Questions about Nut

[Duotones]

Many guys and guitar builders have told that nuts really affects the tone and some guys really think that bone is one of the best material for nuts.

I've thougt that when we play open strings, nuts really affects sound. but when we play some solos or chords like F or E9, I think frets are more important than nuts. Nuts may be important and I think that proper slotting and setup of nut is one of basic and very important procedures. But I can't understand why some guys pay attention to the constitution of nuts rather than frets.

I know that TAGW and John Suhr use Tusq, a synthetic material by GraphTech, and I think that Graphite and Tusq are very practical because they usually give great tuning stability especially in tremolo-equiped guitars. I think that bone nuts may sound better in some circumstances, but I think that nuts doesn't affect sound when we play solos and most of chords.

I want to hear other members' opinion.

Thanks,

Jinwon Seo

[tom]

consistancy for me is very important. tusq is consistant, bone is not. in my personal history, i have had better luck with tusq for tremolo than with bone.

[dannopelli]

Many guys and guitar builders have told that nuts really affects the tone and some guys really think that bone is one of the best material for nuts.

I've thougt that when we play open strings, nuts really affects sound. but when we play some solos or chords like F or E9, I think frets are more important than nuts. Nuts may be important and I think that proper slotting and setup of nut is one of basic and very important procedures. But I can't understand why some guys pay attention to the constitution of nuts rather than frets.

I know that TAGW and John Suhr use Tusq, a synthetic material by GraphTech, and I think that Graphite and Tusq are very practical because they usually give great tuning stability especially in tremolo-equiped guitars. I think that bone nuts may sound better in some circumstances, but I think that nuts doesn't affect sound when we play solos and most of chords.

I want to hear other members' opinion.

Thanks,

Jinwon Seo

IMHO everything affects tone. Obviously things like wood types and pickup configuration will impact it more than say, the nut material. But I have found that the sum total of all the elements creates the sound. I personally DO NOT like the Sperzel type locking tuners, nor Grover style on LP's. Too much mass. A 50's bridge on a Tele sounds different than a 60's. etc.

But you know I kind of searched for the right builder, and find you can't beat an Andy for overall quality, consistancy, and playability.

Just my $.02 :)

[Duotones]

Thanks, Tom.

I totally agree with you. I am a pathologist and have examined many histologic slides of human bone ( I know that nuts are not made of human bone but cow bone... :) ) . Bone is not consistant material; some can be good and others can be really bad. Facial bone and long bone are of different strength although both are from same cow. And each bone from different animals will not have same hardness or characters.

dannopelli,

I really agree to your opinion. Everything affects tone. I also hate Sperzel locking tuners because they have too low gear ratio and they are too heavy. And bridges and saddles may be one of important factors affecting tone.

Due to my horrible command of English, I can't say exactly what I want to tell you. What I want to say was bone can be good material for nuts, but not always.

Because I live in South Korea, I have relatively more frequent chance to play Japanese Custom Guitars like Aircraft, Crews Maniac Sound, and so on. These Japanese manufacturers and some Korean builders usually say that Bone is the best material for nuts and some guys are saying that without bone nuts, you can't earn superb, vintage tone. I hate these guys. I like bone nuts, but I am also fond of newer composites such as Graphite and Tusq.

And I think nuts are really important when we play open strings, but may affect tone less when we play some solos and chords. I want to hear other guys opinion about this subject.

And I really love Andys. I have owned 5 Andys and all of them were great guitars (in fact, I have been a TAG fan for 10 years). All craftmanship, playability and tone satisfied me. Nowadays, I've seen some guys choosing other guitars like James Tyler, John Suhr, and Don Grosh rather than TA, and they are definitely fine guitars. But none of them felt better for me than Andys. ;)

Jinwon Seo, M.D.

[tom]

interesting that they would say "vintage" tone was in bone, no vintage electric i can think of came with a bone nut. at least not fender of gibson.

[dannopelli]

interesting that they would say "vintage" tone was in bone, no vintage electric i can think of came with a bone nut. at least not fender of gibson.

Have to agree with that one. As far as I know Fender has not used bone on anythng. Gibson MAYBE on the very old acoustics.

IMHO, Have to agree that the Anderson is a much better value, better concept, better quality than all of the high end custom stuff out there.

[Duotones]

Thank you, Tom and Dan.

I do agree with Dan. ;)

[Roy (maybe)]

When I built my ’98 Classic I went back and forth testing bone and tusq nuts. I installed them over and over again switching back and forth, dropped them on the table and listened to the ring of the particular material. There is a little difference in tone. The tusq sounds more like the other frets and the bone offered a slightly different open-string tone. Since that time I have played Andersons with both bone and tusq nuts at countless gigs and my conclusion: In real world application the difference is so miniscule that in the middle of the gig or in a song there is no practical difference whatsoever. Without looking I am not sure which one I am playing while I concentrate on getting an F maj9 chord to project just right. My choice is tusq for its consistency and smoother transition between fret and nut tone.

Maybe

[sylvanshine]

dropped them on the table and listened to the ring of the particular material
That's a good way to bust a nut. :D

Sorry, there is a side of me that is still in the 3rd grade

[Roy (maybe)]

You are so right. I'll try and be more careful. Thanks for the nuts up--I mean heads up.

[jimmieb]

You are so right. I'll try and be more careful. Thanks for the nuts up--I mean heads up.

Ouch! The nuts up will get you every time.
What about fossilized ivory. The saddle, nut, and bridge pins of my Martin are fossilized walrus tusk and it has made a huge difference. Even just the pins made some difference. More sustain and a tighter focused bass. The highs are brighter and the overall tone is louder. It's mahogany so the mids are nice and warm already. If I use John Pearse strings it's more classic Martin tone. With Elixiers it's a little more Taylor. Maybe acoustics are more sensitive to these type of changes? They even offered the suggestion of drilling a hole under the nut to set the individual string volume. I can't remember how drilling effected it either loud or quieter.

Jimmie B

[Suriel Zayas]

the guy who sets up my acoustics swears by water buffalo for the saddle, and i really hear the difference.

[billyguitar]

A saddle on an acoustic is obviously always in play but you only hear the nut on an open string. Being electric players, how often do we play open strings? So long as the material functions properly I agree that the tone differences would have to be extremely subtle.

[tom]

suriel, do you have pickups in the acoustics, and if so which ones? did you hear the guitars with and without the pickups?

[Suriel Zayas]

i had the saddles on my taylor 714 ce (w/pup) and martin d28 (no pup) replaced and i do hear a sonic difference. the taylor is the original fishman blender. i have also tried it on a few acoustic home projects i've put together. there is warmer less brittle sound, very obvious with the taylor and martin. i might have an extra water buffalo saddle laying around somewhere i can ship out to you.

[tom]

the acoustics i play all have the buzz fieten mod, so the saddle is larger than normal on the top, and i don't want to mess with them. my question about the pickups was sort of directed at the sound before and after the pickup. i think a pickup will change the sound more than the saddle material.

[Rhys]

i think a pickup will change the sound more than the saddle material.

i agree. i put a dual source element/ibeam in my santa cruz and was quite dissapointed in the tone loss. but the thing sounds very nice plugged up so i'm okay with the compromise i guess. i also experienced it when i put a k&k in my martin, but i think it actually worked out better on that one because it tamed some of the high end that was really a little too harsh before the pickup. pickup definitely had a noticable change on the tone in both cases.