BURNS MARVIN 012-052 ?

For anything specifically about Burns guitars

Moderators: David Martin, dave robinson, Iain Purdon, George Geddes

Re: BURNS MARVIN 012-052 ?

Postby Martyn » Sat Jan 15, 2011 10:39 am

I'd be interested to know if those of you who have changed up or down in string gauges have thought their Burns sounded slightly or hugely different. It can be frustrating to increase gauge, maybe involving modifying the nut to accommodate the heavier strings, faff with springs etc only to find the guitar sounds virtually the same afterwards! Definitely a 'doh!' moment . . . :roll:

I did change from 10s to 11s on my strat and really couldn't hear much variation in tone, if any, but maybe if I'd upped them to 12s I would have? I later reverted to D'Addario 10s for their playability.

I currently have Ernie Ball 10s on the Burns with a wound third - the problem of a wound third being slightly quieter resulted, but I've adjusted my playing style to accommodate this volume variation and it's not as obviously quieter as when I tried a similar trick on the strat fitted with 57/62s. Not so easy to bend, of course, but a gentler, smoother sound in my opinion as I've always thought the plain third to be overly strident on the Burns, unlike the strat.

Cheers,
Martyn
User avatar
Martyn
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:14 pm
Full Real Name: Martyn Welch

Re: BURNS MARVIN 012-052 ?

Postby JimN » Sat Jan 15, 2011 11:20 am

asimmd wrote:Having just got my Burns Custom,do you need to do any alteration
to the nut in order to use heavier strings?
I believe they come with 10/46,but I wanted to fit 11/49,but I am not goimg
to mess about with the nut.
Alan


Probably not for an increase to only 11-49, but you might need to adjust the truss rod and you will need to adjust the trem spring tension (assuming they were set correctly for 10-46, of course).

JN.
User avatar
JimN
 
Posts: 4799
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:39 pm
Full Real Name: Jim Nugent

Re: BURNS MARVIN 012-052 ?

Postby RogerCook » Sat Jan 15, 2011 12:38 pm

I had to widen the nut slot to accomodate a wound 3rd in a change to 11's - 48s(? I think) but I went back to 10's (Ernie Ball but with a wound third though I can't remember the gauge off hand). Not much, if any, discernible difference in sound to my ears except the loss of volume on the 3rd like Martyn says. I'll probably go back to a plain 3rd when I change strings next - too much faffing around to find the right gauge for the wound string :(

Roger
RogerCook
 
Posts: 498
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:56 am
Full Real Name: Roger Cook

Re: BURNS MARVIN 012-052 ?

Postby Bill Bowley » Sun Jan 16, 2011 12:23 pm

I have used Ernie Ball 'Light top heavy bottom' 12 -52 sets on my Marvins and Strats fot the last ten years, no problems at all. ;)
Bill Bowley
 

Re: BURNS MARVIN 012-052 ?

Postby JimN » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:27 pm

Bill Bowley wrote:I have used Ernie Ball 'Light top heavy bottom' 12 -52 sets on my Marvins and Strats fot the last ten years, no problems at all. ;)


Strings gauged 12-52 are usually termed "medium light" or "light medium", rather than "light top heavy bottom". A high E string at 12 thou is not "lighter" than a bottom E of 52 thou. 12-52 is a standard set of even tension (or as even as guitar strings go), only slightly lighter than the classic Black Diamond or Gibson Sonomatic sets. Rotosound do that set (with a wound third of course) as "purples".

Ernie Ball (the company who more or less started off the concept of gauge selection) market a "skinny top heavy bottom" set of 10 / 13 /17(p) / 30(w) / 42 / 52. http://tinyurl.com/4ojh2jb

The gauge difference between the 10 high E and the 52 low E is quite marked. In effect, the set consists of the top half of a 10-46 set and the lower half of a 12-52 set.

HTH,

JN
User avatar
JimN
 
Posts: 4799
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:39 pm
Full Real Name: Jim Nugent

Re: BURNS MARVIN 012-052 ?

Postby cockroach » Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:38 am

You could try Dean Markley 11-52- these gauge sets come with both a plain unwound third of about .18 or .20, and a wound third -which at .20 is a good compromise.
The set is nicely balanced, solid enough for rhythm, they stay in tune, with a good full sound, but they are light enough to bend too.
cockroach
 
Posts: 1459
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Australia
Full Real Name: john cochrane

Re: BURNS MARVIN 012-052 ?

Postby Bill Bowley » Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:07 am

JimN wrote:
Bill Bowley wrote:I have used Ernie Ball 'Light top heavy bottom' 12 -52 sets on my Marvins and Strats fot the last ten years, no problems at all. ;)


Strings gauged 12-52 are usually termed "medium light" or "light medium", rather than "light top heavy bottom". A high E string at 12 thou is not "lighter" than a bottom E of 52 thou. 12-52 is a standard set of even tension (or as even as guitar strings go), only slightly lighter than the classic Black Diamond or Gibson Sonomatic sets. Rotosound do that set (with a wound third of course) as "purples".

Ernie Ball (the company who more or less started off the concept of gauge selection) market a "skinny top heavy bottom" set of 10 / 13 /17(p) / 30(w) / 42 / 52. http://tinyurl.com/4ojh2jb

The gauge difference between the 10 high E and the 52 low E is quite marked. In effect, the set consists of the top half of a 10-46 set and the lower half of a 12-52 set.

HTH,

JN


JimN,

You are quite right of course, it was the 'Skinny Top Heavy Bottom' set that I was referring to, which are 10-13-17-30-42-52! Where I got the idea I was using 12-52 from escapes me at the moment (perhaps a 'senior moment' as my wife tells me quite often?). I also use Dean Markley 11-52 on my BB King 'Lucille' though, the wound 3rd seems to cancel an unwanted 'buzz' I had with unwound 3rd on that particular guitar. :oops:
Bill Bowley
 

Previous

Return to Burns

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests

Ads by Google
These advertisements are selected and placed by Google to assist with the cost of site maintenance.
ShadowMusic is not responsible for the content of external advertisements.