Sheryl hates mediums

[Lars68]

Normally all the big size guitars that pass through my hands get medium PB-strings and sound better with them, in my opinion. The Martin Ds love them. A couple of days ago I tried mediums on my Sheryl Crow Southern Jumbo for the first time. I expected this guitar to sound better too, just like all others guitars have, but I was so wrong. The clear and dry tone which sets this guitar apart all but disappeared. The tone became muted, kind of thick and dull in comparison. Last night I put lights back on and the magic reappeared.

 

I am interested to find out what caused this to happen. Anyone care to take a stab at the physics involved?

 

Lars

[EuroAussie]

Yes, same experience with my SJ, definitely prefers lights. Find mediums 'choke' the tone quite a bit, in particular bottom end. More volume, less value in the tone I find ..

[charlie brown]

Question, did your Sheryl Crow come with "lights," to begin with? If so, Maybe that's

just the tone you're used to hearing, on her. Light strings do have a tendency, often,

to have a slightly brighter, springy'r tone...even on electrics. Whereas medium to heavy

strings may have more volume, but less brightness. Maybe it's to do with less tension

required, on light strings, to get to pitch? Not sure, as I'm (obviously) not a physic's

person. From personal experience, lighter guage strings, seem to have more "harmonic"

response, than some heavier strings. Maybe that's what you're hearing?

 

Also, different brands, and types of strings (of all guages) can make a big difference.

You might experiment, with those things, as well?

 

Here are some opinions, and related subjects:

 

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/music-theory-lessons-techniques/178535-string-gauges-scales-physics-behind.html

 

http://www.professorstring.com/string_FAQs.php

 

 

CB

[duluthdan]

Lights on the 45. Mediums on the SJ, but its tuned down a half-step, and has the wider Luthier's Choice 1 3/4" neck, and mediums on the JB tuned down a whole step. Maybe the difference has to do with the short-scale?

[RichG]

I have always used .012 on my SCSJ so can't comment on how it would sound with .013, but as much as I think my Martin D18GE should have mediums, I think it sounds better with lights. Every time I put the mediums on, I am disappointed.

 

.

[Jerry K]

It often happens that when you go from lights to mediums some setup alterations are required for optimal tone. In some cases this may be what you are experiencing.

[E-minor7]

"In some cases. . . "

[Anthony Buckeridge]

Quote: "I was so wrong. The clear and dry tone which sets this guitar apart all but disappeared. The tone became muted, kind of thick and dull in comparison. Last night I put lights back on and the magic reappeared. I am interested to find out what caused this to happen."

 

 

 

For instance.

 

My experience with Martin D -28's is that as long as the Geometry is correct, and they haven't suffered unduly from temperature and humidity related problems that have affected the Action.

 

Mediums work great, in point of fact, they Drive the Solid Top Best, that is to the Human Ear in an Acoustic Environment. This is the Hallmark Characteristic Sweetness, accompanied by a Volume of Tone (If you Study Musical Form you find Volume and Tonality are directly related) commensurate to Properly Balance Acoustically with Banjo's, Mandolins, Accordions and Traditional Folk and Country Instruments, in a typical Playing Environment.

 

However, for Recording Session Work, where a very wide variety of differing material indeed will be involved. In general I find that the Tonal Balance of Light Gauge Strings on the same Instrument, is vastly preferable to the alternatives. Harmonics Ring far better, and there is a Clearer, Cleaner, more Stringy, Musically Singing Sound to the Voice of the Guitar. Whilst the Lower Mid Range Muddiness that can cloud and dull the Instruments Voice, suddenly is Clean in the Bass, just like a Piano String has a Clean Clarity of its Bass Notes. These Clean Fundamentals inform the basics of the Instruments Overall Tonality.

 

 

 

Whilst Mahogany Back and Side Instruments tend to focus and stimulate the Fundamentals of Notes.

 

Rosewood Back and Side Instruments tend to enhance the Harmonics, introducing greater Tonal Complexity.

 

However Maple Back and Side Instruments tend to be Transparent in Tone. By that I mean that how they Sound, will reflect very directly the manner in which they are Strung and Played. Play them in a Warm Manner and they will Sound very Warm. Play them in a Hard Manner with a Brighter Style of Technique, and they will Sound Hard and Bright.

 

 

 

An Analogy.

 

Sometimes you might find people talking about Mic Pre-Amps and hear them say, "This Pre Amp is Great on Bass, but not so good on such and such an Instrument, etc.

 

What this really means, is that the Mic Pre Amp is either (and most probably) Poorly Designed, or been Designed to Deliberately to Colour Sound. The Greatest Audio Designers relentlessly seek Audio Transparency, that is, their equipment, Faithfully Captures, Records and Translates to Playback the Original Sound.

 

What comes out, is the same as, what went in. This is why Great Audio Engineers do not need lots of Equalisers and Compressors, they can Capture Great Sound with a Simple Equipment Chain, because their Recording Chain is Transparent. And such a Pre-Amp and such a Chain can be utilised on any Sound Source, and it will Sound Great!

 

A good example of a Great Transparent Mic Pre is George Massenburgs Mic Pre.

 

http://www.massenburg.com/products/gml-8304

 

 

 

As I wrote. This is simply an Analogy by way of explanation.

 

The SJ-200 Model (that currently is Factory supplied with Light Gauge Strings) with its Maple Back and Sides, Projects the Traditional Guitar Sound, with Far Greater Transparency than the alternatives which are well known for having their own unique Hallmark Tonality.

 

This is not to imply that the alternatives are bad in any way, simply that they have a Signature Tone, and as long as that's the Tone you desire to use, they are the perfect Instrument for you.

 

However, one can perhaps appreciate, that due to its Immense Possibilities Tonally, where the distinctive Style of the Player can Contribute so Greatly to the Sound.

 

Where such a Wide Variety of Variability affords so much Musical Flexibility. Its no wonder the Instrument is so aptly named.

 

The King of The Flat Tops.

 

 

 

In the case of the Southern Jumbo above the subject of the discussion,, the diminished Gauge of the String, deemphasises the Fundamental of the Note, so crucial to the Characteristic Hallmark Tonality of Mahogany Back and Side Instruments.

 

This Cleans and Clears the Lower Mid Range, reinforcing and enhancing the Tonal Qualities you find desirable.

[Lars68]

As I have said many times before here on the forum, this particular SJ is the most impressive modern guitar I have ever played. It came with lights when new, and I have kept lights on it. I didn't want to mess with a good thing. However, this time around I thought it was time to try the mediums. I love both the Gibson and the Martin tone. The mediums made the SJ more Martin like. More bass heavy and thicker sounding. Not as lively. Not a bad tone at all, but something my Martin D can do soooo much better. No point in trying to make the SJ fight on the Martin turf. I want my Gibsons to sound like Gibsons.

 

Next time around I'll try light 80/20s on this lovely guitar just for kicks.

 

Here she is, by the way. I have done a few mods since this photo. I took out the label, glued the saddle in, and slotted the bridge to fit solid pins.

http://images.yuku.com/image/jpeg/16b359afcda305e8cd96e081e2077f96db85f14.JPG

 

Lars

[duluthdan]

As I have said many times before here on the forum, this particular SJ is the most impressive modern guitar I have ever played. It came with lights when new, and I have kept lights on it. I didn't want to mess with a good thing. However, this time around I thought it was time to try the mediums. I love both the Gibson and the Martin tone. The mediums made the SJ more Martin like. More bass heavy and thicker sounding. Not as lively. Not a bad tone at all, but something my Martin D can do soooo much better. No point in trying to make the SJ fight on the Martin turf. I want my Gibsons to sound like Gibsons.

 

Next time around I'll try light 80/20s on this lovely guitar just for kicks.

 

Here she is, by the way. I have done a few mods since this photo. I took out the label, glued the saddle in, and slotted the bridge to fit solid pins.

http://images.yuku.com/image/jpeg/16b359afcda305e8cd96e081e2077f96db85f14.JPG

 

Lars

Slotted the bridge and went for solid pins? I know plenty of folks like that, my SJ is slotted too, but not a mod I am likely to have done on purpose again, still don't really see the big advantage. Glued in the saddle? I'm not sure why? I'm assuming you used a glue that can be easily undone?

[Phelonious Ponk]

Quote: "I was so wrong. The clear and dry tone which sets this guitar apart all but disappeared. The tone became muted, kind of thick and dull in comparison. Last night I put lights back on and the magic reappeared. I am interested to find out what caused this to happen."

 

 

 

For instance.

 

My experience with Martin D -28's is that as long as the Geometry is correct, and they haven't suffered unduly from temperature and humidity related problems that have affected the Action.

 

Mediums work great, in point of fact, they Drive the Solid Top Best, that is to the Human Ear in an Acoustic Environment. This is the Hallmark Characteristic Sweetness, accompanied by a Volume of Tone (If you Study Musical Form you find Volume and Tonality are directly related) commensurate to Properly Balance Acoustically with Banjo's, Mandolins, Accordions and Traditional Folk and Country Instruments, in a typical Playing Environment.

 

However, for Recording Session Work, where a very wide variety of differing material indeed will be involved. In general I find that the Tonal Balance of Light Gauge Strings on the same Instrument, is vastly preferable to the alternatives. Harmonics Ring far better, and there is a Clearer, Cleaner, more Stringy, Musically Singing Sound to the Voice of the Guitar. Whilst the Lower Mid Range Muddiness that can cloud and dull the Instruments Voice, suddenly is Clean in the Bass, just like a Piano String has a Clean Clarity of its Bass Notes. These Clean Fundamentals inform the basics of the Instruments Overall Tonality.

 

 

 

Whilst Mahogany Back and Side Instruments tend to focus and stimulate the Fundamentals of Notes.

 

Rosewood Back and Side Instruments tend to enhance the Harmonics, introducing greater Tonal Complexity.

 

However Maple Back and Side Instruments tend to be Transparent in Tone. By that I mean that how they Sound, will reflect very directly the manner in which they are Strung and Played. Play them in a Warm Manner and they will Sound very Warm. Play them in a Hard Manner with a Brighter Style of Technique, and they will Sound Hard and Bright.

 

 

 

An Analogy.

 

Sometimes you might find people talking about Mic Pre-Amps and hear them say, "This Pre Amp is Great on Bass, but not so good on such and such an Instrument, etc.

 

What this really means, is that the Mic Pre Amp is either (and most probably) Poorly Designed, or been Designed to Deliberately to Colour Sound. The Greatest Audio Designers relentlessly seek Audio Transparency, that is, their equipment, Faithfully Captures, Records and Translates to Playback the Original Sound.

 

What comes out, is the same as, what went in. This is why Great Audio Engineers do not need lots of Equalisers and Compressors, they can Capture Great Sound with a Simple Equipment Chain, because their Recording Chain is Transparent. And such a Pre-Amp and such a Chain can be utilised on any Sound Source, and it will Sound Great!

 

A good example of a Great Transparent Mic Pre is George Massenburgs Mic Pre.

 

http://www.massenburg.com/products/gml-8304

 

 

 

As I wrote. This is simply an Analogy by way of explanation.

 

The SJ-200 Model (that currently is Factory supplied with Light Gauge Strings) with its Maple Back and Sides, Projects the Traditional Guitar Sound, with Far Greater Transparency than the alternatives which are well known for having their own unique Hallmark Tonality.

 

This is not to imply that the alternatives are bad in any way, simply that they have a Signature Tone, and as long as that's the Tone you desire to use, they are the perfect Instrument for you.

 

However, one can perhaps appreciate, that due to its Immense Possibilities Tonally, where the distinctive Style of the Player can Contribute so Greatly to the Sound.

There's

Where such a Wide Variety of Variability affords so much Musical Flexibility. Its no wonder the Instrument is so aptly named.

 

The King of The Flat Tops.

 

 

 

In the case of the Southern Jumbo above the subject of the discussion,, the diminished Gauge of the String, deemphasises the Fundamental of the Note, so crucial to the Characteristic Hallmark Tonality of Mahogany Back and Side Instruments.

 

This Cleans and Clears the Lower Mid Range, reinforcing and enhancing the Tonal Qualities you find desirable.[/sizet

 

I'm not at all sure what you mean by "transparent" in this context. Im used to that as an audio reproduction term, meaning that, for example, a preamp passes the signal through from the source to the amplifier unaltered. So the preamp is transparent to the source. What is a maple guitar "transparent" to? The strings?

 

P

[E-minor7]

e

I'm not at all sure what you mean by "transparent" in this context.

 

I read 'transparent' as the voice of the guitar being one to one - meaning no hidden clues or side effects.

 

 

 

[Matters]

Normally all the big size guitars that pass through my hands get medium PB-strings and sound better with them, in my opinion. The Martin Ds love them. A couple of days ago I tried mediums on my Sheryl Crow Southern Jumbo for the first time. I expected this guitar to sound better too, just like all others guitars have, but I was so wrong. The clear and dry tone which sets this guitar apart all but disappeared. The tone became muted, kind of thick and dull in comparison. Last night I put lights back on and the magic reappeared.

 

I am interested to find out what caused this to happen. Anyone care the take a stab at the physics involved?

 

Lars

 

 

As I have said many times before here on the forum, this particular SJ is the most impressive modern guitar I have ever played. It came with lights when new, and I have kept lights on it. I didn't want to mess with a good thing. However, this time around I thought it was time to try the mediums. I love both the Gibson and the Martin tone. The mediums made the SJ more Martin like. More bass heavy and thicker sounding. Not as lively. Not a bad tone at all, but something my Martin D can do soooo much better. No point in trying to make the SJ fight on the Martin turf. I want my Gibsons to sound like Gibsons.

 

Next time around I'll try light 80/20s on this lovely guitar just for kicks.

 

Here she is, by the way. I have done a few mods since this photo. I took out the label, glued the saddle in, and slotted the bridge to fit solid pins.

http://images.yuku.com/image/jpeg/16b359afcda305e8cd96e081e2077f96db85f14.JPG

 

Lars

 

 

I thought I would chime in one this. My Sheryl Crow SJ also has the slotted bridge and I've tried at least 20+ sets of strings on the guitar. I also agree that it is the most impressive modern guitar I've ever played. For the most part I prefer lights on the guitar. The exception is when I tried a set of DR Rares in 13-56. These are supposed to be a bit less tension and have that amazing full, dry tone that I love about this guitar. I got a bit more volume but still have a very dynamic tone that works equally well with a pick and fingers. The only reason I put the heavier strings on was to try the guitar at a bluegrass jam and wanted a bit more volume. It did take a couple days for the guitar to start loosening up a bit with the thicker strings.

[mountainpicker]

I remember the Music Villa video on the Sheryl Crow SJ. It sounded old right from the start. And everyone that has owned one that has spoken up say nothing but positives about them. I don't know the physics of why but I wonder from what everyone is saying if it was lightly built for Sheryl, for her ear or whatever (which would be a mark of a true signature guitar) and/or the top was voiced for light guage strings purposely. I know from owning a couple of Adirondack topped guitars that they can make them thinner, because of the strength of the wood, without sacrificing much. But you lose a certain sweetness with mediums...they are just too muscular if you know what I mean. The light guage just drives the top perfectly without needing any more string, and when you really lean on it with lights it just keeps giving you more. I don't think I really knew what headroom was until I got an adi guitar. Anyway, they did something differently to them to get that tone. Wouldn't they have had to? Or is Gibson's consistent inconsistency not up to the task in that regard?

[Lars68]

Slotted the bridge and went for solid pins? I know plenty of folks like that, my SJ is slotted too, but not a mod I am likely to have done on purpose again, still don't really see the big advantage. Glued in the saddle? I'm not sure why? I'm assuming you used a glue that can be easily undone?

 

I slotted the bridge for a couple of reasons. First, the heavy strings kept pushing the pins up and getting caught in the slots. It made string changes a pain. Second, I wanted to prevent premature wear on the bridge plate. Now the ball ends of the strings don't wear on the edges of the hole, instead they sit tightly right on top of the plate with nowhere to go. I am convinced that in the long run, 15+ years down the road, this is a superior way of anchoring the strings and my guitar and future owners will thank me.

 

I glued the saddle in with hide glue, so it can be removed if necessary. The fit of the saddle was kind of loose, and I didn´t want it to start leaning forward. I have seen that happen on two Martins. Not good, and it can potentially disform the saddle slot or even crack the bridge. While working on the saddle, I also sanded its wings to perfectly match the contour of the bridge. It looks much neater now. I guess I just like to tinker...

 

Lars

[EuroAussie]

I really would love to get my hands on the SC SJ and compare it my AL SJ as the Aaron Lewis model is the best modern J-45 /SJ Ive come across thus far. But seems the Shazza SJ could give it a real run for its money ...