Effect of string trees - this time with data!

tfarny

Master Member
Messages
4,481
So, I noticed that the B (w/tree) on my thinline had noticeably more sustain played open than my G (no string tree), then there was that long thread about string trees that ended up getting someone banned I think....
So I thought maybe I could actually measure the difference in sustain and tone with / without string trees. I used my hardtail strat, wound with .011s in Eb, and played G string and E string several times both with and without the string tree attached. Of course I tuned between tries. I tried to be really careful to pick the note with the same medium force each time.  I recorded without effects using my toneport into Audacity, normalized the tracks, and measured the length of the waveform from onset to its end. Also looked at the waveforms to see if the shapes were different post-attack (during the first second or so), because the far tail of the sound as it tapers off doesn't matter that much in reality.

Average increase in sustain from a tree on the high E string: .07 seconds, with quite a bit of variation in total sustain from not to note. Hard to see any real differences in the respective waveforms. Averages: Notree: 7.1 sec W/tree: 7.17 sec.
Average increase in sustain on the G string: 2.47 seconds! Fairly consistent levels of sustain - 'no tree' was always less sustaining that 'with tree'. More importantly, the note decayed much more quickly after the initial attack with 'no tree'.
Averages: Notree: 8.37 sec. W/tree: 10.83 sec.

Maybe if people are interested I'll post photos of the waveforms later.

Initial conclusions: I never thought, while playing the guitar, that the G was lacking anything, but I'm definitely keeping the tree on now. I don't trust myself to say "I hear the difference" because I know there is a lot of psychological stuff behind that - we tend to hear what we want to hear, which is why I did this with waveforms and counting seconds.
I may add D/G trees to my baritone and thinline too. The little barrel ones certainly don't hurt anything tuning-wise.
I have no answer for why there wasn't much difference on the E string, and YMMV. If you play with lots of gain, if you have a floating trem, if you never use open strings, if you have a locking nut, I'm sure you'd get hugely different results.
Anyhow it's always nice to have a little mini science project to answer questions once in a while.
 
Very interesting experiment.  Thanks for conducting that and sharing the results.
 
I once did a science fair experiment testing the "Fat Head" clamp product.

Tested a control headstock, fathead and different masses of C-clamps on the headstock.

I used an ebow and dB meter to ramp up the string to the same level before pulling the ebow off and timing sustain. I didnt use a computer, just timed until the dB meter readout went below a certain threshold.

I found no difference between groups.
 
great work. I have B/E trees on mine; might be worth trying out a second tree considering this data!

-erik
 
I know that if there's an increase in the break angle at the bridge it increases the volume of the plucked string.  So it makes sense that an increase in the break angle at the headstock would have some effect.  Of course, if it doesn't increase the break angle, then it's just a decoration.
 
The length of string from the back of the nut to the tuner G is a harmonic of the open G on most Fender type guitars.
This length of string resonates when the G is played open (with no string tree).
The energy lost from the normal string vibration shortens the sustain.

This would be the case regardless of what the G string was tuned to.

The string tree prevents this resonance and allows the string to vibrate longer.
 
Funky Phil said:
The length of string from the back of the nut to the tuner G is a harmonic of the open G on most Fender type guitars.
This length of string resonates when the G is played open (with no string tree).
The energy lost from the normal string vibration shortens the sustain.

This would be the case regardless of what the G string was tuned to.

The string tree prevents this resonance and allows the string to vibrate longer.

Sounds right in principal. It would be pretty easy to test too, just run the same test as the OP, but doth times with no string tree, once normal, once with cloth or something dampening that section of string. See if it's measurable.
 
I'm very impressed. :icon_thumright: Not many UCLA Bruins would  do such indpeth research and data gathering in regards to those string tree thangamajigs :laughing7:
 
Funky Phil has it right. The mechanics involved have far less to do with the tree itself, or the break angle, than the length of vibrating "dead" string.

It's part of the reason that a Steinberger headless has such great sustain, and part of the reason that a locking nut arrangement seems to help....especially if the strings are cut off above the nut (another interesting experiment).
 
Fascinating stuff.  So when I built a guitar (straight fender neck) and go out my way not to use string trees I'm actually not doing myself any favours??
 
Hey USC blues, wanna lay down some bets on who wins the Pac10 tourney this week? Didn't think so.  :icon_jokercolor:

When I get around to adding the 2nd tree to my teles I'll try and repeat the experiment - should be interesting because on the baritone that won't be the harmonic. And I just like the trees because I know I'm getting a good break angle and can cut the nut lower.

Edit: You know, a lot of people play strats with vintage stagger pickups and a flatter radius fretboard, which is supposed to make your G string overpower the other strings according to people like Jason Lollar who should know. Maybe the lack of a string tree 'balances out' the volume of the strings? I know that on my new 2-tree vintage stagger pup strat, the unwound G is by far the loudest string.
 
Really interesting stuff, I love experiments! And would definitely be interested in seeing that waveform, by the way.

Maybe we should start a 'measure the sustain of your guitars' thread? It wouldn't be too useful comparing one another's data - too many variables. But it would be cool to hear from a bunch of folks who have strats and teles and LPs etc who can compare their guitars.
 
ByteFrenzy said:
That's dedication..
+1, We shall call him Professor T...

It may have something to do with the added mass for the string to vibrate against and therfore transfer the vibration into the neck..... :dontknow:
 
Back
Top