Call me a wimp but I'm so used to the feel of 9's on all the other Gibsons I've owned that the 10's on my 175 just don't feel right. Question; is there any danger of the floating bridge dancing around with a lighter set on-I'm not a particularly aggressive player.
-
THIS IS THE 25th ANNIVERSARY YEAR FOR THE LES PAUL FORUM! PLEASE CELEBRATE WITH US AND SUPPORT US WITH A DONATION TO KEEP US GOING! We've made a large financial investment to convert the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and now have to move to a new host. We also have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!
9's on a 175?
- Thread starter 56jnr
- Start date
Jurius
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2007
- Messages
- 1,399
A floating bridge can always move, but my guess is it probably won't. You could put double sided tape under the bridge.
I would consider increasing the gauge to 11's or 12's rather than putting 9's on a 175. Then you could go back to 10's and they might feel better to you. If you're playing clean, those 9's will sound a tad thin.
I would consider increasing the gauge to 11's or 12's rather than putting 9's on a 175. Then you could go back to 10's and they might feel better to you. If you're playing clean, those 9's will sound a tad thin.
sine_wave
New member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2007
- Messages
- 738
56jnr.... I used to play 9's and 10's all my life on my "electric" guitars. Several years ago when I started going archtop crazy I decided to string them with 12's. Let me tell you, it was not that noticeable! The tonal differences are enough for me to keep the 12's. I personally prefer flatwounds. You should at least try it. If your nut is cut right you can tweak the bridge and you won't even have to apply that much pressure while playing. Give it a shot!
I guess you're probably right and I'm just looking for an easy option!
Logically there shouldn't really be an issue for me at all considering I string my acoustic with 12's, but, being a blues player most notes are bent/curled/vibrato'd...
I have to say I love the tone of this thing (through a Cube 60); there's just so much 'more' of everything when I compare it with solid bodies.
Thanks
Andrew
T
Troels
Guest
A set of 0.009 to 0.42 on a 25,75 scale puts a pressure of app. 12 lb on the bridge (downforce) with a string angle behind the bridge (bridge to trapeze tail piece) on about 10 degrees. That will keep the bridge prefectly well in place. I put 0.009s on my guitars too and have realized that 0.10 won't do it for me - no matter 10.000 guitar players are complete sure that I will have no problems 
The advice of putting 0.12s on and then go back to 0.10 is erhhh funny... it's like banging your head against a wall only because it's so nice when you stop banging it... (and btw then it's probably even better to play barre and bent notes chords on a six string bass)
Scofield and BB btw are among thousand of this worlds 0.009 fans
The advice of putting 0.12s on and then go back to 0.10 is erhhh funny... it's like banging your head against a wall only because it's so nice when you stop banging it...
(and btw then it's probably even better to play barre and bent notes chords on a six string bass)Scofield and BB btw are among thousand of this worlds 0.009 fans
Last edited:
j45
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2002
- Messages
- 9,081
I've used 009's on 175's for about 5 years and love the sound. No probs with stability whatsoever. I went for the macho-tone-man giant guage strings up until about 7-8 years ago when I finally figured out they just would get the type of tone I liked on all my old records. Of course a 175 is not a rocker but I find a better blues guitar with smaller strings. I find the 010 and bigger strings give too much size to the low end. If you listen to Page, Clapton, Hendrix, Albert and B.B. like I do, you'll notice the low end of their wound strings is tight and compact. Especially the old power trio riff tunes get way too sloppy with the "tone monsters". The quality of their vibrato is more liquid as well due to the slinkiness of the thinner guages. I have a clip I did with an ES-175 with 009's and it sounds like a real British blues monster. No good for jazz, though! Gotta have some substantial sized flats.
I haven't had the opportunity to gig with the 175 yet and I'm curious as to how susceptible it might be to feedback with, say, the sort of gain levels EC used in the Bluesbreakers era. Comments?
You're right about vibrato-I'm having trouble getting a smooth, controlled sound at the top of whole-tone bends with the 10's. I have a set of Elixir 9's sitting here so I'll experiment with them.
Wilko
All Access/Backstage Pass
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 20,888
IMNSHO, 9s are too light for that guitar. 10s on it will feel about the same as 9s on other guitars.
10s are barely enough mass to get the top vibrating, but still allow a lot of bending and such. The trap tail makes a big difference.
If you are going to use 9s, the guitar matters much less. might as well be a solid body.
10s are barely enough mass to get the top vibrating, but still allow a lot of bending and such. The trap tail makes a big difference.
If you are going to use 9s, the guitar matters much less. might as well be a solid body.
j45
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2002
- Messages
- 9,081
We've done several threads here about luthier instaled "sound posts", exactly like they fit on an violin, cello, or upright bass. They slide in near the bridge foot area and fit with friction alone, no glue, no mod, and couple the top and back. This can greatly decrease any dead spots, greatly reduce feedback, and when done by a luthier familiar with violin making, can help "tune" your top, much like they tap tune carved spruce archtops giving a much more refined tone. Positioning them in optimum position for the particular guitar is an art. A post under the bridge will help get rid of feedback but if you want your top fine tuned, it takes the experience and knowledge of a violin builder. If you take some time and do a search, you should be able to find some info here. Either that or just Google it. I had sound posts installed my 1959 ES-175 and it made it very easy to use at higher volume.
Wilko
All Access/Backstage Pass
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 20,888
Good link, thanks.
It's actually illegal to use 9s on a 175, or any other 24 3/4" scale Gibson for that matter. Now that you've exposed your probable crime, I'd recommend going the fugitive route to avoid being apprehended. Punshment normally includes forced replacement of all your Gibsons with Teles and Strats, a fate most Gibbo users find unbearable.
seafoamer
New member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 491
I'm rockin' 10's on my 1957 ES-175 now, but I used to rock 9's back when my ulner nerve was giving me problems.
Here's a clip I did a few years ago with 9's on my 175: http://brandonarzillo.com/blues.mp3
Here's a clip I did a few years ago with 9's on my 175: http://brandonarzillo.com/blues.mp3
Very nice...I'm definitely hearing Kenny Burrell in there somewhere!
Elliot Easton
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2003
- Messages
- 3,478
the great jazz guitarist jim hall used very light strings on his 175 and got a beautiful sound. there are no rules. just do what's right for you. period.
plaintop60
New member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2006
- Messages
- 2,210
+1 I think it's true for all instruments and a natural part of playing to use the feedback you get from the instrument as your guide to playing and interacting with that instrument. I think anyone can get a good sound out of a set of .009's, it's all in the technique. The same would be true of playing the same guitar strung with 11's. I like big strings in so far as they may be appropriate for a given guitar and situation. I tried 11's on my newest Les Paul aquistion, an '07 R-8. Normally I can get a good sound out of 11's on most Les Paul. This particular guitar, even though it's a solid body just collapses tonally with 11's sounding compressed with a harsh gritty midrange and a thin bottom end. Even when played unamplified you can hear it. With
.010's the guitar sounds much better with better balance and sweetness. I've seen this before on acoustics too.....the point of diminishing returns. There are no rules.
Jurius
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2007
- Messages
- 1,399
I agree with the "just do what's right for you" statement. However, it could easily be inferred from your statement that Jim Hall used 9's.
Jim Hall plays light gauge, flat wound D'Aquisto guitar strings. Jim's words: "The top string is .011 and the bottom is .050 or perhaps a little heavier. I usually use a .022 for the third string, but I also use an unwound .019 so that I can bend it a bit to sound like a horn."
More recently Jim Hall has been endorsing Sadowsky flatwounds: 11-50 with a .018 plain G string.
The above was copied from a this web site:
http://www.jazzguitar.be/guitar_equipment_jim_hall.html
I'm not arguing with you Elliot. You may have (and probably do) better information than I have.
Jurius
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2007
- Messages
- 1,399
If it's "funny", why did you try it?
If you didn't try it, how do you know it doesn't work?:hmm
I have an idea that responding to this is like banging my head against a wall and I will feel better when I ignore it. :wah
sine_wave
New member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2007
- Messages
- 738
I should have said with my initial post... I play straight ahead jazz/bop. i.e. no distortion bullshit, just straight into the polytone, clean. If you're gonna be playing blues or hard bop type stuff then you might have some trouble bending with the thicker gauges. But if you're playing more chord melody/lines, etc... you can't go wrong with a set of flats that are at least 12 gauge, IMO. BTW, I was actually very surprised how much my tone improved just by using Thomastik-Infeld strings. Good stuff.