|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 25, 2017 10:34:47 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2017 14:40:29 GMT -5
Nice article, good work, the maths seem correct (hey I didn't say *are*  ) |
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Sept 25, 2017 16:56:29 GMT -5
I like that article very much. Here's what I think it's saying (or what I think it is probably saying but Ive only done a speed-read!)
There's nothing revolutionary or 'rocket science' there. Just very careful use of classical physics and engineering mathematics applied to optimising the design of a string set using standard materials.
What's on offer is to design the steel core diameter and winding thickness of wound strings,so that once tuned to pitch, a given tilt of the trem arm, or a given distance of finger bending, causes an equal tonal change in all the wound strings (ie equal number of semitones or cents). Hence, a chord played on the wound strings can be flattened or sharpened by the trem, and it is still a chord. In addition, all of that can be matched to one of the plain strings, so you then have 4 strings with that consistency.
Here's what I think it boils down to:
The frequency of a string depends only on length, mass and tension.
To get that tension, the string is stretched by a distance during tuning. (that distance, divided by length is called 'strain')
When you use the trem you are changing that distance of stretching by a small amount, ie changing the strain. If all your strings had been initially tuned with the same distance of stretching (same strain), then a given change in that strain on all strings will be an equal % change of strain on all strings. So then (given linear elasticity), the tension in all those strings will change by the same %. And then, the tones will all change by the same % which means equal tonal increments in semitones.
So to get this we need the same initial strain in each string. If we also want the same total force in each string so they feel the same, then the only way is if the core wire at the centre of each string is the same (ignoring the small coil winding stiffness, though the article addresses that). Getting the various different pitches is then done by adding mass in the form of coil winding.
The special set takes the plain wire from the 3rd string and uses that as the core of the three wound strings, using winding mass to get them all to pitch with the same tension, hence same strain.
Sadly that can't work across the 3 plain strings too, they fundamentally need different inital strains to tune up.
The article also considers other subtleties such as stiffness of tbe winding coil, and the benefit of a locking nut.
Seems like a good idea. Ive got one concern. The plain G string is the most annoying to set properly. Its the most sensitive to going out of tune, intonation problems and finger pressure. Its because it is tuned with the least strain, and so is most sensitive to small strain variations. Im worried that those issues would be then replicated on the wound strings, which usually have a smaller core.
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 25, 2017 19:45:06 GMT -5
I'll probably be the 500th person in line to bust his chops, should he attempt to patent this with the word 'tremolo' instead of 'vibrato'. You'd think a scientist would pay more attention to details like this.... 
One thing, John... Sorry to say, but you left out an important distinction: strain is defined as stretched length divided by unstretched length. The way I read your statement, it looked like "distance divided by length", which I took to be the same thing, just different words. Of course I knew you wouldn't make that simple a mistake, so I assumed you meant "... unstretched length", which is how I learned this in college, so many decades ago.
BTW, FWIW, I wasn't the first guitar player taking a college course in Physics to think of this very thing, not by a long shot. Where J. Kemp got lucky is, he had the help of a sympathetic string maker right there in his backyard. More power to him! 
sumgai
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Sept 25, 2017 20:15:17 GMT -5
Yes I do know what Strain is, my entire career depends on it....
Its when you make a tomato soup in a blender and pour it through a sieve to get all the seeds out.
|
|
|
|
Post by newey on Sept 25, 2017 22:01:26 GMT -5
Puts me in mind of "Scream of Tomatocaster" . . .  From ChrisK, but I can't seem to find the appropriate link. Pretty sure the image is kaput anyway. Damn, I miss him. |
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 26, 2017 0:50:00 GMT -5
Yes I do know what Strain is, my entire career depends on it....
Its when you make a tomato soup in a blender and pour it through a sieve to get all the seeds out.
And this puts me in mind of "overloaded operators", the English Language version....  |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 26, 2017 1:45:10 GMT -5
I'll probably be the 500th person in line to bust his chops, should he attempt to patent this with the word 'tremolo' instead of 'vibrato'. Ya mean like Leo did? www.google.com/patents/US2741146Speaking of Leo, I guess he figured since he called a duck a pig, he might just as well call a pig a duck.  |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 26, 2017 2:02:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 26, 2017 10:36:48 GMT -5
..... Speaking of Leo, I guess he figured since he called a duck a pig, he might just as well call a pig a duck. Pretty much, yeah. Leo didn't do the English-speaking musical lexicon any favors, that's for sure. This thread is by far the best example of that, sad to say.
At least he got "Reverb" correct... he could've been "in a mood" that day, and insisted on calling it "Echo". Oh, wait.... Ampeg already did that, at about the same time, give or take a year - the EchoJet.
(NOTE: Ampeg insists, on their website, that they preceded Leo by 2 years in putting a reverb spring tank in their combination amplifiers. Fat chance of that.)
sumgai
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 26, 2017 16:18:06 GMT -5
(NOTE: Ampeg insists, on their website, that they preceded Leo by 2 years in putting a reverb spring tank in their combination amplifiers. Fat chance of that.) I tend to believe Ampeg on this one. It would seem their first reverb amp, the Reverberocket R-12R was released at the July 1961 NAMM. Their second, the B-12X (Portaflex) hit the shelves in August. Their third, ET-1 EchoTwin (stereo) was unveiled in November. Leo might have beat them to the punch in 1961 with his standalone Reverb unit 6G15. I'm not sure exactly when in '61 it was released. But that was just an effects unit that plugged in before an amplifier. To the best of my knowledge Fender's first complete amplifiers with reverb debuted in 1963. The Brown 6G16 Vibroverb, the Blackface AA763 Deluxe Reverb, the Blackface AA763 Super Reverb, and the Blackface AB763 Twin Reverb. An odd duck for sure. Or should I say pig? Required an external amp to drive the reverb. Not very popular. Not sure when it was released but I'm guessing something like 1964. |
|
|
|
Post by gumbo on Sept 28, 2017 5:38:17 GMT -5
SOOO glad you guys have finally managed to get off-topic without my help...
...I'm damn busy Down Here doing OTHER off-topic stuff....
g-f-b
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Sept 28, 2017 15:15:39 GMT -5
SOOO glad you guys have finally managed to get off-topic without my help... ...I'm damn busy Down Here doing OTHER off-topic stuff.... g-f-b Yes we managed ok thanks. You taught us well. Just to recap: We were discussing 'Strain, which is the language the locals speak down here in 'Straya. Im not fluent myself, but I can understand it with subtitles. |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Sept 28, 2017 19:43:30 GMT -5
It's really tough for those of us who speak only Murrican.
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 29, 2017 0:51:45 GMT -5
It's really tough for those of us who speak only Murrican. Β‘ΙΉΙΙlΙ ΙΙ―oΙΙq llΔ±Κ llΙ puΙ 'uΚop-ΙpΔ±sdn ΚΔ± uΙΉnΚ ΚsnΙΎ - Κou s,ΚΔ± ou |
|
|
|
Post by gumbo on Sept 29, 2017 6:11:26 GMT -5
Hmm.. I thought it was spelled "Merkun".... ...of course WE HERE say "Nukrem". and we all know what we're talking about...don't we, John...  |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 29, 2017 16:32:51 GMT -5
I thought it was spelled "Merkun".... You misspelled spelt. |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Sept 29, 2017 22:20:50 GMT -5
No, that's a strangely-placed wig.
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 29, 2017 22:58:21 GMT -5
That's a wig? I thought it was just a wind-blown comb-over.  |
|
|
|
Post by gumbo on Sept 30, 2017 5:18:52 GMT -5
We shall overcomb....
|
|
|
|
Post by gumbo on Sept 30, 2017 5:20:13 GMT -5
I thought it was spelled "Merkun".... You misspelled spelt. ...danm ! |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Sept 30, 2017 13:50:08 GMT -5
That's a wig? I thought it was just a wind-blown comb-over. The problem is obvious. The hair creates a wind-foil that drives all the air between his ears. No wonder he holds his rallies indoors... HTC1 |
|
)
