Official Luthiers Forum!

Hey and thanks for the question.

It sounds right to me with one exception there is what you are calling ramping and I call the arc of the string also happening at the nut because the string has a break angle and does not immediately redirect to the saddle. We can prove this by back filing the nut and having the tink reemerge on a slot that had been cut a bit too low.

On say a Floyd Rose electric with minimal break angle that "ramping" or arc may be mouse nuts but it's still there if you could measure something that small.

I don't know your method and as I said there are a lot of methods for this but what you are describing sounds right to me but be advised I have no experience with this method so I don't really know.

We do something similar as what you are describing only without the capo and just with our fingers to verify a high fret.

I don't know beyond looking for a high fret why you would not want to include the first fret in the check though is there a reason why you don't include the first fret?

JTB I just had a conversation with my business partner Dave Collins and asked him about what you are doing.

He thinks that this would be a great classroom exercise to drive home things like the ramp/arc and how on a well leveled fret plane with a neck and rod that doesn't do anything weird that it's a good illustration of how a string behaves in the environment with frets present.

He like me early does not see how this would help you cut the nut slot though since when you capo behind the 1st the nut is completely taken out of play. But for understanding what's happening with the method I describe this verifies things such as ramp/arc and the very idea of isolating several frets and taking the rest of the fret plane out of play. He also mentioned it being a high fret check too but without the capo just our hands and fingers.

I think you misunderstood me. I use the tink method for setting the nut slot depth, just as you describe. My question concerning moving up the fret board with a capo, or fretting with your finger up the fret board was theoretical, and has nothing to do with the nut slots. I don't always get the tink when I check these frets up the fret board. The tink is there, with the wound strings, but not always with the unwound strings. It seems that if the tink is there when checking for the nut slot depth, then it should be there when moving up the fret board. No big deal here, just wondering.

Got it and sorry I did misunderstand.

The tink is at times an added verification that the string is not laying on the fret. I listen for the tink but my primary indicator of how much lower I need to cut a nut slot is what I see when I pulse the string. Dave used to describe it to our students as a "sliver of light and the presence or absence of that sliver of light."

When a slot is pretty high it's common to not have a tink at all and have the tink emerges as the slot gets cut lower and my video actually caught that if you crank the volume. And we discussed here with Brian how there can also be no tink at all and the slot is still fine, very low but acceptable. So reliance on the tink is not what I do but I do know if I hear the tink I have not gone too low.

The tink is not a reliable indicator but it will verify what you see if the string is not laying on the slot and the slot is low enough.

I don't know why when you move the checking up the neck the tink may not reliably sound off everywhere but my mind's eye just took me to how I hold wooden plates to tap them, on a node. I wonder we may have some nodal considerations in the speaking length of the string as we alter the speaking length with the fretting and holding and capos and such. Moving up the neck is shortening the speaking length of the tested area. Just guessing out loud here but the answer to your question why the tink is not reliable everywhere I don't know.

So encountered one of these today on a Strat that I worked on this morning. These are not uncommon and I have seen many of them come to our shop.

A roller nut which is just as useless as a zero fret in the sense that you do not have any adjustability ether individually or collectively. At least with a Floyd Rose locking nut I can collectively drop or raise the entire thing.

So as beautiful as this roller nut is and as well made as it is which is notable here's what's wrong with these:

1). I took a video of me checking the individual nut slots and the high e is probably around 0.015" high and all the other strings are way high too. This will create intonation problems, he much harder to fret and make you tired of playing sooner.

2). You can't lower anything because if you lower the nut channel which is radiused by the way your head stock may snap off since you just deepened the channel and the weakest point in the neck...

3). If you mill the bottom of the roller nut down you lose the radius and there will be gaps at the ends that will show. You also may distort the entire nut from the heat of the tooling.

4). The entire point of the thing is to add the extra length from the nut to the tuner post to the strings so with hard tremolo use there is a bit more string to stretch resisting breaking a bit. But a well cut nut slot does the same thing and does not bind the string at all. There is also nut lube that can lubricate nut slots for the same benefit and reason.

Solution looking for a problem but it sure is pretty though...

If I get a chance I may post the video of the individual nut slot heights for this puppy, not good but you can hear every string "tink" in different pitches even though the slots are WAY too high.

Is there a general approach to troubleshooting a "ping"ing nut? My slots are now cut low enough and it plays well, but some of the strings ping when tuned. Some other nuts I've made have worked perfectly, and I'm not sure how to fix one that doesn't, aside from just trial and error.

Hi Daniel - Yes a pinging nut slot is binding and as we tune you will see on the tuner too no progress until all at once we hear a ping and the tone leaps to the new pitch.

So this is why when I cut a nut slot with the files I use I scrape the sides of the slot initially on the down stroke until the file feels free in the the slot to move without binding. I will also test if I am correcting a pinging instrument that my newly shaped fret slot no longer pings by tuning up and down as I reshape the slot with some clearance.

Some nut materials don't cut as completely either and instead get out of the way of the file and then close back in on the string when you are done. I see this a lot on South Korean built PRS, Ernie Ball, Gretch, etc. The black nuts are notorious for this.

This is also why I suggest in my toot here that if you are cutting for say a 12 string you cut for a non-binding 13 instead.

A last resort is a product called nut lube, another one is nut sauce... A little dab in the slot and a wipe of the excess and the slot is lubricated. But with the method I am teaching here scraping the sides and I also talk about pressing in front and behind the slot to make sure the string fully seats AND cutting U shaped slots, not V shaped slots and you will have a nuts that don't ping. No jokes please

A guitar that has been sitting a long time may ping too as the string seats and begins to bind in the slot from never being moved in time.

I don’t comment much on the forum these days, but it doesn’t mean I don’t read stuff. This thread on nut slotting was interesting. Hesh should be commended on reaching out to help others on this tricky subject. Hesh and I agree on many things, but we have a few differences of opinion here. Of course he’s entitled to his.

For example, his recommendation to put away the tools and join him in celebrating the art of lutherie using just your eyes and ears. …

Coming from a background in research science and statistics, that recommendation simply doesn’t fly with me. In my shop, I measure everything to a known level of precision, and with quantified targets. I can’t speak for everyone, but a dial indicator can measure a gap over the first fret much, much better than I can manage with my eyes and ears, and almost as fast. There is some technique involved and practice helps, but I can quickly set nut slots to a target depth with a level of precision ±0.001”, and I’ve done thousands. Further, every parameter for every setup is documented – if the guitar comes back to my bench, I know when it was last here and exactly how it left.

In this thread, Hesh gives advice on how to generate “tinks” with the string against the fret, and translate this auditory information to an estimated “gap”. This preference to perform setups without bothering with measurement tools does explain why he’s introduced some wacky ideas when he does try to talk numbers. For example:

Personally, I would be very surprised if Hesh actually sets a gap anything like that for the G and remaining strings. His stated target for the third string is 8-9 thou – that’s huge! And for the other strings it’s even worse. The goal for a light 6th string 0.053”, using his calculation, is something over 0.025”! Even Gibson usually manages better than that out of the factory.

My short message, go ahead and use Hesh’s tool-less methods if you so choose, but don’t start quoting numbers about how low your slots are or how similar are your setups from one instrument to the next. You may be fooling yourself.

Personally, I’ll continue to use my dial indicator. My target for plain strings is 0.001-2”, for wound strings and nylon 0.002-3”. The one exception is the low B string on a 5 or 6 string bass at 0.003-4”.

I’ll yield the rest of my time to others.

Hi Tim I'm sorry we no longer offer our classes because clearly you would have benefited. I also don't want to be distracted and get off topic I am trying to help people here and I am not trying to compete for how low I can cut a nut slot. Your post has a number of misrepresentations and I do want to address some of them and then move on.

My recommendation to put away the measuring tools remains valid and you misrepresented why I offered this. I also said that there is no set number or spec for this so you have to also develop some feel for the work. Paraphrasing here. FYI we have unique measuring tools but still find it very difficult to measure this gap sub 0.001". Please note the use of the word "sub" maybe I should have used it in the tutorial.

The reason that there is no set spec for how low you can go is that every guitar and every player and every brand of strings and every gauge of strings AND every tuning is different and they all can impact how low you can go. Lots of variables. Is a slide ever in the picture?

We often take nut slots, perhaps more often than not lower than your stated numbers. For the plain strings I mentioned the high e at 0.0005" or less. that's more than twice as low as your specs that you offered. Again I am speaking of our shop not what I am suggesting to get folks started here. For the wound strings I would caution the forum to not attempt to go as low as you posted it will likely buzz out and without light cured dental fining this is poor advice for an Internet tutorial without an instructor in the room to help folks.

Measuring tools are nice, we use them but we work by feel most of the time because the goal is a very low nut slot that won't buzz out and we really don't care what the number is.

With this said the question might be is the goal of cutting nut slots low a number and spec or to play like butter and never buzz out. The two do not have to be mutually exclusive you can measure all you want. I personally sit down and play Mississippi Queen or Stormy Monday with a heavy pick and moderate attack playing every note on the neck to check.

Dave once wanted to document what we do too for each client and when we found ourselves turning away 60% of the callers because we are always swamped stuff like that never happened. Good idea though if you have the time.

You said that I gave advice how to translate the tinks into a measurement or "estimate gap." I did? I think I stated an observation when the tinks start to be heard but I never intended to imply that a pitch of a tink can be translated into a specific measurement - that's a misrepresentation.

Regarding the specs I did offer as something to shoot for for folks who are brand new to this:

Two things are in play. First the idea that even a great set-up on the high side nut slot wise is 95% better than most people have ever experienced before and a huge improvement for most OLFer over what they can do now and what they currently do. It's also safe in terms of if you blow a nut slot and don't have light cured dental fillings I've not led anyone astray and harmed someone.

That's the last thing I want to do.

So my numbers are high, yep you got that right but in the context of will they still play great you bet your arse they will and again it will be a huge improvement the vast majority of time over what folks could do before. Nothing is stopping the competitive sorts from going lower but again consider how you recover blown nut slots are common when you go too low.

Lastly Tim your specs that you offer "plain strings is 0.001-2”, for wound strings and nylon 0.002-3”. The one exception is the low B string on a 5 or 6 string bass at 0.003-4” I would not go that low on the wound strings.

Why? Because again and as I tried to imply all along a specific spec or measurement is not the end all to be all in this activity. The variables again of the player attack, string gauges, string brands (stiffness), tunings and even things such as break angles and degrees of break angles all become part of a picture that may impact how low one can go with nut slots.

Your plain string numbers are safe and higher than we go but your wound string numbers are too low. A heavy handed player like me would buzz out and Stevie Ray would sound terrible with the wound strings this low. But again one of my jazz players who is famous could play your slots and not buzz out his attack is the lightest I have ever seen. We set his action at 2.5 and 3/64ths as well and he can play it. And once again we see this variable called the player and how they may or may not make a set-up work making numbers, one size fits all not the goal in this business. A successful set-up may be as individual as the person it's for and that should never be forgotten.

I have a very good player coming to my house next week. He's well known and on he says he's on about 25 albums. The plan is to sit down and jam for a while so I can see how he hits the ax and then let him play some of my personal guitars and see what he would like different from how I set-up my own stuff. I may spend more time with him discovering his needs and wants than actually working on his guitar. Of course you can't do that for everyone but it's a good idea and we used to when we had time ask most everyone to play for us so we could be informed on their attack. I have mentioned this on the forum a number of times prior.

Although nut slots are not as big a variable as action settings at the 12th they still are a variable and the other variables need to be considered as well.

The specs I gave the forum in this tutorial are intended to be a very safe start and a huge improvement for most folks here that will not get them in trouble.

Does Hesh go lower as you said as if I am holding back.... Hell yes I do but I have done this more times than I can count and I also can rebuild a nut slot with a proper solution, most here can't.

Hopefully some of this in this post clears up some things.

Thanks for your post Tim.

For folks who are interested in the sausage making of the bleeding edge of measurements I would recommend a great book that I believe is printed to order these days after being out of print in the past for a while: Foundations of Mechanical Accuracy by Wayne Moore

Moore gets into the lengths that machinists go to measure very small things and the reader at some point gets the impression that there is room for error here even though the entire point of the book is accuracy.

When we fret and hold between the 2nd and 3rd how firmly we fret has bearing on how much string arc over the 2nd fret results and this makes the height over the first fret crown vary to some degree. With this said two people attempting to measure the very same nut slot may get different measurements based simply on the pressure that they fret and hold between the 2nd and 3rd.

Point being I would estimate that based on fretting pressure alone I can increase of decrease string arc enough to add a thou or more to the gap.

This underscores that what may work great does not need to be a number it needs to be what works great... The point of all of this is a great playing instrument that plays easy and in tune.

When we get into setting the action at the 12th I'm very much into my numbers and specs but again... the variables such as the player attack and even string gauges come into play and may derail the best laid plans of mice and men. Interestingly how hard I fret can give me different measurements on setting the intonation too just as it does on attempting to measure the gap over the 1st fret. Numbers once again are one guide but not the only one that I would consider because of the variables and errors.

I also had a conversation with someone who wanted to know how low a few other professional luthiers cut their nut slots. They all had different numbers except for one person who is Dave my business partner and he stuck to his description of a sliver of light not using a number at all and what I shared with folks here. They found out that they had different numbers because they measured with different pressure and held measuring tools at slightly different angles. Again as I offered earlier this gap is very difficult to measure and not just measure but for two different people to measure the same way and repeatedly too. It's simply that small that we had to find other ways to inform what we think we see.

Results wise they all cut the slot to the same level of height but it measured differently for each of them. Conclusion here was that the right height for the slot does not and did not change all other things being equal but attempts to measure this varied somewhat and they said up to 1.5 thou of variance simply by how they held the tool that they used to measure.

So again a number, a spec is fine but for Dave who is a machinist by the way and I it's not the final word on what works great and it is possible to cut nut slots all day long very nice and low and never measure a thing. That's what I'm teaching here and only provided a very loose, safe, guide with some higher numbers as a way to compensate for not teaching this in person where you can see what I do and I can see what you produce. You can go lower just again beware of going too low.

Like it or not there is art and science in Lutherie and they both have their place and value.

This also means that neither Tim or I are wrong we just both have a different level of reliance on the art or science involved. If I was Gibson and producing the same guitar all day long with the same strings a number to shoot for with the same person setting the action, holding the tool at the same angle would be a great approach.

For the Luthier who has customers who's attack varies from Robin Hood to a very light attack we can do better and numbers only serve as a ball park.

So this is one of our measuring tools that Dave Collins came up with years ago. If you hold it upright on a surface plate or anything that is known to be very flat it zeros out.

The blade is such that it can fit in a nut slot that is 0.008" or more.

Its greatest use is as a learning tool where you can see the relationship between the string tuned to pitch and the nut slot and fret plane. Of course it also measures the slot depth.

It's not unusual for us to cut a slot lower than the fret height and again if anyone wonders how this is possible, the string arc my friends the string exits the slot not exactly at the slot height but a tad higher.

String pitch and stiffness are some of the variables here that I described a number of times now in this thread.

You can rock this tool ever so slightly and the reading will change perhaps as much a 0.002" and slightly more. This is one of the reasons why measurements at this level of smallness.... are inherently unreliable when the focus should be does the resulting slot play well, easy and help the instrument play in tune.

Beyond a learning tool it can be used in a triage situation with client present to justify why they are going to be dinged for us having to raise a nut slot or six. Had a 12 string the other day and all 12 nut slots were raised with dental filling because the nut was original and the guitar was vintage and valuable. It's a nice option to have and again even with 12 nut slots the exact measurement of what any of the slots came out to be was unimportant and never even determined. The client was thrilled.

Also beyond a learning tool this device is very useful to me in setting Floyd Rose nuts low and near perfect considering all the shortcomings of the Floyd system. With the strings off I can remove all nut shims and see how high or low the nut is on the two e's. Provided that the nut has the proper radius which they often don't.... I can lower the nut or shim it up to read 0.000" and know with string arc that my high e will be very low. How low? I don't care and it's not important again it's just a number but if I had to guess it might be about 0.001". For the low e I set it at 0.002" and with string arc which is greater on a low e it comes out also low and very close to perfect what ever the hell that is.

Being able to set a Floyd nut accurately without strings is a God send in our business so this tool is one of my favorites.

But is it uber accurate? No again any rocking or holing it incorrectly and you may generate errors and that was my point with why measurements for this activity, nut slot cutting do not matter and are really more of an academic pursuit.

So we keep records and I personally keep records on all the guitars I ever worked on. It's not a list of what I cut nuts slots to because I cut them correctly and that's again all I need to know that they were cut correctly. By the way I routinely, almost every day see guitars that I cut the slots on some years ago and as I told Terry Kennedy we do not see our slots wearing down after cutting them low that's my experience my nut slots remain where I cut them often for some years. So how low I cut them is often where they still are.

But we know that for the business I cut the nut slots on 16,000 guitars. Let's not count the 12 strings or the mandos or the banjos and the occasional dulcimer if I just do the math on 6 string guitars I have cut around 100,000 nut slots. So we go low and are very practiced at going low which is why I don't agree that folks here new to cutting slots should attempt unless you have the ability to recover to cut as low as we do. You will in time want to go lower, I did, we all do and you should go for it when you feel you are ready and can recover with a solution to raise a nut slot.

You also will go lower than you intended to do it's unavoidable and I still do it weekly.

Feel free to make your own version of this tool and if you do all I ask is the same thing I have always asked please provide attribution to Dave Collins or anyone who you copy their intellectual property in the Lutherie world. It's what gentlepeople do and it's the right thing to do if you appreciate that people shared with you.

Thanks

A question:

- Hesh is discussing in the tutorial about fretting between 2&3 and tap / tink / sliver of light / measure over the first.

- Tim is talking about string height over the first when open (I believe), and measured with a string height gauge like the SM or similar.

- Hesh is showing Dave’s tool which measures the nut slot itself.

Is that right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

_________________
Insta - https://www.instagram.com/cbcguitars/
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/cbcguitars

This is the part that makes no sense. I've never met anyone who aims for a gap anywhere near that high on the wound strings. Playability and intonation would be terrible with the strings that far above the first fret. Hesh, I have to believe that what you actually do is much different than what you're describing here. We're not talking about subtle adjustments for playing style, or a little margin of safety. These numbers are way off. (Unless you are doing a set up for a player who only frets the first two strings and uses a bottle neck on the wound strings???)

I think Tim is talking about his numbers while fretting and holding between the 2nd and 3rd but I could be wrong. So he is measuring to get the numbers that he works to with the free hand and/or using a capo to fret and hold between the 2nd and 3rd. That's what I am discussing here the gap over the first WHEN fretting and holding between the 2nd and 3rd. Tim's numbers would not work at all if they were for a string open. That would mean for a wound string if one was fretting and holding that his gap would less than the 0.002" he quoted here and that would buzz out for sure.

Dave's nut slot tool registers in the nut slot but it is displaying the nut slot height relative to the first fret crown height. There is no allowance for string arc so if you cut the slot with no strings and a straight neck (truss rod) and you cut the slot to be zero and the same level of the first fret string arc would add some height and it may not buzz. That's why less than zero may, may work too with this tool. I'm not recommending this there is no substitute for how the instrument performs with strings and tuned to pitch. That's why this tool can be used without strings and although it won't give you the exact height of the string over the first it will indicate slot depth and if you add string arc, if we knew what that number is we would estimate pretty closely.

And yes your first statement above is true I am citing my measurements of the bottom of the string to the top of the first fret crown when I fret and hold between the 2nd and the third.

Want to add the check, fretting and holding between the 2nd and 3rd happens perhaps 2 dozen times more or less when cutting six nut slots so using hands is far quicker than using anything else to fret.

Eric please read subsequent posts your question has already been addressed a number of times.

I disagree that the numbers are sky high but they are high and that is intentional as I said several times now above if you would once again read what has already been posted.

The numbers I gave for folks to shoot for are specifically high so they don't blow a nut slot going too low as they are learning. Some of these people don't even have files yet and this will be the first time out. For them they have to deal with the following for the first time:

1). The concept of gauged files and using the right one for the right string.

2). crafting a slot that does not bind.

3). holding the file at the desired break angle which is huge and in our experience where most new folks have a lot of trouble and get the sitar tone.

4). not creating a hump in the middle of the slot with a flat slot exit that makes the sitar tone.

5). and not cutting too far which is also common for a student learning to cut nut slots.

We've taught a lot of people to do this and Dave my business partner was an instructor at the Gallup School of Lutherie and has taught cutting nut slots for nearly 30 years now to countless people, hundreds including me.

So I gave higher numbers, guilty as charged because if someone following my lead here went for the low levels that I cut slots to or maybe you cut them to the odds of them going too low and having to raise the slot are very high. I'm trying to keep people out of trouble. And how are they going to raise a nut slot when they go too low? This is on my mind and again it's always on my mind to give sage, safe, accurate advice. I do vet my posts for this.

I disagree with you that my numbers are sky high but you are right they are high intentionally for a learning exercise for folks. I have not provided target numbers for someone who is experienced with cutting nut slots mostly because the numbers in my view don't matter and are not how we or anyone else I know does this. We work to cut the slot very low and the number is again unimportant what works is what's important and since every guitar may be different for all the variables numbers are misleading and even limiting in some examples.

It's possible and happens often in my world to stop cutting, do the check and detect a faint sizzle on the check of the open string. That sizzle means I went too low but only a bit too low. This is my number by the way what is actually occurring not a numerical value. So I back file the slot a tad, increasing the break angle a tad... and the sizzle goes away. I may raise the slot having gone too far anyway if there is any chance that the player hits harder than I do.

I cut nut slots every day and it is not uncommon for guitars to come our way new from the factory with slots with numbers MUCH greater than I provided here. A low e with a gap of twice the string diameter while fretting and holding between the 2nd and 3rd is not all that unusual and that's why they come to us they are hard to play, don't play in tune and need to be dialed in.

Many of our clients will advise us that they are purchasing a new instrument and their first stop is to pick it up and they want their second stop to have us dial it in. New guitars are more often than not not set-up at all and certainly not well and this is of course dependent on where one gets them from.

I would suggest that everyone here the next time you are in say Guitar Center pull any instrument off the wall and check the nut slot height and then you will understand why Dave has a new home on five acres and my condo is paid off.

Wanted to add for you Eric that classical string numbers although again we don't use numbers to do this are higher than steel string. I would estimate that 80% of the classical we see use normal tension D'Addario strings so these are not the die hard classical folks but often students. For normal tension strings the numbers I quoted above which are for classical guitars too (part of the reason I quoted high) are a bit high but not all that high. Classicals in our experience do need to be cut tighter than steel strings and the strings being more flexible may lash out further too. This is easily evidenced by the fact that a concert classical action may be a bit less and more than 10/64th" at the 12th for some players when steel string action at the 12th may be less than 1/2 of that. Before you go there for someone who strums a classical like Willie Nelson I would set his action on Trigger to 5 and 7 which is at the 12th, 5/64th high e and 7/64th" for the low e. The same size say an OO steel string would be set at 4 - 5.5 so again classical even when cheating and setting for the non-classical playing style are much higher than steel strings.

This means nut slots too for classical for the very same reasons the string lash out further and arc more. Nature of the beast.

So once more there are a number of reasons why I suggested target numbers even though we don't use numbers at all and they now include:

I am not there to help and show how to do this without numbers....

Beginners will blow nut slots we all do and it's expected and beginners do not have a safety net to rebuild the nut slot. If they have to make a new nut it's a big, time consuming deal and at time when they want to play their new creation.

Don't want to get anyone in trouble when my intention here is helping others and genuinely caring about their success.

And now since Tim brought up classical guitars my numbers had to work and be safe and a bit high for classicals. Interestingly my numbers are the least high for classical guitars again because classical guitars both benefit and require slightly higher nut slots and 12th fret action player dependent as well.

My tutorial does say in its title "Steel String Acoustic Guitars" so it might be a good idea to be sure to have read that part. My set-ups of classical guitars have some important differences such as the fact that there are usually, not always... no truss rods.

Hope this helps.

So being someone who is infinitely curious and of the mind set that if I don't know I'm going to find out I just did some measuring of my own nut slots.

Again I freely admit, guilty as charged that the numbers that I gave first timers to shoot for as a first shot at this are very high but they also in many cases are lower than how a factory guitar is.... delivered.

I took the Strat that I played last night, a personal Suhr Strat with stainless frets and a compound radius. Suhr is well known in professional and player circles as having some of the best fret work in the business. Like Collings they use a combination of a PLEK which is good and hand work which is very good to craft their fret planes.

With that said it's very decent fret work and I wanted to take the frets out as a variable hence this guitar.

I set it up and it was set-up for my attack and playing style. I use a heavy pick when I pick and my attack is moderate or middle of the road but I do dig in for emphasis or when I am drunk (just kidding on the drunk part I don't drink anymore, lost interest nearly two years ago).

As I said a bunch of times measuring string height over the first fret crown with the 2nd and 3rd fretted and held (in between them) I used a capo lightly secured just enough for a clean ringing note. See all the variables already and we have not yet measured a single thing....

I did go to the hardware store this morning looking for shim stock or feeler gauges in the 0.001 and above range and was sol.

So I used my micrometer here and found various other things like pieces of paper, again a Post-it-note 3M brand remains 0.003". I also was prepared to double up things if I needed too.

Each number below was the result of measuring things multiple times and averaging what I found, a machinist activity and also I used different parts of the stock I used to measure in case they are inconsistent.

This Suhr Strat is superbly set-up and plays like butter with zero buzzing for my moderate attack and playing style.

Here are your numbers and I freely admit this is so difficult to measure that there may be errors here and I am sure there are but I have endeavored with accepted practices including averaging to minimize same.

High e - less than 0.001"
b - 0.001"
g - 0.002"
d - was unsuccessful in measuring
a - was unsuccessful in measuring
low e - > 0.003" and < 0.004"

This guitar would buzz out if I went any lower with my attack.

You can see the pattern too how the gap increases as the string gauge increases. Extrapolate all you want if you want to fill in the blanks for the d and a.

So again I underscore that numbers are nice but after cutting over 100,000 nut slots this is the very first time I have ever actually measured the results. And again why is because there are so many variables including me and how hard I hit, what I play, how I play it and even my picking style and stroke. Strings, tunings, tensions, relief and even the shape of the fret crown may all have some bearing on a very fine level in what results and what is measured.

You can see that my low e on a superbly set-up instrument low and mean is nearly twice what has been mentioned here as Tim's setting point. I maintain that many people could not play a low e set at 0.002".

Now I'm going to fire up the grill, take a walk and enjoy the nice day here in Michigan

In Germany we have a saying: "Wer lesen kann, ist klar im Vorteil!" In english: " Anyone who can read has a clear advantage!" And exact and correct reading is time consuming in the end!
Dear Hesh, I just made a new nut for my cheap Strat following your advice, and it came out very well!
Again, thank you so much!
Juergen

Cool!!!

Thanks for letting me know and I am very glad you are getting good results Juergen.

OMG a treasure trove in great info - so many thanks!!!

Thanks Robbie I appreciate the thanks very much. I'm spilling my guts here and can't remember this level of detail ever being provided on the OLF before so I'm glad you noticed!

Hesh somewhere years ago I saw something about Collings’ specs for string height over the first with the string fretted between two and three. I’ve always used them and they are pretty much identical to your strat results.

I must confess to using the StewMac dial caliper tool to check. I like numbers.

_________________
It's not what you don't know that hurts you, it's what you do know that's wrong.

I would love to see some published numbers from Collings.

Here is what ChatGPT 3.5 has to say:





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

_________________
Insta - https://www.instagram.com/cbcguitars/
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/cbcguitars

I found my reference. Collings actually said .002 e. .004 B. .0003-.005 wound.

I do go lower on the B. Around .002-3

Thanks to Hesh for a very detailed treatise on his method.

_________________
It's not what you don't know that hurts you, it's what you do know that's wrong.

Sure and those are great numbers however neither of the two Collings that I own came with those numbers they were higher and I had to lower them. I have a I-35 and 290 both new when I got them.

Your numbers Terry are where I would go too and good on you for doing that. Again numbers suggested here are a start for folks who have never done this before so they have lots of room to reshape their break angle if it's too flat or has a hump in it and so they don't go too low and have to make a new nut not having a recovery method available to them. They can go lower I just don't want to lead people astray and forget that I do this every day and it's easy for me but a very difficult thing to learn to do well.

You guys who have time to check and work to a number AND who accept that your numbers are accurate, we believe this to be VERY difficult to measure accurately more power to ya. In my commercial world where they are in line for my work I have to be able to call something done and move on at some point.

No one will benefit more or less from the use of a number than a well cut slot from experience with no number ever obtained. Or, in other words without using numbers, ever my slots are as low or lower and as well shaped as anyone's and it's simply a different approach.

But give some thought to how you measure, the room for error. Dave I have have given this a lot of thought we are aware of this tool and we believe that the only accurate way to really measure this and not be breathing our own air with a belief in how we measure not being flawed when it is not accurate (not saying your method is flawed) has to be a laser and light and likely $50K for the tool.

So I'm happy to look for my sliver of light, hear my tink, use my experience and move on. What matters is the slot and it's relationship to the guitar, break angle, string brand and gauge, pitch relief, neck shape, etc. Every guitar is potentially different.

The tool is also $130 IIRC and some of the folks here are not going to be hanging out a shingle and may only build a guitar or two. With my insistence that they get gauged nut files and say they get this gauge and develop a dependency on this proprietary tool each slot of the six they are cutting are getting rather expensive....

So with all this said one more thought comes to mind. What's important is to cut the nut slots low but not too low and to make it easy to play and reduce notes going sharp from string stretch. Factories don't do this because they know the reason I'm receiving push back here and that is they are SOL when someone goes too low and the instrument has to be rejected and sent back for the nut to be removed and replaced.

This is perhaps the most precise and difficult operation I can think of in guitar building. The Gallup school spends a lot of time on this and Dave tells me that the only way he knew to teach it was to have people do it dozens of times over and over again. That's not going to happen here with the person putting together their StewMac kit. They have one shot without being delayed and having to redo.

So enough justifications from me had I suggested that people here cut slots as I do sub 0.001" for the high e and around >0.003" for the low e AND did not provide them with a tool such as the StewMac $130 gauge we would have a lot of people who went too far. At these levels of lowness it's often the case that only one swipe of the file can ruin your entire day. And I reject that any method of measuring that can be currently used including the StewMac tool is entirely accurate this is a very difficult thing to measure.

You're welcome Terry thanks for the thanks.

So these numbers are more like what I saw on my two Collings when I accepted them I bought them sight unseen and had them shipped to me. Great guitars some of the best I have ever played and owned and personal favorites. The I-35 I think is one of the most versatile guitars too it does it all well from the compactness of a Les Paul without the weight to the jazzy vibe of my 335 the I-35 can go from Stormy Monday to Mississippi queen without a hitch.

So these Collings numbers are more like I saw and this is still a superbly cut nut even though it is higher it is low enough that string stretch is minimized and hand strength to fret notes is very minimal. This is also as good or better than any other factory I've seen, good for Collings. I set-up my Collings too and took my slots lower and when we go to my specs my slots are around TWICE as low as a very well set-up factory Collings.

There are diminishing returns here with increasing risk for the person cutting the slots or owning the instrument.

Again folks go as low as you want you're warned if you blow your nut and don't have a means to raise the slot reliably with a quality fix it's on you.

I had a disagreement with someone yesterday over this subject he thinks I should let people blow the nut if they do because as he said it's the only way he knows to learn something and that is to at times fail. I disagree and maybe I'm wrong but I pushed back and said this is not an academic environment for people who have made the life's decision to become a professional luthier. This is an on-line forum for mostly hobbyists and hobbyists just wanna have fun like that song.... So as someone sharing what I know from my world I'm inclined to try to keep it fun, encourage people and maybe even be...... kind in my approach not taking your new nut that you spent two hours crafting and pitching it in the trash exclaiming "that's nice, now do it again."

We would mention this to our students in our two day classes that pitching someone's nut and making them do it over and over was an actual occurrence but not in our shop, we wanted our students to have fun and be positively reinforced.

So if you guys want me to be a p*ick and lead you into failures to make examples out of you, publicly.... I may not be your man it's not how I want to interact with my friends here and instead I want to hold myself out as the guy who before I built my first guitar the only thing I ever made were reservations. If I can learn this anyone can, well most people can...