So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

[Falloffthebonetone]

In that thicker strings would actually cause less damage to frets over time. I haven't done any experiment yet, but it is where my brain is headed.

The way I think of it is: with smaller strings, they are easier to fret and are obviously thinner, but still strong while bigger strings are harder to fret and are wider in surface area right? So the way I think of it is like a razor is being pushed down on something likely with excessive force as opposed to something like a bowie knife and an appropriate amount of force. Which one would cut better assuming they are both made of the same materials? It would seem like the razor right? Because it is thinner and sharper.

Would then is carry over to guitar in the sense that a thinner , sharper and more pliant string will cut into the fret more than a thicker and more tense one would since it is resisting the force of your fingers more and has a less rounder surface?

It makes sense to me because (using nickeleound steel striings) my bass doesn't get fretwear nearly as much as my guitar does (using nickelwound steel strings), and it is usually the plain strings on my guitars that get the divits sooner and more prominently.

Am I overlooking something or does this make sense to anyone else? The impression I always get when I ask people is that bigger strings tear up frets faster just like your hands. But that seems only because your hands have to work harder, not necessarily the frets. I know SRV used huge strings and he blew through his frets pretty quick but c'mon, he's SRV and played like an aggro madman no matter what.

 

[CTN]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

you're forgetting about string tension.

also the fact that the cross section of a string is, for the most part, circular. which means that at any given fret, the amount of string contacting the fret is a point at the base of the string. A point. not a line.

If the cross section of a string was a square, rectangle, or any non-curved shape, then your hypothesis would be applicable, but since it's not, your hypothesis kinda falls apart.

There is even less contact with the fret when you consider wound strings vs plain strings, due to the minute gaps between the wrapping wire, which also has a circular cross section. Which would explain why your bass frets are taking very long to get worn, because the wrappings are bigger on bass strings than they are on wound guitar strings. Of course with flatwound strings, those gaps are negligible and you may as well consider it a plain string as far as geometry goes.

What matters the most with string wear is string tension, the intensity of strength that a player uses to fret notes, and the hardness of the fret material itself. The thickness of strings matters far far less than these three factors.

SRV fretted like an agro madman, yes but he also used ludicrously heavy gauge strings in standard tuning (what's important here is not the gauge, but the fact that at standard tuning, the string tension was MUCH higher than say a set of 9-42s), without using harder fret material to compensate. So his nickel silver frets got chewed right the hell up.

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

When I switched to 11s with a wound third I noticed much more fret wear from the G than with a plain string . . .

 

[Falloffthebonetone]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

you're forgetting about string tension.

also the fact that the cross section of a string is, for the most part, circular. which means that at any given fret, the amount of string contacting the fret is a point at the base of the string. A point. not a line.

If the cross section of a string was a square, rectangle, or any non-curved shape, then your hypothesis would be applicable, but since it's not, your hypothesis kinda falls apart.

There is even less contact with the fret when you consider wound strings vs plain strings, due to the minute gaps between the wrapping wire, which also has a circular cross section. Which would explain why your bass frets are taking very long to get worn, because the wrappings are bigger on bass strings than they are on wound guitar strings. Of course with flatwound strings, those gaps are negligible and you may as well consider it a plain string as far as geometry goes.

What matters the most with string wear is string tension, the intensity of strength that a player uses to fret notes, and the hardness of the fret material itself. The thickness of strings matters far far less than these three factors.

SRV fretted like an agro madman, yes but he also used ludicrously heavy gauge strings in standard tuning (what's important here is not the gauge, but the fact that at standard tuning, the string tension was MUCH higher than say a set of 9-42s), without using harder fret material to compensate. So his nickel silver frets got chewed right the hell up.

But I would think higher string tension would mean LESS fretwear since the strings fight harder to be fretted, meaning less pressure on the frets right? Also if the string was small enough, wouldn't the shape of the string not matter? Like garrot wire will still cut things and that is round, but if it becomes too thick then it won't cut. As well. I'm not saying it's as important as string material, tension, strength of the player or fret material, only that it is a factor. I'm aware that size does not always equal tension, but it certainly does factor in.

 

[CTN]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

naw, when you fret a string, if it's thicker gauge/higher tension, you have to exert more downward force to push it down onto the fret. That force doesn't disappear as soon as the string touches the fret. I doubt humans are capable of regulating their finger strength to be THAT sensitive.

In reality, that force gets continually exerted on the string until the point where the finger is unable to exert any more force (that varies with how much of an aggro madman you are lol). The downward force on the fret is a combination of the tension of the string and the vertical component of the force being exerted on the string relative to the fret (ie the string curves downward to the fretboard where you fret the string. that creates force on the string AT the fret, at an angle, but only the vertical component of that force is applied to the fret itself. The horizontal component is balanced out by the string tension itself.

That sounds a little bit contradictory, except when you notice that the higher the string tension, the harder you have to press down, and as a result, the greater the vertical component downward. Ie more string tension = more pressure on the fret.

Sorry for the physics-ing

 

[Falloffthebonetone]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

naw, when you fret a string, if it's thicker gauge/higher tension, you have to exert more downward force to push it down onto the fret. That force doesn't disappear as soon as the string touches the fret. I doubt humans are capable of regulating their finger strength to be THAT sensitive.

In reality, that force gets continually exerted on the string until the point where the finger is unable to exert any more force (that varies with how much of an aggro madman you are lol). The downward force on the fret is a combination of the tension of the string and the vertical component of the force being exerted on the string relative to the fret (ie the string curves downward to the fretboard where you fret the string. that creates force on the string AT the fret, at an angle, but only the vertical component of that force is applied to the fret itself. The horizontal component is balanced out by the string tension itself.

That sounds a little bit contradictory, except when you notice that the higher the string tension, the harder you have to press down, and as a result, the greater the vertical component downward. Ie more string tension = more pressure on the fret.

Sorry for the physics-ing

Okay cool! That makes more sense.

 

[ItsaBass]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

That's the exact opposite of what happens. Thicker strings eat through frets a lot faster than thinner ones. They not only have a greater area that contacts the fret, but they don't "give" as much upon contacting the fret. Additionally, they tend to be played with a heavier hand than lighter strings (though this is not always the case).

 

[Falloffthebonetone]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

That's the exact opposite of what happens. Thicker strings eat through frets a lot faster than thinner ones. They not only have a greater area that contacts the fret, but they don't "give" as much upon contacting the fret. Additionally, they tend to be played with a heavier hand than lighter strings (though this is not always the case).

You couldn't tell that I wrote my original post having heard that before?

 

[GuitarDoc]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

You're forgetting one other factor (as CTN suggested)...

The heavier "wound" stings are wound with round wire. This, even more, reduces the surface contact area with the frets and thus increases the force per surface area on the frets. That will dramatically increase fret wear.

(And, NO, it's not just a point contact no matter how thick the strings are...unless you are talking about perfectly elastic materials, which strings and frets are NOT...even stainless steel frets!)

 

[vinta9e]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

Well, my explanation is simple and provocative as usual... thick string players just don't wank around. They bend when they need to, and they do not push the string into the fret.

Here's another one - for some odd reason thick strings seem to last longer than thin ones. And you should know that old, rusty strings are freteaters.

 

[ItsaBass]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

You couldn't tell that I wrote my original post having heard that before?

Your being a dick here must mean that you thought I was being a dick earlier. In fact, I was not. I was simply responding to your OP as best as I knew how at the moment.

 

[ratherdashing]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

A better way to think of it is this:

I hit you with a broomstick. Then I hit you with a baseball bat. Which one will cause more damage?

Both are round, like a guitar string, and both will make contact with your body in pretty much the same way.

It's pretty obvious once you think about it in those terms.

 

[Falloffthebonetone]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

Your being a dick here must mean that you thought I was being a dick earlier. In fact, I was not. I was simply responding to your OP as best as I knew how at the moment.

Your being a dick here must mean that you thought I was being a dick earlier. In fact, I was not. I was simply responding to your reply as best as I knew how at the moment.

But seriously, that original reply wasn't meant to be offensive either. Chill out bro.

 

[blueman335]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

the higher the string tension, the harder you have to press down, and as a result, the greater the vertical component downward. Ie more string tension = more pressure on the fret.

+1. I play with 9's, and don't press down nearly as hard as if I'd have to if I used 10's or 11's. That's why I use 9's. I have much more speed that way.

 

[blueman335]

Re: So I have this weird theory about string thickness and fretwear...

SRV fretted like an agro madman, yes but he also used ludicrously heavy gauge strings in standard tuning.

I don't know how often (as I not a SRV fan) but on some of his recordings he's tuned down a half step, as Hendrix did in his later years too.