Does nut width really matter?

[Dan O'Sullivan]

I'm 70, have large hands to start width, and some of the swelling that seems to come to some in old age. I've been working out on a surprisingly good Savannah, and of course browsing for my next instrument. In the under- and around-1,000 category, there aren't many wide nut choices -- Breedlove Crossover, Godin (considerations about electric aside), or order one for the extra $40 from Big Muddy. The merits of those instruments aside, has anyone been completely happy - neck wise - with the extra 1/8 of an inch?

[fatt-dad]

I'm 6'-5" and also have extra large hands. I loved my Flatiron A5-1, which had a 1-1/8th nut. But, I got a mandolin with the 1-3/16ths nut and noticed the difference. . . preferred the difference!

My 1920 A3 has a 1-1/4" nut. I actually enjoy that a bit more!

All that said, I'm sure I could return to a 1-1/8th nut. I'd never even consider anything narrower; however.

f-d

[Bertram Henze]

Once I moved away from narrow to wide, I found I could never go back. I really feel at home with the 1 1/2 of my OM, and occasionally stretch out on my electric tenor guitar, which is a modified Traveller Ultralight guitar, i.e. 4 strings spread over the width of a 6-string guitar fretboard.
When I pick up my old Aria mandolin for a recording, I always curse the narrow fretboard thinking "WHY??"

[Mandoplumb]

For the most part, if you are a player and used to one width nut a sixteenth will seem like a foot. If you are just starting on mandolin in most cases any width will work. I'm not saying you won't like one over another but any one will become "right" if used consistently.

[CES]

Agree that you can feel the difference. I have relatively large hands, but my fingers aren't huge, so I can play both without issue (my RM-1 has a wider nut). I think I'd prefer the wider nut if I played it exclusively then tried to go back, but most of my mandos are 1 and 1/8, so not there yet. Played Collings MT regular and wide nuts back to back a few months ago, and the difference was noticeable but not pronounced, if that makes sense...

Fwiw, I think the string spacing and board radius make a bigger difference for me than nut width.

[themandocello]

I bought one of those Vietnamese mandolins from Amazon a few years ago and it has a very wide neck

[Jeff Hildreth]

Yes, nut width does matter.

NNS is the main reason I do not purchase otherwise acceptable mandolins... Eastman being an example. Unplayable.

Their nut width hovers around 1 1/16th to 1 1/8th. Absurd.

I talked to them about this for years and their repeated answer was.. we have no reason to change, we sell everyone we make. That curt reply offed me from the brand.

The minimum acceptable standard is 1 3/16ths with 1 1/4 being comfortable and playable. Note that some professional players prefer wider nuts.

How many people would not buy an Eastman if it was 1 3/16ths? .. I would suggest no one. How many would not buy an Eastman because they are weenie,, the answer is some. The executive decision at that point would be make them 1 3/16ths unless you are arrogant and dismissive or disrespectful of your buyers.


Taylor changed to 1 3/4 nut widths on the majority of their guitars.. perhaps not because of my own several contacts with them but because of the logic.. how many won't buy if X... some.. How many will not buy if Y. Simple.

Wider nuts make for more accuracte playing. That is one of the main reasons for 52 mm standard nut width on classical/flamenco guitars.


String spacing at the bridge is also critical. Wider (to a point) is better.

Here again Eastman. They call one of their guitars an OM. It is not an OM for many reasons.
1. Short scale NOT 25.4
2. Narrow bridge spacing around 2 3/32 to 2/18th.. OM is 2 1/4 to 2 5/16 ths
3. Nut width.. they say 1 3/4 but it isn't, it's less and they then cut the slots tight.

No clue, no respect
It is not an OM.


Wide nuts make sense.. narrow nuts make no sense.


(note my post count) : )

[nmiller]

I find that the cross section of the neck matters a lot more than the width of the nut specifically.

[farmerjones]

Simply put, what bothers me is a string too close to the side of the neck. Fretted or unfretted, it's not good when a string slips off the neck unintentionally.

[Michael Neverisky]

For linear single string playing, like fiddle tunes, I'm sure I could get by with 1 1/8. But that extra 1/16 is welcomed as I twist my fingers into Bach transcriptions or jazz chord.

[colorado_al]

The Sweet spot for me is 1 1/8 with a radiused fingerboard. I don't see much difference to a 1 3/16 and would not let either deter me from purchasing a mandolin that sounds good to me. I will not buy one with a flat fingerboard again. I have several times and couldn't really get used to it.

[pops1]

I find that the cross section of the neck matters a lot more than the width of the nut specifically.

I am the same, I have wider necked mandolins, if the neck is slim in depth I don't notice the extra width. If the neck is deeper I notice it immediately. Neck depth for me is more important than nut width.

[Dan O'Sullivan]

This is one reason I'm asking the question. My guitars are a nylon - 2"+ - and a steel - 1.72. I have found some guitars, life Fender 'Casters, to be unplayable, for me. As well as the nylon "hybrids" with narrower than classical widths; can't get a clean shot at the strings even though technically they're wider than the steel. The thicker strings end up too close together.

[frecky]

Yes it does, depending are your fingers and hand. I have shorter fingers and a 12.5 size ring finger. I started playing at 1 1/8" for about a year. My instructor suggested a wide neck and I bought a whopping 1 1/4" beast. A few years later I picked up a sweet little gal with a 1 5/16". The latest is my go to almost everytime, and she fits like a glove. An 1/8" can make the difference as far as I am concerned.

D-

[Charlie Bernstein]

You'll probably like the wider nut. Lots of guitar transplants appreciate it. The extra $40 for a Big Muddy sounds well worth it.

[ccravens]

You'll probably like the wider nut. Lots of guitar transplants appreciate it. The extra $40 for a Big Muddy sounds well worth it.

Agree to this good advice.

[foldedpath]

Wider nuts make for more accuracte playing. That is one of the main reasons for 52 mm standard nut width on classical/flamenco guitars.

I agree about guitars. I've had custom acoustic and electric guitars made with 1 7/8" nuts. My current steel string acoustic guitar has a 1 13/16" nut. But a mandolin isn't a guitar. To the extent that a wider nut means wider spacing between the string courses, it can make some mando-specific techniques more difficult.

For example, a very useful trick is to fret two adjacent string courses with a single fingertip, like the "A modal" chord of 2200, with the 2nd fret G and D strings held down with the index fingertip. This frees up the other fingers for extensions or chord-melody. There are many places along the fretboard where that idea can be used, if your fingertip is shaped for it (not everyone can do this).

The pitch gap between strings due to tuning in 5ths can make for some big stretches on chord shapes, and not just for the iconic Bluegrass G chord. Keeping the string courses a little closer together helps here too. Of course a wide nut doesn't necessarily mean wider spacing of the string courses, but it usually does, and it can get in the way of these mando-specific techniques.

Like many who transitioned from guitar to mandolin, I didn't realize this for a couple of years, until I discovered some tricks like that fingertip chording. It made me realize that fiddle technique was more relevant than some of the techniques I knew from guitar playing.

[George Henry]

I have a Flatiron Performer A with a neck small in both width and depth. My Lafferty A had a neck slightly wider and deeper. I really notice the difference. The Flatiron would be downright aggravating if it didn't sound so good!

My guitars have similar differences. My Breedlove has 1.75" nut. It is cramped compared to my Gallagher Custom with it's 2" nut, which gives me plenty of room and plays like a dream. I have average hands and skinny fingers (10.5 ring size).

[Michael Neverisky]

Excellent points made by foldedpath. I will note, however, that nut width and spacing between unison strings can be considered independently... if the nut is wide enough!

[Jeff Hildreth]

BTW I started playing mandolin and guitar the same year, 1961. And soon learned about nut and string spacing.

I am not suggesting that the period of time I have been playing translates to any skill level. There were lots of stops and starts over the years... and then there is aptitude and skill and all that. Always a beginners perspective.

I have a 1929 Stromberg-Voisinet 12 fretter.. 1 7/8ths nut width.. they knew what they were doing.

My preference in guitars is 1 13/16ths to 1 7/8ths with 1 3/4 being the minimum acceptable width.

With mandolins 1/3/16ths is a squeak.

And I do agree with the fingerboard curvature and neck shape.. it can make a difference but there is no substitute of space.

I have large but not abnormally large hands. no fat fingers.

On my classicals and my flamenco 54 mm, 2mm wider than standard nut width.

Keep in mind that Martin Corp went from 1 3/4 nut width to 1 11/16ths in late 1939 up to 1939 they had adult width nuts. ..my 1939 00-17 had a 1 3/4 nut.



Only in recent years did they go back to 1 3/4 on many of their guitars, of course a real OM always had 1 3/4.

[fatt-dad]

. . . and one more thing on nut width. . .

We are taking a one-dimensional measurement, i.e., nut width, to modify a two-dimensional aspect, neck profile. It's like a square. You double the edge, but you quadruple the area. So, a 5% increase in nut width has a much larger increase in the cross-section at the nut.

f-d

[Dan O'Sullivan]

. . . and one more thing on nut width. . .

We are taking a one-dimensional measurement, i.e., nut width, to modify a two-dimensional aspect, neck profile. It's like a square. You double the edge, but you quadruple the area. So, a 5% increase in nut width has a much larger increase in the cross-section at the nut.

f-d

That's good too.

[Dan O'Sullivan]

Agree to this good advice.

You and Charlie beat it out of me: that's at the top of the list. One of the things I'll decide after I move to my destination and start jamming is whether I think I need to have a pickup pre-installed. In the meantime I'll practice enough to be able to show you-know-who I can play it right out of the box. You-know-who doesn't understand why I have TWO fishing rods.

[sblock]

Yes, nut width does matter.

NNS is the main reason I do not purchase otherwise acceptable mandolins... Eastman being an example. Unplayable.

Their nut width hovers around 1 1/16th to 1 1/8th. Absurd.

I talked to them about this for years and their repeated answer was.. we have no reason to change, we sell everyone we make. That curt reply offed me from the brand.

The minimum acceptable standard is 1 3/16ths with 1 1/4 being comfortable and playable. Note that some professional players prefer wider nuts.

How many people would not buy an Eastman if it was 1 3/16ths? .. I would suggest no one. How many would not buy an Eastman because they are weenie,, the answer is some. The executive decision at that point would be make them 1 3/16ths unless you are arrogant and dismissive or disrespectful of your buyers.


Taylor changed to 1 3/4 nut widths on the majority of their guitars.. perhaps not because of my own several contacts with them but because of the logic.. how many won't buy if X... some.. How many will not buy if Y. Simple.

Wider nuts make for more accuracte playing. That is one of the main reasons for 52 mm standard nut width on classical/flamenco guitars.


String spacing at the bridge is also critical. Wider (to a point) is better.

Here again Eastman. They call one of their guitars an OM. It is not an OM for many reasons.
1. Short scale NOT 25.4
2. Narrow bridge spacing around 2 3/32 to 2/18th.. OM is 2 1/4 to 2 5/16 ths
3. Nut width.. they say 1 3/4 but it isn't, it's less and they then cut the slots tight.

No clue, no respect
It is not an OM.


Wide nuts make sense.. narrow nuts make no sense.


(note my post count) : )

Your position on this topic is rather extreme, and it demonstrates gross intolerance. Many of us -- and perhaps most of us? -- are fully capable of adjusting to playing either a so-called "standard" or "wide nut" mandolin without great difficulty, often after a few minutes of playing. Just because you are unable to do so is no reason to categorically dismiss the widespread use of standard-width nuts, which are preferred by a good many players. The legendary Gibson F5's signed by Lloyd Loar, often held up as the paragon of mandolins, all came with standard-width nuts, between 1" and 1-1/8" wide. It is certainly true that some folks, particularly those transitioning to mandolin from the guitar, often show a preference for wider nuts. But others, particularly those transitioning from violin, often show a preference for standard-width nuts. Those with big hands or pudgy fingers might prefer wide nuts. But those with small hands or slender fingers might prefer standard-width nuts. Your categorical assertion that "wide nuts make sense.. narrow nuts make no sense" is simply untrue on its face. Standard-width nuts make perfect sense to a great many of us, I can assure you! And look at all the great players who are fortunate enough to own and play Lloyd Loar F5's with standard-width nuts. These don't seem to impede their playing!

These days, many of the top-end luthiers will be very happy to build you a custom mandolin with whatever size nut you prefer. And some of the larger-scale makers provide a choice of nut widths in their instruments, as well. They do this to serve a market. If there were no market for standard-width nuts (ah, but there is!) then companies like Eastman would not make these. But I wish you would please stop complaining in these pages, and stop dismissing standard-sized nuts -- which some of us actually like! It is equally silly to try to "define" an octave mandolin based on your own personal preferences for scale length, bridge spacing, and nut width! Sorry, but this type of behavior borders on the ridiculous: you do not get to define what an OM is, or is not. There are plenty of terrific, short-scale octave mandolins with narrower nuts out there, and folks with smaller hands really appreciate the existence of these. It's hard enough to make the stretches on an octave mandolin, thank you, and the short scale really helps.

Finally, it's not just the nut width that matters. Or the string spacing, for that matter. Other important considerations for playability include (1) whether the fingerboard is flat or radiused, and (2) the profile of the neck. You need to accept that other players may not happen to share your personal preferences on these, either!

Different strokes for different folks. Accept more; tolerate more. Adapt! Understand that your preferences may not be the same as mine.

[Mandoplumb]

Sblock I couldn't have said it better!!