# Why not use guitar strings and tension on a bass?



## Hollowway (Feb 8, 2012)

So I'm aware that to tune a bass you use thicker strings and tune it up to a higher tension. But I'm also aware that you can get the same note with a thinner string and a shorter length if you tune it to guitar tension. 

So the question is, when making a multi string bass, I see people having to use ridonculously thick strings to get down to G#0 and below. So why not use guitar strings and go for a shorter length? i.e. why not use a 30" instrument with a .130" string at G#0 (and 17 lbs) and a .095" string at C#1 (and 17.2 lbs) and just do standard bass string spacing, bass EQ, etc? This way you could go even lower than the G#0. 

I understand that you wouldn't necessarily hear the fundamental, but even on a guitar those notes sound lowwwww, so I would think it would be useful.

I ask because I see all of this talk about a 13 single course bass being virtually impossible to make. But using guitar strings you could do a fanned 35-30" instrument with...

A#00 = .254" at 15.3 lbs
D#0 
G#0
C#1
F#
B
E
A
D
G
B
E
A4

And then of course you could do a less crazy instrument with much thinner strings as well.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Feb 8, 2012)

The point of a bass instrument is to have that fundamental, so while you will have a low note with limited transients it still won't have the signature, clear, almost piano like bass tone that a lot of bassists go for. 

There have been 28" to 32" scale hybrid bass/baritone instruments around for decades that use the concept of guitar string tension versus bass string tension, and while they can make those notes they just don't sound like traditional basses. Remember the SR7VIISC?

I suppose with enough processing, and with the right gear you could get close to a traditional bass tone, but if you go that far, wouldn't a few more inches on the scale start to look like an easier method? 

I'm not saying your idea is without merit, I just feel that given the history, it's just not ideal unless you're looking to make a bass with a LOT of strings.


----------



## Explorer (Feb 8, 2012)

I'm not currently gigging, but I've been considering getting a five string fretless like this...






A 21" scale length, one of those tiny Markbass bass amps, and you have a really tiny gig rig.


----------



## idunno (Feb 8, 2012)

Ive got a tiny markbass amp. Not only does it sound great, it weights next to nothing. I can swing it around one handed, its pretty sweet.

Im currently working on a six string 30 inch scale instrument. It will be tuned bass octave E to E maybe drop D at somepoint. The thing is i dont expect it to sound like a bass or a guitar really. im shooting for inbetween. Ill likely play it like a guitar but it may get used for the low end in a jam setting. You need more length and string girth to sound "like a bass". 

Cool post though, I might have to snag that data and make one of those haha


----------



## Hollowway (Feb 9, 2012)

^ Yeah, I'm doing this 9 string 28-32" B0 to D4 build that is similar. I'll be playing it guitar style, since it will have standard string spacing. But obviously it will be in the low register.


----------



## Andromalia (Feb 16, 2012)

Explorer said:


> I'm not currently gigging, but I've been considering getting a five string fretless like this...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nice having an ukulele player in the band, but where's the bass ?


----------



## HaMMerHeD (Feb 16, 2012)

The high tension gives the tight, ringing bell tone that I want. And after 18 years of playing bass, short-scale basses, and long-scale guitars (27-30") feel like toys to me.


----------



## Powermetalbass (Feb 29, 2012)

I get the same thing Hammerhed. I've been playing the standard 34" bass for so long that when I pick up a short scale bass or regular guitar, feels like I've stepped into "munchkin land". Feels like I'm gonna break some little kids toy.

I tried a 35" scale once, and I adjusted (sorta), but still didn't feel.....right!.


----------



## MF_Kitten (Mar 2, 2012)

The string size and scale length are both made for clarity and control, if you think about it. Guitar strings have unruly dynamics and uneven voices. A bass ill have a high end clarity and super clear low end. Also, the sustain is nice.

They have a focus on the lower harmonics and the fundamentals, which is why a baritone guitar is no good substitution for a bass.


----------



## Hollowway (Mar 4, 2012)

Yeah, so it looks like a 13 single course bass build might not give the best results due to the fundamental. But a 13 course instrument is possible, and it would wind up being sort of half guitar half bass. As it is I'm going to be using a G#0 on my next guitar, and I'm specifically wanting it to sound more guitar like, so I guess all of this is good news.


----------



## HaMMerHeD (Mar 4, 2012)

13 string bass.


----------



## Winspear (Mar 4, 2012)

MaxOfMetal said:


> The point of a bass instrument is to have that fundamental, so while you will have a low note with limited transients it still won't have the signature, clear, almost piano like bass tone that a lot of bassists go for.
> 
> There have been 28" to 32" scale hybrid bass/baritone instruments around for decades that use the concept of guitar string tension versus bass string tension, and while they can make those notes they just don't sound like traditional basses. Remember the SR7VIISC?
> 
> ...



Pretty much this 

It's funny, when I was playing around with tensions designing my 9 string scales/strings, I decided to capo my bass at 30" and check out what the .080 A string was like in Eb (meaning tuning it down 9 semitones). 

This was the tension I was going for on the guitar, but it felt and sounded utterly awful on the bass, although I was playing acoustically. Must just be a psychological thing that that isn't how a bass should feel or sound. If someone handed me that and told me I'd be happy playing a guitar with that string tension, I wouldn't have believed them.


----------



## Hollowway (Mar 6, 2012)

HaMMerHeD said:


> 13 string bass.



Isn't that 12? That looks like the original 12 Garry built for himself, yeah?


----------



## HaMMerHeD (Mar 6, 2012)

Hollowway said:


> Isn't that 12? That looks like the original 12 Garry built for himself, yeah?



Disregard. My eyes are crap, thought I saw an extra guitar tuner.


----------



## ZEBOV (Mar 6, 2012)

4:26


----------



## Winspear (Mar 6, 2012)

^ Nice  Seems like it's tuned to guitar octave, though?


----------



## mtndrew (Mar 6, 2012)

ZEBOV said:


> 4:26



Yeah, that's a piccolo bass.


----------



## MTech (Mar 6, 2012)

12 String





15 String.


----------



## Hollowway (Mar 7, 2012)

MTech said:


> 12 String



Yeah, I remember that one. That is absolutely beautiful. I would love a Jerzy Drozd.


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (Apr 25, 2012)

I actually like the lower tensions and lessened fundamental on bass, but I treat my bass more like a baritone guitar with less strings.


----------



## knuckle_head (Apr 30, 2012)

It has more to do with technique than actually pulling off the pitches - you can use 15-20 pounds to tune but you'll get wild excursion with the mass that bass strings have and get fret rattle like mad.

Jauqo IIIX uses low tension on his subcontra - he has a feather-light technique to go along with it.

You will get a more pronounced fundamental doing this and limited overtones - it'll get muddy.


----------



## Hollowway (Apr 30, 2012)

knuckle_head said:


> It has more to do with technique than actually pulling off the pitches - you can use 15-20 pounds to tune but you'll get wild excursion with the mass that bass strings have and get fret rattle like mad.



Hey, so let me ask you a question. I remember reading somewhere that you said that strings need to be tuned to a tension that is 2x the tension they are made at. For that reason you need to tune a bass string up to a tension higher than a guitar string. In other words, I can't just grab an off the shelf .090" bass string and put it on my guitar and tune it up to a tension of, say, 14 lbs and expect it to be tight enough to sound good, right? For example, I have a 30" guitar that I have a .090" guitar string on, and I have it tuned to C#1. And I'm assuming I can't do that with a traditional bass string.

So the reason I'm asking is that I'm going into really low pitches with some of these builds I'm getting, like G#0, and I need to get a string for it.


----------



## ixlramp (May 1, 2012)

Hollowway said:


> I remember reading somewhere that you said that strings need to be tuned to a tension that is 2x the tension they are made at.


Pretty sure k_h said something like 'it's preferable to use a string at a tension above the core tension during winding', not 2x


----------



## in-pursuit (May 3, 2012)

In that case it would be handy to know what tension your strings were wound at. I'm assuming it would be of benefit for tension moreso than tone? That's a pretty interesting bit of information, you'd think that strings being such a huge factor in the playability of a stringed instrument would mean facts like that would be fairly common knowledge.


----------



## knuckle_head (May 3, 2012)

Hollowway said:


> . . . . the reason I'm asking is that I'm going into really low pitches with some of these builds I'm getting, like G#0, and I need to get a string for it.


Best bet is the most flexible string you can find. The most flexible strings are the ones manufactured under the lowest tension.

As most strings are coiled the best way to compare is to take the string(s) out of their envelope(s) and let them uncoil. Hold the string(s) so they they curl back toward you and see how they curve toward the floor under their own weight. The ones that have a tighter curve as they bend toward the floor are the more flexibly made.

A caveat; the larger the outer wrap the more inflexible a string will be - no avoiding this - but the best strings are the ones with as large an outer wrap to core ratio as you can find.



in-pursuit said:


> In that case it would be handy to know what tension your strings were wound at. I'm assuming it would be of benefit for tension moreso than tone? That's a pretty interesting bit of information, you'd think that strings being such a huge factor in the playability of a stringed instrument would mean facts like that would be fairly common knowledge.


Tone is better served with a flexible string, and string made with the least tension is the more flexible. Diminishing returns when the outer wraps get huge.


----------



## ixlramp (May 3, 2012)

in-pursuit said:


> In that case it would be handy to know what tension your strings were wound at [ ... ] That's a pretty interesting bit of information, you'd think that strings being such a huge factor in the playability of a stringed instrument would mean facts like that would be fairly common knowledge.


Well the impression i get is that it's only a subtle advantage to exceed the core tension during winding, it only makes the string a little more flexy. If the string is super flexy to start with it's even less important.

I suspect that many or most guitar strings are used at a tension below the core tension during winding. I can't imagine guitar strings being wound at below 15 pounds.

I have to say CKS never cease to amaze me ...


----------



## Hollowway (May 4, 2012)

This is good stuff. I gotta try some of these fat boys on my guitars.


----------



## Hollowway (May 7, 2012)

knuckle_head said:


> Tone is better served with a flexible string, and string made with the least tension is the more flexible. Diminishing returns when the outer wraps get huge.



So I'm going to try out some of your guitar strings, but I will need one thicker than the thickest one listed under the "guitar" section on the website. So is there a difference between your guitar and bass strings, other than the ball end? i.e. if I got a .090" bass string is that going to be materially the same as a .090" guitar string?


----------



## Winspear (May 7, 2012)

^ Yeah I emailed about that - they are exactly the same. 
But dude, the guitar strings run up to 106  Unless you want more than that - your posting of 90 made me think otherwise.


----------



## knuckle_head (May 7, 2012)

I have guitar ball ended .106s - I am working on designs to go to .124 but that makes the string nearly as big as the ball. Dicey stuff this . . . . .

Does the site not show guitar .106s as available?


----------



## Winspear (May 7, 2012)

It does indeed 

I emailed you about this the other day but just wanted to check here before I place another (larger) order;
The site shows wound guitar strings starting at 17 - you said in your email it's 25 instead. 
So any string I order under 25 that says hybrid will in fact arrive as a plain, and will be this way for the foreseeable future?


----------



## knuckle_head (May 7, 2012)

EtherealEntity said:


> So any string I order under 25 that says hybrid will in fact arrive as a plain, and will be this way for the foreseeable future?



Yes.

We're doing imperial alteration to product which may make that .023 before too long, and when I can be certain of the integrity of wounds smaller than that I'll make them available.

On larger plain strings - as far as tone goes, tighter is better.


----------



## Hollowway (May 12, 2012)

EtherealEntity said:


> ^ Yeah I emailed about that - they are exactly the same.
> But dude, the guitar strings run up to 106  Unless you want more than that - your posting of 90 made me think otherwise.



As crazy as it sounds, yeah. My next build needs to hit G#0 at 33", so it'll have to be slightly thicker. I can work with the bass ball end, since the guitar hasn't been built yet, but I was more concerned about the core, wraps, etc being different.


----------

