Strings too heavy on Fylde Octavious mandola?

[Colin Lindsay]

Hi y’all - my first post so go easy on me!
My most recent purchase is a Fylde Octavious mandola, with a floating bridge and tailpiece, not a pinned bridge. I find the strings amazingly heavy - the recommended sizes are .52, .36, .24, .13 unison strung, with the three heavier pairs in phosphor bronze wound. I find the G string amazingly heavy - at .52 it’s more like a cello string and goes out of tune very easily; playing higher up the neck with a capo sounds terrible.
My other bouzoukis and octave mandolas are around .46 or .47; the shorter neck of the mandola means this heavy string is very chunky and not very tuneful whereas the longer neck of my Fylde bouzouki, which I love playing, allows me to do almost anything I want on any part of the neck. I would have thought that a shorter neck would have meant lighter strings?
Before I go ahead and experiment, has anyone else experience of these and what’s your thoughts or recommendations on strings?

[Jacob]

I have used those recommended string sizes on my Fylde Octavious mandola for the last dozen years and am very satisfied with the results. Shorter necks require heavier strings.

[Martin Jonas]

What's the scale length, and do you keep it tuned GDAE or CGDA? The only current Octavius mandola on the Fylde website is their rather peculiar "Portuguese" model (Link), which is a 10-string CGDA instrument in four courses (and very expensive indeed). All other current Fylde Octavius models are long-scale bouzoukis, for which these gauges would indeed be too heavy. Generally, the shorter the scale the heavier the strings for the same tuning, but without information on the tuning and the scale your question is difficult to answer.

Martin

[Jacob]

The Fylde Octavious mandola I referenced has a scale around 20.75 inches.
It is tuned GG DD AA EE, an octave below a mandolin, with .052, .036, .024, .013 unison strings.
My Fylde Portuguese Mandola has a scale length around 17.5 inches.
It is tuned cCC gGG DD AA, tenor mandola with c & g octaves, with .027 .047 .047, .012 .030 .030, .016 .016, .010 .010 strings.
These are the string gauges recommended by Roger Bucknall.

[Ray(T)]

Fylde have a problem with the way they describe instruments - their "octave mandolas" are what everyone else would refer to as "octave mandolins".

I think your problem is down to the scale length of the instrument and how you tune it. My octave has a 20.25 inch scale length, I use slightly heavier strings than Jacob quotes above and they don't feel too heavy. The shape of the neck - Fyldes,in my mind, generally feel a bit chunky - can also make strings feel heavier than they actually are.

[Bertram Henze]

I think the Octavius you mean is their older teardrop shape, which has been completely replaced by the Touchstone line. I have .052 G on my Touchstone octave with a 20" 15/16 scale, and I am happy with them. They are too heavy to ring out when fretted high up, but that's normal - this is not a bouzouki, after all - and they have that boom I want when played open.

[Bertram Henze]

Fylde have a problem with the way they describe instruments - their "octave mandolas" are what everyone else would refer to as "octave mandolins".

The name business is not Fylde-specific. Octave mandola is the UK word, octave mandolin the US word. Germans just call it mandola, figure that (I am quite happy with that, gives me a short answer for those who ask about the ukulele).

[Jacob]

Yes, my Octavious Mandola is the vintage teardrop shape. My Portuguese Mandola is also that shape, with the original symmetrical five-on-a-side headstock tuner arrangement.

[luthierseye]

[QUOTE=Footerin'About;1274042]Hi y’all - my first post so go easy on me!
My most recent purchase is a Fylde Octavious mandola, with a floating bridge and tailpiece, not a pinned bridge. I find the strings amazingly heavy - the recommended sizes are .52, .36, .24, .13 unison strung, with the three heavier pairs in phosphor bronze wound. I find the G string amazingly heavy - at .52 it’s more like a cello string and goes out of tune very easily; playing higher up the neck with a capo sounds terrible.

I don't know your scale or tuning but this may help:
I play a Weber 17"(432mm) Mandola tuned ADGC (hi to low) and I use 12-20w-28-42 and really like that for melody and some chords.

My OM is a Beard custom with 19" scale(483mm) and tuned EADG(hi to low). I like 13-22w-34-52.

Give us scale & tuning and we can be more specific.

[luthierseye]

And with your bridge type, you really don't need to be too heavy on the string guages

[Shelagh Moore]

.052, .036, .024, .013 unison sounds about right to me for a 20" scale length. If the Octavius has the 20.75" mentioned above I might personally drop down to around .050, .035, .023, .012 but that would be my personal preference. A shorter scale does need heavier strings.

[Lord of the Badgers]

The shape of the neck - Fyldes,in my mind, generally feel a bit chunky - can also make strings feel heavier than they actually are.

this I agree with - I dislike the neck for exactly that... and the reason I'm going to put my Fylde in the classifieds and look for another octave solution.. my buchanan zouk and my davidson mandolins are perfectly fine with fretting barred chords for example, but the Fylde OM, despite its cool powerful sound, is just too limiting to me for that very reason.

[Colin Lindsay]

I think the Octavius you mean is their older teardrop shape, which has been completely replaced by the Touchstone line. I have .052 G on my Touchstone octave with a 20" 15/16 scale, and I am happy with them. They are too heavy to ring out when fretted high up, but that's normal - this is not a bouzouki, after all - and they have that boom I want when played open.

Yes that’s the one - the teardrop shape, it’s quite a few years old. Scale length nut to bridge is 21.5 inches (54cm). I find the lighter three strings - it’s tuned GDAE by the way - to be excellent and very playable but the heaviest G string is just too dull and inclined to ‘thunk’ if used with a capo; in the key of G for example it distorts very easily. It may however be due to the winding on the end of the strings - have a look at the photo, it goes right up over the bridge. Surely this would mute or dull the sound of any string?

[zoukboy]

Yes, I would unwind that blue outer winding back beyond the bridge. Is it thread? That will not only dull the sound but it will throw your intonation off.

[Martin Jonas]

As Roger has said: these thread windings over the end of strings are intended to protect the two ends of the string, at the tailpiece and the headstock, but the oscillating length of the string must be free of them. Thus, they must not reach beyond the nut and the bridge.

This raises two more questions:

1. Have you checked intonation? That bridge looks awfully close to the tailpiece.

2. Are those flatwound strings? Thread windings are rare these days except on flatwounds. If you're using flatwounds, Fylde's recommended string gauges don't apply, as they're for roundwounds only. Flats have higher tension at the same gauge, i.e. you need lighter gauges than recommended. Also, flatwounds are naturally duller in tone.

Martin

[Bertram Henze]

Proximity of bridge and tailpiece seems to be a common feature of the old Octavius - the one I have tried once was just like that. It is one of the reasons why it was a rather quiet instrument.

But those blue windings freak me out. Never seen anything like that on an OM. And they're certainly out of place in saddle slots. You might want to try roundwound PB guitar strings (obtainable as singles) from D'Addario, for instance.

[Colin Lindsay]

As Roger has said: these thread windings over the end of strings are intended to protect the two ends of the string, at the tailpiece and the headstock, but the oscillating length of the string must be free of them. Thus, they must not reach beyond the nut and the bridge.

This raises two more questions:

1. Have you checked intonation? That bridge looks awfully close to the tailpiece.

2. Are those flatwound strings? Thread windings are rare these days except on flatwounds. If you're using flatwounds, Fylde's recommended string gauges don't apply, as they're for roundwounds only. Flats have higher tension at the same gauge, i.e. you need lighter gauges than recommended. Also, flatwounds are naturally duller in tone.

Martin

I thought the thread winding shouldn’t go above the bridge but as this is my first Octavious I thought I’d better ask before breaking something…
The bridge is where it was when purchased; I can find no marks on the instrument to show any original position or where it may have been moved from. I’ll need a few measurements or dimensions before I move it.
Again, the strings are as purchased on the instrument - as you say, Martin, they sound very very dull indeed. I’ll be buying new ones as a matter of course but this is one of the reasons I posted, to check the string sizes as I thought they were so heavy as to be almost unplayable. The D A and E are passable but the G string just… clunks… and gets worse higher up the neck. It’s terrible - in fact the whole instrument sounds so dire I constantly consider selling it, which is unusual for me as out of all my instruments - don’t ask how many lol - my Fyldes are consistently the easiest to play and the nicest sounding!
I’m off to London in two weeks so will hit Denmark Street and all the music shops for suitable strings and grades.

[Shelagh Moore]

I always found the old Octavius design to sound quite good. While the bridge on the Octavius l is quite close to the tailpiece, this one looks a bit closer than usual so I would check for correct intonation... it may have been moved backwards at some stage. You don't really need measurements for this... there will be a position and bridge angle where intonation is more or less close with all strings (check whether the harmonic at the 12th fret is sharp or flat and move the bridge accordingly. If the scale length is close to or a little over 21" I would tend to go somewhere close to the string gauges I suggested above... perhaps even down to a .048 for the G. The windings as shown in the photo are indeed very odd looking and would likely cause problems. I'd suggest ordinary phosphor bronze for the bottom three courses as a starting point for experimentation.

[luthierseye]

Yes that’s the one - the teardrop shape, it’s quite a few years old. Scale length nut to bridge is 21.5 inches (54cm). I find the lighter three strings - it’s tuned GDAE by the way - to be excellent and very playable but the heaviest G string is just too dull and inclined to ‘thunk’ if used with a capo; in the key of G for example it distorts very easily. It may however be due to the winding on the end of the strings - have a look at the photo, it goes right up over the bridge. Surely this would mute or dull the sound of any string?

Ahh! 21.5" scale. For my playing style, I would start with 12-20w-30-46 and with that you could capo and still get decent sound. Finding the right string combo is a fun journey that I have enjoyed and hope you will too. I use the string tension calculator to get started choosing strings; I like to keep the tensions on the wound A, D, G courses just under 20 lbs and adjust from there; clik here for the site: http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html And I echo a previous post re removing the blue winding to just behind the saddle. Good luck and enjoy that neat instrument. Keep us posted-it adds to the communal knowledge

[Colin Lindsay]

Ahh! 21.5" scale. For my playing style, I would start with 12-20w-30-46 and with that you could capo and still get decent sound. Finding the right string combo is a fun journey that I have enjoyed and hope you will too. I use the string tension calculator to get started choosing strings; I like to keep the tensions on the wound A, D, G courses just under 20 lbs and adjust from there; clik here for the site: http://www.mcdonaldstrings.com/stringxxiii.html And I echo a previous post re removing the blue winding to just behind the saddle. Good luck and enjoy that neat instrument. Keep us posted-it adds to the communal knowledge

Thanks Luthierseye and all who replied; I’m glad I came to this forum for a bit of good discussion. I’m going to experiment with strings and see what develops so that tension calculator will be a great help. (Next one I need to string is a hurdy-gurdy….) The blue winding will be gone once I work out the optimum strings and invest in a set. I’ll follow Richard’s advice on the correct bridge position but there are no clues in the varnish that it may have ever been anywhere else. This should be a good instrument if my experience of other Fylde instruments is anything to go by - for real neck chunkiness try a Freshwater cittern… so I hope it just requires a bit of fettling on my part.

[Bertram Henze]

for real neck chunkiness try a Freshwater cittern…

...for real real neck chunkiness try a Weissenborn guitar

[ocarolan]

.................
My most recent purchase is a Fylde Octavious mandola, with a floating bridge and tailpiece, not a pinned bridge. I find the strings amazingly heavy - the recommended sizes are .52, .36, .24, .13 unison strung, with the three heavier pairs in phosphor bronze wound. I find the G string amazingly heavy - at .52 it’s more like a cello string and goes out of tune very easily; playing higher up the neck with a capo sounds terrible........................
Before I go ahead and experiment, has anyone else experience of these and what’s your thoughts or recommendations on strings?

Simplest thing to do is contact Roger Bucknall via the Fylde Guitars website.
http://www.fyldeguitars.com/contact.html

Roger is prompt in answering emails and will undoubtedly have the best advice for you.

Nice instrument by the way!

Keith

[Colin Lindsay]

Thanks Keith - I’ve always loved his instruments and my Fylde bouzouki is one of the most playable I’ve ever had. I’m just back from London with a huge haul of strings courtesy of Danmark Street so will now start experimenting.
Incidentally I found an old sale on eBay where the seller stated he was going to change the loop-end / hooked tailpiece for a more modern Fylde version to take ball-end strings, and with the difficulties I’ve just had in getting good strings I’m considering that path. Any pitfalls, anyone?
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Fylde-Octa...p2047675.l2557

[ocarolan]

You don't have to specifically seek out loop ended strings to fit to a loop-ended string tailpiece - it's fairly simple to remove the "ball" from a ball ended string to leave you with a loop ended one - just carefully but firmly crush the "ball" with fine pliers or wire cutters and remove the cracked fragments.

Hope that helps.
Keith

[Colin Lindsay]

You don't have to specifically seek out loop ended strings to fit to a loop-ended string tailpiece - it's fairly simple to remove the "ball" from a ball ended string to leave you with a loop ended one - just carefully but firmly crush the "ball" with fine pliers or wire cutters and remove the cracked fragments.

Hope that helps.
Keith

Just found that out the hard way - the wonderful, professional and well-recommended guitar shop I visited in London sold me the required strings, THEN once I got home I found out they were all ball-end and NOT loop end as specifically discussed with the guy behind the counter. No wonder he was so keen to wrap them for me. In trying to cut the balls off - and the guy behind the counter should cringe at this, it should have been HIS balls - I saved the .52s but broke both .36s. Thankfully Roger from Fylde has helpfully pointed out that he sells the required strings through his website, so I’ll give him the order asap and keep the original tailpiece. You learn the hard way sometimes...