Acousticraft Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 (edited) I have noticed that with a pre-slotted radiused fingerboard getting the intonation correct is a problem. Its easy to get the twelfth fret an octave above the open string but noticeably on the wound & B strings they play sharp at the first three frets or so. That means all the normal open chords are sharp as well. I know usually .5mm is taken off the nut end of the fingerboard to try and compensate for this. This means the open string length is fractionally incorrect. I have looked at those compensated nuts they make but another idea which I had thought about is actually compensating the frets from their mathematical positions. I found this excellent article that talks about just this and has a calculator to tell you where fret placement should be. I know the guitar is a tempered scale and will never be perfectly in tune all over but it would be nice to have more in-tune open chords. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/coleman005/intonati.htm This way the fingerboard end is not shortened just the fret placements. Has anyone tried this? Edited January 28, 2008 by Acousticraft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanthus Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 I think I've seen a guitar with compensated frets for each string. Very crooked, strange looking thing it was. I know it's not exactly what this article (which is interesting too, btw) is talking about, but it sparked the idea. I personally feel like a normally tuned open chord is pleasing to the ear. A SMALL sharp/flat here or there adds character, I think. Then again, I play most of the jangly stuff on an acoustic, my electrics are basically reserved for playing stuff with distortion. $35 for an Earvana isn't a bad investment, though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalwarrior Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 I'm going to have an Earvana nut on my current build. I've never tried a compensated nut before but I'm hoping I installed it in the right place so I don't make it sound even more out of tune than a regular guitar at the first few frets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickguard Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 My take on all of this is that it's missing the point: part of what a guitar is has to do with the compromise between the instrument and 'perfect' tuning. Which is probably true for all instruments. It seems to me by eliminating the discrepancies in tuning, you eliminate a lot of what makes a guitar interesting to hear and play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acousticraft Posted January 28, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 I be keen to hear your thoughts about it when its finished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al heeley Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 My take on all of this is that it's missing the point: part of what a guitar is has to do with the compromise between the instrument and 'perfect' tuning. Which is probably true for all instruments. It seems to me by eliminating the discrepancies in tuning, you eliminate a lot of what makes a guitar interesting to hear and play.I would disagree it takes away the 'interest' - to me there's a lot of interest outside of the compromise of tuning and intonation issues. For me it just represents an improved compromise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryovanni Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 My take on all of this is that it's missing the point: part of what a guitar is has to do with the compromise between the instrument and 'perfect' tuning. Which is probably true for all instruments. It seems to me by eliminating the discrepancies in tuning, you eliminate a lot of what makes a guitar interesting to hear and play.I would disagree it takes away the 'interest' - to me there's a lot of interest outside of the compromise of tuning and intonation issues. For me it just represents an improved compromise. I think Al really hit the nail on the head. An "improvement" in accuracy is not a bad thing. The real question is going to be are you actually "improving" your accuracy with your modifications. Questions that should be asked or considerations for things such as limiting to a fixed string guage, optimizing for a given key, limiting the range of action and such are often not part of the equation for most methods of compensation. Why? because it shows that in order to "improve" you must limit variables (and different players have different preferences). The classic method of compensation at the bridge is not really that bad (as Mick points out people are used to it, and like it). I think it is cool to dig in and understand the trade offs and method you choose to compensate, but before making a modification to a pretty acceptable system(to most), fully understand what trades and restrictions you are putting into effect. It is very important to recognize you will not be creating a "new" system of compensation, or that your method is "modern". These methods have been adjusted and tweeked for 100's of years on stringed instruments, by people who knew there stuff inside and out. When you come up to speed you are only catching up with what they fully understood. That is just my take FWIW. Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwedishLuthier Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 I think I've seen a guitar with compensated frets for each string. Very crooked, strange looking thing it was. That’ll be the TrueTemperament system. Invented by a countryman of mine. Well not really invented. The Frank Gambale Yamaha model (this is from the 80-is folks!) had some crocked frets for the first positions. Anyway: http://www.truetemperament.com/ I'm going to have an Earvana nut on my current build. I've never tried a compensated nut before but I'm hoping I installed it in the right place It looks like you have placed an OEM Earvana nit into the ordinary nut slot in a standard Fender board. If so, you are in the wrong place. The idea is to move the breaking point of the nut towards the bridge. If you place an OEM nut in the ordinary nut slot you will move the breaking point away from the bridge. I have installed quite a few Earvana nuts and I think that you should wait for the Floyd Rose drop in retrofit nut. It’s not out yet. Out soon. And they said that like two years ago too… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanthus Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 Thanks, Peter! That's exactly the site I was thinking of. Unbelievably frightening I would hate to try and do bends on a fretboard like that, hahaha. The videos are pretty amazing, though. I haven't seen them before. The Floyd retrofit nut is enticing too, but we all know it's just a big marketing smokescreen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGW Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 SwedishLuthier is right, you may have it located wrong. The principal of this system moves the nut point closer to the bridge by shortening the first fret. I put an Earvana retrofit one on my Les Paul and like it a lot. It has a small piece in the nut position and then another piece on top that slides over the end of the fretboard to shorten the distance. On my first real build I made my own by carving a piece of Trem-nut material. I experiemented with the placement by putting small pieces of wood under the strings as a temperary nut position and then carved the nut to match. Under this method, I cut 3mm off the end of the fingerboard at the first fret. I like it a lot; all notes are in tune. You can see a bit of the basic shape in the main photo: http://projectguitar.ibforums.com/index.ph...c=27790&hl= Another hint is that the high E string is usually close to the length of the theoretical scale length. From the picture of your nut, you can see that the high E is set back too far. You can get the Earvana type that mounts in the slot and then slides out onto the fretboard. Try: https://www.earvana.com/ and look for the "Earvana Retrofit Nut - Fender Style" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acousticraft Posted January 29, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 Yes I agree that the High E break over point on the Earvana nut should be on scale length. Obviously the Earvana nuts are a compromise as the action, scale length and string gauge /brand is going to change things from one guitar to another. But I guess its a step in the right direction. I thought about not cutting the first three fret slots and stringing the guitar and intonate at the twelfth fret and use a piece of wire to figure where the frets should be to be in tune and mark each side of the wire. I guess you would end up with those crooked frets if you did that. Very hard to cut slots like that without a CNC machine as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalwarrior Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 I'm going to have an Earvana nut on my current build. I've never tried a compensated nut before but I'm hoping I installed it in the right place It looks like you have placed an OEM Earvana nit into the ordinary nut slot in a standard Fender board. If so, you are in the wrong place. The idea is to move the breaking point of the nut towards the bridge. If you place an OEM nut in the ordinary nut slot you will move the breaking point away from the bridge. I have installed quite a few Earvana nuts and I think that you should wait for the Floyd Rose drop in retrofit nut. It’s not out yet. Out soon. And they said that like two years ago too… That is actually a StewMac board, and if I remember correctly the nut slot was so thin I had to widen it to fit the earvana, and I widened it towards the bridge direction. I think I even emailed the people at Earvana to make sure I went forward the right amount. That was a while ago though, and now you have all got me second guessing whether I did it right or not after all. Hopefully I'll have my spray equipment set up to finish it on the weekend and then I'll be ready to set it up and try it out. I thought about not cutting the first three fret slots and stringing the guitar and intonate at the twelfth fret and use a piece of wire to figure where the frets should be to be in tune and mark each side of the wire. I guess you would end up with those crooked frets if you did that. Very hard to cut slots like that without a CNC machine as well. I have seen where there is a bend just around the B string. What they do is cut off the tang where it is bent then just use a straight slot for the non bent part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwedishLuthier Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 That is actually a StewMac board, and if I remember correctly the nut slot was so thin I had to widen it to fit the earvana, and I widened it towards the bridge direction. I think I even emailed the people at Earvana to make sure I went forward the right amount. That was a while ago though, and now you have all got me second guessing whether I did it right or not after all. Well, then you have it covered. Lets hope everything works out for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.