Why the difference in nuts?

[fretlessman71]

Always wondered, never thought to ask here:

On a violin, the nut is much thicker - i.e., the string is in contact with the wood for a greater length of the string - than you see on a bass or guitar. What is the reason for this, and would a bass or guitar benefit at all from a larger nut like an orchestral stringed instrument?

 

[Beej]

Always wondered, never thought to ask here:

On a violin, the nut is much thicker - i.e., the string is in contact with the wood for a greater length of the string - than you see on a bass or guitar. What is the reason for this, and would a bass or guitar benefit at all from a larger nut like an orchestral stringed instrument?

I haven't done nearly as much work on violin family instruments as some of the builders here, but I'd think it has to do with the significant breakover angle to get the strings from fingerboard height down into the pegbox where they wrap and terminate over the pegs.

That longer, thicker nut has curved slots that transition smoothly from the witness point of the nut at fingerboard terminus to the back of the nut. This lets the strings curves smoothly over that transition without getting a kink or bump, and also allows for more smooth tuning of the string through that curved slot.

Hopefully someone who knows more about this will chime in. I know @Bruce Johnson does something similar on his Ampeg basses where the string breaks over the nut. @james condino and also recently active builder @rickwrench both have built pegbox instruments and may be able to confirm or deny my blatherings.

 

[Rôckhewer]

I would venture a guess... that it's mainly because a violin /viol has a greater break angle from the nut to the tuners.
If the nut was smaller and not rounded... the angle would be too abrupt.
Hard to tune and prone to string breaks.

 

[Rôckhewer]

Beej beat me to it...
But I added a pretty picture

 

[Bruce Johnson]

Yep. It's all about how much of angle you need to bend the string through. You don't want to kink the string to too small of a radius.

But, adding more solid contact between the string and nut and neck will also help with high frequency clarity.

Here's one of my Scroll Basses, with a very high break angle, a zero fret, and a wide aluminum nut with curved radiused slots. Real good contact area, smooth tuning, and minimal kinking of the flatwounds.

On a flat or lightly tilted headstock, with less than 10 degrees of break angle, a wide nut isn't necessary. So the manufacturers use narrow nuts, because they are cheaper.

 

[TFM94]

On a flat or lightly tilted headstock, with less than 10 degrees of break angle, a wide nut isn't necessary. So the manufacturers use narrow nuts, because they are cheaper.

I have a follow up question. I've never built nor played an instrument from the violin family, so maybe this is obvious. Is there any advantage of a steep break angle with a rounded transition as opposed to a smaller break angle as on typical bass guitars, regardless of nut width? Other than tradition, of course.

 

[Bruce Johnson]

I have a follow up question. I've never built nor played an instrument from the violin family, so maybe this is obvious. Is there any advantage of a steep break angle with a rounded transition as opposed to a smaller break angle as on typical bass guitars, regardless of nut width? Other than tradition, of course.

It's important to have a good solid, rigid contact between the string and the neck structure, through the nut. Together with the other three points of contact (tuners, bridge and tailpiece), if all four points are solid, you get better clarity of the high end. Not necessarily louder high end, but clearer and more defined.

With more string break angle over the nut, it's easier to get that good contact, because there's more pounds of downforce of the string on the nut. With a shallow break angle, there's less downforce. You have to be more careful in the fit of the string to the nut and the nut to the neck. You can do it right and make it solid, or you can be sloppy and lose clarity.

 

[Reedt2000]

I'd guess the added tonal benefit of better contact at the nut is more crucial to an acoustic instrument? Seems to me it might be more about how the wood behaves than the string, so with pickups it's less likely to make a difference (maybe? ).

 

[Bruce Johnson]

I'd guess the added tonal benefit of better contact at the nut is more crucial to an acoustic instrument? Seems to me it might be more about how the wood behaves than the string, so with pickups it's less likely to make a difference (maybe? ).

No, I wouldn't say it's more important on acoustic instruments. On both acoustic and electric instruments, it's about the transmission of vibration from the string into the neck and frame. That vibration then gets reflected back from the frame into the string, which may modify the sound on the string.

On an acoustic, that modified string vibration then pumps the bridge up and down, which pumps the top, and pumps out acoustic sound. The flexing of the frame by the string can affect the final acoustic sound.

On an electric bass, that modified vibration on the string is read by the pickup, tweaked a bit by the pickup's own internals, and sent on down the wire to the amp.

In both cases, this interaction on the frame is changing the "sound" on the string before it goes off and becomes real acoustic sound.

 

[MultiScaleMale]

Sometimes I disappoint myself. Heh.

 

[themickster]

I'd guess the added tonal benefit of better contact at the nut is more crucial to an acoustic instrument? Seems to me it might be more about how the wood behaves than the string, so with pickups it's less likely to make a difference (maybe? ).

Acoustic guitars have a thin nut

 

[RichterScale]

I'd say the relative flat design of a modern electric and sideways/flat tuners (compared to a scroll headstock) likely has more to do with the convenience of being compact and portable. As in, fitting in a case, moving around on a stage, etc.
So, most use the least amount of angle that still allows for adequate break angle.
It's also much easier/cheaper to produce, the flat Fender style being the best example.

 

[coy garcia]

I wish more builders would use a zero fret or wood nut for fretless. It makes the open strings match the tone of the rest of the instrument better. Also a plus when you change string gauges or use a bead tuning for instance.

 

[BarfanyShart]

I wish more builders would use a zero fret or wood nut for fretless. It makes the open strings match the tone of the rest of the instrument better. Also a plus when you change string gauges or use a bead tuning for instance.

If we keep talking about zero frets here, it will become a thing. Let's keep up that chatter!

 

[RichterScale]

If it makes anyone feel better, I'm using a zero fret and a wood nut on the current build.
But it's a super secret design and can't be revealed until it's done.

 

[Jazz Ad]

If it makes anyone feel better, I'm using a zero fret and a wood nut on the current build.
But it's a super secret design and can't be revealed until it's done.

Come on show what you got.

 

[coy garcia]

Come on show what you got.

View attachment 4565787

Very cool!!

 

[RichterScale]

Yes, that's awesome.
I didn't start mine yet.
It won't be that fancy though.

 

[RichterScale]

Come on show what you got.

View attachment 4565787

Is that part of the headstock, part of the FB or a separate piece?

 

[Fender_Bender]

I like using open strings quite a bit and was always frustrated by a sound that didn’t live up to the rest of the notes. I then made a brass nut that is very thick and wide and am very happy with the results. If anything, the open strings ring out better than fretted notes. Here it is at 20 years old, so there’s a little bit of surface oxidation. I also screwed the nut in place with 2 Robertson screws to further increase the mass and rigidity there.