The easiest way to low G

The easiest way to low G is to take a new, normal set (GCEA) with the usual high G and rearrange them in order of thickness, according to Glen Rose, who is a jazz and show tune pianist.

It works very good even on my cheap soprano.

zztush said:

The easiest way to low G is to take a new, normal set (GCEA) with the usual high G and rearrange them in order of thickness, according to Glen Rose, who is a jazz and show tune pianist.

It works very good even on my cheap soprano.

Click to expand...

I wonder if Glen Rose takes piano advice from ukulele players???

Snargle said:

I wonder if Glen Rose takes piano advice from ukulele players???

Click to expand...

This is a most awesome observation right on track with my own.

Actually the easiest way to get low G linear tuning on a ukulele present day is to just buy a set of strings in low G. Even single low G strings are available for a couple to a few dollars from many companies.

But there are always other options. I hear a D string from an acoustic guitar set can be used as well.

zztush said:

The easiest way to low G is to take a new, normal set (GCEA) with the usual high G and rearrange them in order of thickness, according to Glen Rose, who is a jazz and show tune pianist.

It works very good even on my cheap soprano.

Click to expand...

Tried this as indicated once upon a time, with 4 different string sets from different makers, and different materials, and was a HUGE disappointment because I found that MOST standard string sets which have a 0.032" or thinner C string were way to floppy with too little tension for me, and pretty much sounded dead to my ear.

Low G string sets are available EVERYWHERE, and are not more expensive than re-entrant sets and WILL have the proper string gauges and tension.

For me, this advice, despite coming from Glen Rose who is supposedly a professional musician, is BAD advice if you care about your tone. However, this is just IMHO, and YMMV.

Switching the strings around sounds 'logical' but fails in practice when I tested it myself.

Booli said:

Tried this as indicated once upon a time, with 4 different string sets from different makers, and different materials, and was a HUGE disappointment because I found that MOST standard string sets which have a 0.032" or thinner C string were way to floppy with too little tension for me, and pretty much sounded dead to my ear.

Low G string sets are available EVERYWHERE, and are not more expensive than re-entrant sets and WILL have the proper string gauges and tension.

For me, this advice, despite coming from Glen Rose who is supposedly a professional musician, is BAD advice if you care about your tone. However, this is just IMHO, and YMMV.

Switching the strings around sounds 'logical' but fails in practice when I tested it myself.

Click to expand...

I've had similarly disappointing experiences. Glen, however, on most of his teaching videos, uses a baritone tuned GCEA with Aquilas made for the purpose (but re-entrant). (Aquila 23U) These are the strings he rearranged.

I don't think Glen is playing a lowG soprano, as he said in the video, but looks like a tenor. I have his books. Great player and pretty straight forward lessons given.

dickadcock said:

I've had similarly disappointing experiences. Glen, however, on most of his teaching videos, uses a baritone tuned GCEA with Aquilas made for the purpose (but re-entrant). (Aquila 23U) These are the strings he rearranged.

Click to expand...

Pueo said:

I have re-arranged D'Addario Pro Arté re-entrant tenor strings with some success, but yes the low G is floppy and will not drive an under saddle pickup that well. Acoustically it was not that bad on my Pono, but I would only do that in dire need of low G if I only had acces s to re-entrant strings.

Just get a low G set if you want low G.

Click to expand...

I should add that when the tension is too low, there is a tendency to bend the string with your fretting hand ever so slightly (unless you are deft enough to alter the use of the one finger on that string apart from how all of your other fingers are working), which will make notes on that string sharp. The other issue is that if tension on the string is too LOW, it will force the intonation to be off +/- 15 cents on the string.

Having the right amount of tension as per string gauge on a given scale length is of paramount importance for intonation to be correct.

Sadly (or OTOH blissfully & ignorantly), many folks lack the hearing perception to tell the difference. This is why more than 50% of newbie players on YouTube sound off.

Simply, they cannot tell the difference. This comes with practice over time, which they do not yet have. One also needs to be motivated to actually care about being 'in tune' on the instrument itself.

I can (tell the difference), and I cannot listen to a uke that sounds way out of tune, it's like nails on a chalkboard to me.

"I can (tell the difference), and I cannot listen to a uke that sounds way out of tune, it's like nails on a chalkboard to me. "

I'm not much of a player yet, but boy, if a uke is off, ouch! It makes me cringe. My ENT Dr says my ears are very sensitive, in all ranges, even with some minor hearing loss in one ear.
I want to learn to play lo G because a lot of Baroque songs are in lo G. I don't want to use a floppy old unwound string unless I have to. I just bought a Aquila red lo G, but I decided I don't wanna file on my nut.
Where can I get a good wound string in lo G?
(I've tried wound guitar strings, I hate them)

Nickie said:

I just bought a Aquila red lo G, but I decided I don't wanna file on my nut.
Where can I get a good wound string in lo G?
(I've tried wound guitar strings, I hate them)

Click to expand...

Either of these I've listed below, are THINNER than any unwound low-G string, so you will likely NOT have to file the nut, but your intonation might need to be adjusted at the saddle since most high-G strings are compensated a hair shorter at the saddle for the thinner string typically used in hi-G. String tension also plays a factor here.

The Thomastik-Infeld strings have a bit more tension than the Fremont listed below, and I've not had to compensate the saddle on certain ukes, and on others, I have a different saddle that I swap out that is filed for the low-G string such that the breakpoint of the string over the saddle is farther back to the butt-end of the instrument.

You can get a Nubone saddle for like $4 online and use a simple nail file or emery board to shape it to your needs, and it takes less than a minute to swap out after you loosen the strings, so it's not complicated to have and use different saddles for hi-G and lo-G.

I've given up on unwound low-G. I've literally tried THEM ALL, including Fluoro fishing leader in 0.0433" and 0.050" and was not satisfied with the sound, feel and intonation of any of them.

However, for a WOUND low-G, I like these both equally well:

Fremont Soloist gold-colored smoothwound 'squeakless' single low-G
(available most better places uke strings are sold: Elderly, Uke Republic, HMS, Just Strings, Strings By Mail, etc)

Or

Thomastik-Infeld single chrome flatwound classical guitar strings, either the CF27 or CF30 string
(BTW these are AWESOME and completely squeak-free)

(available at Just Strings, Strings By Mail)

Hope this helps.

Rearranging the strings has also be done by famous Bruddah Iz Kamakawiwoʻole, and has been mentioned here and elsewhere already many times.

Apart from that, low G will most probably never ever deliver good results on a soprano scale - this is purely physics and cannot be overcome by any low-G string set on this planet.
The soprano scale is simply too short for this low frequency.

Nickie said:

Where can I get a good wound string in lo G?
(I've tried wound guitar strings, I hate them)

Click to expand...

I've been very happy with the Fremont soloist wound low-g.

Louis0815 said:

Rearranging the strings has also be done by famous Bruddah Iz Kamakawiwoʻole, and has been mentioned here and elsewhere already many times.

Apart from that, low G will most probably never ever deliver good results on a soprano scale - this is purely physics and cannot be overcome by any low-G string set on this planet.
The soprano scale is simply too short for this low frequency.

Click to expand...

Not to be argumentative but I have used a wound low G on several different sopranos and they have all sounded fine to my ears. So far, I have been using D'Addario Pro-Arte .028" wound classical strings for the low G.

jollyboy said:

I've been very happy with the Fremont soloist wound low-g.

Click to expand...

I've found it boomy and it rings a long time, overpowering the other strings (Aquilas).

Louis0815 said:

...low G will most probably never ever deliver good results on a soprano scale - this is purely physics and cannot be overcome by any low-G string set on this planet.
The soprano scale is simply too short for this low frequency.

Click to expand...

I'd like to add that also due to physics, the sound box, or resonating air chamber inside of the soprano body and vibrating instrument top, are likely to be too small to yield decent volume at the lower frequency of a G3 note. You will technically 'hear it', but it will not be as loud as notes which more easily cause the instrument to resonate at higher frequencies.

jollyboy said:

I've been very happy with the Fremont soloist wound low-g.

Click to expand...

Jollyboy, I just ordered one.

WhenDogsSing said:

Not to be argumentative but I have used a wound low G on several different sopranos and they have all sounded fine to my ears. So far, I have been using D'Addario Pro-Arte .028" wound classical strings for the low G.

Click to expand...

OK, I should have mentioned that I don't like wound low Gs because IMHO they tend to overpower the other strings (just as Kayak Jim said)

Booli said:

I'd like to add that also due to physics, the sound box, or resonating air chamber inside of the soprano body and vibrating instrument top, are likely to be too small to yield decent volume at the lower frequency of a G3 note. You will technically 'hear it', but it will not be as loud as notes which more easily cause the instrument to resonate at higher frequencies.

Click to expand...

So actually the "overpower" of a wound string could be compensated by putting it on a soprano? Interesting thought, volunteers welcome - I think will stick to re-entrant sopranos.

Louis0815 said:

Apart from that, low G will most probably never ever deliver good results on a soprano scale - this is purely physics and cannot be overcome by any low-G string set on this planet.
The soprano scale is simply too short for this low frequency.

Click to expand...

I guess nobody told Ohta San. I'm very curious what you mean by "good results", because many people have their standards strung Low G, and enjoy it. Maybe you haven't tried a silver wound string there?

I think a lot of people superficially skim that Southcoast Ukes essay online, and sort of miss the point. You actually don't want the resonance frequency to match the lowest note, or you get a boominess. The entire point of the article is the idea of tuning the whole uke up at least a whole step, and maybe two or more, so all notes are above the resonant freq. I didn't see the essay as anti Low G on soprano, although it's quoted that way here quite often.

The note obviously sounds, and with a wound metal D string from a guitar set, there is a good balance there with the other strings. I use some from Augustine and D'Addario Pro Arte.

As said above, Booli seems to have made a point and it seems feasible to have balanced low g on a soprano scale (only) with a wound string.

I never tried that, I only tried a wound low g once on a concert scale and it was (imho) way too dominant so I decided not to follow the wound path any longer. Fortunately we have some plain low g strings available on the market.

But maybe I will change my mind and put a wound string on one of the sopranos just for a test...