has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

dasfonzie

New member
I notice on my Strat even though just got it setup, that I often have to compensate in tuning for particularly the higher strings. Like when switching from a D to an A for example I would some nasty dissonance. It didn't used to bother me, but I think I've developed my ear a little more and it's really annoying...
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

I've used them and like them. I've also got an extra retrofit one for strat that I'm looking to get rid of.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

it's more of an optimization. It won't fix intonation problems if that's what you have.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

Yeah, intonation problems need to be looked into at the saddles first of all.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

well I don't think it's the intonation because, I just had it set up by a luthier. I just don't know the right word for what I'm describing.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

Your luthier didn't do a good job, no matter what he says. Your intonation needs to be set so that every single note on the fretboard reads dead center on a tuner. And, the nut needs to be cut low enough that notes don't bend sharp on the 1st and 2nd fret.

I've even taken guitars to reputable luthiers, who told me the intonation was perfect. Then, I bring it home, and realize it's still off. It boils down to the debate between those who intonate at the open/12th, and those who fine tune it for every note on the fretboard. I still say the first group is dead wrong.

You don't need an Earvana, you need to take it back to the guy who did it, and tell him to do it again.......or better yet, a guy who's better than him.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

In my experience there is no possible way to get every single note 100% in tune on the guitar. It's an inherent design flaw that can't be corrected even with Earvana nuts, "perfect" setups or even tempered tuning systems. IMO a good luthier will work with the tuner to achieve a more in tune sound by leaving some strings slightly flat or sharp. Try playing piano on one that has been tuned by a professional and one that's been set up by some jacka$s with a tuner. The latter will sound pretty bad.

Also, your luthier didn't necessarily do a bad job intonating if it reads off on a tuner. Play some stuff all across the fretboard and if it sounds out of tune despite his intontation setting and a set up (this is assuming you have your strings all tuned in a way that compensates for the inherent intonation problems found on most stringed instruments) then give him crap because he didn't get you in tune in a way that sounds good or in a way that is perfect on your tuner.


I don't mean that in an offensive way, it's just that that's the way it is. I think in theory a guitar with an Earvana nut could be more in tune per se, but with a properly cut nut and intonation set by someone willing to let the idea of "perfect" intonation go it'll sound very good and in tune with all the other strings. After all the guitar is played to make pleasing sounds not to deliver accurate readings on a tuner. Like I said, tempered tunings won't give you 100% accurate intonation across the board (pun intended) but if someone shows me a guitar in which every single note is *perfectly* in tune and sounds good everywhere I'll bang Rosie O'donnel.
 
Last edited:
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

itbepopples said:
if someone shows me a guitar in which every single note is *perfectly* in tune and sounds good everywhere I'll bang Rosie O'donnel.

Already did it.

Because of this inherent “flaw” in the guitar’s tuning structure, I bet if you heard a guitar that was perfectly in tune it would sound weird.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

I'm a big fan of the Earvana nut, I use them on both of my guitars without a locking nut. I think a lot of people dismiss them because they look odd or because they think a practical solution to the problem should cost a lot more than $25. It's not a perfect fix, but my guitars with the Earvana have much better intonation all over the fretboard than my guitar that does not have one.

I'd have to disagree with the idea of getting a guitar with a standard nut to play perfectly in tune everywhere on the fretboard. It reminds me of that arcade game, where the moles pop up from the holes and you have to wack them with a hammer. You hit one, and another pops up somewhere else. Same with intonating a guitar, if you get it perfect in one spot, it'll be out somewhere else. The traditional method of setting intonation is used because it gives the best compromise. Much of the problem comes in the lower frets, and that's where the Earvana excels. The difference over the rest of the fretboard isn't as dramatic, but it doesn't need to be. Like I said, it's not a perfect solution, but I think it's superior to a traditional nut in every way. Both my ears and my tuner confirm that it works. One minor complaint I have is the installation. I don't like the retrofit nuts as much because I don't like messing with a base, a top-piece, and the screws. They work, but the install can be a pain. That's why I ordered my Warmoth Strat neck custom-built to use the OEM version of the Earvana. That model is a one-piece nut that looks very similar to a traditional nut, with the exception of the compensated slots. The OEM model requires you to remove a small amount of wood toward the first fret, which is why the retrofit nut is typically used. But if you're building from scratch using Warmoth or USACG, or if you're replacing the nut on a neck that currently uses an LSR nut, the OEM version is a much better choice. The amount of wood that needs removed is the same amount that needs removed for an LSR installation, and the OEM is a perfect drop-in replacement for an LSR, no modifications needed.

Ryan
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

Has anyone used the Earvana with extensive or fairly heavy dive-bombing? They claim it is made out of a super slippery material.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

heem6 said:
Has anyone used the Earvana with extensive or fairly heavy dive-bombing? They claim it is made out of a super slippery material.

It is, and it works very well during heavy trem use. Like any nut, you'll need to make sure the slots are properly filed and not causing the string to bind.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

rspst14 said:
I'm a big fan of the Earvana nut, I use them on both of my guitars without a locking nut. I think a lot of people dismiss them because they look odd or because they think a practical solution to the problem should cost a lot more than $25. It's not a perfect fix, but my guitars with the Earvana have much better intonation all over the fretboard than my guitar that does not have one.

The Earvana has NO effect on the pitch of fretted notes. As best I can see the Earvana is a band-aid lazily applied to a bigger problem. No offense meant to anyone that uses them, but I setup my own guitars and haven't had a need to try anything other than a good ol' allen wrench turning a saddle screw.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find a guitar that has perfect pitch at every fret. The open/12 method works fine in theory, assuming that each fret is EXACTLY where it needs to be. If you were to intonate a guitar so that the 12th fret was the perfect octave of the open note, everything else should fall into place. If the 16th fret were then sharp, the err is in the construction, not the setup, IMO. The second you tried to adjust the saddle to make the 16th intonate correctly, you'd throw the pitch off at the 12th fret.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

MikeS said:
The Earvana has NO effect on the pitch of fretted notes. As best I can see the Earvana is a band-aid lazily applied to a bigger problem. No offense meant to anyone that uses them, but I setup my own guitars and haven't had a need to try anything other than a good ol' allen wrench turning a saddle screw.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find a guitar that has perfect pitch at every fret. The open/12 method works fine in theory, assuming that each fret is EXACTLY where it needs to be. If you were to intonate a guitar so that the 12th fret was the perfect octave of the open note, everything else should fall into place. If the 16th fret were then sharp, the err is in the construction, not the setup, IMO. The second you tried to adjust the saddle to make the 16th intonate correctly, you'd throw the pitch off at the 12th fret.

First, let me say that I have not used or played a guitar with an Earvana nut before.

I also agree with everything you said about the setups vs. construction.

The only thing I might see differently is that the Earvana definitely has an effect on fretted notes, from a technical standpoint. The compensated nuts technically changes the scale length of each string. If I used a regular nut, but had it installed half an inch closer to the headstock, that would change the way all the notes would sound on all the strings, fretted or not. But according to what Earvana says it does, it's done precisely so that each string sounds as close to perfect as it can for all the notes.

I can't vouch for whether it works or not, but I don't see how fretted notes cannot beaffected by the compensated string slots.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

Vincenzo Galilei (father of Galileo Galilei) may have been the first person to advocate equal temperament (in a 1581 treatise). The first person known to introduce a mathematically accurate specification for equal temperament is probably Chu Tsai-Yu (朱載堉) in the Ming Dynasty, who published a theory of the temperament in 1584. Soon after, European mathematicians Simon Stevin (1585, inspired by V. Galilei) and Marin Mersenne (1636) accurately described equal temperament.

In 1582, the great Chinese scholar of the Jesuits, Matteo Ricci, commenced his studies at Macao. From 1580, the Viceroy of the Cantonese province had established biannual 'trade fairs' lasting several weeks, at which Chinese and Westerners exchanged ideas and goods. The interchange between East and West was intense just at the moment when Chu Tsai-Yu went into print with his new theory. We do not know the exact mode of transmission of the idea to Europe. Within fifty-two years of Chu's publication, his ideas were published by Pere Marin Mersenne. The Ming Dynasty ended eight years later, but influenced musical theory for many years later.

Twelve tone equal temperament was introduced in the West to permit the playing of music in all keys with an equal amount of mis-tuning in each, without having to provide more than 12 pitches per octave on instruments, while still roughly approximating just intonation intervals. This allows much more facile harmonic motion, while losing some subtlety of intonation. True equal temperament was not available to musicians before about 1870 because scientific tuning and measurement was not available. And in fact, from about 1450 to about 1800 musicians tolerated even less mistuning in the most common keys, like C major. Instead, they used approximations that emphasized the tuning of thirds or fifths in these keys, such as meantone temperament.

At the time equal temperament was beginning to take hold in the West, many people perceived the much-increased mis-tuning of the music, relative to meantone temperament, as a disgrace. Those in opposition to equal temperament worried that the temperament, by degrading the purity of each chord, would degrade the purity of music. The composers against equal temperament included Giuseppe Tartini.

Equal temperament does have a weak point in tonal music. Group of musicians such as string ensemble or a capella, where tuning by microtones can be possible simultaneously during concerts, often prefer to tune the parts comprising each chord in just tuning relative to one another, in order to maximize the effect of consonance. Other instruments, such as wind, keyboard, and fretted-instruments, use equal temperament or quasi-equal temperament, when the instruments have technical limitations to be tuned exactly equal. The dissonance of such temperaments is known to be noticed by an average audience. Some claim that this is especially troubling in the lower register, and had somewhat constrained composers in the classical and romantic eras from writing chords narrower than octave for the left hand in keyboard music, while such examples in cello parts of string quartets are more common. Others hear the dissonance as most troubling in the higher register, where beating between harmonics of mistuned consonances is faster, and where combinational tones, often an entire semitone out-of-tune in equal temperament, are louder.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

Also from the Peterson Tuners site:
The following is from the Peterson Tuners site:
What are temperaments and why should I care?
It is perhaps a cruel joke on all of us to be given such remarkable sensitivity in judging musical pitch intervals between simultaneous sounds. The mathematics of positioning (tempering) 12 scale notes in an octave prevents any more than a handful of perfectly harmonious chords for any one tuning of those notes (temperament). We have limited options:
1. We can equally space the 12 notes in the octaves so that chords of each given type (major, minor, b5#7-9, etc.) sound equally good in all keys. This is called equal temperament, the common "standard" in modern music. Unfortunately, this temperament scheme also guarantees that all chords of a given type sound equally bad! Not even one chord will have intervals that sound exactly in tune!

2. We can purposely shift certain scale notes closer to or farther from their neighbors to make perfect intervals or chords in some places. If we choose wisely, we can make the most important chords in a given key be the perfect ones. This is the concept behind Just Intonation (JST in the VS-1 temperament menu). In the key of C, the chords of C major, F Major, and G Major can each have perfectly harmonious tuning intervals within. Unfortunately, the price to pay is that other chords, especially those in more remote keys like C# and F#, sound much worse than they would in equal temperament. If an instrument like a piano is tuned in Just Major temperament for the key of C, notes and chords that fall in the C Major scale sound wonderful. Modulating to the key of G, most chords sound good, some not quite as good. If one takes a more adventurous trek into the key of E, say, some real "ear-sores" start to develop in certain chords and intervals. Historically, the clinkers are dubbed "wolf tones" which gives some indication of their "charm".

3. Between the extremes given above, there are countless compromises. Why not settle for some "nearly perfect" chords in the most popular key signatures, while keeping the "wolves" at bay in the less traveled ones? There are about as many such "well tempered" scales as there have been minds conceiving of them. Each such temperament generally takes the name of its earliest inventor or biggest proponent. Some of the more successful ones, like Werkmeister (WRK), Young (YNG), Kirnberger (KRN), and Kellner (KLN) are included in current models of peterson tuners. Besides stock historic temperaments, Peterson Virtual Strobe Tuners also feature unique instrument specific temperaments such as GTR for guitar, BAS for bass, and (VS-II/V-SAM only) E9 & C6 tempered tuning for pedal steel guitar. The VS-S StroboStomp pedal tuner/DI also features four optimized Buzz Feiten Tuning System presets for electric guitar, acoustic guitar, bass guitar and 12-string guitar. All Peterson Tuners (except the VS-1) are user programmable allowing the saving of from two to 244 user teperaments to memory. The V-SAM allows you to adjust any temperament to any one of 12 roots making these temperaments available in any specific key.
 
Re: has anyone tried an Earvana nut?

CronoDL said:
I can't vouch for whether it works or not, but I don't see how fretted notes cannot beaffected by the compensated string slots.

I don’t disagree with the notion that it changes the scale length, but so does making saddle adjustments. That still leaves me asking “Why?”.

Maybe these things are better suited for guitars with non-adjustable saddles, like the single wrap-around versions found on some PRS and older Gibson guitars.
 
Back
Top