Once again, it has been suggested that you can increase string tension by running the string to a tuner that is farther away from the nut. Some people hope this will give them a less floppy low B on a bass, for instance. Others have argued that increasing the distance from nut to tuner allows for strings to be bent more easily (I sort of think that implies less tension, not more, but we can delve into that further here).
The bending ease issue is somewhat curious and perhaps arguable, but my personal position is that regarding string tension itself, the distance between nut and peghead is totally irrelevant. More generally, there seems to be a lot of myth and confusion about string tension, and I would like to encourage clarity in this area.
I crassly started to hijack this
thread (and apologize again for that). Please back up to read the preceding posts by lbpseq and flaxattack, which prompted my comments.
Here are links to some of the previous discussions on this subject (there are probably more):
speaking length formula (scroll down a couple of screens in this post - my very first one - to the paragraph that starts with String tension, and you'll find a link to an informative article)
Extended B peghead (and some more math)
It would of course be quite simple to set up a definitive experiment, but certainly easier and more fun to just talk about it - so let's try that instead :-)
The remainder of this post is what I originally said back in Jeff's FTC thread, without alteration.
-Bob
------------------
No.
Well, that's just my opinion, and of course I could be wrong, and maybe we should even move this to a separate thread - because if Jeff wants a longer pull, then he should have it. And I let it go earlier this afternoon for just that reason, but if we want to get into it, then so be it.
Tension is based on the vibrating length of the string. That's the portion between the nut and the bridge, just to be clear. There is a mathematical formula for this, that seems to work very nicely.
It doesn't matter whether you have a an extended peghead, or run the bridge end of the strings through the body, or whatever, because to get a given string to a particular pitch, it must be under a specific tension between the nut and the bridge. That is all.
Yes, I have read some articles about Hendrix, including the argument that it made bending easier on the higher strings. I will even agree that, *provided you assume* that the string can freely slip through the nut slot, then it would be easier to bend a string that extended further beyond the nut. That is a different matter, and has nothing to do with what tension the playing length of the string is under. The playing portion is under the same tension, but as long as it can slip freely through the nut, then you have more to stretch. This is a different physical phenomenon.
Bill's statement is correct, that shorter strings have less tension to reach the same pitch, assuming that we use exactly the same strings on two different instruments, that have different scale lengths. Not nut to tuner, but scale length. So yes, if you put the same strings on a Gibson and a Fender, they will be easier to bend on the Gibson. But it does not matter what the peghead/tuner configuration is on the instruments, it is simply the fact that they have different scale lengths.
Sorry guys, but this is bad science. A few writers speculating on why Hendrix (whom I sorely miss) chose to continue playing upside down, does not prove that we can address a floppy low B by running the string to a tuner further away from the nut. The only way to do that is to increase the scale length, or use a larger gauge string (or one with more mass for the same gauge).