Physicists develop bass string theory

[jak352]

Hi, I'm Jonathan Kemp, acoustic researcher and inventor of Kemp Strings. The sound examples were plucked 1 cm from the bridge and recorded straight into the soundcard in order to create enough clear measurements for the overtones to clearly measure their frequencies. I thought it was a good idea to upload these exact sounds that were used to generate the graphs of inharmonicity from the paper even though you wouldn't normally pluck that close to the bridge. The videos of Gus Stirrat playing the Kemp Strings on YouTube have the normal plucking position and amping etc. I'll get more demos up when I've got time.
Inharmonicity is related to pitch drift as discussed in my open access research paper. Well done with the wrapping @iiipopes! Not a durable solution perhaps, but certainly a cool good proof of concept. The top layer of winding on my strings is continuous so they are durable.
My strings are equal sensitvity to pitch bends whereas normal strings are harder to bend on the thin strings and easier to bend out of tune unintentionally on the bottom end (and this is related to my guitar strings that have equal or close to equal cores and parallel bending of chords on the lowest four strings on Strat). Anyway, lumped strings are not for everyone as a lot of people will always want to stick to what their heroes use etc., and they are expensive to construct. They are measurably different and you of course can choose to love it or hate it or go meh. Enjoy your bass either way folks!

 

[ixlramp]

Overtones, which he calls inharmonicity are part of the sound of an instrument. They give it character.

Overtones and inharmonicity are different things. 'Inharmonicity' is the degree to which the frequencies of the harmonics (overtones) diverge from the mathematical ideal.
The lumped strings reduce, not remove, inharmonicity; and reduce it where it is excessive.
There will still be plenty of imperfection remaining, a different type of imperfection, not characterless.

BTW, stretch tuning on a piano and other piano tuning methods are used because we use even tempered instruments not perfect temperament.

Some tuning methods yes, but concerning stretch tuning, that is independent of tonal system and is done to align the tuning of pitches to the very inharmonicity-sharp harmonics of lower notes.

No amount of snake oil is going to repeal the laws of physics.

I have a physics degree, and due to my obsession with music, a fairly good understanding of tonal systems, the physics of music and instruments.
I read most of the Kemp research paper, watched the video, read the site. This is certainly not 'snake oil', everything looks scientifically legitimate and he seems to follow the scientific method.
Your claim that this goes against the laws of physics is silly. You base this on your own misunderstandings of the science of music.
Kemp Strings are the most scientifically rigorous instrument strings i know of. I really appreciate the approach.

 

[ixlramp]

The video keeps talking about inharmonicity, but it does nothing to demonstrate it or even indicate that the strings do anything about it at all.

What they showed in the video was pitch drift.

Notes being out of tune as you move up on the neck is intonation problems.

The video is not particularly technical so perhaps it misled you. If you read the research paper that shows that this project is indeed about inharmonicity, and that the strings do reduce inharmonicity.

 

[RSBBass]

Overtones and inharmonicity are different things. 'Inharmonicity' is the degree to which the frequencies of the harmonics (overtones) diverge from the mathematical ideal.
The lumped strings reduce, not remove, inharmonicity; and reduce it where it is excessive.
There will still be plenty of imperfection remaining, a different type of imperfection, not characterless.

Some tuning methods yes, but concerning stretch tuning, that is independent of tonal system and is done to align the tuning of pitches to the very inharmonicity-sharp harmonics of lower notes.

I have a physics degree, and due to my obsession with music, a fairly good understanding of tonal systems, the physics of music and instruments.
I read most of the Kemp research paper, watched the video, read the site. This is certainly not 'snake oil', everything looks scientifically legitimate and he seems to follow the scientific method.
Your claim that this goes against the laws of physics is silly. You base this on your own misunderstandings of the science of music.
Kemp Strings are the most scientifically rigorous instrument strings i know of. I really appreciate the approach.

I am not a physicist but am a scientist, a geologist, who took two years of physics. I also am very interested in acoustics. Inharmonicity is not a problem I have encountered in my readings. I quick search seems to indicate that while it exists it is typically very slight ins stringed instruments.

I do not understand the idea of "tuning independent of tonal systems". We are dealing with instruments on this forum that use tonal tuning.

I admit I did not read the research paper. I did watch the video and read the post. I will withdraw the snake oil comment but will replace it with being a solution in search of a problem. I also suggest that you don't call strangers ignorant unless you have some way to know they are. Disagreeing with you is not an indication of ignorance.

 

[Frank Tuesday]

The video is not particularly technical so perhaps it misled you. If you read the research paper that shows that this project is indeed about inharmonicity, and that the strings do reduce inharmonicity.

Which is fine, but if you're going to make a video about your research on inharmonicity, it should demonstrate inharmonicity, and not other phenomenon. Furthermore it does not demonstrate the problem exists under normal playing conditions, only an extreme example which has little to do with actual use cases for the instrument. Lastly, he didn't demonstrate that the product makes a significant difference within the use case compared to a "normal" string.

If we're discussing overtones, why isn't there a Fourier transform of the input signal to show the actual overtone frequencies, which can be compared? The higher order overtones have a lower amplitude than the fundamental, so there should be a demonstration that the string change makes an audible difference. And where is the double blind test to show that people prefer the sound of the new design.

And that's the problem. There can be a research paper, but if you give me cliff notes in the form a video, I'm going to look at that first. And nothing in the video convinced me that it is worth my time. People say it's snake oil, because the video makes it look like snake oil. It's all hand waving and poorly considered demonstrations.

 

[EXCAV8]

Hi, I'm Jonathan Kemp, acoustic researcher and inventor of Kemp Strings. The sound examples were plucked 1 cm from the bridge and recorded straight into the soundcard in order to create enough clear measurements for the overtones to clearly measure their frequencies. I thought it was a good idea to upload these exact sounds that were used to generate the graphs of inharmonicity from the paper even though you wouldn't normally pluck that close to the bridge. The videos of Gus Stirrat playing the Kemp Strings on YouTube have the normal plucking position and amping etc. I'll get more demos up when I've got time.
Inharmonicity is related to pitch drift as discussed in my open access research paper. Well done with the wrapping @iiipopes! Not a durable solution perhaps, but certainly a cool good proof of concept. The top layer of winding on my strings is continuous so they are durable.
My strings are equal sensitvity to pitch bends whereas normal strings are harder to bend on the thin strings and easier to bend out of tune unintentionally on the bottom end (and this is related to my guitar strings that have equal or close to equal cores and parallel bending of chords on the lowest four strings on Strat). Anyway, lumped strings are not for everyone as a lot of people will always want to stick to what their heroes use etc., and they are expensive to construct. They are measurably different and you of course can choose to love it or hate it or go meh. Enjoy your bass either way folks!

Jonathan,

Thanks for the clarification! I like the concept of your strings, but they're a bit out of my price range, and I'm sure that shipping from Europe would probably cost as much as the strings themselves!

 

[jak352]

Jonathan,

Thanks for the clarification! I like the concept of your strings, but they're a bit out of my price range, and I'm sure that shipping from Europe would probably cost as much as the strings themselves!

Thanks! I'm charging £1.50 GBP for worldwide shipping from Scotland, UK (so people aren't paying even more for getting these already expensive strings when they live further away). I'll do more videos in due course to demonstrate the differences and am grateful for the feedback. For the moment I would add that the graphs of "Inharmonicity (cents)" against "mode number" in the existing video show how many cents (percent of a semitone) the different modes of vibration are away from the true harmonic series, as determined by finding the peaks in the Fourier Transforms of the actual audio you hear in the video.

 

[MattZilla]

I admit I did not read the research paper.

an indication of ignorance.

 

[RSBBass]

Not at all. My comments were on what was in the video. I did watch the video and as I have otherwise posted I am for from ignorant on the subject. The research paper was posted as additional information by someone following the OP. Nothing in the video made me think it was worthwhile reading the research paper. The video was typical click bait saying with these strings you could sound batter than many famous bass players. Obviously that is nonsense.

String design does play a major role in a players sound but there is no one best sound. If there was we would all play the same strings. If these new strings were the best we would all be playing the strings that had come closest to them before these were released.

The videos attempts to demonstrate his claims relied on a fairly extreme technique of picking very close to the bridge. There is nothing wrong with that as a technique but it isn't how most players play most of the time. Even with that what I heard was the pitch drift from the attack, not the off harmonics (inharmonicity) that was claimed.

I am tired of being called ignorant on this thread when people have no basis for saying so. I suspect it violates forum guidelines. If someone wants to discuss the subject, I am happy to. Can we do so without name calling

 

[LetItGrowTone]

I can add another serious criticism (tough crowd, eh?): in the photos the "witness point" isn't set at the bridge. Naturally, that would benefit the string that is thinnest there, the lumped one. (You need to say explicitly that the witness points *were* set prior to making the graphs/recordings, and/or change the photos.)

**
The added mass has near zero effect on the fundamental (as the peak amplitude of the fundamental is far away up the string), and proportionally more effect on higher harmonics, as needed.

Also, while the problem gets worse as the string gets shorter (fretted closer to bridge), that added mass becomes *proportionally greater*, because the total mass vibrating is less while the added mass stays the same.

If the above is true, then I imagine that a string that's *continuously tapered* (increasing from nut to bridge, very slightly) might be even better. I give away the idea. Somebody do it. Hint: the taper required is likely not linear.

**
I was aware of inharmonicity on the lows of stiff flats (drove me to round core flats or even rounds), but I was not aware that the problem gets proportionally worse on higher order harmonics. Hadn't thought of it.
But now I think it's possible that my addiction to tone=0 on the instrument is partly due to this, and I'll be thinking about it.
Thanks everyone.

 

[LetItGrowTone]

In this context a foam mute could be reinterpreted as being a way to hide this problem, much like sealed cabinet rolled off lows hide the poor speaker damping of most tube amps, both of these whether or not the player realizes it conscously.

**
About the topic: Not snake oil. I believe in the idea. Also not snake oil because in the paper he cites the work that many others have done on this subject (32 other scholarly papers), mainly on piano strings. Seems well established there.

About what could be misunderstood as a conflation of inharmonicity and pitch glide, he explain how they're related near the end of the paper. Amusingly, to focus on the fundamental in this section of the paper they used a low pass filter (i.e. set "tone=0", as I mentioned).

 

[LetItGrowTone]

Lastly, I think the video linked to in post #14 and the other video it leads to are very convincing.
Thanks @Killed_by_Death.

Lastly lastly, @micguy said it makes sense. The end.

 

[RSBBass]

As you go to higher order harmonics, the volume of the harmonic drop off very rapidly. So while the inharmonicity may get more pronounced the affect would not.

 

[LetItGrowTone]

@RSBBass said: "As you go to higher order harmonics, the volume of the harmonic drop off very rapidly. So while the inharmonicity may get more pronounced the affect would not."

But, according to the paper, inharmonicities of higher order (which as you say might each be inaudible because their amplitudes are low), summed together do have the audible effect of worsening pitch glide (pitch drift). That's according to the paper.
There's a relationship between the two which the paper seems to explain well.

 

[LetItGrowTone]

The video was typical click bait saying with these strings you could sound better than many famous bass players.

Just info: That verbiage was not in the Kemp video or paper.

 

[JKos]

For those interested in visualizing the inharmonicity of your strings, there is a really neat Android app called TunerTime which displays the tuning of not only the fundamental but also the 2nd and 4th harmonic all at the same time. Very interesting how different strings behave in this respect.

 

[LetItGrowTone]

For those interested in visualizing the inharmonicity of your strings, there is a really neat Android app called TunerTime which displays the tuning of not only the fundamental but also the 2nd and 4th harmonic all at the same time. Very interesting how different strings behave in this respect.

Thank you @JKos.
Really used it carefully for the first time tonight on a set of flats. Could see that the higher harmonics are sharp, as discussed above.
Could also very easily see the effect of any binding in the nut and string tree.

 

[ixlramp]

I do not understand the idea of "tuning independent of tonal systems". We are dealing with instruments on this forum that use tonal tuning.

By that i meant that the need for stretch tuning is independent of whether you are using 12 Tone Equal Temperament, Just Intonation, Meantone Temperament, Pythagorean Temperament, various microtonal systems (i have studied all this too).

I also suggest that you don't call strangers ignorant unless you have some way to know they are.

I never did, i said you had 'misunderstandings of the science of music', i was trying to be as civil as possible. And i do have a way to know you have misunderstandings, your posts.

The video was typical click bait saying with these strings you could sound batter than many famous bass players. Obviously that is nonsense.

It is nonsense, but none of the Kemp videos state that. These claims are only made by the typically ignorant and sensational journalism that presents the information.
The videos, titles and youtube descriptions are all quite dry and scientific, not remotely 'click-bait' as you state, no mention of sounding better than famous bass players.

If these new strings were the best we would all be playing the strings that had come closest to them before these were released.

We cannot use a particular innovation before that innovation has been made, so this argument is invalid. No one thought of adding a lump yet, probably because no-one else has gone so deeply into the science of vibration.

 

[RSBBass]

By that i meant that the need for stretch tuning is independent of whether you are using 12 Tone Equal Temperament, Just Intonation, Meantone Temperament, Pythagorean Temperament, various microtonal systems (i have studied all this too).

I never did, i said you had 'misunderstandings of the science of music', i was trying to be as civil as possible. And i do have a way to know you have misunderstandings, your posts.

It is nonsense, but none of the Kemp videos state that. These claims are only made by the typically ignorant and sensational journalism that presents the information.
The videos, titles and youtube descriptions are all quite dry and scientific, not remotely 'click-bait' as you state, no mention of sounding better than famous bass players.

We cannot use a particular innovation before that innovation has been made, so this argument is invalid. No one thought of adding a lump yet, probably because no-one else has gone so deeply into the science of vibration.

I don't usually get into pissing matches on this stuff but hey I had a rough day. 1) I don't give two bits of bird dropping what tuning systems you have studied. The fretted electric bass is a tonal instrument. Any tuning system used is a compromise.

I may have some misunderstandings of the science of music. You said I was ignorant. Go ahead scroll back. You did. BTW I am not ignorant on this point.

The Lead to the videos definitely says that the string will make you sound better than various great bass players, so yes clickbait.

BTW, I am pretty sure scientists who have gone deeper than anyone else on the science of vibration aren't debating it on Talkbass.

You got called out for your BS. deal with it.

 

[LetItGrowTone]

Anyone interested should ignore what was said in the times.co.uk about the paper, and just go straight to the paper.

The paper isn't easy reading, but others in this thread have summarized it well.