Anyone tried a compensated nut?

[Woody Sound]

Just another rabbit hole?

[deacon Mark]

Despite what is claimed it cannot work at all and if it does to any extent it would not be any better than the current way of doing things. The guitar cannot ever be in tune all over the neck. Just get a super accurate tuner like a Peterson Strobe clip on and just check every note one the finger from frets 1 to 15. Plav each note on the fingerboard and note the intonation. It will all be off on most all guitars 1 to 3 cents overall these notes.

[kris]

I have a compensated nut installed in my Telecaster.It's great - the guitar tunes great.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

The concept has never made any sense to me. Moving the contact point at the bridge changes the effective length of a string at every fret. But moving the contact point at the nut does not change string length for fretted notes. The vibrating length from any fret to saddle is still the same as it was with a standard nut - the only change is in the vibrating length of the unfretted string (which also changes the tension needed to tune to nominal pitch).

Moving the nut contact point toward the bridge (which shortens the vibrating string length) means sightly lower tension at named pitch, and moving it toward the tuners means higher tension. This can affect intonation, but I'd expect it to cause all frets to be a bit off if they were installed at ideal locations for a standard nut. I'd think the length and tension shifts of a compensated nut would push the guitar out of equal temperament, and compenstion in nut contact locations would simply introduce changes in temperament that could be adjusted to create a "well tempered" guitar.

The Buzz Feiten system is apparently based on the desire to reduce string angle off the nut, since I gather from what I've read that he believes the more acute string angle at the nut is the most significant fixable cause of intonation issues at the first few frets. I've been told by those who've tried it that the Feiten system seems to put their guitars in better tune relative to pianos but not to other instruments, which further supports my assumption.

IME, most intonation issues that do not result from faulty original design or construction of the guitar turn out to be setup issues like poor fret prep, bridge location issues, individual string aberrations, neck problems etc. Some are from incompatibilities between playing style and fret height, e.g. high fretting force on tall frets) and some result from imprecise fretting that pushes strings laterally a bit on guitars with thin strings and very smooth fretwork. A short fingerboard radius can contribute to this.

I don't see how a "compensated nut" can help intonation on most guitars. But to be honest, I've had dozens of fine guitars and only one had intonation problems that were not attributable to one or more of the above issues.

[Gilpy]

A nut that is too high will cause intonation problems, but a well-made regular nut is close enough for jazz.

[Woody Sound]

The concept has never made any sense to me. Moving the contact point at the bridge changes the effective length of a string at every fret. But moving the contact point at the nut does not change string length for fretted notes. The vibrating length from any fret to saddle is still the same as it was with a standard nut - the only change is in the vibrating length of the unfretted string (which also changes the tension needed to tune to nominal pitch).

I thought the idea was to compensate for strings that fret a bit sharp at the first or second fret, because of the string stretching down from the nut.

[deacon Mark]

On my 1938 L5 set up the regular way the high E in tune. Then if you play each note up the neck from the first fret, all them are slightly flat by the strobe tuner. Not much but they are not sharp at all up near the nut as one would expect. By the time you play the C note on 8th ret it strobes dead on at pretty much the same up to the 12th fret. All the rest of the strings exhibit this same "odd" tendency to be slightly flat at the first 3 frets. It is the most odd and rare thing to see but I attest it does. The compensated nut would destroy the wonderful intonation of this lowly 86-year-old guitar.

If someone uses a compensated nut and says it works for them, I willing to bet it can be set up with a regular nut and be just as in tune. To me it is completely smoke and mirrors.

[AllanAllen]

I thought the idea was to compensate for strings that fret a bit sharp at the first or second fret, because of the string stretching down from the nut.

From what I understand, if the first frets are sharp the bridge is too high.

As we can see here, a compensated nut might fix a specific problem (open string being sharp while the other strings are in tune) but it's not going to universally fix the guitars many tuning compensations.

[GuyBoden]

Personally, I'd prefer a Zero fret.

[mr. beaumont]

Personally, I'd prefer a Zero fret.

Man, the zero fret gets a bad rap, doesn't it? It's a great design in my opinion.

I guess there were a lot of cheapo guitars in the past with them that soured people on the idea.

[SOLR]

Although there are many variables this Luthier swears by them (compensated nuts)

S

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

I thought the idea was to compensate for strings that fret a bit sharp at the first or second fret, because of the string stretching down from the nut.

Right - and Feiten apparently thought that reducing the acute string angle was the solution, along with shifting the contact point. He cut the slots deeper, and I think he also removed a bit of the fingerboard and moved the nut a tiny bit toward the bridge.

[John A.]

I've never tried a compensated nut, but I've run into quite a few decompensating nuts. [And I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a ...]

[SOLR]

or the physics

S

[RJVB]

The concept has never made any sense to me. Moving the contact point at the bridge changes the effective length of a string at every fret. But moving the contact point at the nut does not change string length for fretted notes. The vibrating length from any fret to saddle is still the same as it was with a standard nut - the only change is in the vibrating length of the unfretted string

Yes - but no, because:

(which also changes the tension needed to tune to nominal pitch)..

One can describe the frequency a stopped/fretted string as the frequency of the open string multiplied by the quotient of the total scale length (= of the open string) divided by the length of the currently vibrating string.

So, to correct a note that's sharp at fret N when the open string is in tune, you can
- shift the contact point at the saddle towards the tail to make the vibrating string length longer (also w.r.t. the non-sounding part of the string despite the fact that the entire string length increases)
- shift the contact point at the nut in the same direction, to make non-sounding part of the string shorter, and also w.r.t. the sounding part of the string [ibecause[/i] the entire string length gets shorter.

Compensating at the saddle (usually?) has an effect that decreases when you go down the fretboard. Compensating at the nut is more like removing a DC component, or at least had a more or less similar effect on the intonation at all nuts.

I had heard about nut compensation before, first from a luthier. I too was sceptical because I didn't see how it could work - at least not for our most common problem of sharp intonation.

And then I got that Cordoba lemon that had big intonation issues. At one point I had found a G string that was just audibly sharp over the entire useful range, about 5ct. Tuned at the 5th fret the open string would be 5ct flat, the intermediate frets proportionally less. I remember that my 1st thought was how annoying it was that I couldn't fret the string just after the nut, and then I had the idea to jam a piece of tooth pick under the string. I retuned and was surprised that not only were my open string and the 5th fret in tune, but the intermediate frets were too, and intonation was a lot more acceptable over the entire useful length.
It was only later that I realised that I had reinvented compensation at the nut, and why it worked.

A company called Earvana sell drop-in replacement nuts where compensation can be dialled in IIUC. I just fail to see how these could reduce the string length (and thus compensation for sharp intonation).

EDIT: I'm currently compensating this way at the nut on both nylon stringers; I love the sound of Rubino trebles but sometimes they just don't intonate properly and reversing them doesn't help.

[jazzshrink]

...And I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a ...]

And this gem from the same philosopher: "Reality is a concept for people who can't handle drugs."

[bluejaybill]

Right - and Feiten apparently thought that reducing the acute string angle was the solution, along with shifting the contact point. He cut the slots deeper, and I think he also removed a bit of the fingerboard and moved the nut a tiny bit toward the bridge.

Yes, my 1984 Gibson R8 has a Feiten nut, I thought it was an improvement then, but of course I was never able to compare directly.

My recollection is that the open strings were out, and I think this helped. If you have one, you are also supposed to tune the strings slightly sharp or flat in a precise way. I have that curve plugged into my tuner. But I'm not a luthier, maybe it's all smoke and mirrors.

My arch tops seem to intonate very well for instance.

[Tom Wright]

If the frets are accurate then properly tempering the open strings yields sweet chords everywhere.

But the frets can be wrong. My 10-string mandolins all had the first few frets playing sharp, even with the slots cut to the bone, barely clearing the first fret. I shortened the fingerboard by about 0.010". Fixed the problems, as proved by strobe tuner. Now I have sweet chords everywhere, up the neck, etc.

I have no explanation for why this was needed, although the string break angle feels like it might be involved. I heard Taylor shortens the fingerboard similarly. A couple of mandolin makers agreed they also do shorten the fingerboard to less than straight math specifies.

The shortened fingerboard allows a higher nut, more forgiving, and that means open strings can ring fully.

[jim777]

I have an old Charvel with an Earvana compensated nut, and an EBMM JP6 with a compensated nut. they tune well, like my other guitars. I don't know that I would go out of my way for one but I don't believe they hurt.

That said, I also love a zero fret

[Peter C]

or the physics

S

Unless you're a nerd, jump to minute 19'30 for the nitty-gritty, where it finally became clear why I used to get Stratitis on my first Stratocaster as a teen (single coil neck pup set too high) but not on my current Strat fitted with a twin blade rail (even when set high). Ha!

Starting from standard A=440, I usually tune by ear and have been known to "retune" a guitar, much to the bemusement of the guy who just handed me his digitally tuned instrument. Better than a strobe? I don't know. 4-note chords played above 12th fret are pretty telling (obviously not on an archtop)

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

The shortened fingerboard allows a higher nut, more forgiving, and that means open strings can ring fully.

But a higher nut means a more acute break angle and more stretching of the string when fretting (especially at the first few frets). These factors tend to pull the strings sharp.

[sgosnell]

Another thing that I think affects intonation is the amount of relief in the neck. More relief means the string has to be stretched more to fret it, especially in the center area, and usually less at the higher frets. That's why I prefer a straight neck with minimal relief, if any. But whatever gets the sound and playability the guitarist wants is fine with me.

[xuoham]

or the physics

Thank you for this enlightening video!

[kris]

I also had a similar compensation nut in an arch-top guitar with nylons.It worked very well.

[GuyBoden]

or the physics

Good video.
Good Tech Channel.

At 12:20min Compensated Nuts are explained.

Personally, I prefer Zero frets.