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.
Why do folks cut strings?
- Thread starter anightintunisia
- Start date
So I jammed using a JP90 the other day and I popped the E string out the nut slot 3 times on some energetic punk-type songs.
The drummer also happens to play bass and he advised that the string not be cut and the whole length used for more wraps to place more downward pressure on the string at the tuner and thus the nut.
I may have to try that.
Or a pro set-up.
The drummer also happens to play bass and he advised that the string not be cut and the whole length used for more wraps to place more downward pressure on the string at the tuner and thus the nut.
I may have to try that.
Or a pro set-up.
More wraps should make the string leave the post lower, closer to the headstock, giving you a more acute angle at the nut. It couldn't hurt.
Stupid observation after watching a "Noir Alley" film on TCM: the whiskers hanging off machine head posts are reminiscent of the stock curb-feelers on a '50 Buick. IOW, of no real use unless you're parallel-parking a '73 P bass.
Riis
Riis
I think it's more a question of the downward angle that wrapping a string down to the bottom of the tuner post gives, than it is of the problematic extra pressure that a glob of extra string might provide. Which, TBH, I really don't think it does. If 3 or 4 wraps provides all the downward angle you can get; and, if 3 or 4 wraps are secure enough to prevent the string from slipping (and going out of tune)? Then, that's all that's required - unless you just feel the need for big string tumors on your headstock... Personally, I've always found 3 wraps - pushed down to the bottom of a tuner post for the optimum break angle over the nut - to be more than sufficient. And, since I've been doing it that way for... gee; more than half a frickin' century now? I see no reason to change...
Depends on whether you're a fan of break angle or not as to how many windings around a given tuning peg. Obviously there should be enough windings to secure the string. But a 2nd, 3rd or 4th wind and the string is layered towards the headstock. thjat will change the break angle of the string and that may cause nut slot binding. With electrics Gibson has a more aggressive neck angle, compared to PRS & Epiphone. More break angle and the force of the string is tighter/greater on the headstock. That translates to more friction. The wound string acts as a nut file of sorts on the nut slots, the harder a file would be pressed, the more wear or cutting away of the softer plastic. I don't know that there's a definitive study out there on the longevity of a nut with less/more break angle. Since I have to clip the string anyway, I use just enough length to hold the string for tuning stability without over-stressing the headstock.
Why do folks cut strings?
tl;dr
Because they like to make them suffer. I love to hear them scream in pain when I cut them to the right length for my bass. It's cruel, but it's cleaner.
tl;dr
Because they like to make them suffer. I love to hear them scream in pain when I cut them to the right length for my bass. It's cruel, but it's cleaner.
I do like this dude from Fender's official channel, he has barely any windings. Yes, you probably need a new nut!
Yeah…no.
All strings these days have an internal core and then the ‘string’ is wound around that core…thus the ‘…wound’ in Roundwound or Flatwound. The string is NOT secured to the core. It is essentially two components. So the moment he cut that string (without crimping it first) he freed the core to slip internally = dead strings. I may be wrong but 20+ basses, 40 years of playing and three master luthiers have my back on this.
All strings these days have an internal core and then the ‘string’ is wound around that core…thus the ‘…wound’ in Roundwound or Flatwound. The string is NOT secured to the core. It is essentially two components. So the moment he cut that string (without crimping it first) he freed the core to slip internally = dead strings. I may be wrong but 20+ basses, 40 years of playing and three master luthiers have my back on this.
Um, look at the top end of pratically any string and explain how it is different to one cut slightly shorter ...
Can't say I've ever seen one fresh out of the packet 'crimped' in any way.
Last edited:
I like three winds. Fender is promoting TWO. With two or three winds one arguably doesn’t need a winder. It’s the multiple wraps that are the killers. Unless of course you’re changing strings on a lot of basses. Anyway, they’re cheap.
Just trying to help.
I was taught by Richard 'Obe' Oblinger to always "crimp then cut".
Ned Steinberger (for his NS Design and NS Spector basses) the same.
Obe built basses with this guy...one of the three master luthiers in my world.
No disrespect for the Fender U guy but I'd rather take Michael Tobias' word for it.
Or this guy (start at 5:40).
Or don't crimp them. You'll wonder why your bass sounds like a dead piece of wood after a gig or two.
And if you use a Hipshot your strings will die after about five 'flips' - the core will move more than the string.
I was taught by Richard 'Obe' Oblinger to always "crimp then cut".
Ned Steinberger (for his NS Design and NS Spector basses) the same.
Obe built basses with this guy...one of the three master luthiers in my world.
No disrespect for the Fender U guy but I'd rather take Michael Tobias' word for it.
Or this guy (start at 5:40).
Or don't crimp them. You'll wonder why your bass sounds like a dead piece of wood after a gig or two.
And if you use a Hipshot your strings will die after about five 'flips' - the core will move more than the string.
Still nothing about 'crimping'.
Nothing at all other than 'cutting' in the first video, and in the second video the 'bend' is not to stop supposed movement of core wrt windings, but is to stop the windings potentially unwinding at the (though he'd never actually witnessed this ever happening).
Sounds more like an affectation of your luthier, but could do no harm.
And no, my basses don't sound like dead pieces of wood, even after many months and in some cases years. Except my American Standard P when brand-new, but that's another story.
Nothing at all other than 'cutting' in the first video, and in the second video the 'bend' is not to stop supposed movement of core wrt windings, but is to stop the windings potentially unwinding at the (though he'd never actually witnessed this ever happening).
Sounds more like an affectation of your luthier, but could do no harm.
And no, my basses don't sound like dead pieces of wood, even after many months and in some cases years. Except my American Standard P when brand-new, but that's another story.
Interesting discussion. It seems crimping the wire end can't fuse the string wrap and core together, without crushing them together at least. Which a wire cutter won't do.
My guess it's unnecessary as two or three wraps should sufficiently lock the string components in place at the winding post and then at the nut at the bridge.
Sadowsky doesn't practice crimping either.
My guess it's unnecessary as two or three wraps should sufficiently lock the string components in place at the winding post and then at the nut at the bridge.
Sadowsky doesn't practice crimping either.
Last edited:
