What acoustic strings / gauges do you recommend?

ICBM

Amigo said:

I take it that the thickness of the top and the size of the guitar, along with the bracing would also have an impact? Could one tell what is the bracing and the top thickness on a guitar, without actually looking inside? The weight of the guitar might give a hint, maybe?

Yes to all that. You get a 'feel' for these things with experience, but something like a Dreadnought which feels 'heavy' is probably not a good candidate for anything less than 12s, and a small-bodied guitar which feels obviously 'light' will most likely be fine with 10s. Scale length has a slight bearing on it too, 25-1/2" will work better with light strings than 24-3/4" usually.

11s are often a good compromise because in most sets, the lower three strings are almost the same as 12s - the D and A are often exactly the same gauges - so they provide the bass 'thump', whereas the top three strings are lighter (oddly, the G often one gauge smaller than in a set of 10s! I have no idea why) so easier on the fingers than heavier thin strings which tend to cut in.

Mattharrier

ICBM said:

It can depend a lot on the guitar - I have to say I've never heard 9s sound any good on any of the (very rare) guitars I've played with them fitted, but 10s are usually fine on anything that isn't too heavily-braced.

Some great players have used very light strings, John Renbourn is one who comes to mind.

Mine is an Aria AW20 - by no means expensive, and while I don't have any way to really check, it doesn't feel particularly heavy so I'm guessing it's not too heavily braced (what I can see looks reasonably chunky though). Regarding your point in a later reply, it's a 25.5 inch scale - regardless, I'm happy with how it's playing now, and the lighter strings certainly don't seem to have made the sound any worse; it seems to have quietened it down a little, which is not actually a bad thing.

9s does seem a bit extreme, I'm in two minds whether to put 10s on my S-type as the 9s seem a bit too thin.

Mattharrier

Oh, another thing about the EB Rock and Blues is that the G is unwound, so it feels more like playing an electric. It's subtle, but it may be just what you need if you're an electric player first and foremost, and struggling (like I was/am) to branch out into acoustic.

ICBM

Mattharrier said:

Oh, another thing about the EB Rock and Blues is that the G is unwound, so it feels more like playing an electric. It's subtle, but it may be just what you need if you're an electric player first and foremost, and struggling (like I was/am) to branch out into acoustic.

That could be a problem on a guitar with a compensated bridge saddle, worth checking that first.

Mattharrier

ICBM said:

Mattharrier said:

Oh, another thing about the EB Rock and Blues is that the G is unwound, so it feels more like playing an electric. It's subtle, but it may be just what you need if you're an electric player first and foremost, and struggling (like I was/am) to branch out into acoustic.

That could be a problem on a guitar with a compensated bridge saddle, worth checking that first.

That's not an issue for me personally, as this guitar has a standard straight saddle, but good knowledge to have - I shall be more careful with my recommendations in future!

Why would it be an issue with a compensated saddle?

ICBM

Mattharrier said:

Why would it be an issue with a compensated saddle?

On a compensated saddle, the G string break point is deliberately set almost as far forward as possible to be correct for a light wound string. This is a typical one -



A plain string would need to be much further back, probably right at the back edge where the B is, since the G in a set of 9s will be about the same gauge as the B in a set of 12s (a 16 probably). 

With a plain uncompensated saddle, they're all a bit out, but on an acoustic it's not really that noticeable usually. Ironically it would be much more so with a compensated saddle that the G string was out, because all the others are right. Especially as a string that's sharp - as the G will then be - is more obvious than one that's flat. That's why compensated saddles have become popular, because otherwise the B can sound noticeably sharp.

Mattharrier

So a compensated saddle is specifically set up for a wound G? Would it be possible to make a saddle that was compensated for a plain G?

This is, I must say, probably beyond my limited skills at this time, but it might be a nice project should I upgrade my acoustic but continue with the same string set.

ICBM

Mattharrier said:

So a compensated saddle is specifically set up for a wound G? Would it be possible to make a saddle that was compensated for a plain G?

This is, I must say, probably beyond my limited skills at this time, but it might be a nice project should I upgrade my acoustic but continue with the same string set.

Yes, easily. I make my own compensated saddles usually - I don't like that ugly notch thing, so I simply file the top of the saddle into two angled sections, one under the E and B and the other under the remaining four strings, like this -



(I would have used that picture earlier, except that it's slightly less clear what's been done!)

So instead of making the step between the B and G, you would continue the angle at the treble end under the G and make the step between the G and D.

drofluf

@ICBM that looks very elegant 

ICBM

drofluf said:

@ICBM that looks very elegant 

Not my work! Although it could be - I do them exactly like that, except that I generally make the step just a little narrower. Just a pic I found online - a lot of techs are doing them now.

Very easy to do - you just need a broad flat file to cut the two angles and some wet'n'dry paper to polish it up.

Mattharrier

How accurate does that need to be? Or is it more a case of as much angle as possible each way?

ICBM

Mattharrier said:

How accurate does that need to be? Or is it more a case of as much angle as possible each way?

It's not especially scientific, but it seems to work perfectly if you just make the two angles run from the front edge to the back edge over the length of each.

For a three plain and three wound string set I would do the same and make two equal angles. If it's not 100% perfect I doubt you will be able to tell the difference.

jeromegreenday

I *MAY* get strung up for this but acoustic forums will chuck loads more idea's at you, one such forum turned me on to, John Pearse strings with great success.
The thing to bare in mind, is if one set of strings work on one guitar for you, they might not work on a different acoustic. so if you always use Martins, that doesn't mean use them forever more on every acoustic.
Every acoustic will have a set of strings that's RIGHT FOR THAT acoustic, you may have to use ten different brands until you find that set.
Don't underestimate the relation between the wood type and string type on acoustics 

Mattharrier

ICBM said:

Mattharrier said:

How accurate does that need to be? Or is it more a case of as much angle as possible each way?

It's not especially scientific, but it seems to work perfectly if you just make the two angles run from the front edge to the back edge over the length of each.

For a three plain and three wound string set I would do the same and make two equal angles. If it's not 100% perfect I doubt you will be able to tell the difference.

Top stuff, thanks. I may pick up a saddle blank and give it a go!

Lestratcaster

jeromegreenday said:

I *MAY* get strung up for this but acoustic forums will chuck loads more idea's at you, one such forum turned me on to, John Pearse strings with great success.
The thing to bare in mind, is if one set of strings work on one guitar for you, they might not work on a different acoustic. so if you always use Martins, that doesn't mean use them forever more on every acoustic.
Every acoustic will have a set of strings that's RIGHT FOR THAT acoustic, you may have to use ten different brands until you find that set.
Don't underestimate the relation between the wood type and string type on acoustics 

I'm currently pondering which string brand to use on my D28, some say Elixir's and Martin guitars are not a match, I use the Elixir nanowebs on my Takamine and they sound great on that, but currently using the Martin SP 80/20 12-54's on the D28. Its got that mellow warm tone as opposed to the Elixir bright twang. I feel with the SP Authentic's they bring out the natural sound of the Martin, but I haven't tried it with a set of Elixir's yet, they will last longer I'm sure. 

Littlejonny

I use D'Addario NBs. Love them. Also, Martin Retros if I can't get NBs. Very similar, but I think NBs stay brighter for longer. These can really transform the sound of a guitar if you're used to PB or 80/20. NBs are Nickel Bronze and have a mellower tone with less harmonics and more fundamental. 

meltedbuzzbox

jeromegreenday said:

I *MAY* get strung up for this but acoustic forums will chuck loads more idea's at you, one such forum turned me on to, John Pearse strings with great success.
The thing to bare in mind, is if one set of strings work on one guitar for you, they might not work on a different acoustic. so if you always use Martins, that doesn't mean use them forever more on every acoustic.
Every acoustic will have a set of strings that's RIGHT FOR THAT acoustic, you may have to use ten different brands until you find that set.
Don't underestimate the relation between the wood type and string type on acoustics 

I agree with this.

Funnily enough after going round the houses and trying a lot of different strings the best strings for my Martin were Martin lifespan 13 gauge 

Lestratcaster

meltedbuzzbox said:

jeromegreenday said:

I *MAY* get strung up for this but acoustic forums will chuck loads more idea's at you, one such forum turned me on to, John Pearse strings with great success.
The thing to bare in mind, is if one set of strings work on one guitar for you, they might not work on a different acoustic. so if you always use Martins, that doesn't mean use them forever more on every acoustic.
Every acoustic will have a set of strings that's RIGHT FOR THAT acoustic, you may have to use ten different brands until you find that set.
Don't underestimate the relation between the wood type and string type on acoustics 

I agree with this.

Funnily enough after going round the houses and trying a lot of different strings the best strings for my Martin were Martin lifespan 13 gauge 

I'm thinking of giving a set of Lifespans a go, do they have that squeaky coated feel like Elixirs? And are they 80/20 or Phosphor Bronze? I will have to get some 12's though as I ain't man enough to play 13's haha.

I do like the warm natural sound of the Martin's already on my D28 though. 

How long do they generally last for on yours?

jeromegreenday

I think that Guitar has a Cedar top? Cedar's will need different strings to say a spruce, I Hear  Adamas PB lights are a good fir for Cedar, I think PB would be the way to go. 

drofluf

Just replaced the Newtones with a set of Martin Authenics. First impression is that they’re higher tension than the Newtones which is hardly surprising but they’re also less comfortable to play; rougher on my fingers and noisy. It may be my technique but it sounds like a family of mice scratching in the attic whilst I’m playing. 

Tonewise I like them but that may just be a new versus old string effect.