I was purusing around on the site here since I just recently joined and came across a discussion where a very informative guitar luthier recomended not to use medium gauge strings, in effect saying they would stress out ("belly the top")and eventually ruin a fine guitar. I had never heard this...just stuck with what is stamped inside a new Martin, concerning using medium gauge strings. My question, if Martin allows the use of medium strings in their paper work when you buy a new one and in addition to the stamping "ok"ing them, if you will, stamped on the inside back brace, can a new, factory fresh Martin handle medium strings "from birth" or do the majority of you all use light gauge strings, and I've just been naive and never thought to use them???

Well I suppose over time the difference in tension could cause some damage..... maybe..... Here is a tension calculator if you want to work out the difference in pounds or newtons.... http://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_guitar_string.htm .... I have one guitar that needs some work because of a top brace loose and the top "slightly" bellying. The thing is I have had light gauge strings on it all these years......... ya pays ya money and ya takes ya chances .... R/

About ten years ago I went over to light gauge for all of my acoustic guitars. I did this partially to avoid any structural issues, but also because it is just easier to play. I also play electric quite a bit, using similar gauges, and I like the feel of the lights. However, I use mediums  on banjo and on mandolin.

Depending on the guitar, there might be some slight difference in volume, but not enough to matter.

It really depends on the guitar. Some guitars seem to lose some volume with medium strings, and sing better with lighter guage. Many do however just plain sound better with mediums. I went thru a phase of playing heavies .014-.060, and I finally decided there was no volume increase over true mediums, so I went back to true mediums. I've got a little L00 that sounds better with .011-.052s.

My loudest guitar loves .010-.049s, but, it was made in France, has a tiny elliptical soundhole, tailpiece and tapered headstock, likes tunes like Djangology, Jattandrai, Stompin' at Decca, etc.

I really don't think that there is a structural problem using mediums on a Martin dred. In fact, they are shipped that way.

Back in the day, (1940-ish) Martin changed their bracing to accommodate so many players using heavy gauge strings. But this is the only wide spread problem I have ever heard of.

Mike

I agree with musekatcher and blueridge. I was a bit worried after reading the same information, but my D-18 sounds better with mediums and my D-28 sounds better with bluegrass gauge strings (medium gauge E-A-D, light gauge G-B-E). I decided that the folks at Martin put all that work into those guitars so I could enjoy making music with them, so I string them with what sounds best. Using lighter gauge strings solely to reduce stress on the guitar is like not driving your favorite sports car on the highway during a warm, sunny day because you're afraid to wear out the shock absorbers.

Edited by - teleuwhat on 09/17/2012 16:51:44

Where do you start on this subject?

First of all, the words are very misleading on the the packages of acoustic guitar string sets. In most stores you will find three gauges of string sets for acoustics. They are extra light (the smallest and lightest), light gauge (the middle set), and medium gauge (the heaviest of the three sets). Rarely do you find any sets stocked that are heavier than Mediums. Why aren't they marked light, medium, and heavy? I don't know but they are not.

Some players absolutely need the mediums, as they like to "bang it out". Problem is all acoustic guitars have a life span curve, much like a professional athlete. They start out under stress from the first day they are tuned to pitch. They sound better and better as they age, but time tells on them just like it does on our bodies, and at some point ,they reach their prime, and start down the slippery slope on the other side.

High quality acoustics have had a lot of design work, that deals with finding a balancing point in the construction. That point determines how strong you can build a guitar, and still have it sound good, as opposes building it light and good sounding, but too weak to hold up very long.

Big time repair shops make a lot of their living, restoring older acoustics, with warped tops and bracing, and necks that need to be re-set, in order to get the action down to a playable height. Few vintage Martins or any other fine guitars have not had some amount of restoration repair.

So to wind this up, you have a choice, use the heavier strings to get the sound you want, and worry about tomorrow, tomorrow, or go easier on it, and have it around longer in it's original state longer. Listen to it both ways, and make your own decision.
Gene Warner
repairman

I think I’ve made this point before but to me it all depends on how you use the guitar.  If you play out a lot (festivals, jams, live shows, etc.) it might be more important for you to maximize the tone and volume of the instrument to the greatest extent possible, especially if you’re competing with other instruments and/or dealing with unpredictable sound systems.  One of the tradeoffs you might be willing to make to get maximum tone and volume is that you put a little more wear and tear on the instrument in the process.  I would also argue that the people who use their instruments this way are probably logging a lot more hours on the instrument overall.  Between practicing, rehearsal, and actual performance time you could be putting quite a few miles on that instrument on a weekly basis, not to mention all the various environmental elements you’re exposing the instrument to.  So you get higher performance, but more wear and tear, which means you will spend more on maintenance, new strings, setups, neck resets, and other work.  In the long run, the guitar will simply have a shorter life span because it’s been “run hard”.  For a professional gigging musician, I would think this would be an acceptable tradeoff.  For a casual jammer, it might be a necessary tradeoff if they want to be heard.

One of the most notable examples of this is Tony Rice’s old D-28, which he still performs with.  It’s had a lot of work done over the years, including an extensive restoration after being severely damaged in a flood, and still sounds great, to the point that Tony still prefers it over his signature Santa Cruz models.  I wonder how long they can keep it going?

If you don’t use the instrument this way, you don’t necessarily need to maximize the tone and volume.  In fact, for casual “living room playing” you probably won’t be able to tell much of a difference between light and medium strings.  Such differences usually only come to light when you’re in a situation where you really have to cut through.  It amazes me how, in our living room, our D-18 can sound obnoxiously loud.  In a full-on bluegrass jam, you can barely hear it over the banjos, fiddles, and mandolins.  When played with other guitars, however, it tends to be one of the louder ones.  It’s all relative to how it’s being used, and I think the strings, setup, etc. should reflect this.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lonewolf

<snip>

So to wind this up, you have a choice, use the heavier strings to get the sound you want, and worry about tomorrow, tomorrow, or go easier on it, and have it around longer in it's original state longer. Listen to it both ways, and make your own decision.

Gene Warner
repairman

---

Good point.  I know the Flamenco, and classical guitar crowd definitely believe a guitar starts out "green", matures and peaks with heavy playing time, and then decays to some post-peak performance level.  I've heard this decayed state described as "flabby or loose", and other adjectives suggesting its not as brilliant and focused as it once was. I've also heard violinists describe a similar behavior with some fiddles.  A small loss of  arch in the top of a fiddle is believed to be the cause in tone and volume loss.  Perhaps a guitar may change geometrically - bellying top, shifting neck joint, etc., - and experience some losses?