# Low F# Tuning



## bennerman (Aug 16, 2011)

So I am making a 5 string bass. The intention is to be able to play a both F#BEAD and BEADG tuning (don't worry about nuts and the bridge, I have that figured out). Problem, I am told I need a 38" scale to keep the F# from flopping. Couple of problems:
1. Longer scale = more tension, right? I don't want to have to worry about putting in reinforcements.
2. I don't want to have to shop for specialty strings more than I have to (i.e. nothing besides the F# string), so I would really prefer to keep it 35" at the most.

So if I were to do a 34 or 35" scale bass, what guage would you recommend for all 6 strings?

EDIT: I don't mean I will use the same 5 strings for both tunings. I will buy 6 strings, and when I want to switch to standard, I will change all the strings


----------



## thedarkoceans (Aug 16, 2011)

so man.for a decent low F you have to get a long scale like 38",and good pickups,or it will be fucking muddy.you should try to make a 2 truss rod neck.my suggestion is JUMBO FRETS.do it.then you should buy 4 string in the normal way,like d'addario or elixir or whatever.and a circle k string for low F.

take care,good luck.
TDO.


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 16, 2011)

You don't need a 38" scale to pull off a solid F# - what scale length would you prefer? 

2" is about a half step, and a .190 is a decent tight F# for 34/35" scale length. At 36" you can go to .182 with similar tension. 38" will let you get away with .174. Go to 40" and you can do a .166.

These sets will have as much tension as a standard 5 string and won't require exceptional build rigors.


----------



## ZEBOV (Aug 16, 2011)

Just a few days ago, I ordered a set of .174 .130 .098 .073 .055 gauges for a cheap 34" scale bass. http://circlekstrings.com/CKSIMAGES/CircleKtensionChart.pdf
I took a good look at that tension chart before ordering. When I get the strings, I'll get my bass set up for them, try it out on my amp, and then make a video. It's likely that it will be somewhat muddy simply because of the cheap stock pickups on my bass, but I'll know if's it's muddier or cleaner than before. My amp is perfect though.


----------



## ixlramp (Aug 16, 2011)

Some F# strings of the past have been too floppy at 34" or 35" but there's more choice of subcontra strings now. You can pick the exact gauge for the optimum tension for any scale and any note at Circle K Strings: Circle K Strings - Single Strings - All tensions,scales, gauges
Use the tension chart ZEBOV linked to.
They also sell balanced tension sets (strings at equal tension) in finely graded gauges for any tension you desire. Here's the choice of 6 string sets: Circle K Strings - Standard Balanced 6 Strings
A good method for choosing is to pick the set with your preferred gauge of E string.

There are many bassists who successfully tune much lower than F# on a 34"/35" bass. Although extra scale helps, it's not essential, with the right string you can get excellent tone. In the world of ERB, F# is no longer considered particularly low 

If you use another brand for the top 5 strings, 130 95 70 50 35 plus a Circle K 174. This makes a light balanced tension set.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 16, 2011)

bennerman said:


> Problem, I am told I need a 38" scale to keep the F# from flopping.



As you note, the problem is that you've been told something which some don't find to be true in practice. 

Conklin Groove Tools basses have a 34" scale length and use a .165 for the low F# and .195 for the low C#. I trust Conklin more than whoever is telling you that.


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 16, 2011)

Explorer said:


> As you note, the problem is that you've been told something which some don't find to be true in practice.
> 
> Conklin Groove Tools basses have a 34" scale length and use a .165 for the low F# and .195 for the low C#. I trust Conklin more than whoever is telling you that.



*mod edit: just a note, the poster is associated with Circle K strings and the method he states is superior is the way his company makes strings*

There is benefit to scale length - and I've found it beneficial and worthwhile embracing it.

Best preliminary benefit is using three wrap B strings which far and away have better voices than the preponderance of four wrap strings. Most manufacturers use four wraps at or just beyond .125 which is a woefully light B string gauge.

Same holds true with the larger gauges - the less metal and the fewer wraps you need to get where you're going the better your tone is going to be.

Yes you can indeed get there on a 34" - but only within the last 2 years or so have there been any truly viable ways to get beyond A below B.

While there are those who embrace .195 for C#, I contend that it is barely appropriate for 20 Hz E. And when brought to traditional tension presents confounding issues that most bass players wouldn't be willing to live with.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 17, 2011)

Conklins are acknowledged as solid basses on TalkBass. I understand that you, as the manufacturer of Circle K Strings, would have opinions which are demonstrated by your choices in string manufacturing. 

I agree that you would have some insight into this... in the same way that TalkBass members might also. I'm sure it would be an interesting discussion on TalkBass, where there is a deeper and wider experience base of working bassists. I'll keep an eye open for it when it starts up. 

To the OP: I recommend you do some reading on this, rather than take any one individual's comments as the final word.


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 17, 2011)

knuckle_head said:


> *mod edit: just a note, the poster is associated with Circle K strings and the method he states is superior is the way his company makes strings*



This also comes by virtue of my being a bass builder - and I build Knuckle Guitar Works basses FWIW


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 17, 2011)

Explorer said:


> Conklins are acknowledged as solid basses on TalkBass. I understand that you, as the manufacturer of Circle K Strings, would have opinions which are demonstrated by your choices in string manufacturing.
> 
> I agree that you would have some insight into this... in the same way that TalkBass members might also. I'm sure it would be an interesting discussion on TalkBass, where there is a deeper and wider experience base of working bassists. I'll keep an eye open for it when it starts up.
> 
> To the OP: I recommend you do some reading on this, rather than take any one individual's comments as the final word.



Conklins enjoy a well deserved reputation - I have played a few, including Stew McKinsey's 10 featured in another active thread on this board.

Know, too, that Conklin and I were in negotiations to have me manufacture their Sidewinder strings. We know one another. Sadly, as I am a small guy in the industry, I was too expensive to provide them enough of a profit margin.

If you do a search on Talkbass (and you should) you'll find I have a 10 year history there of encouraging exploration of low tunings. Back then there was only one way to do it - SIT. Today you have Warwick Black Labels, Labella subcontra strings (which I helped develop), Octave 4 Plus, myself, and perhaps others - I hope there are others.

The OP suggested he wanted to pursue longer scale lengths - and I hope he is still considering it. There are great benefits to doing this, and I know this as I build basses as well. Mine start at 36" and go to 39.55" speaking lengths. I hope within the next 14 to 18 months to have a 55" scale instrument that will allow F# tuning utilizing a .130 string - I have no idea if/how well it will work, but my experience suggests there are some interesting things to be found in doing it.

Lots of ways for bennerman (the OP) to skin his cat - and I hope I am only one of his resources . . .


----------



## bennerman (Aug 17, 2011)

Well I was hoping not to build a long scale, because my current bass is 34" scale, and I want to base it off of that. I don't know the various fret positions and such on a longer scale bass. Though as a bass maker, I was wondering if you would be willing to help me with that.

EDIT: Can I put it together fretless, test all of the notes with a tuner, and then mark them as I go along?


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 17, 2011)

bennerman said:


> Well I was hoping not to build a long scale, because my current bass is 34" scale, and I want to base it off of that. I don't know the various fret positions and such on a longer scale bass. Though as a bass maker, I was wondering if you would be willing to help me with that.



There is an awesome StewMac resource;

Fret Calculator


----------



## bennerman (Aug 17, 2011)

knuckle_head said:


> There is an awesome StewMac resource;
> 
> Fret Calculator



Alright guys, here's the plan for the bass:

-40" Scale, 24 Frets
-Ebony Fretboard
-5 piece neck, layered as "Maple, Rosewood, Ebony, Rosewood, Maple" (i.e. maple is the two outer pieces, rosewood are the two inner stripes, and ebony is the center stripe).
-Koa Body, shaped like Les Claypool's rainbow bass (with the scroll).
-4 string, F#BEA
-Bone or Deer Antler nut.
-Soap bar pickups (Optimistically EMGs or Q-Tuners with a pickup cover, but more realistically whatever I can find)
-Neck Thru construction
-Strung through construction (and knuckle, can you recommend a bridge that will fit the F#?)

Is a neck like this going to need a dual trussrod or reinforcements? I assume the ebony fretboard and the ebony strip in the neck are going to lend some stability anyway.

Is there anything else I need to worry about?

EDIT: may be 20 frets, because the only ebony fretboards in my price range go up to 26" on a 4 string, 28" on a 5 string (I may get a 5 string anyway and trim it a little, because with the F#, I may need a wider one anyway)


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 17, 2011)

bennerman said:


> -Strung through construction (and knuckle, can you recommend a bridge that will fit the F#?)


Any top loading bridge will work - brass Hipshots are good. I'm fond of the A style but the D style is kinda cool.



> Is a neck like this going to need a dual trussrod or reinforcements? I assume the ebony fretboard and the ebony strip in the neck are going to lend some stability anyway.


A single truss rod will do fine. LMI has done custom length rods for me in the past, and it would be worth it to see if they can do one for you that is 4 to 5 inches longer than their standard rod. Know how many frets you want before you ask them to be sure it will fit under the board you get.



> Is there anything else I need to worry about?
> 
> EDIT: may be 20 frets, because the only ebony fretboards in my price range go up to 26" on a 4 string, 28" on a 5 string (I may get a 5 string anyway and trim it a little, because with the F#, I may need a wider one anyway)


Will you slot this yourself? Having the extra width is a good idea.


----------



## bennerman (Aug 17, 2011)

knuckle_head said:


> Any top loading bridge will work - brass Hipshots are good. I'm fond of the A style but the D style is kinda cool.
> 
> 
> A single truss rod will do fine. LMI has done custom length rods for me in the past, and it would be worth it to see if they can do one for you that is 4 to 5 inches longer than their standard rod. Know how many frets you want before you ask them to be sure it will fit under the board you get.
> ...



I am going to be doing it myself. I am 17 and don't have a job. Can't afford to pay anyone else.

Although, my grandfather is a retired carpenter, and my dad used to be a contractor (specializing in roofing, but he has emphysema, so can't do it anymore). My dad is definitely going to help with it, and he is going to call my grandpa soon to ask if he will help.


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 17, 2011)

bennerman said:


> I am going to be doing it myself. I am 17 and don't have a job. Can't afford to pay anyone else.
> 
> Although, my grandfather is a retired carpenter, and my dad used to be a contractor (specializing in roofing, but he has emphysema, so can't do it anymore). My dad is definitely going to help with it, and he is going to call my grandpa soon to ask if he will help.



My rods measure about 26" for my Quakes - you can make-shift a Fender style tension rod pretty simply and very cheaply. That you're building a very rigid neck will help alot.

There are very cheap single string bridge assemblies to be had - worth it if you want to compensate for string spacing at the bridge.


----------



## bennerman (Aug 17, 2011)

knuckle_head said:


> My rods measure about 26" for my Quakes - you can make-shift a Fender style tension rod pretty simply and very cheaply. That you're building a very rigid neck will help alot.
> 
> There are very cheap single string bridge assemblies to be had - worth it if you want to compensate for string spacing at the bridge.



I wonder, will these work?

$11.41 Free Ship Set of 4 Single String Bass Bridges Gold-plated - Wholesale US$10.47

I also have a question. I have had my bass for 6 months and never once adjusted the truss rod. it is with that said that I ask: do I even need one? Wouldn't steel or graphite reinforcements do the same job that a non-adjustable truss rod would do?


----------



## bennerman (Aug 17, 2011)

I know this is sorta off topic, but I am turning my current bass fretless, and I was wondering if anyone could tell me what strings Les is using on this song?


If I recall, that bass has a crapload of ebony in it, so that could contribute


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 17, 2011)

bennerman said:


> I wonder, will these work?
> 
> $11.41 Free Ship Set of 4 Single String Bass Bridges Gold-plated - Wholesale US$10.47
> 
> I also have a question. I have had my bass for 6 months and never once adjusted the truss rod. it is with that said that I ask: do I even need one? Wouldn't steel or graphite reinforcements do the same job that a non-adjustable truss rod would do?



These are exactly the bridges I hoped you'd find.

I have carbon in my necks and I need the truss rod. You will too. It is worth putting carbon in if you can - it's better than steel and lighter. Strings vary even set to set a little bit, and necks move with the seasons. 

You might want to be careful using ebony as stringers in your neck. I stopped using it as fret board material because it moves so much with humidity changes. But then, I am in Seattle after all.


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Aug 17, 2011)

bennerman said:


> I am going to be doing it myself. I am 17 and don't have a job. Can't afford to pay anyone else.
> 
> Although, my grandfather is a retired carpenter, and my dad used to be a contractor (specializing in roofing, but he has emphysema, so can't do it anymore). My dad is definitely going to help with it, and he is going to call my grandpa soon to ask if he will help.



Just FYI it will be cheaper buy something than make it. Especially if you got a job and worked for all the hours of research you would have put into making the bass, and that doesn't even account for making the instrument.


----------



## bennerman (Aug 17, 2011)

Stealthtastic said:


> Just FYI it will be cheaper buy something than make it. Especially if you got a job and worked for all the hours of research you would have put into making the bass, and that doesn't even account for making the instrument.



First of all, I doubt a bass like this even exists. when looking through everything, I have found the hardware (cheap stuff) to equal about 100 dollars. The fretboard will be about 60 from the places I have looked. The wood I doubt will be more than 200. So liberally, I am placing it at 500 or 600 dollars.

Or I could just save time and order it from Conklin for 3000 dollars with a year or so wait time (real time saver), and not get the pride of doing something myself or enjoy the quality time with my father (who I don't live with) and my grandfather (who I haven't talked to in damn near 10 years). Yeah, buying it makes sense.


----------



## HSI_Official (Aug 17, 2011)

> You might want to be careful using ebony as stringers in your neck.



I second this opinion. I've worked in the finish department of several guitar shops/manufacturers, and I've seen Ebony fingerboards shrink enough during a season change that the fret tang will poke out the side and push bits of the finish away from the wood, leaving little de-laminated spots that appear as whitish dots, just because the Ebony itself shrank.

(There are various ways to avoid this, obviously, as most manufacturers don't have this problem. I bring it up only as an illustration of the amount that Ebony can potentially move during climate changes)

My recent experience doing fretwork leads me to believe that necks with Ebony and African Blackwood fingerboards also have an increased tendency to warp. It's a marginal increase in frequency, but it's worth noting. As with all anecdotal evidence, it's not to be taken as gospel, and you should definitely do some extra research.

I don't have much personal experience with instruments with Wenge necks, but I have been told repeatedly that it is very stable by colleagues in the industry, and might be a more suitable alternative for the center stringer of the neck. You might also consider it as a fretboard alternative if you're not set on Ebony. (Can't blame you if you are; I don't think there's a more beautiful fretboard material than Ebony)


----------



## bennerman (Aug 17, 2011)

HSI_Official said:


> I second this opinion. I've worked in the finish department of several guitar shops/manufacturers, and I've seen Ebony fingerboards shrink enough during a season change that the fret tang will poke out the side and push bits of the finish away from the wood, leaving little de-laminated spots that appear as whitish dots, just because the Ebony itself shrank.
> 
> (There are various ways to avoid this, obviously, as most manufacturers don't have this problem. I bring it up only as an illustration of the amount that Ebony can potentially move during climate changes)
> 
> ...



Any idea how to stop the shrinkage?


----------



## engage757 (Aug 17, 2011)

just get a Warwick Vampyre!


----------



## bennerman (Aug 17, 2011)

I din't think you people understand that I want to do this myself. Even if I had the money to get a good bass, I would still want to do it myself.


----------



## idunno (Aug 17, 2011)

Do IT!! Dont listen to anyone who tells you not to, or why you need to tune so low, why you need so many strings...FUCK YOU THATS WHY.


----------



## bennerman (Aug 17, 2011)

idunno said:


> Do IT!! Dont listen to anyone who tells you not to, or why you need to tune so low, why you need so many strings...FUCK YOU THATS WHY.



I can't tell if you are trolling or not, and frankly I don't care. You're frickin' smart.


Music is about experimentation. If everyone stuck to the standard, not only would we not even have 7 string guitars (and thus this guitar), we wouldn't even have guitars period.


----------



## idunno (Aug 17, 2011)

Exactly! Everyone who hears about the seven im working on says "why seven" like its dirty or something. After i explain most people get it, but a lot unfortunately dont. Or they think all im going to do is chug the low string.....well theres lots of that... but there is more too!

Hit me up if you need help ill be glad to share info! Heres a sneak peak..


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 17, 2011)

I absolutely encourage you to do it your way.

I will suggest that with carbon reinforcement maple in three sections is more than up to the job. Go exotic if you like the look or timbre, but you shouldn't need it for the structure.


----------



## bennerman (Aug 17, 2011)

knuckle_head said:


> I absolutely encourage you to do it your way.
> 
> I will suggest that with carbon reinforcement maple in three sections is more than up to the job. Go exotic if you like the look or timbre, but you shouldn't need it for the structure.



I want the look and the sound it'll (fingers crossed) lend.

EDIT: What is the actual length of the 40" scale strings you sell?


----------



## idunno (Aug 17, 2011)

knucklehead knows whats up.


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 18, 2011)

bennerman said:


> What is the actual length of the 40" scale strings you sell?



They're in the spec PDF on my site;

String Specs


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Aug 18, 2011)

bennerman said:


> First of all, I doubt a bass like this even exists. when looking through everything, I have found the hardware (cheap stuff) to equal about 100 dollars. The fretboard will be about 60 from the places I have looked. The wood I doubt will be more than 200. So liberally, I am placing it at 500 or 600 dollars.
> 
> Or I could just save time and order it from Conklin for 3000 dollars with a year or so wait time (real time saver), and not get the pride of doing something myself or enjoy the quality time with my father (who I don't live with) and my grandfather (who I haven't talked to in damn near 10 years). Yeah, buying it makes sense.



That's cool, I was just saying that don't do it for the reason that you think it'll be cheaper than buying one instead outright.

Even if you only made 10 an hour it would be more time/cost efficient.


----------



## bennerman (Aug 18, 2011)




----------



## ZEBOV (Aug 18, 2011)

ZEBOV said:


> Just a few days ago, I ordered a set of .174 .130 .098 .073 .055 gauges for a cheap 34" scale bass. http://circlekstrings.com/CKSIMAGES/CircleKtensionChart.pdf
> I took a good look at that tension chart before ordering. When I get the strings, I'll get my bass set up for them, try it out on my amp, and then make a video. It's likely that it will be somewhat muddy simply because of the cheap stock pickups on my bass, but I'll know if's it's muddier or cleaner than before. My amp is perfect though.



My Circle K strings arrived today. My next day off work is Saturday, so I'll take my bass to the guitar store then to have the nut filed.


----------



## bennerman (Aug 19, 2011)

Seriously, anyone know anything about stopping the shrinkage of ebony? I read lemon oil somewhere. Does that work? Will it work for the neck, too?


----------



## MF_Kitten (Aug 19, 2011)

Skip, i have been wondering about low tunings on 34" scale... Those who have done it have usually gotten the thickest "regular" strings they can, from the d'addario .145 to .175 warwick dark lord set, and it usually sounds pretty awesome.

Now, the thing is, the options right now are aither really huge strings or really loose tension. Is there any way to make a string that isn't so huge, but that has a tighter core? I know there are guitar strings out now that are thinner, yet tighter, for those who like the sound of thinner strings.

What are e tonal implications of doing that once you get into large strings territory? Like, what if you could make a .170 with the tension of a .190 or something?


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 19, 2011)

bennerman - Ebony will always move on you and will move less the thinner it is. It is a difficult species to glue to as it's not very porous - standard wood glue isn't the right stuff. You'll want to use a urethane glue. 

Don't worry about using it - just know that you will see a line in your finish a little bit. You're using it for the right reason in the right spot.

MF_Kitten - There are a couple of ways to make a string stiffer. There is only one way to make a string tighter. The stiffer you make a string the fewer harmonics there will be - and this runs contrary to string design for standard A and up. While you will end up with something that feels right it will end up sounding incongruous.

Much like speaker enclosures, there is no free lunch. For speakers there is loud and low and cheap. For strings its thin and tight and toneful. You can pick only two of the three.


----------



## MF_Kitten (Aug 19, 2011)

I thought that would be the case. Thanks!

I am okay with a loose feel, as long as it's not floppy (which i know your strings aren't), so i'll be ordering soon... I just need to figure out what i'll be tuning to first, as it has to be able to tune up or down to meet the different tunings i am using on the guitars.


----------



## ixlramp (Aug 19, 2011)

MF_Kitten said:


> Is there any way to make a string that isn't so huge, but that has a tighter core?


The tension equation is T = U * (2 * L * F)squared.
For a particular pitch F on a particular scale L, *T is proportional to U*, the unit weight (the weight of 1 inch of string).
This means double the unit weight -> double the tension.

So essentially tension is proportional to the string mass. One way would be to use a hypothetical ultra-high density wrap wire, but if you are using standard steel wrap wire there's only so much mass you can squeeze into a particular gauge. Depending on the string construction (formula) the mass of a particular gauge does vary slightly, hence the slight variation in tension between different brands. Comparing the unit weight data of nickel roundwounds published by D'Addario and Circle K, the CKs are very roughly 5% more massive for the same gauge, for example the CK 130 has the mass of the D'Addario 135. So CKs are slightly tighter than D'Addario for the same gauge.

I hope this makes sense


----------



## MF_Kitten (Aug 19, 2011)

ixlramp said:


> The tension equation is T = U * (2 * L * F)squared.
> For a particular pitch F on a particular scale L, *T is proportional to U*, the unit weight (the weight of 1 inch of string).
> This means double the unit weight -> double the tension.
> 
> ...



thanks! i guess they feel looser because the sets are totally balanced through all the strings then. 

Skip, do you use the same formulas for all scale lengths? i am assuming yes?


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 19, 2011)

MF_Kitten said:


> . . . do you use the same formulas for all scale lengths?



Absolutely


----------



## ixlramp (Aug 19, 2011)

MF_Kitten said:


> i guess they feel looser because the sets are totally balanced through all the strings then.


This is where perceived tension comes in. In my last post i was referring to actual tension. As far as i understand, perceived tension is a combination of actual tension and stiffness (by stiffness i mean inherent stiffness of the string at zero tension). Stiffness can make a string feel tighter, flexibility can make a string feel looser. Circle Ks are designed to be super-flexible so i guess it's possible a CK 130 may end up feeling looser than a D'Addario 130 even though it's actual tension is higher.

Some strings are made with a thicker core, deliberately stiff, to retain a tight feel at low actual tension (DR DDT?). But IMO stiffness is a bad thing and not a price worth paying.

This is all 'as far as i understand it' AFAIUI!


----------



## MF_Kitten (Aug 19, 2011)

knuckle_head said:


> Absolutely



cool


----------



## bennerman (Aug 19, 2011)

so it'll work just fine with the ebony?


----------



## buddylee05 (Aug 20, 2011)

I am building a 40" scale length bass as well. I am in the process of putting my test bass together. I got some cheap wood from Home Depot and putting everything together to see if to works before building the real one. I am also interested in studying the effects of pickup placement on tone. 

Bennerman,
Where are you finding the long pieces of ebony. The longest I am finding is 24" I would definitely like something 28-30". 

Knucklehead,
How do you use a short 24" fender truss rod on the 39.55" scale length. If the fingerboard is 24 frets, which means 30", then the truss rod will not even make it to the first fret. Would the fingerboard be limited to 20 frets (27.4") to use the truss rod?


----------



## Daken1134 (Aug 20, 2011)

You should have done a search on here for this, my band pre records a backing track that utilizes a bass tuned an ocave below our guitars (strings tuned standard to F#) and i bought these, they work great, 

Warwick Black Label Stainless Steel Dark Lord, .085 - .175, 40250

if you want to hear it here is a link

Iodine Sky - Band Profile | Facebook


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 20, 2011)

bennerman said:


> so it'll work just fine with the ebony?


Yes - it is going to expend and contract and if you have a glosss finish on it the glue line will show. Not a structural issue at all - just a cosmetic one. Remember to use urethane glue on the ebony.



buddylee05 said:


> Knucklehead,
> How do you use a short 24" fender truss rod on the 39.55" scale length. If the fingerboard is 24 frets, which means 30", then the truss rod will not even make it to the first fret. Would the fingerboard be limited to 20 frets (27.4") to use the truss rod?


When I suggested to bennerman that he follow Fender's lead, I was encouraging him to make his own, proper length Fender-type truss rod. A guitar truss rod will not work in a neck this long, but the Fender design is simple and easy/cheap to copy. He didn't want to spend money on a custom made one, and he shouldn't have to.




Daken1134 said:


> You should have done a search on here for this, my band pre records a backing track that utilizes a bass tuned an ocave below our guitars (strings tuned standard to F#) and i bought Warwick Black Label Stainless Steel Dark Lords, they work great


They work, but only at 34" scale lengths - he wants to go longer.


----------



## Durero (Aug 20, 2011)

knuckle_head said:


> I hope within the next 14 to 18 months to have a 55" scale instrument that will allow F# tuning utilizing a .130 string - I have no idea if/how well it will work, but my experience suggests there are some interesting things to be found in doing it.



Wow that sounds really interesting.

Are you having custom strings made for this and will you ever be able to offer strings longer than 40" for sale?


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 20, 2011)

Durero said:


> Wow that sounds really interesting.
> 
> Are you having custom strings made for this and will you ever be able to offer strings longer than 40" for sale?



The first version of this will sport my 39.55" scale length - once I know the ergonomics of it the second will have the 55" scale. Hopefully by time the second bass is ready to show off there will be a Circle K machine capable of producing strings for it, and custom gauges will be facilitated. Custom gauges will be spendy - in the upright range for sets. 

The new machine is more than a year off . . .


----------



## Durero (Aug 21, 2011)

That's great to hear Skip 

Are you still intending to use a shoulder-strap and 'conventional' playing position with the 55" scale or are you going thinking of an upright orientation like double bass?


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 21, 2011)

Durero said:


> That's great to hear Skip
> 
> Are you still intending to use a shoulder-strap and 'conventional' playing position with the 55" scale or are you going thinking of an upright orientation like double bass?



Upright, bordering on stick orientation. It will have an end pin and a strap. You'll be able to get some horizontality out of the configuration.


----------



## bennerman (Aug 22, 2011)

Play it with a bow


----------



## ixlramp (Aug 24, 2011)

Talking of Stick orientation and 55" scales ... my interest in such strings is to create an ultra-long scale tapping instrument. Since the hands only need to reach the frets and not pluck near the bridge such a scale is not a problem, it also compensates for the loss of usable scale length due to using a string damper near the nut. The bridge would be waaayyy off to the right out of reach and the body weight off to the right would act as a counterbalance for excellent balance sitting or on a strap. I already consider a tapped WarrGuitar to have the most awesome tone of any bass-size instrument so i imagine an ultra-long tapper would sound amazing!


----------



## bennerman (Aug 24, 2011)

yo, knuckle head, I believe I heard you say you actually made a 0.002 guage string or something? I am starting guitar soon, and was wondering if you plan to start making guitar strings soon?


----------



## knuckle_head (Aug 24, 2011)

bennerman said:


> yo, knuckle head, I believe I heard you say you actually made a 0.002 guage string or something? I am starting guitar soon, and was wondering if you plan to start making guitar strings soon?



That would be Garry Goodman @ Octave 4 Plus - I'm not doing guitar strings yet, and won't open up with something that thin. I will see about what is involved with doing as thin as a .004 or so to be sure, and will see as well about half sizes under .009.

I want to have guitar strings available in the fall - working feverishly at it.


----------



## bennerman (Aug 24, 2011)

knuckle_head said:


> That would be Garry Goodman @ Octave 4 Plus - I'm not doing guitar strings yet, and won't open up with something that thin. I will see about what is involved with doing as thin as a .004 or so to be sure, and will see as well about half sizes under .009.
> 
> I want to have guitar strings available in the fall - working feverishly at it.



Well, my school has a guitar class. I start it september, so I won't even know how to play one until late fall. I was hoping for a 7 string with EADGBEA. What size would you recommend for the A, or, for the sake of not having to bug you every time I want to know a good string, is there any way I can calculate it myself?


----------



## ixlramp (Aug 24, 2011)

bennerman said:


> is there any way I can calculate it myself?


Explanation of what determines tension, equation for calculating tension for any type of string at any pitch on any scale, plus tension charts for guitar and bass:
http://www.daddario.com/upload/tension_chart_13934.pdf
There is some variation between brands but you can use this to approximate the tension of other brands of string to within roughly 5%.

You can use the 'unit weight' values published in the Circle K tension chart in the tension equation. Frequency values are here: Circle K Strings - Gauges and Tension

For top A4 on guitar see the 'A4 and beyond' thread in the ERG subforum.


----------

