C#1 string size. 9 string players get in here!

[Hollowway]

I just got in a couple of Kalium .106" for C#1 at 30". It still doesn't have that same sound as the F# at 27" with .072" strings. So now I'm wondering if the extra length and lower pitch has taken me into bass territory, where I have to tune up a ridiculous amount of tension to get the same sound/feel of the other strings. What are you guys using for C#1? I have a .146 and a .120 on hand I may experiment with as well.

 

[BigViolin]

Looks like you should be getting 23-24 lbs with the .106. I can't tell you from experience when it comes to tuning that low but from playing around with different setups on an 8 it seems there comes a point when no matter the tension strings just start sounding like a bass and the guitar attack is gone.

Instead of going bigger I'd be looking at the rest of the signal chain, eq, filtering etc to get back some attack. Wish I could be more help.

 

[trem licking]

I too use .106 for C#1 at 30" mainly to cut down on fret buzz... Although it's still buzzy I've learned to deal with it. I don't know what your approach to playing is, but I find that I use the 9th string as more of a bass extension than a normal part of 6-8 string playing if that makes any sense due to the fact that I also experience over bassiness of that string. I'm actually tempted to try lower gauges to try and combat that bass guitar like sound but I hypothesize the string buzz will be too unbearable for me.

As far as feel goes, the .106 feels perfect for me and I have a slight progressive tension set from .009 on up. You should report back about trying those heavier guages though, more specifically if you even get them to fit and intonate properly. What guitar are you using these on?

 

[Hollowway]

Yeah, it may well just be a matter of getting used to not playing it the same as the other strings. It's still buzzy compared to the other strings. For me, an 8 string plays just like a 6 or 7. I cannot understand how people don't like 8s. But the 9th string is like a completely different thing. The .106 is better than the .090, but still doesn't feel like the others do. I'm going to play around with it a little, and maybe even tune it up until the tension feels right, figure out the pitch, and work backwards to figure out what string gauge might work better.

I'm using it on my Doberman 9 string (27-30") and my XEN 10 string (27-30").

I haven't strung up the XEN yet, though. I'll probably do that tomorrow.

What I'm curious about is how the scale length or string diameter or pitch causes the bass strings to need to be of higher tension. In other words, if you grab a bass off the shelf, the string tension will be twice that of a regular guitar. But the bass strings FEEL looser, and sometimes buzz (especially on the low B of a 5 string). So is it the extra scale length that causes that? In other words, if you have a 30" bass tuned to the same as a 36" bass, is the tension the same, or can you go lower tension? The reason I ask is that it appears that as I go to longer scales and thicker strings and lower notes, I need a MUCH higher tension to avoid fret buzzing. I just don't know the reason.

EDIT: OK, after spending an inordinate amount of time on Google, I found this on the Sweetwater site:

"However, many studios pros have long known a secret about the sound of short scale basses. The shorter strings demand lower string tension to be properly tuned. This gives the strings a kind of soft and floppy feeling but it also creates fatter, “blooming” low notes and what musicians perceive as sweet upper notes."

So that would appear to indicate that the longer the scale, the higher the tension required. In other words, you can use a thinner string to achieve the same note, but it will be floppier given the same tension. If that is, in fact, the case, that means that there isn't this linear relationship between scale length and string diameter. I've been operating under the assumption that going longer and longer will permit us to get a lower note with a thinner diameter string. While that's true, we may need to fatten the string up just to make it playable. Which means there is a sweet spot for scale length and string size for a given note. Now I'm wondering if Maybe I shouldn't string up my 28.625" Agile with the old .090 and see what that sounds like. Who knows, maybe I'll find that I like C#1 at less than 30".

 

[MoonJelly]

It may sound like a bonehead idea... but have you tried using strings from a Fender bass VI pack? If you're looking for something between .09 and .105, here's a good example:
La Bella 767 6S Fender Light Bass VI Round Wound 6 Strings Set 26 95 | eBay

Then just use a standard 6-string pack to cover the other 3.

These are also out there in flatwound sets, if you like a smooth feel, it's the deep talkin' bass set from la bella.


I have a buddy with a Conklin 9-string, Sidewinder I think, and this is what he likes to do.

 

[Winspear]

You are correct longer scale requires higher tension. It's because the string has more room to move. The same reason it makes fatter gauges perform better. If you play the string at the 24th fret, it will feel tighter, because it has little room to move. It will also sound muddy because of this. I guess thicker strings also have more weight to move and cause them to buzz.

Your 106 is in the ballpark. Maybe 110 if you want to completely get rid of the buzzing. Its a little more tension than the 114 B0 I use on 30" (bass VI, that I treat like a guitar). EDIT: Hell, actually I just tuned that string up to C# and it still isn't great. I use this guitar for doom though so I'm cool with it haha

As far as tone goes, I think the scale length needed for certain gauges just goes up real fast. Like 25.5 gets muddy for 65+, 28 gets muddy around 85 etc. I think to pull a really clear guitarlike tone from something above 100 you'd need to step into the 32-34 kind of range. Even then, you'd want some more tension, and it's still a big string...You know a 100 E on a 34" bass sounds nothing like an 8 string guitar even acoustically or tuned down to lighter tension. I guess there's just a point where that isn't possible anymore. Kind of like trying to make your plain strings sound warm.

 

[Hollowway]

So Etherial, you know how we are trying to come up with a long scale 10 string with Tom Drinkwater, and I want to figure out what would be the most ideal scale length to reach G#0. So I was planning on doing 34", but that's, of course, going to lengthen all of the other strings as well. Putting the knowledge that a longer scale requires a higher tension and therefore a thicker string, but also a longer scale allows a thinner string to reach the same pitch, do you have any idea what the sweet spot in terms of scale length would be? I could just experiment, but I'm wondering if there's a pseudo math way of figuring it out.

 

[luca9583]

So Etherial, you know how we are trying to come up with a long scale 10 string with Tom Drinkwater, and I want to figure out what would be the most ideal scale length to reach G#0. So I was planning on doing 34", but that's, of course, going to lengthen all of the other strings as well. Putting the knowledge that a longer scale requires a higher tension and therefore a thicker string, but also a longer scale allows a thinner string to reach the same pitch, do you have any idea what the sweet spot in terms of scale length would be? I could just experiment, but I'm wondering if there's a pseudo math way of figuring it out.

Depending on the overall tuning you're going for on the 10 string, i would suggest adding two negative frets for the 10th string. Assuming you're going for a fan that will go longer than 30" scale, then maybe making the 9th string around 32" would give you a 10th string of around 35.9" if you go with 2 negative frets.

Also, if you can get one made i'd also suggest getting a multichannel pickup for the 10 string. By having the ability to eq (and split the coils for) each string individually you can use heavier strings for the desired tension and then eq out the boomy overtones and dial some attack back in.

 

[Winspear]

Sorry , I don't know, no. It would all be experimentation for me there. It's not something I'd put too much thought into personally. Just as long as possible with regards to comfort and overall fan span.
I am very much in support of the EQ idea Luca.

 

[ixlramp]

Yes, at constant tension, a smaller scale length raises perceived tension and reduces floppiness because the 2 anchoring points of the string are closer together. Imagine a 2" scale string and how tight that would *feel* and how it would resist sideways motion.

 

[Hollowway]

Yeah, I guess I can experiment with my basses for longer scale length and guitars for shorter. I figure the realistic length for a 10 string guitar is 35" tops. The cool thing is that Kalium has the tensions listed for each note, so I should be able to work backwards from there. I'm kind of OCD about the Kalium strings, because there are SO many options. I could go from .106 to .110 or .114 or .118. It's just deciding which.

 

[luca9583]

Sorry , I don't know, no. It would all be experimentation for me there. It's not something I'd put too much thought into personally. Just as long as possible with regards to comfort and overall fan span.
I am very much in support of the EQ idea Luca.

Yeah it's all about experimentation. @Holloway, another cool idea might be to get a Brice Defiant 53437 5 string bass and experiment with string gauges in preparation for the 10 string...you'd have access to that range beyond 34" and could test each scale length on the one instrument.

Yeah @EtherealEntity having that control is something i think all ERGs would really benefit from. It's quite fussy with having to route strings separately but it's awesome. I've something like that on my dual scale guitar that allows me to coil tap the two lowest strings separately to each other and to the top strings.

Going back to the original topic of this thread, i think 30" will always be a compromise for a guitarish C#1 or lower, but if you can somehow isolate the output of that string on it's own then using the heavier strings will be fine.

Another thing you can try is to use a very light string and "cheat" the intonation by modifying the bridge and moving the saddle back quite a bit. If on the low C# you only need access to the first 5 frets this is actually quite a good approach as you can get away with a tad more tension for a lighter string

 

[trem licking]

I'm glad this scale length and string gauge/fret buzz topic is being touched upon because this was a maddening and puzzling experience for me when i first received my 9 string. Reading around on this forum and the internet in general yielded no answers for me in regards to why strings that worked on a 25.5" guitar would buzz like crazy on a 30" guitar even though the tension of the strings were tighter. Most everyone would say it was a setup issue or "you can't hear the buzz through an amp" (I personally have never encountered an acoustically buzzy electric guitar where you also couldn't hear the buzz amplified). It's not rocket science and it does make a lot of sense now, but this would be a good thing for ERG newbs to know when they are fishing in these deep seas.

Hollowway... knowing that if you make your next 10 longer it will require you to up your gauges even more to combat buzz, this will make it sound that much more like a bass. Interesting idea indeed about making separate EQ for the 2 lowest strings, that may be awesome or may be weird i have no idea but that would be a cool experiment. i think i would try out G#0 and see how well it intonates and everything on your current guitars and maybe only go an inch or 2 longer on the fan if it even seems necessary. Maybe someone should come up with a prototype guitar that you can change the scale length on the fly in order to quickly experiment with these ideas...

 

[Winspear]

Maybe someone should come up with a prototype guitar that you can change the scale length on the fly in order to quickly experiment with these ideas...

The only way of doing that (aside from pulling back the bridge and just dealing with the microtonal/unintonated fretting) I can think of pretty much translates to using a capo on a long scale. Problem with that is it still seems to retain the properties to a degree (due to perceived tension variables such as more length behind the nut/capo). I.e. a long scale capo'd up still doesn't feel as tight as a shortscale.

While we are on the topic, has anyone found this a downside to their playing?
It's the one thing I don't like about long scales. Even brought up to the higher tension needed, the strings seem to have this odd springiness which makes tight palm muted single note riffing harder to articulate well for me.

 

[Hollowway]

Yeah, I'm starting to think that the strings are vibrating in a completely different way once I hit 30" and that low. I'll try the palm muting to see if I notice a difference there, but there is definitely a feel difference. It reminds me of my B string on a 5 string bass. Simply put, it pisses me off. It's like my 7 strings are a six string plus one more string. My 8 strings are 7 strings plus one more string. And my 9 string is an 8 string plus one noodle. It's like a COMPLETELY different feel on that string. I can't say what it is, cuz I'm slow in the head about this stuff, but it's as if 23 lbs of tension for C#0 is the equivalent of 10 lbs of tension for F#1.
At any rate, I didn't get a chance to experiment tonight. I spent the better part of the evening tearing the house apart and getting in a foul mood because I couldn't find my slipper box for a pair of slippers I bought a year ago. I lost the slippers right after, but kept the box because I remembered they weren't my normal size. My wife kept telling me to throw the damn box away, but I wanted to keep it for when I finally got around to ordering another pair online. Tonight was that night. So yeah, I wasted my evening for nothing and now my adrenaline is so high I'm venting in a thread about 9 strings about how my first world brain thinks it's a travesty that I can't find a box from slippers I bought a year ago. Somebody smack me.

 

[Winspear]

I get you. The "6+1" thing is something I've said before to describe traditional string sets and unbalanced tension. I've always felt it easily remedied though. I.e. a 5 string bass with a 145 B then feels like one instrument to me, a 7 string with a 62 B, an 8 string pulling 20lbs in whatever tuning etc. All those feel like a solid instrument to me with the correct strings, rather than an added loose string on the bottom yeah.
Beyond that it does seem to get harder though yeah. I think some of it is setup, the strings are just too big to run entirely guitar-like action on (afterall, even bass guitars with 40lbs don't handle action THAT low too well).

I'd try the .114 that I'm using and run progressive tension from there. Have you tuned up the string to see what tension you like it at? I think we have to accept that getting this low does have to cross over more into bass guitar territory if we want it to not be flop city.

 

[jwade]

I don't have a 9 string, but I do have a baritone Les Paul (28") tuned anywhere between C1 and F1. I've found that using an .090 bass string (all string examples I use are D'Addario nickel wound) provides fairly good tension for E and F, acceptable tension for D/D#, and is pretty much rubber for C/C#. As for the sound, the Gibson 500T is a pretty high output pickup with a ceramic magnet, so it's quite good at outputting the lower stuff and staying mostly clear. I find that anything below F stops having the 'chunk' you'd expect of a guitar, and instead has a much more rounded-off bass sound, even with heavy distortion.

Going to a lighter gauge, an .084 guitar string helps with palm muted stuff in terms of retaining some of the 'chunk', but still doesn't quite quite avoid the almost bass sound instead of guitar. An .080 guitar string has been the best so far, at F it's a bit more wobbly than I'd prefer, but still sounds like a guitar.

A .074 or .072 are...not great below G, and going down to F or lower was just mud city.

 

[Hollowway]

Have you tuned up the string to see what tension you like it at? I think we have to accept that getting this low does have to cross over more into bass guitar territory if we want it to not be flop city.

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm going to try. I'll do some more experimentation and let you guys know what I find. I'm super curious what I'll get!

 

[AxelKay]

So did you experiment with the heavier gauges?
I'm waiting on my custom fanned 9string (31"-26.5") and trying to figure out gauges for drop C#. I'm stuck with a few 102s from Kalium which I originally bought for my 30" 8string that sound like cr@p at C# but they are ok for D or D#. I ordered some 118s a month ago from them but I asked for a refund yesterday since they seem to have "stopped" shipping packages (if you check out their fb page there's a few cases of guys-me included- asking for their strings)

 

[Hollowway]

So I've got the .106" at C#1 and the .146" at G#0 on my guitars (at 30"). They sound OK, but they don't have near that evil feel and sound that a .074" has at 27" for F#1. It may be that I need to seriously EQ it or try a different sort of amp. TBH, I'm mostly playing through my POD 2.0 these days, and the clean patches definitely sound better, but more bass like.

Interestingly, when I tune up those super thick strings I can tune way the hell up beyond pitch without even noticing. Which makes me think that maybe should be going even THICKER for the correct feel. Like, if I tune the .146" I get up a 5th before I notice I'm way above the note. Just going by trying to get the slack out of the string.

Any of you guys have any new input? I have an order for a .095" Phosphor Bronze bass string (EB Earthwood) that I'm going to put on my Agile Renaissance. It comes stock with a .078" for F#, but that is too floppy on an acoustic. At least for me. Unfortunately I had to buy the whole pack of Earthwoods, which is $20, so I feel like a total idiot.