-
I disagree. How else would we have learned how different nut materials sound dropped on a break room table? It may be helpful one day.
Originally Posted by Strat-itis
^ That's not the most helpful clip is it?
-
07-18-2026 07:58 PM
-
I like Micarta, easy to work. But recently I found StewMac only had bone in useful blank sizes, leading to the bleaching challenge.
My first nut, long ago, was some aluminum stock I had sitting around. Trivial differences between materials.
-
There are enormous differences between materials. Since you brought up micarta, that material really aggressively shapes the tone to a scooped out acoustic sound. Originally Posted by twtunes
-
Maybe my experience differs from being limited to acoustic and electric mandolin.
-
Are you the guy to have the debate with about ‘tone woods’ on solid bodies? Originally Posted by Strat-itis
-
Yes
-
About ten years ago I was enjoying a furious thread about tone woods on solid bodies (don't recall if it was here or elsewhere) and was just about to jump in, but first, out of curiosity I found my stethoscope and listened all over my Strat... Originally Posted by Archie
Results where very interesting; I thought the obvious parts that would sound through the stethoscope when the strings were strummed would include the nut, and bridge block, plate, and saddles, springs and claw - those were all dead silent! All over the body surface front and back were silent. The neck, plate, back, finger board, and frets were all silent. The pick guard, strap pins, switch and knobs were silent.
The ONLY parts of the guitar that made sound were:
- the vibrato bar; it chimed moderately loud
- the head stock wood, chimed moderately loud
- the tuning pegs; even louder
- the tuning machines; even more loud
- the tuning keys; very loud, loudest of any part of the guitar except the strings themselves
This was an informal test; I don't know why it might not be good. The results were a big surprise.
The nut not sounding at all but the head stock sounding immediately behind it means something (may mean just dropping them free on a table top is meaningless). Very surprised nothing was heard of the bridge and vibrato assembly except the bar itself.Last edited by pauln; 07-19-2026 at 01:37 PM.
-
I dont think dropping the nut tells you nothing.
BUT: I dont think its been established what it actually tells you. The nut transfers energy across parts of the guitar.
IMHO its much more important how well the nut is made than what it is made of.
A poorly cut nut made of the worlds best material can create problems all over the neck...not just to open notes.
-
You could make a solid guitar from concrete or ‘tonewoods’ and it would sound the same.
In fact the concrete might have more sustain.
If I made candy from the same favour but changed the colour, you would swear the red one tasted different to the yellow one.
Human perception is not a reliable source of actual data.
Last edited by Archie; 07-19-2026 at 12:28 PM.
-
So what vibrated were the strings, and the things connected to the ends of the strings - tuners, vibrato, and things very close. That doesn't surprise me a lot. I would be tempted to see what vibrated loudest on an archtop, but I don't own a stethoscope, and I'm not about to buy one just to test it. Originally Posted by pauln
-
So much info......, here's my contribution:
When I put my new 335 up against and facing my amp with the Looper reciting a litany of chords Hi an Lo, many parts of the guitar vibrated, especially the headstock. Not the same I know, as just plucking the strings - a lot more energy being input from the speaker, and I believe it was beneficial to the guitar.
But also, when I play a new guitar, I judge its resonance with my left hand on the neck. I like to play a C on the 5th string - 3 rd fret. On most guitars, I will feel the vibrations on the BACK of the neck. On solid body guitars as well. On hollow or semi-hollow guitars, I also look to feel vibrations on my chest from the back of the guitar. And some guitars vibrate A LOT. A good Tele, in my opinion, will vibrate A LOT in my left hand. I remember at a guitar show, a luthier showing off the Tele copies he had made (for a lot of $$$). Couldn't plug one in to an amp but in my hand, I felt no vibration whatsoever.
I don't know if that concludes anything, it could just be my own bias.
-
If the neck is vibrating a lot I think its chewing up energy....reducing sustain.
That may be a good thing or not.
It helps to shape the response and tone of the guitar
Again, neither good nor bad....it depends on what you want.
If you want it to sustain like a les paul vibration is not a good thing.
You dont want vibration from a nut. It makes up half the base of your instrument.
Strings need good support on both ends to behave nicely.
Sorry...but this dropping stuff and listening for thuds and pings is silly. Guys in the woodwind business started a lot of that crap over 50 years ago and it was goofy then. Its still goofy today. Just more clickbait.
-
I prefer brass. My Ibanez GB10 has a hybrid brass/bone not with the brass side facing the fretboard. My Stratishcaster has a brass nut. Why do I like them? I think they look nice. I've never been able to compare the tone of different nut materials because that would mean replacing the nut just to try something different, and that would be silly.
I've had bone and Corian on other guitars, but again have never replaced the nuts on those guitars. Replacing a nut is not something that happens that often- maybe on a guitar with a whammy bar that might be different. In nearly 50 years I've had nuts replaced twice- the cheap plastic to a bone nut during a refret of my flattop, can't say that I noticed a big change in tone. On my carvetop, I replaced a bone nut with another bone nut with different spacing with no noticeable change in tone but much more comfort in fretting.
Does anyone else get a little juvenile hilarity out of discussing a guitar's nuts? Apparently we never grow up...
-
Quote: "Does anyone else get a little juvenile hilarity out of discussing a guitar's nuts? Apparently we never grow up..."
Good way to throw the thread sideways! One guitar - one nut.
-
I disagree with quite a bit that's been written here.
Resonant pieces of wood are generally superior, and boost sustain, because there is more resonating happening, and it will take longer to stop resonating than a less resonant piece of wood. Seems like a no-brainer. Take five of the same guitar off the shelf, one or two will be noticeably superior yet everything is the same specs-wise.
Dropping a nut onto a table to determine resonance=getting an idea of how much additional brightness or lack thereof might be imparted to the tone.
I appreciate some of what PRS has demonstrated. Lightweight tuners for example. I have switched out a set of heavy grovers to lightweight klusons and there was a slight tonal difference afterward. A more "open" sound. Granted, once plugged in on a stage it was negligible but the point is if you swapped all the hardware on a guitar for stuff made from different materials the guitar would have a different voice afterwards to a greater or lesser degree.
I use nickel silver fingerpicks. If I drop them onto a hard surface it creates a very bright, bell-like ping. Consequently, they have a bright attack on the strings.
TLDR every piece of hardware, wood, etc will have some effect on the final tone.
-
I don't think that's how it works. It requires energy input to vibrate the strings. The more energy transferred to vibrate parts of the guitar, the more energy taken from the strings, so the less time they can vibrate, thus less sustain. If none of the energy is lost in causing the body to vibrate, then the strings will vibrate longer, and drive the pickup longer. A loud acoustic guitar has less sustain than a quieter one, and much less sustain than a solid-body. Energy is quickly lost through the top vibrating, and so is sustain. Originally Posted by DawgBone
-
If I strum an electric unplugged and it is louder and more resonant than an another of the same model, I am almost assuredly getting the better sounding instrument i.e the one with the most sustain and the more responsive voice. I have seen that over and over with identical and similar models. In fact I have two ES style guitars now that reflect this. Originally Posted by sgosnell
Woods with a dull thud lacking resonance are not preferred by any builder I'm aware of vs those with a nice resonant response when they are tapped.
-
Tone and sustain are not the same things. Sustain just refers to how long the string vibrates. How it sounds is an entirely different matter. I fully agree that resonance matters, but it does reduce sustain by some amount.
-
I don't agree with your assessment. In effect, resonance IS sustain. Originally Posted by sgosnell
-
Well, one of us is wrong.
-
The only resonance that is actually sustain (by definition keeping a note playing longer) is feedback.
Simply becuase dropping a metal finger pick making a ping noise does not mean it will play brighter. It means it is thin enough to make a ringing sound. If you drop a 200 pound steel block its not gonna go ping. If you could lift it to pluck a note it would be just as bright.
Simply becuase something seems makes sense doesnt make it true.
And of course a resonant acoustic is going to sound better than one that is dead.
That said, if body resonance was equal to sustain we would not have solid body guitars becuase according to your theory that resonant wood increase sustain would suggest that archtops would have near infinite sustain and that simply isnt the case. A good portion of what makes an archtop tone envelope involves decay which is facilitated by an intentional loss of energy through vibration/resonance.
I design and make sax mouthpieces from various materials. Lots of horn players think the same way. They believe if the mouthpiece is shiney metal it will play brighter than ebonite. This simply is not the case. I wont bore you with the details. Im just saying that this tenedency to suscribe to "what makes sense" does not constitute fact.
If someone wants to make a useful video about guitar nut material they should pull out some tools to measure weight, density and mass. Dropping crap on a table just tells us what a nut sounds like when its dropped. Its says nothing about how it interacts with a vibrating piece of metal (a string). We also need to know that all of those nuts are cut exactly the same. That, in itself can be difficult becuse different tools are potentially used to cut different materials. We also need a measure of how each material transfers energy to the neck.
-
The nut is also damped by being wedged/glued into a slot in the neck, and that changes its resonance, if it has any, in unpredictable and irreproducable ways.
-
I wasn't making anecdotal remarks. Originally Posted by Sigmund451
A thin nickel silver fingerpick makes a ping because it is a highly resonant material. A thin plastic pick does not make the same ping because it is not a resonant material, it's soft plastic. I have brass versions of the same pick. Dropping it on the same surface results in a duller sound. Accordingly, they are less bright in their attack on a string but brass is still brighter than an equivalent plastic fingerpick.
-
Any resonance is damped out as soon as a finger fills the pick. Hardness is not affected by the damping.
-
The point is that a given material in contact with the string will affect the sound based on it's characteristics i.e nickel silver is a brighter tone than than brass or plastic. Sigmund seemingly suggested it would not necessarily play brighter, but it does. I guess what I'm saying is that dropping different nuts, ala PRS, on a break room table WILL give you an idea of the tonal characteristics a given material will add to an instrument. Originally Posted by sgosnell
Reply With Quote
Dampening a carved top for thunk I think
Today, 04:49 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos