Ongoing debate: heavier strings give a player "better

Well I'll be. Nice post. I'm intrigued, so I'll try to reiterate what I think you said. String with higher tension/gauge will create less (my guess) higher partials/overtones/harmonics so it won't sound so “chimey?”

For example, I hit an A and the fundamental sounds out at about 440 hertz. Then next overtone is 440 + 440 = 880. The next overtone is 880 + 440 = 1,320 ….

So we have:

440 hz (full length of vibrating string)
880 hz (1/2 the vibrating string)
1,320 hz (1/3 the vibrating string)
1,760 hz (1/4 the vibrating string)
2,200 hz (1/5 the vibrating string)
2,640 hz (1/6 the vibrating string)

So are you saying the overtones are more pronounced on thinner strings and less so on fatter ones?

It should be kinda related, because it is frequency related. I can build an antenna out of a thin gauge wire (18ga), and the same length out of a thicker wire (10ga). the 10ga will have a better frequency response and dynamic range than the 18 gauge. that is the resonant frequency is wider.

for those who dont know, the 10ga is about 4 times larger than the 18ga

The effect of thicker strings is quite obvious on an accoustic, but if it is better or not is a matter of taste. On electrics the effect is less obvious, and IMHO should only be done when you prefere the playabillity of heavier strings.

Arjen has hit the nail on the head IMHO!

Acoustics gauge very critical for feel and volume and electrics play what is comfortable and ... doesn't break! :lol:

I have 10's on my strat and just recently got used to them after years of only playing 9's. But I'm still not satisfied and will be making the jump to 11's shortly. I've always felt that my sound was too thin. Time to gain weight.

All strings will produce the same overtones as far as frequency goes - you won't find one A string that has a 440 overtone and another that's got a 420, for example... but the distribution of them will change with different strings (different in gauge OR material). So one set of strings might have a 440 overtone that's 30% as strong as the fundamental, and the next set might produce one at that frequency that's only 25% as strong.

I'm exaggerating the numbers for effect. The point being: overtones don't change between gauges, but the relative distribution of them will.

I happen to like lighter strings, but then my guitars accentuate the bass notes through design. If I played a Taylor instead of a Martin, I'd probably go up .001 in string gauge. Heavier strings are great for big booming twangy stuff like bluegrass.

On electrics, my Strat is set up with lights, but I use medium silk & steel on my archtop.... it's not just the choice of strings, but also the choice of guitar and style of music that you play on it that dictates 'best' tone (at least to my ears).

It should be kinda related, because it is frequency related. I can build an antenna out of a thin gauge wire (18ga), and the same length out of a thicker wire (10ga). the 10ga will have a better frequency response and dynamic range than the 18 gauge. that is the resonant frequency is wider.

for those who dont know, the 10ga is about 4 times larger than the 18ga

Dynamic range on an antenna? Are you referring to transmission power? That's a function of power handling related to resistance per unit length. Thicker antennas have a wider bandwidth because of the "fuzziness" of the electrical length. What I mean is that due to the increased diameter, the electrical length is smeared and ambiguous -- if one thinks of the shape as a cylinder, it's length may be measured on a perfect axial (shortest) or from one edge of one face to the opposite edge of the opposing face (longest) or anywhere in between. This particular example would be more analogous to a guitar string's note stability, that is how much the frequency of the tone can vary, and probably doesn't relate to the level of harmonic content.

In a guitar string, the particular overtones and their respective strengths, are related to non-linear effects in the structure and vibration of the string. How does this relate thick and thin strings? Well, to get the same audio volume (energy/time or power) out of a thinner string, it must vibrate with a wider displacement (side-to-side motion) than a thicker string. The wider the side-to-side displacement, the more non-linear (further from perfect single tone) the vibration is, and the more higher order harmonics will be excited. The vibration becomes more non-linear with greater displacement because all sort of parameters change with that displacement, especially at the points of maximum offset from rest. So, the bigger the displacement (vibration), the bigger the changes wrought on the string: the tension increases at the far edges of vibration, the string stretches more, changing it's mass/length, at the anchor points (fret or nut, saddle) the string must flex more and begins to exert more non-ideal forces. Every notice how the electronic tuner shows different frequency readings at different loudnesses. Some of this is just the tuner locking on, but on a really good tuner (e.g., Peterson strobe), one can see the differences clearly. Anyway, all of these non-linear effects corrupt the fundamental note and that resulting corruption excites the harmonics.

Harmonics are not always in perfect multiples of the fundamental. This is because the string doesn't act as if it's the same length at all frequencies. So a 440 A's harmonics might actually be at ... say, 881.173 and 1327.5 and so on. If playing one note, it probably sounds okay, but the more notes played, the more clashing of mistuned harmonics is possible. This difference can be heard on different guitars -- some are real strummers. These probably have lower level and/or more accurate harmonics. But every guitar reaches a point of being overstrummed and sounding "not so good." That's where the string vibrations become so imperfect as to offend our ears.

Enough already -- Greg

I saw some bad physics (i.e., incorrect statements of "physical facts") in some of the posts above.

The last one's right on track about the nonlinear effects of string vibration. Ideal strings would all have the exact same set of harmonics, all of which are exact integral multiples of the fundamental frequency. And they wouldn't vary with the amplitude of the vibration, either. Real strings have bending stiffness, which ideal strings don't. Ideal ones would be perfectly flexible, with only linear tension keeping them straight at rest. Real strings with stiffness don't pivot right at the anchor points on the nut and bridge as they're bent sideways, but make smooth bends over a short distance from where they're anchored. Like a diving board clamped at one end. The vibrating length of the string is effectively shortened a tiny bit by this. The effect is more noticeable on the higher harmonics, where it can shorten the effective vibrating length by a considerable part of a wavelength of the short wavelength higher harmonics, which are multiples of the effective vibrating length. The result is that as we go up the harmonic scale, the harmonics go progressively sharper relative to the fundamental frequency. The closer a string is stretched to its breaking tension, the more closely it approaches the behavior of an ideal string. So the heavy string, which is stretched more tightly to reach the same pitch, has less of this progressive inharmonicity going up the harmonic scale. But it's a pretty subtle difference.

Acoustic guitars will change in volume and tone with varying amounts of string tension, as the compliance of the vibrating top changes over the range of pressure applied to the top. It depends on the type and thickness of the wood, and the bracing structure. Has to be determined experimentally. Too many factors involved to predict precisely.

I can't hear a huge difference in tone or volume on my acoustics with different size strings. Except for slide playing, where a tight string better supports the slide, I'd rather have light strings because they're easier to play.