Compensated saddle?

A correctly compensated saddle should help your intonation problem significantly. Go for it.

If you play a lot of open chords, the bone nut may improve your guitar's tone, but don't expect miracles. Plus, if it is an uncompensated nut (typically it is), it will not affect your intonation/tuning issues. You may do the nut and saddle replacements at different times.

thanks gnease. Would it make the most sense to do the nut and saddle at the same time, with a compensated nut too? Aslo, is there anything else I can do to make my guitar sound its best. Its a good guitar, solid spruce top, and its in great condition. I'm just planning on sticking it out with this for at least a year, and I want to make it sound as good as possible. I'll put $100-$150 in it if it makes sense.

thanks!

It's not necessary to do both at the same time but may save some labor money.

Also, I see no need to go with both a compensated nut and saddle. I would just go with the compensated saddle and a standard nut since that is the biggest bang for the buck.

Those are the two items you will get the most out of and anything else you do bedsides that and finding the best strings will be minimal gain.

I agree with Nils that the compensated bridge should make the most difference. However, if you do decide to go with a compensated nut, I would do both saddle and nut at once so everthing may be optimized together.

One more thing: Are you aware of the fact that many (if not all) guitars with compensated nuts are tuned slightly differently? You should take this into your cost accounting, as you may need to purchase a specially setup tuner -- or at least a tuner that indicates offsets from standard tuning with enough precision to allow you to tune your compensated-nut guitar properly. A tech installing a compensated nut should know this -- if not, you might need to find a more knowledgable tech.

What is the difference between a normal saddle and a compensated saddle?

I would imagine it would be the difference in material used to make it.

Either way, what is it's main purpose? Different tone? If so, what would be the difference?

Thanks

I will try to tackle this.
An uncompensated saddle is pretty much strait across.
Compensted saddle sits under each string at different points.
The most notable is the low E and B strings.
The reason for compensation is to achieve correct pitch on each string as you move up the fretboard.
You will notice in an uncompensated model if you play the notes on the 12th fret that some will be off and not exactly an octave above the open string.

Okay then what does a compensated nut look like?

Look here:
http://home.cogeco.ca/~jciguitars/Compensated_guitar_nut.html

Thanks Jim.

I was wondering why the saddle on my Taylor looked odd. It has a compensated saddle but only for the b string, and a regular nut.

So, are the compensated saddles/nuts made of a different material or are they just designed differently?

A compensated nut and/or saddle can be of any material from plastic to bone just like an uncompensated nut or saddle.

So, the bottom line is they are just designed differently to compensate for the lack of individual string adjustments. It's become more and more common for acoustics to come with compensated saddles. Especially on the mid to higher end guitars.

Even putting the saddle on a slant is done to achieve a first order approximation of bridge compensation. However, that alone is not a known as a compensated saddle, which will further fine tune the overall bridge compensation by tweaking the length of individual strings a little this way or that right on the saddle itself.

(Apologies to those who already know this:) The whole reason for compensation is to make up for the extra stiffness in thicker strings. This makes the endpoints at the nut and bridge less than perfect nodes or "pivot points" for a vibrating string. The result is the vibrational length of the string is effectively shorter (sharp) than the bridge-to-nut physical length would indicate. Note how the compensation makes the thicker strings longer ... except in one case: The reason there is a significant change in compensation at the G string of an acoustic, is that this is the first wound string, and it's core filament is actually smaller than the B string, making its endpoints more flexible than the B -- so the G actually requires less compensation than the B.

On electric guitars equipped with unwound G strings, the big change in bridge compensation occurs between the G and D strings -- something to note when changing over from a wound G to and unwound G or reverse.

My first guitar is a Yamaha accoustic that came in a starter pack. It was the gigmaker pack and the saddle on it is compensated. The G, B, and high E strings are all compensated. Untill I started looking around at other accoustics I thought they all were.

I've been needing a new nut since it came from the box. Somebody at the factory cut the string slots as little V's instead of U's so I get lots of issues trying to tune the wound strings. I'll probably replace the saddle at the same time and get the entire thing setup.

Any idea how much all that would cost?

Typical setup is around $30 to $40 plus cost of parts.
Here are some saddles I have been eyeballing myself.
http://www.guitarsaddles.com/pricing.htm

As a follow up to my original post, I did have a compensated bone saddle put on in place of the uncompensated plastic one. I do think it sounds better now, although I went from ultra-light up to light strings, so that probably made a difference too. To set up with proper action, the repair guy had to sand about an eigth of an inch off the top of the bridge so the saddle wouldnt sit too high. Anyway, $50 for all of it, and it sounds much better to me, so money well spent. The only thing he didnt do was vacuum out the guitar.

Also, I wouold welcome any suggestions for a polish or simply a wipe down spray that I can use periodically to wipe off smudges from my acoustic.