Official Luthiers Forum!

I've noticed on many classical guitars that the G string is often weak compared to the others. Is this a string issue or a top/bracing issue? I was hoping our classical crowd could enlighten me.
Thanks

_________________
Jim Watts
http://jameswattsguitars.com

Well my opinion comes from the perspective of a player. I don't build, I wish i could but I do like hanging around here reading the stuff you guys write. Anyway, I think it's more of a string problem. The g is the thickest of the unwound strings and at an average of .040" depending on tension, the g is actually thicker than the wound D string which seems to average around .029". The effect of that thickness of the G tuned up to pitch is often described as tubby as well as weak. Some players have grown to like it describing it as creamy. I and others of my ilk experimented with using a G made of other materials to try and smooth out that blend problem between the G and the D. D'addario for example makes a coffee colored composite G that some like. I've never used that one. Most others, John Williams most notably, use a Savarez KF Alliance G which I believe really is made of the same stuff as fishing line and not really carbon. I used it for a while and while the material is denser and therefore can be made thinner in comparable tensions it felt stiffer and too thin under the fingers. It's hard to describe. The KF to my ear also sounded a bit too dry and didn't often blend well with the 2 other plain nylon strings. Currently I'm using normal tension Oasis brand GPX "carbon " G's and am happy with them. They feel like nylon under the fingers are not quite as thick as a true nylon G but are thicker than Savarez and sound more nylon- like, making a good blend. Williams plays a Smallman which is as classicals go is a pretty loud guitar so I don't think it's a bracing issue. Oh and sorry for the windy response

Not at all! Good to hear from a serious player and get a new perspective.

Thanks!

John

John,

I suggest that the "weak" note for the G string is because that frequency often coincides with the first top fundamental. Plucking that note causes the string to drive the fundamental to the detriment of the played note.

The usual fix for this during the building process is to make the back first fundamental a semitone above or below the top fundamental so that the back and front couple. That way the string-to-top-fundamental coupling effect is spread over several frets rather than concentrated in a single fret.

I'm sure Al will have a better explanation, but this is how I understand it and how it seems to work in my instruments.

aloha,

_________________
David C. Hurd
http://www.ukuleles.com

Alice laughed: "There's no use trying," she said; "one can't believe impossible things." "I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. Through the Looking Glass by L. Carroll

"Since my house has burned down, I have a much better view of the moon"

I also agree that the Classical G string is the biggest issue for a player. It is the string (primarily) not the guitar. I have used the brown optional G string from the composite set and it does have a slightly different sound. Maybe...a bit less mellow, giving it a lighter/brighter tone. Many pros use multiple combinations/type/wound/brand of different strings to get a perfect blend of tine qualities. The hopes are to have an even blend of sound on melodic runs through all the strings.
Kent B

_________________
Wood Creations by Kent A. Bailey
EXCELLENCE IN SCULPTURE, CARVING, LUTHIER, ARCHITECTURAL MILLWORK AND DESIGN

http://www.kabart.com

I'm with John. Don't apologies! There are an awful lot of classical strings out there. I've tryed so many I can't remember which ones I like the best.

David, that's a pretty interesting theory. The first guitar I build was a classical X and seems to suffer from the week "G" syndrome. What do you use to measure the frequency when tuning the plates? I would welcome some more discussion on this one. From my limited experience it seems that it takes a little more know how to finesse the sound you're looking for out of classical.

Thanks,
Danny

There may be a partial truth to what you say. I should say that my main guitar has a, what is it called Helmholtz frequency? of F#, and I would not describe the g string as "weak" but rather, tubby. In classical guitars with a main body frequency of g that weakness you speak of may accentuate the problem along with that flabby tubbyness that the thick, relatively loose g string makes. The other issue for nylon G's for players is tuning. I hear more gripes from other players about how the flabby G is the hardest string to tune. I had that issue when I played a long scale Ramirez 1A (since sold) The thinner, harder material composite G's used a lot by players today seem to do a much better job eliminating that issue.

IMO, the if the 'main top' resonant pitch agrees to closely with a played note, you tend to get a 'short' sound, rather than a 'weak' one. The guitar extracts the energy from the string in a hurry, and dumps it into the room, so it's twice as loud for half as long. And, of course, it's only that note.

I actually have that problem is spades on one of my 'test mules'. The 'main top' resonance is just below the open G pitch, and the movement of the top 'feeds back' into the string in such a way as to cause it to vibrate at two distinct frequencies, about 7 Hz apart, for the fundamental of the note. The fundamental comes and goes at that seven Hz difference frequency. None of the overtones are effected, of course. Surprisingly, most people don't notice it unless I point it out; the overtones mask it.

I agree that the main problem is with the string. The solution is actually rather simple; use a wound string. There are two problems with this: the winding has to be really light, and it makes more noise when the player shifts. Savarez makes a plastic wound G that sounds a lot better than the usual monofilament, but the thin winding wears out fast. The Thomastic 'S' series G, with a steel rope core and flat nylon winding wears better, but sounds pretty 'steely'. I wonder if some of the new 'spider silk' type of materials that are used in fish line might make it possible to use a heavier winding. The stuff will tune an octave higher than a plain nylon string without breaking.

I sure wish somebody would fix this, though! I'm tired of being the goat.

Thanks for the reply David. I,m curious though, do you think this would be true for the whole string, and not just the G note. If it was a top resonance thing wouldn't it also occur on the other G notes of the same frequency? - I really like you book by the way

I had thought about sound box volume also but discounted it due to my above comment/question to David.

Spuced - Thanks for the string input and players perspective, not long winded at all. I'm getting drawn deeper into classical guitars and need to build more, but I've noticed this G string issue a lot and am trying to get educated on it.

Thanks,

_________________
Jim Watts
http://jameswattsguitars.com

I'd say just leave the dang thing off. Who needs it? Five string instruments are so much more manageable.

_________________
Todd Rose
Ithaca, NY

https://www.dreamingrosesecobnb.com/todds-art-music

https://www.facebook.com/ToddRoseGuitars/

I think Todd has a good point, there's no unique notes on the G string anyway

_________________
Jim Watts
http://jameswattsguitars.com

Jim,

You're quite correct when you say that the weakness/shortness/tubbiness should occur on other strings if the note coincides with the top fundamental. I've always used Savarez Alliance red's for the unwound strings on my instruments and no one has complained about the E string (for tenor ukuleles) or the B string (for baritone size) yet. These string tensions are ~50% higher than for nylon so perhaps the combination of my trying to couple the front and back as well as a higher tension string has dealt with both a transition string tension issue and a top fundamental coupling issue at the same time. And thank you for the book compliment .

Dave,

I use the SpectraPlus software for deconvolving tap tones. It's pretty pricey though and perhaps some of the other software brought up in Steve Smith's earlier thread would do just as well.

aloha,

_________________
David C. Hurd
http://www.ukuleles.com

Alice laughed: "There's no use trying," she said; "one can't believe impossible things." "I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. Through the Looking Glass by L. Carroll

"Since my house has burned down, I have a much better view of the moon"