Has anyone tried this "eNut"?

[quarry]

I was wondering if anyone has checked this out:

www.monteallums.com/Stretch_Tuning_DW.html
NOTE: you may need to scroll down to get all the info...

Looks like a poor-man's Buzz Feiten Tuning System...

I actually ordered one (and it has arrived), but I'm not done building the guitar I'm gonna put it on. Just wanted to know what everyone thought...

[sumgai]

quarry,

I only see three links, nothing else. Those links go to an image gallery of a Carvin, an mp3 file of an Xmas song, and an image of a graph showing response curves for different capacitor values.

Am I missing something here?


sumgai

[quarry]

Thank you, Sumgai, for pointing out my goof...

It has been corrected, or you can follow the link here:

www.monteallums.com/Stretch_Tuning_DW.html

That's what I get for not proofing my posts...

[sumgai]

quarry,

Looks good (thanks for the repair job). I'd have to say, this is probably a bit more slick than the Feiten method, and it costs a lot less. I've always been a fan of the zero fret system, so this might be a good thing.

The installation page (linked in the same "box" as the eNut kits, etc.) is loaded with good info, I recommend it as good basic reading for everyone who isn't a luthier.

Thanks for lead, I'm going to take this under serious advisement.



sumgai

[quarry]

Sum,

As I mentioned, I bought one of the "kits" (the bone type) which includes the exacto saw blade. I also purchased the "nut slotting tool" which is actually a torch tip cleaner... but it seems like it should do the job nicely.

I found this site while I was looking for some shielding material. I found this:
www.monteallums.com/Shielding.html

I also purchased 2 12" x 12" adhesive backed copper foil sheets.

I have yet to install any of these items, cuz my "project guitar" is currently in the "curing" stage (I just gave it a poor-man's burst lacquer finish). Next month I begin the wet sanding and polishing. Then I can begin adding the goodies mentioned above!

[sumgai]

quarry,

Unless you live in Canuckistan, then you don't need to wait for months to get lacquer to "cure". Average home temp and humidy levels below the 48th Parallel are sufficient to get 99.9% of all curing done in 7 to 10 days, usually less. This is pretty much good for all year, but in the summer months, it probably goes a little quicker.

Check out www.electricguitarhandbook.com for more details. (Nice site for lots of other stuff, too.


in re: that eNut thing, if you don't mind, I'll let you run with the ball for awhile, and see if you make it to the goal line. Pictures would be a good thing, hint hint.

HTH


sumgai

[mlrpa]

ummmm, that enut thingy doesn't seem to make sense to me.
If it's sharp at the third fret, shouldn't you FLATTEN it? (ie: move it back)

[quarry]

Sum,

Actually, I agree that lacquer should cure in a reasonably short time... This body has about 10 coats of clear on it, and I want to be sure its good before sanding.

The notion that it should cure for 6 weeks or more came from an ebook I purchased called "How to Create a Factory Guitar Finish With Just a Couple of Spray Cans!"

Its by John Gleneicki, who also has a column in "Guitar World" about painting guitars.

There are several things I disagree with him on - for instance, he claims that Krylon spray paints are lacquer-based paints. While they behave similarly (they use solvents, and each coat does slightly "melt" into the last), they contain no lacquer.

Anyway - I have a week's vacation in July, and I've earmarked that as my "finish the guitar" time...

I purchased some overwound pickups from Guitar Fetish for $15!
Yeah - I'm going "all out" on this one! But I am having fun!

I should have some pix to share (provided I don't make a mess of the entire deal!)...

[jester700]

mlrpa said:

ummmm, that enut thingy doesn't seem to make sense to me.
If it's sharp at the third fret, shouldn't you FLATTEN it? (ie: move it back)

No, because since it terminates closer to the bridge, you *loosen* the string so the open string rings in tune. This makes the third fret note flatter than it was before.

[monradon]

I have to find my old books but this looks just like what they used to call I think a false fret on guitars years ago and for some reason the style went out but going to have to find where I saw it they used to be on higher end guitars

[Runewalker]

Not to be contrarian, but I can't concieve of why the enut, if it makes any differeence at all, it would have any affect on a freted note. At that point everything between the freted note and the nut is rendered null. The only thing being heard is between the fret and the bridge.

I've seen Monte's shipment and it just looks like a way to intonate, except from the nut. Then it would only affect the open strings. He does however, include what is essentially a 'tempered tuning" system, with small cents variantion from the normal cps of a tone (eg, 440 for A, lowered or raised a couple of cents), and that does seem to make sense.

I had a friend put it on an uncooperative Ibanez, and it helped --- the open string, and had no effect on the prob when a note was fretted. String length is string lenth, or as our favorite beat poet, CK would say:

"string length is...."








[Notice I did put the word "string" in.]

[sumgai]

Rune,

I see that you're being careful, adding that "string added on purpose" was a good thing! ;D

In point of fact, it would seem (stress the "seem") that some readers here have forgotten that if you install one of these Earvana or Feiten thingies, you do change the placement of the string's endpoints, but not the overall length, nor the string's tension. This has the effect of changing all of the frets' relationship with the bridge endpoint.

After moving the string's endpoint at the nut, you re-tune the string, and re-intonate it at the bridge. At this point, if you moved the nut endpoint towards the bridge, you probably also moved the bridge saddle back from the fretboard a tiny bit. You have effectively moved every fret farther away from the bridge, haven't you? You just moved each fret "flat" in relation to the bridge saddle. Ditto for the string who's nut endpoint moved in the opposite direction. When the installation, setting up and tuning are all done, some strings will have frets that are sharp compared to the bridge, and some will have frets that are flat by comparison. Does anyone really believe that this is better than a straight-across nut? I'd sure like to see some hard-and-fast proof, not just conjecture. Oh, wait, that's what this thread is all about, isn't it? Well, count me in as 'waiting for the pudding'.

As far as I can tell, a very large majority of all the guitarists out there that try this go back to a standard nut, usually before the first set of strings goes TU. This is because all they've really done is shift the tuning compromises to different locations along the fretboard. In most instances, these shifts are worse than the original problem. Admittedly, not in all cases, but as delivered by the factory, most guitars, even cheap Squiers, have the nut and bridge locations pretty d@mn close to where they should be.

Disclaimer: I've never personally had any of these things on any of my guitars, so I might be a fine one to talk. All that I've said here is based on what I've heard from other players, and seen on customer's guitars that have come into the shop (only two, and both of them changed back to stock within two months). The reviews at websites like H-C are glowing, but I suspect that most of them were written before the first blush had faded into everyday ordinariness.

HTH


sumgai

[ChrisK]

Oh just stop it (already, is). ;D

I'm glad that y'all are being """"good"""". Random asked me to help out by becoming a moderator (I've yet to do anything in moderation in life). I'm not sure what this really means, but I've got some new buttons with hammer icons in them. I guess that I have to be extra good now (drat'ski).

If I show up with some new wounds, it means that I've been testing them on myself......

I've wondered about the Feiton system. While I can see how the increased string tension occurring from fretting a note causes sharpness, adjustments at the nut are not (blindingly) clear (to me) as to their real (helpful) effect.

(((If I get a chance, I'll post the link to the patent.)))

Here is a link to the issued patents;
patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=in%2Ffeiten&d=PTXT

Here is a link to the pending applications;
appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=in%2Ffeiten&d=PG01

These links are too long. Copy and paste in yer browser, and be sure to remove any superfluous spaces.

The use of a zero fret does help, but tends to force lower string action. I often hear that pro players use high action for best note definition, so a zero fret isn't helpful (although Brian May did fine w/ one).

The best method to alleviate incurred sharpness might be variable fret spacing on a string by string basis.

Oh drat, Yamaha already invented the Fretwave system.

I like big frets (6105) as opposed to plateaus (6200), so every thing's a variable anyway. ;D ;D

(And yet, I STILL have to rent my audience!)

[dunkelfalke]

hm, what is so special about the zero fret? i have it on one of my guitars, don't like it very much (strange action). i'd rather prefer a roller nut, should have more or less the same sound as a zero fret but without that strange action.

[monradon]

ChrisK you are right it was called a zero fret not the false fret I called it. Would of looked it up but my book may have been misplaced by the Dog easier to blame the pup than the wife and I know I could not of lost it ( Joke )

[ChrisK]

The zero fret is special in that it ensures the same action height over the first fret as on subsequent ones.

In other words, the string clearance on (over) the first fret is the same as the string clearance over the second fret when the string is fretted at the first fret. This alleviates the extreme sharpening of the note when a string with higher fret clearance is fretted at the first fret (with the typical inadequate nut slot depth found on many guitars today, production speed is). The effect lessens as the fretting goes up the neck, but it still occurs.

The zero fret accomplishes the same effect as a very well cut nut with minimal clearance over the first fret. A roller nut will have the same effect ONLY if it has an equally low action. It will enable easier string movement thru the nut, but so will "guitar nut lubricant".

In essence, with the zero fret doing all of the action height work of a well cut nut, the nut becomes only a string guide. This DOES MEAN that a higher zero fret CAN BE USED for greater first fret clearance. (WOW, I don't think I've seen this stated before!)

This relatively constant clearance spacing off of each subsequent higher fret is the basis for consistent action. This is why the bridge saddle height should be used for action height on the highest frets (the truss rod ain't gonna have any effect on the part of the neck bolted/glued directly to the body), and only thereafter should the truss rod be used for action height down the neck to the nut.

If yer real lucky, you'll get a consistent extrapolated average fret clearance across all frets. Then you level the frets.

This works best with a compound fretboard radius (as in a 10" to 16" extrapolated cone). Smaller cylinder radius necks (such as Fender 7 1/4" and 9 1/4") will require higher clearance just to avoid "fretting out" on string bends.

[dunkelfalke]

ok, thanks for the info :-)

[bam]

There had been another thread talking about zero frets, and I should add that (the conclusion of that thread), the actual purpose of zero frets are actually tone-wise.