Les Paul set up for C standard?

[hsnyder]

Hello everyone,

So i've been fighting with my guitar a bit. My band has made the choice to go from D to C, a sort of last minute decision, and I've gotta get my guitar sounding good at that tuning. I tried a set of elixir 12s and they were alright, but felt a bit loose in C. That would have been alright, but the G string (well, "G" string) was wound, which made it feel very wrong for bends on solos.

I then tried a set of ernie ball beefy slinkys. Not only do they feel loose (looser in fact) but the plain metal (not wound) "G" string sounds like shit. It is so dull and lifeless compared to the rest of the strings. lol.

I'm just wondering, for all of you downtuners, how do you get a les paul performing well in C? I figure I'm going to need to get a tech do the action, intonation, and truss rod, but they're gonna ask what string guage/brand to use. What do I tell em?

Thanks guys

 

[crillemannen]

Les Paul models are probably the worst models to record with in drop tunings. They are always out of tune when the pick hits the string to get in tune like 0.3 seconds later. I hate record with them haha.

 

[AD Chaos]

^ I take it you're referring to Gibbys only?

 

[Terminus]

You probably need to use a custom set with larger rhythm strings and smaller lead strings. Also might want to look into the Dunlop Heavy Core strings, they make the strings feel more tense due to the larger radius middle core. The box says they're made for dropped tunings.

 

[Benalthel]

My Gibson LP is in C standard also, and I haven't had any problems with it. It's a baritone though so might be why. Anyway I use D'addario's 0.60-0.12 set, and then I switch the "G" to a wound 0.26. I haven't had any problems with having it wound, feels and sounds much much better to me than with any plain string!

 

[jangoux]

Les Paul models are probably the worst models to record with in drop tunings. They are always out of tune when the pick hits the string to get in tune like 0.3 seconds later. I hate record with them haha.

+1

My SG does exactly that on the thickest string. Also recorded a client with a EC500 and dear lord, that thing was DIFFICULT to tune and stay in tune.

 

[Lasse Lammert]

I have te same problem with my Eclipse...chose to ignore it, got a fat sound...am happy.

 

[crillemannen]

Well Lasse it is kind of annoying when you have to do almost twice the retakes you would have been because of the guitar can't stay in tune. When you have to tune individual chords because the guitar is a bitch haha. I hate it!!!

And i think i've recorded most of the expensive Les Paul models out there. Numerous Gibsons, ESP etc. And they are all the same. The last band borrowed my Jackson with locked floyd. Had zero tuning problems or chords that sounded out of tune. So i guess for recording it is better to go with a speed-metal-guitar. I would love though to try a Les Paul model that was made for drop tuning, because i belive that is the biggest problem that people play guitars that are made for standard tuning and then droping them 1 1/2 note down. Not enough string tension for those tunings even though you go for a thick string set.

 

[crillemannen]

My Gibson LP is in C standard also, and I haven't had any problems with it. It's a baritone though so might be why. Anyway I use D'addario's 0.60-0.12 set, and then I switch the "G" to a wound 0.26. I haven't had any problems with having it wound, feels and sounds much much better to me than with any plain string!

There is your answer my man

 

[Lasse Lammert]

My Eclipse does have that problem, but my Washburn Dime3, which has the same scale length, does not....

EDIT: BTW, the Gibson scales are actually a tiny bit shorter than the often quoted 24.75".

The real Gibson scale is 24.56"
ESP Eclipse is 24.75
Fender etc is 25.5

I didn't know that before, just measured my Flying V's scale and found out it's shorter than my Eclipse's scale (which is exactly 24.75")....so I googled around a little and this is what I found:


From Melvin Hiscock's "Make your own guitar":

"Many makers stick to the scale lengths that ae used on the Les Paul and Telecaster which are published as being 25 1/2 in (648 mm) for the Fender and 24 3/4 in (629 mm) for the Gibson. In actual fact, the Gibson Les Paul has a slightly shorter scale length as the published measurement refers to the string length, which is slightly longer than the scale length since the bridge is moved away from the nut by a small amount to allow for the stretch in the string when it's fretted. [...] Therefore, if you try to replace the fingerboard of a Les Paul with one cut to allow a scale length of 24 3/4 in, it will be too long and the fret positions will not match. The actual scale length is 24 9/16 in (625 mm)."

Some more info on scales:
http://www.stewmac.com/fretscales

 

[jangoux]

Just crossed my mind..wound those compensated nuts ´improve´ the Les Paul tuning problems as far as chords sounding out of tune ? The G, as always, is the biggest problem for me, specially on low tunings

 

[egan.]

I feel like someone (Greg?) mentioned that LP's have uneven fret placement or some such design absurdity. I've experienced that issue with the LP's and to a lesser extent the Eclipse but it's at least partly due to the giant frets on those guitars.

 

[D.Vial]

Got the same situation with C standard here... Right now I'm using Ernie Ball 0.12 to 0.56.. I had to set up the tuneomatic in a strange way to make the strings feel with tension, It's a problem but the guitar sounds so good that I can live with it.

Rotosound just release the Mike Amott string set (I'm assuming that he is in the same situation, as his deans are probably 24.75) you may wanna try them (I will)

 

[AD Chaos]

A bit of a weird idea, but wouldn't be possible to have a luthier install some locking nut and add some fine tuning mechanism to the fixed/Tune-O-Matic bridge?


*or less intrusive locking tuners..

 

[amarshism]

The 12th fret isn't half the scale length on les Paul's iirc.

 

[hsnyder]

So I ended up ordering a set of ridiculously heavy strings 13-72 or something... Had to order cause that kind of stuff isn't even available locally.. We'll see how that works out for C/B (some debate amongst the band now )

 

[hsnyder]

Got the same situation with C standard here... Right now I'm using Ernie Ball 0.12 to 0.56.. I had to set up the tuneomatic in a strange way to make the strings feel with tension, It's a problem but the guitar sounds so good that I can live with it.

Rotosound just release the Mike Amott string set (I'm assuming that he is in the same situation, as his deans are probably 24.75) you may wanna try them (I will)

Sorry for the double post. but thanks for this, I'll try these if the set I ordered is over-the-top heavy

 

[D.Vial]

Sorry for the double post. but thanks for this, I'll try these if the set I ordered is over-the-top heavy

BTW where did you order that kind of set? (0.13 to 0.72)

 

[hsnyder]

Off of amazon. It was ernie ball baritone strings I think

 

[Robert W]

So I ended up ordering a set of ridiculously heavy strings 13-72 or something... Had to order cause that kind of stuff isn't even available locally.. We'll see how that works out for C/B (some debate amongst the band now )

http://www.juststrings.com/