• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Why the difference in nuts?

#21
Beej- thanks for the mention.

Bruce- That aluminum nut and zero fret is VERY sexy looking. I laughed out loud looking at the screws because I instantly knew exactly why they were there! I LOVE zero frets. As a player I can tell a huge difference and as a technician I'd hate to calculate how many hours a year I spend cutting traditional bone nuts. Sadly they have been adopted by the $26 import "guitar shaped objects" club so much that they are forever associated with them. Django used a zero fret; 'Nuff said!

I'm primarily a double bass builder who occasionally lurks over here on the electric bass side. While I do build very interesting and functional electric basses & guitars, I don't show them off very much. I've also built about 200+ guitars and 132 mandolins, plus a few others over the last 42+ years.

There are plenty of semantics, geometry, and tonal considerations we could talk about, but I think it is even more simple. If we look at Leo for our origins, he was ever thrifty. Today it comes down to a $3 small nut vs. $20 for a nice chunk of ebony on an upright bass. It gets geometrically more complex (and expensive) when you start adding extensions on double basses with extra rolls & curves so much that some folks add wheels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceJockey, BassToGoGo, Beej and 3 others
#22
Bruce Johnson said:
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.
Click to expand...
The break angle might also have to do with violin strings being roughly 10lbs of tension compared to 40lbs for bass guitar strings and violins being played by bow that would tend to pull strings out of the nut slot if the break angle was too shallow and/or the nut slot was not deep enough. But I'm honestly guessing.
 
#23
James Collins said:
The break angle might also have to do with violin strings being roughly 10lbs of tension compared to 40lbs for bass guitar strings and violins being played by bow that would tend to pull strings out of the nut slot if the break angle was too shallow and/or the nut slot was not deep enough. But I'm honestly guessing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's probably true. A buzzing nut slot while bowing is probably a lot more irritating than while plucking.

And I shouldn't need to mention that The Buzzing Nut Slots could be a band name.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smokinjoe, mdogs, James Collins and 7 others
#26
Bruce Johnson said:
On both acoustic and electric instruments, it's about the transmission of vibration from the string into the neck and frame.
Click to expand...

This gets posted all the time, and if you're talking about the bridge end of an acoustic, yes, you want to transfer some (but not all) of the string's vibration into the body. That's how you make acoustic output.

However......everywhere else (the nut on all stringed instruments, and the bridge on a solid body), you want to transfer very little (ideally, none) of the strings' energy into the neck or body. Sustain (we obviously want a fair amount of that, or we wouldn't ever buy solid bodied instruments) comes from NOT transferring vibration into the instrument's body and neck - the nut, fret or bridge should present a solid platform that does not move (or does very little movement) so the energy stays in the string.
 
Last edited:
#31
These threads are never about what I think they're going to be about. :D

jumping cat.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: creaturegods, James Collins, J-Bassomatic and 4 others
#33
fretlessman71 said:
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?
Click to expand...

the violin is an acoustic instrument ... the bass guitar is an electric instrument ... for the most part, and usually solid bodied as well
 
#34
James Collins said:
The break angle might also have to do with violin strings being roughly 10lbs of tension compared to 40lbs for bass guitar strings and violins being played by bow that would tend to pull strings out of the nut slot if the break angle was too shallow and/or the nut slot was not deep enough. But I'm honestly guessing.
Click to expand...

True, but double bass strings are even more: in the range of 65-80 lbs. tension per string!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beej
#35
micguy said:
This gets posted all the time, and if you're talking about the bridge end of an acoustic, yes, you want to transfer some (but not all) of the string's vibration into the body. That's how you make acoustic output.

However......everywhere else (the nut on all stringed instruments, and the bridge on a solid body), you want to transfer very little (ideally, none) of the strings' energy into the neck or body. Sustain (we obviously want a fair amount of that, or we wouldn't ever buy solid bodied instruments) comes from NOT transferring vibration into the instrument's body and neck - the nut, fret or bridge should present a solid platform that does not move (or does very little movement) so the energy stays in the string.
Click to expand...
This notion would support my preference for denser necks such as wenge. Less overall tone loss to my ears.
 
#36
fretlessman71 said:
This notion would support my preference for denser necks such as wenge. Less overall tone loss to my ears.
Click to expand...

Wenge (being a bit denser than maple) is probably a step in the right direction in terms of sustain. If you want a big step in that directiion, the aluminum necks on old Kramer have ungodly sustain. Yes, they neck dive.

The losses at the neck/fret end of the string are more significant than at the body/bridge end - there is naturally more mass and stiffness there than on your neck. If you want less losses/more sustain, work on the neck/fret end - there are more gains to be had there than you’ll get from a heavier bridge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: instrumentalist

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back