Conference napalm::guitar

    Actually its best not to cut your strings - rather, wind them up
    at the head to keep them from getting in the way.  By cutting those
    strings which are wound, you reduce tension and cut down on the
    longevity of a crisp sounding string.  As for the 60's era, it seemed
    to be the thing to do (not to cut that is) and rather then wind
    them at the head they must have decided it look "cooler" to let
    them hang.  
    
    Joel

>    at the head to keep them from getting in the way.  By cutting those
>    strings which are wound, you reduce tension and cut down on the
>    longevity of a crisp sounding string.  As for the 60's era, it seemed

    What tension are you speaking of here?? I can't possibly see how
    cutting the string ends can affect string longevity. However, it
    is important to "lock" the wound strings around the pegs when
    installing new strings. This method involves taking the string
    as it exits the peg and winding it back in the opposite direction
    around the peg. This end is then passed under the string entering
    the peg and bent up at a right angle to the entering string. In
    effect, this "locks" the string core and it's windings to the peg.
    
    I realize that this is a bad description. If you've seen this done,
    then you know what I mean. It's a tough thing to describe without
    a guitar in hand or pen and paper to draw on. I'll try to come up
    with step by step instructions and/or diagrams(if possible with
    keyboard characters) and post it later.
                                           
    rick

    Any thoughts as to how cutting strings afftects those of use using
    Floyd Rose trem's?? You basically have to cut the string at both
    ends (well, you don't *have* too, but its easier that way).
    
    -Bj

    
    Are you guys serious (-.0,-.1)???
    
    I always figured that the rat's nest was because the strings had
    to be changed in a hurry (like one was broken onstage) and the band
    didn't have twelve spare guitars, two guitar techs, etc.
    
    Maybe I'm wrong.....
    

    The lock method that was described in a previous note works.
    
    He's right too, it's very hard to desribe.....

    Basically what you're doing is allowing the string to adhere to
    itself due to the pressure caused when the string is wound
    tight.  Doing this on the wound strings creates this 'lock'.
    
    It's been something I've done since high school, and do still,
    even though I've got a Kahler with a lock at the nut.
        
    I just think that back in the 60s where everyone was trying to
    be radical, that this was just another idiom.  And it wasn't
    quite as disgusting as painting peace signs or pasely prints
    on your telecaster.

    I remember back in the early to mid seventies someone told me not
    to cut strings. He claimed it reduced sustain if you cut them. I
    think this was a common misconception. How could it effect sustain
    when the part of the string you want to vibrate is between the 
    bridge and the nut ? Sustain was not very well understood 10 years
    ago and people were constantly trying new tricks to increase their
    sustain. Today however with all the custom hardware, pickups, 
    and greatly improved amplifier technology you can get all the sustain
    you want without all of these silly tricks. 
    
    One other thing. If you are familiar with the mini in-line tuners
    used on Fenders from about 1968-80, they had a slot cut into the
    tuning machine. This was so that you could cut the string allowing
    just enough slack to wind it around the tuner a couple of times,
    and you didn't have to content with sharp string ends. If Fender
    opted to do this you know the slack can't be effecting the sound.

>    What tension are you speaking of here?? I can't possibly see how
>    cutting the string ends can affect string longevity. However, it
>    is important to "lock" the wound strings around the pegs when
>    installing new strings. 
>    In effect, this "locks" the string core and it's windings to the peg.

    If cutting the wound string has no effect then why do you feel it
    to be important to "lock" the string core?  If there is no tension
    release upon cutting then presumably there would be no need in 
    locking the windings to the peg as you suggest.  Like the "right 
    angle" technique,  cutting a string after is has been wound normally
    around a peg appears to have no visible effect on the string.  Audible
    differences can be heard to the discerning ear when some kind of
    process (among which may include the technique you refer to) is not
    used to negate tension loss when cutting.  This is the longevity I 
    refer to - not how long a string will last on your guitar before it breaks.
    Audible differences in strings are derived by the characteristics which
    make up those strings - among which includes elasticity.  If you
    reduce or change these characteristics then you in effect have changed
    the sound of the string.
    
    Joel

I've read about "not cutting" the ends of your strings, and if you *must*
do it make sure you bend the string at a ?degree angle, but I could never 
understand why. I am in agreement with previous noters that I don't know
how cutting the string (the unused portion) could possibly affect the sound.

Maybe a difference in sound can be heard on an acoustic guitar. I still 
don't see how. 

As for winding the string around itself on the peg, I have always done that,
because from my experience, the guitar stays in tune better since there is
no way for the string to slip from the peg if its wound on itself. The worst
it will do is stretch. It's locked in there.

Since we're on the subject of strings, Aare all of you as loyal to a 
particular brand as I am ?? GHS 9's exclusively. I flurted with schecter
strings for a while (prior to their demise) but since I can't get them 
anymore I'm back to GHS. GHS boomers seem to be the brightest, cleanest
sounding string going. 

By the way, does anyone know how many companies out there actually 
manufacture strings ?? I have heard that the entire potpourie of strings
comes fro a select few manufacturers? Any truth to this? If so can anyone
enlighten us on what companies make which brands ????

-Bob

    RE:8 <Strings -n- things >
    
    	You asked if noters become religious to string brands.  
    I do.  I've used Marcleys' for a few years now.  I don't
    know if it's all in the head, but the strings (Marcleys') seem
    to  work out good for me.  I've used others and frankly, wasn't
    as happy with any of them till I tried Marcleys.  Others seemed to 
    die out alot quicker than the Marcleys.   I usually acohol wipe
    strings after each use so I don't think it's an oil build up problem.

    	On my last to string purhcases Marcleys were sold out, so I picked
    up Diaddrio and Vinci.  I didn't think they were close to the
    resonance and brilliance of Marcleys.

    	I've also hear rumor to the fact that there's relativley
    few companys that make strings.   Could be a sales pitch to get
    you to buy anything.  Not sure if that's the way it is, but I see
    a difference in string brands.  Regardless of where there made and
    what the companies names are.

    I use mostly D'addario's.
    
    Why?  Cause they tend to be the cheapest and I haven't found much
    significant difference between string brands other than minor
    differencesin in how long a stays "bright" and how often they break.
    
    Perhaps my ears aren't as finely tuned as other peoples.  However,
    after years of quietly holding this opinion (which I felt might
    have indicated a lack of good ears), I was relieved to hear Steve
    Morse espouse essentially the same view off-the-record at a clinic
    (sponsored by Ernie Ball!!!) he recently gave.
    
    Then I remembered that before he got the Ernie Ball endorsement
    deal, he had stated in interviews that he doesn't stick to any one
    particular brand, and generally goes with whatever familiar brand
    is on sale.

    	db

I just had to jump in here again to elaborate on my dedication to GHS boomers.

I once bought a set of Markleys (because my store was out of GHS boomers).
I got to the gig and changed the strings, and was so dissapointed with the
sound that I put the old ones back on - this actually happened. And if you
knew how much I *hate* to change my strings, (my idea of success musically
would be to never have to change my own strings again) you'd realize how
significant this happening really was.

I can definately hear a difference in brilliance from one brand to another,
and my only explanation is that they must use different alloys to make 
different brands. I'd still love to know how many companies actually make 
strings, and who makes which brands.

As for how long the brilliance lasts, I change them every week (ususally 
friday nite) so I wouldn't know. I know on those rare occasions when I 
get exceptionally lazy and go two weeks, I end up turning the presence
control up to 10 and adding more treble and mids, trying to "tweak" that
new string sound from my guitar. It usually results in merely producing 
a more trebely version of the deadining sound I had. I am also prone
to breaking a string if I go two weeks, (usually the D), and it usually
happens right before my favorite solo. So I rarely take chances and usually 
have a new set on Friday.

    I can tell ya'll know quite a bit more about strings than I. I have
    been bouncing back and forth to find the right string for my
    acoustic. I generally use D'addaios or Martin Marquis. I would
    welcome any recomendations. Most recently I have switched from
    light guage to medium guage D'Addario's. Even though my left hand
    is a little sore now, the tone is much brighter and and cleaner
    than the lights. 
    
    Dave.
    

    I have to agree with .11 to an extent. GHS are real bright and retain
    their brightness for quite a while. I don't like them because they're
    so bright, so that's why I use D'addario's. They have a stronger
    midrange quality to them (I think). Who cares? I care, ok?
    
    -Bj

    Just as an aside, Martin makes all their own strings at the 
    Nazereth plant.
    
    D.
    

    A couple of comments:
    
    On guitar strings, I used to use Martin Marquis mediums on my accoustic
    (I understand that Martin guitars are factory tuned for medium strings,
    and I have found that anything lighter generally loses significant
    tone). However, based on earlier recommendations in this file, I
    recently tried out GHS (I bought bluegrass gauge istead of medium,
    because medium was not available -- the only difference is that
    the high 3 strings are one unit lighter), and I was quite pleased
    with both the original brightness and the duration. I intend to
    keep using GHS, when I can find them (they seem to be in short supply
    around here).
    
    For those who believe in using the cheapest they can get, you might
    be interested to know that the Minor Chord in Acton is selling Vinci
    strings at 2 sets for $3.50! I got some, and they seem reasonably
    good. At that price you can afford to replace them often.
    
    On the original subject, I'd like to speculate about how not cutting
    the strings might improve the tone or sustain. In a wound string,
    the winding is separate from the core, and under tension they could
    presumably behave somewhat independently. Thus, even though the
    string appears to be wrapped tight and even locked, only the winding
    is actually held absolutely tight, because the core does not come
    in contact with itself. When you tune the string, however, you are
    really tuning the core, so it is conceiveable that when the core
    is tuned to a specific pitch the tension on the winding could vary.
    Not cutting the string would tend to reduce this effect, because
    the more winding you have in contact with the core at the end, the
    more friction there is and the less likely they are to move
    independently of one another.
    
    That's all purely hypothetical, speculative, and possibly ridiculous.
    It's certainly not based on any actual observation, because I've
    never had enough strings around at any one time to waste them by
    trying out silly experiments. But I just thought I'd raise the point,
    since no one else seemed capable of explaining the unexplainable.
    
    All this aside, to get back to the REALLY original topic of why
    people in the 60's let their tails wag: My recollection is that
    during that highly psychodelic and pseudo-spritual time of
    experimenting with everything, there was a theory that the string
    tails served as antennas which were capable of picking up ethereal
    vibrations, which were thought to enhance the music in some magical
    way. Those who cut them off were considered to be conservative,
    square, un-cool supporters of establishment totalitarianism, that
    were definitely out of it and would never understand the real essence
    of freedom and reality. And certainly not capable of performing
    music.
    
    - Ram
    
    

    
    
    re .15
    
    HUH??  I've heard some weird explanations of that, but that one
    takes the cake!!  I used to leave my strings hanging cause my
    bass player had bad breath.   If he got too close, I'd give him
    a little shock!!  ;^)
    
    As far as a brand of strings go, I always use D'addario.  I used
    to know someone who worked in a music store and he gave me great
    deals on them...$2.00 a set!!  I guess I'm just too lazy to try
    anything else now that I no longer get that deal.  Besides, I
    change my strings too often to worry about how long they'll last.
    
    rhc
    
    

    Re: Changing Strings often:
    
    I HATE the feel of new strings. Give me ones that have been on there
    for a month. Then they're kind of broken in. Besides, they sound
    the same forever once the original brightness dies out. I don't
    really look for too much treble anyways. Just wipe 'em down after
    you're done playing and presto! good as old (a legitimate concept
    from the world of reliability engineering, which also has brought
    'bad as new' into the vernacular, for all who care). What the hell
    do they make amps with treble controls and 'bright' switches for,
    anyways? 
    
    -Dave

    re .15
    
    As the originator of this note (from a different account) I have
    to say I tend to agree with .15. It was really only your average
    folk rock bands that refused to cut their strings (CSN&Y and subsequent
    clones). That is very long hair, drooping moustaches, tassly jackets,
    flared jeans and masses of guitar strings hanging off the machine
    head!
    
    Cool man.
    
    Richard Briggs
    UK SWAS

	Glad to see so many using D'addario's.  I've been using them
	for year and years on both my electric and my acoustics.  I
	am currently using GHS tho on my Dobro since they are the only
	ones I could find in a set (Jerry Douglas model).

	As far as cutting off the strings and locking them in place,
	there was an article in Guitar Player many many moons ago
	(back in the workshop section) that showed how to properly 
	wrap the strings and lock them in place so that they won't
	slip.  Been doing it that way for years and it seems my guitars
	hardly ever go out of tune.

	-gary

    If you're like me, and play a 12-string acoustic, leaving the
    strings uncut has a decided effect on the sound of the guitar.
    
    It's kind of like having a built-in tambourine player, with the
    sound of the strings rubbing together as they wave...

    Ref: .19
    
    Hi could you tell me what is the technique you talking about?
    

    
    
    	Is anyone old enough to remember MAPES strings?
    
    	They came with a little piece of emery paper to shine them up
    
    	after you had them on for a while. ( months?  years? )
    
    
    		...... seemed logical at the time..... ??
    
    50's_60's_Rocker__Ray.
    

re : < Note 227.21 by PARSEC::MELENDEZ >

>    Hi could you tell me what is the technique you talking about?
    
	It's kind of hard to explain without a picture, but you sort of
	take the end of the string (after you put it through the hole
	in the tuner) and wrap it back around and under the rest of the
	string as and then bend it back up at an angle so that as you
	tighten the string it locks itself in place.  

	If I think of it I'll see if I can dig up the issue from the
	archives this weekend.  

	-gary

    Years ago I used a brand on my acoustic - "Nashville Straights".
    I haven't seen them in the stores for years.  Anyone know if they
    are still marketed?
    
    Joel

re : > "Nashville Straights".

	I remember those.  Those were the ones that came in a big long
	box because they supposedly sounded better if they never got
	rolled up or something like that.  I remember buying a whole
	mess of those at a music store auction years ago.  I think it
	was an idea that never caught on....

	-gary

re: Nashville Straights
   
   Yeah, that was it.  Straight strings that cost a whole bunch more than
   the "regular" strings at the time.  I was working at Acton Music then,
   and remember that normal strings were around $4/set, but they wanted
   ~$12 for the Straights.  I tried them once and found them to be no big
   deal, and not worth the money, in my mind.
   
   Still got the neato silver and black "Nashville Straights" sticker on
   my acoustic's case, though...  :-)
   
   -- Sam

    
    	re. 19
    
    	I would like to add that I have tried various brands of strings,
    	GHS, Fender Super Bullets, Gibson, Ernie Ball, etc. etc. I have
    	found that I like using D'addario's. The others usually break
    	on me when I least suspect. I have yet to break a D'addario
    	(knock on wood). I also HATE IT when I break a string since
    	I have a locking tremolo. When one breaks, the whole thing goes
    	out of tune ! So far, D's have done the trick and I am pleased.
    
    	Tony

    Seen at a guitar repair shop...
    
    "Not responsible for replacing the curley cues on the ends of your
     strings!"
    
    _stew-

    	Another vote for D'addario's. I've been using them on my
    electric and acoustic's for quite some time. Just like the feel
    of them I guess.
    	I read an atricle on strings in GP about 3 or 4 years ago that
    stated there are only two manufacturers of the wire used to make
    strings in the U.S.. The article stated there are several diferent
    manufacturers of strings,utilizing different alloys,winding machinery,
    winding techniques,bead tying techniques,and quality control.
    	As far as the rats nest on the head stock I have no idea other
    than maybe they just didn't give a sh*t.
      
       den

    I've got an old set of bass strings, roundwound with light blue silk.
    Anybody have an idea what brand they are?

    Possibly ROTOSOUNDS. Mine look like that. Roundwound with light
    blue silk.
    
    Tony

    One vote for GHS... I use Brite-Flats almost exclusively on my guitars
    because a) I hate the wretching sound of a finger being dragged
    along a roundwound (god forbid - a PICK!?!?!?!?), and b) I love
    to bend, and they have some incredible elstic qualities.  They do
    lack sustain, but my PAIA HOT LYX Sustain unit takes care of that.
    
    Jon (BPOV02::NELSON)
     

    	I believe that loose string ends were a fad started in Los
    Angeles by a group of militant eye doctors! I find that cauterizing
    the cut ends of my strings with a soldering iron keeps the sustain
    from leaking out.
    	My favorite victims are GHS Boomers at .009 and when those are
    unavailable I go with Ernie Ball Hybrids. Both seem to last quite
    awhile. 
    
    In your eye,
    Don
    

    If you care about the sound always cut your excess string length
    as short as possible.  As mentioned previously, it is a good idea
    to lock the string in place at the machine head.  Also, my experience
    dictates that it is a definite advantage to have as few wraps as
    possible around the tuning post.  There is less string to strech
    so the "break-in" faster, stay bright longer, and seem to break
    less.    ...i guess it's my lack of attack but i've never had a
    problem with breaking strings on any of my guitars...   The real
    solution however is the Sperzel locking machine heads on my brand
    new 87, had it less than a year and another topic, Strat.
    
    	love this conference but don't respond much...
    
    							Dave Hodan

    For years I locked my strings under each other in various ways, until I
    bought a guitar from Johnny Smith. The strings were installed in such a
    simple manner that I was sure it would not stay in tune, but I soon 
    found it to be rock solid.  I called Johnny and asked him about
    it--amazingly, he said he had described it in a GP article, which I had
    never bothered to read--I mean, I'd been stringing guitars for years,
    why would I read a beginner's article?
    
    Johnny's method is fast, easy and stays in tune. Turn the peg until the
    hole is perpendicular to the headstock. Insert the string from the
    inside and sharply bend it clockwise on the bass strings or
    counterclockwise on the treble strings on both sides of the post.
    Tighten the peg while guiding the string in a descending spiral,
    tightly packed, but not overlapping, so when you're through, it looks
    like a screw thread. Cut the string flush with the post. You're done.
    
    The only trick is to know how much to insert the string. You want 3
    turns on the bass strings, 5-6 on the treble: it will take some
    practice to figure out what this means for each string. There must be
    no overlaps--these will dig into each other and cause tuning changes.
    The upward pressure on the tapered post locks the string more securely
    than the usual under and around lock stitch.  On guitars with drop-in
    tailpieces, I don't insert the string in the tailpiece until it is
    wound to the exact length. If the string threads through the tailpiece,
    just keep it tight with your right hand while winding. A string winder
    (or Gibson Crank tuners) will allow you to change a set in 5-10
    minutes.
    
    For Fender style tuners, do the same thing, but cut the string to
    length first and insert the end into the post hole, then put a right
    angle bend in it.. These posts are short-use 2 bass, 4-5 treble turns.
    
    I don't do much dive bombing, but this method seems to work on my
    guitar with a Kahler and locking nut. I have done hundreds of string
    changes this way with perfect results.
    
    Danny W.
    

    re .-1
    
    That's the way I always string my guitars, acoustic and electric, and
    I've never had a string slip or lost intonation on that score. I keep
    hearing about people using complex methods of wrapping them, and I
    could never figure out why they were going to such lengths. The more
    convoluted you make the winding on the post, the more stress you are
    going to put on the wire and the more likely that it will break. But
    that's just my opinion - glad to see that at least one expert (two,
    counting Danny) back it up.
    
    - Ram

    ...although I also "lock" the string end under the length of string
    that's coming from the bridge. I picked the tip up from an article in
    the early days of International Musician mag, from a luthier whose name
    escapes me. His suggestion for getting the correct length of string was
    to make a right-angle bend at the next machine post (so it's about an
    inch too long) and then make another right-angle bend when it comes out
    the post (as Danny said). It's a good rule of thumb for beginners. For
    the end string in the row (top E in 6-in-line or D and G on 3 per side)
    make the bend about an inch past the post.
    
    FWIW
    
    Nick

    For anyone interested, that particular article by Johnny Smith is in
    the July '84 issue of Guitar Player.
    
    Greg

    To any who are watching,
    	I bought a Gibson in about 1974, and the 'user's guide' that came
    with it (yes I DID read the documentation) gave a very simple method
    for stringing the guitar.  The head is 3 a side, so the idea was to
    bring the string up the neck, over the nut, through the tuning peg from
    the 'inside', wind the string around the post 'clock-wise' for the ead,
    and 'anti-clock-wise' for the gbe, hook the end of the string under
    itself, and bend back at an angle approching 180 degrees.  Tighten and
    trim to taste.  Tres simple, and I never had any problems with tuning
    or gross tonal changes.
    	I experimented for a while by not trimming the excess, but rather
    wind it onto the peg.  You know what ?  All I really got for my efforts
    was a pain in the hand winding on all that extra string !  Though, it
    did look nice when I really sat down and did it properly :*).  But
    no-one stopped a galloping horse to admire my 'handiwork' :*(.  So now
    I don't bother.
    	What do the other guitar manufactures' recommend ?  (I couldn't
    spell luthier :*} )
    			Harry :*)

    Speaking of handi-work ...  before I cut the excess I wrap an inch or
    two real tight around the peg.  After releasing, it remains in a nice
    curl.  Cut while it is still bending and you get six springy looking
    curly things.  No one I know gallops by on horses, but some people have
    noticed.
    
    						Billiter

    I always leave a little excess on my G string.  It makes a nice
    little cigarette holder while I'm playing.  :^)
    
    cheers/mike

    Just for chuckles -- it's Saturday and I'm bored ;^)
    
    Many moons ago a friend showed me a neat trick which I still sometimes
    use.  I usually lock my strings around the post (per "the Gibson
    method" in .39)  If, for some reason, I *don't* have a pair of cutting
    pliers handy, I'll pull a penny out of my pocket, place it next to the
    excess string coming out of the post, squeeze the penny/string pair and
    pull.  Presto!  Instant curlicue!
    
    A great way to get that '62 look on your Gretsch Duo-Jet..(I wish!) ;^)
    ...actually, I've seen close-ups of George Harrison's Duo-Jet and he
    had curlicues up there quite a bit....
    
    						--Eric--