Higher hz Tuning

guitarjack66

I have recently tuned both a concert sized guitar and a jumbo to standard at 445 mhz rather than 440 mhz. Both have 0.10- 47 string sets on and it seems to have helped bring out a much more pleasing sound,to my ear at least. 
Is this a thing and have you yourself benefited from anything similar?

ICBM

MHz? That's radio frequency...

You mean Hz .

Higher tuning usually gives a slightly brighter, zingier tone. It will also marginally increase the string tension, which will pull the bridge up and the neck forward a tiny bit, which should reduce fret buzz (even if it was imperceptible before, there is usually some when the action is low) and open up the tone and volume slightly.

RickLucas

I prefer it lower, 432 Hz.

guitarjack66

ICBM said:

MHz? That's radio frequency...

You mean Hz .

Higher tuning usually gives a slightly brighter, zingier tone. It will also marginally increase the string tension, which will pull the bridge up and the neck forward a tiny bit, which should reduce fret buzz (even if it was imperceptible before, there is usually some when the action is low) and open up the tone and volume slightly.

Sorry,yes of course hz,

guitarjack66

ICBM said:

MHz? That's radio frequency...

You mean Hz .

Higher tuning usually gives a slightly brighter, zingier tone. It will also marginally increase the string tension, which will pull the bridge up and the neck forward a tiny bit, which should reduce fret buzz (even if it was imperceptible before, there is usually some when the action is low) and open up the tone and volume slightly.

This is a pleasing benefit as I feel the bass strings had a bit of fret buzz.

AntonHunter

The Germans tune to 442hz as standard. I think a lot of mainland Europe does, based on jazz club pianos we used when touring over there. That's also how I found out my version of the Polytune Noir doesn't allow for the tuning frequency to be changes...

thermionic

ICBM said:

MHz? That's radio frequency...

Lower case m… milli Hertz. 445 mHz is once every 2.2 seconds!

ICBM

thermionic said:

ICBM said:

MHz? That's radio frequency...

Lower case m… milli Hertz. 445 mHz is once every 2.2 seconds!

The thread title has Mhz, but I did see that in the post and wonder if I should be doubly pedantic (again) .

I'm not sure I've ever actually seen millihertz used as a unit though.

ToneControl

AFAIK you can get a similar effect by using a thicker string gauge

Some guitars are very sensitive to tension. All the ones I've owned work fine with 11s, but can't do drop tunings with them, 11s seem to be the limit for most guitars. Hence I tune up a semitone for DADGAD with 11s

Same applies the other way. I have a tenor guitar that sounds horrible and shrill with the recommended gauge and tuning, I use thinner strings instead and it sounds lovely

Tannin

@ToneControl is on the money. If you like the feel (and even the sound) of your guitar tuned up (or down) a little, simply change to a different make of strings, one with slightly higher(or lower)  tension.

ToneControl

Just re-read OP and noticed he is using 10s. They won't work for most acoustics at normal pitch.
It's all to do with the choice of bracing and the thickness of the top. Most luthiers expect and design for 11s, 12s or 13s.
Goodall even state on the label which gauge is recommended

guitarjack66

ToneControl said:

Just re-read OP and noticed he is using 10s. They won't work for most acoustics at normal pitch.
It's all to do with the choice of bracing and the thickness of the top. Most luthiers expect and design for 11s, 12s or 13s.
Goodall even state on the label which gauge is recommended

10s work best with my playing style. I've tried both 11s and 12s(most off the shelf guitars I buy tend to come with 12s) but I don't get on with them.

ToneControl

guitarjack66 said:

ToneControl said:

Just re-read OP and noticed he is using 10s. They won't work for most acoustics at normal pitch.
It's all to do with the choice of bracing and the thickness of the top. Most luthiers expect and design for 11s, 12s or 13s.
Goodall even state on the label which gauge is recommended

10s work best with my playing style. I've tried both 11s and 12s(most off the shelf guitars I buy tend to come with 12s) but I don't get on with them.

Hmm, that's a bit of a problem. Ideally you'd seek out a lightly-braced model intended for use with less tension

I use what used to be called "Heavy bottom 9s" on electric, perhaps you could try the same idea.
Basically they allow bending of the top 3 strings same as 9s, but the bottom 3 strings are 10s, so a tighter sound on the bass.

On an acoustic I'd say try a set of 11s, with the top 2 strings replaced with the top 2 from a set of 10s. (i.e. 10 and 14)

ICBM

ToneControl said:

On an acoustic I'd say try a set of 11s, with the top 2 strings replaced with the top 2 from a set of 10s. (i.e. 10 and 14)

Unless it's definitely the top two strings which are too hard on your fingers, I would probably do the opposite, because most sets of 11s are closer to the same as 12s for the wound strings.

Typically...

10s: 10, 14, 23, 30, 39, 47
11s: 11, 15, 22, 32, 42, 52
12s: 12, 16, 24, 32, 42, 53 (or sometimes 54)

The oddities you should notice are that the G in a set of 11s is actually *lighter* than in a set of 10s, and that the D and A strings are exactly the same gauges as a set of 12s. I don't know why they've come to be like that.

The reason I like 11s is actually because they have the 'heft' of 12s on the bottom strings, but the easier playability on the top ones. Even then, the G can seem too light - when I had two electro-acoustics where I used 10s on one and 11s on the other, I used to swap the G strings. Now I use Newtones and specify a 23-gauge G, but they allow you to choose your own set entirely if you want.

thermionic

ICBM said:

thermionic said:

ICBM said:

MHz? That's radio frequency...

Lower case m… milli Hertz. 445 mHz is once every 2.2 seconds!

The thread title has Mhz, but I did see that in the post and wonder if I should be doubly pedantic (again) .

I'm not sure I've ever actually seen millihertz used as a unit though.

You’re right, once it goes below 1 Hz it makes more sense to describe it in terms of period.