Earvana nut > 1st fret?

[Chuck H]

I would think the phenomenon would be more pronounced on the highest tension string then. Which isn't typically the G string. Maybe I'm also tone deaf because I haven't noticed it on strats either. I've had trouble tuning the G on some acoustic guitars, but I attributed that to a lack of compensation differential at the saddle.

I've always been very particular about string height at the nut. If this has any affect on it. I could only see compensating length at the nut if the tension on the fretted string was disproportionate due to the nut being too high. And then it's not the best solution. Oh well. There's all kinds of things I don't entirely get. The world would certainly keep spinning without my $.02 (right or wrong).

[Richard]

Whenever I've seen tension listed for guitar strings it seems like they were all 15-18 lbs. The heavier strings are stretched less to reach the same tension so that little bit of stretch to fret the string is larger, relatively speaking.

[eschertron]

testing the 'large format picture' trick

[Sea Chief]

EDIT: P.S. I give this no more than a week before sea chief finds a "problem" with his "solution"

Then you come back procrastinating in reams how that can 'never work' too. Go play one before telling us all how it can't work ChuckH. It does work.

[EDIT: P.S. I give this no more than a week before sea chief finds a "problem" with his "solution"]

And don't patronise me on some "problem".. "his solution": its a stepped nut needing positioning v carefully back (further) & a fraction up by a shim top side: if there's no www info then help needed that's all, & actually I spent time figuring this out as no-one seemed actually know the precise positioning (inc the Co/ no answer).. so hopefully there's useful info now to someone else with one of these odd nuts/ at least they have a ref point anyway. Helpful, useful info ChuckH.. not how much I know & dismissive comments.

[Chuck H]

Yes. I am a snide @$$h0!e. It get's me into some trouble. Please take solace in that.

To be more clear about the matter then...

I know you to be particular. You continue to be pro active and hopeful about solutions but you don't settle for mediocrity once you've found a problem. I actually sympathize with this. Tenacity is generally a good thing, but it can drive you crazy seeking perfection in an imperfect world. Settling for "the best you can do" always feels like a compromise unless you know absolutely everything about every option. Which is impossible because one can't reasonably expect to become expert in every matter where a flaw is perceived.

So please understand that, while clumsy and rude, my commentary is at least partly me recognizing my own flaws in you and poking you in the ribs for it. That is to say, I don't wish for your failure or revel in it at all.

That's enough inner selfness for one day

I happen think compensated nuts are a stupid idea for a number of blatantly obvious big reasons that far outweigh the supposed advantages whose reasoning is justified in minutia. Unequal string tension and inherent flaws in untempered note scaling seem to be at the root of the theory. But the absolute fact remains that compensating at the nut can only correct the open string note. And... If your nut is placed in scale accurately and height adjusted properly you should always be better off tempering the "out of tune-ness" across the entire scale. It's impossible to compensate the nut and correct a total scale length problem without creating a bigger scale interval problem UNLESS your nut is not placed at a correct interval in the first place. These are glaring realities that I know you will come to see eventually because of your nature.

I'll attempt to be less dismissive and condescending because, as you infer, it advances nothing and therefor serves no positive end. But we can't deny our natures. So no promises

[Dave H]

Yes. I am a snide @$$h0!e.

But quite a helpful one.

But the absolute fact remains that compensating at the nut can only correct the open string note.

What about the note at the first fret? If the nut is moved forwards (to make the string shorter) the distance between the nut and first fret is reduced so the first fret note is closer in pitch to the open string. i.e. the first fret note has been flattened (compensated) relative to the open string. The distance to the second fret has also been reduced slightly so the second fret note is flattened to a lesser extent and so on up the neck. I believe it's to compensate for sharpening due to finger pressure at the first few frets.

[Chuck H]

But quite a helpful one.

Thank for allowing to that. I feel so tolerable now

I think I understand your meaning. And yes, compensating at the nut changes the interval from the nut to the first fret. And the interval from the nut to the second fret. And so on. But that interval difference would be insignificantly small unless, or until the nut is adjusted such that the interval between the nut and the first fret is much too obviously inaccurate. I conceptualize it like this, put a capo on the first fret and tune the guitar to F (so E, or proper with the capo removed). If the guitar isn't acceptably in tune this way then you have a bigger issue than nut compensation can correct anyway. At that point, then, the guitar should not be suddenly significantly out of tune when the capo is removed. If it is then the interval from the first fret back to the nut is not analogous to the interval from the second fret back to the first fret. That is, the nut is in the wrong place. That or the nut height is too great and should be reduced. There is no magic difference between the nut to first fret interval and the first fret to second fret interval to justify adjusting the nut to first fret interval out of proportion with every other interval on the fingerboard.

I think I'm invested for more than $.02 at this point.

EDIT: I also wanted to note that differences in string tension should absolutely be greater at every fret beyond the first unless the nut is too high. Straight up, the further you push a string the more you increase tension. Therefor, it doesn't make any better sense to correct for this at the nut than it would, say, the interval between the fifth and sixth frets. If that were possible.

[Justin Thomas]

So, what about those of us who play Fender electrics and use a wound G? No pre-cut or compensated nuts for me! So whatever. I just have a new nut cut every time I get a refret, which seems to be every few years as the string slots wear out. I'd <LOVE> to get stainless frets, that would fix THAT issue... And, I set my intonation at the 12th fret & run with it. But, $35 is a small price to pay every so often.

Justin

[Sea Chief]

ChuckH. If you played a gtr with it spot-on intonated, even at the 1st fret (when often there is a fractional out-of kilter usually G or B, which is normally acceptable nonetheless), then you simply cannot say anyhting other than it is excellently intonated whether you agree with the principle of the nut it has, or not. You just can't.

They work. Forget how/ whether the logic fits on your x + y axis in you lab, they just work. Unless you've played/ used one & know from experience that they're rubbish, sorry but your replies are just hot air procrastinations. I thought urgh Im getting rid of that horrorshow nut asap on getting the neck, but briefly strung it before I sent whole neck for a refret (wheeby the damn nut was shifted by luthier/ ffs!) I was amazed at how much better the tuning was to any gtr Ive had before. Any of many gtrs during 30 years, 4 gibsons, 5 fenders acoustics & leccys. They do work.

(If you want some thread-meat to get stuck into, your time's far better spent in amp maintenance- my amp's gone to pot!)

[John_H]

Chuck, I really think that you should stop procrastinating, Isn't there something that you should be doing?

[Chuck H]

I'm glad it's working out for you. And you're right that I haven't tried one, and therefor can't speak from hands on experience. I know that they are used and enjoyed by a lot of players and some luthiers. I just can't get past the flaws I perceive in their implementation. My loss I guess.

[Sea Chief]

Chuck, I really think that you should stop procrastinating, Isn't there something that you should be doing?

This guy is a moderator (so he says). Yes, seriously.

[Sea Chief]

Id not choose to have it let me make it plain- t'was on the neck I bought, so an arse of a ~£40 job to fit a tusq or suchlike so its there to stay (its wider at the recessed-into-neck slot too, so a std nut wouldnt fit w'out major fettling.. so there for good looklike).

Looks a bit naff, plus the faff to set it, but Ive grown to like it, its intonation is superb. Try one mr. potatoface then I'll read your ssh-peel on it (clever potato-based pun). SC

[Chuck H]

Well... I did pick the avatar because, like me, it has a-peel. Rough and dirty as it is

[dai h.]

FWIW, an article by Simcha Delft I remembered seeing (plus a couple of links I stumbled into trying to find the article again) :

Stephen Delft's Compensated Nut

A Further Look at Guitar Intonation | NZ Musician | New Zealand Music Magazine

Compensating the Nut for Intonation

my own (vague) understanding of this is that the conventional calculations for nut position were slightly off since they did not account for the tiny bit of string next to the anchoring point that doesn't vibrate. Some guitars (as I understand) do have a bit of nut compensation (slightly closer placement of nut towards bridge) such as PRS.

When I've personally set intonation it takes me ages (tin ear+(probably) some OCD tendencies). (This may be incorrect, but) I use 19th fret (fretted/harmonic) since since it seems easier to hear by itself (close to human ear sensitive 1kHz?) and against other notes (using octaves and unisons). A tuner and learning to use a neutral consistent touch seemed to help. A typical Boss tuner doesn't seem to have enough resolution IME (but still helpful to check if your touch is consistent). When "finished" (when I feel like I am), higher position chords seem to ring more nicely.