This method is a bit silly for any tuning in which two or more strings are tuned to the same note. Although I guess at a certain point, you just point and say "this string right here."
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Idle thoughts: why is the G string string "1"?
- Thread starter lermgalieu
- Start date
This method is a bit silly for any tuning in which two or more strings are tuned to the same note. Although I guess at a certain point, you just point and say "this string right here."
I looked at my string sets. I could not inspect all of them because some have a sealed inner package that I did not want to open. Of the three brands I could inspect, only one package numbered the individual string baggies (and it was a 4-string set). The baggies in the 6-string set I looked at were not numbered, but had gauges marked on each string bag.
If you look at how the numbers are organized on the outside packaging, they all seem to go from smallest to largest.
Vertical (top to bottom)
Horizontal (left to right)
As far as I can tell, strings are simply numbered from smallest to largest.
If you look at how the numbers are organized on the outside packaging, they all seem to go from smallest to largest.
Vertical (top to bottom)
Horizontal (left to right)
As far as I can tell, strings are simply numbered from smallest to largest.
this discussion has me wondering why I always re-string starting with the E string (#4) on a 4-string or B (#5) on a 5-string.
I've been stringing basses for a number of years, and I don't really "think" about it too much while I'm doing it.
But I suppose I string with the lowest strings first in order to build up the tension on the neck. the low strings exert less tension on the neck than the high strings. I think gradual is better than all at once, but I have no scientific evidence to support that view.
oh, and just so you know, on DB you only re-string one new string at a time. you avoid moving the bridge and sound post that way. you don't have the equivalent issue with modern electric basses, so it's a non issue. If there are those of you who re-string that way, I suppose you're very cautious people. plus I like having "all strings off" to oil the fretboard, etc, while doing the restringing.
I've been stringing basses for a number of years, and I don't really "think" about it too much while I'm doing it.
But I suppose I string with the lowest strings first in order to build up the tension on the neck. the low strings exert less tension on the neck than the high strings. I think gradual is better than all at once, but I have no scientific evidence to support that view.
oh, and just so you know, on DB you only re-string one new string at a time. you avoid moving the bridge and sound post that way. you don't have the equivalent issue with modern electric basses, so it's a non issue. If there are those of you who re-string that way, I suppose you're very cautious people. plus I like having "all strings off" to oil the fretboard, etc, while doing the restringing.
Agree 100%.
Just like going up the neck should be towards the headstock. When you hang the bass, or put in stand.....headstock is up at the top. Bridge is on the bottom.
Going up the neck is towards headstock.
If you want something genuinely arbitrary to worry about, how about "front pickup/back pickup"? I've been playing for 50 years, and I still don't know whether the so-called front pickup is the neck or the bridge pickup.
No matter which string was designated as "1", someone would ask why another string was not the "1".
My underlying premise is that this is a conspiracy against the low end. I’m surprised more people aren’t outraged.
This is not necessarily an accurate assumption.
For example:
Looks like the D is the highest tension on all of these sets.
The E has higher tension than the G on the ECB84 set.
maybe it's just that the high strings seem to be higher tension, because you have to crank them more to get into tune.
It never even crossed my mind to worry about this. Maybe it's because I almost never change strings 
. My process is to pull all the strings out of their little baggies so I can see their relative size. I probably do line them up largest to smallest, but I am not a string maker who has to deal with the math.
For a string maker, IMHO it makes sense to organize them from smallest to largest as that is how we typically organize numbers. After all we are used to counting 1,2,3,4,5; 2,4,6,8,10; 2,4,8,16,32; 10,20,30,40,50; and etc.
Well, that's wrong. On a 5 string the B string would be 5.
Well, the highest string in pitch is 1. That's just the way it is. Do you have trouble with stage left and stage right, too?
Ah, the good ole “that’s just the way it is”Well, that's wrong. On a 5 string the B string would be 5.
Well, the highest string in pitch is 1. That's just the way it is. Do you have trouble with stage left and stage right, too?
argument. Thanks, dad. I don’t have “trouble” understanding this, I have a problem with it. Two different things, but thanks for the condescension.
Again, the string set thing is just what made me think of this, not really the core issue. This is used in instrument pedagogy as well.
My process is to pull all the strings out of their little baggies so I can see their relative size. I probably do line them up largest to smallest, but I am not a string maker who has to deal with the math.
For a string maker, IMHO it makes sense to organize them from smallest to largest as that is how we typically organize numbers. After all we are used to counting 1,2,3,4,5; 2,4,6,8,10; 2,4,8,16,32; 10,20,30,40,50; and etc.
How are you using "lowest" here? The one that makes the lowest tone, or the one physically lowest to the ground?
The child doesn't know anything about the sound a string makes - they're looking at the physical layout and saying "the one closest to the ground is 1."
Or think of it this way - how do you number the strings on a ukulele? Standard tuning is GCEA, but the tone order, low to high, is CEGA. Banjo (5-string) does the same kind of thing - the strings aren't tonally sorted.
If you really want to go crazy, check out this Wikipedia page to see how different stringed instruments are tuned!
Lowest to the ground is arbitrary. Doesn’t even apply to double bass at all. So yeah I meant lowest in pitch, which is also thickest, so naturally seems “low” to me. But I do agree that the concept really makes no sense when you examine it. My takeaway is that we’d be better off without numbering strings at all. Well, I would be.
