String gauge uniformity

[JKambing]

I was wondering how come string gauges aren't always uniform across the heavy, light and medium of a particular brand. For example:

Rotosound Monel Flatwounds (Light): .40 .60 .80 .100
Rotosound Monel Flatwounds (Medium): .45 .65 .85 .105
Rotosound Monel Flatwounds (Heavy): .50 .75 .95 .110

From the light to the medium, all string gauges increase by a uniform .005 each, but for the medium to heavy, string gauge increments vary from .005 to .010 across the strings. What is the main reason for this? to maintain even tension? To maintain even tone? I'm really curious because only certain companies do this. DR, as far as I know, has even increments in gauge size across all strings from light to heavy.

(Pardon me if this has been discussed before, I wanted to do a search, but didn't have a clue about what keywords to type.)

[JKambing]

*bump*

[JKambing]

*bump again*

[greenboy]

Just my opinion, but it's more a convention than anything else, stemming from historical precedent. To illuminate this take a look at the D'Addario string tension guide, and play around with the spreadsheet in my sig if you wish. The D'addario unit weights of each type of string will put you in the ballpark for any string manufacturer's string of a similar type, and you can see that the tensions of various sets vary hugely from string to string.

Partly that's because gauges for bass strings seem to be available only in .005" increments, partly it's because of a long-established tendency to jump an average of .020 for each string. Does it make sense? For my needs I tend to build sets where the tensions are a little more uniform. But for yours that is up to you to decide. Certainly stock sets are cheaper than buying a bunch of singles...

[drnknmstr]

Personally I wish more companies did custom balanced sets like Ken Smith or Thomastiks. I'd love to have a 107. What's with all the numerical uniformity? I care about FEEL, not numbers.

[Kevinmach]

Coming from a guitar background, I know that strings *do* make a difference. But mainly just in lighter to heavier, with some variances in quality on electric guitars and more so on acoustic.

But I am beginning to realize which strings you choose for bass make a much bigger difference on tone and feel, than it does with a guitar (gauge is more noticeable w/guitar between different sets of strings than is tone usually, IMO). So, I too was confused to see the thicknesses jumping around (not being uniform within a given set), and even wondered if it was down to the point where you could individual purchase each string- to get the exact thickness you wanted for each.

Granted, that seems like overkill (or over thinking it), but anyway, this concept has confused me to some extent too. I thought it was a good question.

[JKambing]

Thanks Kevinmach

I read greenboy's reply, but didn't really understand it.. Perhaps someone who does understand it could rephrase it for me?

And thanks to everyone who replied.

[Solarmist]

As greenboy said: about .020 change per string, but I come up with .004 graduation/change per half step - i.e. G to D string from a 45105 set:

G ------ F# ---- F ----- E ----- D# --- D
.045 -- .049 -- .053 -- .057 -- .061 -- .065

D'Addario string tension chart:
http://www.daddario.com/Resources/JD...sion_chart.pdf

[lemur821]

Originally Posted by JKambing

Thanks Kevinmach

I read greenboy's reply, but didn't really understand it.. Perhaps someone who does understand it could rephrase it for me?

He says that if you take a look at the tensions listed for a given set of strings (D'addario has a big old chart that makes a good reference) you'll see that they go from pretty low on the E string to really high on the D, and then probably a little lower on the G.

You might think this would be for reasons of playability or tone, but how often do you hear people complaining about their floppy B string? All the time. I bet if strings came in sets of equal tension across the board, you wouldn't have this problem.

[JKambing]

Ah okay. That makes sense. Thanks lemur821!

Actually I have noticed in the past.. Just didn't hit me.. My E string is always floppiest, A string feels most comfortable, D string has most tension, G string is somewhat comfortable too. I really wonder why there hasn't been improvements on this.. I think we'd all be happy with more uniform tension strings, yes?

[greenboy]

It's all relative to one's technique, bass and electronics, etc whether they notice things tonally or feelwise they'd like to change. For me, I always thought the 45-65-85-105 sets had A and D strings that required a touch that didn't work the same on the G and E strings, so I tried 45-60-80-105 and that worked and sounded a lot better for me; I no longer felt the G and E were floppy.

Same when going with lighter sets fer instance 40-60-80-100. To me the D and A strings there want a harder touch, then when you play the G and E strings they appear floppy or just don't sound right. But change the gauges of those two strings so that tension per string is closer - 40-55-75-95/100 and your technique begins to adjust to having a more even feel for all four strings. After that adjustment of technique the floppy feel is no longer an issue.

Unless of course the entire set is not your thing ; } - then you might go to 45-60-80-105 or whatever.

[JKambing]

Originally Posted by greenboy

It's all relative to one's technique, bass and electronics, etc whether they notice things tonally or feelwise they'd like to change. For me, I always thought the 45-65-85-105 sets had A and D strings that required a touch that didn't work the same on the G and E strings, so I tried 45-60-80-105 and that worked and sounded a lot better for me; I no longer felt the G and E were floppy.

Same when going with lighter sets fer instance 40-60-80-100. To me the D and A strings there want a harder touch, then when you play the G and E strings they appear floppy or just don't sound right. But change the gauges of those two strings so that tension per string is closer - 40-55-75-95/100 and your technique begins to adjust to having a more even feel for all four strings. After that adjustment of technique the floppy feel is no longer an issue.

Unless of course the entire set is not your thing ; } - then you might go to 45-60-80-105 or whatever.

Thanks greenboy. You've been rather helpful. I think I better understand the concept now =)

And what you says makes sense. Even though I can literally feel the uneven tensions on my bass strings, it doesn't really bother me because I'm already used to it. Thanks again!

[greenboy]

Originally Posted by JKambing

Even though I can literally feel the uneven tensions on my bass strings, it doesn't really bother me because I'm already used to it. Thanks again!

Well, I used 4-string examples, but what first got me exploring this was the B strings in many sets. Like many, especially players who hadn't yet built up more ability to pluck lightly as well as heavily, I really felt the B was floppy most of the time and just didn't seem to respond the same. When I lowered the gauge on D and A strings the B started to feel a lot more like it belonged to the rest of the set and I was on my way.

Now when I encounter a bass that's strung with typical sets it takes a few moments to accomodate the difference in feel. But most of all what I miss is having all strings acting about the same dynamically and tonally. Only a few companies seem to have a set or three that are more balanced in tension, and I don't often encounter those around here unless I've bought 'em. When I get back to my more balanced sets on my basses I go, "Ah, that's HOME!"

[P-BASSLOVER]

Originally Posted by drnknmstr

Personally I wish more companies did custom balanced sets like Ken Smith or Thomastiks. I'd love to have a 107. What's with all the numerical uniformity? I care about FEEL, not numbers.

Dean Markley SR 2000's requested your wish!
The Wll Lee set. go to www.juststrings.com

[greenboy]

If you have a digital caliper and measure the Will Lee set you will find that the numbers on the package differ from the actual strings. A marketing ploy with Sevens methinks.