Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
So you can have a productive conversation with the dealer, a couple of things to keep in mind when viewing the specs on the Santa Cruz web site.
— Most of the differences in the various models are visible, such as woods, dimensions including sound hole and neck shape, finishes, and cosmetics.
— Some of the differences are “under the hood,” so to speak. Primarily, these are the bracings for the top, such as tapered, double tapered, scalloped, scalloped with advanced X, tapered with scalloped tone bars, sitka or red spruce braces, hide glue or other glue, etc. Any of these are design choices to achieve a desired sound — I wouldn’t label any specific one versus another as an “improvement” or “upgrade,” although costs could be different. Seems like this is what you mean by “engineering.”
So after you get information on what the specifications are for any particular model or custom build, the next question for the dealer or Santa Cruz is “what’s the objective of these specs, what sound is the goal?”
You’ll see all the specs and options on the Santa Cruz site, and can do a comparison. What the effect on the sound is would be explained by Santa Cruz or an astute dealer.
Hope this helps. Enjoy the ride!
JS Bach, Partita No.3 for solo violin, first movement, Prelude.
Transposed from E to G for 5-string banjo.
3 months in, up to measure 43 out of 138. A lot of new skills and patterns needed for banjo, for sure. Probably another 6 months to learn the whole piece passably, and another 3 months to polish it for performance.
I’m a much below average guitar player, so nothing new there — but you asked for music! For a guitar piece, tried Mr. Tony’s “Faded Love.” Got 4-5 measures in and realized that, while the transcription notes were accurate, the pick strokes that were labeled in the tablature were not Mr. Tony’s typical way of playing. Put that one away for a while, frustrated and don’t have the knowledge to figure it out. Someday maybe.
What Mr. Richard described is called a “compound radius.” This is where the surface of the fingerboard is modeled as the surface of a cone, where the radius changes along its length, rather than the surface of a pipe of constant radius.
Some makers will state the radius at the nut, and also the radius higher up around the 12th fret. “Average” radius doesn’t mean anything with a compound radius.
Mr. Richard gave a clear description of the purpose of a compound radius. Thanks for asking the question
From what I’ve understood, seems like the intent of the “parabolic” tension was not quite equal tension on all strings, but rather a sense of proportionate tension given the position of the strings on the saddle and the tension of the adjacent strings not being played — the intent being more uniform feel and response of each string to being plucked. And the tools are diameters of core wire and wrappings.
That being said, the result is that the edge strings — 1st and 6th — are close to “typical” diameters (such as .013 and .056 for mid tension), while the interior strings are a little lighter. This is similar to the Mr. Tony himself strings that Martin puts out. For Santa Cruz, it is relative tension and the feel of elasticity that are important, and the diameter just falls out where ever it does.
Myself, sample of 1, I like the feel and the tone of the Santa Cruz strings, but since I’m a mediocre player, I don’t have the precision to get a good solid sound out of the middle strings (in the mid-tension) with a flat pick. I need help! Like a few more pounds of tension in the middle strings. Fingerpicking, feels much better, a real pleasure to play.
You get a good player who is used to a .012 first string, and substitute a .0115 first string in a low tension set, the player will feel a difference right away. From my measurements, the mid tension sets were virtually right on the money — just a very occasional +- .0005 from stated spec for each string. The low tension sets were consistently on the smaller side, typically in the range of -.0005 to -.0015 below stated spec for a lot of the strings in a set.
Depends on the guitar also. The TR Pro played beautifully with SC mid-tension. The Collings varnish is stunning with John Pearse PB mediums, although somewhat more subdued with SC mid-tension, as if there is more in the guitar that is trying to get out.
I’ve had 4 sets of mid-tension strings. The first string is spec’d at .013″, and each of the 4 first strings measured .013″. For calibration, a John Pearse medium string measured .013″ as well. So, all good, right on the mark.
I’ve had two sets of low-tension strings. The first string is spec’d at .012, but each of the 2 first strings measured .0115. For calibration, a John Pearse light string measured exactly .012″. Based on this, some first strings on the low tension sets may be lighter than intended, and as a result have less tension, and that’s what players are noticing.
Did the shop have an explanation of how the guitar came to need a neck reset after 3 months?
What was moving? Bracing, top, back?
Martin “vintage” (TKL) for 000-12 at Elderly, $475. https://www.elderly.com/products/martin-vintage-000-12-fret-guitar-case?variant=26854390464576.
My wife used one for her SC 000-12, until we got a Visesnut case with a lighter weight. We still have the Martin case, empty for several years.
If you’re interested in a used case, send me a PM, and I can describe what I have.
I think the tensions that SC has published need some adjustments. And here is why.
First, the plain strings:
— For the mid-tension set, SC shows the tension of the .013 1st string as 22.5 lbs. This is a solid string, so the only difference in tension between the SC string and other brand solid strings is going to be the density/linear weight of the material. D’Addario shows 27.42 and GHS 28.0. Adjusted for the difference in scale length (25.375 vs 25.5), almost exactly 1%, D’A would be 27.1 and GHS 27.7. So let’s call the SC spec too low by about 5 lbs.
— SC shows the tension of the .0165 2nd string as 24.0 lbs. This is a solid string, so the only difference in tension between the SC string and other brand solid string is going to be the weight of the material. For a .017 D’Addario shows 26.31 and GHS 27.7. Adjusted for the difference in scale length (25.375 vs 25.5) and for the difference between .0165 and .017, D’A would be 24.5 and GHS 25.8. So let’s call the SC spec too low by about 0.5 lbs.
So the two plain strings are too low by about 5.5 lbs total, which would make the SC 163 lbs into 168.5 lbs.
Second, the 4th string:
— SC shows the .033 4th string of the mid-tension set as 28.5 lbs. At the same time, it shows the .032 4th string of the low-tension set at 30.5 lbs. — smaller string, but higher tension. And while gauge doesn’t determine tension for wound strings, why would the low-tension set have a higher-tension 4th string than the mid-tension set? And the 28.5 spec for the mid-tension 4th string is exactly the same as the spec for the 3rd string. Maybe a copy error?
I’ve used the mid-tension strings on my TR Pro, and the overall tension works pretty well. The guitar sounds a bit constricted with a regular .013-.056 set, particularly on the 3rd and 4th strings.
From the specs and from the feel of the strings, I’d put the overall total tension of SC mid-tension strings about half-way between a conventional PB light .012-.054 and medium .013-.056. Maybe put the Vegas over-under line at 170 lbs.!
Hope this adds some information on the topic.
