Manufacturers' string tension charts

[Peter C]

There can obviously be variation in tension for a given wound string gauge due to different core types etc, but D'Addario list 27.4 lbs for a plain .013 tuned to E, while Thomastik Infeld show 25.9 and Curt Mangan 25.8.

As far as I know, plain strings are pretty much the same wherever you go, and D'Addario use a 25.5" scale length for their measurements, whereas Curt Mangan state 24.75" on their site. Anyone know for sure if Thomastik also reference a 24.75" scale?

By the way, if this is the case, their Jazz Swing wounds actually have proportionately (much) higher tension for a given gauge.

[marcwhy]

Peter,
Not sure about the JS tension, but this is a helpful tool (and the video is good, too).

[Peter C]

Thanks man, that seems quite useful as a reference. D'Addario and Curt Mangan put you in the picture, whereas it seems Thomastik prefer to keep ya guessing. Adds to the mystique, no doubt. Where's that emoji... <bit too "smiley", but anyway.

[Hammertone]

Yet again, a reminder that the string gauges listed by almost all string makers, on their sites and on their packaging, are aspirational, not accurate.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

As far as I know, plain strings are pretty much the same wherever you go

Actually, they're not.

A string labeled 0.013" is not necessarily exactly 0.013" in diameter - it depends on how the manufacturer chooses to measure and describe it. For example, TI builds to a metric measurement and converts the mm value to inches. Interconversion between mm and inches is not an exact formula and string gauge is rounded off to a usable figure like 0.013" from its actual value for convenience. One millimeter = 0.03937008" and that's rounded off. The closest 2 digits millimeter value to 0.013" is 0.33 mm, which converts back to 0.1299 mm with the digits beyond that rounded off. So a 0.33mm string from a metric manufacturer is actually a thou or two smaller than 0.013" but is sold as a 0.013" string because that's what people understand. This is part of why TIs feel more flexible than most standard strings - they're a tiny bit thinner although labeled the same.

The metals from which plain strings and cores are made vary from brand to brand and style to style. Thre is no such thing as standard "plain steel" - all steel is an alloy of iron with other metals and carbon, and there are at least a few different alloys used in commonly available strings (unwound and cores). Some "plain steel" strings are plated, e.g. Pyramid, Martin SP, and TI. Some are "treated", e.g. Cleartone uses a treatment that they call Enhanced Molecular Protection (EMP). I think Elixir claims to "treat" their unwound strings. Some European strings are rumored to use the same steel wire alloys found in radial tire belts, although I've never been able to confirm that. It's hard to believe that there's enough of a market around the world to justify the independent manufacture of many dedicated alloys for plain guitar strings and cores, although I could easily be wrong about that.

All of these variations and interventions affect the way strings feel. Even when the gauge is exactly the same, some either are or feel as though they are more flexible, softer, stiffer, etc than others. I've never heard a consistent difference in sound from most "plain steel" strings regardless of manufacturer. But true coatings like tin plating may account for the tonal differences many hear in TI vs D'Addario, for example. Whether a higher % of nickel in the steel alloy is audible is debatable at best - I can't hear it.

But not all "plain" strings are indentical in feel, and a few actually sound different from the general group of interchangeable ones.

[RJVB]

...Interconversion between mm and inches is not an exact formula

? As far as I know, 1 inch = 2.54 cm :

Standards for the exact length of an inch have varied in the past, but since the adoption of the international yard during the 1950s and 1960s it has been based on the metric system and defined as exactly 25.4 mm.

That still leaves plenty of margin for subtle differences in rounding.

I'm pretty certain all plain strings are plated to prevent corrosion and that the treatment some brands give them is an additional process that aims to protect/stabilise the plating. I'm quite convinced this is the main concern brands have with the plain trebles; there's very little innovation going on to create alternatives with truly different tonal characteristics.

[sgosnell]

AFAIK all strings are plated, even the cores of wound strings. Steel rusts easily, especially when coated with all sorts of gunk from fingers. Plating is the only way to prevent that. Tin is by far the most common, because tin is cheap, and it works well. I'm not sure if TI plates their plain strings with tin or anything else underneath the brass. I would be surprised to learn that the alloys in steel strings varied a lot, but I'm no expert, and I seem to recall that I was wrong once before.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

? As far as I know, 1 inch = 2.54 cm.

Right - and 1 / 2.54 = 0.3937007874 inches per centimeter. So 0.33mm = 0.012992125984 mm - and even using that conversion factor, a nominal 0.33 mm string is a hair smaller than a 0.013” string.

But the original metric conversion factor was a few thou greater than 2.54 cm. In 1943, the inch was “converted” to exactly 2.54 cm in the US to enable lathes to make metric parts with a 127 tooth gear (because 2x127=254) so wartime manufacturing could be standardized. This did not change the objective conversion factor, which was and is still used by the metricized world. TI uses the original and “correct” larger centimeter.

[JohanAbrandt]

Right - and 1 / 2.54 = 0.3937007874 inches per centimeter. So 0.33mm = 0.012992125984 mm - and even using that conversion factor, a nominal 0.33 mm string is a hair smaller than a 0.013” string.

But the original metric conversion factor was a few thou greater than 2.54 cm. In 1943, the inch was “converted” to exactly 2.54 cm in the US to enable lathes to make metric parts with a 127 tooth gear (because 2x127=254) so wartime manufacturing could be standardized. This did not change the objective conversion factor, which was and is still used by the metricized world. TI uses the original and “correct” larger centimeter.

Both ANSI and BSI adopted CEJs metric inch already in the 30s.

2.54 was nice and round in the middle of the us and the imperial definitions.

[RJVB]

I would be surprised to learn that the alloys in steel strings varied a lot, but I'm no expert, and I seem to recall that I was wrong once before.

Idem here, but I also recall reading that the plain trebles are piano wire, and that there are only a few (as in handful) producers.

Note that the same is true for nylon and carbonfluor string extrusion, but of these I know that the manufacturers do work to specifications from their clients. Think additives and different annealing treatments. The same thing could be going on in piano wire string manufacturing but I guess it's safe to say there are not quite a many variables to tweak in steel wire if you don't have smelting plant on site.

[Peter C]

So, Thomastik values are for Fenders or Gibbos?

[sgosnell]

Or something else? I'm unable to find what TI uses for scale length. They must have a standard, but they don't say what it is.

[RJVB]

You could calculate it since you know the diameter and can measure the weight...

key post from a very interesting thread

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

Both ANSI and BSI adopted CEJs metric inch already in the 30s.

2.54 was nice and round in the middle of the us and the imperial definitions.

I'm not sure that TI adopted a modern standard for measuring - they seem to be using the same one they've used since they converted from coal to electricity. Here's the TI tension chart for Jazz Swings. They show a nominal 0.013" string as being 0.32 mm rather than the closer 0.33, which calculates to 0.01259". So a TI sold and labeled as 0.013" is actually 0.0126. The same conversion "adjustment" applies to all of their strings, but a very few are not smaller than others of the same nominal size. Their 16 is actually a 15.7 and their 53 is actually 52.7 - but their 50 is exactly 0.050". This is one reason that their tension chart is a bit different from others for the same nominal sizes.

[Peter C]

A D'Addario nickel plated roundwound (the most common type) .022 gauge has a tension of 23.5 lbs for a 25.5" scale length and Thomastik quote 27.3 lbs for their smaller diameter .021 gauge Jazz Swing flatwound, both obviously tuned to G. If Thomastik use a 24.75" scale, that difference in tension is going to be nominally even higher.

Now, here's the thing: all the comments I've read here over the years, plus limited personal experience, suggest that the TIs actually feel "softer, "lighter", "easier on the hands" etc etc than other brands of comparable gauges.

Curious, eh?

PS My interest is simply in case I consider going lighter at some time in the future: my current preferred gauges are custom 13,17,24,32,42,56.

[JohanAbrandt]

I'm not sure that TI adopted a modern standard for measuring - they seem to be using the same one they've used since they converted from coal to electricity. Here's the TI tension chart for Jazz Swings. They show a nominal 0.013" string as being 0.32 mm rather than the closer 0.33, which calculates to 0.01259". So a TI sold and labeled as 0.013" is actually 0.0126. The same conversion "adjustment" applies to all of their strings, but a very few are not smaller than others of the same nominal size. Their 16 is actually a 15.7 and their 53 is actually 52.7 - but their 50 is exactly 0.050". This is one reason that their tension chart is a bit different from others for the same nominal sizes.

No doubt based on german inch (Zoll) which converts 1 to 2.634mm


Skickat från min iPad med Tapatalk

[Peter C]

Or something else? I'm unable to find what TI uses for scale length. They must have a standard, but they don't say what it is.

I even googled "Thomastik-Infeld Skalenlänge für die Berechnung der Gitarrensaiten Spannung"

Nichts ("zilch" is actually not German, lol)

I'll leave it as one of life's mysteries.

[Gabor]

DIY, the only task is to determine the UW for your specific string. To do it, you have to measure the string factory length and weight then divide. After you have the UW, use the following formula, for your guitars scale length and tuning:

T(Tension)= (UW x(2xLxF)2)/386.4

where:

UW- unit weight is expressed in pounds per linear inch (lb/in).


L- Scale Length. This is the vibrating length of the string. This is determined by measuring the distance from the nut to the bridge of the instrument in inches (in).


F- Frequency or pitch. This is the pitch at which you will be tuning the string expressed in cycles per second (Hertz).

(to convert the result into Newtons, multiply by 4.45)

[RJVB]

UW- unit weight is expressed in pounds per linear inch (lb/in).

Since when do they use imperial units in Bulgary?

[JohanAbrandt]

Since when do they use imperial units in Bulgary?

They do, in the provins Daddariostan,

https://www.daddario.com/globalasset...hart_13934.pdf

[RJVB]

They do, in the provins Daddariostan

Oh, that's where the Bulgarian villains in Fleming's Bond novels came from and got their garrots?