Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

string core breakage occurs at intonation saddle, why?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    that's not a fair summary regarding heavier gage susceptibility

    i was explaining the reason behind why larger cross sectional load bearing metal would fail.
    i think most folks don't make the connection that the intrinsic metal properties don't change no matter how you change cross sectional area.
    and it is the limitation of the material, from such intrinsic properties, which ultimately is responsible for failure, under the imposed conditions.
    while true i could have summarized as you have. but an inquisitive mind possibly would question why this is so.
    i suppose that's the difference between science and practice, viewpoints.
    science can yield betterment in a different way to that of practice.
    but still, both modes toward betterment are driven by desire to cure or improve on a matter.
    take for example that dead-ended high tension conductor spiraled around the feeble signal conductor of the incoming guitar signal within the amplifier. practitioners would not dream of tinkering with such intention to isolate the feeble guitar signal from external corruption within the chassis. but the faraday's cage principle applies in the scientific world and it can be applied, by intent, to obtain a desired effect. the principle behind it's workings is of science. it's application is afforded through the knowledge of why and how it works.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Steve Conner View Post
      Axpro, even if you're done debating string breakage, I'd still be grateful to hear your $.02 on PRS pickups
      lol, i saw this and had to at least give you THAT info.... looks like professor science is spouting off again though....

      10 lines of text to say "I disagree with your simplified view" blegh

      As to PRS pickups, the McCartys tend to be underwhelming. i agree that the neck is good, both together is ok (cause the neck is good) and i never liked the bridge. for the classic Gibson-y thing, Alnico pro ii's would be a really good choice. I tried a set of them and liked it, and i had a JB in the bridge for a while too.

      The only other pickups i put in a McCarty were the Eric Johnson customs, which are a low gain option to make your LP sound more likea gretsch... they were kinda cool... but i am gretsch fan.

      I had a few McCartys, a couple of McCarty Rosewoods and few McCarty soapbars... never kept any of them. took me YEARS to realize the big issue for me was the sound attributed to the hardtail bridge. I love their trem equipped guitars, something about what having a trem installed does to the midrange response. I never use the trems, and usually add an extra spring so it doesn't shift under heavy bending.

      Sold a lot of my PRS gear off over the last few years... but still have a couple of customs, Singlecut trems, and an artist HBII. as well as a few heavily modified import models. Truth be told i like their Dragon pickups a lot (though they quit making dragon I's) and thats what is in most of them (even my Hollowbody... with a 5 way rotary too)

      The only PRS i really wish i still had was a first run 513 with a solid rosewood neck. great guitar, but the wife needed a new car

      Comment


      • #33
        flex, fatigue, break over angle, modes of wear, quality

        1. flexing dramatically reduces forces acting, upon both my hand and the string. it's analogous to the "whiplash" effect of the compound bow used in archery. do consider energy is being momentarily stored within that fiberglass flex and will recover when it whacks on the opposite stroke. but timing is involved.
        2. forces acting affect your response. so in the case of a reactionary force imparted onto your hand, you must compensate by imparting more force.
        3. this in turn, turns into a vicious cycle until the string is overwhelmed by "brute" force control by the over-powering hand.
        4. when you think about it, the string is being "brutalized" because of this.
        5. the string should be operated in it's "sweet" spot, i.e., not overly stressed.
        6. this way, the metal won't have the tendency to change.
        7. same with fretting it. just pressurize it to obtain that "sweet" response, no more. furthering it will only accelerate wear and tear. and as you already advised, this necessitates changing strings.
        8. my rule of thumb is don't change it until the intonation strays off. there is a definite stability period whereby intonation remains very acceptable over the life of the string. in the very beginning and very tail end of life you may notice intonation imperfection. but other than that i just leave it be. to set intonation i strung and idled the instrument about three months under actual tension conditions. this allowed the strings to equalize into what they'd be. you have to re-tension all with every adjustment, and, you have to relax a particular before even attempting to make an adjustment. it is time consuming but the process works. care must be made not to impart any imperfections onto each string. you mentioned fret indentations. well that is an imparted imperfection, greater if pressurized by "brute" force.
        9. those break-over angles eventually fade away and the string will take on a true vertex in lieu of the "pillowing" discussed. yes you can demand that defined vertex sooner by forcing it. but i don't because doing so will lead to metals properties inhomogenity along the length of the string, something that doesn't fit well with desired vibrational characteristics.
        10. the wear and tear can be optimally reduced without sacrificing playability or output. big wide frets disperse fretting pressure. a stable guitar structure and setup reduces unnecessary compensatory re-tensioning. pick attack and fingering, too, can be controlled so as to operate the string only within it's "sweet" spot, essentially it's elastic envelope. recall the metals intrinsic properties do not change, well, with cyclic fatigue it does, but that's under the condition whereby you extend applied force beyond elasticity margins, over and over, again and again.
        11. in a nutshell, yes you can reap maximum longevity out of the strings. but to do so, you can't bear down with passionate excitement which players just love to do. instead, you have to be conscious of what you're doing to those strings, always, remembering how easily damaged they are. it can be done and the output music still savored.
        12. in regards to manufacturing quality, no, i must say that those united states strings are okay, run of the mill as they are. the metallurgy of cores and wraps does affect performance, but it's minuscule in comparison to what the vacuum tube waveform shaping can do. manufacturing process control is crucial though as wrap must be integral with core, absolutely! likewise, consistency is paramount, otherwise intonation would be afloat during change out. strings are a mature science. the only thing that will come about is the advent of better materials, again, intrinsic material properties is everything. maybe they'll be able to build the string the same way they do those intel materials, molecule by molecule, from the ground up. it is conceivable that a metal ceramic core integrated with an outer polymer porcelain elastic sheathe could work, in conjunction with ceramic frets, thereby eliminating wear and indentations altogether.

        Comment


        • #34
          whoops, forgot the even ordered harmonics

          1. no, in a class A scheme, the rich even ordered harmonics are existing.
          2. it is the class AB scheme to which you refer to of odd ordered harmonics.
          3. isn't this correct?
          4. because of the wastage of power consumption, and tube expenditure, class A schemes are undesired by users.
          5. however, their performance is spectacular. coupled with the right choice of marginally under rated paper speakers, the results are so very addictive. there are things inside of the sound that makes you really wonder whether the strings and guitar actually made them. it's like you said, "...try playing the guitar naked and listen to what your strings sound like...". well maybe these sounds are actually there, intrinsic, from the strings and guitar, just that our ears can't distinguish them until the class A scheme enunciates it? what's your take on this?

          Comment


          • #35
            Sorry hewo, I'm not quite getting your drift! I'll maybe smoke some more of that "diesel" and try again later But yes, the strings are being brutalized with passionate excitement, it's called rock and roll.

            Axpro: I think I know what you mean about the PRS hardtail bridge. I believe it's the long grooves that the strings rest in to blame. The grooves are kinder on the strings than the small pointy saddles on a Gibson Tune-O-Matic, but I think they somehow deaden some frequencies in the upper midrange, because they stop the little bit of string BEHIND the saddle from vibrating. (Hewo: got an opinion on this? Boundary conditions?)

            My McCarty will barely sound some artificial harmonics that come out strongly my other guitar (an American Standard reissue Strat) They just go plunk.

            It's still a keeper for me, because I have big hands and love the fat neck on it. The guitar I always really wanted was an ES-335, but I hate playing them because the fingerboard is just too narrow at the nut. The McCarty has a neck like a cricket bat.

            Anyway I'm on a mission to obtain and fit an Alnico 2 Pro bridge pickup, thanks for the tip guys I'll record "before and after" sound clips if anyone is interested.
            "Enzo, I see that you replied parasitic oscillations. Is that a hypothesis? Or is that your amazing metal band I should check out?"

            Comment


            • #36
              amplification classification

              1. in class A, the amplifier is full throttled, so to speak.
              2. in class AB, there are two amplifier portions, one portion for only dedicated amplification of the waveform crest, and the other portion for only dedicated amplification of the waveform trough. that means the baton has to get handed over to each amplification portion, back and forth, at some designated point on that waveform. so they chose zero crossing. this also means that at any one split moment in time, one portion works while the other sleeps. making certain that the "synchronization" of when the baton gets handed over to the other portion is paramount, critically crucial timing, otherwise the waveform won't be preserved as a smooth transition. well it just so happens that this preservation is not a perfect setup, it drifts and is sensitive to factors beyond your control. as a result, the waveform smoothness of continuity, equivalently, the sound to the ear can be distinguished as imperfect.
              3. you yourself have to experience the direct comparison by having both amps side by side in a plug and play hearing comparison test.
              4. while true pre-amplification can compensate, meaning, it can agitate the waveform to the point that imperfections are drowned out beyond recognition, you still can control the listening comparative test by dialing in a sparkling configuration to realize just what the difference is between the two.
              5. an expert told me that there is a class AB1 whereby the two halves of amplification are simultaneously striving together, one hurling the waveform "into" the speaker transformer while simultaneously the other is "sucking" it back out from the other end of the speaker transformer. the speaker transformer can be thought of as the car's transmission whereby torque is mechanically leveraged at the expense of rpm. in this classification AB1, there is no resting. consequently it still drinks quite a lot of electricity and consumes vacuum tube life.
              6. and yes, rock n roll is everything but it need not injure the strings. passionate expressions from a guitarist needn't injure the hardware. you can still achieve the same response, if not better, by "working" the instrument within it's designed range of capabilities. think about this. does it really change the sound whether you fret that note with half a pound of pressure versus quadruple that? similarly, does it really make a difference whether you deflect that string a quarter inch versus triple that?
              7. i looked at those prs wilkinson bridges, extremely simple and functional too. what they did was eliminate unnecessary junctions. more junctions means more interface loss. as you can see, the perfect bridge would be no parts at all, no insert bushings, no threadings, no latch-on to studs. technically it could be achieved by computer machining. but first you'd have to get the points in space defined. these are the points where the string embarks vibration at the bridge. once you have these, the computer can machine the rest, ultimately unified with the craved top out of a material that will complement and adjoin. since electricity is involved, it has to be grounded. as far as selective frequency response inequalities, you must be made aware of the fact that your biological hearing is actually impaired. you do not have a "perfect" hearing system. there are "favoritism's". plus, as you destroy your hearing due to those marvelous sounds launched out of the celestions, you compensate by seeking to restore what sensitivity your biological system has forfeited in permanent damage. the audience has pristine hearing, unlike the musician who has suffered abuse. but you can doublecheck whether your claim is actually substantiated. you would need to freeze that waveform and snapshot it, then compare it under "fair" equivalent conditions utilizing another bridge, say, a schaller, a badass, a tune-o-matic, a noble. i can't imagine a bridge actually responding unequally to the frequency spectrum. usually the amount of metal mass and solidly coupling it into the carved top is more than adequate for the whole tonal range of frequencies. another "unlikely", though quite possible, explanation would be the destructive counter vibrational response of the transducer for that particular frequency portion. this means that in that frequency portion you claim deficient, the transducer is "canceling" it's waveform generation because it is mechanically shaking "out-of-phase" to the string's vibration. this can occur if the transducer is physically resonating, but lagging, out of phase. what causes the transducer to "lag" is a complex situation owing to involved mass, dissipation and elastic energy conservation. i recall i had a 70's student rickenbacker whose trusses (dual) would dull the output from the transducers (amazingly lovely transducer performance) until i drowned them in their tunnels with beeswax (battery circuit used for very mild heating of these metal conductors to liquify beeswax). the wax changed the "involved mass, dissipation and elastic energy conservation".

              Comment


              • #37
                I was allways breaking the D string on my main PRS that I used live. I eventually realized that my sweat was rather costic (sp?) it seems the D would break because it was the thinnest core of all the wound strings. The sweat would wick into the wraps and corrode the core. the other strings were either unwound, and so evaporated quicker or had a thicker core. hence the D tended to break. Try a little drop of oil of some sort on the string right over the saddle. I think I used Valve oil. The stuff that people use on trumpets or reeded instruments of something. I image any oil would achieve the same thing. I hope this helps.

                Comment


                • #38
                  oxidation of core

                  i found some crayon in the sewing department used to lube zippers. i recall it had an ingredient in it glycol or some sort. anyway i'd apply it to the nut and saddle windings and the plain strings too to stop that geek noise caused by binding in the groove i believe. then later i realized i could dissolve the crayon in zippo lighter fluid and apply it surgically using a needle dispenser. that's when the lube entered deeper into the core of wound strings. i think it just seals out the bad stuff from getting inward. once the lighter fluid evaporates (quickly), the crayon stuff is left behind. i also tried pure bees wax because it's a lot stickier and stays forever justabout.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Hewo, punctuation is your friend. So are paragraphs.

                    Bottom line is just change your strings every few weeks like everyone else.
                    It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure. Albert Einstein


                    http://coneyislandguitars.com
                    www.soundcloud.com/davidravenmoon

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Steve Conner View Post
                      I guess that's one way of dealing with covered humbuckers... Grind the covers off with your plectrum of doom!
                      Your pick shouldn't hit the pickup cover.

                      Actually you can see some scars on the pickup it was used with... the little dents:



                      I remember the old anodized aluminium Tech picks, the metal wore down and left black residue all over my fingers. Right now I'm using a Big Stubby or my fingers. Not because the Big Stubby is my favourite but because I've lost all the other ones and need to buy more.
                      I had some of those aluminum ones, and the other aluminum ones with the ridges on the edge. I filed those off.

                      My wife bought be a bunch of those Tortex pickups a few years ago as a gift. I think I have three left.

                      I also like those white Clayton pickups. I might like those better.
                      Last edited by David Schwab; 03-06-2010, 05:29 AM.
                      It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure. Albert Einstein


                      http://coneyislandguitars.com
                      www.soundcloud.com/davidravenmoon

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        teriibly sticky adhesive backing, pick material

                        1. just last night at band practice i discovered something beneficial, very beneficial.

                        2. so i write.

                        3. i didn't have my pick so i ended up scissoring out an old apple computer mouse pad pick, peeling away the nepoprene sponge cushion from it's backside.

                        4. the sticky adhesive remained on the pick material and i just couldn't get it off.

                        5. i played with it and the strings got terribly contaminated.

                        6. but the playability and sound was fantastic. why is this?

                        7. the pick felt like an extension of my bones. i could feel the string not wanting to part from the pick, string by string, really weird but it definitely enhanced separability, string by string.

                        8. i am going to go online and try and find some of this terribly stick stuff. i'm wondering if it is the same stuff on the super market coakaroach traps and mouse traps that use adhesive to snare the critter.

                        9. i put some reynolds aluminum foil over the contaminated string area so that i could check if it would still play the same the next practice session. otherwise the hardshell case lining would dampen the adhesive with fibrous payload. it worked!

                        10. change of subject: anybody got ideas on how to stuff the amplifier innards with larger capacitance for the tiered high tensions that supply the plate voltages? the reason for this is so that the chassis can be mated back into the combo, for ease of transport. i already separated the chassis from the combo in a previous venture because the capacitors just won't fit. but that means having two pieces of equipment instead of just one to lug. bigger capacitance in the tensions equates to bigger sound, all things equal. i especially like the jabs of punch the capacitance adds, almost a percussive enhance. voltages remain rock steady, even under musical loading, so performance consistency becomes constant. the mains transformer works more because more energy is being passed through the system. so does the speaker transformer work harder. i put in an ac fan to preserve transformers reliability and it works well. i purviewed around the interior of the chassis for real estate property to house capacitors and found some real estate property. what i don't know is whether the length of run, say give or take five to seven inches of wiring extend, would cause detriment, say antennae or oscillatory instabilities. saint louis music utilizes the shortest path lengths to curb said maladies, and it saves material, ultimately money.

                        Comment

                        antalya escort
                        kartal escort
                        sex vidio
                        altyaz?l? porno
                        antalya escort
                        beylikduzu eskort bayan eskort bayan escort antalya sirinevler bayan escort
                        Working...
                        X