adapting a 12 string

[songman]

Has anyone ever tried removing the higher tuned E (and possibly also the higher tuned A) string from a 12 string? Why am I interested? Well I somehow have the feeling that this might improve the bass response and also I think most of the contribution to the sound of a 12-string comes from the higher double strings. Does this make any sense or am I wrong?

Cheers, Bob.

PS I have the 856ce (2015 Andy Power model) and I found this to be one of the best 12 strings I ever heard, so my question does not entail a critique of that particular guitar, it is an observation I have in general when hearing a 12 string being played on its own.

[guitarsrsoawesome]

I bet it would have that effect and may be why Taylor built the 8-string baritone to only have octave strings on the D and G...would certainly abate the additional jangle of the octaves on the E and A.  Would make an interesting experiment. 

My only question is would the removing of those two octaves and the consequential loss of tension do anything over an extended period, say years, to effect the neck?  Probably not, but I think about stuff ilke that.

[timfitz63]

... My only question is would the removing of those two octaves and the consequential loss of tension do anything over an extended period, say years, to effect the neck?  Probably not, but I think about stuff ilke that.

This was my first thought too.  But after considering it a bit more, I tend to think the neck would be fine; I think (read that as "I'm guessing") that the main "E" and "A" strings provide the bulk of the tension with those pairs, and truss rod adjustments would probably compensate any tendencies for the neck to bow fore/aft.

Something else to ponder, though:  would removal of the octave "E" and "A" strings cause a lateral imbalance in the neck tension, causing it to perhaps warp side-to-side?  Like a standard 12-string guitar, the 8-string baritone string arrangement is symmetrical (1-1-2-2-1-1); taking off the octave "E" and "A" strings on a 12-string would unbalance the symmetry and perhaps cause the neck to 'list' toward the higher "E" strings.  I can't say whether this might be a problem; it would all depend on how strong the neck is braced against asymmetrical loads, and how great the asymmetric load is.  But I tend to think the neck is mostly braced for fore/aft loads, not side-to-side; and truss rod adjustments wouldn't correct any imbalance in the latter.

But to answer the original question in my case:  no, I've not tried that.

[gscratch]

I've had a 12-worth playing and been playing it for about nine months (having played only 6 strings before).

I can't comment on the neck effects, but IMPO, the octave E and A strings contribute significantly to the 12-string "sound".  The doubled G string (again, IMO) is the least useful, but I don't intend to try removing it.

[Joseph]

I do think that those octave sets contribute tremendously to the tone of a 12 string. I have tried removing the E and A octaves and then beefed up the main E and A strings to a higher gauge. However, I didn't like the effect.. as I decided that if I want to play a 12 string guitar... which I love... then work with the way it is designed.  So... that theory led me to where I am now, and love the result, which is to put together my own sets of medium gauge strings. I have noticed that the E octave is... for some reason... unduly thick for it's purpose, so I cut it's gauge back from .030 on a medium set.. to an .025..and bump up the primary string to a .054... which brings out more noticeable bass from that set. As for the A set of strings, I have put an .018w (they are available) or cut back to an .016 in place of the unwound .020 on a medium set. Also... on the D set, I will replace the .014 octave with an .012 string. I like to cut back the G strings to a .022/.009 to tame them a bit...since the G (@.025) and the E octave (@.030) share the highest tension in the medium set!... and to even out the string balance a bit overall. This crazy plan came about using Daddarios String Tension site, so that I could balance out the tension and get plenty of bass also.

This works great on my Guild... giving it a bit more dominant sound on the primary strings... and sends the octaves strings' strong volume to the back.  I love it's bassier tone and more even tension across the set. I do tune the guitar down at least 1/2 step as recommended... but it can play up to concert pitch for a short Sunday morning use for the children's 2 worship services without having to use a capo.

Is all this worth it? To me it is... I just buy a medium set.. and a couple extra strings to put this set together.

[guitarsrsoawesome]

I do think that those octave sets contribute tremendously to the tone of a 12 string. I have tried removing the E and A octaves and then beefed up the main E and A strings to a higher gauge. However, I didn't like the effect.. as I decided that if I want to play a 12 string guitar... which I love... then work with the way it is designed.  So... that theory led me to where I am now, and love the result, which is to put together my own sets of medium gauge strings. I have noticed that the E octave is... for some reason... unduly thick for it's purpose, so I cut it's gauge back from .030 on a medium set.. to an .025..and bump up the primary string to a .054... which brings out more noticeable bass from that set. As for the A set of strings, I have put an .018w (they are available) or cut back to an .016 in place of the unwound .020 on a medium set. Also... on the D set, I will replace the .014 octave with an .012 string. I like to cut back the G strings to a .022/.009 to tame them a bit...since the G (@.025) and the E octave (@.030) share the highest tension in the medium set!... and to even out the string balance a bit overall. This crazy plan came about using Daddarios String Tension site, so that I could balance out the tension and get plenty of bass also.

This works great on my Guild... giving it a bit more dominant sound on the primary strings... and sends the octaves strings' strong volume to the back.  I love it's bassier tone and more even tension across the set. I do tune the guitar down at least 1/2 step as recommended... but it can play up to concert pitch for a short Sunday morning use for the children's 2 worship services without having to use a capo.

Is all this worth it? To me it is... I just buy a medium set.. and a couple extra strings to put this set together.

This is genius, and Tim, that is an interesting query, i could almost imagine the neck wanting to twist.  But if the person increased the gauge of the E and A, as Joseph suggests, I bet that would compensate some and prevent it...maybe we can get those myth busters guys to test it? Ha!

[songman]

I have noticed that the E octave is... for some reason... unduly thick for it's purpose, so I cut it's gauge back from .030 on a medium set.. to an .025..and bump up the primary string to a .054... which brings out more noticeable bass from that set. As for the A set of strings, I have put an .018w (they are available) or cut back to an .016 in place of the unwound .020 on a medium set. Also... on the D set, I will replace the .014 octave with an .012 string. I like to cut back the G strings to a .022/.009 to tame them a bit...since the G (@.025) and the E octave (@.030) share the highest tension in the medium set!... and to even out the string balance a bit overall. This crazy plan came about using Daddarios String Tension site, so that I could balance out the tension and get plenty of bass also.

This works great on my Guild... giving it a bit more dominant sound on the primary strings... and sends the octaves strings' strong volume to the back.  I love it's bassier tone and more even tension across the set. I do tune the guitar down at least 1/2 step as recommended... but it can play up to concert pitch for a short Sunday morning use for the children's 2 worship services without having to use a capo.

Is all this worth it? To me it is... I just buy a medium set.. and a couple extra strings to put this set together.

Great idea, I am going to give this a try!

[timfitz63]

I do think that those octave sets contribute tremendously to the tone of a 12 string. I have tried removing the E and A octaves and then beefed up the main E and A strings to a higher gauge. However, I didn't like the effect.. as I decided that if I want to play a 12 string guitar... which I love... then work with the way it is designed.  So... that theory led me to where I am now, and love the result, which is to put together my own sets of medium gauge strings. I have noticed that the E octave is... for some reason... unduly thick for it's purpose, so I cut it's gauge back from .030 on a medium set.. to an .025..and bump up the primary string to a .054... which brings out more noticeable bass from that set. As for the A set of strings, I have put an .018w (they are available) or cut back to an .016 in place of the unwound .020 on a medium set. Also... on the D set, I will replace the .014 octave with an .012 string. I like to cut back the G strings to a .022/.009 to tame them a bit...since the G (@.025) and the E octave (@.030) share the highest tension in the medium set!... and to even out the string balance a bit overall. This crazy plan came about using Daddarios String Tension site, so that I could balance out the tension and get plenty of bass also.

This works great on my Guild... giving it a bit more dominant sound on the primary strings... and sends the octaves strings' strong volume to the back.  I love it's bassier tone and more even tension across the set. I do tune the guitar down at least 1/2 step as recommended... but it can play up to concert pitch for a short Sunday morning use for the children's 2 worship services without having to use a capo.

Is all this worth it? To me it is... I just buy a medium set.. and a couple extra strings to put this set together.

This is genius, and Tim, that is an interesting query, i could almost imagine the neck wanting to twist.  But if the person increased the gauge of the E and A, as Joseph suggests, I bet that would compensate some and prevent it...maybe we can get those myth busters guys to test it? Ha!

Yeah, I thought the same thing about Joseph's method:  increasing the low "E" and "A" string gauges might do the trick to re-balance the whole neck, side-to-side.

Somewhere out there on the interweb is probably a method of determining the tension on a given string gauge at concert pitch; in fact, I seem to remember it being discussed here on this forum at one point.  Using that method and a bit of math, one could pretty easily figure out exactly what combination of heavier (but solo) "E" and "A" string gauges would balance the neck in the same manner as the standard 12-string "E" and "A" octave-pair gauges.  But I'm probably splitting hairs with my engineering approach...

[Joseph]

Daddario's String Tension Pro is excellent for accurate tension measurements and custom string configurations...
http://stringtensionpro.com/

[JeffK]

I've played 12s with various numbers of strings, accidentally after I've broken one or more.   

This is a handy tension calculator that I've used, http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html, with some more info and frequency numbers here, http://www.donaldsauter.com/string-calculation.htm  More or less, each of the 12 strings has about the same tension, so removing two drops the total tension between headstock and bridge by about 15%.  That's equivalent to keeping all 12 and tuning the whole thing down 3 half-steps to C#, which is a lot but not ridiculous and certainly not as great a change as removing all the strings.  The nut width is vastly smaller than the scale, so I can't imagine there being any significant sideways torque on the headstock, all that will happen is that the total tension will be reduced, roughly proportional to the number of strings you remove divided by 12.

[Jersey tuning]

The doubled upper E and A (which are in the same octave) counter-intuitively help boost the bass, or so it would seem if one looks at the new HD light sets with the medium trebles and light bass strings and take into consideration that Taylor claims the heavier trebles boost the bass. 

[Joseph]

I have noticed that the E octave is... for some reason... unduly thick for it's purpose, so I cut it's gauge back from .030 on a medium set.. to an .025..and bump up the primary string to a .054... which brings out more noticeable bass from that set. As for the A set of strings, I have put an .018w (they are available) or cut back to an .016 in place of the unwound .020 on a medium set. Also... on the D set, I will replace the .014 octave with an .012 string. I like to cut back the G strings to a .022/.009 to tame them a bit...since the G (@.025) and the E octave (@.030) share the highest tension in the medium set!... and to even out the string balance a bit overall. This crazy plan came about using Daddarios String Tension site, so that I could balance out the tension and get plenty of bass also.

This works great on my Guild... giving it a bit more dominant sound on the primary strings... and sends the octaves strings' strong volume to the back.  I love it's bassier tone and more even tension across the set. I do tune the guitar down at least 1/2 step as recommended... but it can play up to concert pitch for a short Sunday morning use for the children's 2 worship services without having to use a capo.

Is all this worth it? To me it is... I just buy a medium set.. and a couple extra strings to put this set together.

Great idea, I am going to give this a try!

I might add to this... that after going with this string configuration, I found out that the Elixir medium 12 string set (#11172 ) matched my configuration the closest, with minimal string swap outs. However, after buying several sets to stock up on... I found out through Elixir that they are discontinuing this set....   Guess I better stock up some more!

[guitarsrsoawesome]

I've played 12s with various numbers of strings, accidentally after I've broken one or more.   

This is a handy tension calculator that I've used, http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html, with some more info and frequency numbers here, http://www.donaldsauter.com/string-calculation.htm  More or less, each of the 12 strings has about the same tension, so removing two drops the total tension between headstock and bridge by about 15%.  That's equivalent to keeping all 12 and tuning the whole thing down 3 half-steps to C#, which is a lot but not ridiculous and certainly not as great a change as removing all the strings.  The nut width is vastly smaller than the scale, so I can't imagine there being any significant sideways torque on the headstock, all that will happen is that the total tension will be reduced, roughly proportional to the number of strings you remove divided by 12.

I really like your analysis and feel you completely answered the query. Thanks!

[Earl]

Don't forget that in 2009, Taylor issued the nine string guitar (no octaves on EAD, the bass side),  There is still one sitting at a dealer here in Boise last I saw.  Personally it felt better and "more right" to me than the eight string baritone ever did.  Clear distinct bass lines, with 12-string jangle on the top three.
https://www.taylorguitars.com/news/2009/09/10/9-string-bliss

I use the D'Addario string tension data all the time to look at options for heavier strings or weird combinations.

[timfitz63]

Don't forget that in 2009, Taylor issued the nine string guitar (no octaves on EAD, the bass side),  There is still one sitting at a dealer here in Boise last I saw.  Personally it felt better and "more right" to me than the eight string baritone ever did.  Clear distinct bass lines, with 12-string jangle on the top three.
https://www.taylorguitars.com/news/2009/09/10/9-string-bliss

Hmm.  That's an oddball!  Never encountered a 9-string before -- from any manufacturer...!

I wonder if the GS bracing was altered for this special 9-string configuration, or if Taylor just used a standard GS 12-string bracing configuration and only strung it with nine strings...?