Official Luthiers Forum!

http://www.mimf.com/nutcomp/index.htm is it realy neccessary? I have seen many guitars the players were happy with ,and not one had a nut that looked like this . thanks Jody

not that i have any experience with this, but the nut could be compensated by setting it closer to the 1st fret than whats called for and cutting it back. wouldn't look so obvious that way.
But i'm sure that my ears would never pick up on the difference though.

_________________
Frank

Looks to me like a radical attempt to "compensate" for poor setup and saddle placement. Among other things.

_________________
Bill Hodge


One does not simply, own enough guitars!

That artical is 17 years old! I haven't seen anyone need that much nut comp. I've seen Mark Swansons compensated nut. He set the nut a little forward and routes back center of the string with something that looks like a 3/32" bit maybe. It looks pretty good nothing like the artical photo. That's just silly.

Funny thread title.

Mike

Taylors all have some compensation at the nut. I believe they use 1/32", uniformly. It does make sense that, just like at the saddle, the 'best' nut compensation wouldn't be identical for all strings. Doolin wrote some stuff about it in his series of articles on intonation.

It is most certainly NOT 'compensating' for doing something else wrong. Guitars, by their design, don't intonate very well. For the most part, we're just very used to tuning out the dissonant sounds they make on some intervals.

_________________
Bob Garrish
Former Canonized Purveyor of Fine CNC Luthier Services

An interesting quote from a well known lute guru..."Compensation is for whimps!"

Well if you cut the front of the board at the zero fret the you already have 1/2 the fret slot nut compensation right?

Exactly Chris .. thats how Taylor is getting their nut comp number ...

_________________
Tony Karol
www.karol-guitars.com
"let my passion .. fulfill yours"