Is All Flourocarbon Basically The Same?

I thought this might provoke some mildly heated debate...


The facts:

• I'm thinking of trying a few different string sets on my new baritone uke.
• Most of the string sets are made up of some or all clear fluorocarbons.
• I prefer relatively even tension across all four strings.
• Finding accurate string tension information is hard.

I'm wondering if I can reasonably interchange tension numbers between clear flouro strings from different suppliers (for strings of the same gauge tuned to the same pitch). I know it's not going to be 100% accurate, but then again, they are all made by the same Japanese fishing line manufacturer... right?

I prefer Worth Browns on baritone ukes. I use Worth clears on my tenors.

http://www.elderly.com/accessories/strings/ukulele-strings/baritone-ukulele-strings?manufacturer=330

I've mixed and matched different brands of fluorocarbon for similar reasons at times, other times because I had a broken string and had an open set of a different brand laying around. I also have mixed and matched different sets and unique wound strings together with great success. And I have even cobbled together 3 totally different brands, to come up with a CGDA mandola tuning setup. I will not go so far as to say they are all the same. In fact, I would say there are very noticeable differences between the different brands. Especially Worth to me, stand out as unique to all the other fluorocarbon strings I have tried. I am not saying better or worse, just unique. Once the strings settle in, and they are to your liking balance wise, I don't think you will have any complaints.

Southcoast folks go to a lot of effort to explain why they select specific formulations and gages for their string sets, one factor being equal tension. They and Worth Browns are my favorites

Ralph

Just to throw in some more thoughts:

• The same string gauges seem to show up time and time again - in sets from the same supplier, and even in sets from different suppliers. It's as though string sets are being put together from a "limited palette" of gauges. For example Worth's Fat Low-G set is basically identical to their baritone set. I do wonder if this is because only certain gauges are available from manufacturers.
  
• Suppliers often declare their strings to be '100% pure flourocarbon'. As I understand it fluorocarbon is pretty simple stuff, made up of just three elements - hydrogen, carbon, and fluoride. So how much difference can there really be between strings from different suppliers?
  
• Some sets seem to have wildly uneven tension figures. For example D'Addario's baritone Titanium set has tension figures listed as follows: E: 9.120lbs B: 7.110lbs G 17.830lbs D 16.640lbs

.

I guess I'm frustrated cos I'm finding it hard to identify an "off the peg" baritone set that has evenly balanced tension and I don't really want the hassle (or cost) of making up my own frankenset.

I've learned to value gauge/diameter of strings and pay attention to that information, if it's listed, because my ukuleles are set up for specific diameters, so the intonation is negatively affected if new strings are thinner or thicker (the latter can be a real issue with the 3rd string in particular).

I do think fluorocarbon strings are basically all the same, yes, but I'm not entirely sure how much the smaller differences matter. Living Water strings have a different texture than, say, Worth Clears. They do feel, well, wetter. I'm relatively sure that is not just my perception, but I'm not a hundred percent sure about it. Perception based on knowledge or what we've been told by others isn't always factual, but powerful (e.g. when people hear differences that they didn't hear before they were told that they should be hearing them).

I think if a ukulele sounds good with one material of strings, it'll sound good with other strings of the same material also. Would be interesting to see how many people can hear the difference between different fluorocarbon strings on the same ukulele played by the same player, even with varying gauges -- in a blind test with a large enough number of samples (perhaps with some duplicates).

Making up my own "Frankenset" as you put is about the only way I have been able to get what want. As you say a lack of good info is frustrating and has caused me to experiment.........which is the best way to find out what works for yourself.

I would say most florocarbons are similar when comparing similar diameters. But the compound mix can vary which will change tone and tension. Not enough to rip your bridge off but enough to notice it under finger..........hence the personal experimentation.

All fluorocarbons are NOT alike! I've tried Martin, Living Water, Worth, GHS, Fremont they are all different. I liked Martins on my vintage Style 0 and my C1K. Living Water works great on my Kanile'a, Worth browns on several things, Fremont blacklines on my Islander. Living Water strings are made in England, Martins are made in Mexico, Worth and Fremont are made in Japan.

I recently did a review of bari-tenor strings and Tenor strings used dGBE on a tenor. Most of the strings sets were Fluro's.

http://forum.ukuleleunderground.com/showthread.php?124671-dGBE-DGBE-for-a-Tenor-Eight-options

UkerDanno said:

All fluorocarbons are NOT alike! I've tried Martin, Living Water, Worth, GHS, Fremont they are all different.

Click to expand...

Agree completely, and I'll add Oasis to that list as well. Of all of those the only ones I favor are Martins (which are my go-to string for my soprano and concert koa ukes).

The only mixing I've done is between tenor and soprano/concert sets, and using a G string as an A string since as a low G player I tend to have a lot of extras on hand - and quite honestly, I've never found tension balance to be an issue either way other than my extreme dislike of non-wound low G strings, which feel to me like a floppy rubber band. So that last bit might apply to the OP's bari uke situation, but having never played a bari I can't really speak to that.

janeray1940 said:

Agree completely, and I'll add Oasis to that list as well. Of all of those the only ones I favor are Martins (which are my go-to string for my soprano and concert koa ukes).

Click to expand...

Martin strings have unique gauges, though. The core question for me, and that I don't know the answer to either, is whether fluorocarbon strings of the same diameter sound differently. Martin's specs stray from the bulk of fluorocarbon strings, so their tension and sound are also different.

Mivo said:

Martin strings have unique gauges, though. The core question for me, and that I don't know the answer to either, is whether fluorocarbon strings of the same diameter sound differently. Martin's specs stray from the bulk of fluorocarbon strings, so their tension and sound are also different.

Click to expand...

Interesting question, and one I certainly don't know the answer to. But maybe that's why the Martins have the characteristics that I tend to prefer, which I suppose I'd describe as higher tension and brighter sound.

jollyboy said:

....Suppliers often declare their strings to be '100% pure flourocarbon'. As I understand it fluorocarbon is pretty simple stuff, made up of just three elements - hydrogen, carbon, and fluoride. So how much difference can there really be between strings from different suppliers?....

Click to expand...

As polymer chemist retired from Dow Chemical, I got quite a grin at this. Believe me, we chemists are clever enough to take those three elements and turn them into amazingly different substances by varying the ratios of the elements and the molecular weights of the polymers. And after that we compound them with various additives and plasticizers to make them even more different.

Better living through Chemistry (no wait, that was DuPont!).

Mivo said:

Martin strings have unique gauges, though. The core question for me, and that I don't know the answer to either, is whether fluorocarbon strings of the same diameter sound differently. Martin's specs stray from the bulk of fluorocarbon strings, so their tension and sound are also different.

Click to expand...

I currently have the Martin 630 set on my bari and they sound fine. Pretty good actually. It's just that nagging feeling that maybe there's another string set out there that will sound even better

Heres another random thought, based entirely on personal conjecture:

I seriously doubt that there exists anywhere in the world today a factory devoted exclusively to the manufacture of fluorocarbon strings for musical instruments. I suspect, instead, that there are large-scale plastic manufacturers (such as Kureha Corporation in Japan) who produce various pvdf products, amongst them long thin lengths of the stuff that might be termed 'line' or 'string' (or even 'membrane') depending on the intended application. I think that it's entirely possible that available gauges might be influenced by the laws of supply and demand. And that demand for fishing line might well be higher than the demand for uke strings.

Just me thinking out loud

besley said:

As polymer chemist retired from Dow Chemical, I got quite a grin at this. Believe me, we chemists are clever enough to take those three elements and turn them into amazingly different substances by varying the ratios of the elements and the molecular weights of the polymers. And after that we compound them with various additives and plasticizers to make them even more different.

Better living through Chemistry (no wait, that was DuPont!).

Click to expand...

Aloha besley,

Mahalo for chiming in with your "Professional" perspective on this matter being that you are a retired polymer chemist from Dow Chemical. :shaka:

besley said:

As polymer chemist retired from Dow Chemical, I got quite a grin at this. Believe me, we chemists are clever enough to take those three elements and turn them into amazingly different substances by varying the ratios of the elements and the molecular weights of the polymers. And after that we compound them with various additives and plasticizers to make them even more different.

Better living through Chemistry (no wait, that was DuPont!).

Click to expand...

Ah well, I was wondering about all of this so I was interested to read your reply.

Firstly I wasn't sure about varying the ratio of elements - my basic knowledge of chemistry led me to believe that a molecule of a compound substance always contained the same 'ratio' of elements - e.g. water is H2O - so always two hydrogen to every one oxygen.

And... I guess I figured that different additives would probably end up in there somewhere (Worth have to be putting something different in the browns after all). But then, strictly speaking, that ain't '100% pure' anything is it? So the advertising is a little misleading (no real surprise).

jollyboy said:

Ah well, I was wondering about all of this so I was interested to read your reply.

Firstly I wasn't sure about varying the ratio of elements - my basic knowledge of chemistry led me to believe that a molecule of a compound substance always contained the same 'ratio' of elements - e.g/ water is H2O - so always two hydrogen to every one oxygen.

And... I guess I figured that different additives would probably end up in there somewhere (Worth have to be putting something different in the browns after all). But then, strictly speaking, that ain't '100% pure' anything is it? So the advertising is a little misleading (no real surprise).

Click to expand...

Well I have to agree about the "100%" bit, but I'd be amazed if these strings aren't all formulated or coated with something other than fluoropolymer. As for the ratios, a fluorcarbon contains hydrocarbon and fluorine, and the number of things attached to each carbon (the "valence") stays the same, but the amount of fluorine can vary all over the map. If it were completely substituted with fluorine replacing every hydrogen you get Teflon, which probably wouldn't make very good strings. So we vary the amount of hydrogen on the hydrocarbon that is replaced with fluorine. And after that we can even vary where we put the fluorine - randomly, bunched up, or strung out. Anyway, I take the "100%" fluorocarbon tag to simply mean that it isn't part nylon.

I'm simply amazed that everyone in the UU can hear all the differences between the many, many different strings offered for sale. I'm also impressed that everyone has opinions about which strings go best on what ukuleles. Most of my fellow Ukers even know the blooming string sizes!

And here I am still trying to keep my fingers from getting stuck between the strings. And changing them?--Ha! ld:

jollyboy said:

Just to throw in some more thoughts:

Suppliers often declare their strings to be '100% pure flourocarbon'. As I understand it fluorocarbon is pretty simple stuff, made up of just three elements - hydrogen, carbon, and fluoride. So how much difference can there really be between strings from different suppliers?

Click to expand...

Not being in the string business, I couldn't say how different the various fluorocarbon brands are, but in general, the physical properties of plastics are greatly influenced by their molecular weight -- how long the chain of atoms that make up the molecule are.
For example, the stretchy polyethylene bags that you might see in the grocery store for putting vegetables in have the same chemical formula as Dyneema, which is, for a given weight, about ten times the strength of steel. Dyneema has much longer molecules, though. It's an ultra-high-molecular weight polyethylene. They both float, though.

So, yes, in theory, there can be differences between two "100% pure fluorcarbons", even if they have the same chemical formula.

As a relative newcomer to the ukulele, it has been interesting to note the string discussions, and to have a little bit of an eye towards the history of string preference as well.

I'm surprised nobody has brought out the threads about using fluorocarbon fishing line...but that is also worth a try if you think fluorocarbon is fluorocarbon.

As I have noted in the past, I like the feel of the Martins on all of my instruments--and I also like that they are readily available and relatively inexpensive. I have been changing out the Super Nylgut strings that have come on all of the sub $500 instruments that I have owned...but I wouldn't dare tell someone else that they shouldn't use them. Additionally, I just put Aquila KIDS (colored Super Nylgut) strings on 90 ukuleles at our school for instructional purposes...so I have nothing against them.

I also just ordered some Living Waters strings...one set for the (cheap) baritone that I own, and one set for my Opio in the event that something happens to the stock KoAloha low G strings that are on that instrument. I also plan on ordering some low G worth clears for that instrument. I don't believe that Martin sells a 620 set with low G, and while some of you are happy "Frankensteining" sets together like that, I am not at that level of tinkering in my ukulele playing. I've heard the detailed conversations about strings on the Ukulele Site podcast (not much there for a while, which makes sense as they are so busy right now).

What I really would like to see is someone that would take the "named" fluorocarbon strings and do a detailed chemical analysis to compare them to the Seagur fishing line. There has been a lot of speculation that only one or two factories actually make the fluorocarbon strings.

Years ago, I got caught up in motorcycle engine oil analysis. Along with many other Victory owners across the United States, we were spending money to get chemical analysis of different oils at an oil change, as well as studying the post-use analysis (you would also send a clean sample in). These were the early days of synthetic oil mass availability (synthetic is almost the same price as non-synthetic today). We were surprised to find that (at the time) some branded motorcycle oil (more than $8 quart) was the same apparent formula as inexpensive oil that could be purchased at Wal-Mart, etc ($2 quart).

There are some ukulele players that suggest the same might be true with strings...I just don't have the scientific knowledge to prove it.