Danielo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 365
Registered: 7-17-2008
Location: Paris
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
String Calculator !
Dear oud friends,
I took some time to make a simple string calculator..... It is useful to build a custom set using lute strings.
You simply enter the string length and pitch (i.e. 440Hz or anything else), then the spreadsheet gives the tension for various kind of strings, using
all possible arabic tunings.
So far I entered the data for all the Aquila and Savarez strings (wound and plain), and plain nylon (from any manufacturer).
Data about Pyramid strings is still missing (not found on the net yet) but if there is some interest I can try to include it as well 
I hope you'll find this useful !
Dan
Attachment: OudStringCalculator.xls (141kB)
This file has been downloaded 976 times
|
|
|
corridoio
Oud Junkie
Posts: 184
Registered: 3-11-2007
Location: Italy
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Hi Danielo
this is a very useful link about string tension calculator, it was linked several times here in mikeouds but one more time I think is not so bad..
there are values for gut, nylon, nylgut and also metal strings for everybody involved with instruments that use it and an online calculator but anyway
one can use the values in a personal excel document:
http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/wikla/mus/NewScalc/
Here also the table of conversion of string tension between nylgut-nylon-pvf directly from aquila strings website:
http://www.aquilacorde.com/en/corde-per-musica-antica/our-products/...
Ale
|
|
|
Danielo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 365
Registered: 7-17-2008
Location: Paris
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Hi Ale,
I am aware of this online calculator thanks (although the java applet does not work on my linux).
The main interest of this spreadsheet is to give also the tension for the wound strings, for which the actual string data from each
manufacturer is needed.
Dan
|
|
|
jdowning
Oud Junkie
Posts: 3485
Registered: 8-2-2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I posted a set of Pyramid string tension tables (with permission of Pyramid) for download on this forum back in July 2006. You might find this data to
be of interest.
Do a search for 'Pyramid String Tension Tables'.
|
|
|
Danielo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 365
Registered: 7-17-2008
Location: Paris
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Thanks John for the Pyramid data !
I can include it in the file but it does not seem to arouse much interest 
Dan
|
|
|
Aymara
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1162
Registered: 10-14-2009
Location: Germany / Ruhr Region
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
130 clicks so far tell us the opposite 
I think, it's similar to my homerecording thread ... only a few people respond, but MANY are looking and reading. We'll see, if the downloads of your
XLS table will rise.
Greetings from Germany
Chris
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
I think this is a very important contribution to the whole. The ultimate thing we need is a general program that does not need specific manufacturer
string part numbers, but rather works on generalized properties and string gauges. The problem with a spreadsheet is that it's a lot of surface area
to look at. I personally like tight user interfaces.
Once we have the general equations checked so that they work well enough for multi-material wound strings (as they do for solid materials), some
simple entry for a given string type from a manufacturer should be enough to make it "available" in all gauges. For a given string type it should be
enough to enter two known points of note, scale, tension and pitch to have the program inter/extrapolate within reason.
There are no "oud strings". The same types of strings are used for guitar, lute, and other instruments, but at different scale lengths, tunings and
tensions. For instance the silverplated copper round wire wound over nylon filament core is very common. The windings traveling over a smooth
fingerboard provide much of the oud's typical buzzy bass timbre. And then there are some very specialized strings, that have probably never been tried
on the oud, like Thomastik's KR strings that use a silverplated copper flat wire on a loose pleated iron rope core !? (my next try
for classical guitar, on which they offer low tension and allegedly astounding sustain).
Without a generalized program it takes more work to figure out which gauges to use on which courses, most people wouldn't even dream of trying.
If I have enough data I can write the program. Once we get to that point, we can start trying a much wider variety of strings that might normally be
marketed e.g. for lute or guitar, without relying strictly on trial and error, and especially without fear of stressing the oud.
The timbre of the oud is made up of several elements we can control, and others that are fixed. Without straying into bastardized hybrid instruments,
it would be lovely to have more control in bringing out the character of individual instruments. Let's say I have an Egyptian that I want to bring up
more sustain on. I can reasonably control the height of the strings (a bit with the loop height, and more with the adjustable neck on Fadi Matta and
Sukar ouds), the hardness/smoothness of the fingerboard (with coatings that can be added or removed), and although we don't modify the bowl,
soundboard and bracing etc, we could use very different string materials, quite beyond the usual "oud strings" the providers offer us.
|
|
|
Sazi
Oud Junkie
Posts: 786
Registered: 9-17-2007
Location: Behind my oud
Member Is Offline
Mood: مبتهج ; ))
|
|
I wish it were that simple that we could just use string calculators.
There are many things which affect the tension, perceived or real, of a string on an instrument.
In an ideal world one would be able to calculate the tension, string diameter etc. simply by using the calculator, but I'm sure I'm not the first to
have damaged an oud severely doing just that.
If you look at the tables of Matthias for instance you will notice that the string sets he recommends for 57cm oud are thicker than those recommended
for a 60cm oud...
Despite the seemingly obvious theory regarding scaling things down on a smaller instrument, on the surface it makes sense, a shorter scale would
need higher tension (therefore thicker given the same materials) yet I have a 58.5cm and a 57cm which use the same guage strings with the perception
of the same feel due to the 57cm having a higher break angle over both the bridge and the nut. These things are not taken into account with string
calculators and can have an enormous bearing on the outcome.
I think you fixed bridge players have it a bit easier there, not so many variables, though I have found that even then, where say, a Ramazan oud
creates higher tension compared to an oud with a flat face with the same guage strings . (The bridge area has a dip, the rear of the oud face is
slightly raised, giving a different geometry).
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
Sazi, if we shorten a string, keeping the material the same, the pitch goes up. If we wish to keep the pitch the same, we have to loosen the string,
less tension, not MORE as you were saying. And of course Matthias uses fatter strings for shorter scale, to keep the pitch and tension the same, you
need fatter strings. I suspect the 1.5 cm diff between your 57 and 58.5 cm ouds is not enough to be very noticeable in tension, regardless of
break/angle. It's very confusing, but I think in time the math will work out.
|
|
|
Sazi
Oud Junkie
Posts: 786
Registered: 9-17-2007
Location: Behind my oud
Member Is Offline
Mood: مبتهج ; ))
|
|
No arguments there.
Where did I say that?
No arguments there either
Quote: Originally posted by fernandraynaud  | I suspect the 1.5 cm diff between your 57 and 58.5 cm ouds is not enough to be very noticeable in tension, regardless of break/angle. It's very
confusing, but I think in time the math will work out.
|
Well, I thought it should balance out too, the difference in length suggesting the tension would be lower, but the difference in break angle of both
the head and nut make more difference than either of us suspected, I forgot to mention also that not only is the break angle over the bridge higher,
it is compounded by the fact that the soundboard slopes back lower at the back, not folded, sloped, as in the M. Fadel style when he wasn't using the
fold, (the whole soundboard is curved).
Anyway, the upshot of it is that both ouds use the same guages and both FEEL the same tension-wise, whereas using a string calculator gives me thicker
strings with their correspondingly higher tension and the result being a damaged oud...
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
Sazi, I wasn't playing "who's wrong". It's hard enough keeping this stuff straight, I thought it was backwards when you were saying "a shorter scale
would need higher tension".
If I can't TELL which has more tension, it's impossible to say what didn't contribute to it. Maybe the angles play no role at all.
And if I can't tell any difference when I use the same strings on two different ouds with slightly different scale, and a string calculator tells me
to use slightly thinner strings on the slightly longer scale, and I don't, I wouldn't think the difference is going to be large enough to damage the
oud.
But maybe I'm just not feeling it, yet by NOT listening to the string calculator, I am stressing it?
If by "tension" we understand something like "the impression of resistance to deflection", that also may be an issue, like how we perceive "tension",
because maybe THAT could be different with different topologies, where in fact the actual tension, as in "pull on the bridge" is the same.
Probably we should run some tests with a little digital sensor we could place in-line on a string without wrecking the string? Like maybe tie the
string to a tiny sensor past the nut and leave the string uncut so we can put it back on the tuning peg, with a pigtail going temporarily from the
load cell to the tuning peg? You know anything about load cells etc? I can write the software and make a little circuit.
If we could answer some of our basic doubts and questions this way, and get/confirm some measurements on mixed materials, we could move on to creating
a general little program we all trust?
|
|
|
Sazi
Oud Junkie
Posts: 786
Registered: 9-17-2007
Location: Behind my oud
Member Is Offline
Mood: مبتهج ; ))
|
|
We went over the whole topic of tension/angle/downforce etc. some time ago, somewhere here in the forum is a whole thread with links to other sites
and a lot of info but I'm darned if I can find it!
|
|
|
corridoio
Oud Junkie
Posts: 184
Registered: 3-11-2007
Location: Italy
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
from liutaio mottola website about the breakangle in floating bridge:
http://liutaiomottola.com/formulae/downforce.htm
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
The down-force on the floating bridge is a whole different issue. When we say a reasonable string tension on a fixed bridge oud is 4 Kg, it's
longitudinal tension that threatens to pull off the bridge or spoon the soundboard. The total tension may not be affected by break-angles, but if you
have a floating bridge oud the total tension is not what you are concerned about. I see now where you were headed with this.
I don't have a floating bridge oud, nor do I know what an acceptable range of longitudinal tensions is. Of course the break angle influences how much
down-pressure there is on the soundboard, how much is longitudinal pull at the anchoring, but there are so many differences, it's almost an entirely
different instrument.
So what is considered a reasonable L-tension for such an oud?
|
|
|
Sazi
Oud Junkie
Posts: 786
Registered: 9-17-2007
Location: Behind my oud
Member Is Offline
Mood: مبتهج ; ))
|
|
Thanks Corridoio! Isn't that a great site!
Definitely no argument there!
Well I suppose Mathias is the best one to answer that, but as we have seen, the different methods of construction and variables have a bearing on
that. It has been my experience that there is no "one size fits all" when it comes to oud strings, apart from the aforementioned variables there is
also a matter of personal taste, some like a higher tension, others may prefer lower, and in the end we can never know unless we have tried a set,
perhaps using the calculator as a starting point, and taking notice of how the instrument responds and feels, making adjustments from there if
necessary.
|
|
|
Danielo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 365
Registered: 7-17-2008
Location: Paris
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Thanks Chris, Fernand and Sazi for your feedback
I agree that a program that can compute the tension for any wound strings would be more convenient but, alas, they are so many physical parameter
involved in the construction that I doubt one could find a universal formula... And also one should take into account that, for the wound strings, the
string manufacturers don't provide lot of different sizes so it is important to know which choice is the closest to the desired tension...
When I'll time I will include the pyramid data from John!
Dan
PS: Fernand did you try the plastic wound strings from Savarez ? I am interested because they have probably less buzz than metal wound for the third
course, but I am afraid that the wiring would not last long with the rish strikes..
|
|
|
fernandraynaud
Oud Junkie
Posts: 1865
Registered: 7-25-2009
Location: San Francisco, California
Member Is Offline
Mood: m'Oudy
|
|
Danielo, no I have not. I am very happy with Daniel Maris except two things.
I wanted a brighter buzzier timbre on the top cc and gg plain nylons, more like the silvered copper wound DD third course, and I find I can get that
by using a little rosin on the risha. For an Egyptian timbre, the plain nylon sounds ok.
Secondly, my Sukar shipped with a 0.051" bass string, but not a very high quality one. The Daniel Mari (and most other sets) offer no thicker than a
0.041". That sounds a little weak and floppy. So I am looking for a fatter Bamm string, and will probably try a Thomastik guitar string.
|
|
|
Luttgutt
Oud Junkie
Posts: 578
Registered: 1-10-2009
Location: Norway
Member Is Offline
Mood: Curious
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by fernandraynaud | Danielo, no I have not. I am very happy with Daniel Maris except two things.
I wanted a brighter buzzier timbre on the top cc and gg plain nylons, more like the silvered copper wound DD third course, and I find I can get that
by using a little rosin on the risha. For an Egyptian timbre, the plain nylon sounds ok.
Secondly, my Sukar shipped with a 0.051" bass string, but not a very high quality one. The Daniel Mari (and most other sets) offer no thicker than a
0.041". That sounds a little weak and floppy. So I am looking for a fatter Bamm string, and will probably try a Thomastik guitar string.
|
I use Aquila or Pyramid for the thick base!
The wood might be dead, but the oud is alive.
|
|
|
rojaros
Oud Junkie
Posts: 581
Registered: 7-9-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by fernandraynaud | I think this is a very important contribution to the whole. The ultimate thing we need is a general program that does not need specific manufacturer
string part numbers, but rather works on generalized properties and string gauges.
|
Hi Danielo,
Thanks for the great spreadsheet. Unfortunately, for general physical reasons there cannot be any 'general' string calculator for wound strings.
Why?
Because the tension of a given string depends on too many parameters that are not programmable:
- ratio of the diameter of the nylon kernel to that of the winding
- kernel material and making (how many strands, how thick etc.)
- the tightness of the windings
- the specifiv weight of the alloy used for the string.
I aprreciate very much the work of Danielo - it is valuably information and he provided us with a simple input for pitch and scale length, instead of
having all the tedious calculations done by hand.
Many thanks Danielo, it was exactly what I was looking for!
best wishes
Robert
|
|
|
rojaros
Oud Junkie
Posts: 581
Registered: 7-9-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
PS is there any general cosensus on what is to be considered as a 'good' tension for arabic ouds?
|
|
|
Danielo
Oud Junkie
Posts: 365
Registered: 7-17-2008
Location: Paris
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I'm glad that it's useful Robert..
I'll try to update it with the Pyramids data, but they have so many gauges !
I'm not sure there's a consensus about tension.. the reasonable range is 3,2 to 3,8 kg but people's preferences may vary..
It depends I think of many parameters:
-responsiveness of the oud
-whether the oud is prone to buzzing or not
-light or heavy risha strikes
-near-pickgard vs. near-rosette plucking
-for old ouds, how much the instrument can handle
- the sound one wants to achieve, of course
... and so on.
Personally I prefer low tension (about 3,2 kg), in part because my oud is an ancient one but not only. I also like the warmer tone one gets.
When I lent it to JT for a try he told me "your tension is so low man !" and didn't like it so much.. (but the sound he got from it was lightyears
above what I will ever achieve)
Dan
|
|
|
rojaros
Oud Junkie
Posts: 581
Registered: 7-9-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Thanks, Dan.
So I could start out with something around 3.5 kg (modern Oud but quite responsive) and se in which direction I'd modify.
At the moment I have Daniel Mari strings on it, and they seem to be a bit on the too light side.
Anyway, thanks also for your useful work
best wishes
Robert
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xmbprobrown/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
