# nylon vs bone vs tusq



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

Is there really a ton of difference between these materials as far as tone and sustain goes?
I've always thought that nylon was the material of choice for cheap guitars (Like on my old Harmony) but I see that some builders are still using it. I don't know much about plastics, but if I didn't know better, I'd assume that working with nylon would be more difficult than bone or tusq? I recall it being tough and sinewy and hard to cut without it having a "furry" edge. (My only working experience has been with industrial nylon and UHMW)

What's your nut/saddle preference and why?


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

I thought it was more about friction and resistance to wear. Anyway, I like whatever you guys tell me to like.

Don't let me down.


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

adcandour said:


> I thought it was more about friction and resistance to wear.


Good point, I didn't think of that.


----------



## amagras (Apr 22, 2015)

No idea, I'll follow this thread with attention.


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

I'm pretty fussy about having bone on acoustic guitars and mandolins but care much less about electric instruments. Tusq is okay for me on electrics, but if I'm changing them I'll still choose bone. I've used a slightly softer horn (black) on nylon strung guitars and ukuleles in the past but not currently.

There can be exceptions, but generally bone is what I gravitate towards.


----------



## TWRC (Apr 22, 2011)

I'm a huge fan of Graphtech, and have their nuts on all of my electric guitars - mainly for the lubrication properties. I used to have their saddles on about 90% of my guitars, but a couple of years ago, switched back to each respective stock saddle (along with some graphite lube that I made). My reasoning behind this was more aesthetics than anything, as Graphtech stuff can look out of place on certain guitars. I'd say that the only reason why you should switch to Graphtech or Tusq is if you break a lot of strings. Other than that, there's no huge audible difference.

With that said...In my experience, the difference is audible on an acoustic guitar. On an acoustic, I just noticed more sparkle when I switched from Tusq to bone. My wife's not a guitar player and even she noticed the differences. The first time I made that switch, I was instantly sold on bone, and all of my acoustics since have been outfitted with nuts and saddles that Bob Colosi have made for me. Well, worth the investment.


----------



## Lord-Humongous (Jun 5, 2014)

Nylon on a Les Paul. But on my Seagull acoustic, the Tusq nut seems to work pretty well.


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

I prefer bone on my acoustics for the nut and saddle. I can hear the difference (or at least I think I can) and bone has a more pleasant tone to my ears. On electrics, I don't really care all that much. If I were replacing the stock nut, I'd likely go with Tusq on an electric.


----------



## BSTheTech (Sep 30, 2015)

I always thought the nut should be made from the same material as the frets so they both sound/resonate the same whether a string is fretted or open. I guess that might be the idea behind the zero fret? Once again tradition is just blindly followed.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

I have Tusq, bone, nylon and brass/bone nuts on my guitars & basses--I'd have to say over all it is between bone & Tusq.
They don't wear as much--and metal can get nicks or burrs that slice into strings.


----------



## nnieman (Jun 19, 2013)

I'm off the belief that it really doesn't make a ton of difference, as long as it's fairly dense and cut properly.

However a guitar tech buddy of mine swears that it makes a big difference and uses bone for everything.
He's been doing guitar tech work for a lot longer than I have.

I like the preslotted tusc ones, I've got a brass one that I've been meaning to put on a guitar just to try it.

The aluminum one on my dano looks cool.

Nathan


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

A friend of mine made a nut for a Les Paul out of Vanadium--he bought a screwdriver with a square shaft, and ruined some files trying to make it--but he did it.
He loves it--but I don't think he'll ever make a second one.


----------



## alwaysflat (Feb 14, 2016)

I like Tusq, I've done a couple and plan more. I did one bone nut that took me 2 blanks to complete, but iirc they're pretty cost effective.


----------



## jbealsmusic (Feb 12, 2014)

I would consider a properly sized stainless steel (or harder) zero fret with a PTFE impregnated nut (TUSQ XL for example) to be the perfect nut system for my tastes (electric or acoustic).

The jury is still out for me on an ideal acoustic saddle.


----------



## knight_yyz (Mar 14, 2015)

I have no idea how a bone nut sounds, but I noticed a difference when replacing my shitty OEM nut and going to the tusq brand


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

I have student who made a nut out of caribou antler when the cheapo factory nut broke - sounds great!


----------



## Jamdog (Mar 9, 2016)

bw66 said:


> I have student who made a nut out of caribou antler when the cheapo factory nut broke - sounds great!


What did he do with the rest of the antler? 

i.e. Are there more where that comes from?


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

Jamdog said:


> What did he do with the rest of the antler?
> 
> i.e. Are there more where that comes from?


Apparently he has a tonne of antler (he's a taxidermist) but not all of the antler is usable.

I suspect your local taxidermist would also have some if you wanted some.


----------



## Jamdog (Mar 9, 2016)

bw66 said:


> Apparently he has a tonne of antler (he's a taxidermist) but not all of the antler is usable.
> 
> I suspect your local taxidermist would also have some if you wanted some.


I don't know that I have a local taxidermist...


----------



## NGroeneveld (Jan 23, 2011)

Jamdog said:


> What did he do with the rest of the antler?
> 
> i.e. Are there more where that comes from?


You can get antlers at any pet store if you really want to try some.


----------



## BSTheTech (Sep 30, 2015)

zontar said:


> A friend of mine made a nut for a Les Paul out of Vanadium--he bought a screwdriver with a square shaft, and ruined some files trying to make it--but he did it.
> He loves it--but I don't think he'll ever make a second one.


I think a decent piece of Stainless Steel would be adequate. I like where we're going with this. My father-in-law is a gunsmith. I think I just figured out my Christmas present.


----------



## BSTheTech (Sep 30, 2015)

I was looking forward to trying out a Tusq nut on my new LP copy. I dropped it off to my tech requesting a set-up. Got it back with a new bone nut installed. His response was "it's a nice guitar so I took that Tusq piece of crap off and installed a bone nut." Ya it was probably just an upsell but the bone does look and play beautiful (no LP tuning issues). Maybe I'll try a Tusq in another guitar.


----------



## jbealsmusic (Feb 12, 2014)

BSTheTech said:


> I was looking forward to trying out a Tusq nut on my new LP copy. I dropped it off to my tech requesting a set-up. Got it back with a new bone nut installed. His response was "it's a nice guitar so I took that Tusq piece of crap off and installed a bone nut." Ya it was probably just an upsell but the bone does look and play beautiful (no LP tuning issues). Maybe I'll try a Tusq in another guitar.


Is it still considered an upsell when bone is cheaper than TUSQ?


----------



## KapnKrunch (Jul 13, 2016)

Shouldn't be too hard for a qualified shop to set up comparison tests of different nuts on the same guitar. Then we wouldn't have to guess. Check loudness level, sustain length, and frequency response. You weren't doing anything anyway, right?

Otherwise I want bone on Larrivee acoustic, bone 1939 Cromwell archtop, tusq on Godin Core P90, and acrylic Uninut on my Fury Fireball & Fury Bandit -- because that's what they have and they are all keepers.

Still a dang good question! Even if the answer is "doesn't matter", I would like to know for sure.

BTW, some believe that zero fret makes first fret fingering easier, as well as maintaining a consistent physical response throughout the neck. These are distinctions that elude my blunt tactile and sonic perceptions.


----------



## jimmy c g (Jan 1, 2008)

i seem to hear a little more clarity with tusk, i tried bone nut and saddle on j 45 and went back to tusk, I would have thought bone would be better but not in this case, the tusk saddle does seem to develope slots where the string rests quicker than bone tho


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

BSTheTech said:


> I think a decent piece of Stainless Steel would be adequate. I like where we're going with this. My father-in-law is a gunsmith. I think I just figured out my Christmas present.


He had heard about the density or something like that about vanadium--so he wanted to try it--but as I indicated--he won't be doing it again.
Stainless steel? maybe.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Bone on acoustic and Tusq on electric for me. I think the bone helps a bit with the sustain.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

IMO Tusq is a really good good material for a nut or saddle and for a while I was installing it in my guitars and customer guitars, but even though it costs more, I think it's second to bone and I'm back on the bone bandwagon 100%.

A couple things I've noticed;

1. if you check the picture below you'll see two (customer's) Tusq nuts changed out for bone in the last month or so, to me both guitars sound "better" with bone.

The top one was installed in the guitar for 9 years and the bottom one 6 years, (both are Tele's with lacquered fretboards and fretboard oil is apparently not a factor).

Neither guitar has been stored in a case, both on stand/hanger. So you can see, longer-term, that Tusq is definitely susceptible to discoloration from sunlight, dirt/hand oils etc. I will say it doesn't seem to have softened the material or had any other noticeable effect.

2. Anyone can check this for themselves, take two Tusq nuts and drop one on the other, then do the same with two bone nuts (same size shape), the bone rings a much higher tone, the tusk rings higher than any nylon or plastic but bone is highest... if that matters.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

I like whatever the guitar came with. I mean after all. I bought the guitar for how it sounded. Why would I change anything.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

guitarman2 said:


> I like whatever the guitar came with. I mean after all. I bought the guitar for how it sounded. Why would I change anything.


The nut can wear out.
I have replace one--and it was because the slots got too deep on a couple of strings--and it didn't play well


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

zontar said:


> The nut can wear out.
> I have replace one--and it was because the slots got too deep on a couple of strings--and it didn't play well


Yes but in that case I'd just replace it with whatever the original material was.


----------



## Jamdog (Mar 9, 2016)

guitarman2 said:


> Yes but in that case I'd just replace it with whatever the original material was.


Crapstic? 

What if you are looking some potential awesomeness from you axe by using sub-par material replacement part?


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Jamdog said:


> Crapstic?
> 
> What if you are looking some potential awesomeness from you axe by using sub-par material replacement part?


If you're replacing the nut because its sub par then probably there's a lot of stuff on the guitar thats sub par. By the time you replace all that sup par crap you could've just bought a better guitar.
If I'm playing the guitar and enjoying it then nothing wrong with keeping it the way it is. I've never owned a guitar where I thought changing the nut is going to give me a much better guitar.


----------



## Jamdog (Mar 9, 2016)

guitarman2 said:


> If you're replacing the nut because its sub par then probably there's a lot of stuff on the guitar thats sub par. By the time you replace all that sup par crap you could've just bought a better guitar.
> If I'm playing the guitar and enjoying it then nothing wrong with keeping it the way it is. I've never owned a guitar where I thought changing the nut is going to give me a much better guitar.


Good for you to just own guitars with 100% top-of-the-line parts. Most players have guitars where not every single parts are the best possible.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Jamdog said:


> Good for you to just own guitars with 100% top-of-the-line parts. Most players have guitars where not every single parts are the best possible.


 I've bought inexpensive guitars and spent the money to get them the way I thought I wanted it only to discover I spent more money than if I'd just bought a better guitar.


----------



## Jamdog (Mar 9, 2016)

guitarman2 said:


> I've bought inexpensive guitars and spent the money to get them the way I thought I wanted it only to discover I spent more money than if I'd just bought a better guitar.


Even if I bought a "better guitar" I would still spend on a pickup swap, and maybe nut or bridge. 

Sometimes it's about the sound, sometimes it's about the journey. And sometimes it's just about the project. 

Sometimes even top dollar guitars need parts changed. They don't always have unicorn parts... 

Sometimes on cheaper guitar you manage to spend less and get what you'd want on another one, too. 


That said, I have a 100% original 1981 matsumoku vantage vs rainbow that was produced in very limited number, and if I had to put a new nut, it would certainly be identical. 
I know where you're coming from. 

Point is, it's not always "what was on it is what it needs" IMHO.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Jamdog said:


> That said, I have a 100% original 1981 matsumoku vantage vs rainbow that was produced in very limited number, and if I had to put a new nut, it would certainly be identical.
> I know where you're coming from.
> 
> Point is, it's not always "what was on it is what it needs" IMHO.


Yes I know exactly where you're coming from to. 20 years ago there wasn't a guitar I didn't change many things on. I guess my focus changed over the years and I stopped buying guitars to change things for the tone quest and rather looked at the guitars I was buying as a whole for that tone quest.
But yes even expensive guitars need some changes. Case in point was my $4,000 custom shop Nocaster. Still had to change out the saddles for compensated. But that was more for function rather than tone.


----------



## KapnKrunch (Jul 13, 2016)

Here is something we haven't considered yet. 

The response from the nut will vary with the TYPE OF STRINGS that you use. Steel, bronze, flatwound, heavy guage, light guage, etc.

You can increase or decrease your volume level by up to a millionth of a decibel by using a different nut with a certain type of string.

Likewise, sustain can be lenghtened or shortened by almost a nanosecond!

And lets not forget frequency response. The wrong match between strings and nut could result in frequency alterations that are actually measurable by the most sophisticated scientific devices. 

Sorry. I think I am funny.


----------



## Jamdog (Mar 9, 2016)

KapnKrunch said:


> The response from the nut will vary with the TYPE OF STRINGS that you use. Steel, bronze, flatwound, heavy guage, light guage, etc.
> .


I had nut considered that yet (pun intended) but it does make sense, it's the combination that makes the results. So combining it right must give a better result.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

guitarman2 said:


> If you're replacing the nut because its sub par then probably there's a lot of stuff on the guitar thats sub par. By the time you replace all that sup par crap you could've just bought a better guitar.
> If I'm playing the guitar and enjoying it then nothing wrong with keeping it the way it is. I've never owned a guitar where I thought changing the nut is going to give me a much better guitar.


Well I had one where replacing the nut made a difference.
I've only ever replaced one--it was cheap plastic.
I did replace other stuff as well--including the pickups--but for what I paid I now have a guitar I play, instead of letting it sit in its case.
And for what I paid for all of it I could have bought a new guitar--but a cheap one that I probably would have replaced stuff on any way to make it as good as what I have now.
And I don't care about resale (I would probably get more money out of it if I put the old pickups back in & sold it that way & sold the new ones separately.-but I know I'll never get the money back)--but the point was to have a guitar I would use.
And that worked.


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

adcandour said:


> I thought it was more about friction and resistance to wear. Anyway, I like whatever you guys tell me to like.
> 
> Don't let me down.


You are just too funny. "I like whatever you guys tell me to like". LMAO


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

To tell you the truth I really don't know what kind of nut is on my 95 SG. I will have to investigate. The one on my Parker is carbon fiber I do believe. I am checking them out right now and will get back to you.

Did some research. On my 2004 Parker Nite fly the nut is made from carbon fiber.

The nut on my SG is made from Corian which is a mixture of minerals and acrylic which forms a stone hard surface.

I don't think it really matters to me. I prefer my Parker over my SG anyways but it's not the nut that has anything to do with it. I just think the Parker is superior is so many more ways than my SG. I love the feel of the carbon fiber neck. It gets me every time.

Thanks to ever started this thread because now I know these two facts which I didn't have a clue about before. Knowledge! Love it!


----------



## Scotty (Jan 30, 2013)

Lola said:


> Thanks to ever started this thread because now I know these two facts which I didn't have a clue about before.


My pleasure. Makes two of us.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

When I bought my 6120 and got it set up, the local tech at the L&M wanted (in the worst way) to pin the bridge and replace the nut with some black, self-lubricating nut (graphite possibly). He said Bigsby tuning stability would be much better. But I hadn't even played the guitar hard yet and didn't like the idea of a black nut on it. As it turns out, the way I use a Bigsby I don't need either of those. I ain't trying any EVH-type or Setzer-crazy stuff on it, just using it for wobblin' and shimmerin'. I would replace that with whatever it came with.

But on acoustics I hear a big difference with bone v anything else I've heard. I like bone. I replaced a lot of nuts with bone when I worked in the guitar shop and did basic repairs and setups. Now I would get bone installed on any acoustic that needs it and not even think twice. I just won't do it myself - cutting bone is one of the worst smells I've ever had to deal with. I'll pay my guitar guy to do that - and have a few times.


----------



## Lola (Nov 16, 2014)

Jamdog said:


> Good for you to just own guitars with 100% top-of-the-line parts. Most players have guitars where not every single parts are the best possible.


 I guess it's all in the budget! I bought the best guitars that I could at the time! Both of my guitars are high end but I had to make a few sacrifices to get them! I have never had a problem with either! They still play like the day I bought them. I would rather save and buy a really nice guitar instead of getting a crappy cheap one now! Right now I am saving every penny for s Les Paul goddess! It may take some time to find one! Gibson discontinued that line of guitars which makes them very difficult to find and more rare!


----------

