Siminoff's Straight Up Strings

[hank]

Correct me if I'm wrong but we have choices with the Curt Mangan Irv Pearman set and the D'Addario EXP 74 CM set. Both these sets are similarly tensioned in an attempt to tweak the tonal balance of moving between string sets. I think the Siminoff work is valid and a great contribution to our community with the new string set selections we are seeing. Is their anyone that have tried these sets on the same instrument and can comment. I bought a couple SUS med. sets but haven't tried them yet. Anyone tried them on their F4's?

[BrianWilliam]

I don't need to understand 100 percent of something that doesn't make sense.

f-d

I can't say whether this quote is accurate related to the OP but it was funny. That said, I have been drinking. Happy early thanksgiving!

[ThompsonII]

Michael Lewis: "new Straight Up strings which I have now tried. I didn't measure anything, just put them on a few mandolins and can honestly say they are nice strings and produce an even volume and tone..." ...' won't knock your socks off..'

This is a good quote.
I've been using Gibson Monroes and J75s on my '02 Gibson Fern model. I put my new Straight up strings on a few days ago. They do have an even sound, I'm not used to that really. I am used to my D string really singing out. Not so on these strings. They do feel easier on the fingers. I was thinking that they might help the E string a bit. But it is kinda like asking the sound man to 'turn me up', everyone ask for it until he turns the whole thing down and balances it out. These strings are like the soundman, turned down and balanced out. Good for some applications. Maybe I'll like them better after another week.

I'm going to leave them on for a gig next week but after that. I expect to take them off and go back to what I had before.

Totally agree. I replaced my last set of Firewires on my Girouard F5 with SUs and two weeks later took them back off again. They produced an even tone across all strings but lacked the overall punch. Have now put on J74s and am barking again (I still miss the Firewires). I'm going to try the SUs on my Rigel which is usually played through the pickup so volume won't be an issue and from the way they changed the F5 sound, I anticipate I will like what I hear. I wouldn't say the SUs are 'good' or 'bad', but they are different and as a new entry with fresh thinking in the strings market, I welcome them.

Question for Roger - The single piece bridge (eg Red Henry style) is an alternative way to address the uneven vibrations of the 3 piece bridge. What are your views on the merits of one against the other?

[lloving]

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder", "Your results may vary", etc. etc. etc.
My Weber Yellowstone and the SUS medium strings are a great match for me. On the other hand D'Addario strings have been less so. My point is if you are interested give them a try. They might work for you where they don't for others.

[George R. Lane]

My Isabella has her voice back. I gave the SUS two weeks, they sounded fine, not great but, fine. Nice sustain I might add. I just felt she sounded muffled, like she was being held back. So I just put the GHS A270's back on and a big difference, she sings sweetly and can growl when I ask her too. I did communicate my impressions to Roger. So, I think I will stick with these strings. I see that lloving, (see above post) loves the tone on his particular Yellowstone. I am glad they are working for him.

[siminoff]

Thompson II…

Ooops, really sorry for the delay in responding - my bad. (I've been on the site, but missed your add to this post.)

So, regarding one-piece bridges vs adjustable bridges; yes, you are correct that the one piece bridge "addresses the uneven" energy distribution problem. However, the one piece bridge is typically heavier than the adjustable (two-piece) bridge and as such robs amplitude a bit. Also, the resilience of the saddle on the two-piece bridge gives that bridge a bit more sustain - especially on the inner two courses of strings. And while I know this is obvious, I just want to add that the two-piece bridge has the advantage of easier set-up and adjustability of action. Another important aspect of the "traditional" (i.e., Gibson style) one-piece bridge is that is is a single-footed bridge. The single foot lends itself to an oval-hole instrument where there are no tone bars and the bridge can straddle an unbraced (or un-tone-bar'd) soundboard. The two-piece adjustable bridge has two feet with each foot sitting over a bass tone bar or treble tone bar respectively, very much like the violin's bridge having one foot over the bass bar. (Like everything else on the F5 mandolin, this two-foot feature was borrowed from the great violin makers, which Loar was very influenced by. Loar was a witness on the Gibson's two-piece adjustable bridge Patent that awarded to Ted McHugh and Lewis Williams.) Very early violins also had one-footed bridges until the design transitions from Amati to Stradavari to Guaneri where the bridge had two feet. So as it relates to SUS they are specifically designed for two-piece bridges to compensate for where the four courses of strings sit on the saddle - there is not as great an advantage when using SUS strings on one-piece bridges.

(Again, sorry for missing your post and commenting earlier!)
R

[FilmGuy]

New guy here- but regards to this issue I may have a different solution. Looking at classical mandolins typically you have a solid compensated bone top on a fixed sold wood base. I don't see any with this typical adjustable bridge where you load up all the strings and expect the stop part not to flex, and yet transmit all the vibration down two support pins into the base part.

My solution was to determine the best height setting on my adjustable bridge. Bought a bone guitar saddle which came closest to the opening dimensions and sanded it to fit. Raised the bride up to insert the bone, and then lowered it to rest completely on the bone which basically fills the gap L to R and is wider than the width of the outside strings. The bone saddle is also as wide as the top compensated support. The adjusters do not support the bridge, but are screwed down and tightened to the base.

There is zero sag this way - fully supported upper bridge - and no need to worry about mixing strings. The sound is much improved in tonality across all the strings, and it is louder with the increase in vibration to the top. I did this to a previously owned Bovier F mandolin and got it to break in faster with this method as well. Sold that to get the Eastman Grisman DGM2 and this model has a thicker soundboard. I played around with various strings, but once I put the bone saddle insert it fixed the issue and really gave the E & A strings a much improved tone - less tinny and more mellow. Also a better sound right up the fretboard. Took me about 30 minutes to fit the bone saddle. Strings tune up and hold tune better. FYI

[fscotte]

So now that the fad and novelty of new strings have perhaps faded, are those that tried Straight Up Strings still using them? Thinking about stringing up new builds with these sets. Been using J75's for a long time.

[Mandobart]

I tried them on my hybrid F4. I like the sound better with J74's so I went back to them on the next change.

[Caleb]

I keep seeing Caleb Klauder posting pics of his string changes on Instagram and he uses these. It almost has me curious enough to buy a set.

[Phil Goodson]

I could see no significant difference in sound in spite of about twice the cost. With no convincing data given supporting the theory in any case, I have abandoned them.