String Minutia

[Nobody]

So I went back to Gibson 9s from 10s a while ago...when I went to having my amp in a head and with this big-ass 2x12 cabinet:

http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs/VerticalRectifier2x12.JPG

....the bass response and tone changed, and I found that I had to use a smaller gauge low E to tame the bass.

Good thing is, it sounds great still with 9s, and better than 10s did to my ears now.

Wild.

Any similar experiences?

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nunya Bidni]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35c91$c653cd60$6ba1580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
> So I went back to Gibson 9s from 10s a while ago...when I went to having
my amp in a head and with this big-ass 2x12 cabinet:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs/VerticalRectifier2x12.JPG
>
> ...the bass response and tone changed, and I found that I had to use a
smaller gauge low E to tame the bass.
>
> Good thing is, it sounds great still with 9s, and better than 10s did to
my ears now.
>
> Wild.
>
> Any similar experiences?
>
> --
> Jason
> http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs
>

I use .010s on everything, mostly because they hold together and hold a tune
better than .009s. Tonally, outside of a little more beef on the low end,
they sound roughly the same as the .009s, and they're no harder to play.
It's also a little easier on me to go from .010s on my electrics to .012s on
my acoustics.

-nyb

[Nobody]

Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article <bGjYa.1064$Ih1.672153@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...

> I use .010s on everything, mostly because they hold together and hold a tune better than .009s.

You mean "stay in tune" or "hold a tune"?

I don't understand what you mean there.

>Tonally, outside of a little more beef on the low end, they sound roughly the same as the .009s,

I agree, but the thicker wound low string of a 46 sounds much different to my ears than a 42.

And the high strings of a set of 9s seem to be not so much in your face..I mean that the tone is a little less pronounced
obviously, but with my amp it still sings right nicely. I also find the set of 9s to better balanced volume wise between the low
and high strings as opposed to a set of 10s.

That really applies to solo lines and chords using the high strings..otherwise the sound roughly the same.

I think I just disagreed some, but not much.

>and they're no harder to play.

Hmm...9s are easier to play to me, I can tell you that....especially for my index finder doing blues bends.

> It's also a little easier on me to go from .010s on my electrics to .012s on my acoustics.
> -nyb

Cool...that makes sense. Never thought of that...smart though really.

Suddenly I'm in the mood to go and get another Larrivee...

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Odin]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> > I use .010s on everything, mostly because they hold together and hold a
tune better than .009s.
>
> You mean "stay in tune" or "hold a tune"?

Yes.


> I don't understand what you mean there.

Because you're an idiot.


> >Tonally, outside of a little more beef on the low end, they sound
roughly the same as the .009s,
>
> I agree, but the thicker wound low string of a 46 sounds much different
to my ears than a 42.

You couldn't tell the difference in a blindfold test.


> And the high strings of a set of 9s seem to be not so much in your
face..I mean that the tone is a little less pronounced
> obviously, but with my amp it still sings right nicely. I also find the
set of 9s to better balanced volume wise between the low
> and high strings as opposed to a set of 10s.
>
> That really applies to solo lines and chords using the high
strings..otherwise the sound roughly the same.
>
> I think I just disagreed some, but not much.

You're hearing things that aren't there.


> >and they're no harder to play.
>
> Hmm...9s are easier to play to me, I can tell you that....especially for
my index finder doing blues bends.

You tune the ****ing guitar to C you dumbass, 13's would feel like rubber
bands. If 10;s are hard to play then you're more of a pussy that I
thought.


> > It's also a little easier on me to go from .010s on my electrics to
..012s on my acoustics.
> > -nyb
>
> Cool...that makes sense. Never thought of that...smart though really.
>
> Suddenly I'm in the mood to go and get another Larrivee...

Why? Do you do an acoustic version of "Downshift"?

[Nunya Bidni]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35c9b$0d263580$6ba1580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
>
>
> Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article
<bGjYa.1064$Ih1.672153@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
>
> > I use .010s on everything, mostly because they hold together and hold a
tune better than .009s.
>
> You mean "stay in tune" or "hold a tune"?
>
> I don't understand what you mean there.

Same thing- they stay in tune better and if you tune to alternate tunings
they don't drift.


> >Tonally, outside of a little more beef on the low end, they sound roughly
the same as the .009s,
>
> I agree, but the thicker wound low string of a 46 sounds much different to
my ears than a 42.

Not enough to where it would ever matter in a band context.


> And the high strings of a set of 9s seem to be not so much in your face..I
mean that the tone is a little less pronounced
> obviously, but with my amp it still sings right nicely. I also find the
set of 9s to better balanced volume wise between the low
> and high strings as opposed to a set of 10s.


See above. You'll hear it in your bedroom, playing by yourself. It won't
matter in a band context.


> That really applies to solo lines and chords using the high
strings..otherwise the sound roughly the same.
>
> I think I just disagreed some, but not much.
>
> >and they're no harder to play.
>
> Hmm...9s are easier to play to me, I can tell you that....especially for
my index finder doing blues bends.

You've been playing- what? 4 years? Play another 14 or so. It won't
matter.


> > It's also a little easier on me to go from .010s on my electrics to
..012s on my acoustics.
> > -nyb
>
> Cool...that makes sense. Never thought of that...smart though really.
>
> Suddenly I'm in the mood to go and get another Larrivee...

Nice guitars, for sure.

-nyb

[Odin]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> Hmm...9s are easier to play to me, I can tell you
that....especially for my index finder doing blues bends.

What kind of "blues bends" are you doing with your index
finger? Don't you have a ring finger?

[Nobody]

Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article <1%qYa.1751$Ih1.730795@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...

> > > I use .010s on everything, mostly because they hold together and hold a
> tune better than .009s.
> >
> > You mean "stay in tune" or "hold a tune"?
> >
> > I don't understand what you mean there.
>
> Same thing- they stay in tune better and if you tune to alternate tunings
> they don't drift.

I haven't experienced that at all..its more of properly stretching the strings on the post to make it tune stable, IMHO.

So I guess I disagree.

> I agree, but the thicker wound low string of a 46 sounds much different to my ears than a 42.

> Not enough to where it would ever matter in a band context.

I've already heard it in a band context, and I disagree with you that it can't be heard.

Unless, of course, you can't hear it...and that's okay.

> See above. You'll hear it in your bedroom, playing by yourself. It won't
> matter in a band context.

See above.

> Hmm...9s are easier to play to me, I can tell you that....especially for my index finder doing blues bends.

> You've been playing- what? 4 years?

About 6.

>Play another 14 or so. It won't matter.

Jeff Beck, for example, will switch to 9s from 10s in the course of a tour because its easier on his fingers.

So it DOES matter...just not to you.

> Suddenly I'm in the mood to go and get another Larrivee...
>
> Nice guitars, for sure.
> -nyb


--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nobody]

Odin <res0jmoj@verizon.net> wrote in article <3f325a12@shknews01>...

> "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> > Hmm...9s are easier to play to me, I can tell you that....especially for my index finder doing blues bends.

> What kind of "blues bends" are you doing with your index finger?

Do you really need an answer for this one, fat boy?

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Odin]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> > > > I use .010s on everything, mostly because they hold
together and hold a
> > > > tune better than .009s.
> > >
> > > You mean "stay in tune" or "hold a tune"?
> > >
> > > I don't understand what you mean there.
> >
> > Same thing- they stay in tune better and if you tune to
alternate tunings
> > they don't drift.
>
> I haven't experienced that at all..its more of properly
stretching the strings on the post to make it tune stable,
IMHO.
>
> So I guess I disagree.

You disagree with just about everything that just about
every more experienced guitarist says, so that's not
surprising.



> > I agree, but the thicker wound low string of a 46 sounds
much different to my ears than a 42.
>
> > Not enough to where it would ever matter in a band
context.
>
> I've already heard it in a band context, and I disagree
with you that it can't be heard.

But then again you hear lots of things that nobody else
hears. Like voices.



> Unless, of course, you can't hear it...and that's okay.

Thanks for your approval.

You're a joke, you know. You claim to hear the difference
between 9's and 10's in a live band situation yet you have
never played your guitar in a live band situation.



> > See above. You'll hear it in your bedroom, playing by
yourself. It won't
> > matter in a band context.
>
> See above.
>
> > Hmm...9s are easier to play to me, I can tell you
that....especially for my index finder doing blues bends.
>
> > You've been playing- what? 4 years?
>
> About 6.

Oh, well, then that's different. How many of those years
were spent playing outside of your bedroom with a band?




> >Play another 14 or so. It won't matter.
>
> Jeff Beck, for example, will switch to 9s from 10s in the
course of a tour because its easier on his fingers.
>
> So it DOES matter...just not to you.

Jeff Beck, for example, might play 2-3 hours per night for
250 nights in a row. Which would cause his fingers to be
considerably more stressed than yours, so he may have a
legitimate reason to switch to lighter strings. How many
hours per day are you putting in doing those index finger
blues bends?

[Odin]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> > > Hmm...9s are easier to play to me, I can tell you
that....especially for my index finder doing blues bends.
>
> > What kind of "blues bends" are you doing with your index
finger?
>
> Do you really need an answer for this one, fat boy?

Yes, I do, blues boy.

[Nobody]

Odin <res0jmoj@verizon.net> wrote in article <3f326a76$1@shknews01>...
>
> "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
>
> > > > Hmm...9s are easier to play to me, I can tell you
> that....especially for my index finder doing blues bends.
> >
> > > What kind of "blues bends" are you doing with your index
> finger?
> >
> > Do you really need an answer for this one, fat boy?
>
> Yes, I do, blues boy.

I believe I'll just let it remain a mystery.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Odin]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> > "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > > > Hmm...9s are easier to play to me, I can tell you
> > that....especially for my index finder doing blues
bends.
> > >
> > > > What kind of "blues bends" are you doing with your
index
> > finger?
> > >
> > > Do you really need an answer for this one, fat boy?
> >
> > Yes, I do, blues boy.
>
> I believe I'll just let it remain a mystery.

I believe it is a mystery why you claim to do "blues bends"
with your index finger, especially to the extent that it
requires switching to a lighter string gauge. I believe
that you're full of **** and don't know what you're talking
about. But please feel free to give some examples of "blues
bends" with the index finger that require light strings.
You really don't know when to shut up, do you? Every time
you spout off about something you reveal more and more of
your ignorance. Sad.

[John S. Shinal]

"Odin" wrote:

>I believe it is a mystery why you claim to do "blues bends"
>with your index finger, especially to the extent that it
>requires switching to a lighter string gauge.

Well, strictly a Strat hack here, but no kookery - I do blues
type bends with my index finger just to get off my overuse of the 3rd
finger always bending. I'm boring enough as it is. But I use .010s, my
guitar tech will attest to the manly height of my strings (well, until
my last setup, anyway), and I can do an acceptable bend with my 4th
finger too. I love finding something that feels weak or wrong when I
try it. I'll spend the next week on an awkward bend until I can get it
down. Finger independence is a cool thing.

But I sure don't need lighter strings for it. That's the
opposite of what I'm trying to achieve (strength without getting CTS).



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[miker]

> >I believe it is a mystery why you claim to do "blues bends"
> >with your index finger, especially to the extent that it
> >requires switching to a lighter string gauge.
>
> Well, strictly a Strat hack here, but no kookery - I do blues
> type bends with my index finger just to get off my overuse of the 3rd
> finger always bending.

I do bends with the first three all the time. Not so good (like "at all")
with pinky tho.

Thinking about it, first finger I more tend to pull (i.e. toward treble side
of neck). 2nd finger usually push. 3rd, both ways.

[Nobody]

miker <miker4nospamok@mindnospamokspring.com> wrote in article <bguiha$rkt$1@slb2.atl.mindspring.net>...
> > >I believe it is a mystery why you claim to do "blues bends"
> > >with your index finger, especially to the extent that it
> > >requires switching to a lighter string gauge.
> >
> > Well, strictly a Strat hack here, but no kookery - I do blues
> > type bends with my index finger just to get off my overuse of the 3rd
> > finger always bending.
>
> I do bends with the first three all the time. Not so good (like "at all")
> with pinky tho.

I use all four.


> Thinking about it, first finger I more tend to pull (i.e. toward treble side
> of neck). 2nd finger usually push. 3rd, both ways.

Depends on the string I am using, really, for me.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nunya Bidni]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35cec$b44ba740$fbc8580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
>
>
> Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article
<1%qYa.1751$Ih1.730795@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
>
> > > > I use .010s on everything, mostly because they hold together and
hold a
> > tune better than .009s.
> > >
> > > You mean "stay in tune" or "hold a tune"?
> > >
> > > I don't understand what you mean there.
> >
> > Same thing- they stay in tune better and if you tune to alternate
tunings
> > they don't drift.
>
> I haven't experienced that at all..its more of properly stretching the
strings on the post to make it tune stable, IMHO.
>
> So I guess I disagree.

Let's not pretend it's a revelation that you need to stretch a new set of
strings. Being the reigning RMMG King of Dropped Tuning (TM), it should be
patently obvious to you that if you bang on detuned strings, they'll drift
out of tune faster than strings tuned to normal pitch.


> > I agree, but the thicker wound low string of a 46 sounds much different
to my ears than a 42.
>
> > Not enough to where it would ever matter in a band context.
>
> I've already heard it in a band context, and I disagree with you that it
can't be heard.
>
> Unless, of course, you can't hear it...and that's okay.


The clinical term for that is "psychosomatic." Hope this helps.


> Jeff Beck, for example, will switch to 9s from 10s in the course of a tour
because its easier on his fingers.


I think you meant that the other way around, but hey, celebrate diversity,
dude.


-nyb

[Reign_Of_Error]

"Odin" <res0jmoj@verizon.net> wrote in message news:<3f328a3e@shknews01>...

>Every time
> you spout off about something you reveal more and more of
> your ignorance. Sad.

I must confess: I log into this group for the same reason one slows
down when passing a car accident. I don't post messages let alone get
involved in flame wars, but I really have to ask you guys a question:
what kind of satisfaction do you get out of flaming each other? Is it
really that fun or enriching to sit at your computer and spew venom
over something as inconsequential as your deeply held issues
pertaining to string guage? Please enlighten me, I can't understand it
for the life of me.

[Nobody]

Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article <g_AYa.2469$Ih1.831437@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...

> Let's not pretend it's a revelation that you need to stretch a new set of
> strings. Being the reigning RMMG King of Dropped Tuning (TM), it should be
> patently obvious to you that if you bang on detuned strings, they'll drift
> out of tune faster than strings tuned to normal pitch.>

Again, I disagree.

As I said, I haven't experienced that at all..its more of properly stretching the strings on the post to make it tune stable,
IMHO.

> The clinical term for that is "psychosomatic." Hope this helps.

And yours apparently must be "psychotic" as soon as you start with your pissy little comments.

Don't tell me what I hear and what I don't hear.

> Jeff Beck, for example, will switch to 9s from 10s in the course of a tour
> because its easier on his fingers.

> I think you meant that the other way around,

No..I meant it exactly as I wrote it.

>but hey, celebrate diversity, dude.
> -nyb

Well, I don't celebrate your intentions of coming out of the woodwork to talk **** to me with no honest attempt at civil
conversation.

DoOd.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nobody]

Odin <res0jmoj@verizon.net> wrote in article <3f328a3e@shknews01>...

> I believe it is a mystery why you claim to do "blues bends" with your index finger, especially to the extent that it requires
switching to a lighter string gauge.>

Before you start with your bull****, read close:

Despite your mental illness and what you think you may have read, I never said that using my index finger to bend strings *required
a lighter gauge.

>I believe that you're full of **** and don't know what you're talking about. But please feel free to give some examples of "blues
bends" with the index finger that require light strings. You really don't know when to shut up, do you? Every time you spout off
about something you reveal more and more of your ignorance. Sad.>

What's sad is that you are talking **** about me using my index finger to bend strings, and yet you don't have a clue as to what
it's all about.

Looks like you have some stuff to learn, but you won't shut up long enough to realize that your guitar knowledge and playing
ability is obviously limited if you don't even know how to use your index finger to bend strings.

Have a nice evening.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Odin]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> > Let's not pretend it's a revelation that you need to stretch a new set
of
> > strings. Being the reigning RMMG King of Dropped Tuning (TM), it
should be
> > patently obvious to you that if you bang on detuned strings, they'll
drift
> > out of tune faster than strings tuned to normal pitch.>
>
> Again, I disagree.

And again you would be wrong. I play 4 songs per gig in open G tuning (all
4 back to back) and I can tell you that a standard guitar tuned to a lower
pitch has a tendency to go out of tune faster than if it were tuned to
standard pitch. I'm speaking from lots of experience, not talking out my
ass like some bedroom wanker. HTH.



> As I said, I haven't experienced that at all..its more of properly
stretching the strings on the post to make it tune stable,
> IMHO.
>
> > The clinical term for that is "psychosomatic." Hope this helps.
>
> And yours apparently must be "psychotic" as soon as you start with your
pissy little comments.

And your is definitely bipolar.



> Don't tell me what I hear and what I don't hear.

Yes, there are enough voices in that empty head of yours already.



> > Jeff Beck, for example, will switch to 9s from 10s in the course of a
tour
> > because its easier on his fingers.
>
> > I think you meant that the other way around,
>
> No..I meant it exactly as I wrote it.

So Jeff Beck changes to heavier strings because it's easier on his fingers?
That makes about as much sense as anything you've said.

[Odin]

"Reign_Of_Error" <reign_of_error@hotmail.com> wrote in message

> >Every time
> > you spout off about something you reveal more and more of
> > your ignorance. Sad.
>
> I must confess: I log into this group for the same reason one slows
> down when passing a car accident. I don't post messages let alone get
> involved in flame wars, but I really have to ask you guys a question:
> what kind of satisfaction do you get out of flaming each other? Is it
> really that fun or enriching to sit at your computer and spew venom
> over something as inconsequential as your deeply held issues
> pertaining to string guage? Please enlighten me, I can't understand it
> for the life of me.

Polfus is the group punching bag that keeps begging for it. Sometimes we
oblige him.

[Odin]

"Polfus" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> > I believe it is a mystery why you claim to do "blues bends" with your
index finger, especially to the extent that it requires
> switching to a lighter string gauge.>
>
> Before you sta

Shut up.

[Odin]

"ryanm" <ryanm@fatchicksinpartyhats.com> wrote in message

> > So I went back to Gibson 9s from 10s a while ago...when I went to
having
> > my amp in a head and with this big-ass 2x12 cabinet:
> >
> > http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs/VerticalRectifier2x12.JPG
> >
> > ...the bass response and tone changed, and I found that I had to use a
> > smaller gauge low E to tame the bass.
> >
> Couldn't be a pair of 12s in a closed back cab that is putting too
much
> bass in your tone, could it? Or possibly the fact that you're detuned?
>
> Seriously, though, have you thought of moving to a 2x10 or something
> similar? Same great tone, less beefy low end. Although Aron has a 2x10
> closed Fender cab on his Tonemaster and it's still way too damn beefy.
>
> ryanm

Those Tonemaster cabs are 2x12's, and they're separate sealed enclosures
and waaaay bigger than most, so they have a lot of bass. Too much
sometimes.

[Nunya Bidni]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35d48$429cb2e0$74c4580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
>
>
> Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article
<g_AYa.2469$Ih1.831437@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
>
> > Let's not pretend it's a revelation that you need to stretch a new set
of
> > strings. Being the reigning RMMG King of Dropped Tuning (TM), it should
be
> > patently obvious to you that if you bang on detuned strings, they'll
drift
> > out of tune faster than strings tuned to normal pitch.>
>
> Again, I disagree.
>
> As I said, I haven't experienced that at all..its more of properly
stretching the strings on the post to make it tune stable,
> IMHO.

Go play two hours at a bar. Anywhere. Then come back and disagree.


> > The clinical term for that is "psychosomatic." Hope this helps.
>
> And yours apparently must be "psychotic" as soon as you start with your
pissy little comments.
>
> Don't tell me what I hear and what I don't hear.

Pissy? Accurate. Go play for two hours in front of people, at gig volumes.
Anywhere. Then tell me "what you hear and what you don't hear." There's a
world outside your apartment- go play in it.




> > Jeff Beck, for example, will switch to 9s from 10s in the course of a
tour
> > because its easier on his fingers.
>
> > I think you meant that the other way around,
>
> No..I meant it exactly as I wrote it.

Brilliant. Because common sense decrees if your fingers are getting
fatigued, you want to change to heavier guage strings.

But hey, I'm sure you read it on the Internet somewhere, so it must be true.

-nyb

[ryanm]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35c91$c653cd60$6ba1580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
>
> So I went back to Gibson 9s from 10s a while ago...when I went to having
> my amp in a head and with this big-ass 2x12 cabinet:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs/VerticalRectifier2x12.JPG
>
> ...the bass response and tone changed, and I found that I had to use a
> smaller gauge low E to tame the bass.
>
Couldn't be a pair of 12s in a closed back cab that is putting too much
bass in your tone, could it? Or possibly the fact that you're detuned?

Seriously, though, have you thought of moving to a 2x10 or something
similar? Same great tone, less beefy low end. Although Aron has a 2x10
closed Fender cab on his Tonemaster and it's still way too damn beefy.

ryanm

[ryanm]

"Odin" <res0jmoj@REMOVEverizon.net> wrote in message
news:_BDYa.1569$bM6.714@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
>
> Those Tonemaster cabs are 2x12's, and they're separate sealed enclosures
> and waaaay bigger than most, so they have a lot of bass. Too much
> sometimes.
>
Are they 12s? Well, there you go...

ryanm

[Tukin Fourscan \(and seven years ago\)]

"Odin" <res0jmoj@REMOVEverizon.net> wrote

> Those Tonemaster cabs are 2x12's, and they're separate sealed enclosures
> and waaaay bigger than most, so they have a lot of bass. Too much
> sometimes.

Thy brother's factchecker, gaddamn.

--
Toucan, four can
Hey man jam
the Tou-Wang Clan
Reply to me @ toucan@mailblocks.com

[Nobody]

Odin <res0jmoj@REMOVEverizon.net> wrote in article <EtDYa.1556$bM6.771@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>...
>
> "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
>
> > > Let's not pretend it's a revelation that you need to stretch a new set
> of
> > > strings. Being the reigning RMMG King of Dropped Tuning (TM), it
> should be
> > > patently obvious to you that if you bang on detuned strings, they'll
> drift
> > > out of tune faster than strings tuned to normal pitch.>
> >
> > Again, I disagree.
>
> And again you would be wrong. I play 4 songs per gig in open G tuning (all
> 4 back to back) and I can tell you that a standard guitar tuned to a lower
> pitch has a tendency to go out of tune faster than if it were tuned to
> standard pitch. I'm speaking from lots of experience, not talking out my
> ass like some bedroom wanker. HTH.

It remains increasingly difficult to believe you actually know what *you* are doing, especially given the fact that you don't even
know how to bend strings with your index finger.

So I don't care what you believe or not, fat boy.


> > > Jeff Beck, for example, will switch to 9s from 10s in the course of a tour because its easier on his fingers.

> > > I think you meant that the other way around,
> >
> > No..I meant it exactly as I wrote it.
>
> So Jeff Beck changes to heavier strings because it's easier on his fingers?
> That makes about as much sense as anything you've said.

And looks like you cannot read either:

If one switches TO 9s FROM 10s, you figure it out.

How is that switching to "heavier strings"?

You are really stupid, Odim.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nobody]

Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article <z9EYa.2515$Ih1.863929@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...

> G

Oh shut up already.

> Brilliant. Because common sense decrees if your fingers are getting fatigued, you want to change to heavier guage strings.
> But hey, I'm sure you read it on the Internet somewhere, so it must be true.
> -nyb

Hey idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is that switching to "heavier guage strings"?


--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nobody]

Odin <res0jmoj@REMOVEverizon.net> wrote in article <mvDYa.1557$bM6.334@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>...

> Polfus doesn't exist, but it doesn't stop assholes like me to use a screenname as a punching bag and I keep begging for it.
Sometimes my paranoia makes me obsess over him, but mainly it's just me being a self-admitted asshole.>

Well said.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nobody]

ryanm <ryanm@fatchicksinpartyhats.com> wrote in article <vj60oo5ttdubd3@corp.supernews.com>...
> "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
> news:01c35c91$c653cd60$6ba1580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
> >
> > So I went back to Gibson 9s from 10s a while ago...when I went to having
> > my amp in a head and with this big-ass 2x12 cabinet:
> >
> > http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs/VerticalRectifier2x12.JPG
> >
> > ...the bass response and tone changed, and I found that I had to use a
> > smaller gauge low E to tame the bass.
> >
> Couldn't be a pair of 12s in a closed back cab that is putting too much
> bass in your tone, could it? Or possibly the fact that you're detuned?
>
> Seriously, though, have you thought of moving to a 2x10 or something
> similar? Same great tone, less beefy low end. Although Aron has a 2x10
> closed Fender cab on his Tonemaster and it's still way too damn beefy.
>
> ryanm

Thanks for your concern, but everything is fine.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nunya Bidni]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35d7d$690c1300$78c3580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
>
>
> Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article
<z9EYa.2515$Ih1.863929@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
>
> > G
>
> Oh shut up already.
>
> > Brilliant. Because common sense decrees if your fingers are getting
fatigued, you want to change to heavier guage strings.
> > But hey, I'm sure you read it on the Internet somewhere, so it must be
true.
> > -nyb
>
> Hey idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is that switching to
"heavier guage strings"?

Go back and reread your post, Einstein- that's not what you said.

-nyb

[Robert Barker]

"Odin" <res0jmoj@REMOVEverizon.net> wrote in message
news:ewDYa.1559$bM6.1052@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
>
> "Polfus" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
>
> > > I believe it is a mystery why you claim to do "blues bends" with your
> index finger, especially to the extent that it requires
> > switching to a lighter string gauge.>
> >
> > Before you sta
>
> Shut up.
>
>
To be fair to Jason, I do bends with my index finger all the time...and
vibrato, too...(or is that tremolo...heh) but for the life of me, I can't
distinguish between a 'country' bend, or a 'blues' bend....please help.
Thanks. ;+)

[Odin]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> > > ...the bass response and tone changed, and I found
that I had to use a
> > > smaller gauge low E to tame the bass.
> > >
> > Couldn't be a pair of 12s in a closed back cab that
is putting too much
> > bass in your tone, could it? Or possibly the fact that
you're detuned?
> >
> > Seriously, though, have you thought of moving to a
2x10 or something
> > similar? Same great tone, less beefy low end. Although
Aron has a 2x10
> > closed Fender cab on his Tonemaster and it's still way
too damn beefy.
> >
> > ryanm
>
> Thanks for your concern, but everything is fine.

Contrary to your statement, everything is *not* fine.
You're off your meds again and it's showing.

[Jeff Liberatore]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35c91$c653cd60$6ba1580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...

> Good thing is, it sounds great still with 9s, and better than 10s did to
my ears now.

> Wild.

> Any similar experiences?

There's a guitar in my house right now tuned to C (one of my sons guitars).
It has 12's on it. It's still easier to play than my standard pitch 10's. I
plugged that thing into one of my Marshalls and it was ripping with those
12's. It was through a 4X12 and I can't EVEN imagine getting as heavy and
definitive sound if that guitar had 9's on it. The one way to get that
ripping sound is attack. The heavier the strings the more tension, the more
tension, the more attack availabe, the more attack available, the more input
to the amp and the more aggressive sounding. (IF the power tubes can take
it, that is).

I think you're just not used to being around an amp that can rip your
****ing head off. Those bands you like are getting those sounds from ripping
ass loud amps turned up loud! They are playing aggressively, and I'd bet
that they ain't using 9's, because them things would just lay on the guitar
like a rubber bands and you'd have to play like a sissy boy so the thing
wouldn't go sharp on you... Those strings need to be tight to get that
sound.

I'm not trying to start something with you Jason, but you're leaving a LOT
on the table with that set up.

So, are you playing blues or heavy stuff in that tuning? I could see playing
heavy stuff in C, but not blues. But either way I can't see using 9's tuned
down to C.

Have you noticed that they are coming out with amps that are specifically
designed to handle the lower frequencies of dropped tunings. There have been
modifications made to the preamp, power amps and speakers and cabs. You are
probably pushing those little power tubes (EL84's??) into submission before
your speakers are being hurt. EL 84's et al just can't handle the input. Me
thinks yer power tubes are taking a dump, not the speaker.

Jeff

[John S. Shinal]

"Jeff Liberatore" wrote:

>Have you noticed that they are coming out with amps that are specifically
>designed to handle the lower frequencies of dropped tunings. There have been
>modifications made to the preamp, power amps and speakers and cabs.

It's interesting, innit ?

I heard the metaldoods talking about how Marshalls were flabby
on the low end with detuned or 7 string guitars, and that's why they
liked solid state for heavily fuzzy stuff. The Mesa deep 4x12s are a
different animal than Marshall 4x12s, too.

But it seems like a properly set up SuperBass would address
all those issues, and then some. Maybe it's the JCM900s that are
flabby and not the vintage iron.

The one I can't figure is that new Marshall hybrid stack. It's
what, 400W ? Supposedly for headroom - of a heavily saturated tone. I
think they may mean "transient & peak response" but the marketing guys
got a hold of the description. Anyway, it's an odd and powerful amp.



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Odin]

"Jeff Liberatore" <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote in
message

> > Good thing is, it sounds great still with 9s, and better
than 10s did to
> my ears now.
>
> > Wild.
>
> > Any similar experiences?
>
> There's a guitar in my house right now tuned to C (one of
my sons guitars).
> It has 12's on it. It's still easier to play than my
standard pitch 10's. I
> plugged that thing into one of my Marshalls and it was
ripping with those
> 12's. It was through a 4X12 and I can't EVEN imagine
getting as heavy and
> definitive sound if that guitar had 9's on it. The one way
to get that
> ripping sound is attack. The heavier the strings the more
tension, the more
> tension, the more attack availabe, the more attack
available, the more input
> to the amp and the more aggressive sounding. (IF the power
tubes can take
> it, that is).

An EL84 amp is the last amp in the world that I'd run a
detuned humbucker guitar into. If I was tuning to C and
running humbuckers I'd want 6L6's at a bare minimum and
probably KT88's. A Hiwatt might work though. Otherwise I'd
probably get a VHT 100 watt head, tightest and fastest
transients of any amp I've played. ****ing brutal when you
crank it up.


> I think you're just not used to being around an amp that
can rip your
> ****ing head off. Those bands you like are getting those
sounds from ripping
> ass loud amps turned up loud! They are playing
aggressively, and I'd bet
> that they ain't using 9's, because them things would just
lay on the guitar
> like a rubber bands and you'd have to play like a sissy
boy so the thing
> wouldn't go sharp on you... Those strings need to be tight
to get that
> sound.

I'd literally pull those 9's off the fretboard dropped to C.


> I'm not trying to start something with you Jason, but
you're leaving a LOT
> on the table with that set up.
>
> So, are you playing blues or heavy stuff in that tuning? I
could see playing
> heavy stuff in C, but not blues. But either way I can't
see using 9's tuned
> down to C.

It's possible I guess, but the tightness and balls won't be
there. Tightness in dropped C is a relevant term anyway, as
most of these new drop tuning bands have an extremely flabby
guitar tone, but that's just due to the combination of Mesa
amps and low tunings and humbuckers. But it can be
minimized with the right power amp section and some heavy
gauge strings. When I drop my 10's or 11's to open G the
low E string is pretty much worthless and that's only
dropped one step. I don't like flabby tone though, so maybe
I'm overly sensitive about it.


> Have you noticed that they are coming out with amps that
are specifically
> designed to handle the lower frequencies of dropped
tunings. There have been
> modifications made to the preamp, power amps and speakers
and cabs. You are
> probably pushing those little power tubes (EL84's??) into
submission before
> your speakers are being hurt. EL 84's et al just can't
handle the input. Me
> thinks yer power tubes are taking a dump, not the speaker.

The EL84s are definitely taking a dump if the master volume
is up above 1/3 with humbuckers. That's part of the cool
factor with EL84s, the natural compression.

[Odin]

"John S. Shinal" <jshinal_REMOVE_THIS_PART@mindspring.com>
wrote in message

> >Have you noticed that they are coming out with amps that
are specifically
> >designed to handle the lower frequencies of dropped
tunings. There have been
> >modifications made to the preamp, power amps and speakers
and cabs.
>
> It's interesting, innit ?
>
> I heard the metaldoods talking about how Marshalls were
flabby
> on the low end with detuned or 7 string guitars, and
that's why they
> liked solid state for heavily fuzzy stuff. The Mesa deep
4x12s are a
> different animal than Marshall 4x12s, too.

I had a Marshall 1960AV and a Mesa Rectifier cab at the same
time and the Mesa was definitely deeper and had more chunk,
but I wouldn't say it was any tighter. This was with both a
Mesa Triple Rectifier head and a Marshall TSL100 head. I'd
say the JCM800 cabs were as tight as any.


> But it seems like a properly set up SuperBass would
address
> all those issues, and then some. Maybe it's the JCM900s
that are
> flabby and not the vintage iron.

Any old JMP or plexi (USA version with 6L6's) without a
master volume would be the picture of tightness. But you'd
need a pedal or rack effect out front to get the
skullfukkin' distortion.


> The one I can't figure is that new Marshall hybrid stack.
It's
> what, 400W ? Supposedly for headroom - of a heavily
saturated tone. I
> think they may mean "transient & peak response" but the
marketing guys
> got a hold of the description. Anyway, it's an odd and
powerful amp.

It's a solid state POS. Those SS 400 watts are about the
equivalent to 30 tube watts most of the time. The Washburn
"Dimebag" stack with four 12's and one 15 is 300 watts of
solid state crap and couldn't hang with a JCM800 50 watt
2x12 combo.

[Jeff Liberatore]

"John S. Shinal" <jshinal_REMOVE_THIS_PART@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3f33c1c5.271692837@text-west.newsfeeds.com...

> The one I can't figure is that new Marshall hybrid stack. It's
> what, 400W ? Supposedly for headroom - of a heavily saturated tone. I
> think they may mean "transient & peak response" but the marketing guys
> got a hold of the description. Anyway, it's an odd and powerful amp.

Supposedly 350 watts and youNEED the cab with the head to do all the damage.
I took my son to try out amps about a month ago. Tried all the Mesa's and
Marshalls, Peavey XXX, one Bogner and that new Line 6 silver metal head
thing. he like the Dual Rec the best by FAR... He couldn't lift the 4x12
Mesa cab to save his life. ****, he probably couldn't lift the head!

Jeff

[Jeff Liberatore]

"Odin" <res0jmoj@verizon.net> wrote in message news:3f33c773@shknews01...
>
> "Jeff Liberatore" <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote in
>The heavier the strings the more
> tension, the more
> tension, the more attack availabe, the more attack
> available, the more input
> to the amp and the more aggressive sounding. (IF the power
> tubes can take
> it, that is).

> An EL84 amp is the last amp in the world that I'd run a
> detuned humbucker guitar into. If I was tuning to C and
> running humbuckers I'd want 6L6's at a bare minimum and
> probably KT88's...

Yessiree... That's why you need 3 amps!!!

Jeff

[Nil]

On 08 Aug 2003, "Jeff Liberatore" <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote
in news:Z0PYa.48906$hc.7099@fe3.columbus.rr.com:

> Have you noticed that they are coming out with amps that are
> specifically designed to handle the lower frequencies of dropped
> tunings. There have been modifications made to the preamp, power
> amps and speakers and cabs.

I don't think it was designed for that specifically, but there was a
Rivera model (endorsed by watzisname from Toto) that was a huge double
4x12 stack that also incorporated a sub-woofer.

A quick look on their site doesn't show it, so maybe it's discontinued.
I also don't see watzisname, so maybe he and Rivera had a falling out.

[Nobody]

Jeff Liberatore <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote in article <Z0PYa.48906$hc.7099@fe3.columbus.rr.com>...
>
> "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
> news:01c35c91$c653cd60$6ba1580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
>
> > Good thing is, it sounds great still with 9s, and better than 10s did to
> my ears now.
>
> > Wild.
>
> > Any similar experiences?
>
> There's a guitar in my house right now tuned to C (one of my sons guitars).
> It has 12's on it. It's still easier to play than my standard pitch 10's.>

Your findings are interesting, Jeff. I tried 12s as well, and I didn't feel what you say.

Let's just take one single string as an example:

So that means on one, the high E is a *12* tuned to D.

And on your standard tuned, the high E has a *10* tuned to E.

Hmmm..

>I plugged that thing into one of my Marshalls and it was ripping with those
> 12's. It was through a 4X12 and I can't EVEN imagine getting as heavy and
> definitive sound if that guitar had 9's on it.>
>The one way to get that ripping sound is attack. The heavier the strings the more tension, the more
> tension, the more attack availabe, the more attack available, the more input
> to the amp and the more aggressive sounding. (IF the power tubes can take
> it, that is).
>
> I think you're just not used to being around an amp that can rip your
> ****ing head off.>

You are welcome to think so, obviously.

>Those bands you like are getting those sounds from ripping
> ass loud amps turned up loud! They are playing aggressively, and I'd bet
> that they ain't using 9's, because them things would just lay on the guitar
> like a rubber bands and you'd have to play like a sissy boy so the thing
> wouldn't go sharp on you... Those strings need to be tight to get that
> sound.

Wow...all this from playing your son's guitar!

> I'm not trying to start something with you Jason,

Sure you are!

>but you're leaving a LOT on the table with that set up.

I was just thinking the same thing of you, Jeff.

> So, are you playing blues or heavy stuff in that tuning?

Yes.

>I could see playing heavy stuff in C, but not blues.

It's easy, man...what's the damn mystery here with you people that don't understand that tuning is one thing...what you play is
another!

>But either way I can't see using 9's tuned down to C.

In all fairness, you don't have to.

> Have you noticed that they are coming out with amps that are specifically
> designed to handle the lower frequencies of dropped tunings.

Yes.

>There have been modifications made to the preamp, power amps and speakers and cabs. You are
> probably pushing those little power tubes (EL84's??)

The "little power tubes" are the same ones in a Vox AC30.

>into submission before your speakers are being hurt.

I never mentioned power tube distortion in this thread.

>EL 84's et al just can't handle the input. Me thinks yer power tubes are taking a dump, not the speaker.
> Jeff

I'll go tell my NOS Sylvania 6BQ5s you said that.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nobody]

Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article <03MYa.2605$Ih1.952873@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
>
> "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
> news:01c35d7d$690c1300$78c3580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
> >
> >
> > Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article
> <z9EYa.2515$Ih1.863929@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
> >
> > > G
> >
> > Oh shut up already.
> >
> > > Brilliant. Because common sense decrees if your fingers are getting
> fatigued, you want to change to heavier guage strings.
> > > But hey, I'm sure you read it on the Internet somewhere, so it must be
> true.
> > > -nyb
> >
> > Hey idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is that switching to
> "heavier guage strings"?
>
> Go back and reread your post, Einstein- that's not what you said.
>
> -nyb

I don't need to "reread" my post....that remains your task since you have a serious problem.

Here it is for you to ponder:

"Jeff Beck, for example, will switch to 9s from 10s in the course of a tour because its easier on his fingers."

So like I asked, you idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is that switching to "heavier guage strings"?


--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Charlie Escher]

Nil wrote:

> On 08 Aug 2003, "Jeff Liberatore" <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote
> in news:Z0PYa.48906$hc.7099@fe3.columbus.rr.com:
>
>
>>Have you noticed that they are coming out with amps that are
>>specifically designed to handle the lower frequencies of dropped
>>tunings. There have been modifications made to the preamp, power
>>amps and speakers and cabs.
>
>
> I don't think it was designed for that specifically, but there was a
> Rivera model (endorsed by watzisname from Toto) that was a huge double
> 4x12 stack that also incorporated a sub-woofer.
>
> A quick look on their site doesn't show it, so maybe it's discontinued.
> I also don't see watzisname, so maybe he and Rivera had a falling out.

The Los Lobottom, that'd be. I heard it was designed for Korn, FWIW, but
Lukather is also featured in the advertizing. It's here:
http://www.rivera.com/prod_lukeseries.htm

It's unclear if the bottom module is discontinued, or just the Bonehead top.

Anyhow, lots of those deWds have been looking at my bass stack, asking
if that would work well for drop guitar. 2 X 450 watts? Sure, go for it!
NRLOL...

.cE

[Nil]

On 08 Aug 2003, Charlie Escher <charliejane@gorge.net> wrote in
news:vj7m9u1ern655@corp.supernews.com:

> The Los Lobottom, that'd be. I heard it was designed for Korn,
> FWIW, but Lukather is also featured in the advertizing. It's here:
> http://www.rivera.com/prod_lukeseries.htm

Interesting that although the page name is "prod_lukeseries.htm",
there's no mention there of Steve Lukather! Makes me think he withdrew
his endorsement for some reason.

[Nobody]

Jeff Liberatore <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote

>But either way I can't see using 9's tuned down to C.

I'll try to explain this really clearly, Jeff:

Have you heard of a guitarist named Tony Iommi?

See....he was with a group called Black Sabbath, and he used even lighter strings than I do, and he also regularly tuned down to
C#.

He said that when he started out, he had to use a banjo set's high string..an 8...for the 1st. This was due to an injury he had to
his fingers ( he chopped off the ends of his right hand's middle and index finger at 18 in a machine press ), and he had to use
very light strings because he had no fingertips on a few of his fingers. He says in The Guitar Magazine, Dec 2000, that " Back when
I had the accident you couldn't get really light gauge strings, you could only get heavy strings, so I couldn't bend anything and
it hurt like hell to just fret them as well. So I came up with the idea of using a lighter set so it would be less effort for me to
bend them....So I ended up making my own sets by combining the lightest set available and a banjo string. What I would do is drop
the low E out of the set and make the A string the low E and so on."

Yet despite the use of very light strings, his TONE remains one of the most massive in the history of recorded rock and roll.

In fact, he says in The Guitar Magazine, Dec 2000, that..." I've been tuning down to C# for the best part of 30 years [ low to high
C#, F#, B, E, G#, C# ] ".

So now you need an example of what can be done with this, despite you not being able to even " see 9's tuned down to C", or your
willingness to "..bet that they ain't using 9's, because them things would just lay on the guitar like a rubber bands and you'd
have to play like a sissy boy..." .

A great one to allow you to hear where I am coming from is a tune called "Sweet Leaf", from the Black Sabbath album Masters Of
Reality.

After you listen to that, get back to me and we'll go from there.

Have a good one...

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Charlie Escher]

Nil wrote:
> On 08 Aug 2003, Charlie Escher <charliejane@gorge.net> wrote in
> news:vj7m9u1ern655@corp.supernews.com:
>
>
>>The Los Lobottom, that'd be. I heard it was designed for Korn,
>>FWIW, but Lukather is also featured in the advertizing. It's here:
>>http://www.rivera.com/prod_lukeseries.htm
>
>
> Interesting that although the page name is "prod_lukeseries.htm",
> there's no mention there of Steve Lukather! Makes me think he withdrew
> his endorsement for some reason.

Looks that way, doesn't it? Might be moot if it's discontinued, in any
case. Did you notice the total weight of that rig? 255 pounds, or 355
with a full stack. No wonder guys are eyeing my bass rig.


.cE

[John S. Shinal]

"Jeff Liberatore" wrote:

>I took my son to try out amps about a month ago. Tried all the Mesa's and
>Marshalls, Peavey XXX,

What did you think of the XXX ? I haven't tried one out at
volume.



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[John S. Shinal]

"Jeff Liberatore" wrote:

>Yessiree... That's why you need 3 amps!!!

This is what kills me about the big hogs, onstage they have an
AC30, a Twin and a Bluesbreaker or the boutique equivalent of them.
Must be nice. It's no wonder I've been driven to silicon heresy.



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[John S. Shinal]

Xref: news.newshosting.com rec.music.makers.guitar:134201

Charlie Escher wrote:

>Anyhow, lots of those deWds have been looking at my bass stack, asking
>if that would work well for drop guitar. 2 X 450 watts? Sure, go for it!
>NRLOL...

Tried one channel on my Crown with clean guitar last week -
into a HD 10" - about 320 watts. Sounded like poo, but the low E was
spankin'.

BTW Charlie, I tried to reply/email you a while back about the
HF drivers but it bounced - I'll try again this weekend.



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Odin]

"Jeff Liberatore" <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote in
message

> > An EL84 amp is the last amp in the world that I'd run a
> > detuned humbucker guitar into. If I was tuning to C and
> > running humbuckers I'd want 6L6's at a bare minimum and
> > probably KT88's...
>
> Yessiree... That's why you need 3 amps!!!

3, is that all?

[Odin]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> > There's a guitar in my house right now tuned to C (one
of my sons guitars).
> > It has 12's on it. It's still easier to play than my
standard pitch 10's.>
>
> Your findings are interesting, Jeff. I tried 12s as well,
and I didn't feel what you say.
>
> Let's just take one single string as an example:
>
> So that means on one, the high E is a *12* tuned to D.
>
> And on your standard tuned, the high E has a *10* tuned to
E.

Exactly. The fact that it is detuned a full step makes a
*huge* difference in string tension. A 10 at standard pitch
will offer more resistance than a 12 detuned a full step.
That's physics at work.



> >There have been modifications made to the preamp, power
amps and speakers and cabs. You are
> > probably pushing those little power tubes (EL84's??)
>
> The "little power tubes" are the same ones in a Vox AC30.

*Exactly*! The Vox AC30 is probably known for it's EL84
compression more than anything else. It is the last amp in
the world thaty someone would use if they were going to
detune to C, unless they wanted a bucket of mush.



> >into submission before your speakers are being hurt.
>
> I never mentioned power tube distortion in this thread.

You don't have to, with EL84's you're hearing some power
tube compression at all but the absolute lowest volumes.
And if you're running the volume that low then you're either
(a) using the amp as a headphone amp or (b) playing only at
bedroom volumes.


> >EL 84's et al just can't handle the input. Me thinks yer
power tubes are taking a dump, not the speaker.
> > Jeff
>
> I'll go tell my NOS Sylvania 6BQ5s you said that.

Talking to tubes now, are you? It doesn't matter what EL84
you stick in there, EL84's are all about compression and
power tube distortion. They sound best when cranked and not
polluted with any preamp distortion. When combined with
preamp distortion EL84's quickly turn to buzz and mush.
Used correctly they are one sweet sounding tube, used wrong
they sound awful.

[Odin]

"Polfus" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> Jeff Liberatore <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote
>
> >But either way I can't see using 9's tuned down to C.
>
> I'll try to explain this really poorly, Jeff:
>
> Have you heard of a guitarist named Polfus?
>
> See....he was with a group called, well he never actually
played with a band but he also regularly tuned down to
> C.
>
> He said that when he started out, he had to use a banjo
set's high string..an 8...for the 1st. This was due to the
fact that he was
> a wimp and he had to use very light strings because he had
no finger strength in his fingers. He says in "I couldn't
bend anything > and it hurt like hell to just fret them as
well. So I came up with the idea of using a lighter set so
it would be less effort for me to
> bend them....So I ended up making my own sets by combining
the lightest set available and a banjo string. What I would
do is
> drop the low E out of the set and make the A string the
low E and so on."
>
> And possibly due to the use of very light strings, his
TONE remains one of the flabbiest and nastiest in the
history of recorded
> crappy rock and roll.
>
> In fact, he says that..." I've been tuning down to C for
the best part of 3 years [ low to high
> C, F, Bb, Eb, G, C ] ".
>
> So now you need an example of what can be done with this,
despite you not being able to even " see 9's tuned down to
C", or > your willingness to "..bet that they ain't using
9's, because them things would just lay on the guitar like a
rubber bands and you'd
> have to play like a sissy boy..." .
>
> A great one to allow you to hear where I am coming from is
a tune called "Downshift", from Polfus' only venture in
recording.
>
> After you listen to that, get back to me and we'll go from
there.
>
> Have a good one...
>
> --
> Polfus
> http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs


Sad

[Nunya Bidni]

"Nunya Bidni" <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in message
news:03MYa.2605$Ih1.952873@newssrv26.news.prodigy. com...
>
> "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
> news:01c35d7d$690c1300$78c3580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
> >
> >
> > Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article
> <z9EYa.2515$Ih1.863929@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
> >
> > > G
> >
> > Oh shut up already.
> >
> > > Brilliant. Because common sense decrees if your fingers are getting
> fatigued, you want to change to heavier guage strings.
> > > But hey, I'm sure you read it on the Internet somewhere, so it must be
> true.
> > > -nyb
> >
> > Hey idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is that switching to
> "heavier guage strings"?
>
> Go back and reread your post, Einstein- that's not what you said.
>
> -nyb

To be fair, I need to stop reading Usenet early in the morning. I misread
Jason/Polfus/Tim/Nobody's statement initially. Yes, to .009s from .010s
will be slightly slighter. That said, Mr. Beck is playing 2-3 hours a
night, 4-5 nights a week when he's on tour. Certainly not what I'd call
bedroom rocker or cover band rocker duty.

[Nunya Bidni]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35dcf$2441a080$2fc8580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
>
>
> Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article
<03MYa.2605$Ih1.952873@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
> >
> > "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
> > news:01c35d7d$690c1300$78c3580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
> > >
> > >
> > > Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article
> > <z9EYa.2515$Ih1.863929@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
> > >
> > > > G
> > >
> > > Oh shut up already.
> > >
> > > > Brilliant. Because common sense decrees if your fingers are getting
> > fatigued, you want to change to heavier guage strings.
> > > > But hey, I'm sure you read it on the Internet somewhere, so it must
be
> > true.
> > > > -nyb
> > >
> > > Hey idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is that switching to
> > "heavier guage strings"?
> >
> > Go back and reread your post, Einstein- that's not what you said.
> >
> > -nyb
>
> I don't need to "reread" my post....that remains your task since you have
a serious problem.
>
> Here it is for you to ponder:
>
> "Jeff Beck, for example, will switch to 9s from 10s in the course of a
tour because its easier on his fingers."
>
> So like I asked, you idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is that
switching to "heavier guage strings"?


I've already corrected myself in another post- I misread what you said.

Now let's see how many years you ride it out. Look at the thread title, pay
close attention to the word "minutia" and remember what it means. Remember
it means about that much to a guitarist with some time on the instrument.
Even Mr. Beck. I'll guarantee that he's not crying into his sleeve if he
plays one night too many on those huge, heavy .010s.

Go hook up with some old jazz guys and ask them what guages they played in
the '50s. Just like on an acoustic, .012s were considered light strings
then.

-nyb

[Nobody]

Odin <res0jmoj@verizon.net> wrote in article <3f33f18b@shknews01>...

> > Let's just take one single string as an example:
> >
> > So that means on one, the high E is a *12* tuned to D.
> >
> > And on your standard tuned, the high E has a *10* tuned to
> E.
>
> Exactly. The fact that it is detuned a full step makes a
> *huge* difference in string tension. A 10 at standard pitch
> will offer more resistance than a 12 detuned a full step.
> That's physics at work.

How about some support for your theory regarding these tunings and the string tension...with a Les Paul, of course.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs












>
>
>
> > >There have been modifications made to the preamp, power
> amps and speakers and cabs. You are
> > > probably pushing those little power tubes (EL84's??)
> >
> > The "little power tubes" are the same ones in a Vox AC30.
>
> *Exactly*! The Vox AC30 is probably known for it's EL84
> compression more than anything else. It is the last amp in
> the world thaty someone would use if they were going to
> detune to C, unless they wanted a bucket of mush.
>
>
>
> > >into submission before your speakers are being hurt.
> >
> > I never mentioned power tube distortion in this thread.
>
> You don't have to, with EL84's you're hearing some power
> tube compression at all but the absolute lowest volumes.
> And if you're running the volume that low then you're either
> (a) using the amp as a headphone amp or (b) playing only at
> bedroom volumes.
>
>
> > >EL 84's et al just can't handle the input. Me thinks yer
> power tubes are taking a dump, not the speaker.
> > > Jeff
> >
> > I'll go tell my NOS Sylvania 6BQ5s you said that.
>
> Talking to tubes now, are you? It doesn't matter what EL84
> you stick in there, EL84's are all about compression and
> power tube distortion. They sound best when cranked and not
> polluted with any preamp distortion. When combined with
> preamp distortion EL84's quickly turn to buzz and mush.
> Used correctly they are one sweet sounding tube, used wrong
> they sound awful.
>
>
>

[Nobody]

Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article <9YSYa.2716$Ih1.1031248@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...

> > > Hey idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is that switching to
> > "heavier guage strings"?
> >
> > Go back and reread your post, Einstein- that's not what you said.
> >
> > -nyb
>
> To be fair, I need to stop reading Usenet early in the morning. I misread ( now check this out for continuing to talk **** )
Jason/Polfus/Tim/Nobody's statement initially. Yes, to .009s from .010s will be slightly slighter, and I was wrong as hell when I
called him "einstein" and told him to go reread his own post. But, even though I was wrong and jumped all over Jason, I will not
apologize for being an asshole. That said, Mr. Beck is playing 2-3 hours a night, 4-5 nights a week when he's on tour. Certainly
not what I'd call bedroom rocker or cover band rocker duty. And that is beside the point, because the only posts I have made in
three days are about Jason and trying to prove some bull**** point in a pissing contest when he started an honest thread trying to
talk about music and gear.>


You were wrong, and looks like you can't handle it.

You can go talk to someone else, 'cause you aren't worth the time.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nobody]

Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article <S1TYa.2720$Ih1.1032179@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...

> > > > > Brilliant. Because common sense decrees if your fingers are getting
> > > fatigued, you want to change to heavier guage strings.
> > > > > But hey, I'm sure you read it on the Internet somewhere, so it must
> be
> > > true.
> > > > > -nyb
> > > >
> > > > Hey idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is that switching to
> > > "heavier guage strings"?
> > >
> > > Go back and reread your post, Einstein- that's not what you said.
> > >
> > > -nyb
> >
> > I don't need to "reread" my post....that remains your task since you have
> a serious problem.
> >
> > Here it is for you to ponder:
> >
> > "Jeff Beck, for example, will switch to 9s from 10s in the course of a
> tour because its easier on his fingers."
> >
> > So like I asked, you idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is that
> switching to "heavier guage strings"?
>
>
> I've already corrected myself in another post- I misread what you said.

So how about apologizing for the bull****, instead of writing some *more* **** to follow your own agenda?


> Now let's see how many years you ride it out. Look at the thread title, pay
> close attention to the word "minutia" and remember what it means. Remember
> it means about that much to a guitarist with some time on the instrument.
> Even Mr. Beck. I'll guarantee that he's not crying into his sleeve if he
> plays one night too many on those huge, heavy .010s.
>
> Go hook up with some old jazz guys and ask them what guages they played in
> the '50s. Just like on an acoustic, .012s were considered light strings
> then.
>
> -nyb

[Atlas]

x-no-archive: yes

On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 17:27:31 GMT, Nil <rednoise0@lycos.com> wrote:

>Interesting that although the page name is "prod_lukeseries.htm",
>there's no mention there of Steve Lukather! Makes me think he withdrew
>his endorsement for some reason.

Lukather and Paul Rivera had a huge blowout about 2 years ago.
Right after that, Rivera ****canned the Lukather Bonehead amp. I
think he's now using CAE heads.




Atlas

[Nunya Bidni]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35de7$08085c20$13a0580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...

Don't edit my posts, you pathetic wannabe.

[Nunya Bidni]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35de7$4705d920$13a0580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
>
>
> Nunya Bidni <bothersomeoneelse@home.com> wrote in article
<S1TYa.2720$Ih1.1032179@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
>
> > > > > > Brilliant. Because common sense decrees if your fingers are
getting
> > > > fatigued, you want to change to heavier guage strings.
> > > > > > But hey, I'm sure you read it on the Internet somewhere, so it
must
> > be
> > > > true.
> > > > > > -nyb
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is that switching
to
> > > > "heavier guage strings"?
> > > >
> > > > Go back and reread your post, Einstein- that's not what you said.
> > > >
> > > > -nyb
> > >
> > > I don't need to "reread" my post....that remains your task since you
have
> > a serious problem.
> > >
> > > Here it is for you to ponder:
> > >
> > > "Jeff Beck, for example, will switch to 9s from 10s in the course of a
> > tour because its easier on his fingers."
> > >
> > > So like I asked, you idiot...if one switches TO 9s FROM 10s...how is
that
> > switching to "heavier guage strings"?
> >
> >
> > I've already corrected myself in another post- I misread what you said.
>
> So how about apologizing for the bull****, instead of writing some *more*
**** to follow your own agenda?
>

You're no one to talk about agendas. Go practice. Not noodle, practice.


>
> > Now let's see how many years you ride it out. Look at the thread title,
pay
> > close attention to the word "minutia" and remember what it means.
Remember
> > it means about that much to a guitarist with some time on the
instrument.
> > Even Mr. Beck. I'll guarantee that he's not crying into his sleeve if
he
> > plays one night too many on those huge, heavy .010s.
> >
> > Go hook up with some old jazz guys and ask them what guages they played
in
> > the '50s. Just like on an acoustic, .012s were considered light strings
> > then.
> >
> > -nyb

[JASONST]

I use 11s...not for sound but they last longer......I tend to break a lot of
E strings with the bending.....I tried 9, 10, different brands and on
different guitars but the 11s seem to be the most durable to withstand the
agressive bending requiremin in the blues I play.


"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35c91$c653cd60$6ba1580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...
> So I went back to Gibson 9s from 10s a while ago...when I went to having
my amp in a head and with this big-ass 2x12 cabinet:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs/VerticalRectifier2x12.JPG
>
> ...the bass response and tone changed, and I found that I had to use a
smaller gauge low E to tame the bass.
>
> Good thing is, it sounds great still with 9s, and better than 10s did to
my ears now.
>
> Wild.
>
> Any similar experiences?
>
> --
> Jason
> http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs
>

[Odin]

"John S. Shinal" <jshinal_REMOVE_THIS_PART@mindspring.com>
wrote in message

> "Jeff Liberatore" wrote:
>
> >Yessiree... That's why you need 3 amps!!!
>
> This is what kills me about the big hogs, onstage they
have an
> AC30, a Twin and a Bluesbreaker or the boutique equivalent
of them.
> Must be nice. It's no wonder I've been driven to silicon
heresy.

While I'd like to play through that rig on stage, I only
bring a combo amp and one guitar to gigs. Stage space is a
premium and I don't like to load in/out any more than I have
to. Playing live is an exercise in compromise.

[Odin]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> > > Let's just take one single string as an example:
> > >
> > > So that means on one, the high E is a *12* tuned to D.
> > >
> > > And on your standard tuned, the high E has a *10*
tuned to
> > > E.
> >
> > Exactly. The fact that it is detuned a full step makes
a
> > *huge* difference in string tension. A 10 at standard
pitch
> > will offer more resistance than a 12 detuned a full
step.
> > That's physics at work.
>
> How about some support for your theory regarding these
tunings and the string tension...with a Les Paul, of course.

Why, are Les Pauls immune from the laws of physics?

[Nobody]

Odin <res0jmoj@verizon.net> wrote in article <3f340ceb@shknews01>...
>
> "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
>
> > > > Let's just take one single string as an example:
> > > >
> > > > So that means on one, the high E is a *12* tuned to D.
> > > >
> > > > And on your standard tuned, the high E has a *10*
> tuned to
> > > > E.
> > >
> > > Exactly. The fact that it is detuned a full step makes
> a
> > > *huge* difference in string tension. A 10 at standard
> pitch
> > > will offer more resistance than a 12 detuned a full
> step.
> > > That's physics at work.
> >
> > How about some support for your theory regarding these
> tunings and the string tension...with a Les Paul, of course.
>
> Why, are Les Pauls immune from the laws of physics?

If you are such an expert, then explain it.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Odin]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message

> > > > > Let's just take one single string as an example:
> > > > >
> > > > > So that means on one, the high E is a *12* tuned
to D.
> > > > >
> > > > > And on your standard tuned, the high E has a *10*
> > > > > tuned to E.
> > > >
> > > > Exactly. The fact that it is detuned a full step
makes
> > > > a *huge* difference in string tension. A 10 at
standard
> > > > pitch will offer more resistance than a 12 detuned a
full
> > > > step. That's physics at work.
> > >
> > > How about some support for your theory regarding these
> > tunings and the string tension...with a Les Paul, of
course.
> >
> > Why, are Les Pauls immune from the laws of physics?
>
> If you are such an expert, then explain it.

Polfus, if you're trying to bring scale length into this it
won't matter. A Gibson with 10's tuned to standard pitch
will have more string tension than a Gibson tuned to C with
12's, same with any other scale length guitar. As long as
you use the same guitar for both string gauges and tunings
the guitar with 10's tuned to standard pitch will always
have more string tension that the guitar dropped to C with
12's. If you want me to go get a trigger pull scale and set
up a scientific experiment to prove this to you then just
say so. The wager will be $100 USD and I'll use a Gibson
Les Paul guitar with 10's and 12's of the same brand, one
tuned to standard pitch and one tuned to dropped C and I'll
check tuning with the Boss tuner that we both own so you'll
be able to conduct a parallel experiment. Using the high
"E" string (the actual ".010" and ".012"), we'll measure
string tension at 1" and 2" of string pull, and we'll
measure the distance the string moves at 3lbs and 6lbs of
tension. I'm telling you that the 10's tuned to standard
pitch will have more tension that the 12's tuned to drop C.
If you respond within 15 minutes I'll know that you're
serious. If you delay I'll assume that you're looking up
data to rig the test in your favor or consulting someone for
assistance. Put your money where your mouth is.

[ryanm]

"Jeff Liberatore" <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
news:B3QYa.48916$hc.30376@fe3.columbus.rr.com...
>
> Supposedly 350 watts and youNEED the cab with the head to do all the
damage.
> I took my son to try out amps about a month ago. Tried all the Mesa's and
> Marshalls, Peavey XXX, one Bogner and that new Line 6 silver metal head
> thing. he like the Dual Rec the best by FAR... He couldn't lift the 4x12
> Mesa cab to save his life. ****, he probably couldn't lift the head!
>
The triple rectumfrier can kill small animals at 300 feet.

ryanm

[Kate Ebneter]

Odin wrote:
> "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
>
>
>>>>>>Let's just take one single string as an example:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So that means on one, the high E is a *12* tuned
>>>>>
> to D.
>
>>>>>>And on your standard tuned, the high E has a *10*
>>>>>>tuned to E.
>>>>>
>>>>>Exactly. The fact that it is detuned a full step
>>>>
> makes
>
>>>>>a *huge* difference in string tension. A 10 at
>>>>
> standard
>
>>>>>pitch will offer more resistance than a 12 detuned a
>>>>
> full
>
>>>>>step. That's physics at work.
>>>>
>>>>How about some support for your theory regarding these
>>>
>>>tunings and the string tension...with a Les Paul, of
>>
> course.
>
>>>Why, are Les Pauls immune from the laws of physics?
>>
>>If you are such an expert, then explain it.
>
>
> Polfus, if you're trying to bring scale length into this it
> won't matter. A Gibson with 10's tuned to standard pitch
> will have more string tension than a Gibson tuned to C with
> 12's, same with any other scale length guitar. As long as
> you use the same guitar for both string gauges and tunings
> the guitar with 10's tuned to standard pitch will always
> have more string tension that the guitar dropped to C with
> 12's. If you want me to go get a trigger pull scale and set
> up a scientific experiment to prove this to you then just
> say so.

<snip>

*sigh*

You don't need to measure it, you can calculate it. Take a look at
http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html for example.

A .012 plain string tuned to C has about 13.8 lbs of tension.

A .010 plain string tuned to E has about 15.4 lbs of tension.

A .012 plain string tuned to D has about 17.4 lbs of tension.

(Calculated for a 24.75" scale length.)

The tension of the string is more or less directly related to how
hard it is to bend, so, a .012 at D will be harder to bend than a
..010 at E (so Jeff is wrong, I'm afraid, although the difference
is not that huge), but a .012 at C will be easier to bend, although
again the difference isn't enormous.

It is a simple matter of physics.

Kate Ebneter
Collector of Noise Toys

[Nobody]

Kate Ebneter <ebneter@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article <3F3483F7.1010601@ix.netcom.com>...

> A .010 plain string tuned to E has about 15.4 lbs of tension.
> A .012 plain string tuned to D has about 17.4 lbs of tension.

Well....Odim, looks like you are wrong yet again.

And I was right yet again.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Don Evans]

"Kate Ebneter" <ebneter@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3F3483F7.1010601@ix.netcom.com...
> Odin wrote:
> > "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
><<snip>>
> >
> >
> > Polfus, if you're trying to bring scale length into this it
> > won't matter. A Gibson with 10's tuned to standard pitch
> > will have more string tension than a Gibson tuned to C with
> > 12's, same with any other scale length guitar. As long as
> > you use the same guitar for both string gauges and tunings
> > the guitar with 10's tuned to standard pitch will always
> > have more string tension that the guitar dropped to C with
> > 12's. If you want me to go get a trigger pull scale and set
> > up a scientific experiment to prove this to you then just
> > say so.
>
> <snip>
>
> *sigh*
>
> You don't need to measure it, you can calculate it. Take a look at
> http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html for example.
>
> A .012 plain string tuned to C has about 13.8 lbs of tension.
>
> A .010 plain string tuned to E has about 15.4 lbs of tension.
>
> A .012 plain string tuned to D has about 17.4 lbs of tension.
>
> (Calculated for a 24.75" scale length.)
>
> The tension of the string is more or less directly related to how
> hard it is to bend, so, a .012 at D will be harder to bend than a
> .010 at E (so Jeff is wrong, I'm afraid, although the difference
> is not that huge), but a .012 at C will be easier to bend, although
> again the difference isn't enormous.
>
> It is a simple matter of physics.
>
> Kate Ebneter
> Collector of Noise Toys
>

Cool chart, thanks!

Don

[Gamelan]

"Kate Ebneter" <ebneter@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3F3483F7.1010601@ix.netcom.com...
> Odin wrote:
> > "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
> >
> >
> >>>>>>Let's just take one single string as an example:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>So that means on one, the high E is a *12* tuned
> >>>>>
> > to D.
> >
> >>>>>>And on your standard tuned, the high E has a *10*
> >>>>>>tuned to E.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Exactly. The fact that it is detuned a full step
> >>>>
> > makes
> >
> >>>>>a *huge* difference in string tension. A 10 at
> >>>>
> > standard
> >
> >>>>>pitch will offer more resistance than a 12 detuned a
> >>>>
> > full
> >
> >>>>>step. That's physics at work.
> >>>>
> >>>>How about some support for your theory regarding these
> >>>
> >>>tunings and the string tension...with a Les Paul, of
> >>
> > course.
> >
> >>>Why, are Les Pauls immune from the laws of physics?
> >>
> >>If you are such an expert, then explain it.
> >
> >
> > Polfus, if you're trying to bring scale length into this it
> > won't matter. A Gibson with 10's tuned to standard pitch
> > will have more string tension than a Gibson tuned to C with
> > 12's, same with any other scale length guitar. As long as
> > you use the same guitar for both string gauges and tunings
> > the guitar with 10's tuned to standard pitch will always
> > have more string tension that the guitar dropped to C with
> > 12's. If you want me to go get a trigger pull scale and set
> > up a scientific experiment to prove this to you then just
> > say so.
>
> <snip>
>
> *sigh*
>
> You don't need to measure it, you can calculate it. Take a look at
> http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html for example.
>
> A .012 plain string tuned to C has about 13.8 lbs of tension.
>
> A .010 plain string tuned to E has about 15.4 lbs of tension.
>
> A .012 plain string tuned to D has about 17.4 lbs of tension.
>
> (Calculated for a 24.75" scale length.)
>
> The tension of the string is more or less directly related to how
> hard it is to bend, so, a .012 at D will be harder to bend than a
> .010 at E (so Jeff is wrong, I'm afraid, although the difference
> is not that huge), but a .012 at C will be easier to bend, although
> again the difference isn't enormous.
>
> It is a simple matter of physics.
>
> Kate Ebneter
> Collector of Noise Toys

Too bad that thing won't work using notes in different octaves from the standard
EADGBE. I'm trying to figure out a set of strings to be used on a guitar tuned
AEBF#C#G#. That would be fifths, a minor 6th lower then violin. I'm thinking of
ripping the frets out of one of my guitars and tuning it like this, but I can't
figure out the right gauges. I figure one would start with a .007 if it can be
found for a high G#, maybe a .008 if a .007 can't be procured.

[Gamelan]

"Gamelan" <bobafett1NOSPAM@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:bh2o6b$qq3$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
>
> "Kate Ebneter" <ebneter@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:3F3483F7.1010601@ix.netcom.com...
> > Odin wrote:
> > > "Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
> > >
> > >
> > >>>>>>Let's just take one single string as an example:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>So that means on one, the high E is a *12* tuned
> > >>>>>
> > > to D.
> > >
> > >>>>>>And on your standard tuned, the high E has a *10*
> > >>>>>>tuned to E.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Exactly. The fact that it is detuned a full step
> > >>>>
> > > makes
> > >
> > >>>>>a *huge* difference in string tension. A 10 at
> > >>>>
> > > standard
> > >
> > >>>>>pitch will offer more resistance than a 12 detuned a
> > >>>>
> > > full
> > >
> > >>>>>step. That's physics at work.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>How about some support for your theory regarding these
> > >>>
> > >>>tunings and the string tension...with a Les Paul, of
> > >>
> > > course.
> > >
> > >>>Why, are Les Pauls immune from the laws of physics?
> > >>
> > >>If you are such an expert, then explain it.
> > >
> > >
> > > Polfus, if you're trying to bring scale length into this it
> > > won't matter. A Gibson with 10's tuned to standard pitch
> > > will have more string tension than a Gibson tuned to C with
> > > 12's, same with any other scale length guitar. As long as
> > > you use the same guitar for both string gauges and tunings
> > > the guitar with 10's tuned to standard pitch will always
> > > have more string tension that the guitar dropped to C with
> > > 12's. If you want me to go get a trigger pull scale and set
> > > up a scientific experiment to prove this to you then just
> > > say so.
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > *sigh*
> >
> > You don't need to measure it, you can calculate it. Take a look at
> > http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html for example.
> >
> > A .012 plain string tuned to C has about 13.8 lbs of tension.
> >
> > A .010 plain string tuned to E has about 15.4 lbs of tension.
> >
> > A .012 plain string tuned to D has about 17.4 lbs of tension.
> >
> > (Calculated for a 24.75" scale length.)
> >
> > The tension of the string is more or less directly related to how
> > hard it is to bend, so, a .012 at D will be harder to bend than a
> > .010 at E (so Jeff is wrong, I'm afraid, although the difference
> > is not that huge), but a .012 at C will be easier to bend, although
> > again the difference isn't enormous.
> >
> > It is a simple matter of physics.
> >
> > Kate Ebneter
> > Collector of Noise Toys
>
> Too bad that thing won't work using notes in different octaves from the
standard
> EADGBE. I'm trying to figure out a set of strings to be used on a guitar tuned
> AEBF#C#G#. That would be fifths, a minor 6th lower then violin. I'm thinking
of
> ripping the frets out of one of my guitars and tuning it like this, but I
can't
> figure out the right gauges. I figure one would start with a .007 if it can be
> found for a high G#, maybe a .008 if a .007 can't be procured.
>


Never mind, I figured it all out except for the low A.

The set would have to be:
G#, .008
C#, .012
F#, .018
B, .028
E, , .044
A and the A I don't know.

This should provide a tension from 16-15 lbs.

[Atlas]

x-no-archive: yes

On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 22:17:43 -0700, Kate Ebneter
<ebneter@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>You don't need to measure it, you can calculate it. Take a look at
>http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html for example.
>
>A .012 plain string tuned to C has about 13.8 lbs of tension.
>
>A .010 plain string tuned to E has about 15.4 lbs of tension.
>
>A .012 plain string tuned to D has about 17.4 lbs of tension.
>
>(Calculated for a 24.75" scale length.)
>
>The tension of the string is more or less directly related to how
>hard it is to bend, so, a .012 at D will be harder to bend than a
>.010 at E (so Jeff is wrong, I'm afraid, although the difference
>is not that huge), but a .012 at C will be easier to bend, although
>again the difference isn't enormous.
>
>It is a simple matter of physics.

Thanks for that link! Fantastic resource.




Atlas

[Nobody]

Odim The Dumbass Racist Redneck verizon.net> wrote in article <3f341bd9@shknews01>...

> Polfus, if you're trying to bring scale length into this it
> won't matter. A Gibson with 10's tuned to standard pitch
> will have more string tension than a Gibson tuned to C with
> 12's, same with any other scale length guitar. As long as
> you use the same guitar for both string gauges and tunings
> the guitar with 10's tuned to standard pitch will always
> have more string tension that the guitar dropped to C with
> 12's. If you want me to go get a trigger pull scale and set
> up a scientific experiment to prove this to you then just
> say so. The wager will be $100 USD and I'll use a Gibson
> Les Paul guitar with 10's and 12's of the same brand, one
> tuned to standard pitch and one tuned to dropped C and I'll
> check tuning with the Boss tuner that we both own so you'll
> be able to conduct a parallel experiment. Using the high
> "E" string (the actual ".010" and ".012"), we'll measure
> string tension at 1" and 2" of string pull, and we'll
> measure the distance the string moves at 3lbs and 6lbs of
> tension. I'm telling you that the 10's tuned to standard
> pitch will have more tension that the 12's tuned to drop C.
> If you respond within 15 minutes I'll know that you're
> serious. If you delay I'll assume that you're looking up
> data to rig the test in your favor or consulting someone for
> assistance. Put your money where your mouth is.

Wow...so much bull**** out of one person.

But I was right again, and here's the proof as Kate explained:

> A .010 plain string tuned to E has about 15.4 lbs of tension.
> A .012 plain string tuned to D has about 17.4 lbs of tension.


You were WRONG, but that didn't stop you from talking so much **** that you pollute rmmg as you infect honest threads about music
and playing.

And I'm not going anywhere, son, so you might as well shut the **** up.

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nobody]

Odin <res0jmoj@verizon.net> wrote in article <3f33f32f@shknews01>...

> > > In fact, he says that..." I've been tuning down to C for the best part of 3 years [ low to high C, F, Bb, Eb, G, C ] ".

And here's some more reality for your dumb ass:

I don't use that tuning, and neither does Tony Iommi.

So what the **** are you talking about *this* time?

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Nobody]

Odumbass<res0jmoj@REMOVEverizon.net> wrote in article <ewDYa.1559$bM6.1052@nwrddc03.gnilink.net>...

> I believe it is a mystery why you claim to do "blues bends" with your index finger, especially to the extent that it requires
switching to a lighter string gauge.>

Figure it out yet, fat boy?

--
Jason
http://www.geocities.com/nobody_upstairs

[Jeff Liberatore]

"John S. Shinal" <jshinal_REMOVE_THIS_PART@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3f34e9cb.281940355@text-west.newsfeeds.com...
> "Jeff Liberatore" wrote:
>
> >I took my son to try out amps about a month ago. Tried all the Mesa's and
> >Marshalls, Peavey XXX,
>
> What did you think of the XXX ? I haven't tried one out at
> volume.

Sounded sorta like a SS Rectumfrier wannabe!

Jeff

[Jeff Liberatore]

"ryanm" <ryanm@fatchicksinpartyhats.com> wrote in message
news:vj8c0f7p2tm586@corp.supernews.com...
> "Jeff Liberatore" <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:B3QYa.48916$hc.30376@fe3.columbus.rr.com...
> >
> > Supposedly 350 watts and youNEED the cab with the head to do all the
> damage.
> > I took my son to try out amps about a month ago. Tried all the Mesa's
and
> > Marshalls, Peavey XXX, one Bogner and that new Line 6 silver metal head
> > thing. he like the Dual Rec the best by FAR... He couldn't lift the 4x12
> > Mesa cab to save his life. ****, he probably couldn't lift the head!
> >
> The triple rectumfrier can kill small animals at 300 feet.

Indeed! Will rip your face off.

Jeff

[Jeff Liberatore]

"John S. Shinal" <jshinal_REMOVE_THIS_PART@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3f35ea8a.282131970@text-west.newsfeeds.com...
> "Jeff Liberatore" wrote:
>
> >Yessiree... That's why you need 3 amps!!!
>
> This is what kills me about the big hogs, onstage they have an
> AC30, a Twin and a Bluesbreaker or the boutique equivalent of them.
> Must be nice. It's no wonder I've been driven to silicon heresy.

Yeah! That's pretty much all the clasic sounds right there. That's all ya
need!

Jeff

[Jeff Liberatore]

"Odin" <res0jmoj@verizon.net> wrote in message news:3f33efa8@shknews01...
>
> "Jeff Liberatore" <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote in
> message
>
> > > An EL84 amp is the last amp in the world that I'd run a
> > > detuned humbucker guitar into. If I was tuning to C and
> > > running humbuckers I'd want 6L6's at a bare minimum and
> > > probably KT88's...
> >
> > Yessiree... That's why you need 3 amps!!!
>
> 3, is that all?

It's a nice little start!

Jeff

[Jeff Liberatore]

"Nobody" <nobodyupstairs@aolDELETE.com> wrote in message
news:01c35dce$0577f6a0$2fc8580c@715162529worldnet. att.net...

> Jeff Liberatore <jliberat@columbus.rr.com> wrote in article
<Z0PYa.48906$hc.7099@fe3.columbus.rr.com>...

> > There's a guitar in my house right now tuned to C (one of my sons
guitars).
> > It has 12's on it. It's still easier to play than my standard pitch
10's.>

> Your findings are interesting, Jeff. I tried 12s as well, and I didn't
feel what you say.

> Let's just take one single string as an example:

> So that means on one, the high E is a *12* tuned to D.

> And on your standard tuned, the high E has a *10* tuned to E.

> Hmmm..

Yeah... I read Kate's post regarding "string tension"... Nice post... I
admit exaggerrating somewhat to make a point about detuned guitars. also, I
think that guitar has 11's and NOT 12's.

> > I think you're just not used to being around an amp that can rip your
> > ****ing head off.>

> You are welcome to think so, obviously.

Well... That was part of my point... You being in a room for a few hours
with a Rec and a 4X12 and your guitar tuned to C with 9's and another Les
Paul tuned to C with 11's with the amp turmed up loud and see what you think
then...

> >Those bands you like are getting those sounds from ripping
> > ass loud amps turned up loud! They are playing aggressively, and I'd bet
> > that they ain't using 9's, because them things would just lay on the
guitar
> > like a rubber bands and you'd have to play like a sissy boy so the thing
> > wouldn't go sharp on you... Those strings need to be tight to get that
> > sound.

> Wow...all this from playing your son's guitar!

No Jason bro... ALL that from playing my entire life. I know what different
tunings and string gauges do to guitars. I know what works well and what
doesn't.

> >but you're leaving a LOT on the table with that set up.

> I was just thinking the same thing of you, Jeff.

See Jason... I'm kinda' old... I used to use 9's and I used to tune them
down just for fun. This, even before it became the thing to do... There's
not a lot that gets by me with this stuff...

> >I could see playing heavy stuff in C, but not blues.

> It's easy, man...what's the damn mystery here with you people that don't
understand that tuning is one >thing...what you play is
> another!

Well, one thing is, if you want to play in C you have to