The Intonation Fiasco [schematic]

[RuptorGB]

I am gradually setting up my kit Les Paul copy as per this thread
viewtopic.php?p=299825#p299825

It is difficult to believe that after almost 100 years easily fixable faults from their first designs have never been sorted out. Looking at the Les Paul and other guitar bridges on the same length frets I thought I can save myself a lot of bother tuning the intonation by copying the positions of the moulded bridge on the Gibson Junior to the saddles on mine. I took a picture and measured the positions then set my saddles accordingly. I drilled the bridge mounting holes offset that I also measured, fitted all the bits of the guitar and strings then checked the intonation. The intonation was perfect so I didn't give it any more thought. I didn't like the action so I set about doing the appropriate adjustments, lowering the nut & adjusting the neck. Checking the intonation it was all out so I can see why the instructions say intonation is the last thing to do. I now can't set the intonation on the lower three strings due to lack of saddle travel.
Now it starts to get weird because I checked my shop bought Epiphone SG copy & Ovation acoustic copy and their intonation is out particularly on the lower strings. Thinking it must be my ears or I don't understand what I am doing I searched this site and found the following quote on this thread.
viewtopic.php?p=263471&hilit=intonation#p263471

"Why guitars are always sharp when it comes to intonation ,I always have to lengthen the string,this happens to real gibsons ,epis,fender,squier you name it,I guess the same tech sets up the cnc machine for all factories,I mean they have to know their bridges are off ,that's what scares me about buying a high end gibson,I had a studio and sold it cause it was horrible,the bridge was off by 1/8 at least."

Reading that clearly I am not the problem but why has it been perpetuated for so long and repeated on all copies? Surely someone can lead the way to the simple solution. All the Gibson problems of angled bridge and inability to set the intonation would disappear if they gave it a saddle movement of 1/2 an inch like the Stratocaster.
Slightly ahead but in tandem I made one of the Stratocaster kits as well. I hadn't set the intonation on it so set the saddles to the Junior measurements to start with only to realise the fret length was different. Most of the 12th fretted notes were sharp compared to the harmonic except the highest note string that was spot on because I measured it from the 12th fret to form the datum to measure all the other saddles to. No problem in setting the intonation by ear on all the strings of the Stratocaster since it had the 1/2 inch range.
On my Les Paul kit I either have to shift the low note string bridge mount closer to the string bar or change the bridge for one with more saddle travel.
I guess the thing I have learnt is if you intend or need to change the action of a guitar to be able to play it don't buy one with a fixed bridge or make sure there is sufficient bridge adjustment of at least 0.4" preferably 0.5" from the position of the highest note string saddle when its intonation is correct.

[FiveseveN]

All the Gibson problems of angled bridge and inability to set the intonation would disappear if they gave it a saddle movement of 1/2 an inch like the Stratocaster.

But then it wouldn't be an AuThEnTiC Gibson, the company that hasn't had a good idea in 66 years.

[Cub]

All the Gibson problems of angled bridge and inability to set the intonation would disappear if they gave it a saddle movement of 1/2 an inch like the Stratocaster.

But then it wouldn't be an AuThEnTiC Gibson, the company that hasn't had a good idea in 66 years.

Bring back the harmonica bridge !
https://www.vintageguitarandbass.com/gi ... -matic.php

[RuptorGB]

Bring back the harmonica bridge !

So how do we interpret this quote?
"The extra long saddle travel allows accurate tuning of the strings called for by today's rock musician."
Is it that guitar players up to rock ones didn't notice or care intonation was wrong and since Gibson dropped it nobody cares about intonation in the end anyway?

Even other manufacturers don't want to improve things like these roller bridges that still reverse saddles because of the lack of travel. A world full of sheep.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/115874878972 ... R-yJppWxZA

[Manfred]

Hi RupterGB.
This YouTube channel is my favorite.

Mr. Mcconville intonates guitars perfectly with self-made compensated saddles and bridges.
The method is explained, but for more detailed videos you have to be a Patreon.
I was also impressed by the pragmatic work with simple tools, no expensive special tools.
I spent a lot of time watching the videos and learned a lot.

[mozz]

Thought it was best to intonate while standing up and the weight of the guitar was on the strap?

[bajaman]

Thanks for the video link Manfred Many many years ago I borrowed my friend's Sunburst tiger maple top 63 (or thereabouts) Gibson Les Paul and measured the fretboard length and fret positions - at the time i was quite surprised because the top nut was actually positioned closer to the first fret than i thought at that time that it should be - the rule of 17 theory seemed to be out with this guitar's top nut placement ! Years later I read an interesting article by Buzz Feiten describing his tuning method - I think he patented it and Korg actually produced a tuner using his tuning method compensation. On many of my guitars, i insert a small zero fret behind the nut and have found like the guy in your video, tuning is vastly improved.
I think Gibson knew how to intonate their Les Pauls this way back then but the new company obviously still doesn't - maybe this is one of the reasons those old bursts are prized by those in the know ?

[Manfred]

Thought it was best to intonate while standing up and the weight of the guitar was on the strap?

Opinions differ on the intonation in playing position.

[RuptorGB]

Mr. Mcconville intonates guitars perfectly with self-made compensated saddles and bridges.

When I was trying to set the intonation after changing the action screwed it up it occurred to me the height of the strings above the fret board on the 12th fret must affect the fretted note. The logic being if the strings are higher you have to press them further to the fret stretching the strings that must change the note effectively sharpening it. If the logic is right it would mean the string stretch & pitch change would be different on every fret unless your strings are the same height above the frets all the way up the neck. Is bridge intonation actually fixing string stretch as it makes the fretted note stretched string the same as the open string harmonic? I think I will stick at getting the bridge positions right for 12th fret harmonic to fretted notes right because it is significantly out to my ears but I don't think string stretching or nut changes are audible to me. It would be nice to see manufacturers do a good job and give us corrected nuts & bridges as it isn't a costly thing to do even if they think it is irrelevant.

[Manfred]

Sure, changing the string height and the string gauge changes the intonation.
It should also be noted that with a compensated nut and a compensated bridge, you are fixed to the string gauge used to make the compensation.
An alternative is an Earvana nut
https://earvana.com/shop/ols/products/g ... -shelf-nut
or a Hosco S.O.S compensation strip.
https://www.hosco.co.jp/en/products/par ... acer-parts

It would be nice to see manufacturers do a good job and give us corrected nuts & bridges as it isn't a costly thing to do even if they think it is irrelevant.

That is also the point, it is a personal consideration whether you need it or not.

[dai h.]

I found these videos from annarbor guitars informative:



(while I'm not a luthier) some of the takeaways for me was:

-nut height being very important for intonation and playability (too high = the strings will tend to be pressed sharp, also makes it harder to hold down barre chords. Also (what I gathered is that) nut height can be quite low since the string doesn't (can't) vibrate back and forth as much it can as midway between the two anchored points (nut or fret and bridge)--(I think?) nut(string slot) height can be lower on the plain strings (since stiffer?--not sure))

-overall quality of the build of the nut being extremely important (placement, slot location, take off location (the point nut is touching the string), how gradual the angle of the slot is, slot width and depth plus whatever else goes in to crafting a quality nut)

(If I understood correctly) according to the author of the videos (David Collins) nut compensation can help at the nut end but throws tuning off higher up on the fretboard towards the bridge end.

Checking out various tuning related videos on Youtube (piano stuff is interesting) it looks pretty complicated (equal vs just temperament, scale length, string type, string height, hand strength and on and on) but setting intonation seems worthwhile unless you play a one string fretless or something.

edit: adding a bit of info re: the nut from Bill Lawrence:

http://billlawrence.com/Pages/All_About ... Tuning.htm

[RuptorGB]

(If I understood correctly) according to the author of the videos (David Collins) nut compensation can help at the nut end but throws tuning off higher up on the fretboard towards the bridge end.

If this is the case perhaps it is the reason Gibson dropped the curved nut as in the video Madfred posted further up. People tend to play higher notes further up the fretboard.

[Manfred]

I own an LTD PB-500 guitar that already came with a compensated nut.
I really appreciate that, especially when playing open chords.

[dai h.]

here's where he addresses compensated nuts (from about 11m58s onwards) :

(If I understood correctly) according to the author of the videos (David Collins) nut compensation can help at the nut end but throws tuning off higher up on the fretboard towards the bridge end.

If this is the case perhaps it is the reason Gibson dropped the curved nut as in the video Madfred posted further up. People tend to play higher notes further up the fretboard.

[RuptorGB]

here's where he addresses compensated nuts (from about 11m58s onwards) :

Thanks for pin pointing the info as my attention span is limited at the best of times. The more you look the more complex it gets but it is good to know where you stand and then decide what suits you. After decades his conclusion was use standard fret scale & nut then tune saddles. I have to find out if my kit Les Paul has the original fret spacing or the standard one so I know what I am dealing with. The video explained about the string stretching and why the frets are filed down as in this picture of this expensive EKO acoustic neck I picked up. I bought the neck from a broken acoustic at a guitar shop back in the mid 70s with a view to making an electric guitar but never did. However after building a couple of DIY kits namely a Sratocaster & the Les Paul the EKO necked electric is next. As you can see in the picture the nut is cut really low as are the frets at less than half the height of standard so there isn't any stretch meaning no nut compensation is required. The EKO fret wire is already narrower than standard giving a smaller diameter arc then it is filed flat making it even lower. It looks like it was rigged so as the string touches the fret it also touches the board. It begs the question why are guitars not made with low profile fret wire?

[Cub]

Somewhat related, how do you good people feel about tempered or sweetened tunings ?
I've been using the Buzz Feiten offsets with good results, even though none of my guitars have a Buzz Feiten nut.

e 0
B +1
G -2
D -2
A -2
E -2

[BMS1971]

I have been using Eravana nuts with great results
https://earvana.com/

[dai h.]

sorry, I don't have enough experience to say, but I very vaguely recall a bit on some youtube video (which I can't remember right now) where there was something about the feel not being great and something about flatwound strings. A quick google turns up threads like this which do mention some of the aforementioned, so perhaps my recollection was somewhat accurate:

https://www.strat-talk.com/threads/les- ... rs.579055/

yes, as far as tuning it does seem VERY complicated. I remember the days when I used to think all I had to do was center the needle on my Boss tuner.

Thankfully these days, there are many web resources to make things a bit clearer, like this one:



..where (from what I understand) you can see how equal temperament tuning compromises the intervals, and David Collins suggests/shows one proposed aid by easing up on the pressure to try to flatten the note slightly. Also this (from Tim Lerch) I found very interesting:



Some people like Edward Van Halen went further and tweaked the tuning (since this was 1. apparently crucial to the song, and 2. more objectionable sounding if un-tweaked under lots of distortion) :





(from my non-expert understanding) the tuning tweak isn't a cure-all for tuning issues but compromises to suit the music, and were unsuitable (IIRC) for something like jazz where there might be a lot of key modulation.

[Manfred]

here's where he addresses compensated nuts (from about 11m58s onwards) :

Thanks for pin pointing the info as my attention span is limited at the best of times. The more you look the more complex it gets but it is good to know where you stand and then decide what suits you. After decades his conclusion was use standard fret scale & nut then tune saddles. I have to find out if my kit Les Paul has the original fret spacing or the standard one so I know what I am dealing with. The video explained about the string stretching and why the frets are filed down as in this picture of this expensive EKO acoustic neck I picked up. I bought the neck from a broken acoustic at a guitar shop back in the mid 70s with a view to making an electric guitar but never did. However after building a couple of DIY kits namely a Sratocaster & the Les Paul the EKO necked electric is next. As you can see in the picture the nut is cut really low as are the frets at less than half the height of standard so there isn't any stretch meaning no nut compensation is required. The EKO fret wire is already narrower than standard giving a smaller diameter arc then it is filed flat making it even lower. It looks like it was rigged so as the string touches the fret it also touches the board. It begs the question why are guitars not made with low profile fret wire?

I think that the neck of an acoustic guitar is not necessarily suitable for an electric guitar.
In the picture you can see that the fret wire has come loose.
I think that this will also be the case with others.
You can try whether you can drive the fret wires back in with a fret hammer, or even better with a fretsetter.
If this is not possible, they must be glued in with superglue and pressed.
Here in this YouTube channel you can see the gluing of the frets several times.
https://www.youtube.com/@TanyaShpachuk
I also really appreciate the way she works.
What is the condition of the fret wires, do they have any dents?
Playing chords is no problem with such low frets, but the sound can die off while bending.
I have a Gibson Les Paul with the so-called “fretless wonder frets”,
This is the case after the first fret dressing. The only thing that helps is refretting.

[RuptorGB]

I think that the neck of an acoustic guitar is not necessarily suitable for an electric guitar.
In the picture you can see that the fret wire has come loose.
I think that this will also be the case with others.
You can try whether you can drive the fret wires back in with a fret hammer, or even better with a fretsetter.

All the frets are the same and solid although they look like they are coming out. There is no pushing them in further that made me think they are glued. If they did go further in they would go out of alignment with the height above the fretboard so it is clearly how it was made and not a defect. I intend to bolt the arm to the body so it can be replaced if it doesn't work out but that project is a way off yet.