Warwick - Different types of Just-A-Nut

[Rattanee]

Hey guys, I just became a Warwick owner, and there is one single thing I would like to change. The nut. I want to replace the stock nut with a brass one, but I am not sure which version to grab from Warwick's shop. So here's a few quickies for those in the know:

If the width and number of strings match, would I be able to install either type/version?
Is there any advantage of the style where you can adjust each string separately over the JANIII where it's alll about setting the slant of the entire nut?

Thanks in advance!

 

[96tbird]

Justanut is ALMOST bogus but not quite. Once the nut is properly set up, you’d never really need to adjust it again. It’s mostly an unnecessary over engineered item that approaches the vestigial once set. Consider just getting a regular brass blank and slot and shape it properly.

My .02 ¥.

But if you insist on the JAN both the length and the width must match what you have now. Someone else might know those dimensions. I do though understand if you laugh me off and why you’d want the JAN: to keep it “stock” and whatnot. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Rattanee]

Justanut is ALMOST bogus but not quite. Once the nut is properly set up, you’d never really need to adjust it again. It’s mostly an unnecessary over engineered item that approaches the vestigial once set. Consider just getting a regular brass blank and slot and shape it properly.

My .02 ¥.

But if you insist on the JAN both the length and the width must match what you have now. Someone else might know those dimensions. I do though understand if you laugh me off and why you’d want the JAN: to keep it “stock” and whatnot. Nothing wrong with that.

I don't really think I have the knowhow to slot one by myself, and while I'm not looking to keep it stock (plastic to brass ain't stock no more), I do want to keep the parts original

I'm really just wondering if there is any real advantage with one version over the other, and if the three different versions are 'cross compatible'.

 

[Goatrope]

For your initial set up, the variants that are adjustable with the strings on are more convenient. After that, you’ll forget you even have an adjustable nut. Oh, until you drop it on the floor whilst changing your strings.

 

[Rattanee]

Ha! I'll try and not drop it I just don't trust that piece of plastic in the long run.

So... are these two cross-compatible?
WARWICK Just-A-Nut - Brass / 6-string (55,00 mm)
WARWICK Just-A-Nut III - Brass / 6-string (55,00 mm), Fretted & Fretless (Lefty)

 

[Goatrope]

Look to be interchangeable to me, but I’d favor the “III”.

 

[sissy kathy]

No, the JAN is a failed design because as you raise or lower the nut you will have different side of the screw as the leading edge of the nut; indicating that both edges are the same height. But the leading edge (fret side) should be higher. The JAN III looks to be a better design, though I don't see the need for an adjustable nut unless you switch string gauges a lot; even then, if you change strings enough to warrant changing the nut height, you'll be needing to change the width of the slots too. All in all, I think it's a solution is search of a problem in either case.

 

[Rattanee]

Thanks for the advice, I'll stick with the JAN III.

I don't really mind if it's adjustable or not, I just want to use original parts and was thinking I'd go the more flexible route, but I suppose it is indeed a moot point as it's pretty much a set once then forget thing.

 

[3alfa3]

JAN III, plastic or brass is good nut. Sound differences is only on open string, but adjustability is great feature (the same) on both versions and if you have JAN III, no need for replacement unless you want (very) small change in sound of open strings.

Only in case of JAN II, replacement is justified to prevent problem when JAN II breaks (poor design)

 

[B-Mac]

They have brass just-a-nut here

Invalid Link Removed

Elnézést, just noticed you're in Hungary.

 

[B-Mac]

Justanut is ALMOST bogus but not quite. Once the nut is properly set up, you’d never really need to adjust it again. It’s mostly an unnecessary over engineered item that approaches the vestigial once set. Consider just getting a regular brass blank and slot and shape it properly.

My .02 ¥.

But if you insist on the JAN both the length and the width must match what you have now. Someone else might know those dimensions. I do though understand if you laugh me off and why you’d want the JAN: to keep it “stock” and whatnot. Nothing wrong with that.

I would debate this somewhat in situations when experimenting with different gauge strings on basses that have a shallow headstock angle and no string tree. This would increase the break angle and prevent any fret buzz on open played strings. Probably the only situation applicable.....

 

[Turnaround]

I would debate this somewhat in situations when experimenting with different gauge strings on basses that have a shallow headstock angle and no string tree. This would increase the break angle and prevent any fret buzz on open played strings. Probably the only situation applicable.....

I don't see how an adjustable nut would have value when changing string gauges. Regardless of gauge, the bottom of the string sits in the bottom of the nut slot, and that determines the clearance over the first fret. Light gauge or heavy, that clearance remains the same.

 

[B-Mac]

I don't see how an adjustable nut would have value when changing string gauges. Regardless of gauge, the bottom of the string sits in the bottom of the nut slot, and that determines the clearance over the first fret. Light gauge or heavy, that clearance remains the same.

You are absolutely correct....I am talking about the other direction...the break angle towards the tuning machine. I have a situation where I have to raise the nut just a hair so my open E string does not buzz on the first fret. If I raise the bridge saddle it raises the action too much for me. I am talking a C.H. adjustment or even a R.C.H. adjustment.

If I press on the string between the nut and the tuning machine the buzz goes away. The headstock has an extremely shallow angle and there is no string tree which I do not want to add. So that is where I am coming from. Do you think this wouldn't fix this?

An easier fix would be to get new strings and have another winding or two lower on the tuning machine which would also increase the break angle. That is probably the cheapest attempt at a fix.

 

[Turnaround]

If the E string buzzes on the first fret, the nut is too low or the fret is too high. Break angle is another matter. If the buzz goes away when you press the string on the tuner side of the nut you may have too little break angle OR the nut slot is too wide, OR the nut slot is not angled toward the headstock, OR the nut slot is too deep, OR any combination of those conditions.

 

[B-Mac]

If the E string buzzes on the first fret, the nut is too low or the fret is too high. Break angle is another matter. If the buzz goes away when you press the string on the tuner side of the nut you may have too little break angle OR the nut slot is too wide, OR the nut slot is not angled toward the headstock, OR the nut slot is too deep, OR any combination of those conditions.

I definitely have too little break angle as the headstock angle is really shallow. The fret is not high when checking with a straight edge.

The just-a-nut raises the string. Have you used these? I have one of these on my Warwick Rockbass Corvette and they work quite well. 2 screws. One raises or lowers the E and A string and the other raises or lowers the D and G string. If I did this and raised the nut on the E string side I'd have more of a break angle and a slightly higher clearance at the first fret. Again I am talking a micro adjustment here. Only buzzes on open if I pick hard. Not at all if I pick soft.

Before I do any of this I am going to try new strings and more windings on the E tuning machine. Right now there are only 2 1/2 windings on the tuning machine from the previous owner.

 

[Turnaround]

First off you don't have enough windings on the post. Secondly, the nut should not be adjusted to optimize the break angle, it should be optimized for the proper clearance at the first fret.

 

[mmbongo]

I always forget that my Warwick has a Just-A-Nut...until I remove the strings and it falls off and I have to crawl around looking for it

 

[96tbird]

I definitely have too little break angle as the headstock angle is really shallow. The fret is not high when checking with a straight edge.

The just-a-nut raises the string. Have you used these? I have one of these on my Warwick Rockbass Corvette and they work quite well. 2 screws. One raises or lowers the E and A string and the other raises or lowers the D and G string. If I did this and raised the nut on the E string side I'd have more of a break angle and a slightly higher clearance at the first fret. Again I am talking a micro adjustment here. Only buzzes on open if I pick hard. Not at all if I pick soft.

Before I do any of this I am going to try new strings and more windings on the E tuning machine. Right now there are only 2 1/2 windings on the tuning machine from the previous owner.

Look, Listen to @Turnaround, he’s a pro guitar mechanic. if you're using the nut to adjust break angle, you need to back to square one and do some research.

Nut height is adjusted only when you need to address certain issues on the fret board side.

 

[B-Mac]

First off you don't have enough windings on the post. Secondly, the nut should not be adjusted to optimize the break angle, it should be optimized for the proper clearance at the first fret.

agree 100%. The bass I am referring to has a known design flaw and I am trying to do a low cost work around. I'd like to PM this rather than take up space here if that suits you.