• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Add String Tension

#24
not all brands of strings have the same tension when using the same guage...i.e. a .105 from one brand can be tighter than a .105 from another.

A post here said that it is fact that the thinner the string, the looser it will be.......this is not the case either....necessarily.

Tension is a factor of many things. The single largest factor in string tension (other than length of scale) is the relationship between the core ratio vs. overall guage. The larget the core, the more tense the string will be. Also, but to a lesser degree, is core shape. Hex tends to be more tense then round core.

Anyone that thinks it is strictly an issue that fatter strings are more tense then thinner strings should try DR Jonas Helbourg strings. This are very thin compared to "normal" strings. They have a very, very large core and only a single outer wrap. The .75 of this set is stiffer then the .105 of a D'Addario XL.
 
#25
+1

guage only corresponds loosely to tension when you are considering all brands. Within a particular brand or winding configuration it makes all the difference in the world, but not across brands and materials.

Every Fender brand string that I've played has been pretty high tension. You might want to give them a shot.

Stay away from Thomastik Insfields....if you like high tension that is.
 
#26
Sorry, but this is wrong. I'll explain.
hasbeen said:
not all brands of strings have the same tension when using the same guage...i.e. a .105 from one brand can be tighter than a .105 from another.

A post here said that it is fact that the thinner the string, the looser it will be.......this is not the case either....necessarily.
Click to expand...
Both statements can be true, although they generally are not. And they are not caused by the reasons you put forward below.
Tension is a factor of many things. The single largest factor in string tension (other than length of scale) is the relationship between the core ratio vs. overall guage. The larget the core, the more tense the string will be. Also, but to a lesser degree, is core shape. Hex tends to be more tense then round core.

Anyone that thinks it is strictly an issue that fatter strings are more tense then thinner strings should try DR Jonas Helbourg strings. This are very thin compared to "normal" strings. They have a very, very large core and only a single outer wrap. The .75 of this set is stiffer then the .105 of a D'Addario XL.
Click to expand...
Ok, here goes.


There are four interrelated, and codependent variables in the action of a string. They are vibrating length, tension, pitch produced, and mass per unit length. If any one of these is changed while two are held constant, the fourth must change.

The reason the first statements above are sometimes true (larger sometimes looser) is because outside diameter (OD, or "gauge size") of a string is normally used to represent the mass per length of the string. While this is a good guideline, it is not always a direct relationship. It is therefore quite possible for a larger guage string to require less tension to produce a given pitch for a given length, compared to a smaller gauge string-- but only if the strings violate the rule of thumb, that is to say, only if the larger gauge string is less massive (less mass per unit length) (lower linear mass density), despite its being larger.

This happens several ways, involving string construction. First of all, different choices in core and wrap wire sizes, and even number of layers, will mean that a larger diameter string could still have less metal, and more air, compared to the other.

Second, different strings use different materials, with different densities. Two strings with identical dimensions and construction, except for one has a stainless steel outer wrap and the other has a pure nickel outer wrap, will be at different tensions (at the same pitch and vibration length) because nickel is denser than steel, so the nickel wrap string will have a higher linear mass density, so it will have to be held at a higher tension to produce the same pitch.

And if part of the construction is nylon or some other nonmetal, the influence would be huge.

But, in general, a larger string, especially fro the same company and from the same product line, will always be heavier and require higher tension.


Now on to core wire influence.

The size of the core wire does not influence the tension the string is held at. It does, however, affect the flexibility. How is this so?

Well, the tension is one of the four variables in the string equation. And the equation has been tested, and proven. So, two strings of the same linear density, one with larger core and less wrap, and one with thinner core and more wrap, will be held at the same tension in order to produce the same note at the same vibrating length. But a large core is less flexible. It offers more resistance to being pulled or plucked sideways off of the string centerline, because it is more resistant to bending in an arc around your finger or pick and taking off in two slightly different directions (back to the string centerline at the nut and bridge ends). (Just think of it, if you had a .100 solid rod "core" with no wrap, it would be too stiff to pluck at all.) In the end, a string with a thinner core will feel "slikier" even though it is held at the same tension.

Hex core vs. round core: if you have a hex core, and if the first wrap "bites" deeply into the core, this will likely result in a string of higher linear density, because the assuming you are comparing a round core of a given diameter, and a hex core with the same measurement acroass the flats, and if all the wraps and the final OD are the same, the hex core was heavier to begin with.

Further, I would guess that a round core string is likely to do more rolling under the fingers, and thus seem looser. Although I don't have direct experience of this.

I have an extremely hard time believing that a .075 of one brand could be at higher tension than a .105 of any other brand, if they are both all-metal roundwound strings. The difference is just too great. Are you sure you're comparing them at the same pitch and at the same vibrating length?
 
#28
pilotjones said:
Sorry, but this is wrong. I'll explain.
Both statements can be true, although they generally are not. And they are not caused by the reasons you put forward below.

Ok, here goes.


There are four interrelated, and codependent variables in the action of a string. They are vibrating length, tension, pitch produced, and mass per unit length. If any one of these is changed while two are held constant, the fourth must change.

The reason the first statements above are sometimes true (larger sometimes looser) is because outside diameter (OD, or "gauge size") of a string is normally used to represent the mass per length of the string. While this is a good guideline, it is not always a direct relationship. It is therefore quite possible for a larger guage string to require less tension to produce a given pitch for a given length, compared to a smaller gauge string-- but only if the strings violate the rule of thumb, that is to say, only if the larger gauge string is less massive (less mass per unit length) (lower linear mass density), despite its being larger.

This happens several ways, involving string construction. First of all, different choices in core and wrap wire sizes, and even number of layers, will mean that a larger diameter string could still have less metal, and more air, compared to the other.

Second, different strings use different materials, with different densities. Two strings with identical dimensions and construction, except for one has a stainless steel outer wrap and the other has a pure nickel outer wrap, will be at different tensions (at the same pitch and vibration length) because nickel is denser than steel, so the nickel wrap string will have a higher linear mass density, so it will have to be held at a higher tension to produce the same pitch.

And if part of the construction is nylon or some other nonmetal, the influence would be huge.

But, in general, a larger string, especially fro the same company and from the same product line, will always be heavier and require higher tension.


Now on to core wire influence.

The size of the core wire does not influence the tension the string is held at. It does, however, affect the flexibility. How is this so?

Well, the tension is one of the four variables in the string equation. And the equation has been tested, and proven. So, two strings of the same linear density, one with larger core and less wrap, and one with thinner core and more wrap, will be held at the same tension in order to produce the same note at the same vibrating length. But a large core is less flexible. It offers more resistance to being pulled or plucked sideways off of the string centerline, because it is more resistant to bending in an arc around your finger or pick and taking off in two slightly different directions (back to the string centerline at the nut and bridge ends). (Just think of it, if you had a .100 solid rod "core" with no wrap, it would be too stiff to pluck at all.) In the end, a string with a thinner core will feel "slikier" even though it is held at the same tension.

Hex core vs. round core: if you have a hex core, and if the first wrap "bites" deeply into the core, this will likely result in a string of higher linear density, because the assuming you are comparing a round core of a given diameter, and a hex core with the same measurement acroass the flats, and if all the wraps and the final OD are the same, the hex core was heavier to begin with.

Further, I would guess that a round core string is likely to do more rolling under the fingers, and thus seem looser. Although I don't have direct experience of this.

I have an extremely hard time believing that a .075 of one brand could be at higher tension than a .105 of any other brand, if they are both all-metal roundwound strings. The difference is just too great. Are you sure you're comparing them at the same pitch and at the same vibrating length?
Click to expand...

it looks to me like you said the exact same thing that I did.
 
#29
continued to PilotJones-

I just re-read your post and have to concede that you're right on the flexibility vs. tension issue. I was using the words interchangably. On a science level they are not but "where the rubber meets the road" they can have the same effect...that is to reduce string rattle as the less flexible string, as you pointed out, has less excursion.

One issue though, please note that my post did say "necessarily" and "from brand to brand"...not within the same brand.

I also just saw your last question regarding the Jonas strings from DR. Yes, they were tuned up to the same pitch. These have got to be the stiffest strings on the market. I've consulted for several different bass string companies over the years. Most notably I did much of the testing and "tweaking" on Trace Elliot back in the day and I'm currently evaluate strings for DR.

Mark Dronge had sent me a set of these Jonas strings and commented that "Marcus Miller thought they were the stiffest strings he had ever played"....and Mark wanted to know what I thought of them. Well, they are indeed stiff. The string is so unusual in construction that they won't fit in the slot on the post of many tuning machines.

Because the string is almost all core, they aren't tapered at the tuning machine end.
 
#30
hasbeen said:
continued to PilotJones-

I just re-read your post and have to concede that you're right on the flexibility vs. tension issue. I was using the words interchangably. On a science level they are not but "where the rubber meets the road" they can have the same effect...that is to reduce string rattle as the less flexible string, as you pointed out, has less excursion.
Click to expand...
Hmm... I suppose that if a stiffer (but same tension) string rattles less in use, it's actually because you plucked it less-- gave it less lateral displacement-- since it's harder to pluck. An interesting way of regulating rattle (overexcursion into the frets)! It's a process that could be behind every normal application, that I hadn't considered. Cool.

Another possibility is that if (and this is just conjecture) in a very stiff string, certain harmonics died out quicker, and if those harmonics were the ones causing the large excursion at the proceeding fret that is fret rattle, that the general overall excursion could be the same, but the rattle would be so short in time as to be less or unnoticable.
One issue though, please note that my post did say "necessarily" and "from brand to brand"...not within the same brand.
Click to expand...
Right. I guess I hopefully clarified to the original poster that he can in fact go to a higher guage in the same brand, and perhaps also in most other brands, and get higher tension, reducing his rattle.
I also just saw your last question regarding the Jonas strings from DR. Yes, they were tuned up to the same pitch. These have got to be the stiffest strings on the market. I've consulted for several different bass string companies over the years. Most notably I did much of the testing and "tweaking" on Trace Elliot back in the day and I'm currently evaluate strings for DR.

Mark Dronge had sent me a set of these Jonas strings and commented that "Marcus Miller thought they were the stiffest strings he had ever played"....and Mark wanted to know what I thought of them. Well, they are indeed stiff. The string is so unusual in construction that they won't fit in the slot on the post of many tuning machines.

Because the string is almost all core, they aren't tapered at the tuning machine end.
Click to expand...
Cool. Do they sound very different from typical strings, or is the difference mostly in feel? I ask because the construction sounds so strange, and the thicker the core gets, the more it should behave as a rod rather than as a string. And to to feel that stiff while being that light (assuming they are actually lighter, and don't for example use tungsten to keep weight up while reducing the gauge), it also seems like they'd be behaving less like a string. Do they sound different, especially when fretting high notes?
 
#32
pilotjones said:
Hmm... I suppose that if a stiffer (but

I didn't especially care for them but DR sent them just out of curiosity ...to see what others thought of them. So are so "strange" that they don't catalog them but were wondering, if enough people like them, they might run some ads and such.

To my ears they sounded very different. Of course, I begged that issue by changing my technique as they were quite "difficult" to play. I usually have a very low action on my basses and I pluck pretty hard but way back towards the bridge. With these strings I had to move my right hand towards the neck some.

Overall, in the end I heard less fundamental with these.....lot of overtones.....all up and down the neck. Mark Dronge said that Jonas doesn't use these on all his basses....it is kind of a special application string. He makes a piccolo set for him too.
Click to expand...
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back