Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

[34029324079]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

^^Useless blanket statement which will now be voided by fact.

I play in e-standard. For downtuning to d I use 13-60 .... I know multiple people In RL and on this and other messageboards who use similar guages in standard.

lol

I didnt know anyone did that

 

[Earwicker]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

At the risk of boring everyone to death with this string gauge business, I finally got round to putting 11s (EXL115) on me PRS the other day, and despite my worst fears, they suit it down to the ground. And the tone... the tone is nothing short of phenominal. As is the playability, believe it or not!

Don't go to mediums if you find it makes your fingers hurt - tendonitis has threatened the careers of all too many overambitious guitarists, but if you can handle them, the sound is awesome.

EW

 

[octavedoctor]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

At the risk of boring everyone to death with this string gauge business, I finally got round to putting 11s (EXL115) on me PRS the other day, and despite my worst fears, they suit it down to the ground. And the tone... the tone is nothing short of phenominal. As is the playability, believe it or not!

Don't go to mediums if you find it makes your fingers hurt - tendonitis has threatened the careers of all too many overambitious guitarists, but if you can handle them, the sound is awesome.

EW

I usually find that if you have good technique you adjust to the heavier gauges quite easily. PRS use a short scale anyway so 11s aren't that heavy a choice.

On the technique side, i find that many superb players actually have very bad technique from a classical and orthopaedic viewpoint.

I remember seeing a transcription of Always with me, Always with you and the recommended fingering involved some tortuous technique involving fretting the low E with your thumb. I figured if Satch plays it that way he's heading for a bad case of RSI, but the silly thing is that it's easier with classical technique and you can get more expression into it.

 

[Mephis]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

Heh, I have an cheapo Ibanez acoustic that sounds suprizingly good and has massive strings on it... It still plays and bends as good as an electric though. :|

really strange lol...

 

[Earwicker]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

On the technique side, i find that many superb players actually have very bad technique from a classical and orthopaedic viewpoint.

I agree. I suspect a lot of purely electric players develop bad habits by learning on superlight strings.

 

[jimku]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

Hand me your electric with 10's on it and I will hand it right back and tell you to take the railroad cables off of it. I play 9's on everything. And don't give me that bullcrap about bad tone with light strings unless you can diss Billy Gibbons who plays with ... 7's.

I even play 9's on my acoustic jumbo and it sounds just great. Maybe a wee tad less volume, but more sustain and ... I can bend strings well for blues, and if I can't do that, as far as I am concerned any guitar (including acoustics) is worthless.
https://youtu.be/4sZb9YjL-N8
https://www.musiciansfriend.com/acc...light-phosphor-bronze-acoustic-guitar-strings

 

[Silence Kid]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

I use 9s on an acoustic; twelve string ultra-lights. Need all the help I can get wrestling with that much, myself.

In fact I generally use extra-lights (but not 9s) on acoustic; there was a time when I would use heavies on everything, and that time has passed. 9s on electric all around. I'd rather take it easy and focus on my playing than challenge myself with heavy cables. That said, for better or worse lighter guage strings (especially on acoustic) are less dynamic and add compression to your sound, which is another aspect in which they can even out slop in your playing. So it depends- do you want to improve your dynamic control and technique at the expense of 'sounding good' within your own admitted limitations (or practice to raise those limits as a goal?) Do you prefer to maximize consistency for the benefit of an audience? Does your performance technique demand dynamic variance?

One aspect where lighter strings can improve your playing: I think for certain techniques on high strings (such as tremolo picking or certain fast runs) it is *harder* to pull off with lighter strings. Larning to do so properly with light guage strings will actually improve your picking in that respect. I also agree with what was said about high strings responding strangely on some guitars with lighter guages; lighter guages are much more sensitive to having your pick lined up in a way where you can pluck the string and not just slip past it when you're doing something complex. So if you're into improving your game, I think it's worth it to practice with both lighter and heavier strings, for different reasons. Otherwise, you will keep making excuses for your playing either way if you have to pick up one or the other.

On electric I find there are so many other sound variables that the sound of super-light strings isn't really noticeable (but the technique-related aspects can be.)

*Old thread? I don't mind.

 

[Demanic]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

I play bass. If I try to play electric guitar with anything less than .10's the strings just mush out.
Nothing against Billy G. but I believe Hendrix played .13's.

Sent from my Alcatel_5044C using Tapatalk

 

[Sirion]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

Wow, a 12 year old thread.

Interesting to see this. I think the cult of heavy strings, which was very oppressive at the time, has mellowed down a fair bit, just as it is no longer conventional Internet wisdom that buffered pedals = bad.

 

[Mincer]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

There was a lot of strange internet 'wisdom' handed down over the years. Most of it was taken from interviews of famous stars and hearsay from gear 'experts', and not ever with any real-world research.

 

[PFDarkside]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

Except .009s strings on acoustics does sound bad. May as well just play an electric unplugged.

If you don’t have enough tension on the top to move it, it really just sounds like an unplugged electric.

 

[Clint 55]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

I like the fatness of 11s or 12s but agree that the tension of 9s in standard is ideal. Tuning down a whole step solved all my probs. I played 11s in D a while and the tension was ok but I get plenty of fatness with 10-52s having the notes be lower.

 

[ehdwuld]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

I put ultralight 10s on mine
When the Martin still felt too tight
I bought a Epiphone Hummingbird with a 24.75 scale
And put 10s on it
Plays like heaven

It came with 12s and was much louder
And harder to play

Sounded good though

Those 12s didn't make it through the weekend

 

[Gtrjunior]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

I’ve tried light strings years ago in my old acoustic. I don’t think they were .09’s but they were light. I didn’t care for them. As stated above, they sounded thin and didn’t have the oomph, the heavier strings did.
My current Taylor came strung with .13g, and although they sound fantastic they are damn heavy and tough to play.

 

[JB_From_Hell]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

Interesting to see this. I think the cult of heavy strings, which was very oppressive at the time, has mellowed down a fair bit...

Yeah, now it's the cult of people claiming ultra light strings with super low action sounds amazing because Billy Gibbons uses that. Never mind all the gear he's running through and how his tech uses an oscilloscope to ensure all his guitars sound identical.

 

[Sirion]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

Yeah, now it's the cult of people claiming ultra light strings with super low action sounds amazing because Billy Gibbons uses that. Never mind all the gear he's running through and how his tech uses an oscilloscope to ensure all his guitars sound identical.

If so, they are not doing a very good job being heard.

 

[Sirion]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

bump to kill the polls.

I wonder what the story behind this post was…

 

[canon_mutant]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

Weak fingers, I suspect.

I very early on found even going down to 11s made my acoustic sound anemic.

Try sliding in and out of notes on the fretboard more to get the bend effect on your heavier gauge acoustic strings.

You may well find out that you will start using the same technique more on electric too.

Watch Andy Timmons play a while. The dude has completely changed my attack and style. Sure he still bends, hammers on, and pulls off, but does a LOT of just sliding on the fretboard.

Very unique and I think better sound.

And, for the aging demographic, as I have aged and started dealing with arthritis and mobility issues, sliding in and out of notes is also less painful when the joints are acting up. :bigthumb:

 

[JB_From_Hell]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

If so, they are not doing a very good job being heard.

If they used heavier strings maybe they'd be louder

 

[Sirion]

Re: Anyone ever tried 0.09's on their acoustic?

Possibly, but they could also just turn up their amps