E9th String breakage question

George Kimery · Post by **George Kimery** » 11 Nov 2006 6:12 am

I had a Kline Keyless for 15 years and breaking strings was just about unheard of. I can't say it was the keyless design, but think about it....on a keyless, the string does not have to be as long, so wouldn't a shorter string not have to be tightened as a longer string to get pitch? Also, since a keyless is up to 6" shorter, wouldn't there be less flex and less detuning problems?

Brad Malone · Post by **Brad Malone** » 11 Nov 2006 6:41 am

Michael, thanks for your information about the Excel. You say your string lenght is 25 1/4 and yet your string breakage is less because of the design of the Excel changer. You speak from great experience because you have had other guitars and you play steady gigs. What is the cost and waiting time for the Excel? I think, from what you say, that the Excel has taken the anxiety factor out of the string breakage problem. Even if you change strings often there is still a chance of getting a bad batch of strings and the new string may not last as long as the string that just broke...design is the way out of the problem, as you indicated..thanks again for a very informative post.

Brad Malone · Post by **Brad Malone** » 11 Nov 2006 6:59 am

Hey Tony, thanks for your input. I'm learning a lot from all the people that took time to post about the string breakage issue. Some posters had the chance of playing many guitars and have much more experience than me and I am grateful for their replies.

Curt Langston · Post by **Curt Langston** » 11 Nov 2006 7:16 am

I can't say it was the keyless design, but think about it....on a keyless, the string does not have to be as long, so wouldn't a shorter string not have to be tightened as a longer string to get pitch?

George my man, you are wise beyond your years. There are many pros, and "experts" that have yet to grasp your findings.

Thats what people have said when they try to explain that on a keyless, the WHOLE length of the string is shorter,(about 26 inches total) even with a 25 inch scale, than a keyed 24 inch guitar.(about 28.5-29 inch total)

The longer the string is from anchor to anchor(keyed or keyless), the more apt you are to break strings.(must be stretched tighter) Especially the 3rd G#.

Thats why there are no keyed 25 inch scale guitars. To make a keyed 25 inch scale guitar, you would have 29.5 to 30.0 inches of string to pull up to pitch. An .011 G# WILL NOT take that much tension, regardless of your scale length!

At 28.5 to 29.0 inches of total string on a 24 inch scale guitar, you are almost at the breaking point of the .011 guage G# string when you raise to an A. Hence the reason for not making a 25 inch scale keyed guitar. Buddy Emmons and Shot Jackson already tried that. The .011 guage G# would not hold up.

Consider the "Beast" built by Tom Baker at Sierra. It has a scale length of 29.7(or so) inches. Basically it is all scale. Yet, it is tuned to C9th. Why?... Simple. 30 inches of .011 guage G# string will not pull up to an A, without breaking strings, very frequently

....on a keyless, the string does not have to be as long, so wouldn't a shorter string not have to be tightened as a longer string to get pitch?

Indeed George, indeed!

Good post.

Brad Malone · Post by **Brad Malone** » 11 Nov 2006 8:34 am

....on a keyless, the string does not have to be as long, so wouldn't a shorter string not have to be tightened as a longer string to get pitch?<<

The above statement really solves the issue IMHO..thanks George and Curt. I was wondering why Michael could have a 25 1/2 inch scale and almost never break strings..he plays 20 (five set) gigs before he changes the high G# (E9th) what a testament!

Bill Duve · Post by **Bill Duve** » 11 Nov 2006 10:15 am

I read Jim Bob Sedgwick's thoughts about it using "Mothers Aluminum Polish" on the tops of the fingers and spent 4 hrs polishing out the string grooves worn on mine, I dont know about breaking strings but it sure does sound better !
Then I wonder ?. Why are they using aluminum, about the next best sound deadening metal next to LEAD, ie: like playing with an aluminum bar..
If were talking $3000.00 insturments cant they use something more resonant than that ? Like hard yellow brass chrome plated ?
Just struck me funny whilst polishing !

Brad Malone · Post by **Brad Malone** » 11 Nov 2006 11:25 am

Why? Like the Anapeg and now I think the Lamar,the Excel changer pulls the strings horizontally instead of cranking them around a rotating cam. Ever notice that strings always break at the crown of the cam? It's called bending a string back and forth till it breaks from metal fatigue. Straight pull changers don't do that and consequently don't break strings. Someday all changers will be built like that.<<

Hey Dave, I think Michael's statement has the answer to the grooving problem. "Straight pull changers" will probably groove less than "sharp bend pull changers".

Charlie McDonald · Post by **Charlie McDonald** » 12 Nov 2006 6:28 am

I'm gonna go get me some Mother's today.
I did the job with a Diamond Deb nail file once. Not recommended.

Erv Niehaus · Post by **Erv Niehaus** » 12 Nov 2006 7:12 am

If you've got really deep grooves, Mother's will take a looooooooooong time. Start with emery paper, then some rubbing compound, then go to polishing compound and then Mothers.
Spend the time you will save on mashing pedals!

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 13 Nov 2006 6:13 am

We've been around and around about total string length before. The total string length has nothing to do with the tension on the string. For a given pitch and gauge, tension is solely dependent on scale length (bridge or changer to nut). 25" and 25 1/2" keyless guitars actually have more tension on the strings than 24" and 24 1/4" keyed guitars. But keyed guitars do have more stretch to get up to pitch, because of the extra string length behind the nut. That extra stretch requires more string bending over the changer, and can contribute to more string breakage. In other words, because of less stretch, and less bending at the changer, keyless guitars can actually handle more tension on the strings, and therefore can use a longer scale length. A straight pull would also help with the problem.

As for the grooves on changers, I don't think all manufacturers use aluminum for the top of the changer fingers, but I don't know about specific brands. Also, maybe a really old guitar with lots of playing time would get some wear grooves. But I think the vast majority of grooves in changers come from inexperienced players/mechanics turning the guitar upside down without protecting the changer top. The weight of a 50-60 lb. guitar on steel strings can easily gouge the surface of the changer. It just takes one time upside down with no protection to gouge a changer.[This message was edited by David Doggett on 13 November 2006 at 06:16 AM.]

Brad Malone · Post by **Brad Malone** » 13 Nov 2006 8:04 am

Dave, thanks for your reply but you left me a bit confused...Doesn't more stretch on a string equal more tension on a string?

Chris Lang · Post by **Chris Lang** » 13 Nov 2006 9:16 am

yes it does Brad. When those strings have more than 28 inchs to strech they break a lot.Those 3rds cant take that much tension at 28 or 29 inchs. that how come nobody makes a 25 scale guitar. strings would be close to 30 inchs.and thats to long. Buddy even said. Look up his talk about it. That Baest of ED Packer is tuned lower so he can have that long scale. he cant tune it to e9.

Brad Malone · Post by **Brad Malone** » 13 Nov 2006 10:03 am

Thanks Chris, I'm glad someone agrees with my conclusion...I'd love to hear the tone of the 25" scale Guitar but I do not know anyone who has one in my area...seems the way to go.

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 13 Nov 2006 10:31 am

No, the length of stretch has nothing to do with tension. Yes, the longer string will stretch further in getting up to tension, but the final tension will be the same, if the pitch, gauge and scale length are the same. Curt is confusing scale length with total string length. A longer scale requires more tension, if the gauge and pitch are held constant. Buddy and Shot, in the experiments Curt is referring to, were examining the effect of scale length on string breakage, not total string length. They apparently decided 24 ¼” was the maximum scale length for their keyed pedal steels with a G# 3rd string pulling up to A. Shot stayed with 24” on Sho-Buds, and Emmons went to 24 ¼” on the Emmons push/pull. Apparently, when Sierra and others started making keyless pedal steels, they discovered that the less stretch of the short overhang behind the nut caused less bending at the changer and allowed them to use longer necks with higher tension without incurring more breakage.

Technically tension is the force measured at the end of the string. X lbs of tension is X lbs of tension, and it doesn’t matter how long the string is and how much stretching it has to do to reach X lbs of tension. It is still X lbs of tension.

Curt Langston · Post by **Curt Langston** » 13 Nov 2006 11:13 am

Hi Brad! Don't despair. You're on to something here that is rarely understood. David spoke of Sierra. Well, here is Sierra's official word from their website:

New technology fulfills the 30 year dream of tone plus sustain. Remember the old beautiful rich tone and everlasting sustain of the long-scale steel guitars? Due to excessive string breakage, scale lengths had to be shortened when pedals were added to steel guitars. Even though this also reduced sus- tain and tone quality, it was necessary to keep the strings on the guitar. Sierra's advanced engineering and manufacturing quality of the 'Gearless Tuner' allows a 25-inch scale with shorter string length than a keyed or geared guitar with a 24 inch scale. This, united with Sierra's super-strong body construction, makes the 30-year dream of tone plus sustain a reality! Sierra's Gearless Tuner gives the benefits of 'keyless' design that has been written about for years. Yet the Sierra design is tuned 'on top' of the instru- ment with finger-knob adjustment. The finger knob adjusting screws raise or lower the string tension through a precision lever, giving a micrometer fine adjustment. Machine head backlash is eliminated and the historical string stretch problem behind the roller nut is cured. Extensive testing proved string hysteresis theories true. Sierra's gearless tuner solved this problem. Actual laboratory tests with a strobe tuner proved that even the historically troublesome strings (4 & , with both raise and lower functions, would return to true pitch with zero flat/sharp troubles. The design also allows for a shorter guitar body. Gearless models are all 31'/2 inches long. 5 inches shorter than a 'standard' 14 string guitar Of course, this means less weight!

Keep your mind on this part:

allows a 25-inch scale with shorter string length than a keyed or geared guitar with a 24 inch scale.

Sierra is obviously talking about the entire string length here. In many discussions on this subject, it has become the general consensus that the part of the string behind the nut,(in the keyhead) is under the same tension as the scale portion. And since this is so, it would suffice to say that this is the reason Buddy and Shot could not construct a 25 inch scale keyed guitar. WHY?, because that extra inch in the total length of the string, put the G# up to just about its breaking point. By shortening the scale, (by just 3/4 to 1.0 inch) they were able to reduce the tension to just under the breaking threshold.(when pulled up to an A)
Chris talked about Ed's "Beast". It's scale is almost 30 inches, with very little (maybe 1/2 inch) overhang, yet it cannot be tuned to E9th. (Overhang is the portion of strings in the keyhead) It has to be tuned lower, to C9th or C6th9 (or something like that). If you were to put an .011 gauge G# on it, and tune it up to pitch, you would get very little playing done. You would be too busy changing the G# string!
Remember this: when you tune up a steel guitar, you are pulling up THE ENTIRE STRING to pitch. From tuning end to changer end. Not just the scale portion.
Here is another perspective from Forum member Michael Johnstone: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The strings are easier to change - and just about all keyless guitars are something like this - you just hook the string on at the changer end and bring the other end up and wrap it around a small allen head bolt about 1/2 wrap,tighten down the bolt,bend the excess string back and forth a couple times to break it off and the string is on. Then you tune up the string either with the same allen key you used to tighten down the bolt or like on my Sierra and also GFIs work like this - you can tune the string with your fingers using little knurled buttons which look like the fine tuners on a violin. If I break a string onstage,I can have a new one on and be playing again within a verse and a chorus.As far as scales lengths go,most keyed guitars max out at 24.5" before you run into excessive string breakage because the section of string under tension(changer to tuning post)is as much as 27" on the middle strings of a keyed guitar.Conversely on a keyless design,say on a 25" scale,the section of string under tension is only 25" in total. So there is actually more tension on most of the strings on a keyed 24.5" guitar than all the strings of a keyless 25" guitar. Less tension means less string breakage and a shorter pedal pull/string stretch to achieve a given pitch change - so strings last longer and don't break nearly as much.Plus all the strings are the same length with no overhang past the roller nut which translates into zero unwanted overtones that many keyed guitars display and most guys damp out with foam rubber or plastic tubing.Not to mention that harmonics are easier to get,high register stuff is easier to play in tune and the tone is just fundamentally more pure and phat.Lightweight - compact - stays in tune for months - you can't knock it out of tune just by taking it out of the case - it's just a better design from every angle you want to talk about. C'mon guys - On with the future!
-MJ- <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't get frustrated, you are on the right track.

Now lets hope b0b does not close this thread!

[This message was edited by Curt Langston on 13 November 2006 at 11:22 AM.]

Curt Langston · Post by **Curt Langston** » 13 Nov 2006 12:04 pm

Brad, here is another perspective from Carl Dixon:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Billy,
As always, you are apt to get a myriad of opinions. I will join that fray

Having had both and played them extensively (at home) for a long time, the following is my assestments; Pro and Con:

Keyed:

1. Generally harder and takes longer to change strings.

2. Because of a longer string string length(bridge to key peg), string breakage tends to be more frequent. Too much tension.

3. The overtones from strings beyond the nut give the guitar's sound a more "WANTED" tone according to many I have talked to. And I concur. This, even though the fingers to the left of the bar are supposed to mute these sounds. Something is still there. I can't explain it. I just know it is.

4. 10 and particurly 12 string keyheads tend to be large and take up a lot of room. Thus, the guitar must be made longer; and of course heavier.

5. Since most humans tend to have a low DC factor (they Detest Change ), the key head is said to be aesthetically more appealling. Or as one player put it, "it 'jes luks better!".

6. Sustains better AFTER the 12th fret*

7. Open string tuning somewhat more convenient. (This is changing like the Sierra and GFI presently do it)

Keyless:

1. Shorter and of course lighter Guitar.

2. Changing strings often considerably faster. (Excluding the 3rd string which can be a bear)

3. Looks odd to many. ("jes don luk right!")

4. Because the total string length is much shorter, it is common to have a longer scale. IE, 25-25 and 1/2 as opposed to 24-24 to 1/4. This is supposed to give a better sound and have more sustain. (See note below)

5. The longer scales make respective pedals and knee levers stiffer than on keyed guitars. More tension is the culprit here.

6. Loses sustain faster beyond the 12th fret*

Please note the asteriks (*) in both the keyed and the keyless scenarios.

* I have been taken to task on this several times. However, I can only speak from my OWN personal experiences going from my keyed to my keyless guitars and back.

Further, because my style of playing (like JB) uses a lot of very long and many fretted sustains, from one end of the neck to the other, both my Sierra AND my Excel have simply run out of gas before the sustained phrase has finished.

This has NEVER happened on any of my keyed guitars. For those that don't play this style, this may be NO problem. And, they may have never noticed it as a result. I can assure you that this IS the case on both my keyless guitars. I can only attribute the cause to them being keyless vs keyed.

carl
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Keyed point # 2 is where the meat is:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>2. Because of a longer string string length(bridge to key peg), string breakage tends to be more frequent. Too much tension.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As is keyless point # 4

4. Because the total string length is much shorter, it is common to have a longer scale. IE, 25-25 and 1/2 as opposed to 24-24 to 1/4. This is supposed to give a better sound and have more sustain. (See note below)

Brad, you are on the right track.

[This message was edited by Curt Langston on 13 November 2006 at 12:05 PM.]

Brad Malone · Post by **Brad Malone** » 13 Nov 2006 12:33 pm

Curt, you have proven beyond a doubt that the Keyless is the way to go to solve the string breakage problem, as far as I'm concerned. I just wanted to know the truth and you have provided it. When I went from non-pedal to pedal steel, I hated the sound of the pedal steel because it lacked sustain and did not sound as good as the non-pedal steel...now I know why..thanks again for your detailed explanation..the truth is out there if people want it.

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 13 Nov 2006 4:32 pm

Bad science. Curt is wrong. Curt's argument sounds logical but it is not. We debunked this once before. The tension required is based on the scale length. The extra length of string behind the nut does not increase the amount of tension required to bring the string up to pitch.

This is first year physics stuff. We shouldn't have to go through it step by step, over and over.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b2005.gif" width="78 height="78">Bobby Lee (a.k.a. b0b) - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6) My Blog 
<div style="display:none">

Curt Langston · Post by **Curt Langston** » 13 Nov 2006 5:28 pm

No b0b. Its not. reread Sierras explaination. Look at Buddys comments. Look at Carls comments. Look at Michaels comments.

And answer this: Where are all the 25 inch scale KEYED guitars?

Besides, a person does not have "to go through it step by step, over and over."

Eds Beast is almost 30 inches, with virtually no overhang. He cannot tune it to E9th because of the total string length.

I've tried putting a .011 G# where the 5th string goes, and adjusted the pulls to where it would pull up to A.

Guess what?........

The G#'s break almost immediately. One time just tuning up to G#!

You try it.

WHY?
Because you are at 30+ inches of string length, and that .011 gauge will not take the tension.

Bad Science?..

No, common sense.

We debunked this once before.

No, WE did not........

I gave you guys a rest.

[This message was edited by Curt Langston on 13 November 2006 at 07:25 PM.][This message was edited by Curt Langston on 15 November 2006 at 06:23 PM.]

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 13 Nov 2006 5:34 pm

Strings weren't as good in the 1950's. That's why Buddy and Shot couldn't do it.

Sierra's ad was designed to sell guitars. It's wrong.

Carl Dixon didn't think it thru carefully.

Ed's guitar has a 30 inch scale. That's why you can't tune a string to high A on it.

The main reason that there aren't any 25 inch keyed guitars is that a case for one wouldn't fit between the wheel wells in the trunk of an average car. That simple fact reduces the demand for such an instrument by about 50%.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b2005.gif" width="78 height="78">Bobby Lee (a.k.a. b0b) - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6) My Blog 
<div style="display:none">

Curt Langston · Post by **Curt Langston** » 13 Nov 2006 5:48 pm

Strings weren't as good in the 1950's. That's why Buddy and Shot couldn't do it.

OK.
So why don't they do it now?

Sierra's ad was designed to sell guitars. It's wrong.

What! Thats a little weak, don't you think?
Besides, Sierra guitars are the Cadillac of steels, and sell themselves!

Carl Dixon didn't think it thru carefully.

Carl Dixon thought it through very carefully. He was/is highly thought of on this forum, and a smart guy to boot!

Ed's guitar has a 30 inch scale. That's why you can't tune a string to high A on it.

Partially right on this one.
Ed's guitar is virtually ALL scale.
Virtually no overhang to deal with.
30 inches of an .011 G# string will not pull up to an A more than a very few times before,......POP!

The main reason that there aren't any 25 inch keyed guitars is that a case for one wouldn't fit between the wheel wells in the trunk of an average car. That simple fact reduces the demand for such an instrument by about 50%.

Really? 3/4 to 1 inch more will keep it out of the trunk?

I get it now. Your pulling my leg.[This message was edited by Curt Langston on 13 November 2006 at 05:52 PM.]

Brad Malone · Post by **Brad Malone** » 13 Nov 2006 7:10 pm

b0b, Aside from the tension issue, wouldn't you agree that a changer that bends a string less would produce longer string life even on the keyed steels. The Williams changer comes to mind but there may be others on the market that I do not know.

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 13 Nov 2006 8:35 pm

I think that if you want to play strings after they've gone dead, a straight pulling changer might do better than rotating changer. But why would you want to play dead strings?

I like the Williams fingers for the way they look. The patent is a design patent, you know. There's no claim of improved function in the Williams patent.

I'm only half kidding about fitting the case in the trunk, Curt. The truth is that people don't like the feel of the added tension of a long scale length. There isn't a big demand for long scale steels. Most steel players stick with shorter, more traditional scale lengths, even if they go keyless.

Sho-Bud players use an .012 and their "total string length" is greater than on my 25" Sierra Session. I'd be a nervous wreck with a .012 G# on my Sierra.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b2005.gif" width="78 height="78">Bobby Lee (a.k.a. b0b) - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6) My Blog 
<div style="display:none">[This message was edited by Bobby Lee on 13 November 2006 at 08:39 PM.][This message was edited by Bobby Lee on 13 November 2006 at 08:42 PM.]

Brad Malone · Post by **Brad Malone** » 13 Nov 2006 9:34 pm

I think that if you want to play strings after they've gone dead, a straight pulling changer might do better than rotating changer. But why would you want to play dead strings?<<

I'm not talking about a straight pulling changer, just a changer that bends the strings less so it won't be popping 3rds every other night. Strings do not go dead in a month. Again, I'm not talking about never breaking strings just breaking them less...thanks for your reply.

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 13 Nov 2006 10:14 pm

b0b is right. Why do we have to keep going over this step by step? Here's the previus thread where that was done: http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum5/HTML/013038.html

That thread contains a quote from Curt where he finally agreed that extra overhang or total string length does not cause greater tension; but increased scale length does. I'm not sure why he has changed his mind again and is arguing with b0b again and is again bringing up the same erroneous arguments and quotes that even he agreed were shot down before.