of
the fingerboard. And the third way I've seen is to put a radius on the nut
end of the fingerboard, with a curved nut to match, so that the nut under
the middle strings is slightly closer to the body than the outers.
Hopefully that makes sense. I've never done any of these myself.
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:20 am ]
Post subject: 
Actually I did comp the g on the classical commission at the nut. but chalked that up to no using a wide enough saddle. I was taken a bit during the set-up to fine I had to move the G as forward as I did. live and learn
Author:  j.Brown [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:46 am ]
Post subject: 
Once the string is fretted, this compensation at the nut is negated, right?
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:51 am ]
Post subject: 
Yep nut comp only affects the open tone and harmonics.
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 8:59 am ]
Post subject: 
Did you read the article in the recent American Lutherie?  He was compensating at both ends, but I never could figure out how.  I need to read it a few more times.  I was getting "brain dead" when I was trying to read it.  It wasn't the article, it was me.  It is by Mike Doolin.
Author:  Dennis Leahy [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:24 pm ]
Post subject: 
I asked Mike Doolin, and he was nice enough to reply: he cuts about .005" off of the (nut) end of the fingerboard. The entire nut is thus shifted .005" towards the saddle, with no other nut compensation for individual strings.

That was close to 2 years ago, and I have not read the article, so maybe he has changed his nut compensation methods now.

Dennis
Author:  Barry Daniels [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 pm ]
Post subject: 
Hmm, I think nut compensation actually does work even when fretting the
string. The reason is that when you move the nut forward, then the string
has to be re-tuned at a slightly lower tension in order to have the open
string in tune. Thus, when you fret the string, you still have a slightly lower
tension and this is where the compensation takes effect. If none of this was
true, then nut compensation would be essentially worthless, would it not?
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
In the article in AL, he puts on a generic nut and sadde, then intonates each string based on the number of cents flat or sharp to make the thing come out.  He figures for a 65cm scale, .015"per cent sharp or flat.  Some strings are compensated in both directions depending on how they sound.  3/4 of the article was about music theory and scales, and how you get to the cents sharp and flat.
Author:  SniderMike [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:05 pm ]
Post subject: 
I've started another thread about how I apparently have been moving my
nut closer to the first fret without knowing it. I'm not sure what to do
with that yet though. Hopefully I can find the AL article and it will
enlighten me. Anyone know where I can find it?
Author:  Billy T [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:00 pm ]
Post subject: 
     I've heard that nut compensation is an equivalent of saddle compensation before, it's not.

     Nut compensation, generally, compensates for fret sharpening, the act of sharpening the intended note by the very act of pressing down on the string itself to the fret, changes the note by increasing tension on the string.

     This generally is not a problem if all strings are fretted or all are open, but becomes a problem when one has open string postion and fretted notes in chords.

     This is part of the tuning difficulties mentioned in other threads on saddle compensation. tuning in fifths is combining fretted strings to open then in playing chords this relative changes. If tuning to octave harmonic the same thing happens in reverse.

     I've heard Taylor moves nut postion forward(towards saddle) to address this issue by a 32nd, by undercutting the nut itself.

    I have seen more advanced Luthiers notching the nut back to each individual string need after moving the whole nut forward like Taylor, and I've seen small extensions added to the nut forward then string slot recut.

    I was just wondering if anybody on the forum does this and if they were willing to share their means of determining precisely the amount of compensation needed for each string.
Author:  Dave White [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:16 pm ]
Post subject: 
Billy,

You might find this an interesting read.
Author:  Alexandru Marian [ Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:43 pm ]
Post subject: 
Waddy, check this one too. Byers' method. 
Author:  Gary L [ Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:29 am ]
Post subject: 
I use the Byers' method on my classicals (nut set-forward and saddle set-back) for the reasons that Billy mentioned. The resuls are good. Alex posted the link to the mathematically-intensive Byers GAL article but the synopsis can be found here: Byers Compensation
Author:  Gary L [ Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:33 am ]
Post subject: 
Try this link: Byers Compensation Synopsis
Author:  WaddyThomson [ Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:39 am ]
Post subject: 
Wow, thanks for those links.  There is some good information in there.  It will take me some time to digest it all.  I'll have to read them 5 or 6 times to get it.   Theory is not my strong point, and this gets down to the most basic music theory, and the keys in which guitars are played most.  Very interesting.

Author:  Kevin Gallagher [ Sat Jan 19, 2008 5:33 am ]
Post subject: 
    The Beyers synopsis is about the best resource for understanding compensation of individual strings and achieving as close rendition of it.

   I liked Mike Doolin's article a lot too. Mike has a solid grasp on intonation, compansation and aligning the fundamental and harmonic plains of the guitar and his guitars clearly show it.

   Will nut compensation make your guitars better than those of another builder? No, but there will be one in a thousand players who will be able to detect and appreciate the difference.

   I think there are enough great guitars with very accurate intonation being made without nut compensation to justify their builders not investing the time in its pursuit or application.

   I've installed many Earvana units and have even made ivory and bone compensated nuts for players who insisted that they needed their benefits, but have never offered them on my guitars simply because my intonation is on.

   It's a fu thing to experiment with and learn about, though so have fun with it.

Regards,
Kevin Gallagher/Omega Guitars
Author:  Wade Sylvester [ Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:31 am ]
Post subject: 
I always cut a little extra off the fretboard end at “0”. This seemed to fix some of the tuning problems of playing first position chords. Even if a nut is setup proper at “0”, some strings seem to play sharp at the first and second frets. By moving the nut forward a bit, this seems to “compensate” for that sharpening effect and makes the guitar “sound” like it’s not sharpening the notes anymore. Besides, if it doesn’t seem to work for you, you can always carve a little off the front of the nut to get it back to “0”.
Author:  Billy T [ Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:15 pm ]
Post subject: 
[quote]Billy,
You might find this an interesting read.[/quote]

Thanks Dave! That was!!!

Thanks everybody else too!
Looks like I have to get a nice chromatic tuner!
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 2:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
BarryDaniels wrote:
Hmm, I think nut compensation actually does work even when fretting the
string. The reason is that when you move the nut forward, then the string
has to be re-tuned at a slightly lower tension in order to have the open
string in tune. Thus, when you fret the string, you still have a slightly lower
tension and this is where the compensation takes effect. If none of this was
true, then nut compensation would be essentially worthless, would it not?



Fact is for a given open string at at any pitch, once fretted in front of the nut then the nut has no influence. I do under stand that this is all driven because of the shortened affective scale compared to the theoretical scale, thereby inducing a slight detuning of the strings in relation to fret slot spacing. But in my terms of nut compensation I do not consider the shortening of the first fret increment by moving the nut forward as being nut compensation. When I think of nut compensation I think of individual string length variances at the nut as being compensation. but that is splitting hairs. Non the less once a sting is fretted it no longer know anything about the nut.
Author:  Parames B [ Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:24 am ]
Post subject:  Re:
Billy T wrote:

I've heard Taylor moves nut postion forward(towards saddle) to address this issue by a 32nd, by undercutting the nut itself.


Taylor had moved the nut position forward by .016" or about 1/64" according to Bob Taylor in this Q&A at frets.com but that was in '98. Not sure if the method has been changed since.
Author:  Barry Daniels [ Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:
MichaelP wrote:
BarryDaniels wrote:
Hmm, I think nut compensation actually does work even when fretting the
string. The reason is that when you move the nut forward, then the string
has to be re-tuned at a slightly lower tension in order to have the open
string in tune. Thus, when you fret the string, you still have a slightly lower
tension and this is where the compensation takes effect. If none of this was
true, then nut compensation would be essentially worthless, would it not?



Fact is for a given open string at at any pitch, once fretted in front of the nut then the nut has no influence. I do under stand that this is all driven because of the shortened affective scale compared to the theoretical scale, thereby inducing a slight detuning of the strings in relation to fret slot spacing. But in my terms of nut compensation I do not consider the shortening of the first fret increment by moving the nut forward as being nut compensation. When I think of nut compensation I think of individual string length variances at the nut as being compensation. but that is splitting hairs. Non the less once a sting is fretted it no longer know anything about the nut.


I guess we can agree to disagree.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/