.010-.056 6-String Set?

[kraml]

Does anyone make a 6-string set out-of-the-box in a ".010-.056" where we have .010 .013 .017 .036 .046 .056? That's a big jump in the middle. I bought the guitar used from GC out of state about a year ago (6122-1958). Kept the strings but finally broke one (1st string, tuning down). I like the sound so much that I want to try to figure out what was on it. They appear to be round core and nickel/steel wrap. They look a lot like Ernie Ball to me. No colors on either end. I can't find such a set for 6-string. It's not DR; the increments are different. Could be custom, of course. I'm even wondering if the prev. owner removed the .026 from some 7-string set. k

[marcwhy]

Hi -- just go to Stringjoy and order a set!

[sgosnell]

That set is going to be way out of balance, tension-wise. The bass strings will have much more tension than the treble. The neck might be strong enough to resist twisting, but I wouldn't want to play it with that much difference evenso. I prefer a reasonably balanced tension set, although 'reasonably' has a range of acceptability for me.

[neatomic]

talk about light top-heavy bottom!!

if you can feel the difference between the set you describe and the dr tite-fit 10-56 set...you ought to forget about guitar and become a surgeon!!

i take it that you measured the strings on your guitar...may be slight misreadings...otherwise cobble an exact spec'ed set together..easy enough these days

luck


cheers

[JPP65]

Stringjoy or Curt Mangan (among others, I'm sure) will do custom sets.
I would check their string tension charts to see if they are "balanced", might make a difference, might not.
Happy Hunting!

[mr. beaumont]

Why would anybody want that?

I'm a light bottom heavy top kinda guy. For guitar strings, that is.

[kraml]

Thanks for all the replies. I did consider the possibility of the neck twisting and balance. I think my mic is accurate; tested against strings of known dimensions. I like both Stringjoy and Curt Mangan. I'm guessing the previous owner was after a Duane Eddy (you jazz guys might not know who that is . . . .) sound. He had put a big DeArmond in the treble position and a Supertron in the rhythm. Who knows what he was after. I put a TV Jones Filtertron+ in the rear. The giant bass strings explain in part why the instrument on some settings sounds more like a Super 400 than a Gretsch 6122! I did not realize they were so big until I measured them today. I have a strong left hand and I like larger bass strings set high for Chet style, so I guess it did not register that they were quite that large. Thanks again for all the responses; I like this board. k

[Tal_175]

That set is going to be way out of balance, tension-wise. The bass strings will have much more tension than the treble. The neck might be strong enough to resist twisting, but I wouldn't want to play it with that much difference evenso. I prefer a reasonably balanced tension set, although 'reasonably' has a range of acceptability for me.

If you look at tension charts you'll see that treble strings actually have similar tensions to bass strings. I was surprised when I saw that. But it made sense after if you consider that although they are thinner they have to be tighter to get higher frequencies.

[sgosnell]

Yes, the tensions are reasonably similar in a balanced set. But the set in question isn't going to be very balanced. You generally see something like a .013 e paired with a .056 E, not a .010, and the b string is really light.

[kraml]

I have a set of 13-56 from Stringjoy waiting to go on my L5 Studio. The early Chet sometimes played 10s on both the E and B strings. You can hear it on the late 50s early 60s albums, especially against the fine-wire frets. * Anyhow, I'm thinking that the "originals" might be a custom set of Curt Mangan's. The ball end wrap is similar if not identical to Curt's: the last 6-12 wraps are "flattened." Of course I don't know how many wrapping styles exist. Stringjoy wrap looks quite different on the ball and along the string. I did put on the 6122 a set of Ernie Ball Slinky's (10 13 17 30 42 52), which I had laying around. The Ernie Ball set sounds nothing like what I removed, even considering the difference in size and tension. I had to make considerable adjustments to reconcile the difference in action, of course. The Ernie Ball set sounds like tin or aluminum compared to the original set, especially the trebles. The basses sound "bonky." Ernie's are lighter and brighter in appearance, too. I thought that might be due to their newness, but Curt's are darker out of the box, about the same as my "originals." I play a lot, but I'm pretty consistent on cleaning strings every time when done. Well, all that's a lot of detail, but since some of you were interested, I thought I'd offer a few more observations. I may not even go back to the larger strings on this instrument. I've been planning (when time) to set it up with Thomastic-Infeld 10s (flatwound). The change to a lighter set with adjustments has me going in that direction now. So, after all that, who knows? k