AldenS - Posted - 09/13/2019:  17:18:41

Ok, so I own a couple of reasonably nice late 19th century banjos and I've been thinking a bit about the best strings to use on them. One thing I haven't found yet in old threads (happy to be pointed to one if you know of it) is a source for tension measurements for common gauges of nylon strings when used in standard banjo tunings. I've looked around online, but most of the tools I've found are, not surprisingly, for steel strings. I found one that claimed to handle both steel and nylon strings, but the results I got seemed a little strange. I wonder if someone can point me to some reliable figures that would give me a quantitative sense of the load that these instruments were designed to bear.

I've read a number of the old threads on the steel/nylon debate, and I know that many talented and intelligent people disagree strongly about which types of strings are best, safest, or most appropriate, and that there's more to it than just whether necks will warp or break. I'm hoping not to spark another rehashing of that debate.

mbanza - Posted - 09/13/2019:  18:25:01

This utility may help: chordgen.rattree.co.uk/tensiontool.php

davidppp - Posted - 09/13/2019:  19:56:32

You can get to the numbers you want if you wade into D'Addario's stringtensionpro.com/ .

To do a comparison of any two materials and gauges for the same scale length and pitch for the two, the ratio of their tensions equals the ratio of their linear densities, i.e.m, the weights per length.

Another tidbit that enables you to get it just about right is that solid steel is about 8 times as dense as nylon.  Of course, no nylon strings are as thin as steel.  So you have to know the gauges and the fact that the linear density is proportional to the 3D density times the cross sectional area.  Putting those together: T(nylon)/T(steel) = (1/8) x [nylon gauge/steel gauge]-squared.  (These are the formulas that D'Addario uses.)

AldenS - Posted - 09/13/2019:  20:01:01

quote:

---

Originally posted by mbanza

This utility may help: chordgen.rattree.co.uk/tensiontool.php

---

I appreciate the link. As it happens, that's the one I tried. Their default setup for nylon strung banjo gives about 56 lbs of string tension, and the gauges didn't seem unusual. However, this is almost exactly the same as the tension on a set of light gauge (.009 - 0.020) steel strings, both according to the calculator, and according to the packaging on a set I have in my drawer. Given the warnings I've encountered about using even light gauge steel strings on these banjos, I figured something must have been wrong, either with the calculator or with my inputs.

Does the 56 lbs figure seem plausible?

AldenS - Posted - 09/13/2019:  20:12:07

quote:

---

Originally posted by davidppp

You can get to the numbers you want if you wade into D'Addario's stringtensionpro.com/ .

To do a comparison of any two materials and gauges for the same scale length and pitch for the two, the ratio of their tensions equals the ratio of their linear densities, i.e.m, the weights per length.

Another tidbit that enables you to get it just about right is that solid steel is about 8 times as dense as nylon.  Of course, no nylon strings are as thin as steel.  So you have to know the gauges and the fact that the linear density is proportional to the 3D density times the cross sectional area.  Putting those together: T(nylon)/T(steel) = (1/8) x [nylon gauge/steel gauge]-squared.  (These are the formulas that D'Addario uses.)

---

Thanks for the formula. I always prefer to know what's going on under the hood, so to speak. That yields a reasonably similar result, with Tn/Ts roughly in the 0.85-1 range, depending on the string, for medium gauge nylon compared to light gauge steel.

davidppp - Posted - 09/13/2019:  20:58:18

I put everything I know (which is really very little) into the DECEMBER 2018 entry on its.caltech.edu/~politzer/ .  The write-up is called Extra Extra Light Steel Strings on Old Banjos, and there are sound sample comparisons (on page 3) to oft-recommended nylon ones.  

(I put the link to the whole collection because I suspect there are lots of folks who like to look under the hood.  There might be something else there of interest.)

mbanza - Posted - 09/13/2019:  21:04:48

Nylon strings are capable of producing high tensions, but they work better at lower tensions than metal.

Work the utility to obtain unwound string tensions of about ten pounds and wound string tensions of about 13 pounds. You'll probably wind up near 0.022, 0.027, 0.032, 0.024w, and 0.022 in.  You may be able to reduce your target tensions to eight and 11 pounds.



Forget about sets and buy single rectified nylon strings from strings by mail or similar suppliers.

Edited by - mbanza on 09/13/2019 21:14:01

csacwp - Posted - 09/14/2019:  04:24:48

The gauges being discussed here are not historically accurate. At the time these old banjos were made, a common string set would have been .017", .019", .023".024", .017". Players continued using these gauges after the switch to from gut to nylon was made.

rudy - Posted - 09/14/2019:  05:04:35

quote:

---

Originally posted by csacwp

The gauges being discussed here are not historically accurate. At the time these old banjos were made, a common string set would have been .017", .019", .023".024", .017". Players continued using these gauges after the switch to from gut to nylon was made.

---

Hi John,

Are you factoring in the historical difference in tunings commonly used "then" vs. what most modern era players are going to be using?

csacwp - Posted - 09/14/2019:  05:57:56

quote:

---

Originally posted by rudy

quote:

---

Originally posted by csacwp

The gauges being discussed here are not historically accurate. At the time these old banjos were made, a common string set would have been .017", .019", .023".024", .017". Players continued using these gauges after the switch to from gut to nylon was made.

---

Hi John,

Are you factoring in the historical difference in tunings commonly used "then" vs. what most modern era players are going to be using?

---

The tuning was practically the same. By the beginning of the 1880s when these string gauges were introduced the banjo was tuned gCGBD. It's now primarily tuned gDGBD, so one note difference.

Edited by - csacwp on 09/14/2019 05:58:29

MacCruiskeen - Posted - 09/14/2019:  06:04:53

quote:

---

Originally posted by csacwp

The gauges being discussed here are not historically accurate. 

---

How much does that really matter? I mean, we are playing to please ourselves, not people who are dead. 

csacwp - Posted - 09/14/2019:  06:30:11

quote:

---

Originally posted by MacCruiskeen

quote:

---

Originally posted by csacwp

The gauges being discussed here are not historically accurate. 

---

How much does that really matter? I mean, we are playing to please ourselves, not people who are dead. 

---

It matters only because we are discussing the string tensions that historical banjos were designed to handle. Heavy nylon strings (especially a heavy wound 4th like a .030") can damage some older banjos, though they are still safer overall than steel strings because of how the tension is distributed across the string. This is all scale length dependent of course, but back in the day short scale banjos were often  tuned higher than full-size banjos while retaining the really light string gauges. 

MacCruiskeen - Posted - 09/14/2019:  06:42:20

I suppose, though if it is safe to use a modern set of strings such as La Bella or Aquila, which are not especially historically accurate, then any strings of roughly the same tension are probably okay.

csacwp - Posted - 09/14/2019:  07:20:47

quote:

---

Originally posted by MacCruiskeen

I suppose, though if it is safe to use a modern set of strings such as La Bella or Aquila, which are not especially historically accurate, then any strings of roughly the same tension are probably okay.

---

Yes. One only potentially runs into problems with really heavy nylon sets (.022" first string and heavier), but it still depends on the scale length and the whether a tension tailpiece is used.

MacCruiskeen - Posted - 09/14/2019:  09:34:07

Also, how much construction variation was there in old models? My Stewart is an Orchestra #2, and I get the sense that the neck is a little beefier than average for the day. (I still wouldn't use steel on it, because it still has the original nut and celluloid tuners). Heck, it's probably a better neck than the modern Goodtime banjo I've got steel strings on.

AldenS - Posted - 09/14/2019:  09:37:27

quote:

---

Originally posted by csacwp

quote:

---

Originally posted by MacCruiskeen

quote:

---

Originally posted by csacwp

The gauges being discussed here are not historically accurate. 

---

How much does that really matter? I mean, we are playing to please ourselves, not people who are dead. 

---

It matters only because we are discussing the string tensions that historical banjos were designed to handle. Heavy nylon strings (especially a heavy wound 4th like a .030") can damage some older banjos, though they are still safer overall than steel strings because of how the tension is distributed across the string. This is all scale length dependent of course, but back in the day short scale banjos were often  tuned higher than full-size banjos while retaining the really light string gauges. 

---

Indeed, I was most interested in figuring out what kind of load these instruments would likely have been built to withstand, and was hoping to sidestep the much more complicated normative questions about what a person `should` use, so historical gauges are relevant here, and I appreciate the input. 

I plugged those gauges into a tension calculator and was getting about 5lbs, give or take, per string in gDGBD, and only around 3 lbs for the low D. This seems pretty low, though I may just be unfamiliar with what kind of string feel would have been customary at the time. Was the nylon used then about comparable to the nylon used now (relevant for whether I can trust the calculator results)?

Edited by - AldenS on 09/14/2019 09:49:14

AldenS - Posted - 09/14/2019:  09:40:45

quote:

---

Originally posted by MacCruiskeen

Also, how much construction variation was there in old models? My Stewart is an Orchestra #2, and I get the sense that the neck is a little beefier than average for the day. (I still wouldn't use steel on it, because it still has the original nut and celluloid tuners). Heck, it's probably a better neck than the modern Goodtime banjo I've got steel strings on.

---

Yeah, this is a whole other dimension. I figure this whole line of inquiry (about how many lbs of tension the builders anticipated) is moot for some of the lower end instruments (ex. no-fretboard buckbees) , which may not even have been made to last under the playing conditions of the day.

Edited by - AldenS on 09/14/2019 09:48:34

csacwp - Posted - 09/14/2019:  10:52:26

quote:

---

Originally posted by AldenS

quote:

---

Originally posted by csacwp

quote:

---

Originally posted by MacCruiskeen

quote:

---

Originally posted by csacwp

The gauges being discussed here are not historically accurate. 

---

How much does that really matter? I mean, we are playing to please ourselves, not people who are dead. 

---

It matters only because we are discussing the string tensions that historical banjos were designed to handle. Heavy nylon strings (especially a heavy wound 4th like a .030") can damage some older banjos, though they are still safer overall than steel strings because of how the tension is distributed across the string. This is all scale length dependent of course, but back in the day short scale banjos were often  tuned higher than full-size banjos while retaining the really light string gauges. 

---

Indeed, I was most interested in figuring out what kind of load these instruments would likely have been built to withstand, and was hoping to sidestep the much more complicated normative questions about what a person `should` use, so historical gauges are relevant here, and I appreciate the input. 

I plugged those gauges into a tension calculator and was getting about 5lbs, give or take, per string in gDGBD, and only around 3 lbs for the low D. This seems pretty low, though I may just be unfamiliar with what kind of string feel would have been customary at the time. Was the nylon used then about comparable to the nylon used now (relevant for whether I can trust the calculator results)?

---

The string feel was very light and the right hand technique and setup were geared specifically towards their use (and were very different from modern practices). The move to heavier nylon in the second half of the 20th century was driven by classical guitarists picking up the classic banjo and by banjoists used to steel strings making the switch to nylon.

Ken LeVan - Posted - 09/14/2019:  13:43:57

I went on that D'Addario String Tension Pro site, but for the life of me I can't figure out which octave gDGBD the strings on a banjo are, which is necessary to use the site.  Sitting at the piano a with the banjo in double C tuning, it seems as if the 4th string is either the second or third C from the low end, but the first C is not in a full octave.  I asked my wife, who plays the piano which octave a banjo is in, and she said "What?"

Can anybody identify the octave of the DGBD on a banjo?

Thanks.

Edited by - Ken LeVan on 09/14/2019 13:44:33

csacwp - Posted - 09/14/2019:  14:04:53

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken LeVan

I went on that D'Addario String Tension Pro site, but for the life of me I can't figure out which octave gDGBD the strings on a banjo are, which is necessary to use the site.  Sitting at the piano a with the banjo in double C tuning, it seems as if the 4th string is either the second or third C from the low end, but the first C is not in a full octave.  I asked my wife, who plays the piano which octave a banjo is in, and she said "What?"

Can anybody identify the octave of the DGBD on a banjo?

Thanks.

---

It's D3G3B3D4

Ken LeVan - Posted - 09/14/2019:  14:15:56

quote:

---

Originally posted by csacwp

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken LeVan

I went on that D'Addario String Tension Pro site, but for the life of me I can't figure out which octave gDGBD the strings on a banjo are, which is necessary to use the site.  Sitting at the piano a with the banjo in double C tuning, it seems as if the 4th string is either the second or third C from the low end, but the first C is not in a full octave.  I asked my wife, who plays the piano which octave a banjo is in, and she said "What?"

Can anybody identify the octave of the DGBD on a banjo?

Thanks.

---

It's D3G3B3D4

---

Thanks!

Ken LeVan - Posted - 09/15/2019:  14:08:49

I learned a couple of things on the D'Addario site,

(1) In G tuning on a banjo, both the 1st and 5th strings are in octave 4, and the rest are in octave three

(2) With steel strings, Double C tuning has three pounds less tension than G tuning.

What I didn't learn was what nylon gauges are the same as what steel gauges in the same tuning and length, which was what I was trying to find out.  The site wouldn't let me enter a nylon string less than 32 gauge.  It's a complex site where you have to enter a lot of useless information like whether the string is loop end, ball end, bass ball end, guitar ball end, etc, which has nothinbg to do with the string tension.  I probably screwed up there somewhere or else D'Addario doesn't give much of a flying fig about nylon strings.