Set up, I´m confused

[ken cierp]

I'd have to agree with Brain and Dave on this method's order of operations -- the last step is matching the nut slots to the fret height, now if the capo was not used its a different story.

[Tom West]

That's what I get for not reading the whole post. My bad.
Tom

[John Link]

There is a case that can be made for the zero fret (a la Mario Maccaferri, if you are concerned that zero frets are "cheap"). Myself, I find the unwound treble strings are hardest on my admittedly seldom used fingers (which are therefore really tender). The fatly wound strings are a piece of cake in comparison. I set one guitar nut up with .010 clearance on the e and b strings and found they do not buzz, with neck relief on the treble side at .002 and bass side at .008. Capoed at the first fret, the trebles measure .070 at the 13th, which is about the same as in Dave's post. It seems like a zero fret is the easier way to go, in retrospect - not so much sweating of blood as I carve the groove deeper and deeper in a procedure that is not easily reversed. But zero frets are not popular.

[ken cierp]

Hi John -- welcome back

I agree the zero fret simplifies set-up ---- I believe this is going to catch on

[Dave Bagwill]

I'd like to try one of those out. That might be a step forward.

[John Link]

Interesting brassy sound. I have thought about slightly widening the zero fret slot in a zero fret design so that the fret is more easily removed without damaging the surrounding wood. The pressure of the strings should, I hope, keep it completely in place, or there might be a way to use binding to keep it from sliding side to side. With the strings bearing down from the top, it would certainly never drop off.

With an easily removed zero fret, it would be less involving to subtly adjust the "nut end" action by using different height frets at the zero position, as for heavy handed strumming with several open strings.