Effect on through body stringing on string tension

[chris_b]

Leo Fender strung all his guitars through the body. I don't know why but if it was good enough for him.....!

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='chris_b' post='638652' date='Oct 27 2009, 11:59 PM']Leo Fender strung all his guitars through the body. I don't know why but if it was good enough for him.....![/quote]
I wonder why he didn't string them through the headstock as well.

[alexclaber]

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='638637' date='Oct 27 2009, 11:34 PM']That could be correct but the difference might well be too small to make any noticeable difference.[/quote]

Depends on the saddle shape/material - some exhibit a greater change in friction than others.

Most of it's in everyone's heads - you only have to read the gloriously flawed leaps of logic in most magazine reviews to see that it's a common problem though!

Alex

[OutToPlayJazz]

I don't know about a difference in tension, but through body stringing does give a thicker tone with more bottom end. I love the difference on my Am.Std. Jazz.

[Doddy]

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='638658' date='Oct 28 2009, 12:04 AM']I wonder why he didn't string them through the headstock as well. [/quote]

That's what string trees are for.

[GreeneKing]

The odd thing is, if you want to achieve a greater break angle over the saddles there's easier ways to do it than thru body stringing, and ways that keep the string length much shorter..

I feel like I'm becoming a cynic as I'm adding it to my growing list of things that I consider to be predominantly marketing hype

I'm not immune from it btw

[Nostromo]

I've got top loaders and through body strung bass's . . . . I cant say I can hear any discernible difference to be honest ?

[4000]

[quote name='Ray' post='638513' date='Oct 27 2009, 09:37 PM']I can see the logic in what you're saying but...

I always strung my Jazz through the body then one day I thought I'd string it through the bridge to see what difference it would make to the tone and sustain.

The first thing I noticed was the string tension. The strings had much less tension in them when tuned to pitch (using the same set of strings too). So much so I had to make a truss rod adjustment!

So, in my experience, through body stringing [b]does[/b] increase string tension.[/quote]

I once did the same thing before I knew there even was an argument about this and had very similar results; I didn't have to make an adjustment but I could feel the difference quite noticeably.

[obi 2 kenobi]

Adding my 2p....

Got 2 stingrays, a thru-body and top load.

Soundwise, no real difference.

Feel, however is very different. Thru body with same strings are noticably tighter, strings have less 'slack', and less freedom of movement. Switching from bass to the other, difference is very apparent. So much so, that if I use one bass for long period (e.g. weeks) and then change to other, the 'new one' feels difficult to play.

Consequently, now use different strings. High tension La Bella Slappers in top load and EB Slinkies in thru-body to even them out.

Edited October 29, 2009 by obi 2 kenobi

[Low End Bee]

The four ferrules on the back of my precision look like the 'speed holes' on a 50s Buick.

Therefore string through is definitely cooler than top loading.

I can't notice any difference in tension between it and my top loading P though.

[alexclaber]

Static string tension is determined by mass per unit length, pitch, and length between witness points. Nothing else matters.

However, dynamic string tension (the range tension moves within when you pluck the string) and feel is also affected by movement over the witness points, string elasticity, string stiffness, note envelope and response (a bass with greater fundamental will have a softer feel than one whose fundamental dies almost immediately). Furthermore ergonomic issues such as action (obviously) but also pickup height (if you rest on them), neck size/shape, string spacing, string roughness, etc will affect your perception of the dynamic tension (though won't actually affect the dynamic tension) and thus the feel.

Alex

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='obi 2 kenobi' post='639831' date='Oct 29 2009, 10:38 AM']Thru body with same strings are noticably tighter, strings have less 'slack', and less freedom of movement.[/quote]
I don't mean to deny your experience but, all other things being equal, the physics of this means that if the overall string length is greater from through-body stringing it will make the string more not less compliant or elastic and can have no effect whatsoever on tension (which is determined only by mass per unit length, pitch, and length between nut and bridge). If through-body stringing were to shorten the length between bridge and string end then you could expect an increase in compliance or elasticity.

My own experience is that it makes no discernible difference with the extra lengths we are in practice talking about.

[Prosebass]

[quote name='OutToPlayJazz' post='638662' date='Oct 28 2009, 12:11 AM']I don't know about a difference in tension, but through body stringing does give a thicker tone with more bottom end. I love the difference on my Am.Std. Jazz.[/quote]

This is correct but brings in other factors other than the tension of the strings at rest.

I suggest everyone reads this explanation [url="http://www.tothestage.com/upload/StringTension_1949.pdf"]D'Addario PDF[/url]

There are only 3 variables that can change the tension of a string. The unit weight ( the weight of the string between the nut and bridge contact points) Scale length and the frequency of tuning , covered by the equation below

T (Tension) = (UW x (2 x L x F)2) / 386.4

In simple terms vibrating length, mass and pitch. Thats it...
What most people are experiencing is 'percieved' tension which brings in lots of variables and is entirely different for each individual instrument and string type used. That is to say a certain string used on a certain bass that is not through body strung may have more 'percieved' tension than the same string used on a different bass that is through body strung.
Conversly changing the string type on the same bass may exibit more 'perceived' tension irrespective of whether the string is through body, and with a given string changing from through body to standard stringing may increase the 'perceived' tension. Its a minefield and what works for a certain bass / bridge / string combination is not necessarily a universal rule.
2 identical basses will exibit different perceived tension quite easily !

I fitted some new 105 / 45 Rotosound flats to the last Picobass (30.25" scale headless, Steinberger style bridge) that I sold and the strings seemed to have more tension than on one of my standard scale basses fitted with some old 100 / 40 Rotosound Roundwounds strung through body but when measured the tension was 2lbs less ?????

So in answer to the question......it depends on the bass, the nut, the bridge, the string type, the gauge. The only way to find out is to try it and if it feels good then do it...Personally I never go off the mathematics or what one manufacturer says against another and build my basses so that they 'feel' right.

Or put your action up to about 10mm , your strings will seem to have more tension and its cheaper than a bridge change

Edited October 29, 2009 by Prosebass

[sdgrsr400]

I have the feeling that through-body seems to communicate a little more energy from the strings into the body of the bass: one can sense the body vibrating a little more. Consequently, there may well be reduction in sustain in this mode as by definition sustain will reduce if relatively more energy is transferred away from the moving string.

However, I think these are quite subtle effects, and as I've just sold my only string-through bass I can't verify it either way.

Some very erudite points in posts above.

[Shaggy]

I always thought string-thru improved sustain - my RD Artist can be strung either through or top, and my impression is it definitely sustains better when strung thru (but needs extra-long strings!)
Compliance? Sounds like the bass version of cellulite.........

Edited October 30, 2009 by Shaggy

[chris_b]

[quote name='sdgrsr400' post='640736' date='Oct 30 2009, 08:51 AM']....I have the feeling that through-body seems to communicate a little more energy from the strings into the body of the bass: one can sense the body vibrating a little more. Consequently, there may well be reduction in sustain in this mode as by definition sustain will reduce if relatively more energy is transferred away from the moving string....[/quote]
+1. I don't think string tension is the reason for through body stringing. Anchoring the strings in the body could have the same effect as adding a high mass bridge.

[TDM]

Why don't we get a newton meter, attach it to the strings on a few different basses and see what happens?

I can't speak for basses because none of my string through the body but I had a play with my two 7 strings guitars today. One is a Jackson with a big reverse headstock and a string thru setup and the other was a Ibanez with a non-reversed headstock and tremolo (blocked so it's effectively a non-string thru fixed bridge) It may be psychological, as having read this thread I'm expecting a difference, but the string-thru, reversed headstock Jackson definitely required less force to bend the E-string up a tone than the Ibanez did. Both are also strung with the same gauge and brand strings.

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='thedonutman' post='640979' date='Oct 30 2009, 12:16 PM']Why don't we get a newton meter, attach it to the strings on a few different basses and see what happens?[/quote]

You'd have to fret the strings with it to get a meaningful result.

Through stringing effectively makes the whole body the bridge, so is equvalent to a high mass bridge.

[alexclaber]

So what sort of stringing does my RIM Custom 5 have?



Alex

[funkypenguin]

[url="http://www.behindthenotes.com/index.php/Featured-Video/Features/Bass/Roger-Sadowsky/menu-id-17.html"]http://www.behindthenotes.com/index.php/Fe...menu-id-17.html[/url]

In my experience it makes no difference. Roger Sadowsky says more or less the same thing after doing his own R&D

[4000]

I'd just like to add that I had absolutely no bias either way when I tried both; I wasn't even aware there was supposed to be a difference at the time (many years ago). All I can say is strung through the body the feel was definitely different, the strings definitely felt stiffer (which I don't like, so I strung it through the bridge again).

Edited October 30, 2009 by 4000

[thepurpleblob]

[quote name='GreeneKing' post='638409' date='Oct 27 2009, 08:08 PM']I've taken this question out of another thread.

Here's something I don't understand. People often talk about increasing string tension by using through body stringing.

Here's my thought process:

If you take a string the tone produced is set by tension between fixed 'contact points', the bridge saddle and the nut. The 'stretchiness' or tension of an individual string is set by how springy it is in terms of how much it elongates when a force is applied. i.e. if there were no stretch in a string and it was rigidly mounted it would be bar taut and wouldn't work. Given that the longer the string is between it's fixed points (not contact points) then the more it stretches for the same amount of force applied (due to a greater length of string subject to the forces that produces stretch), which makes through body stringing lead to floppier lower tension strings.

Well that's my logic anyway.

Am I correct and therefore everyone who says it increases string tension is wrong, or am I having a flawed reasoning process?

Peter[/quote]

You are right.... they are wrong.

If you stretch a string between two points in order to achieve a certain tuning then the bits on either side of the fixed points make stuff-all difference to the tension or anything much else. What I think people might be thinking/hearing is that the string (which is attached to the vibrating bit after all) is rather more 'attached' (in some sense) to the wooden bit. That is - it just might sound a bit different.