Strat trem question

muttley600 said:
You are correct.

The tension in the sounding string length of any vibration string is a product of it's mass per unit length and it's pitch. Change one and you change the other. The constants are the mass per unit length and the sounding string length. The variables are the tension and the pitch.

Of course on a guitar we can also change the sounding string length. We don't change any of the other components as we do so though.
Click to expand...

thought so ...... I's smart!

:D
 
That's what I always thought. All that matters is the part that vibrates between the nut and saddle. Top-wrapping the tailpiece, headstock shape, string-through body, all bullshit.
 
Greg_L said:
That's what I always thought. All that matters is the part that vibrates between the nut and saddle. Top-wrapping the tailpiece, headstock shape, string-through body, all bullshit.
Click to expand...

It's not all bullshit but it is very often overstated and many false claims are made about much of that stuff.
 
muttley600 said:
It's not all bullshit but it is very often overstated and many false claims are made about much of that stuff.
Click to expand...

It just seems crazy to me that people think that stuff matters. How does top-wrapping a tailpiece with a tune-o-matic bridge matter? The string stops vibrating at the saddle. The little bit after that going to the tailpiece does nothing. Pluck a string and touch it at the tailpiece. Nothing happens. Some people say it makes bends easier. I don't buy it. Maybe I'm just not good enough to tell the difference.
 
Greg_L said:
It just seems crazy to me that people think that stuff matters. How does top-wrapping a tailpiece with a tune-o-matic bridge matter? The string stops vibrating at the saddle. The little bit after that going to the tailpiece does nothing. Pluck a string and touch it at the tailpiece. Nothing happens. Some people say it makes bends easier. I don't buy it. Maybe I'm just not good enough to tell the difference.
Click to expand...
I agree.
I've never understood how top wrapping a tailpiece could have any effect on bending.
 
Top wrapping does nothing at all. Pure placebo.

The size and shape of headstocks and stuff like that can have an affect on the tone although it is hard to predict how and what. Stuff like the length of the string behind the saddle and nut can have a slight affect on ease of bending at the nut end. All very limited though. Mostly that stuff is not important in the grand scheme and as I say people overstate most of it..
 
The reason it can make bends easier towards the nut is that the string can move over the nut. With a locking nut you have to bend the string without that extra bit of freedom to move behind the nut. It is very marginal though and I don't believe it to be of any real benefit.
 
muttley600 said:
The reason it can make bends easier towards the nut is that the string can move over the nut. With a locking nut you have to bend the string without that extra bit of freedom to move behind the nut. It is very marginal though and I don't believe it to be of any real benefit.
Click to expand...

so IF the string can move freely over the nut that extra string on the headstock could allow for easier bending down there.
I can see that ..... not that it's hard to bend a string down there anyways though.
 
Yeah I can see it on the nut end.

What about string-through-body setups? Is that just aesthetics? I don't see how that does anything special.
 
Lt. Bob said:
so IF the string can move freely over the nut that extra string on the headstock could allow for easier bending down there.
I can see that ..... not that it's hard to bend a string down there anyways though.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Far too much is made of the supposed benefit IMHO..
 
Greg_L said:
Yeah I can see it on the nut end.

What about string-through-body setups? Is that just aesthetics? I don't see how that does anything special.
Click to expand...

I can say that it does make a difference because I have observed it. It is impossible to control or predict though. On a bass I recently finished I strung it both through body as per customer requirement and also tried it with the strings anchored at the bridge block because I could. Through body was "darker" and quieter. If I had to put it down to anything it is the clamping action of the the string tension pulling the bridge block down onto the body and thus imparting a different set of harmonic partials to the string. Impossible to say for sure though. I have noticed a difference on guitars as well when I've strung through body.
 
muttley600 said:
I can say that it does make a difference because I have observed it. It is impossible to control or predict though. On a bass I recently finished I strung it both through body as per customer requirement and also tried it with the strings anchored at the bridge block because I could. Through body was "darker" and quieter. If I had to put it down to anything it is the clamping action of the the string tension pulling the bridge block down onto the body and thus imparting a different set of harmonic partials to the string. Impossible to say for sure though. I have noticed a difference on guitars as well when I've strung through body.
Click to expand...

Okay. So say we have a guitar like a Gibson with a tune-o-matic and a stopbar tailpiece. Would jamming the tailpiece all the way down to the body get more sustain or do anything harmonically?
 
Greg_L said:
Okay. So say we have a guitar like a Gibson with a tune-o-matic and a stopbar tailpiece. Would jamming the tailpiece all the way down to the body get more sustain or do anything harmonically?
Click to expand...
yes.

And while we're at it ..... neck thrus.
My Stinnett is a neck thru and it has the most sustain acoustically (and also amped up) of any electric I've ever had.
Is there a relation? Or is it another of those unpredictable things?
 
Greg_L said:
Okay. So say we have a guitar like a Gibson with a tune-o-matic and a stopbar tailpiece. Would jamming the tailpiece all the way down to the body get more sustain or do anything harmonically?
Click to expand...

It may but in my experience very little. It's more likely to alter the tone slightly than add sustain. How and how much is impossible to predict. Sustain is just the decay rate so I'd have to ask how doing what you say would keep energy in the string for longer or keep energy in the string more efficiently and I can't really see how it would. If it did then you would be likely to lose some of the amplitude of the note which is what appeared to happen on the bass. I didn't notice an increase in sustain but that is harder to pick by ear on low frequencies.

Decay rate = total energy in the string and the speed at which it is lost. There is no way we can get more out than we put in so if all else is equal more sustain = less amplitude.
 
I do believe in neck thrus. That's one thing I like about gibson firebirds. Strum a chord and that thing will ring for days.

I also believe in set-necks being better than bolt-ons, but the difference isn't that substantial to me. I just like the feel of a set neck better. Maybe it's psychological, but it feels sturdier to me.
 
Lt. Bob said:
yes.

And while we're at it ..... neck thrus.
My Stinnett is a neck thru and it has the most sustain acoustically (and also amped up) of any electric I've ever had.
Is there a relation? Or is it another of those unpredictable things?
Click to expand...

The bass I mentioned was neck through.

This is all theory mind but a neck through could well be more efficient in that there is no neck joint to impact on the decay rate. Most of the strings energy is lost via the body so the better that is at reflecting energy back down the string the more efficient it will be. Just to mess things up though I have heard bolt on's with more natural sustain than through and set necks. I would put that down to the rest of the body being more efficient. Everything comes into play and no two bits of wood are the same.
 
Greg_L said:
I do believe in neck thrus. That's one thing I like about gibson firebirds. Strum a chord and that thing will ring for days.

I also believe in set-necks being better than bolt-ons, but the difference isn't that substantial to me. I just like the feel of a set neck better. Maybe it's psychological, but it feels sturdier to me.
Click to expand...

I prefer set neck but just from a workmanship point of view. Bolt on's always seem to be a bit "lego" to me. Nothing wrong with them, they work fine but thats my preference.
 
muttley600 said:
It may but in my experience very little. It's more likely to alter the tone slightly than add sustain. How and how much is impossible to predict. Sustain is just the decay rate so I'd have to ask how doing what you say would keep energy in the string for longer or keep energy in the string more efficiently and I can't really see how it would. If it did then you would be likely to lose some of the amplitude of the note which is what appeared to happen on the bass. I didn't notice an increase in sustain but that is harder to pick by ear on low frequencies.

Decay rate = total energy in the string and the speed at which it is lost. There is no way we can get more out than we put in so if all else is equal more sustain = less amplitude.
Click to expand...

Okay so if the string only vibrates between the nut and bridge, how could it matter where the tailpiece is positioned, besides that it just sometimes does? It seems like it's just one of those things that might work on one guitar and not on another. I think people that worry about this stuff are just entertaining themselves.
 
muttley600 said:
I prefer set neck but just from a workmanship point of view. Bolt on's always seem to be a bit "lego" to me. Nothing wrong with them, they work fine but thats my preference.
Click to expand...

Yeah it just seems chintzy to me. Cheap guitars always have bolt-on necks. Better guitars have set necks or neck thrus. A set neck makes me think that some thought and care went into putting the guitar together instead of just screwing pieces together.
 
Greg_L said:
Okay so if the string only vibrates between the nut and bridge, how could it matter where the tailpiece is positioned, besides that it just sometimes does? It seems like it's just one of those things that might work on one guitar and not on another. I think people that worry about this stuff are just entertaining themselves.
Click to expand...

The sounding string vibrates between the saddle and nut but most of the energy is lost at and beyond those points and it is those points reflecting the energy back down the string that dictate it's tone and timbre. It is whats added by the materials beyond the sounding string that colour the sound and why what a guitar is made of makes a difference. When the vibrations in the string bounce back from the saddle and lesser extent the fret, it is the harmonic partials that it picks up that give us the tone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top