Earvana nut...I don't get it

[John Suitcase]

Looks to me like it is making it so that as you go down from the 12th toward to nut, the notes get slightly flatter. Adjusting the saddle is half of the equation, but as you go down the neck, notes start to get a little sharp. This compensates for that, so that you're in tune in every position. More of a problem on acoustic guitars that don't have adjustable saddles, of course.

[Musiclab]

what John said is essentially right, where the Earvana makes a big difference is tuning in the first position. I do think they work well on electrics with adjustable
saddles. I have them on 2 guitars, a tele and a strat, both play more in tune with the Earvana than they did before

[AnnihilationRob]

Ah I think I get it now, and I'm considering getting one of these installed. Are you guys getting yours done by one of the "earvana techs" listed on the site or just a local luthier you know is good?

[Musiclab]

Originally Posted by AnnihilationRob

Ah I think I get it now, and I'm considering getting one of these installed. Are you guys getting yours done by one of the "earvana techs" listed on the site or just a local luthier you know is good?

I had a local luthier do it, the other nice thing is if you ever wanted to go back to the original style nut, installing the earvana wont screw up your guitar like the Feiten will

[Hot Vibrato]

Most electric guitar players use relatively light strings. Of course, light strings are more flexible. When you fret a note, you're also bending it downward slightly so that it touches the fret. If you use any more pressure than is absolutely necessary, the note goes sharp. This phenomenon is most prevalent on the G-string near the nut. Slightly less so on the B-string, and to varying degrees on the others. This problem is compounded by the inherent flexibility of lighter strings. The traditional mathematical formula for calculating fret placement does not take any of this into account, including the fact that you're bending the string downward slightly so that it contacts the fret.

The Earvana nut was designed to compensate for the issues mentioned above. This concept is similar to how the Buzz Feiten tuning system works (at least at the nut). With the Feiten system, you actually move the leading edge of the nut forward slightly. Feiten has a patent on this concept, although he did not invent it. The first mention of this concept that I've seen is in a book called "The Acoustic Guitar" by Don Teeter, which was first published in the 70's.

The tuning problems that are associated with the nut address a completely different set of issues than the bridge saddle intonation adjustment. Intonation problems that are caused by incorrect saddle placement manifest themselves when playing higher up the neck - If the saddle is too far forward (toward the nut), the fretted notes are too sharp; if the saddle is too far back, the fretted notes are too flat.

[bencahill]

Most electric guitar players use relatively light strings. Of course, light strings are more flexible. When you fret a note, you're also bending it downward slightly so that it touches the fret. If you use any more pressure than is absolutely necessary, the note goes sharp. This phenomenon is most prevalent on the G-string near the nut. Slightly less so on the B-string, and to varying degrees on the others.

No. You SHOULD compensate for intonation issues by adjusting your touch. Obviously, where a note is sharp at it's equilibrium position this is more difficult. But intoning notes properly is something that is essential to being a competent guitarist.

The guitar is not truly equally tempered. The point of such systems is to spread the temperament issues across all keys. E.g. so that the G on the high E string functions equally as well as the 3rd in a Ebmaj and as the 5th in a Cmin. (and so on and so forth for all notes and intervals)

Intonation problems that are caused by incorrect saddle placement manifest themselves when playing higher up the neck

Not really, incorrect saddle placement will affect the intonation as a function of how far the fretted octave (12th fret) is from the octave harmonic.

[Hot Vibrato]

Originally Posted by bencahill

No. You SHOULD compensate for intonation issues by adjusting your touch. Obviously, where a note is sharp at it's equilibrium position this is more difficult. But intoning notes properly is something that is essential to being a competent guitarist.

The guitar is not truly equally tempered. The point of such systems is to spread the temperament issues across all keys. E.g. so that the G on the high E string functions equally as well as the 3rd in a Ebmaj and as the 5th in a Cmin. (and so on and so forth for all notes and intervals)


Not really, incorrect saddle placement will affect the intonation as a function of how far the fretted octave (12th fret) is from the octave harmonic.

I agree that proper technique is essential for good intonation. Most players' intonation problems (assuming they're playing a well adjusted guitar) can be solved by improving their technique.

Your statement regarding saddle placement is indeed correct, but in no way does it contradict mine. If you don't believe what I said, however, I recommend a simple experiment:

On an electric guitar or bass, move one of the saddles toward the nut so that it intonates sharp at the twelfth fret. Plug it into a strobe tuner. Starting at say the third fret, check the tuning on that note. Check the tuning of the note on the fourth fret, and continue up the neck until you run out of frets. You will see that the higher up the neck you play, the more the note deviates from its intended pitch.

With the Feiton system, intonation at the twelfth fret, as well as the open string's pitch is offset on each string by varying amounts to compensate for the inherent tuning inaccuracies associated with the fretboard, as well as the tuning inaccuracies that are inherent in the western scale. His system is based largely on the equal temperament system that has been in use by piano tuners for centuries.

The Op's question was in reference to the Earvana nut. The best explanation of that system that I have read so far was an article written by Greg Byers published in American Lutherie #47 1996. The back issue is available from The Guild of American Luthiers, and is reprinted in their Big Red Book of American Lutherie vol 4.

In Byers' article, which is based on the compiled results of numerous experiments, he explains how he came up with a design that looks a lot like the Earvana nut.

Among many other things, he explains, in eloquent mathematical terms, what I was attempting to describe in layman's terms - that (for the reasons that I've stated) the fretted notes on the G-string just want to be somewhat sharp, and advancing the nut forward compensates for the difference in pitch. The B-string is is also prone to this issue, but to a lesser degree, so the position of the nut is moved forward slightly less on that string. And, the other stings suffer from the same problem to varying degrees, and the nut is compensated accordingly.

My statements in my previous post are perhaps over-simplified, but are by no means inaccurate, as far as I can ascertain from the material that I've read on the subject. I love to read about this stuff, so if you can recommend any reading material that will enlighten me further on this subject, I'd sure appreciate it.

[drbob1]

Actually, the first use of this concept predates the 70s by a bit. There was a brand of guitar, Microfrets, that had an adjustable nut just on the G string-it was able to slight forward about 1/8th of an inch IIRC. This would have started in the late 60s. Please see:

Microfrets History

[Hot Vibrato]

Originally Posted by drbob1

Actually, the first use of this concept predates the 70s by a bit. There was a brand of guitar, Microfrets, that had an adjustable nut just on the G string-it was able to slight forward about 1/8th of an inch IIRC. This would have started in the late 60s. Please see:

Microfrets History

Cool! I've never seen or heard of Microfrets guitars. Their designs were way ahead of their time - wireless transmitters and locking bridge saddles? In the 60's? It took the rest of the world a lot of years before they caught on to those concepts. Thanks for sharing!

[bencahill]

How about this system?
Anyone tried it? How does bending work?
Nice reply Hot Vibrato, I'll check out that article.

[Sotsirc]

Originally Posted by bencahill

How about this system?
Anyone tried it? How does bending work?
Nice reply Hot Vibrato, I'll check out that article.

I tried them, really nice. Bending works fine, if there's a slight difference I think you compensate for it rather quickly. The funny thing is, there are two different tunings (fret systems), one is an equal tempered one (ie it perfects what is supposed to be done on guitars and pianos, equal distance in frequency between half notes); the other one is more towards the natural tone scale. I thought it was a given that people preferred the equal tempered one. But no, the majority bought the one that tended towards the natural tone scale.

You can really hear the different characters of the keys, an A flat has a lot more color and bite than a G for instance. The octaves sound really clean still.

I'm not associated to that company in any way BTW, just visited them once; got to see the whole process of making the necks.

It's pretty crazy when you think of the natural tone scale, take the tone A flat, it differs 38 cents between a E major chord and an F minor. If that makes sense.

[drbob1]

If you want to hear this in action, listen to the difference between barbershop and a traditional "sing along to the piano" choir. Barbershop usually ends up using natural tones and the choirs use just temperment and they sound completely different. After so many years of piano based music, babershop sounds out of tune to me...

The problem with the newer intonation systems for guitar is that, while they sound great on their own, put them in a band context and things get weird. Buzz Feiten is already a problem if the whole band doesn't use it, but those modified frets played against a bass with straight frets and a piano, that's going to sound pretty weird.

As to Microfrets, I owned a series 1 at one point (the big aluminum M had fallen off leaving a shadow on the top, and this one was pre-tremelo). It was a decent enough guitar, but like so many good ideas, the implementation was just OK. It's not just that guitarists are conservative, sometimes the cool new stuff is just 1/2 baked! To give an idea, it sounded a little like a semi-hollow tele without the rock solid construction.

[tstrahle]

It's certainly cheaper (and seems more precise) than the Feiten System I have on my main strat.

[ds11]

Originally Posted by drbob1

If you want to hear this in action, listen to the difference between barbershop and a traditional "sing along to the piano" choir. Barbershop usually ends up using natural tones and the choirs use just temperment and they sound completely different. After so many years of piano based music, babershop sounds out of tune to me...

The problem with the newer intonation systems for guitar is that, while they sound great on their own, put them in a band context and things get weird. Buzz Feiten is already a problem if the whole band doesn't use it, but those modified frets played against a bass with straight frets and a piano, that's going to sound pretty weird.

As to Microfrets, I owned a series 1 at one point (the big aluminum M had fallen off leaving a shadow on the top, and this one was pre-tremelo). It was a decent enough guitar, but like so many good ideas, the implementation was just OK. It's not just that guitarists are conservative, sometimes the cool new stuff is just 1/2 baked! To give an idea, it sounded a little like a semi-hollow tele without the rock solid construction.

It'll sound weird against a piano?? How so? I though the point is to tune each fretted note perfectly so it would line up to a piano perfectly..

[Hot Vibrato]

Originally Posted by Sotsirc

I'm not associated to that company in any way BTW, just visited them once; got to see the whole process of making the necks.

I've re-fretted more guitars than I could ever count, but I'm completely stumped as to how that design could be implemented. How do they install those crazy looking frets? Is the cross section of the fret similar to that of a traditional fret-wire (sort of T -shaped), or is it something different? I've got a mental image of some dude bending each individual fret with pliers. That would take forever, and the result would be likely to look pretty sloppy. How do they do it?

[Sotsirc]

Originally Posted by Hot Vibrato

I've re-fretted more guitars than I could ever count, but I'm completely stumped as to how that design could be implemented. How do they install those crazy looking frets? Is the cross section of the fret similar to that of a traditional fret-wire (sort of T -shaped), or is it something different? I've got a mental image of some dude bending each individual fret with pliers. That would take forever, and the result would be likely to look pretty sloppy. How do they do it?

They had tiny pieces of frets, one piece for each string. He put every piece in place by listening to the pitch. He used some sort of machine to make it into one single fret. Can't remember if the little pieces were used for the final version or just for a model. This was perhaps five or six years ago and I was there as a gitarrist, helping out a journalist friend of mine. I knew nothing about how to build a guitar neck so I remember more about the philosophy than the technical stuff. Sorry.

[Hot Vibrato]

Originally Posted by Sotsirc

They had tiny pieces of frets, one piece for each string. He put every piece in place by listening to the pitch. He used some sort of machine to make it into one single fret. Can't remember if the little pieces were used for the final version or just for a model. This was perhaps five or six years ago and I was there as a gitarrist, helping out a journalist friend of mine. I knew nothing about how to build a guitar neck so I remember more about the philosophy than the technical stuff. Sorry.

It sure is an interesting concept. However, the earvana nut seems to be a more logical solution than those wavy frets. I'd love to see and play one though.

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by bencahill

No. You SHOULD compensate for intonation issues by adjusting your touch. Obviously, where a note is sharp at it's equilibrium position this is more difficult. But intoning notes properly is something that is essential to being a competent guitarist.

The guitar is not truly equally tempered. The point of such systems is to spread the temperament issues across all keys. E.g. so that the G on the high E string functions equally as well as the 3rd in a Ebmaj and as the 5th in a Cmin. (and so on and so forth for all notes and intervals)


Not really, incorrect saddle placement will affect the intonation as a function of how far the fretted octave (12th fret) is from the octave harmonic.

I think people may get confused here.

Guitars are generally designed to be equally tempered. But the conventional 12 Tone Equal Temperament system, by its very nature, means that all the intervals (except octaves) will be somewhat-to-a-fair amount out of tune. This is how it is SUPPOSED to be.

One can design a temperament that has all mathematically accurate, in-tune intervals, but then he will not be able to modulate or change keys without a serious intonation train wreck.

So we have the 12 TET system (that defines the basic tuning for pianos, guitars, the xylo family, etc) which provides a workable set of compromises.

That means that, while we can't get away from beat tones in 12TET triads, we CAN modulate and change keys fluidly.


There is also another factor which affects our intonation systems for metal string instruments: inharmonicity. That means that, because of the physical properties of metal strings when they are in oscillation, a length precisely half the length of another similar string (or a string fretted to half its effective resonating length) will not be precisely an octave higher.

And that is where stretch tuning comes in. This is why steel-string guitars almost always have compensated saddles. And, if I'm understanding the thinking behind these compensated nut/saddle intonation systems, they seem to be attempting to further address that inharmonicity. That said, their marketing materials often sound like utter nonsense and it's hard to make out what their thinking really is.


(Of course, all the above assumes a theoretically 'perfect' instrument. In the real world, there are a number of factors that drag an instrument and its current string set away from that ideal.)

[Hot Vibrato]

Originally Posted by theblue1

...That said, their marketing materials often sound like utter nonsense and it's hard to make out what their thinking really is.

I think it's because it's easier to have average guitar player to fall prey to marketing hype, as opposed to educating them properly on the subject at hand. It is indeed a complicated subject (check out the American Lutherie article that I've cited in my previous post). Asking the layman to understand the theory behind the design of the product would require a relatively complex mathematical explanation. I'm afraid the effort would be lost on the average guitar player. Therefore it's easier to dazzle them with marketing hype and buzz-words, even if it is all completely meaningless.

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by Hot Vibrato

I think it's because it's easier to have average guitar player to fall prey to marketing hype, as opposed to educating them properly on the subject at hand. It is indeed a complicated subject (check out the American Lutherie article that I've cited in my previous post). Asking the layman to understand the theory behind the design of the product would require a relatively complex mathematical explanation. I'm afraid the effort would be lost on the average guitar player. Therefore it's easier to dazzle them with marketing hype and buzz-words, even if it is all completely meaningless.

You're probably right, of course.

Heck, it certainly twists my head up into tiny knots at times.


I'd had people try to explain the broad points of equal temperament more than a couple times before I broke down and tried to find out more about it. But, you know, before the internet, that was the kind of thing you pretty much had to go to a big university library for.

I knew something about it, but it wasn't until the 90s that I could really start getting a grip on how it affects us. And, for a while, I felt like 12TET was almost a 'conspiracy'... I'd put my guitar in an open chord and really lock it in, harmonically, as close to 'Just' intervals as I could -- and then I'd play a fretted chord to predictably wolfish results and say, "See! 12TET -- it's totally out of tune!"

And, on one level, that's pretty true -- but what it took me a while -- and a whole lot of Harry Partch and Prent Rogers listening -- to realize was that, as 'perfect' as the intervals sound in Just intonation, the road-blocks* to modulation were, mostly, a deal killer when trying to work with conventional fixed temperament instruments. (Which started me on an exploration of things like the Justonics dynamic intonation system for keyboard synths.)

Fascinating topic with dang few 'easy' answers.


*You can't write road blocks as one word on this BB or the middle turns to asterisks: ro*******s. I guess because of the name of the ad-blocking software?