fingerstyle with NO nails???

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by Rockguy475

Does anyone that plays fingerstyle keep their nails short and just use their finger tips? Is there anything nails give you besides louder volume?

Iv never grown my nails out before and now they are starting to get a little length to them. Not sure how I feel about having long nails on one hand and short on the other.

Hi R-guy...

I've been an all flesh player with a hint of nails for emphasis occasionally.

Nails don't make you louder than all flesh, but the tone is a bit clearer perhaps. At least that's the name my friend who glues his nails on calls it. But I can play every bit as loud as he. I call my tone less sterile and warmer (just to needle him).

It's about nail strength, what your day job requires, and how much care you want to give nails. I have always had to use my hands for other things, and my nails chip fairly easily. And I'm not wearing glue-ons or having hardening treatments. And I'm not going to spend hours-n-hours and spare dollars keeping them in shape.

I've been playing this way for 50 years, so it's not likely to change.

If you choose to try nails, there's no penalty, and if you decide to keep playing that way, it's cool. And if it doesn't work out, join the ranks of others who tried something and reverted.

[s2y]

I also use fingertips. I tried growing nails for classical and found that bass guitar would rip off my nails.

[nopicknick]

I find nails and a thumb pick to be a little restricting. I agree with most everyone else and prefer the sound and feel of just the fingers.

[random works]

I have tried nails and no nails. As LJ said, no nails give a warmer, perhaps 'fatter' sound and and nails sound crisper. For me, no nails means more of a plucking and less of a brushing against the strings, therefore more power needed to get volume. I prefer nails for strumming with the back of the fingertip. I have short nails and can get all flesh if I slightly change hand angle.

But....when a nail breaks badly, it really really affects the playing...with all flesh, I guess you are okay unless you slice the tip while cutting carrots!

If you have a responsive guitar with volume to spare, you do not have to use as much power for no nails.

no nails= coffee nails= tea ( just a random thought) and Happy New year upcoming.

[Nailpicker]

I keep the nails on my right hand just slightly longer so that I can either use the nails or the pads of my fingers interchangably depending upon what sort of sound I want to bring out. And I use a thumb pick.

[piper_guitarist]

Before I started attempting to learn classical guitar (which was a major FAIL) I played on my bare fingertips. Upon trying to learn classical I started growing out my nails.

It's a matter of preference, I think. I prefer the louder, clearer attack with nails but if you're playing live a little extra amplification can overcome the slight loss in volume and of course playing at home by yourself volume doesn't matter that much.

Of course, the upside of playing on bare flesh is you don't have to care for your nails, which for me and my weak nails means having to maintain fakes.

[Bingoccc]

Fingertips only. I have rather large and rough hands but my fingernails are as soft as a baby's. As was said, if it's good enough for Clapton...

[songz]

Chet is the the reason I started using acrylic nails 20 years ago. He suggested it at
lunch one day when I was complaining about breaking my nails. He had been using the acrylics for quite a while.

Ron

[Opa John]

Strictly bare fingers for me. The only time my nails come into play is if I'm brushing down the strings while strumming.

I've tried thumb picks and finger picks in the past, but just never got the hang of 'em. I still have some finger picks in my pick jug, but never use 'em.

[lotis]

Fingertips here. I like the touch aspect and I dislike finger picks. I use them on pedal steel but they bug me.

[Glennwillow]

Hi RG,

The nails on my plucking fingers are only about 1/16" long, so they look pretty normal. The nails on my fretting fingers are shorter yet, but I don't think that the difference is apparent to anyone. I pluck the strings with my short nails; I don't care for the sound when my nails get longer and more flexible.

Some people, Tommy Emmanuel is a good example, play with their finger tips because they don't have strong nails. After a while a person develops calluses on their finger tips and these provide a little more clarity to the tone.

Plucking with fingernails adds treble to the sound; plucking with finger tips is a little darker sound, often producing less volume than nails until you develop some calluses on your finger tips.

- Glenn

[TheGuitarMann]

I prefer the warmness of fingertips but it seems you can benefit from having both. I hate the way the clip-on nails look and they seem so unnatural.

[dgonz]

Bare fingers, short nails. I don't like using nails, and especially not finger picks, when I play fingerstyle.

I like the tone when I play with my fingers better, and have no problem with normal volume, though it's probably not as loud as if I were using picks.

[The Growler]

Originally Posted by ralphj

Laurence Juber plays with his fingertips. Do you know him? I don't know if he has any "tricks" to get extra volume, but he doesn't seem to have any problems getting heard

I prefer the sound of playing with my fingertips myself, and I just don't want to bother with caring for my nails. For me, volume is not a concern, since I play for myself only. If I start to play out sometime, I'll probably use amplification anyway.

Works for me. I like the sound without nails.

My bass strings would break the nails anyway when I play bass.

[VJP5]

Put me in the finger group, as well. Like others have stated, I don't want to spend the time/money on my nails. And since I do this mostly for my own enjoyment, I'm happy with the sound I make