# 'Strings gauges and inharmonicity' question



## Winspear (Dec 18, 2010)

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/extended-range-guitars/10064-string-gauges-inharmonicity.html

I have recently read and understood (I think) this thread.

I have also had an idea of using a capo on a custom guitar in the future, which I wrote about here;

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/music-theory-lessons-techniques/140252-anyone-using-capo.html

The basic idea was- I will have a 30" guitar tuned down to Eb, and use a capo anywhere up to fret 4 to play in different tunings all of which I feel I need for writing my music. I did not want to own multiple guitars or retune, so this seemed like a great idea.

Then I read the inharmonicity thread, and realised...
While (for example) a 30" guitar with a .080 tuned to low Eb may be great by these inharmonicity 'rules', when I use a capo at fret 4 that would be low G, still with an .080 gauge, but at a short scale length of around 25-26 inches! 
I suddenly realised that this would be an issue, and perform no better (actually a _lot_ worse) than my 25.5 guitar in G# with a .070. This defeats the whole point of my capo idea.

Hopefully you can understand and see where I am coming from, when I say;
How is this inharmonicity idea much use, when it only really applies to open strings? As soon as you fret a note on a longer scale guitar, the advantages are somewhat lost - as you still have the heavier gauge, and fairly low note, but are playing on a much shorter scale length. 

Some examples;
25.5" guitar tuned to B with a .062 for 18lbs tension. 

30" guitar tuned to E with a .080 for 18lbs tension.

Same 30" guitar fretted at 4. Same tension, same gauge, 24" scale length. G# at 24" with an .080? 
Same 30" guitar fretted at 7. Same tension, same gauge, 20" scale length. B at 20" with an .080? !! 
The B would actually sound much better as an open string on the 25.5" in this case.

I hope this makes sense..I'm finding it hard to word what I mean  
Basically - should inharmonicity really be a concern? Seen as fretted notes decrease the scale length for each semitone increase by much more than desirable amounts.


----------



## Hollowway (Dec 18, 2010)

Huh. That's a great point. That would really affect ANY guitar, too. Hopefully Bostjan feels a disturbance in the Force and chimes in soon!


----------



## bostjan (Dec 18, 2010)

Yes, the inharmonicity for open strings gets worse for fretted notes. For an extreme example, play the highest fretted note on the thickest string and compare that with the same note played on a thinner string.

The take-away from the whole idea is that the longer the length of string that is vibrating, the closer the overtones are to whole numbers, and the clearer the note rings. I think all guitarists are fundamentally aware of this notion, but the thread helps to put a numerical measurement on it. The deviation between ideal harmonics and actual harmonics cannot be resolved by the human ear until the inharmonicity reaches about five cents or more.

Inharmonicity shouldn't be a concern to make or break a decision to do something with the guitar, but a deeper awareness of how it works can help to make more desirable tones easier to achieve. If you are thinking about how the harmonic content gets worse, then you've already got into the mindset.


----------



## Winspear (Dec 18, 2010)

bostjan said:


> Inharmonicity shouldn't be a concern to make or break a decision to do something with the guitar, but a deeper awareness of how it works can help to make more desirable tones easier to achieve. If you are thinking about how the harmonic content gets worse, then you've already got into the mindset.



Indeed - atleast reading that thread has made me realise that my capo idea is very, very flawed  Now I need to find another way to go about this without having tons of guitars..


----------



## Peteus (Dec 18, 2010)

I am not sure that this does what I think it does, however I think it is a brige which allows multiple tunings
TMB4 8 String > Store > Hipshot Products


----------



## Hollowway (Dec 18, 2010)

I know we shouldn't use inharmonicity as a guide when doing something with the guitar, but we should when building a guitar! I've got 3 8 strings on order that are 27.5" and I plan to tune to F#, which, based on bostjan's original thread, isn't ideal. I'd be better off at 28.625". I do like the sound of my 28.625" better than my 27" that I have currently, so hopefully the 1.125" difference won't make too huge of a deal when I get the new ones. Or I'll be tuning up to G!


----------



## Durero (Dec 20, 2010)

EtherealEntity said:


> should inharmonicity really be a concern? Seen as fretted notes decrease the scale length for each semitone increase by much more than desirable amounts.



I've been grappling with this issue for some time as well. I think incorporating capos into the design concept has lots of potential; as shown with instruments such as the Steinberger Trans-Scale and Kubicki EX-Factor.

There are two main issues in my head:

1) deciding if there are certain low pitches you want to favour over others and making sure those are open strings or 1st fret notes whenever possible.

2) if you want a very neutral design that doesn't particularly favour certain pitches then you should consider extremely long scale lengths; scale lengths that are so long that you are truly happy with the tone of the lowest string from the open note through to the 4th fret (assuming the lowest string is tuned a 4th below the next string, drop tunings compound the problem.) Edit: well drop tunings add 2 more frets to the problem.

The custom DeLap baritones built for Allan Holdsworth are great examples of this. Allan would not accept a shorter scale length for his low E2 so he insisted on 25.5" to that pitch and then added lower notes by extending the scale in semitones past that point so his E2 was still at 25.5".

You may want to contemplate various scale length specs using the Reverse Fret Calculator

For example, if you experiment with tunings on a 25.5" guitar and decide that Ab1 is the lowest pitch with an acceptable tone at that scale, then to reach Eb1 you can extend the scale by 5 frets to about 34".

That's a long scale for a guitar and many guitarists freak out at the thought of it, yet many of those same guitarists own and play basses with that scale, and with bass strings at a far higher action and tension than any guitar, without the slightest trepidation.

Why more guitarists don't dare to venture past 30" scales is a mystery to me  when the tonal benefits are so great. 

Just because Meshuggah is satisfied with 30" scales (which they've done incredible things with imo) doesn't mean anyone else has to accept that as a limit. Even Fredrik Thorendal's favourite guitarist (Holdsworth) plays a 38" scale guitar.


I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts on this, especially you Bostjan


----------



## ixlramp (Dec 20, 2010)

I know many prefer a baritone scale length, and that's cool. But using a 34 inch scale we can use bass and ERB strings, and avoid all that hassle of finding guitar strings with the necessary winding length. I'd like to see more 34 inch guitars with guitar string spacing, like the Warr Guitar ...







I've just restrung my 35 inch 6 string bass with strings of gauges 45 35 25 16 13 10 to experiment with a 24EDO all-neutral-thirds tuning. The tone is so clear.


----------



## highlordmugfug (Dec 21, 2010)

ixlramp said:


> I know many prefer a baritone scale length, and that's cool. But using a 34 inch scale we can use bass and ERB strings, and avoid all that hassle of finding guitar strings with the necessary winding length. I'd like to see more 34 inch guitars with guitar string spacing, like the Warr Guitar ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's gorgeous, and sorry as this is a bit OT, but what's your source on the Admiral Angry bit? I love them (sucks so much about Daniel). I didn't know they used the basses. Send me some pics/links please.


----------



## Winspear (Dec 21, 2010)

Durero said:


> I've been grappling with this issue for some time as well. I think incorporating capos into the design concept has lots of potential; as shown with instruments such as the Steinberger Trans-Scale and Kubicki EX-Factor.
> 
> There are main issues in my head:
> 
> ...



Very valid points. I am very comfortable with the idea of a longer scale, as I play a 35" 6string bass and want a 37"  
Ideally I would bump the scale up to around 32"-33", which would give me pretty much the right 'favouring' of certain pitches. 
However, the problem came with the fanned frets. I'm going for a high G# and don't want to have to use O4P strings, so I'm going to use D'addario 007,008,0085s at 24.75". This should be fine from what I've tried so far, but I still need to get these strings in and play with them in G at 25.5" and see how they last. 
I just can't get the scale length any longer because of this. 24.75"-30" was pretty much the comfortable limit on the 9 string design. Bumped up from the original 29.25" I had thought of. Mainly because of the bridge angle, not the nut. I've tried all different parallel fret positions but can't really get any further 
This is indeed worsened by drop tunings. Tuning up from Eb to F would help here quite a bit, but I have quite specific ideas for the double-dropped tuning that I wish to use. (EA EADGBE A - all down 1 semitone). I would be happy to raise the lot a semitone or two, but of course, there is the problem of the high string).


----------



## Active Reasoner (Dec 21, 2010)

I 've been playing a Roscoe 35" scale 7 String as a solo guitar for many years now. I know most of the musicians on this forum are into shredding metal lead guitar, and I'm into a clean tone, but if anyone is interested, you can get an idea of how a long scale instrument works as a lead guitar, by checking me out on YouTube. Just search Active Reasoner.

Good Luck, 

Active


----------



## ixlramp (Dec 21, 2010)

highlordmugfug said:


> what's your source on the Admiral Angry bit? I love them (sucks so much about Daniel). I didn't know they used the basses. Send me some pics/links please.



Hi man highlordmugfugman! here's the source of the information ...

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/2215551-post23.html


----------



## ixlramp (Dec 21, 2010)

Another one, the 34 inch Touch Guitars U8, developed by former Fripp student Markus Reuter and luthier Ed Reynolds. Normally tuned in Crafty 8 string tuning Bb, F, C, G, D, A, C, D ...











www.touchguitars.com


----------



## highlordmugfug (Dec 21, 2010)

I'm really seeing anything definitive there, but thanks regardless.


----------



## Durero (Dec 21, 2010)

EtherealEntity said:


> Very valid points. I am very comfortable with the idea of a longer scale, as I play a 35" 6string bass and want a 37"
> Ideally I would bump the scale up to around 32"-33", which would give me pretty much the right 'favouring' of certain pitches.
> However, the problem came with the fanned frets. I'm going for a high G# and don't want to have to use O4P strings, so I'm going to use D'addario 007,008,0085s at 24.75". This should be fine from what I've tried so far, but I still need to get these strings in and play with them in G at 25.5" and see how they last.
> I just can't get the scale length any longer because of this. 24.75"-30" was pretty much the comfortable limit on the 9 string design. Bumped up from the original 29.25" I had thought of. Mainly because of the bridge angle, not the nut. I've tried all different parallel fret positions but can't really get any further
> This is indeed worsened by drop tunings. Tuning up from Eb to F would help here quite a bit, but I have quite specific ideas for the double-dropped tuning that I wish to use. (EA EADGBE A - all down 1 semitone). I would be happy to raise the lot a semitone or two, but of course, there is the problem of the high string).



I see your dilemma. If it's any help I've had great results with O4P strings tuned up to G#4 on my 28.5" scale 9-string. I've gotten them up to A4 at that scale but they don't last longer than a month or two. I've yet to have one fail at G# though. If you did go the O4P route that'd open up the longer scales for your low strings.


----------



## dkeenan7 (May 25, 2012)

Hi I'm new here. I just read Bostjan's brilliant inharmonicity thread from 2006 and I'd love to know if anyone has tried one of these electric cello strings from D'Addario (part number NS516), to get a clean low F# (or lower) from a standard 650 mm (25.5") scale guitar.
D'Addario Bowed Strings : Product Details : NS Electric Cello String Set, 4/4 Scale, Medium Tension

They are designed for a low F on a 700 mm scale Ned Steinberger electric cello at 27 lb tension. They have a stranded-steel core with a tungsten-silver winding. Tungsten (Wolfram) is about 2.4 times as dense as steel and Silver is about 1.33 times as dense as steel.

Can anyone see any reason why they would not work?
I'm considering trying one on a future 8 string version of my carbon-fibre and concrete "Choob":


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (May 25, 2012)

Durero said:


> For example, if you experiment with tunings on a 25.5" guitar and decide that Ab1 is the lowest pitch with an acceptable tone at that scale, then to reach Eb1 you can extend the scale by 5 frets to about 34".




After lots of experimentation I found G to be as low as I could go with 'good tone' on a 25.5" scale guitar, and because of this my sixer is in (lo-hi) GDAEBF# instead of FCGDAE, even though I honestly liked FtoE better on all the strings except the F.

On my Schecter 8 (26.5") I have an 85 for my F# and it feels and sounds great. So I'm in the market for a 26.5"-27" sixer for and FtoE fifths tuning and I'd like to try the same tuning scheme on a 5/6 string bass-in unison with the guitar, not down an octave.

I'd also like to see more companies making some basses longer than 35" scale. I have not found one bass instrument at 34" or 35" that has a low B with a tone I like. All the low B's I've heard are all drastically darker, and with much less sustain than the immediately higher low E.

I like bright bass tone, so I use light SS strings on bass. Using a lighter low B gets a better tone, but sustain is nonexistent and I can barely play the thing.
Using big gauges gives better sustain and makes it more solid feel wise, the tone is not to my taste at all.


----------



## vansinn (May 25, 2012)

dkeenan7 said:


> Hi I'm new here. I just read Bostjan's brilliant inharmonicity thread from 2006 and I'd love to know if anyone has tried one of these electric cello strings from D'Addario (part number NS516), to get a clean low F# (or lower) from a standard 650 mm (25.5") scale guitar.
> D'Addario Bowed Strings : Product Details : NS Electric Cello String Set, 4/4 Scale, Medium Tension
> 
> They are designed for a low F on a 700 mm scale Ned Steinberger electric cello at 27 lb tension. They have a stranded-steel core with a tungsten-silver winding. Tungsten (Wolfram) is about 2.4 times as dense as steel and Silver is about 1.33 times as dense as steel.
> ...




Thanks for this info 
Hadn't thought of or noticed those.
Indeed, tungsten/wolfram does have those much higher unit weights.
Definately worth a try. If those works, they could also resolve issues for the shorter scales. I'll go order some to try out on my Riot 8.


----------



## dkeenan7 (May 26, 2012)

vansinn said:


> Thanks for this info
> Hadn't thought of or noticed those.
> Indeed, tungsten/wolfram does have those much higher unit weights.
> Definately worth a try. If those works, they could also resolve issues for the shorter scales. I'll go order some to try out on my Riot 8.


After reading Bostjan's thread I thought "So to get lower bass on a short scale we need a string winding material significantly more dense than steel or nickel. So off to the wikipedia "density" page to make a list, then check that list against the list of abundances in the earths crust - 'cause if its rare its gonna be expensive. Tungsten was really the only option. (Gold, Platinum or Plutonium wound strings anyone?) The latter would give new meaning to Disaster Area, a plutonium rock band from the Gagrakacka Mind Zones.

So off to google tungsten wound strings. I found the Thomastik spirocore cello C and G strings pretty quick but it was a while before I found the low F cello strings from D'Addario. Not sure why the tungsten is alloyed with silver, or in what proportions, in the D'Addarios. The Thomastiks only say tungsten, no silver, but they don't seem to have a low F string.

A possible issue may be low volume relative to other strings, since the winding is not ferromagnetic, only the steel core. But I only use piezo pickups so I'm not worried about that. 

That leads to thinking about extending the range at the treble end. What you need there is a material that's significantly less dense than steel but with the same or better yield strength. The closest I can find is Titanium alloy, the most common being Ti6Al4V (Titanium with 6% Aluminium and 4% Vanadium). Pure titanium is too weak. But this alloy has about the same yield strength as ordinary high-tensile steel (830 MPa, 120 kpsi) and only 0.57 of the density of steel. But steel music wire is not ordinary high-tensile steel. It is about 2.7 times stronger again (2200 MPa, 320 kpsi) due to being cold drawn and not annealed.

So you don't actually get to a higher top pitch by using titanium. What you do get is a bit more comfort, a thicker string for the same pitch. No need for cheese-slicer 0.08" strings.
0.25mm Dia x Coil Ti6Al4V Ti Gr5 Annealed Wire, UNS R56400 3.7165 fine wire from stock buy online


----------



## vansinn (May 26, 2012)

^ very interesting info, keenan - though I think I'd stay off plutonium strings 

WRT tungsten strings, I think the steel core alone having magnetic properties might be less of a problem, depending on it's gauge.

AFAIK, Kerry from Slayer is using phosphor-bronce wounds lower strings, which works the same way.

Now, suppose we string up with phosphor-bronce on all the wound strings except the low one, for which we choose the tungsten/silver cello string, we'd have a set where all strings magetic properties are based on the core only, and thus they just might balance in an intereresting way.

Actually, such a setup copuld end up sounding less intonicity-off, because, if an ordinary string is chosen fairly thick due to too short a scale, it's possible it'll sound ugly not just due to it's thickness, but also due to the whole thickness taking part in the magnetic picking up.

As the tungsten or phospor-bronce wound strings will use only the core for this, they just might end up sounding quite.. mmnn.. interesting..


----------



## dkeenan7 (May 26, 2012)

Thanks van Sinn. Good ideas re the phosphor-bronzes. I'm dying to hear if the tungsten-silver works for you. I also wonder if the tungsten-silver cello C string might be worthwhile for the second lowest string. The trouble is, you can buy the low F separately, but to get the C you have to buy a set of four (CGDA) and the low F is expensive enough as it is.

It's been fun talkin' heavy metal with you.


----------



## Amanita (May 26, 2012)

actually this discussion made me register. or at least bostjan's excellent post from the past 
the formula he uses seems formula for a perfect upright bass string, as elastic and as dense as possible. upright bass and flatwound electric bass strings are like that. yet hardly anyone uses them in ERGs, because they're not exactly on the bright side 
i believe bostjan used d'addario data in his calculations, d'addarios seem some of the lightest and brightest strings on the market.
eg. roundcore DRs in general and their new DDT line in particular (tho' i haven't yet tried these) seem to behave much better in terms of harmonicicity and tension from hex core strings, by being a bit more elastic and dense. but they sound a bit duller.
if anyone wants to go that way, i'd advise to try Fodera or GHS Pressurewound bass strings before resorting to cello strings. i had Fodera .085 string tuned to E on a 30" eightstring and in terms of harmonicity and intonation it outperformed EB and DR bass strings of the same gauge i used before it. yet at the same time it lacked the 'bite' of hex core roundwound strings. 
for now i use .080 GHS guitar string for the application, seems a nice compromise, tho' i could use a bit more tension


----------



## Explorer (May 26, 2012)

So, if I understand correctly...

You should never fret above the fifth fret or the inharmonicity will be unbearable. 

I hadn't noticed, but I'll keep it in mind while I continue doing what I'm doing. 

To me, this whole subject, and the arguments contained therein, are very much like those topics where a fervent believer argues that we should all use a different temperament than equal temperament, with all kinds of theoretical arguments against what has been working.

Of course, what is lost is the part about whatever is "unbearable" is just unbearable to that person. I'm not arguing that they don't find it unbearable... just that it matters to anyone else. 

I know that the phosphor bronze strings on my guitar don't sound as clear as the plain strings when I'm above the 12th fret. I can live with that, and don't expect them too. I know that the thickness is too large to support the same subtle harmonics as a smaller string. What they provide me which a plain string cannot is a larger range at a reasonable price on a standard instrument. 

(No, my strings don't sound dead above the 12th fret, on any of my acoustics, 8-strings or even my 5- and 6-string basses. I'm just noting that the tone is different.)

I'm ready for a vid showing that these extended scale lengths manage to sound like an open string when sounding a pitch above the 12th fret. Until that compelling video, I have no reason to believe mathematical arguments that this will sound better than what I'm doing. 

I can't wait!


----------



## dkeenan7 (May 26, 2012)

Thanks for that, Amanita. So you think the problem with the tungsten-silver wound electric-cello low F string may be that it may be lacking in higher partials compared with typical electric guitar strings. But if that is so, I presume it would not be because it is tungsten-silver, but because it is flat-wound. Then the question would be why don't D'Addario or Thomastik make round-wound or ground-wound tungsten strings for guitars.

And even if a round or ground wound tungsten is still dull, some folks will be happy to trade brightness for pitch definition.

I mentioned titanium-alloy plain strings for top-end comfort (thicker than steel plain strings for the same pitch), but they don't work with magnetic pickups. But there is another option for that. Nylon flat-wound on a steel core. The top E string from a Thomastik John Pearse Folk set:
Setfamilien SubSub


----------



## Winspear (May 27, 2012)

Explorer - 
Of course, every guitarist is aware of the change in tone as they progress up the fretboard. It's not a good or bad thing, just science. 
Possible to use to your advantage, great for a jazzy tone, even some metal riffing (Lamb of God comes to mind with their riffs around the 12th fret rather than using the next string as is common). 
I seem to recall you use something like a 100 gauge on 25.5"? From various comments of yours I have read, I can understand how this may work for various sounds you are going for.
However, I'm sure you're aware that this isn't going to sound good at all to the tastes of the 'stereotypical' downtuners here.

But it's safe to say it's usually a sound one would want to avoid, definitely on the open strings and as far up the fretboard as possible. 

Of course it's subjective, but it doesn't mean this kind of information isn't good for getting an idea what's going on with various gauges. If we are using a 25.5" standard E as our reference, things get real messy and we end up with Alan Holdsworth style 38"(?) guitars just for tuning down to A! He does that because he wants his standard E to retain the same sound as usual. Understandable. 

The sound above the fifth fret may indeed be unbearable to some, if the open string is already pushing the limits of this inharmonicity 'rule'. 

After understanding Bostjans thread and coming to the fretting realisation, which is what made me create this thread, I did ask at the end;
"Basically - should inharmonicity really be a concern? Seen as fretted notes decrease the scale length for each semitone increase by much more than desirable amounts."

Should inharmonicity be a concern? It's a good thing to be aware of. In my example, it made me push the length beyond what I had considered acceptable for the open string, because I wanted the fretted notes to function just as well. (Or at least, it would have even moreso if the fanning wasn't too extreme)


----------



## Amanita (May 27, 2012)

i'd guess tungsten doesn't get used for electric guitar strings for the same reason phosphor bronze strings don't get used. both ain't ferromangnetic. they may work better acoustically, but as soon as magnetic pickups are involved the advantage is lost 
again, i mentioned presserwounds just because they seem to be a neat compromise between tone of roundwounds and physical properties of flatwounds 

@Explorer - you're trying to turn it ad absurdum 
i'd look at it as an explaination why longer scale guitars work better with low tunings, and why lower gauge strings provide better clarity of tone, even it's at the cost of lowered tension and detuning of fundamental on attack. both being observable fenomena


----------



## Explorer (May 27, 2012)

Hopefully not ad absurdum, but just noticing that all the "solutions" to the "inharmonicity problem" make it sound like everyone feels instruments sound terrible, and that all the proposed "solutions" work beyond the first few frets. (They don't, if there really is a problem.)

Most likely just my opinions, as I'm sure that vid will get posted soon.


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (May 27, 2012)

Amanita said:


> i'd guess tungsten doesn't get used for electric guitar strings for the same reason *phosphor bronze* strings don't get used. both ain't ferromangnetic. they may work better acoustically, but as soon as magnetic pickups are involved the advantage is lost


I've tried Phosphor acoustic strings on an electric, they sound fine-different, but fine.


----------



## coffeeflush (Dec 16, 2013)

@Explorer : I think I see your point. Most note frequencies are just definitions we have come to define. While inharmonicity may make a note on a certain instrument sound off from our defined milestone, its important to remember these are lines drawn in sand and have no meaning or scientific basis. 

Its true having a more accurate note would make it sound clearer but we have to see other end of the argument too, lot of pianos considered to sound good have more inharmonicity then others.


----------



## coffeeflush (Dec 16, 2013)

Still, id be stoked if someone came up with a solution for ERG's that don't have the tonal compromises that we are used to living with. Im not saying existing instruments sound bad, I am saying if they can sound better then its awesome.


----------



## Rook (Dec 16, 2013)

Well like you said, what you call a compromise I call character. I tend not to be able to resist using things how the numbers would suggest you don't - tuning a 25.5" to Eb with a 90 gauge for example - and the comparatively nasty sounds I get I really love.

There are things like setup compromises I could live without but sound wise I'm plenty pleased with my imperfections.

Also, happy necrobump. This is a useful thread though so probably not bad to have it bumped once a year or so


----------

