Same string gauge harder to bend on hollow body?

[John A.]

Those are valid points. But if the OP’s complaint is true and if the strings and scale length are identical, I can’t think of any other explanations. I don’t think neck angle or break angle over the bridge would effect string bending effort.

Somehow differences in neck profile or the geometry of the hand/guitar interface lead to slight differences in mechanical advantage and perceived effort? I dunno. I was futzing around with my semi (which has a trapeze). I stuck a piece of tape on the string between bridge and tailpiece and tried bending strings.

The tape did not move as far as I could tell. Not sure what this means.
Also, this is an angled TP and the distance from bridge to TP at the high E is not much more than with a stop TP, so maybe not the right guitar to experiment with. But still, it night be a data point.

[KirkP]

This thread is not about string tension.It's about string compliance.

Compliance is an important factor, but when bending a string, the pitch only increases as a result of an increase in tension!

[pingu]

Last time I bent a string I had long, thick, luxurious hair. It was along time ago.

proof that string bending is bad for
your hair ....

Look at Metheny , hardly ever bends

Jim Hall ..... oh ok , got that wrong then

[buduranus2]

The difference is a matter of both material properties and the length of the string between both ends, String length is roughly between tuner peg and ball end. On the material side it is the Elasticity Modulus (E) of the material. At bending, the string becomes temporarily a tiny bit longer between both ends. What you feel is the force you need to bend to a certain pitch. The "stiffer"the material is, the more force is required. The more elastic the material is, the lesser force is required. The longer the string length between firm ends. the less force is required. The shorter the length between both ends, the more for is required. It is just mechanical engineering.

OP here. This had me scratching my head. As I may have mentioned, I don't know enough physics to fill a thimble. That aside, I can only go by my (limited) experience. By your reckoning, a Les Paul or other 24-3/4" scale solid body should be harder to bend strings on than a Super 400? Just can't wrap my mind around that.

All true ...however... it is true only to the distance, not the pitch. I mean bend to "up" 2 cm is easier when the non vibrating length is bigger. However bend to a particular pitch (say half note) is _exactly_ the same, because you must increase the tension to the exactly the same value, regardless the non vibrating length.

going forward on this path, if the non vibrating part is bigger, that means to achieve a half not bend you must bend to a bigger distance, and someone can feel, that it is harder to achieve is bending goal (the pitch), despite, that regardless the non vibrating length that is exactly the same tension increase.

Given the the archtops have way bigger non vibrating length compared to a Les Paul or Tele, this could be the reason of harder to bend feeling

This seems to be the flip side of the previous quote. Intuitively it resonates more comfortably but, again, I don't really know enough to have an opinion.

It occurs to me that with a typical archtop, the neck and strings are physically further away from your body that when you play, for example, a Strat. All the leverage points are different. It takes the same amount of force, deployed through a different, and less efficient system of body levers. It just feels stiffer, because the angles are a bit awkward. Practice should take up some of the slack.

Maybe so. The guitar in question is actually thinner than a Les Paul. I bought it because it's very light, which is an important consideration if you're gonna be doing three sets standing up.

A trapeze tailpiece adds a length of non-vibrating string, increasing the total string length compare to a stop tailpiece. This means you must bend the string a greater distance to get the same increase in tension. Frequency of vibration is proportional to string tension. The requirement to bend it farther makes bending feel more difficult. After all, Physics 101 says work = force X distance!

Therefore, while tailpieces do not increase string tension, they do increase the effort when bending strings.

Edit: I’ve realized the above argument may have a flaw, since the force that the finger is pushing against should drop as the string length increases, which would tend to *reduce* the amount of work required. Nevertheless, with a trapeze tailpiece the string still needs to travel further across the fret to get the same change in frequency as a stop tailpiece, and you are also working against the friction of the fretboard, so I still think more work would be involved.

This had my head spinning around like Linda Blair's in The Exorcist.

Last time I bent a string I had long, thick, luxurious hair. It was along time ago.

Hair today, gone tomorrow.

[aquin43]

The string tension change for a semitone bend is just over 12% so it is safe to assume that for changes of this magnitude the string slides over the bridge and the nut otherwise tuning would be impossible in the first place and pitch stability after bending would be very poor. Therefore the tension is the same along the whole length of the string.

The string acts like a spring and stores energy proportional to its length and tension. The 12% increase in tension implies 12% increase in stored energy. The source of that stored energy is the work (force X distance) done by the bending finger. Since the longer string on the archtop stores more spring energy because of its greater overall length, the bending finger must do more work to put that energy there. So the archtop string needs more effort to bend.

Of course, if the solid guitar is a strat and we are talking about the top strings, there is already a long dead length of string at the headstock because of the one sided design.

[KirkP]

The string tension change for a semitone bend is just over 12% so it is safe to assume that for changes of this magnitude the string slides over the bridge and the nut otherwise tuning would be impossible in the first place and pitch stability after bending would be very poor. Therefore the tension is the same along the whole length of the string.

The string acts like a spring and stores energy proportional to its length and tension. The 12% increase in tension implies 12% increase in stored energy. The source of that stored energy is the work (force X distance) done by the bending finger. Since the longer string on the archtop stores more spring energy because of its greater overall length, the bending finger must do more work to put that energy there. So the archtop string needs more effort to bend...

You did a better job of explaining it than I did!

[RJVB]

Since the longer string on the archtop stores more spring energy because of its greater overall length, the bending finger must do more work to put that energy there. So the archtop string needs more effort to bend.

Doesn't this same thread argue that the same tension strings are easier to play on an archtop because of the longer part behind the bridge. If I understand correctly that's because string feels like it would on a flattop with a that much (say 10cm?) longer scale length, when tuned to whatever lower pitch this same tension would give. Or maybe what you are really saying here is that bending a semitone on an archtop requires a larger/wider bend. Just like I suppose it would on that hypothetical longer scale flattop tuned lower so string tensions are the same as on the archtop?

[jads57]

So just a thought! I haven’t played my Benedetto Bambino in over a week. And when I did the strings felt really slinky compared to a week ago. I just moved up a gauge to 12-52, Lol!

The neck shape also felt smaller and thinner overall. I think some of this is how we feel at any given time.