Increase string tension by reversing headstock?

[PhatBasstard]

This topic has been flogged in the Basses forum. The physics are indisputable. Length past the bridge makes no difference in tension. Gary Willis is a very sharp technical person. And that is why I was mystified that he would make the statement about the spacer. It just didn't make ANY sense. I did however go back and look at the page in his book that illustrates the spacer. It works for him because his B sting is TAPERED. The spacer effectively reduces the length of tapered core from 1/2" in front of the saddle to almost zero, making the string less floppy. Increasing the length of a normal string CHANGES NOTHING regarding tension. If the tension increases the pitch changes. The laws of Physics don't stop functioning just because you're playing bass.

Right. He's increasing the overall mass of the string by using more of the full winding area for his speaking length (point A to B). Thus, a very important variable has changed. His spacer works because of the change in string mass between points A and B. Not because of the added length behind the witness point. Props to you and Mr. Willis for seeing this.

 

[WarriorJoe7]

This topic has been flogged in the Basses forum. The physics are indisputable. Length past the bridge makes no difference in tension. Gary Willis is a very sharp technical person. And that is why I was mystified that he would make the statement about the spacer. It just didn't make ANY sense. I did however go back and look at the page in his book that illustrates the spacer. It works for him because his B sting is TAPERED. The spacer effectively reduces the length of tapered core from 1/2" in front of the saddle to almost zero, making the string less floppy. Increasing the length of a Normal string beyond the bridge CHANGES NOTHING regarding stiffness or tension. If the tension changes the pitch changes. The laws of Physics don't stop functioning just because you're playing bass.

Yes Gary's answer is PERFECT for tapercore strings but that has to do with getting rid of that chorusy effect caused by the string vibrating at 2 very close but slightly off frequencies. I don't think it would have any effect on stiffness (horizontal per jazz ad.) It definitely would have NOTHING AT ALL to do with longitudinal tension.

I've done it... Here is the thread and a very close up view of a warwick corvette FNA with the tapercore strings extended millimeters using cut up steel fuel line.

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=368500&highlight=tapercore

NOTICE THAT THEY ARE TAPERCORE STRINGS

 

[PhatBasstard]

Yes Gary's answer is PERFECT for tapercore strings but that has to do with getting rid of that chorusy effect caused by the string vibrating at 2 very close but slightly off frequencies. I don't think it would have any effect on stiffness (horizontal per jazz ad.) It definitely would have NOTHING AT ALL to do with longitudinal tension.

Once again, slightly off point. I think you meant to hit that new DR thread about the "long neck" strings.

 

[Son of Magni]

This topic has been flogged in the Basses forum. The physics are indisputable. Length past the bridge makes no difference in tension. Gary Willis is a very sharp technical person. And that is why I was mystified that he would make the statement about the spacer. It just didn't make ANY sense. I did however go back and look at the page in his book that illustrates the spacer. It works for him because his B sting is TAPERED. The spacer effectively reduces the length of tapered core from 1/2" in front of the saddle to almost zero, making the string less floppy. Increasing the length of a Normal string beyond the bridge CHANGES NOTHING regarding stiffness or tension. If the tension changes the pitch changes. The laws of Physics don't stop functioning just because you're playing bass.

Yes, I think there's about 20 threads that should be merged into a "BS about increasing string stiffness" megathread. Then the people that feel the need to continue beating it to death can have a place to hang

 

[pilotjones]

And to add to the "must decrease the bare core length" debate: consider that a piano bass string will have a good couple of inches bare, in order to get a "proper" tone. Maybe it's different because both ends of the string are approximately equally bare, so its fairly symmetrical.

 

[PhatBasstard]

And to add to the "must decrease the bare core length" debate: consider that a piano bass string will have a good couple of inches bare, in order to get a "proper" tone. Maybe it's different because both ends of the string are approximately equally bare, so its fairly symmetrical.

Could be. But keep in mind piano strings are designed to vibrate at a certain static length, not variable fretted lengths where their harmonic structure is constantly changed.
The guys that seem to have problems with tapered/exposed core strings seem to have them (problems) only on certain notes or certain groups of notes.

 

[waseok]

Just because it is Fodera doing something, doesn't mean that it is correct.

lowsound

and vice-versa
Just because it is Fodera doing something doesn't mean that it is marketing. They already have enough orders...duhh

 

[PhatBasstard]

and vice-versa
Just because it is Fodera doing something doesn't mean that it is marketing. They already have enough orders...duhh

I believe it's neither. That headstock was something they did for Mike Pope or Oteil Burbridge. Not sure if it's a regular (irregular? ) production option.

 

[PhatBasstard]

I just read an interview in a popular bass magazine. It said that this artist was having a problem with low tension on a tuned down E-string. Someone at the custom shop of the worlds most popular bass company solved the problem by installing a left handed neck on his right handed bass. He said this increased the tension by making the string longer.

Finally saw the exact article in Bass Player.
You left one huge detail out of this whole mess you proposed:
He also changed to a .125 E string!!!!!

Yeah, that might increase tension.

 

[bench]

This topic has been flogged in the Basses forum. The physics are indisputable. Length past the bridge makes no difference in tension. Gary Willis is a very sharp technical person. And that is why I was mystified that he would make the statement about the spacer. It just didn't make ANY sense. I did however go back and look at the page in his book that illustrates the spacer. It works for him because his B sting is TAPERED. The spacer effectively reduces the length of tapered core from 1/2" in front of the saddle to almost zero, making the string less floppy. Increasing the length of a Normal string beyond the bridge CHANGES NOTHING regarding stiffness or tension. If the tension changes the pitch changes. The laws of Physics don't stop functioning just because you're playing bass.

1. I´m aware of the fact that the TENSION of the SAME string at the SAME length has to be the SAME for the SAME frequency.

2. By modifiing parts of the instrument (bridge, nut, headstock, string-through-body, neck-mass, etc.) you can influence the way the string vibrates WITHOUT changing mass, tension or length of the string.

3. IF 1. and 2. are correct THAN I think it´s a fact the way the string reacts to manual manipulation (plucking that is...) can also be influenced by those modifications. And this is what some people in this thread call "stiffness".

4. In my opinion that has nothing to do with laws of physics that stop working. I rather think that it´s about a whole lot of laws contributing to an instrument and its sound and feel, that we (as bassists) do not know.

 

[jcoopcoyote]

About halfway through this thread, I did acknowledge that changing to heavier strings is what must have really helped.
I didn't intend to start a big hullabaloo!
I simply had previously discounted the idea that lengthening the strings after the nut or saddles would "stiffen the strings". Then this article appeared, giving legitimacy to this idea that makes no sense to me.

 

[PhatBasstard]

About halfway through this thread, I did acknowledge that changing to heavier strings is what must have really helped.....

Looking back, yes you did.
My appologies.

 

[Taylor Livingston]

So increasing string tension by reversing headtsock = busted. I guess the only real way to increase string tension is to string through the body.

 

[Taylor Livingston]

Oh yeah, .

 

[meev992]

I guess the only real way to increase string tension is to string through the body.

oh boy, here we go again.

 

[Taylor Livingston]

Did you miss the wink?

 

[meev992]

Did you miss the wink?

no I didn't, I knew you were just kidding.

 

[T. B. Player]

3 pages and no one's mentioned this...

Change your strings.

Strings are constructed differently, which makes their tensility (the amount of pressure required to bring them to pitch) different. I went through this discussion when I wanted a 34" scale bass with a tight low B. I was told this can be done, but a 35" scale would give me a tighter B with a wider variety of strings.

SIT strings are made so that the low "B" is not floppy on a 34 inch scale instrument. But put DRs or D'Addarios on them and the low "B" exhibits "floppiness." I LOVE DR Black Beauties on my 35" scale - but I hesitate to put them on my 34. If only SIT made a coated string.

The construction/tightness of the neck joint has an effect on the tightness of the string as well, but I couldn't believe the truth in the brand of string argument until I tried it on my own.

Z

 

[PhatBasstard]

3 pages and no one's mentioned this...

Change your strings...

Not exactly:

Finally saw the exact article in Bass Player.
He also changed to a .125 E string!!!!!

...but we get your point, however, your point is more related to overall mass of the given string than tensile strength (which are going to be somewhat related by default, although I'm no metallurgist).

 

[pilotjones]

3 pages and no one's mentioned this...

Change your strings.

Strings are constructed differently, which makes their tensility (the amount of pressure required to bring them to pitch) different. I went through this discussion when I wanted a 34" scale bass with a tight low B. I was told this can be done, but a 35" scale would give me a tighter B with a wider variety of strings.

SIT strings are made so that the low "B" is not floppy on a 34 inch scale instrument. But put DRs or D'Addarios on them and the low "B" exhibits "floppiness." I LOVE DR Black Beauties on my 35" scale - but I hesitate to put them on my 34. If only SIT made a coated string.

The construction/tightness of the neck joint has an effect on the tightness of the string as well, but I couldn't believe the truth in the brand of string argument until I tried it on my own.

Z

Tensility is not a word.

If by it you mean "the amount of tension (or pulling force) required to bring them to pitch," then the term is tension. And it is the same for any two strings with the same mass per length, regardless of the construction method.

Strings are constructed differently. Which means that one manufacturer's .120 diameter B may be heavier (more mass per length) than another manufacturer's .120 diameter B, and therefore will tune up at a higher tension.

Floppiness is a pretty poorly defined term. I think most people would relate it to the non-scientific definition of stiffness, that is, how easy it is to deflect the string sideways on a pluck. But on the other hand, I think people are likely to call their B string floppy if it rattles against the neck, and this is entirely related to the height of the action, not just intrinsic to the string.