C# tuning part II

[eric22rr]

I plan on getting some D'adarrio Heavy gauge strings (.012 .016 .020 .032 .042 .054) and drop-tuning to C# (standard tuning, down 1 1/2 steps) for a Gibson Les Paul. If I were to tune up to standard E every now and then, would the tension be too much? In other words, are strings of this gauge only suitable for drop-tuning? If they actually are OK for standard E, is it too hard to play to be practical?

My primary reason for using such a heavy gauge string is to keep it from flopping around too much when its tuned so low. I don't have any experience with this; I'm only going off of what other guitarists have done (check out the Troy Van Leeuwen interview on SeymourDuncan.com). I can use any help and advice that I can get!

One more thing -- I'll probably have intonation problems with 12's and C# -- How bad will that be? Is it subtle? Is it a glaring problem?

 

[LiquidSky]

Re: C# tuning part II

I have heavy gauge EB's on my strat...not sure of the gauge 12-56 or 54 something like that. Anyway, I had to reset the intonation and action on my strat after putting those on there because it was such a drastic change. I keep it in B drop - C# standard. Some putz tuned it to standard one day and totally threw all of my adjustments off. I had to reset the truss rod, intonation the whole nine yards. It would be best just to keep it in the same area that you drop it to especially with strings of that guage. LP's might be different though since they are a lot bigger than strats. You may not have the problems that I did. Also, as you can imagine, when it was tuned to standard the action was about sitting a few inches from the ceiling. Hope this helps.

 

[eric22rr]

Re: C# tuning part II

yes! very helpful, thanks

 

[dilney]

Re: C# tuning part II

Once I had the same question and found this calculator:
http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html

 

[some_dude]

Re: C# tuning part II

I use 13-70 for C#....works great, but you wouldn't want to tune it upto standard.....

.....that guage you're using though (12-54) will work fine in standard, though tuning up and down that far may force you to compromise on your setup alot.

 

[eric22rr]

Re: C# tuning part II

I use 13-70 for C#....works great, but you wouldn't want to tune it upto standard.....

.....that guage you're using though (12-54) will work fine in standard, though tuning up and down that far may force you to compromise on your setup alot.

How do you handle the intonation problems? Since I've always tuned to standard E, it was more of a fine-tuning problem, not to mention the fact that its easy since the scale length of the guitar/saddles are designed for a somewhat standard tuning. Do you have intonation problems; and if so, are they easy to hear?

 

[Loserchief]

Re: C# tuning part II

i use 13-65 for C#, C standard and B tuning and don't have problems with that. You just need to set the guitar up for it and then keep the alternate tunings in the same range that the guitar was set up for.

 

[Zerberus]

Re: C# tuning part II

I plan on getting some D'adarrio Heavy gauge strings (.012 .016 .020 .032 .042 .054) and drop-tuning to C# (standard tuning, down 1 1/2 steps) for a Gibson Les Paul. If I were to tune up to standard E every now and then, would the tension be too much? In other words, are strings of this gauge only suitable for drop-tuning? If they actually are OK for standard E, is it too hard to play to be practical?

I play 12-52 in standard tuning withoiut issues, and played 13-60 for years. The neck will hold if the guitar isn´t a total POS (which a Gibson LP shouldn´t be). Structurally it´s no problem.

One more thing -- I'll probably have intonation problems with 12's and C# -- How bad will that be? Is it subtle? Is it a glaring problem?

Depending on how exact the bridge is mounted and which style of T-O-M it is (the wider more modern "Nashville" or the classic ABR-1), it may be an issue... too many variables to say for sure that you won´t have issues, but also too many to say that you will

 

[Dirtyking]

Re: C# tuning part II

I had the same problem bro. The solution was getting another guitar for the different tuning. I'm to anal about my setup's to be tuning up and down.

 

[Diego]

Re: C# tuning part II

I use 11-48 tuned to E on my Epiphone and sometimes I go as low as C with no problem, no floppy strings and good sustain and all that. It's a matter of controlling the pick attack. :smokin:

Give it a try.

 

[eric22rr]

Re: C# tuning part II

I had the same problem bro. The solution was getting another guitar for the different tuning. I'm to anal about my setup's to be tuning up and down.

Yeah, after I got a little more practice with setting up guitars, I relaized how bad the setup would be to switch to something as far away as 1 1/2 steps.


Thanks for the help everyone!

 

[eric22rr]

Re: C# tuning part II

Once I had the same question and found this calculator:
http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html

That site is EXACTLY what I needed! Thanks!

 

[some_dude]

Re: C# tuning part II

How do you handle the intonation problems? Since I've always tuned to standard E, it was more of a fine-tuning problem, not to mention the fact that its easy since the scale length of the guitar/saddles are designed for a somewhat standard tuning. Do you have intonation problems; and if so, are they easy to hear?

I had no problems setting up the intonation. I use separate guitars for C# and E though.

 

[WITH FULL DISTORTION]

Re: C# tuning part II

0,12 for ... E standard? ONLY if you wanna stop playing and start gymn in the guitar
Hhaahahahahahah!

 

[Johtosotku]

Re: C# tuning part II

0,12 for ... E standard? ONLY if you wanna stop playing and start gymn in the guitar
Hhaahahahahahah!

Not really! I played 12-54 with my SG Standard without problems. I changed to 12-52 as I just didn't like the sound. I also like 11-50 with my ESP with different scale, and I'm thinking of going heavier.

 

[V-Spot]

Re: C# tuning part II

.15-.70's for B is just fine for me, and I'm sure I could go to C# for a little while and it'd still be comfortable.