# Show Me Your 9 String Tunings (2017 Edition)



## TWF (Jun 6, 2017)

There had been a thread with a similar name a couple of years ago. And I remember many discussing — and being sure — that 9 string guitars would be 8 strings with an additional high a (or g string) when they become more "mainstream". Now we have the RG9 for the masses (I own one myself) and its three low bass strings added to the standard 6. Time for a reissue of the thread, what do you think?

Currently, I play standard/factory tuning:
*C#F#BEADgbe*

I love to have 3 bass strings, 3 "treble" and 3 "high" strings.
The continuation of perfect fouths intervals make sense, yes. But I have to admit that I have never been a fan of C# and F# as open strings.

I am thinking about trying out tuning one step lower:

*B(0)E(1)A(1)D(2)GCfad*

This looks much more natural to me. In the end, this is a 6 string in D tuning plus bass strings in standard (5-string bass) tuning.

What do you think? What's your approach to 9 string guitar playing?


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Jun 6, 2017)

PAGING @Hollowway


----------



## bostjan (Jun 7, 2017)

TWF said:


> There had been a thread with a similar name a couple of years ago. And I remember many discussing — and being sure — that 9 string guitars would be 8 strings with an additional high a (or g string) when they become more "mainstream". Now we have the RG9 for the masses (I own one myself) and its three low bass strings added to the standard 6. Time for a reissue of the thread, what do you think?



http://www.sevenstring.org/threads/9-string-tuning.166277/

Naw, most folks thought it'd be a low C#


----------



## GunpointMetal (Jun 7, 2017)

A, E, A, E, A, D, G, B, E

The first 7 are 7-string drop A, with the two lowest strings being an octave lower than their counterparts. At this point its arguable whether I'm playing a short-scale 9-string bass with extra high strings, or a long scale guitar with three extra low strings, as the lowest string is the same pitch as a 5-string bass tuned down one step.


----------



## Winspear (Jun 7, 2017)

BEADGCFAD is very nice indeed. 
I use perfect fourths myself and a high treble so I'm in EADGCFBbEbAb, or would be BEADGCFBbEb in a typical 9 string. Or C#F#BEADGCF if standard  
Anything is good for me if in perfect 4ths, but usually I'll take a typical standard tuning for a string number and tune down a step (D standard 6, A standard 7, E standard 8 string like I have done).

Minor 3rds tuning is beyond awesome but will only give you the range of a 6.


----------



## Halowords (Jun 7, 2017)

Winspear said:


> BEADGCFAD is very nice indeed.



What he said. That is what I went with. However, I am thinking of selling my 9-string to get something for a high-A string (or high-G, depending) instead. The BEADGCFAD tuning makes sense when you play it, as would the C#F#BEADGBE. The patterns stay the same, and the high-E on the 1st remains intact, only there are two frets lower(!). Point being, notes are more-or-less where you left them, only you can go quite a bit lower than your six- or seven-string.

For me, I found that I tend to play more leads/melodies and have not found a string I love at the B0. I think I can tune up a bit and come up with something that has a high-G or high F# that might be more suitable to my (seemingly ever evolving) tastes, and I may end up just keeping what I've got with that, and saving up for the headless custom job I am coveting. Time will tell. I really like it, and it fits in with how my brain _sees_ the notes and patterns for "guitars" in my head (which is pretty much as standard tuning). However, I find myself gravitating toward wanting (if not actually needing) one string higher for playing with chord formations, melodies, and the like.

Take that for what it's worth.


----------



## Hollowway (Jun 8, 2017)

KnightBrolaire said:


> PAGING @Hollowway



 Sho nuf! I was skimming the latest posts and saw this thread and got all excited. 

Anyway, for all my ERGs I use standard tuning and just stack strings up in forths for the lower strings. Abandoned A4 years ago. Partly because it's a bear to get a string tuned up that high, but mostly because my tiny brain couldn't adapt to a higher string. But for whatever reason, I can play 7s, 8s, 9s, and 10s with ease - provided the additional strings are added below, not above, and provided that they're in "standard" tuning. I will drop the lowest string a whole step on occasion, but otherwise I want to be able to riff on the lower strings in the same way I'd do on the E, A, D strings on a normal guitar. That requires 4ths. Because of that, I think it's vastly easier to learn to play and ERG if the uning is kept in the G#0, C#1, F#1, B1, EADGBE realm. 

However, one cool thing is to change what string you tune up a major 3rd from, as opposed to a 4th. Ben Elmer turned me on to this. So, on a regular guitar, you can do typical barre chords because of the G to B interval between the 3rd and 2nd strings. But, if you have a 7 string guitar, and move that major 3rd interval to the 4th to 3rd strings, you now have the guitar tuned BEADF#BE. So if you play the typical barre chords with the root on the lowest string, you can still use the same shapes and get the same chords - but now lower. It's like you suddenly have a baritone guitar with an additional high string. If you fret that high string, it's fine, because it's just adding a 5th to a barre chord with the root on the lowest string. If you do an 8 string guitar, it would be F#BEAC#F#BE. In this case, fretting the second to the highest string would give a 5th to the chord, but the highest string adds a minor 7th, which would definitely color the chord.
Anyway, it's a cool trick that takes very little alteration to a standard tuning, yet allows you to really easily mess around with super low chords. 
For 9s, I really don't do any chording on the lowest string. It's really hard to get it to sound good.


----------



## bostjan (Jun 8, 2017)

I've been doing eight strings with high A4 for nearly a decade now, and I love the layout, but the first couple of years, I did stumble every once in a while going back to a seven without a high A4. To put things into perspective, though, I did learn to play the lute as a teen, and the lute is tuned ADGBEA, just like the top six of my eight. I think that helped me wrap my head around the layout better.


----------



## Halowords (Jun 8, 2017)

Hollowway said:


> However, one cool thing is to change what string you tune up a major 3rd from, as opposed to a 4th.



I won't tell you how long it took me to figure out what you meant here, except to say it took me too long.



> (I)f you have a 7 string guitar, and move that major 3rd interval to the 4th to 3rd strings, you now have the guitar tuned BEADF#BE. So if you play the typical barre chords with the root on the lowest string, you can still use the same shapes and get the same chords - but now lower. It's like you suddenly have a baritone guitar with an additional high string. [snip] If you do an 8 string guitar, it would be F#BEAC#F#BE.



I really, really like that. It allows more chord complexity (which is part of what I like in theory about adding a high-A string to a standard guitar tuning, and you can get most of that benefit by moving up a few frets), and makes barre chords more practical. Plus, you get the extra range and more-notes-under-finger to play with.



> For 9s, I really don't do any chording on the lowest string. It's really hard to get it to sound good.



Agreed. And on that note...

What is the lowest or (completely subjective, I know) best note/tuning/string-gauge you've found for the lowest string on your 9-strings for guitar work (as opposed to turning it into a _really_-short-scale bass)? I know that topic has come up before, however I am still mulling over what to do with my 9th string.

-Cheers


----------



## PBC (Jun 8, 2017)

I've experimented with several tunings. The main thing I question is the placement of the Major Third and if I want the extra strings to be P4 or a P5 apart.

9 String (L to H):

C#{F#/G#}C#F#BEG#C#F#, the 8th string is either a P4 or P5, usually a P5, 1st string is F#4

Open E Standard: BEBEADBE

9 String Standard: C#F#BEADGBE

Drop B: BF#BF#BEG#C#F# (Extended a la All Shall Perish tuning)

Drop A: AEAEADGBE

Open A Standard: AE[ADGCEA]E, A standard in the middle with P5 extra high string, great for chords. Have trouble adjusting with using the interval for soloing and runs.

I applied this same token to my 10 strings. 

Open G# Standard: G#{C#/Eb}[G#C#F#BEbG#]EbG#, that's G# standard with open tuning on the highest strings with a G#4. 

I do the same with A taking the tuning above and tuning it up a half step, but the A4 at 25.5" is looking for an excuse to snap, so I don't play it that much. So I tuned it down. G standard in this variation would also work but it's so low on the bottom end. 

A Standard Extended: AE[ADGCEA]DG, this is my favorite 10 string tuning which is basically A standard with two extra high strings. It's not quite as good for chording, but fits within the scale lengths and standard shapes. 

I agree that the extra high strings are more appealing to my ear than extra low strings. 



Halowords said:


> Agreed. And on that note...
> 
> What is the lowest or (completely subjective, I know) best note/tuning/string-gauge you've found for the lowest string on your 9-strings for guitar work (as opposed to turning it into a _really_-short-scale bass)? I know that topic has come up before, however I am still mulling over what to do with my 9th string.
> 
> -Cheers



I've used super light gauges, (.080 for A0 & G#0 up to .092 as well), to try and be as clear as possible. I found that with the 10 and 9 string variations that the lowest string just gets lost in a chord strum. Power chords/P5 work okay for anything C#1 and above, but again that differs for personal taste. The Drop A with A0E1, I can barely discern the A0. It most likely has to do with amps and settings, so there is still much experimenting to be done.


----------



## GunpointMetal (Jun 8, 2017)

What scale length are you playing at that you can get away with even a 92 for A or G#? I'm running a 118 for A on a 30" scale and its JUST barely tight enough. I was using a 124 but the difference in string sound from the A to the E was too great.


----------



## PBC (Jun 8, 2017)

GunpointMetal said:


> What scale length are you playing at that you can get away with even a 92 for A or G#? I'm running a 118 for A on a 30" scale and its JUST barely tight enough. I was using a 124 but the difference in string sound from the A to the E was too great.



Hey gunpoint, 

On my 9 and 10 strings the scale lengths are 30, 28.625, and 28. I'm using LaBella Strings, which I believe you might be using as well if I recall your response in an older thread. The strings have a heavier mass so the tension is deceiving for their gauge, I will admit that they are extremely light. The trick is balancing out the strings with other super light gauge strings. For example for those tunings I use a .065 and .067 for C#1 and .048 for A1 and .052 for G# or G. The .065 C# is the best I've ever heard the note. I tuned the 7th string down to C#1 and kept the .090 C#1 as well on the 9th string. Just to see the difference, The heavier string is very grunt/short scale bass while the super light gauge sounds more guitar like. However, each half step once you get to C#1 is a whole new beast. I've taken a break on trying to get anything in the 0 octave to sound halfway decent, but I might revisit it soon. I've tried from .080-.142 on those notes and I decided to not go over .100 since the string girth becomes too close to the surrounding strings and I dislike the tone. 

What kind of amplification are you using for your double drop A? That might shed some light (help us) get some decent definition for these low notes.


----------



## Hollowway (Jun 8, 2017)

Halowords said:


> Agreed. And on that note...
> 
> What is the lowest or (completely subjective, I know) best note/tuning/string-gauge you've found for the lowest string on your 9-strings for guitar work (as opposed to turning it into a _really_-short-scale bass)? I know that topic has come up before, however I am still mulling over what to do with my 9th string.
> 
> -Cheers



I'm using a .106 at 30" for C#1, and I still think it's a little floppy. It's a Kalium. So I think I'm going to go up to .118. And on my G#0 string at 30" it's .142. Those are both 23.5 lbs, but that just doesn't seem to give it enough stiffness at 30". So I'll probably go to .118" for the C#1, and maybe .158" for the G#0. But we're definitely in bass territory with those strings. I think that the gray area of the string size/scale length is diminished by the string spacing and other strings, though. In other words, even if I played a piccolo bass, it's not going to sound like a guitar, because the string spacing and pickups are designed to sound like a bass. But move those strings to guitar spacing, through an Aftermath in the bridge position, and let me plug into a Fryette Pittbull, and that same instrument is going to sound like a guitar. So I'm not super worried about that issue. 

The overriding factor is that there is a limit to how low we can tune an instrument. I've got this Quake bass being built, which will be tuned to C#0, which is ridiculously low. It will be interesting to see how it sounds.


----------



## GunpointMetal (Jun 9, 2017)

PBC said:


> What kind of amplification are you using for your double drop A? That might shed some light (help us) get some decent definition for these low notes.


I actually went to Kalium a while back. I was getting "dead" sets from LaBella with strings that were starting to oxidize so I stopped ordering them. I run my 9's through a L6 Helix with a kind of interesting signal chain. The signal is split with a crossover split at 300Hz and then I run the >300Hz signal into one boost-gate-amp model and the <300Hz signal into another boost-gate-amp model with different gain and EQ settings on each part of the signal. Both amp model outputs are then merged back into a single Mesa OS 4x12 IR and blended till I like it. I find I need to boost/distort the low end a little more than the top end to get them to sound equally saturated. I'm also not too concerned with the fundamental on the low A as long as it sounds "good" with the rest of the guitar.


----------



## TWF (Jun 9, 2017)

Thank you guys for your feedback!

@Winspear @Halowords :
What string gauges would you recommend for BEADGCFAD on my 28" RG9? 
Plus: Is there a six string set for D tuning you could recommend?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## ixlramp (Jun 9, 2017)

Here's one i haven't used on a 9 string but have used on a 6 string bass.
Neutral thirds (350 cents) which is fairly usable for playing quartertone music.
http://sevenstring.org/threads/retune-to-play-quartertone-scales-microtonal-beginners-guide.161530/
Ideal for ERGs as a reasonable range is preserved.
I calculated gauges for this too, pick 9 from 74 59 48 38 30 24w 17p 13p 10p 8p.


----------



## Halowords (Jun 10, 2017)

TWF said:


> Thank you guys for your feedback!
> 
> @Winspear @Halowords :
> What string gauges would you recommend for BEADGCFAD on my 28" RG9?



These are what I use for now (the gauges are all listed there):
http://store.kaliumstrings.com/inde...tring-sets/standard-tuning/g9h-11-118-mt.html

You could probably also ask MFkitten here or email them at the Kalium site for recommendations. They work well for me on my Agile 92730 (which is a multiscale that goes from 27" to 30").


----------



## Winspear (Jun 10, 2017)

TWF said:


> Thank you guys for your feedback!
> 
> @Winspear @Halowords :
> What string gauges would you recommend for BEADGCFAD on my 28" RG9?
> ...



10 13 17 28 38 50 65 85 115  110 could cut it, wouldn't bother with less than a 105
10-46 would be usable for the 6 string part but I think 10-49 sets exist.


----------



## Winspear (Jun 10, 2017)

That set linked above is really on point BUT it's totally balanced, meaning the trebles are as tight as the wounds nearly. Wouldn't recommend it personally, especially as it's a tight wound set to begin with. The wound portion would be fantastic though!


----------



## TWF (Jun 10, 2017)

Thank you!


----------



## Halowords (Jun 10, 2017)

Winspear said:


> That set linked above is really on point BUT it's totally balanced, meaning the trebles are as tight as the wounds nearly. Wouldn't recommend it personally, especially as it's a tight wound set to begin with. The wound portion would be fantastic though!



Good point. FWIW, on my LP-scale and normal tunings, I tend to use 11's for the 1st string tuned to high-E, and like thicker strings. So I'm used to thicker strings and like that tonally. You can keep that in mind as your preferences may differ from mine, and I asked for something kind of specific and pretty much got it.


----------



## Halowords (Jun 11, 2017)

Hollowway said:


> So I'll probably go to .118" for the C#1, and maybe .158" for the G#0.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> The overriding factor is that there is a limit to how low we can tune an instrument. I've got this Quake bass being built, which will be tuned to C#0, which is ridiculously low. It will be interesting to see how it sounds.



Yeah. The B0 at 30" does not sound bad, it just sticks out a bit to my ear. Maybe with the proper setup a/o thicker string or whatever it would be great. However, I'm thinking of just tuning the thing a bit higher overall and tune up to a major third on the 4th string instead of the 3rd and try it that way to change things around a bit.

Anyway, I'd love to hear if going thicker on the bass-side of things makes it sound better or just more like a compromised bass.

As for the Quake bass...should sound (or probably even more than that, _feel_) awesome! It is one of those things I think I would love, however find myself interested more in also going higher than going that low, just with how I end up playing these days, so I've not quite given up on A4 or the like at this point.


----------



## PBC (Jun 12, 2017)

TWF said:


> Thank you guys for your feedback!
> 
> @Winspear @Halowords :
> What string gauges would you recommend for BEADGCFAD on my 28" RG9?
> ...



You didn't ask me but I feel that for your tuning a 9-46 set (ernie ball hybrid) for the D standard portion with a 64 for A, and 82/84 for E and a 110 for B would be a good benchmark. That's about even on the bottom end but lighter on top to compensate for the 28" scale length. I must mention that I couldn't fit my ernie ball .105 completely through the string ferrule on my RG9, which I think coincides with some other people's experience. You could always drill it.


----------



## TWF (Jun 13, 2017)

Thanks for your advice, @PBC, and the note on potential problems with the string ferrule. That's something I have not thought about...

The Kalium strings have not yet arrived. But I have an "Ernie Ball 9-String Slinky" set here with a .105. Do you use that for your B? How's your experience with that?

I may also be trying BEBEADgbe tuning first as I am so used to standard tuning.

The ideal solution for future guitar building might be a 9-string with two extra frets for the lowest two (or three) strings. Such as the Rick Toone Blur has it. So the open strings could be B and E, the rest could be standard, and the intervals would still be standard. I know I could use a capo for the first seven.


----------



## Daken1134 (Jun 30, 2017)

ill bite!
[youtubevid]
Tuning is C-G-C-E-G-C-G-C-E


----------



## TWF (Jul 1, 2017)

Daken1134 said:


> ill bite!
> Tuning is C-G-C-E-G-C-G-C-E



Sounds great!


----------



## Ram150023 (Jul 3, 2017)

I am anxiously awaiting my Agile 928 to arrive hence my stop on the thread... @Hollowway... Thanks for always keeping me in "GAS mode" for more strings with your adventures over the years hahahaha

@dean... That was an awesome display mate!! I will have to try the tuning your using!!

One of my main concerns is/ was the string gauges... I order from and have been using for quite a while now... Stringjoy's brand.

Drilling the tuning peg is a fore-gone conclusion as ive done this to each 8 I have ever owned to accomodate a .090 / .095 tuned to E /A/G#... So i know ill be doing it to the new 9 as well...

For the new 9 however... Really curious with a 28.625 scale... What would be the general concensus to avoid a floppy, s#itty sounding 9th string for gauge?


----------



## GunpointMetal (Jul 3, 2017)

What are you tuning to?


----------



## EverDream (Jul 4, 2017)

Okay so I play an 8-string guitar, but I'm using a 9-string tuning with no high string basically. All you 9-stringers just imagine your high string broke and you only had the 8 lower ones... those are the same as my 8, lol.

So right now I have it in Drop-B: BF#BEADGB with a .012 - .110
It's going to be in Drop-A after I put the new strings on I just got and then it'll be: AEADGCFA with .0125 - .118, assuming the .118 fits through the string holes in the body.
If that doesn't fit then it's going to be in either Drop-A, or B: BEADGCFA with .0125 - .114. If .114 doesn't fit then it'll be in B with .0125 - .110.

(So I ordered 10 strings total: 7 gauges for each of the first 7 strings (.0125 - .082), and 3 gauges for the lowest string (.110, .114, and .118) so that I could find out the biggest string gauge that will fit through my guitar's body, the .110 I know will fit so that one I bought as a fail-proof last option if the .118 and .114 both don't fit.)

@Ram150023 I have a .110 tuned to B0 on my 28.625 scale Agile right now, and it feels great to me and not "floppy, s#itty sounding" lol!

More about that:

My guitar is an Agile 828 so it's also 28.625 scale and the .110 I have on it sounds fairly decent (it feels great though, doesn't feel floppy at all to me), although it is a bass guitar string (D'Addario) that I took off an old bass I'm not longer using (after buying a newer, better one), but since my other 7 strings (LaBella) are still the guitar strings that came with the guitar (the high string broke and I moved the last 7 strings over one string to make room for the .110 to be the 8th) and that was nearly 2 years ago, and since the bass string didn't have nearly as much playing time on it, there ended up being no weird tonal difference between it and the other 7 guitar strings, haha. It worked out perfectly as an experiment to see if the guitar would fit a .110 through the body and it did!

So I bought a set of Kalium all 8 are guitar strings this time, this time I got a set for B with .0125 - .110, but I also bought a .118 and .114 as well to see what will fit through. I'm gonna first try the .118 and if it fits then I'm tuning it to Drop A, and if it doesn't then I'll try the .114 and if that works then I'll do either B or Drop-A, and if that doesn't fit either then I'll just do the .110 like I have on now and tune it to B (but this time it will be brand new and an actual guitar string, and a different brand as well (Kalium instead of D'Addario) so it would still be different even though it's the same gauge string).

That being said I think the .118 is probably going to fit, seeing as how I noticed when I put the .110 through the body, there was still room to spare. There wasn't like a TON of space, but it wasn't like it "just barely" fit through either. I'm guessing that the body hole is probably about .125, since that's the diameter of a Hipshot bridge saddle hole (at least the ones I've read about anyway). However your 9-string might have bigger through-body holes for the lowest strings than my 8-string (Yours may or may not, but one thing I feel is that... any 9-string guitar SHOULD be built with a bigger string hole (I'd say 1.5 times bigger, so assuming .125 is normal, then .1875) for the lowest string at the very least if it was designed intelligently, and ideally the 2 lowest ones (or 3 lowest if it was a 10-string) should be bigger and also have bigger bridge saddle holes and tuner holes (or just bass tuners even) IMO and an 8-string guitar should have the lowest string setup like that as well), but I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't, in which case my findings would probably (I only say "probably" because mine is an Intrepid Pro 828 that I bought 22 months (almost 2 years) ago, and yours you just ordered and it's a 928 and not an 828, and plus you might not be getting the Intrepid Pro model, etc.) apply to your guitar as well.


----------



## TWF (Jul 4, 2017)

Just as a little update after all your help:
My tuning is now 
*BEBEADGBE*. 
And I feel very comfortable with that. I think this will be my standard tuning for my 9-string.

String gauges are:
110, 90, 64, 46, 34, 24, 16, 11, 9
110 and 90 are bass strings. The tension from E to E is great. B0 could have a little more, but .110 is the thickest that works with the RG9's mechanics.


----------



## GunpointMetal (Jul 5, 2017)

If 110 feels right in B at 28.6 you'll probably be alright with 118 in A. I'm running a 118 for my low A, but its a 30" scale. I actually preferred the 124 in feel, but it was too big of a jump from the 8th string size-wise and was screwing up my picking having to adjust over that huge string, lol.


----------



## CollinG96 (Jul 7, 2017)

Two steps down because I'm a bastard. (from lowest to highest): A, D, G, C, F, A#, D#, G, C.


----------



## TWF (Jul 29, 2017)

Here are a some tunings, based on the idea that the 9-string guitar merges electric guitar and electric bass in on instrument:

*BE*BEADGBE (standard 7-string + 2 lowest strings of a 5-string bass)
*BEA*EADGBE (standard 6-string + 3 lowest strings of a 5-string bass)
*BEAD*ADGBE (5 strings of standard guitar + 4 strings of 5-string bass)
Note that there is always a drop/perfect fifth irregularity separating bass and guitar part.


----------



## Grindspine (Jul 29, 2017)

A long while ago, I remember seeing a Chapman Stick Bass for the first time. It was a Chapman stick version that had a bass low side and high treble side, more aimed toward guitar/bass players than the regular low string in the middle style Grand Stick.

That Stick Bass was eight strings with the four lowest being like a four string bass (EADG) and the six highest being like a one step detuned guitar (DGCFAD). To this day, that tuning still makes the most sense to me as a guitarist who sometimes picks up basses. EADGCFAD feels very natural for chording and lower single note lines.

To that note, seven strings at ADGCFAD still feel very natural to me as well.


----------



## summit101 (Aug 10, 2017)

main is DbAbDbGbBEAbDbGb (Drop Db for 8 string w. an added High GB) or Db*Gb*DbGbBEAbDbGb or *Gb0*GbDbGbBEAbDbGb. alternate tuning Bb0FBbEbAbDbGbBbEb or DbEAEADGBE or AEAEADBGE or standard lol


----------



## Poo (Aug 13, 2017)

Hollowway said:


> ...I've got this Quake bass being built, which will be tuned to C#0, which is ridiculously low. It will be interesting to see how it sounds.


My Squire JBass (34") is tuned B00 - B0 - E1 - A1 and it sounds pretty good so I can only imagine that the Quake will sound excellent with the longer scale.
A demonstration: https://soundcloud.com/hermann-snorri/b00


----------



## TheOnlyKtulu (Nov 30, 2019)

Guys!
I'm in the process of designing, together with a veteran luthier here in Romania, a 9-string acoustic ERG guitar for me.
And I'm not talking the likes of this one (already existing). I'm sure we can all agree on the flaws it has.
Instead, although he first disagreed with my take on this, it's gonna be a 30" scale, NON-fanned (cause let's be honest, barrés are a bitch on that fretboard type, at least for me), and with body bout-roundings styles taken from harp-guitars.
It's all meant to be aimed at getting the best sound possible, especially from the lows.
Adjustable bridge, and I'll also try to convince him to design a compensated bone nut.
He also came up with the idea of mounting a Fishman.

I then came up with the idea of putting it up on Reverb when it's done. Cause if such a guitar would sell, then he'd be doing another one.
Now... I'm not asking how much you'd throw in, for something like this to be yours... But I am however curious if you'd be interested in such a project.
So, I'd like to know. Just to make myself an idea. Thanks!

FYI, I'm already years now into Reverb with my personal gear, but recently also with some of his (he's 60 and not willing to make an account for himself, lol).
I can tell you, his stuff is a beast, at least the looks and the wood.
If you wanna know more, just pm me.


----------



## TheOnlyKtulu (Dec 1, 2019)

I'm actually beginning to root for that
F#(1)B(1)EADF#BE
that Hollowway wrote about.
Adding the B(0) on a 9-er, it's kind of neutral and covers the most barrés. Well... The most among other options.


----------

