Is converting from a 1 1/8 to a 1 3/16 nut possible? Practical?

[ccravens]

So this may be a stupid question, but that hasn't seemed to stop me before...

I'm talking about converting an existing mando from a 1 1/8 to a 1 3/36 nut width.

Thanks in advance for any replies.

[fscotte]

Yes, someone used a wider piece of binding along the fretboard , and tapered it down to the width of the neck. The thread is around here somewheres.

[jim simpson]

I replaced a fretboard once on a mandolin. The replacement was already fretted so I sanded it to match the old fingerboard (or so I thought) and then would glue on new binding. I discovered that I didn't take enough off so that the binding was wider than the routed area. I tapered the binding to match the neck while maintaining the thickness along the surface of the fingerboard. In essence it gave me a wider fingerboard without being detectable from the sides.

[ccravens]

What would the cost of something like that?

Average cost, for a luthier. I know that's hard to estimate, but maybe ballpark?

[tbrahan]

Are you sure you mean "1 3/36"? That would be making your nut and neck narrower instead of wider which is a whole different animal than making it wider.

I made mine wider by using wider binding and tapering it down to the neck. This also required refretting (which I intended to do anyway), a new nut and a slight adjustment to spacing at the bridge. If I had been more careful in taping off the neck I wouldn't have had to refinish the neck, but that could be required as well. So, if you go to a luthier you'll need a refret, new nut, new binding, and a set up with a chance of a neck refinish. I see re-frets advertised at 200-300, nuts at 50-75, and I would guess the binding would run 50-100. Combining all together might be cheaper. I did the work myself, so I saved up front, but Duco cement leaked onto the top of the mandolin and it cost me 200 to get the finish repaired.

If you are wanting to narrow the neck, I think it might be cheaper since you wouldn't need a refret, but for sure you'd have to do a neck refinish.

You list a Girouard and a Flatiron in your signature. Re-sale value would be an issue, so you would want it done by someone qualified.

[sblock]

Are you sure you mean "1 3/36"? That would be making your nut and neck narrower instead of wider which is a whole different animal than making it wider.

I made mine wider by using wider binding and tapering it down to the neck. This also required refretting (which I intended to do anyway), a new nut and a slight adjustment to spacing at the bridge. If I had been more careful in taping off the neck I wouldn't have had to refinish the neck, but that could be required as well. So, if you go to a luthier you'll need a refret, new nut, new binding, and a set up with a chance of a neck refinish. I see re-frets advertised at 200-300, nuts at 50-75, and I would guess the binding would run 50-100. Combining all together might be cheaper. I did the work myself, so I saved up front, but Duco cement leaked onto the top of the mandolin and it cost me 200 to get the finish repaired.

If you are wanting to narrow the neck, I think it might be cheaper since you wouldn't need a refret, but for sure you'd have to do a neck refinish.

You list a Girouard and a Flatiron in your signature. Re-sale value would be an issue, so you would want it done by someone qualified.

The title of the thread says "1 3/16" (not 3/36; 36ths of an inch are not a usual unit of measure; that must be a typo). It seems clear that the OP wants to increase the nut width by 1/16".

For a change this small, it is sometimes possible, depending upon the mandolin, to leave the nut width exactly as it is (1 1/8"), but make a new nut with a slightly wider string spacing, if there is sufficient clearance to do that. 1/16" is just 0.0625", after all, which is not very much. Each string pair would only have to move by about 2 hundredths of an inch!

This leads me to question the wisdom of wanting to change the nut width by such a minuscule amount -- rather than just get used to it -- but some folks (converted guitar players, for the most part) seem to be hypersensitive to this, I have learned.

[dhergert]

For that small of a difference you might be better off fudging the slots on a new 1 1/8" nut so they extend to the full available width of the frets.

I've done that before on mandolins and other instruments, and this process can provide noticeably more playing space and it can make playing a lot easier.

You have to analyze your frets to make sure your new first and last nut slots don't extend strings over the end-bevel of the frets or onto binding, but within the range of that analysis this kind of thing is still very possible.

If your fret ends are squared off and covered by binding (ala Gibson) and if you're getting a complete re-fret at this time, you can request that the binding be leveled and that the new fret ends be laid over the binding (many luthiers prefer to do this anyway -- or if you're doing the re-fret yourself, you can follow this practice). If this is done, you gain significantly more fret space, and your new nut slots can also take advantage of this extra space.

[Pete Braccio]

My thinking was also in line with the last couple of posts. My first thought was "how much space do you have to play with on your current fretboard?". A new nut with strings spaced all the way to the "edge" of the frets might just do the trick (as stated above).

[ccravens]

You were correct; the title 1 3/16 is correct. My first post was a mistake!

The 1/16 seems to make a big difference for me; it makes the difference between me being able to fret cleanly without hitting/muting an adjacent string. I've got large fingers.

Increasing the nut spacing sounds like a really good option. It wouldn't require too much work or expense.

It would be for the Flatiron. The Girouard is already a wide nut. The Girouard is amazing, BTW.

[belbein]

Seems to me it's an issue of geography. I have an instrument in which the outside (G and E) strings are right on the edge of the fretboard. It's a professionally made and otherwise beautiful instrument. But in fretting, I sometimes end up with my strings slipping off the fretboard. Maybe I'm just sloppy fretter. Just sayin'.

[J.Albert]

My opinion only, but probably cheaper and easier to sell the mandolin with the narrow(er) neck and buy something with the neck width you want...

[Greg Mirken]

Possibly your string pairs are spaced farther apart than necessary. Even if the outer E and G strings stay where they are [in case you have no extra fret to take advantage of] just bringing the paired strings closer to each other can make it feel like there's a lot more room between strings, because there is!
/ / / / / / / / vs. // // // //

[That doesn't look as good as it does on my computer because of how this handles multiple spaces, but you get the idea]

[Bernie Daniel]

You were correct; the title 1 3/16 is correct. My first post was a mistake!

The 1/16 seems to make a big difference for me; it makes the difference between me being able to fret cleanly without hitting/muting an adjacent string. I've got large fingers.

Increasing the nut spacing sounds like a really good option. It wouldn't require too much work or expense.

It would be for the Flatiron. The Girouard is already a wide nut. The Girouard is amazing, BTW.

Agreed! That 1/16" does not seem like much but it makes a difference in how the mandolin plays for a lot of individuals including myself.