Strange playability difference between Regal and LP

[docteurseb]

I recently completed an Aqua Marine Regal build and found an unexpected difference in playability with my LP where string bending is very noticeably harder in the upper register (frets 12+), and overall not as "fast playing" as the Les Paul. It's similar to the difference between 9s vs 10s.

The necks have the same string gauge, same neck relief, same e/E action (and only minor difference on the other strings given the radius mismatch of the Tune-O-Matic 12"), but based on specs alone I would have expected the Regal to be far easier to play:
  - Gibson: short scale, 12" radius, medium jumbo nickel frets, rosewood,  "slim 60s neck profile" (close to the Warmoth 59, maybe a tad slimmer).
  - Regal: short scale conversion neck, 10-16" radius, 6105 stainless steel, ebony, standard thin contour.

I'd like to point it's far from being the first neck I setup, that's not to say I'm an expert at all, but I like to think I roughly know what I'm doing ;-)

Regarding the "fast playing" feel I suspect that just comes from the slightly taller 6105 frets (I prefer shorter frets like vintage frets for that). I still need to confirm how tall those "medium jumbo" frets are on the Les Paul.

For string bending I'm however a little at a loss, specs alone would suggest the Regal neck to be much better.
Maybe it's the way I position my hand on the thicker LP neck in those high register frets, or it's a combination of fret height + back contour +(rosewood vs ebony).

I haven't given up on this regal build just yet, I'm leaning towards experimenting with different necks (though that could become an expensive experiment!).

So, I thought I'd ask here for some thoughts/suggestions from those who may have experimented with various neck specs and may have experience similar differences.

 

[Great Ape]

Frets has got to be the answer...granted, nothing is ''easier'' to play than a LP, the 243/4'' scale guitars I've built (Warmoth) are very much comparable to a LP. Close enough, anyway...but any guitar
with those cursed  6105 frets is just a whole 'nuther animal, and noticeably different in terms of playability--and not in such a good way. Alot of this is based on my personal preferences, of course, but I'm nonetheless certain the thinner frets are the culprit. Best of luck with what I'm sure is a gorgeous instrument. 

 

[stratamania]

It could just be a case of getting used to it  :dontknow:

 

[Logrinn]

Do they have the same string brand? I found that Ernie Ball 009 steel strings felt "stiffer" than Rotosound 009 steel strings.

 

[docteurseb]

Thanks. The Regal has Ernie Ball, the LP most likely still has its factory strings.

 

[amigarobbo]

What's the break angle at the nut and saddles like?

 

[Cederick]

Some guitars just feels stiffer for some weird reason

My main Warmoth guitar feels a bit stiff, but I like it on that guitar
My Jackson RR24 has almost exactly same action height, but it feels a lot looser

Both has blocked Floyd Roses at the moment. Main difference would be that RR24 has a laminated neck, but that doesn't make sense with general opinion on quartersawn necks; people tend to say quartersawn feels stiffer to play but are more stable... The 3-piece laminated neck on the RR24 is probably more stable than a regular maple neck, but it still appears to be more loose, even with a similar setup...  :dontknow:

 

[Cagey]

Some guitars just feels stiffer for some weird reason.

True enough. I go to a great deal of trouble to make my guitars feel the same - I just want them to look/sound different. Muscle memory is a big deal, and I don't have the time/energy to climb a lotta learning curves. But, the little rascals do feel different, and I've never been able to identify why. It's not dramatic, but it's noticeable. Thankfully, it's not enough of a difference to get me too worked up.

 

[docteurseb]

Break angle is much larger on the Les Paul, both at the nut and bridge.  Is that supposed to help bendability ?
I can't do anything at the neck as it seems the LP has a more pronounced break angle by design. As for the tail piece, I might be able to get closer to the LP, but I don't think there's enough room to match it

 

[dmraco]

likely strings....also you start dealing with a bolt on vs a glued neck.  Some folk find the glued neck a bit easier to play.

this is not to become a glued vs bolted discussion, simply some prefer one over the other.

 

[amigarobbo]

Break angle is much larger on the Les Paul, both at the nut and bridge.  Is that supposed to help bendability ?

No, in principal the more it breaks over the saddle the less 'slinky' the strings should be.

 

[docteurseb]

Thanks so far. I'll first try different strings, it's quite a bit cheaper than experimenting with neck frets/profiles/woods ;-)

 

[docteurseb]

:doh:  :doh:    :doh:
...so it's indeed most definitely the strings.
I had only measured the bass strings of the LP and concluded it was fitted with 10s (which the spec sheet also lists as such). However the three treble strings are one gauge lighter, it appear to be an hybrid 9-46 which Gibson was apparently using the year my guitar was built (2013).
Alright, time to re-string and compare the two again ;-)

 

[Cagey]

No, in principal the more it breaks over the saddle the less 'slinky' the strings should be.

There's no such principle, it's just a popular fallacy. A string's vibrating frequency depends primarily on its material, cross section, vibrating length and tension. Shorter speaking lengths require less tension than longer ones to vibrate at a given frequency. That's why when you have two guitars, one with a 24 3/4" scale (like a Gibson) and one with a 25 1/2" scale (like a Fender), with both strung up with the same string set and tuned the same, the shorter scale will feel more "slinky" than the other. There's less tension involved. Matters not how long the string is, it's the scale (vibrating length) that matters.

If overall length and breakover angles made a difference, then guitar designs like the Jaguar/Jazzmaster would be so slinky it would feel like it was strung up with rubber bands, since their strings run for several inches past the nut and bridge and at low breakover angles, compared to something like a Melody Maker, where the headstock is shorter and the bridge is the opposite termination point, both of which have high breakover angles. But, the shorter scale length of the Melody Maker means it'll feel more slinky.

 

[docteurseb]

Lighter treble strings help somewhat, the LP still feels quite a bit easier/faster to play
It's probably worth trying different strings.
The investigation continues ;-)

 

[amigarobbo]

No, in principal the more it breaks over the saddle the less 'slinky' the strings should be.

There's no such principle, it's just a popular fallacy. A string's vibrating frequency depends primarily on its material, cross section, vibrating length and tension.

The idea is that the tension between the bridge and the nut is the same, but on a steinberger guitar the strings full length not much more than 25.5 inch (lets call it 650mm) where as on a arch top the strings distance from ball end to tuning peg is greater lets say 900mm.

Assuming that the tension between the bridge and the nut is identical and the string is free to glide over the bridge and nut with no friction.

So to bend (or fret) a string, you have to deflect the string.

So for example you need to lengthen the string by 5mm, maths strugles at this point, but on the steinberger you need to stretch each 10cm of string 0.077mm on the Archtop you need to stretch each 10cm of string 0.055mm.

Hence although the tension of each string is identical the arch top will be 'slinkier' to play.

:dontknow:


At least that's the principal. I'm sure the force required to bend a string is relatively easy to measure, as far as I know no ones actually ever bother to test this hypothesis.

 

[TBurst Std]

I am awaiting responses to this.

 

[mayfly]

I've done this experiment.  Conducted in a university lab. 

The result was exactly what, if you think about it, you'd expect.  Only the speaking length, string material, and gauge makes a difference.  And I prove it to myself every time I bend the E and then B strings of any of my bender telecasters 

 

[amigarobbo]

I've done this experiment.  Conducted in a university lab. 

Citation Required


:evil4:




Ooh, just found the article I spent a little long trying to find:

http://www.liutaiomottola.com/myth/perception.htm


Incidentally I can't tell a difference between the Rotosound 66 Swing bass strings 45-105 on my Peavey T-40 and Steinberger basses. But  I'm sure when I raided the stop bar on my Epiphone SG the string tention compliance did seem to change.

Probably placebo, but I can see a theoretical reason that changing the break angle at the bridge could have an effect, I don't know if it would be noticeable to a normal human or important in any real life situation. 

 

[mayfly]

I've done this experiment.  Conducted in a university lab. 

Citation Required

This was part of the standard curriculum for engineering students at the University of Alberta.  100's of students did the experiment, myself included.  We varied the non-speaking length like crazy (doubling it in some cases).  Had zero measurable effect.  Because it was undergrad, no one published.  Not that it was anything that the scientific community didn't already know mind you.

Here's the math behind it all.  The equipment in the photo is a dead ringer for the stuff I used in undergrad! 

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/waves/string.html