Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
Does a person of average size body/hands, find a lot of difference between a Flamenco guitar that is 650mm length and 52mm nut width and a guitar of 660mm length and 53mm nut width?
I know there are infinite possiblities but does the two differences make much difference for the average sized adult?
RE: Nut width: 53 vs 52 mm, and neck... (in reply to darylcrisp)
I think the main difference has to do with the use of a capo. A person with big hands will have trouble using a guitar with a shorter scale as the capo moves up the fret board toward the 12th fret. Some small people prefer a longer scale; other people talk about a longer scale guitar requiring greater stretch in the first position.
RE: Nut width: 53 vs 52 mm, and neck... (in reply to darylcrisp)
I went from a 650/52 to a 660/53, and the difference was subtle. But, for some reason, when I go back to the 650/52, I find that I prefer it. I'm not exactly sure what average size is, but I'm pretty short (5'7ish).
Hemeola is right, you could just tune down and put a capo on, but over time, that becomes a pain.
RE: Nut width: 53 vs 52 mm, and neck... (in reply to darylcrisp)
Skyboyroller.
We´ve discussed this MANY times. Do a search.
My experiences are that scale length is not so important. The stifness of the guitar is more important in the feel os a guitar. Some small guitars feel big because of their pulsation or stifness.
Nut width. Here I´m a bit more picky. I like 52 and 53mm and 54 is to big for me.
You forgot one which is very important: Stringspacing at the bridge. Old school guitars can be down to 56mm .standard now is 58mm which is what I like myself. I´ve build and played 60mm, which I totally dislike. In general after talking about this with many players and clints, it seems that a more narrow stringspacing favors thumb and rasgueado while a bigger one favors arpeggios and tremolos.
My own experience as a builder and a player is that 655/53(or 52)/58 suits most players. Only if you are very big or small I will advice someting else.
Posts: 15725
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Nut width: 53 vs 52 mm, and neck... (in reply to Anders Eliasson)
Yeah, string spacing makes a BIG difference to me where as the other measurments don't. Not just at bridge but at the nut too. For example, I measured two guitars, both had nut 53mm, but the way the slots were cut into the nut itself, made one guitar feel MUCH wider than the other. Honestly I prefer the wider nut, but have learned to get used to the different spacings on my different guitars.
RE: Nut width: 53 vs 52 mm, and neck... (in reply to Francisco)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Francisco
58mm string spacing with a 53mm nut? Do the strings fan out towards the bridge to make the bridge 58mm+ wide? I think I'm missing something.
The 52-53mm measurement is the width of the nut (or fingerboard at the nut if you prefer) not the string spacing. Subtract 7-10mm for the string spacing depending on the maker. The finger board is normally around 63-64mm at the twelfth fret (a rule of thumb is to add 10mm to the width of the nut but most people go a little more than that).
58mm is the suggested distance between the 6th string and 1st string at the saddle. Equivalent in inches would be about 2.25 or 45 hundredths between the strings.
If the strings didn't fan out towards the bridge the guitar would be unplayable.
RE: Nut width: 53 vs 52 mm, and neck... (in reply to darylcrisp)
I have slightly below average hand size so 5 fret stretches are very noticeable when moving from a 52mm nut (42-43mm string width) to 53mm nut (45mm string width). My Condes are 53mm(45mm) nut (string wodth) and 650mm scale, moderately easy to play for me and are my go to flamencos.
I have flamencos guitars in 650mm and 660 mm scale, the 660mm flamencos have narrower necks and are suprising easy to play. neck width and neck shape is more critical than scale length IMO.
Consider this - some vintage flamencos I have are very easy to play, they have 49mm and 50mm nuts (40-41mm string width) and 660 scale length, playability is easy for me, but my fingers are thinner too.
FYI - I rotate through my all guitars so that every week I have played every scale and neck width combination, and it has become alot easier to play any dimension now. That said, 650mm scale and 52mm nut standard is the best choice for average size hands of a newer player and is the easiest to sell on resale market in case you decide to upgrade later.
RE: Nut width: 53 vs 52 mm, and neck... (in reply to darylcrisp)
Thanks for the info guys, I had no idea. I guess I'm going to have to break out the ruler and measrure my main guitar (HSL F03) to see exactly what spacing it has. I like the sound of the guitar, but I prefer the size of my Yamah CG171.
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread