Strings: tension vs. scale vs. diameter?

So, lot of talk recently about these topics, but it seems to me to be going round and round.

I'm trying to understand something, generally, and without splitting hairs on 'linear density' and 'composite extrusion uniformity' which are typically technical details not available to the consumer of strings as far as I can tell.

With, all other things being equal (this is VERY important - and to simplify the answers).

Given a set of generic theoretical fluorocarbon strings, for a 'MEDIUM' gauge and/or tension, I have the following questions:



Now that you've got your thinking cap on - same questions for for 'LIGHT' strings, and/or 'HEAVY' strings...

For example, if you take the ever popular Martin M600 strings, and put them on a soprano, the tension is sort of 'medium' but It seems to me when you put them on a concert or even if you put them on a tenor (heaven forbid OMG such blasphemy ) that the strings have MORE tension...and if you were to again go against the grain and put Martin M620 'TENOR' strings on concert they are less tension, and if you put them on a soprano, they are almost floppy (and the C string sounds kind of thunky and dead, despite being the same gauge as used in the M600 set).

There is a purpose to this madness which I will reveal later, but I do not wish to bias any discussion.

Also, since I am always tinkering and trying to work out things to better serve my individual purposes, I consider the 'official designations' for a specific scale length more a guideline, rather than an immutable law of string use.

Please share your experiences and opinions, all of which will have value to me. Thank you.

Please discuss...

-Booli

Three things are used to determine the tension of a string: scale length, weight of the string (lb/lin inch) and the note you're tuning to.

So to answer your questions:

1-The tension of the strings would be less, since you are taking the scale length from 17" on a tenor to 15" on a concert, there will be less tension overall.
2-The opposite happens. If you put a set of strings that says "Soprano" on a concert or tenor (provided there is enough length), since you are increasing the scale length, you are increasing the tension of the strings to tune to the same note.
3-Putting baritone strings on a smaller scale instrument gives you the same result as #1.

However, it is my understanding that thicker tenor strings on a soprano will require higher tension than thinner soprano strings of the same material for the same tuning.

Time to get out the popcorn, sit back and learn something :music:

You simply cannot over-simplify this subject if you want answers to be real. Linear density is if utmost importance, and it's really easy to understand.

Basically, not all string compositions of the same diameter will weigh the same at a given length. A 1" length of .025" diameter flurocarbon may weigh more than a 1" length of .025" diameter nylon, for instance. And it will weigh less than a 1" length of .025" steel. Linear (that is length) density (that is basically weight)...one of the three interactive elements in string design.

So "thicker" for higher tension ONLY applies if the string material is exactly the same formula.

The problem is that hardly any string companies will give you a straight answer on any of this. You're stuck with adjective-modified descriptions like "low tension", "high tension", "extra high tension" that are basically meaningless beyond comparing strings of a single given brand.

Another issue may be if different string companies are comparing their strings at different scale lengths. It's not enough to say "soprano", "concert", "tenor", or "baritone" without specifying the exact scale length. They are not all the same, and a shorter scale will exhibit lower tension for a given set of strings.

D'Addario is the industry leader in giving out real numbers...they tell you the scale length, the diameter, and the pitch. From that you could calculate the linear density if that were of interest to you. Nobody else that I know of gives out the real (and important if you want to compare one string brand to another) and vitally important numbers. Vital, that is, if this is important to you.

I used the D'Addario chart a number of years ago to develop a spreadsheet of recommended optimum guitar string gauges for different open tunings, and that became part of an article I wrote for Acoustic Guitar Magazine.

It would be great if all uke string companies published their string tensions at an industry agreed scale length and pitch. I say pitch because there are still some soprano players using "D" tuning, a whole step up from "modern club tuning". Raising the pitch raises the tension.

Rick, that's great info and very helpful, but finding the linear density published anywhere (aside from D'Addario) is like getting blood from a stone - maybe you have a secret source?

Rick Turner said:

So "thicker" for higher tension ONLY applies if the string material is exactly the same formula.

Click to expand...

So in my example above with the Martin M600 or M620 strings, can we safely assume for the sake of this question of the Martin string sets being of the same formula?

What about if we look at the 10 or so different string sets for Worth BROWNS (from #BL to #BS) (as it's own comparison within these sets) or across the variations of Worth CLEARS (from #CL to #EX-HD) (see http://worthc.to/english/w_strings.html and scroll down) - can we figure each types of these (Martin, Worth Browns, Worth Clears) are each unto their own, yet consistent formulae?

Rick Turner said:

It would be great if all uke string companies published their string tensions at an industry agreed scale length and pitch.

Click to expand...

I agree, and being that I'm on my way to being a real strings geek, I'd really love to have access to this info.

I would be remiss if I did not mention that SouthCoast seems to be the only company that publishes relative/comparative tension info for tuning and scale length.

Rick Turner said:

The problem is that hardly any string companies will give you a straight answer on any of this. You're stuck with adjective-modified descriptions like "low tension", "high tension", "extra high tension" that are basically meaningless beyond comparing strings of a single given brand.

Click to expand...

That's been one of the big priorities of mine since I came aboard GHS Strings last year. We are now one of only three string companies that have published tension charts for our electric bass strings (other two being D'Addario and Kalium), and I provided all of the fluorocarbon set info for the string comparison chart that is on this forum. And for reference, I used the "standard" scale lengths of 13", 15" and 17" for soprano, concert and tenor sizes. I use "standard," mainly because my Boat Paddle concert has a 16" scale, which is going to have more tension than a 15" scale.

If there's anything else that people are curious on from GHS, I will find it out and publish it.

One Bad Monkey said:

That's been one of the big priorities of mine since I came aboard GHS Strings last year. We are now one of only three string companies that have published tension charts for our electric bass strings (other two being D'Addario and Kalium), and I provided all of the fluorocarbon set info for the string comparison chart that is on this forum. And for reference, I used the "standard" scale lengths of 13", 15" and 17" for soprano, concert and tenor sizes. I use "standard," mainly because my Boat Paddle concert has a 16" scale, which is going to have more tension than a 15" scale.

If there's anything else that people are curious on from GHS, I will find it out and publish it.

Click to expand...

Thank you so very much for all of your efforts on this, they are very much appreciated.

Please keep up the good work!

One Bad Monkey said:

So to answer your questions:

1-The tension of the strings would be less, since you are taking the scale length from 17" on a tenor to 15" on a concert, there will be less tension overall.

Click to expand...

Would it be reasonable then to expect that if you need to have lower tension strings on a given scale, that you could take the next scale size up and put them on to achieve this?

i.e., tenor strings on concert or soprano, OR concert strings on soprano?

You might wonder why the need for lower tension strings?

I have two reasons that have come across my path:


In the case of #1 above, would it be better to just not play it at all until it can be repaired?

What do you think?

-Booli

Sorry on two counts:

1) You cannot assume that all the strings from a given manufacturer have the same linear density. Worth and D'Addario in particular have quite a few plastic formulas for different sets.

2) Take any and all strings off of that uke NOW. Do not even hope that a light tension set will be OK for any instrument with a lifting bridge. Yes, many's the time when a bridge pops off, all is well...other than the need to reglue the bridge...after removing all old glue carefully and doing it the right way. Then there are those times when the bridge will pop off of....revealing 75% of the top space under it...taking nice splinters and chunks of the top forward of the bridge away leaving your unfortunate luthier with a f...ing mess to deal with, and you with visible damage to the uke top...forever.

If you really can't afford to deal with that uke properly, consign it to being a wall hanger until you can deal with it.

Would you drive your car with the front brakes 95% gone? If so, then you may be 95% gone soon...like that uke.

Rick Turner said:

Sorry on two counts:

1) You cannot assume that all the strings from a given manufacturer have the same linear density. Worth and D'Addario in particular have quite a few plastic formulas for different sets.

2) Take any and all strings off of that uke NOW. Do not even hope that a light tension set will be OK for any instrument with a lifting bridge. Yes, many's the time when a bridge pops off, all is well...other than the need to reglue the bridge...after removing all old glue carefully and doing it the right way. Then there are those times when the bridge will pop off of....revealing 75% of the top space under it...taking nice splinters and chunks of the top forward of the bridge away leaving your unfortunate luthier with a f...ing mess to deal with, and you with visible damage to the uke top...forever.

If you really can't afford to deal with that uke properly, consign it to being a wall hanger until you can deal with it.

Would you drive your car with the front brakes 95% gone? If so, then you may be 95% gone soon...like that uke.

Click to expand...

Hi Rick,

Thanks for your advice. Your points are well taken.

I have now removed the strings and will wait until proper repair can be made. The uke will sleep in it's case until then.

-Booli

Booli said:

I would be remiss if I did not mention that SouthCoast seems to be the only company that publishes relative/comparative tension info for tuning and scale length.

Click to expand...

Thanks Booli,

I guess I'll go ahead and weigh in here, though I do it with some trepidation.

The first post by Jon was very good as a general guideline, and the post by Rick had points well taken as far as diameters being useless apart from same formula comparison. That was excellent advice from Rick as well about "retiring" your "lifting bridge" instrument until repairs can be made. Also well stated by Rick, however, was this:

Rick Turner said:

You simply cannot over-simplify this subject if you want answers to be real.

Click to expand...

And unfortunately that applies to tension data as well. Tension measures the force exerted when the strings are at rest. It doesn't take flexibility into account, so it doesn't give a real perspective on how a given set of strings will play.

We are firmly in that often maligned "subjective" rating category. But we firmly believe it's by far the best measure. We have strings that we call "Heavy Medium" for example, that have lighter tension than strings that we rate as "Medium". It's because they're less flexible.

To use an extreme example, think of a set of relatively low tension strings that when you strum it feels like you've hit four iron bars. Then imagine another set that might have a tighter pull at rest, but when you strum those strings, they flex so much that "the feel" is looser than the lower tension strings.

That's why we feel these sort of things can never be subjected to scientific data. Not unless that data takes so many variables into account that it goes far beyond what would be useful to a player shopping for the right strings for his situation.

We admit that we rate strings subjectively, but we offer such a wide spectrum, in both tension and tone, that once you have a "toehold" - a set of strings in hand - if necessary, it then becomes easy to move to something firmer or looser - or to a warmer or brighter tone.

On the other hand, going by tension or diameter, unless you're calculating a single known material, will simply lead you into an endless circle of frustration.

southcoastukes said:

And unfortunately that applies to tension data as well. Tension measures the force exerted when the strings are at rest. It doesn't take flexibility into account, so it doesn't give a real perspective on how a given set of strings will play.

Click to expand...

That's a huge thing; tension does not equate the feel of the strings. I think a lot of that initial misconception came from the old classical guitar gauges of "medium tension," "high tension," etc.. so that people just equate stiff strings with high tension (which is not always the case).

But then again, while it's great that companies are publishing tension data, what does that actually mean to the player, that just wants to know if a string is going to have a good feel? Not a lot, as per Dirk's analogy of a string with low tension but extremely stiff feel.

For example, if you take the ever popular Martin M600 strings, and put them on a soprano, the tension is sort of 'medium' but It seems to me when you put them on a concert or even if you put them on a tenor (heaven forbid OMG such blasphemy ) that the strings have MORE tension...and if you were to again go against the grain and put Martin M620 'TENOR' strings on concert they are less tension, and if you put them on a soprano, they are almost floppy (and the C string sounds kind of thunky and dead, despite being the same gauge as used in the M600 set). - Booli


It's a jungle out there in string land!!!
I think I have a simple concept that may be applied your question....
When taking the exact same strings from your soprano to your concert, each string is longer - in effect you are adding a couple of extra frets to the fretboard, so, at the same tension the open strings will have a lower note on the concert than on the soprano.
So the open strings, now on the concert, need to be tightened (ie. more tension added) to reach the same pitch as they were on the soprano. And the reverse is true of course......so.......
.........same strings from smaller uke to bigger feel tighter; from bigger to smaller feel looser.....

................ummmm, I hope I got that the right way around, even the "simple" version is confusing!!!!..........

Strumdaddy said:

When taking the exact same strings from your soprano to your concert, each string is longer - in effect you are adding a couple of extra frets to the fretboard, so, at the same tension the open strings will have a lower note on the concert than on the soprano.

Click to expand...

Not quite. The difference is that going from a soprano to a concert scale is going from 13" nut to bridge to 15" nut to bridge. While the fretboard between a soprano and concert CAN have more frets, lengthening the fretboard doesn't necessarily change the scale length, which is one of the three determining factors of string tension.

So, using your M600 string set, going from a soprano to a concert to a tenor is going to increase the tension because you're increasing the scale length.