String buzz on one open string with staggered tuners

[alexreinhold]

Situation: got truss rod and nut filing done by a luthier on a Tele neck with staggered tuners. Now I have a very very slight buzz on the B and G string when played open. Pushing down the string behind the nut seems to be the remedy.

From what I can see my options are:

1. Ignoring the buzz (not really audible anymore when played through amp)
2. Re-file the nut
3. Add string tree between B and G

For 1 OCD is the problem, for 2 lack of skills, for 3 aesthetics. I'm leaning towards 3. What do you guys recommend?

 

[stratamania]

Ask the "luthier" to address the problem by doing 2.

Or do 2 yourself.

https://www.stewmac.com/luthier-tools-and-supplies/tools-by-job/tools-for-nuts-and-saddles/stewmac-safe-slot-nut-guard

 

[alexreinhold]

Ask the "luthier" to address the problem by doing 2.

Or do 2 yourself.

https://www.stewmac.com/luthier-tools-and-supplies/tools-by-job/tools-for-nuts-and-saddles/stewmac-safe-slot-nut-guard

Yes, I'd love to do 2 myself but I'm a bit shy to do it lacking the experience (see the other thread in general). I guess 3 would be the easy and unsmart way out?

 

[Sadie-f]

My nut adventure noted in your other thread touches on this, and I don't have staggered tuners so I'm more at-risk.

I had a buzz at b & e. My filing angle was good (and I'd done a successful fix of a Fender with a buzzing e, in spite of a stock string tree).

So I knew that a slot down slanted towards the fretboard could buzz, and that I could fix it. However, that wasn't enough in this case, and I had no aesthetic issue with adding a string tree.

However all my necks going forward will feature tilt back headstocks.

 

[stratamania]

Ask the "luthier" to address the problem by doing 2.

Or do 2 yourself.

https://www.stewmac.com/luthier-tools-and-supplies/tools-by-job/tools-for-nuts-and-saddles/stewmac-safe-slot-nut-guard

Yes, I'd love to do 2 myself but I'm a bit shy to do it lacking the experience (see the other thread in general). I guess 3 would be the easy and unsmart way out?

3, would be the less smart way out. I have no issue with the aesthetic of a string tree and have some on more vintage spec guitars. The reason to avoid them is that it is just one more thing to potentially affect tuning stability when using a trem.

But really if you paid someone to do the job already it should not be buzzing if done correctly.

There is only one way to get experience - jump in...

 

[Cowbell Fever!]

Ok I certainly am not a luthier but I have tinkered around a bit. The buzz isn't going away on it's own and will forever bother you if you don't remedy. Whoever did your nut should make it right if they are worth their salt. Since you have no trem, a string tree may well be a perfectly fine solution. However, some times a string tree can create other tuning problems as in creating too much down pressure on the nut that isn't quite right and PING! Also, you are putting a hole in your head stock. If you don't want to shell out for files, abrasive cording can be found that you could use to gently/slowly shape the slots in question. The danger is you go too low and make other problems.
So, you have to decide what the least of all evils is. 1. If you paid someone, make them fix it. 2. Take a chance and string tree away. I have string trees on all my Fender style head stocks but have the trems docked and blocked.

You did such a nice job on that guitar it would be a shame to not get it to a place where you are happy with it's play-ability whatever yo decide.

 

[Cowbell Fever!]

One more thought, you have checked that you have the lower tuners toward the top away from the nut right?  And make sure it isn't a tuner rattle.

 

[alexreinhold]

One more thought, you have checked that you have the lower tuners toward the top away from the nut right?  And make sure it isn't a tuner rattle.

It's definitely the nut. Will have the luthier fix it.

 

[adrianb]

However all my necks going forward will feature tilt back headstocks.

I have forever sworn off straight headstocks. I wish i'd gotten into tiltbacks years ago.

 

[Cowbell Fever!]

However all my necks going forward will feature tilt back headstocks.

I have forever sworn off straight headstocks. I wish i'd gotten into tiltbacks years ago.

With a tiltback in my experience you lose some snap and immediacy of attack. So there is a trade off.

 

[Sadie-f]

However all my necks going forward will feature tilt back headstocks.

I have forever sworn off straight headstocks. I wish i'd gotten into tiltbacks years ago.

With a tiltback in my experience you lose some snap and immediacy of attack. So there is a trade off.

<Admittedly snark>
So what works for about every acoustic ever made is lacking applied to electrics?
</snarky>

More seriously, fender started making the telecaster ~1950 using construction that made production as inexpensive as possible. This included the flat / recessed headstock and necessary string trees, allowing it to be shaped from a smaller board without having to section larger lumber for the tilt back. It doesn't save any wood, just simplifies the construction steps.

Granted that also allows for extreme bends with less chance of returning to correct pitch (however that wasn't the point above).

I gotta call confirmation bias as likely a cause of what you hear as anything physical.

 

[Cowbell Fever!]

We will agree to disagree.

Aaron! Video ?!!