Acoustic Guitar Construction

Does anybody here has a preference which strings to use. And the reason for their preference please?

d"Addario EJ 16 (12-53) for all my acoustics. They have the right sound and touch. And they stay good long enough.
I know a lot like Elixers, but for me they are far too slippery. (FWIW: I play with a strong attack).
But the favor for certain strings is quite subjective, isn't it?
Herman

I feel you are on target, Herman, about "subjective". Roger Siminoff writes that there are only a handful of firms that actually manufacture strings, so they provide the same basic string to a number of sellers who market the same string under different names. One person prefers NAME-1, another swears by NAME-2. But there are differences in the way the marketers make up the sets. To cite an extreme example, you can use several different configurations to make up a wound string, say, .053. The core can be .001 and the winding .026 (ridiculous, but this is just an example). Or the core can be .051 and the winding .001 (also ridiculous). These would be very different strings with very different tensions and would therefore respond very differently. The first would be "tight" and hard to move, the second "floppy" and given to wide swings. But on their respective packages they would both say .053.

There are other possibilities as well. D'Addario makes up sets it calls "true medium" and such. These sets use strings with inner cores that, when tuned to pitch, generate approximately the same tension across the bridge. More typical sets have the low E with reduced tension, the other wounds with various other tensions, and so on. D'Addario also lets you assemble custom sets according to their calculator for tension.

Siminoff and Santa Cruz are working together to furnish what they call "parabolic" sets. These increase tension as the string moves from the outer position on the bridge to the middle. I have two sets of Siminoff's version but have not tried them yet.

Coatings certainly affect the sound. Everything from reducing finger squeak to adding a small amount of non-metallic substance to the mix. They prolong string life by protecting the metal from corrosion from our fingers, but do not affect the fact the string changes just from being stretched to a given tension, and further, from the length of time it has been stretched. So coated strings will "wear out" even if you never play them. Taylor, I think it was, noticed that coated strings gave his instruments a sales advantage over the competition that did not use them, simply because buyers play many instruments before they purchase. In the process they accelerate the inevitable wearing out process by adding corrosion to the strings on all the instruments they check out but do not purchase. By inhibiting the effect of this corrosion, Taylor's guitars would soon sound better than competitors with corroded strings, assuming the same length of time on the wall and amount of playing. But he did sacrifice something in an "out of the box" comparison. Today, of course, many others use coated strings, likely for the same reason.

So, one possible conclusion from all this, after you arrive at a configuration of tensions you like, would be to use coated strings on guitars you play frequently, and uncoated on guitars you don't play often. Tension, via the core + winding configuration, metal used for windings, and whether or not the string is coated seem like "real" considerations that a sensitive ear could discern as differences. "Brands", if these other factors are held constant, maybe not so much. Of course, the difference between one "brand" and another might well be the relative size of their cores versus windings for a given final diameter of string, as well as the arrangement of tensions they use to compose "light", versus "medium", versus "true medium", and so on. Such differences would apply even if both "brands" got their strings from the same manufacturer.

Myself, I really like D'Addarios because they give you so many options, and provide the handy web based app for looking at the effect the different possibilities have on tension - and at any scale length and tuning you want to look at. I have found that if I get a "wolf note" on a particular instrument, I can modify it by increasing the size and therefore tension of the string that is producing it. But that is trial and error and eliminating one wolf note can generate another somewhere else.

I believe that few things bring out the sonic majesty of an acoustic guitar like a fresh set of strings -- I am told many studio musicians/guitarists are in agreement with this notion and change for each session. And here's some trivia which I believe to be true ---- the standard Martin Strings which are made in Mexico are produced with the same materials and the same machines used to produce the "much" more expensive "Marquis" line of strings. So these are the strings I have come to use -- usually lights. In bulk they are even less expensive -- to my ear and budget a good way to go.

http://www.juststrings.com/cfm-m-535.html

That's a good price.

Ken is correct, strings are like Mexican beer. There's only about two breweries in Mexico despite the number of brands, and about two string makers in the USA.

(Mexicans play polkas on accordians because just before the start of the 20th century they imported Germans to make beer, and they brought company oompah bands. The brand Dos Equis – two X's – is named that, Roman numerals, for the 20th century)

One of the string makers is GHS, maybe 20 miles west of me in an industrial park that used to be Fort Custer, just west of Battle Creek. For 55 years I've used GHS phosphor bronze light (.012” - .054”), made there. They used to be called Squier, and the “S” in “GHS” stands for that.

I'm of the Dave Van Ronk school of changing guitar strings, mostly being lazy, not very musically talented, and now, partially deaf. I've played my #3 build, finished a year ago, daily, and haven't changed strings yet.

My good guitars stay at home. When I play out acoustically around here I take #3. When it requires amplification I used to put an in-soundhole pickup in my “formica” Martin, one of the first DXM's, made in PA, not Mexico. The formica top didn't sound like spruce, but the fretwork, intonation, and setup were flawless.

But I recently went to upgrade it for one with built-in electronics. Martin now makes, in Mexico, a spruce-topped HPL sided and backed series of guitars. The “HPL” stands for high pressure laminate, and is the Formica stuff we used to do kitchen counters with back in the '70's.

I played a couple of these at Elderly Instrument. One was a GPCPa5k, or somesuch – played several.
Then I played a Taylor 114ce, an additional $100 but still very inexpensive in todays prices. It sounded about an order of magnitude better than the Martins, had a spruce top and sapele back and sides, all wood, plus the electronics. I was looking for an 1-3/4” nut that the Martins had, but bought the Taylor with a 1-11/16” nut because of the obviously better sound – even to my ears.

Which brings us to John Link's excellent discourse, above, concerning strings:

(John's one of the local master luthiers here this barbarian consults with as he attempts to learn how to do this.)

This new Taylor has Elixir strings on it, beloved of one of my old Texas guitarist friends. They're also light gauge, same dimensions, but being coated, they feel like cables to me when I go to pick it. I thought the height at the nut was too high, from the feel, until I took feeler gauges and ascertained that the nut slots were actually splendidly close to the fingerboard.

I'll keep the Elixir's on until, as Van Ronk used to say, “When God wants you to change strings, He has a way of letting you know”, then I'll put on a set of my GHS lights. If I was a professionally capable guitarist with better hearing I would probably not take this approach. I always buy at least 3 sets of strings at a time as Elderly gives me a better price that way. Price them a dozen at a time.

ken cierp wrote:I believe that few things bring out the sonic majesty of an acoustic guitar like a fresh set of strings -- I am told many studio musicians/guitarists are in agreement with this notion and change for each session. And here's some trivia which I believe to be true ---- the standard Martin Strings which are made in Mexico are produced with the same materials and the same machines used to produce the "much" more expensive "Marquis" line of strings. So these are the strings I have come to use -- usually lights. In bulk they are even less expensive -- to my ear and budget a good way to go.

http://www.juststrings.com/cfm-m-535.html

This is as good as any place to start experimenting.
Just one more question if I may. I am accustomed to playing classicals (nylon) with nails. My nails are no match for the steel strings on an acoustic. Any recommendations for thumb picks, and/or finger picks?.
Thanks.