Nuts... how low can you go?

Strat_a_tat_tat

If you fret a string at the 3rd fret and look at the gap between the underside of the string and the top of the 1st fret... is there some magic measurement - in thousandths of an inch - that tells you if your nut slot is cut perfectly (for a low action without buzz... assuming the neck has a touch of relief... say 6 or 8 thou of relief / forwards bow at the 7th fret... and assuming the player doesn't have an overly heavy strumming technique)????

Thanks.

spark240

Just on nuts....interestingly today at the PRS thing in PMT, Paul was asked about the nut and groove sizes etc, his take on it was that the depth of cut is relatively unimportant, their research suggested that the most crucial factors were the curvature of point where the string passes over it.

Strat_a_tat_tat

spark240 said:

Just on nuts....interestingly today at the PRS thing in PMT, Paul was asked about the nut and groove sizes etc, his take on it was that the depth of cut is relatively unimportant, their research suggested that the most crucial factors were the curvature of point where the string passes over it.

Not sure I understand that. The depth of the cut determines the action at the lower frets.

richardhomer

What you're trying to replicate is the same amount of clearance over the first fret when the string is played open, as the clearance over the second fret, when fretted at the first.

The advantage of the 'third fret' method is it takes action and relief out of the equation.

The gap on my main electric is probably a couple of thousandths of an inch on the treble side - and a touch higher on the bass strings.

ICBM

Between 1/10th and 1/4 of the string diameter, preferably nearer the low end.

Strat_a_tat_tat

richardhomer said:

What you're trying to replicate is the same amount of clearance over the first fret when the string is played open, as the clearance over the second fret, when fretted at the first.

The advantage of the 'third fret' method is it takes action and relief out of the equation.

The gap on my main electric is probably a couple of thousandths of an inch on the treble side - and a touch higher on the bass strings.

Good point... I've never thought about the 'replicate' the clearance at the second fret (when fretted at the first) idea. Makes perfect sense to me. Thanks for that. (I guess, to some extent, the action at the bridge will also have some influence over the clearance at the second fret when the string is fretted at the first... but it's a good guide).

Yes... I agree that the 'third fret' method appears to help diminish (or maybe remove) the influence of other set up factors. That's why I'd prefer to use that method... instead of the countless YouTube vids that tell me to aim for 18 - 20 thou clearance at the first fret (with an open string).

One time, I played a masterbuilt Strat that had a very, very low cut nut... so low, that I thought it would buzz horribly... but it didn't. There was almost no clearance (using the 3rd fret method)... but I guess one can only get away with that sort of set up if the fret heights are all perfect. Mark Kendrick was the masterbuilder... and, based on that one guitar, it seemed like he knew what he was doing!

Anyway... back to reality... it's time to get the feeler gauges out, methinks.

sweepy

I always compromise when I set nut height on guitars, as I'm a light handed player I can get away with a flat fretboard and a very low cut nut. A good friend, who's guitars I look after is primarily an acoustic player so I always set his electrics with a higher action and nut . The proof of the pudding is that when he plays mine, they rattle like crazy whereas they are as clean as a whistle when I play them.
The "tap" test is usually a good indicator, fret the 3rd fret and see if you can "tap" the string at the first fret, it's a good addition to visually checking the height 

ICBM

The third-fret method completely eliminates the other factors because the neck is not flexible enough over the distance between the nut and the second fret for the relief to make any measurable difference, and clearly the bridge height doesn't.

That's why I always set the nut height first, even before the relief - although some people prefer the other way round.

Strat_a_tat_tat

ICBM said:

Between 1/10th and 1/4 of the string diameter, preferably nearer the low end.

Thanks.

So... on a set of 10-46 strings... we're looking at a lower limit of 1 thou (1st string) to 4.6 thou (6th string).

Wow that sounds low (and for me - a low-action-obsessed muppet - that's a good thing).

Strat_a_tat_tat

ICBM said:

The third-fret method completely eliminates the other factors because the neck is not flexible enough over the distance between the nut and the second fret for the relief to make any measurable difference, and clearly the bridge height doesn't.

That's why I always set the nut height first, even before the relief - although some people prefer the other way round.

Good to know.

Thanks.

Are there any major disadvantages in having the nut cut really low... but not low enough for buzz?

I'm guessing it partly comes down to personal preference regarding the 'feel' of a guitar (??)

Strat_a_tat_tat

sweepy said:

I always compromise when I set nut height on guitars, as I'm a light handed player I can get away with a flat fretboard and a very low cut nut. A good friend, who's guitars I look after is primarily an acoustic player so I always set his electrics with a higher action and nut . The proof of the pudding is that when he plays mine, they rattle like crazy whereas they are as clean as a whistle when I play them.
The "tap" test is usually a good indicator, fret the 3rd fret and see if you can "tap" the string at the first fret, it's a good addition to visually checking the height 

Thanks.

I've not got a very strident strum technique... so I'm thinking I can get away with a low nut too.

Wolfetone

Virtually touching on the top E and half a strings width on the low E.

Strat_a_tat_tat

Wolfetone said:

Virtually touching on the top E and half a strings width on the low E.

Thanks for the info.

Half a string's width on the low E?? So that's 23 thou on a 46 thou E string? I'm definitely not 'having a go'... but, to me, that sounds like a lot. Am I missing something?

richardhomer

Strat_a_tat_tat said:
Thanks for the info.

Half a string's width on the low E?? So that's 23 thou on a 46 thou E string? I'm definitely not having a go... but, to me, that sounds like a lot. Am I missing something?

Not only would that height be hard to play - you'd almost certainly suffer tuning issues over the first few frets.

Jack_

Depends how long your legs are.