ShortScale.org

I owned a Mustang for over a year. After getting a AVRI Jazzmaster, I can see why their trems are much more highly regarded.

The Mustang trem is less stable than pretty much every other type of tremolo. I had mine set up pretty well so that it would return to pitch after use, but that's another thing... It has almost TOO MUCH range, to the point where it's difficult to be subtle with its use. Just a slight bend yielded a cartoonish pitch dive, and it was nearly impossible to get nice subtle surf shimmers, Nels Cline-esque lead vibrato, or Kevin Shields pre-bends without extra effort. With other trems (yes, even strats), these techniques are a lot more simplified.

Basically, yeah, been there done that, and don't like Mustang trems. I like the way the guitars themselves sound, but I didn't bother with the trem much because of the aforementioned issues. I would prefer a Duosonic for the stability/sustain if I were to get another non-Jag shortscale.

it appears to me that in theory it makes sense to vary the gauge of the string in accordance with the scale length. while in practice it really comes down to personal preference, as the difference in tension is based on thousandths of an inch difference in string diameter and hence negligible.
to suggest that lighter gauge strings on a shortscale will be "floppy" is a little extreme. i still stand by my initial statement that shortscale guitars don't require heavier strings. and i really don't see what string gauge has to do with tuning stability. i use floppy strings on all my guitars and they never go out of tune.

bubbles_horwitz wrote:shortscale guitars don't require heavier strings. and i really don't see what string gauge has to do with tuning stability.

I use 9's or 10's on most of my guitars. I don't have a stability issue at all with any of my guitars. I agree with you Bubbles.

bubbles_horwitz wrote:and i really don't see what string gauge has to do with tuning stability.

It's the combination of gauge and scale that produces tension.

Obviously with increased tension comes increased tuning stability, since the strings (which always slip out of tune in time) will remain in their static position for longer because of the increased mechanical stress holding them in place. Also the "floppiness" when you use 9s and 10s on shortscales can cause players to fret notes slightly bent and so end up playing out of tune in that manner. I'm sure a precision player or someone who was not a heavy fretter would not notice the difference but I absolutely do. We all know I have a world-famous slack playing style and I fret with a heavy hand, this used to drag my fretted notes out of pitch very easily with 9s and 10s, even on my 25.5" Baja Telecaster which had 9s as stock. I noticed a vast improvement on replacing the strings with 11s.

bubbles_horwitz wrote:the difference in tension is based on thousandths of an inch difference in string diameter and hence negligible.

Absolutely incorrect. I can feel it, lots of us can feel it. It's absolutely clear as day to me.

Mike wrote: I noticed a vast improvement on replacing the strings with 11s.

i quite agree.. i can't play my mustangs with anything less then 11's now..

Mike wrote:

bubbles_horwitz wrote:the difference in tension is based on thousandths of an inch difference in string diameter and hence negligible.

Absolutely incorrect. I can feel it, lots of us can feel it. It's absolutely clear as day to me.

i was referring to the difference in calculating the formula that nicks provided. the difference in a 12 gauge string versus an 11 gauge string will have a minuscule effect on the frequency.
what you said only further proves my point. doog may say that smaller strings feel floppy on a shortscale, while someone else will say they feel just fine. it's down to personal preference.

I use 10's on all my guitars generally, and i notice the Mustang is effortless to play with them. Almost too easy! I divebomb with the bar on harmonics and it returns to pitch 9/10.

There is a video on Youtube of Kahler vs Floyd Rose. The most diverse of trem systems ever. Its very educational.
The Kahlers downfall is the fact that it is strung up traditionally using the 'ball ends' of the strings like all Fender trem systems. The windings on the ball end is a weak spot. Old school Kahler users used to solder this area of the string to prevent movement/loss of tension!

bubbles_horwitz wrote:

Mike wrote:

bubbles_horwitz wrote:the difference in tension is based on thousandths of an inch difference in string diameter and hence negligible.

Absolutely incorrect. I can feel it, lots of us can feel it. It's absolutely clear as day to me.

i was referring to the difference in calculating the formula that nicks provided. the difference in a 12 gauge string versus an 11 gauge string will have a minuscule effect on the frequency.
what you said only further proves my point. doog may say that smaller strings feel floppy on a shortscale, while someone else will say they feel just fine. it's down to personal preference.

You're wrong (again).

The formula is mass per unit difference. There is a large difference in mass over a scale length between gauges of string.

You're tying yoursself in knots. It makes a difference, it's real, and the vast majority of people feel the same way. You are in the (wrong) minority.

Mike wrote:Also the "floppiness" when you use 9s and 10s on shortscales can cause players to fret notes slightly bent and so end up playing out of tune in that manner. I'm sure a precision player or someone who was not a heavy fretter would not notice the difference but I absolutely do. We all know I have a world-famous slack playing style and I fret with a heavy hand, this used to drag my fretted notes out of pitch very easily with 9s and 10s, even on my 25.5" Baja Telecaster which had 9s as stock. I noticed a vast improvement on replacing the strings with 11s.

i wouldn't exactly call myself a "precision player", but i prefer lighter gauge strings because they allow me to exercise more control over the strings. i like being able to effortlessly bend to a desired pitch, but more often than that, i like being able to do wild, exaggerated vibrato. and maybe it's a result of having played viola for so many years, but i like being able to feel more fretboard than string.

Mike wrote:The formula is mass per unit difference. There is a large difference in mass over a scale length between gauges of string.

how exactly are you calculating the mass? i was under the impression (and correct me if i'm wrong, which you seem to be so willing to do) that the diameter of the string is the gauge. say for 10's we have a diameter of 10 thousandths of an inch (on the high e string), while with 11's we have a diameter of 11 thousandths of an inch. the difference in mass per inch isn't very big (i know diameter isn't mass, but the effect .001" change in diameter will have on the mass is insignificant). the difference is more noticeable on the lower strings, but it's not nearly as much as you seem to want it to be.

edit: and lol, my argument was based on the feel and personal preference of string gauges and you tell me i'm wrong because they feel different to you (and apparently everyone else on the planet).

Thicker strings = more tention
Longer scale = more tention

Thinner strings = less tention
shorter scale = less tention

I use 9's on my 22.5 mm and I don't have any issues at all with buzziing or staying in tune. It also has a lot to do with the type of music I play on that guitar. Different guitars with different set ups are different. To me, guitars are like paint brushes, everyone has a preference, but they are all good for something.

this site is pretty interesting even though it seems primarily geared towards classical guitar.

bubbles_horwitz wrote:

Mike wrote:The formula is mass per unit difference. There is a large difference in mass over a scale length between gauges of string.

how exactly are you calculating the mass? i was under the impression (and correct me if i'm wrong, which you seem to be so willing to do) that the diameter of the string is the gauge. say for 10's we have a diameter of 10 thousandths of an inch (on the high e string), while with 11's we have a diameter of 11 thousandths of an inch. the difference in mass per inch isn't very big (i know diameter isn't mass, but the effect .001" change in diameter will have on the mass is insignificant). the difference is more noticeable on the lower strings, but it's not nearly as much as you seem to want it to be.

edit: and lol, my argument was based on the feel and personal preference of string gauges and you tell me i'm wrong because they feel different to you (and apparently everyone else on the planet).

I have always been primarily talking about the change to 11s. Taking the high E string in isolation is OF COURSE a warped sample. All the other strings differ by much larger amounts.

Anyway:
9s -11s high E
0.002" thickness x 24" scale = 0.048" of extra string. That's FUNDAMENTALLY more string. It is absolutely heavier, and it terms of resonace acts completely differently.

Let's warp the sample in my favour shall we?

Low E 0.042 -> 0.049 - that's 0.007" x 24" = 0.168".

Massive difference.

The mass change is substantial and real. Stop being wrong.

Haha

FFS even if you go 9s-10's that still a sodding 11.1% increase in width on the high E-string, the least effected.

Fucking 11% people.

Doog wrote:String Gauge- Serious Business

No, not talking a lot of tripe is serious business.

bubbles_horwitz wrote: doog may say that smaller strings feel floppy on a shortscale, while someone else will say they feel just fine. it's down to personal preference.

To the 25.5" player, they do feel floppier- not ridiculously so, but would make me want to up the gauge so I don't have a different playing experience each time I switch to the shortscale.

Yes- it's all preference but there is less tension going on.

bubbles_horwitz wrote:this site is pretty interesting even though it seems primarily geared towards classical guitar.

Excellent reference.

Anyway, some further thoughts, working the formual:
Tension vs. string dia. Remember that a change from .010" to 0.011", a 10% change in diameter, equates to a 21% increase in cross-sectional area and hence 21% increase in mass/unit length. To maintain the same frequency at the same length you'd need a 21% increase in tension. At the original tension you'd get a note about 10% lower (frequency proportional to square root of tension, remember) - say a G (196 Hz) instead of an A (220 Hz). So if you have a guitar you keep in a funny tuning (e.g DADGAD) you might want to bear in mind that 10% increase in dia. should give you about a full tone drop at the same tension

Tension vs. scale length To keep the rest constant, tension varies with the square of length. Drop scale length 12% and you'll need to drop tension by the square - 25.4%. To see how that feels on a 3/4 scale, detune your guitar a little over a full tone. A Jaguar is about 6% shorter than a Strat, so detune by about a semitone to see how that feels.

Scale length vs. string dia. A Stratocaster is 25.5" scale, a Swinger or 3/4 scale Mustang is 22.5" scale, a 12% drop. Keeping frequency and tension the same, you want (mass/unit length) x (length)² constant. But mass/unit length is proportional to diameter², so that means you want to keep length x diameter constant - so 12% increase in diameter. Seems to me that to keep the same tension on a 22.5" 3/4 scale as on your 25.5" longscale a change from .010"s to .011"s is about right.

Moving from a Strat to a 24" scale Jaguar, 6% drop in length, maybe you want to think about upping from .010"s to those fancy .0105"s some string-makers sell. Otherwise you'll need a 12% decrease in tension.