Ed Bickert's String gauges...

[van]

It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."

The mystery continues...

[Joey Goldstein]

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

Lorne Lofsky once told me that he used the same gauge as Ed:
.012 to .052, with a plain .020 G.
That's what I use nowadays too.
Lorne's just gone up to a .013 for the high E. fyi

But the 12th Fret (a local pro guitar shop that used to do all of Ed's
work) just put out an Ed Bickert tribute Tele, and they claim his
"favourite" set of strings was .010 to .046.
I just don't hear the lighter strings when I listen to Ed so I'm gonna
stick with the .012 to .052s.

Note: With these gauges, string-to-string balance can get out of whack,
especially the G which is quite a bit louder than the rest.
Supposedly, Ed put the humbucker on his Tele, not for tone, but to
achieve better string balance.
I'd like to see a pic of how he set the G string's pole piece on his
humbucker.
But he probably didn't futz with it all if I know Ed.
On *my* jazz-Teles it's sunk quite deep below the cover.

[o***@hotmail.com]

Post by Joey Goldstein
.012 to .052, with a plain .020 G.
That's what I use nowadays too.

Yeah, I don't believe that .010" bit either.
That might have been Fender's stipulation on the Ed Bickert Tribute guitar, because maybe they don't want heavy strings on their current necks?

I also put a 13 1st string on a 12 set, or a a 14 1st on a 13 set to keep the balance between the E and B strings.

I've seen videos of Ed with the Humbucker, and the pickup adjustment screw for the high E string is screwed out pretty high.

Ott.

[Anon Anon]

Post by o***@hotmail.com
I've seen videos of Ed with the Humbucker, and the pickup adjustment screw for the high E string is screwed out pretty high.
Ott.

Hmm. Interesting. Thanks.

[Jazzer]

Post by o***@hotmail.com

Post by Joey Goldstein
.012 to .052, with a plain .020 G.
That's what I use nowadays too.

Yeah, I don't believe that .010" bit either.
That might have been Fender's stipulation on the Ed Bickert Tribute guitar, because maybe they don't want heavy strings on their current necks?
I also put a 13 1st string on a 12 set, or a a 14 1st on a 13 set to keep the balance between the E and B strings.

I have many guitars and each one requires thought for what will sound
best.
On some boxes I have 10's, some 11's, some 12's and one 13's.

For me it is the box that tells me what to use. Some guitars just
play/sound better with a certain gauge of string than another.
I just go with the flow.
As a player I am adaptable and don't mind the feeling of 10's right up
to 13's.

So far I have never been brave enough to try 14's. :)

Post by o***@hotmail.com
I've seen videos of Ed with the Humbucker, and the pickup adjustment

screw for the high E string is screwed out pretty high.

Post by o***@hotmail.com
Ott.

Often times I have wanted my E string pole screw to be higher than I
have set it, but was forced to bring it back down because of the ol'
"string hitting the screw" dilemma we all must have faced at one time or
other. :)

[Gerry]

Post by o***@hotmail.com

Post by Joey Goldstein
.012 to .052, with a plain .020 G.
That's what I use nowadays too.

Yeah, I don't believe that .010" bit either.
That might have been Fender's stipulation on the Ed Bickert Tribute
guitar, because maybe they don't want heavy strings on their current
necks?
I also put a 13 1st string on a 12 set, or a a 14 1st on a 13 set to
keep the balance between the E and B strings.

I have many guitars and each one requires thought for what will sound best.
On some boxes I have 10's, some 11's, some 12's and one 13's.
For me it is the box that tells me what to use. Some guitars just
play/sound better with a certain gauge of string than another.

I agree absolutely. I use Savarez Argentine's 1610, a gypsy string, in
one of my acoustics. The set is 10/45. It feels right, while on my
primary guitars, both solid body electrics, I'm with 12/50.

I just go with the flow.
As a player I am adaptable and don't mind the feeling of 10's right up to 13's.
So far I have never been brave enough to try 14's. :)

I did for almost a year in the mid-70's. At the end I found myself
regularly thinking about how bad my fingers hurt. And occasionally
balked at playing the guitar, thinking of the "wrestling match" quality
of the engagement. That's when I went to lighter gauges. Back then I
was assured it wasn't gauge that was so important so much as the
*alloy*, and was all about trying to get the highest nickel content.
Go figure!

Post by o***@hotmail.com
I've seen videos of Ed with the Humbucker, and the pickup adjustment

screw for the high E string is screwed out pretty high.

Post by o***@hotmail.com
Ott.

Often times I have wanted my E string pole screw to be higher than I
have set it, but was forced to bring it back down because of the ol'
"string hitting the screw" dilemma we all must have faced at one time
or other. :)

[o***@hotmail.com]

Post by Jazzer
I have many guitars and each one requires thought for what will sound
best.
On some boxes I have 10's, some 11's, some 12's and one 13's.
For me it is the box that tells me what to use. Some guitars just
play/sound better with a certain gauge of string than another.
I just go with the flow.
As a player I am adaptable and don't mind the feeling of 10's right up
to 13's.
So far I have never been brave enough to try 14's. :)

I agree absolutely that certain guitars work with certain string types.

I just buy d'Adarrio chromes usually .013's and use them on everything,
although on a long scale neck I'm fine with a .012 set with a .013 on top.
I need my first string to stand out over the B string, since the B is thicker.

I've never used a whole set of .014's, I just try to thicken up the top half.
I just want my chords, no matter how awkward the grip, to stay in tune.
If I pickup an electric guitar in a music store I usually can't play it.
I rarely ever bend a string except for a bit of vibrato.

Ott.

[Gerry]

Post by o***@hotmail.com

Post by Joey Goldstein
.012 to .052, with a plain .020 G.
That's what I use nowadays too.

Yeah, I don't believe that .010" bit either.

Nor I. I think it impossible.

Post by o***@hotmail.com
That might have been Fender's stipulation on the Ed Bickert Tribute
guitar, because maybe they don't want heavy strings on their current
necks?
I also put a 13 1st string on a 12 set, or a a 14 1st on a 13 set to
keep the balance between the E and B strings.
I've seen videos of Ed with the Humbucker, and the pickup adjustment
screw for the high E string is screwed out pretty high.

Over the past few years 11/52 means less to me that *whose* 11/52's
we're talking ab out. I've become addicted to Thomastik-Infeld's "Jazz
Swing" (JS112) which are 12/50's. They are flat-wrap and painfully
expensive. But it seems to pays off because they last forever. By
which I mean a year or so!

I'll never sound like Bickert, an admirable goal. for any number of
reasons, beginning with the fact that I don't use a pick. But if I
somehow began sounding a bit more like him, it undoubtedly would have
nothing to do with strings and pole-pieces!

[Jazzer]

Post by Gerry
Over the past few years 11/52 means less to me that *whose* 11/52's
we're talking ab out.  I've become addicted to Thomastik-Infeld's "Jazz
Swing" (JS112) which are 12/50's.  They are flat-wrap and painfully
expensive.  But it seems to pays off because they last forever.  By
which I mean a year or so!

I have been loyal to the Thomastik-Infeld brand now for decades.
Sure they cost more than most other strings but you get what you
pay for.

And most of my string sets last well over a year!
Pretty good bang for the buck. :)

[o***@hotmail.com]

Post by Jazzer
I have been loyal to the Thomastik-Infeld brand now for decades.
Sure they cost more than most other strings but you get what you
pay for.
And most of my string sets last well over a year!
Pretty good bang for the buck. :)

I pretty well do that with the Chromes too, although I may change out the First and maybe even 2nd string if they don't intonate well.

Ott.

[Jazzer]

Post by o***@hotmail.com

Post by Jazzer
I have been loyal to the Thomastik-Infeld brand now for decades.
Sure they cost more than most other strings but you get what you
pay for.
And most of my string sets last well over a year!
Pretty good bang for the buck. :)

I pretty well do that with the Chromes too, although I may change out the First and maybe even 2nd string if they don't intonate well.
Ott.

I have used Chromes over the years too and they can sound great but the
Thomastik add one extra dimension to the string, softness/feel.

[Gerry]

Post by Jazzer

Post by o***@hotmail.com

Post by Jazzer
I have been loyal to the Thomastik-Infeld brand now for decades.
Sure they cost more than most other strings but you get what you
pay for.
And most of my string sets last well over a year!
Pretty good bang for the buck. :)

I pretty well do that with the Chromes too, although I may change out
the First and maybe even 2nd string if they don't intonate well.
Ott.

I have used Chromes over the years too and they can sound great but the
Thomastik add one extra dimension to the string, softness/feel.

They do have a different feel.

[Gerry]

Post by o***@hotmail.com

Post by Jazzer
I have been loyal to the Thomastik-Infeld brand now for decades.
Sure they cost more than most other strings but you get what you
pay for.
And most of my string sets last well over a year!
Pretty good bang for the buck. :)

I pretty well do that with the Chromes too, although I may change out
the First and maybe even 2nd string if they don't intonate well.

I have a drawer of chromes still, I think, that I gave up on when I
couldn't get 8-10 G strings in a row to behave intonation-wize. By
which I mean "screwed". They also had weird buzzing in various places
on the neck and other miseries. I'm scared to death of them. I also
liked Pyramid, but am sticked with Thomastik-Infeld for consistency
and, surprisingly value.

[van]

Post by Joey Goldstein

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

.012 to .052, with a plain .020 G.
That's what I use nowadays too.
Lorne's just gone up to a .013 for the high E. fyi
But the 12th Fret (a local pro guitar shop that used to do all of Ed's
work) just put out an Ed Bickert tribute Tele, and they claim his
"favourite" set of strings was .010 to .046.
I just don't hear the lighter strings when I listen to Ed so I'm gonna
stick with the .012 to .052s.
Note: With these gauges, string-to-string balance can get out of whack,
especially the G which is quite a bit louder than the rest.
Supposedly, Ed put the humbucker on his Tele, not for tone, but to
achieve better string balance.
I'd like to see a pic of how he set the G string's pole piece on his
humbucker.
But he probably didn't futz with it all if I know Ed.
On *my* jazz-Teles it's sunk quite deep below the cover.

I don't know, there's a certain smoothness of chord changing on Ed's playing that make me think that it might be lower than .012s.

Lorne was probably just trying to mislead you, so you wouldn't be able to chord like Ed...; ' )

But who are you going to believe; Lorne, Reg or 12th Fret?

[van]

Post by van

Post by Joey Goldstein

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

.012 to .052, with a plain .020 G.
That's what I use nowadays too.
Lorne's just gone up to a .013 for the high E. fyi
But the 12th Fret (a local pro guitar shop that used to do all of Ed's
work) just put out an Ed Bickert tribute Tele, and they claim his
"favourite" set of strings was .010 to .046.
I just don't hear the lighter strings when I listen to Ed so I'm gonna
stick with the .012 to .052s.
Note: With these gauges, string-to-string balance can get out of whack,
especially the G which is quite a bit louder than the rest.
Supposedly, Ed put the humbucker on his Tele, not for tone, but to
achieve better string balance.
I'd like to see a pic of how he set the G string's pole piece on his
humbucker.
But he probably didn't futz with it all if I know Ed.
On *my* jazz-Teles it's sunk quite deep below the cover.

I don't know, there's a certain smoothness of chord changing on Ed's playing that make me think that it might be lower than .012s.
Lorne was probably just trying to mislead you, so you wouldn't be able to chord like Ed...; ' )
But who are you going to believe; Lorne, Reg or 12th Fret?

I go with Reg- I think he used some type of mixed set.

[Tim McNamara]

Post by van

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He
uses .010s .011s or .012s. A dude that knows him well said that he
spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I
just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

Wasn't there, don't know, purely speculating: maybe Ed cobbled together
a custom gauged set of strings when playing with the stock Tele pickup
to get the balance he wanted with the technique he used.

I have done that with two of my guitars that have Vintage Vibe CC type
pickups. Back when Thomas Vinci strings were a going concern, you could
buy custom string sets from them for very good prices. Mine are nickel
plated RW .013 - .017 - .024w - .032 - .042 - .050 and the balance
really nicely with the un-notched bar in my pickups. The bridge setup
for intonation looks kind of funny with the G waaaay forward.

Post by van

Lorne Lofsky once told me that he used the same gauge as Ed: .012 to
.052, with a plain .020 G. That's what I use nowadays too. Lorne's
just gone up to a .013 for the high E. fyi
But the 12th Fret (a local pro guitar shop that used to do all of
Ed's work) just put out an Ed Bickert tribute Tele, and they claim
his "favourite" set of strings was .010 to .046. I just don't hear
the lighter strings when I listen to Ed so I'm gonna stick with the
.012 to .052s.

<snip>

Post by van
I don't know, there's a certain smoothness of chord changing on Ed's
playing that make me think that it might be lower than .012s.
Lorne was probably just trying to mislead you, so you wouldn't be able
to chord like Ed...; ' )
But who are you going to believe; Lorne, Reg or 12th Fret?

It's also possible that Ed changed his string preferences from the time
he was playing regularly with Lorne to the end of his career. IIRC
reading an interview in which he mentioned having arthritis, so he might
have switched to lighter strings to cope with that. Reg, Lorne and the
12th Fret might *all* be right!

[d***@gmail.com]

Post by Joey Goldstein

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

.012 to .052, with a plain .020 G.
That's what I use nowadays too.
Lorne's just gone up to a .013 for the high E. fyi
But the 12th Fret (a local pro guitar shop that used to do all of Ed's
work) just put out an Ed Bickert tribute Tele, and they claim his
"favourite" set of strings was .010 to .046.
I just don't hear the lighter strings when I listen to Ed so I'm gonna
stick with the .012 to .052s.
Note: With these gauges, string-to-string balance can get out of whack,
especially the G which is quite a bit louder than the rest.
Supposedly, Ed put the humbucker on his Tele, not for tone, but to
achieve better string balance.
I'd like to see a pic of how he set the G string's pole piece on his
humbucker.
But he probably didn't futz with it all if I know Ed.
On *my* jazz-Teles it's sunk quite deep below the cover.

Me too! Rounds btw

[Dave Askren]

Post by d***@gmail.com

Post by Joey Goldstein

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

.012 to .052, with a plain .020 G.
That's what I use nowadays too.
Lorne's just gone up to a .013 for the high E. fyi
But the 12th Fret (a local pro guitar shop that used to do all of Ed's
work) just put out an Ed Bickert tribute Tele, and they claim his
"favourite" set of strings was .010 to .046.
I just don't hear the lighter strings when I listen to Ed so I'm gonna
stick with the .012 to .052s.
Note: With these gauges, string-to-string balance can get out of whack,
especially the G which is quite a bit louder than the rest.
Supposedly, Ed put the humbucker on his Tele, not for tone, but to
achieve better string balance.
I'd like to see a pic of how he set the G string's pole piece on his
humbucker.
But he probably didn't futz with it all if I know Ed.
On *my* jazz-Teles it's sunk quite deep below the cover.

Me too! Rounds btw

12-52 btw

[o***@hotmail.com]

Post by Dave Askren
12-52 btw

That's what they sound like to me too.
Bg.

[Cameron Cooper]

Post by Joey Goldstein

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

.012 to .052, with a plain .020 G.
That's what I use nowadays too.
Lorne's just gone up to a .013 for the high E. fyi
But the 12th Fret (a local pro guitar shop that used to do all of Ed's
work) just put out an Ed Bickert tribute Tele, and they claim his
"favourite" set of strings was .010 to .046.
I just don't hear the lighter strings when I listen to Ed so I'm gonna
stick with the .012 to .052s.
Note: With these gauges, string-to-string balance can get out of whack,
especially the G which is quite a bit louder than the rest.
Supposedly, Ed put the humbucker on his Tele, not for tone, but to
achieve better string balance.
I'd like to see a pic of how he set the G string's pole piece on his
humbucker.
But he probably didn't futz with it all if I know Ed.
On *my* jazz-Teles it's sunk quite deep below the cover.

==========================

Aug 10, 2023
Update on Lorne's string gauges. I messaged him and he told me:

"Just for the record, for quite some time, I’ve been using.013-.056 with a plain .022 G string and Seymour Duncan Cool Rail pickups.. works for me…."

[j***@mindspring.com]

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

According to an interview years ago, he said he used:

11 13 16 24 36 46

[Joey Goldstein]

Post by j***@mindspring.com

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

11 13 16 24 36 46

Yes. That article in GP in the early 70s.
I dunno about those gauges.
They also claim he used a medium gauge Fender pick.

But when I first started exploring using a Tele for jazz, I talked to my
friend Lorne Lofsky who had done considerable playing/recording with Ed
and who tends to use what seems to me to be a similar setup/tone with a
plain G string.
Lorne told me that Ed was using .012 to .052 roundwounds with a plain
.020 G string.
That's what Lorne was using at the time I talked to him about it too.

So that's what I've been using and my Tele builds are definitely in the
zone for Ed's type of tone, even though most of what we all dig about Ed
is actually his touch so I don't really sound much like him when I play
them.
And I've recently re-read that article and recently tried those gauges
myself.
They simply don't get you there.
Then I put a .012 on.
Still not there.
Then I upped the B to a .016 too.
Still not happening.
And the .016 G is just way too flappy.

So I'm making a few hypotheses about all of this, none of which I've
confirmed yet.
My guess is that when Ed first starting using his Tele on jazz gigs,
instead of just for the pop studio sessions he normally used it for,
that he tried doing it with .010 to .046 which was and still is the most
common gauge for rock and pop and R&B.
But from all his years playing jazz on an archtop my next guess is that
he started using heavier high E strings for jazz gigs.
First an .011 and then a .012.
I'm also guessing that with his dark-ish tone, he found his wound stings
a bit louder than ideal when rolling back the tone control, especially
since he was still using the stock single coil neck pickup at that time
that has no adjustable pole pieces, and that this is why he may have
favoured the relatively light gauge wound strings.
All you can really do is to lower that pup on the bass side and raise it
on the treble side.
But there's no string-to-string adjustment.
I heard he switched to the humbucker, not because of 60hz hum or even
for the tone, but because he was having string balance issues and the
humbuckers had adjustable pole pieces.

So *I* think this 11 to 46 thing is not what he was using on most of the
records we all dig, yet.

I suppose I could just try to contact Ed and ask him, but I don't want
to bother him.

[Gerry]

Post by Joey Goldstein
I suppose I could just try to contact Ed and ask him, but I don't want
to bother him.

They whole guitar world would appreciate it and what the hell--he might
appreciate it too!

-- Gerry

[van]

Post by Joey Goldstein

Post by j***@mindspring.com

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

11 13 16 24 36 46

Yes. That article in GP in the early 70s.
I dunno about those gauges.
They also claim he used a medium gauge Fender pick.
But when I first started exploring using a Tele for jazz, I talked to my
friend Lorne Lofsky who had done considerable playing/recording with Ed
and who tends to use what seems to me to be a similar setup/tone with a
plain G string.
Lorne told me that Ed was using .012 to .052 roundwounds with a plain
.020 G string.
That's what Lorne was using at the time I talked to him about it too.
So that's what I've been using and my Tele builds are definitely in the
zone for Ed's type of tone, even though most of what we all dig about Ed
is actually his touch so I don't really sound much like him when I play
them.
And I've recently re-read that article and recently tried those gauges
myself.
They simply don't get you there.
Then I put a .012 on.
Still not there.
Then I upped the B to a .016 too.
Still not happening.
And the .016 G is just way too flappy.
So I'm making a few hypotheses about all of this, none of which I've
confirmed yet.
My guess is that when Ed first starting using his Tele on jazz gigs,
instead of just for the pop studio sessions he normally used it for,
that he tried doing it with .010 to .046 which was and still is the most
common gauge for rock and pop and R&B.
But from all his years playing jazz on an archtop my next guess is that
he started using heavier high E strings for jazz gigs.
First an .011 and then a .012.
I'm also guessing that with his dark-ish tone, he found his wound stings
a bit louder than ideal when rolling back the tone control, especially
since he was still using the stock single coil neck pickup at that time
that has no adjustable pole pieces, and that this is why he may have
favoured the relatively light gauge wound strings.
All you can really do is to lower that pup on the bass side and raise it
on the treble side.
But there's no string-to-string adjustment.
I heard he switched to the humbucker, not because of 60hz hum or even
for the tone, but because he was having string balance issues and the
humbuckers had adjustable pole pieces.
So *I* think this 11 to 46 thing is not what he was using on most of the
records we all dig, yet.
I suppose I could just try to contact Ed and ask him, but I don't want
to bother him.

Yeah, I don't know where they got that medium Fender pick thing from, but they list his recording output at the end of the article, and the most recent LP they listed was "Ed Bickert", the great live, trio album with Don Thompson and Terry Clarke. I still have the vinyl on PM Records, and it says 1976 on the record, so the article must be from shortly after he made that record.
When I was going through my EB phase in the 80s, I was using a Hondo(!) Strat copy, and an orange Cube 60. I used .010s exclusively, and was able to approximate his sound, although not his ability, so I always thought that he used a light gauge back in the 70s. Many of the chord solos he was playing in the 70s were just impossible to play with .012s or higher. They wouldn't have the lightness of sound Ed had, and you couldn't play with the dexterity that Ed played with, because you can't do some of those things with heavier gauges.
You could play the chords he used, but you wouldn't be able to play with the precision EB did, because of the tension and the thickness of the strings.

By the time he recorded for Concord, he wasn't making the guitar,bass,drum trio oriented records (even when there was a horn player on the record) he made for Sackville, so it sounds like he went to a heavier gauge (.012s?) and different pickup (with adjustable pole pieces), so he wouldn't get that muddy sound he complained about in that article.

[j***@mindspring.com]

Post by Joey Goldstein

Post by j***@mindspring.com

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

11 13 16 24 36 46

Yes. That article in GP in the early 70s.
I dunno about those gauges.
They also claim he used a medium gauge Fender pick.
But when I first started exploring using a Tele for jazz, I talked to my
friend Lorne Lofsky who had done considerable playing/recording with Ed
and who tends to use what seems to me to be a similar setup/tone with a
plain G string.
Lorne told me that Ed was using .012 to .052 roundwounds with a plain
.020 G string.
That's what Lorne was using at the time I talked to him about it too.
So that's what I've been using and my Tele builds are definitely in the
zone for Ed's type of tone, even though most of what we all dig about Ed
is actually his touch so I don't really sound much like him when I play
them.
And I've recently re-read that article and recently tried those gauges
myself.
They simply don't get you there.
Then I put a .012 on.
Still not there.
Then I upped the B to a .016 too.
Still not happening.
And the .016 G is just way too flappy.
So I'm making a few hypotheses about all of this, none of which I've
confirmed yet.
My guess is that when Ed first starting using his Tele on jazz gigs,
instead of just for the pop studio sessions he normally used it for,
that he tried doing it with .010 to .046 which was and still is the most
common gauge for rock and pop and R&B.
But from all his years playing jazz on an archtop my next guess is that
he started using heavier high E strings for jazz gigs.
First an .011 and then a .012.
I'm also guessing that with his dark-ish tone, he found his wound stings
a bit louder than ideal when rolling back the tone control, especially
since he was still using the stock single coil neck pickup at that time
that has no adjustable pole pieces, and that this is why he may have
favoured the relatively light gauge wound strings.
All you can really do is to lower that pup on the bass side and raise it
on the treble side.
But there's no string-to-string adjustment.
I heard he switched to the humbucker, not because of 60hz hum or even
for the tone, but because he was having string balance issues and the
humbuckers had adjustable pole pieces.
So *I* think this 11 to 46 thing is not what he was using on most of the
records we all dig, yet.
I suppose I could just try to contact Ed and ask him, but I don't want
to bother him.

Best idea is to contact him. However, if you look at the YouTube videos - specifically, "Street of Dreams", it appears that the way he moves around with light touch using the pick and fingers for that "Rhodes" sound that he IS using light strings. I would bet the 11 13 16 24 26 46 is accurate -- I doubt he was using 12 to 52's on the Telly.... you don't get that "light touch" with 12 to 52's on the Telly.... watch closely and you see the very light touch and ease with which he picks and moves.

[van]

Post by j***@mindspring.com

Post by Joey Goldstein

Post by j***@mindspring.com

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

11 13 16 24 36 46

Yes. That article in GP in the early 70s.
I dunno about those gauges.
They also claim he used a medium gauge Fender pick.
But when I first started exploring using a Tele for jazz, I talked to my
friend Lorne Lofsky who had done considerable playing/recording with Ed
and who tends to use what seems to me to be a similar setup/tone with a
plain G string.
Lorne told me that Ed was using .012 to .052 roundwounds with a plain
.020 G string.
That's what Lorne was using at the time I talked to him about it too.
So that's what I've been using and my Tele builds are definitely in the
zone for Ed's type of tone, even though most of what we all dig about Ed
is actually his touch so I don't really sound much like him when I play
them.
And I've recently re-read that article and recently tried those gauges
myself.
They simply don't get you there.
Then I put a .012 on.
Still not there.
Then I upped the B to a .016 too.
Still not happening.
And the .016 G is just way too flappy.
So I'm making a few hypotheses about all of this, none of which I've
confirmed yet.
My guess is that when Ed first starting using his Tele on jazz gigs,
instead of just for the pop studio sessions he normally used it for,
that he tried doing it with .010 to .046 which was and still is the most
common gauge for rock and pop and R&B.
But from all his years playing jazz on an archtop my next guess is that
he started using heavier high E strings for jazz gigs.
First an .011 and then a .012.
I'm also guessing that with his dark-ish tone, he found his wound stings
a bit louder than ideal when rolling back the tone control, especially
since he was still using the stock single coil neck pickup at that time
that has no adjustable pole pieces, and that this is why he may have
favoured the relatively light gauge wound strings.
All you can really do is to lower that pup on the bass side and raise it
on the treble side.
But there's no string-to-string adjustment.
I heard he switched to the humbucker, not because of 60hz hum or even
for the tone, but because he was having string balance issues and the
humbuckers had adjustable pole pieces.
So *I* think this 11 to 46 thing is not what he was using on most of the
records we all dig, yet.
I suppose I could just try to contact Ed and ask him, but I don't want
to bother him.

Best idea is to contact him. However, if you look at the YouTube videos - specifically, "Street of Dreams", it appears that the way he moves around with light touch using the pick and fingers for that "Rhodes" sound that he IS using light strings. I would bet the 11 13 16 24 26 46 is accurate -- I doubt he was using 12 to 52's on the Telly.... you don't get that "light touch" with 12 to 52's on the Telly.... watch closely and you see the very light touch and ease with which he picks and moves.

You could be right, but the sound and the touch is heavier on SOD than the earlier videos with Don Thompson, so I always got the impression that he changed to a heavier set by this time. he also plays more single string lines on SOD than usual.

[j***@mindspring.com]

Post by van

Post by j***@mindspring.com

Post by Joey Goldstein

Post by j***@mindspring.com

Post by van
It seems that Ed's choice of strings is more complicated than, "He uses .010s .011s or .012s.
A dude that knows him well said that he spoke to Reg Schwaeger about it, and Reg said something like, "I just buy a set of strings, Ed sure doesn't..."
The mystery continues...

11 13 16 24 36 46

Yes. That article in GP in the early 70s.
I dunno about those gauges.
They also claim he used a medium gauge Fender pick.
But when I first started exploring using a Tele for jazz, I talked to my
friend Lorne Lofsky who had done considerable playing/recording with Ed
and who tends to use what seems to me to be a similar setup/tone with a
plain G string.
Lorne told me that Ed was using .012 to .052 roundwounds with a plain
.020 G string.
That's what Lorne was using at the time I talked to him about it too.
So that's what I've been using and my Tele builds are definitely in the
zone for Ed's type of tone, even though most of what we all dig about Ed
is actually his touch so I don't really sound much like him when I play
them.
And I've recently re-read that article and recently tried those gauges
myself.
They simply don't get you there.
Then I put a .012 on.
Still not there.
Then I upped the B to a .016 too.
Still not happening.
And the .016 G is just way too flappy.
So I'm making a few hypotheses about all of this, none of which I've
confirmed yet.
My guess is that when Ed first starting using his Tele on jazz gigs,
instead of just for the pop studio sessions he normally used it for,
that he tried doing it with .010 to .046 which was and still is the most
common gauge for rock and pop and R&B.
But from all his years playing jazz on an archtop my next guess is that
he started using heavier high E strings for jazz gigs.
First an .011 and then a .012.
I'm also guessing that with his dark-ish tone, he found his wound stings
a bit louder than ideal when rolling back the tone control, especially
since he was still using the stock single coil neck pickup at that time
that has no adjustable pole pieces, and that this is why he may have
favoured the relatively light gauge wound strings.
All you can really do is to lower that pup on the bass side and raise it
on the treble side.
But there's no string-to-string adjustment.
I heard he switched to the humbucker, not because of 60hz hum or even
for the tone, but because he was having string balance issues and the
humbuckers had adjustable pole pieces.
So *I* think this 11 to 46 thing is not what he was using on most of the
records we all dig, yet.
I suppose I could just try to contact Ed and ask him, but I don't want
to bother him.

Best idea is to contact him. However, if you look at the YouTube videos - specifically, "Street of Dreams", it appears that the way he moves around with light touch using the pick and fingers for that "Rhodes" sound that he IS using light strings. I would bet the 11 13 16 24 26 46 is accurate -- I doubt he was using 12 to 52's on the Telly.... you don't get that "light touch" with 12 to 52's on the Telly.... watch closely and you see the very light touch and ease with which he picks and moves.

You could be right, but the sound and the touch is heavier on SOD than the earlier videos with Don Thompson, so I always got the impression that he changed to a heavier set by this time. he also plays more single string lines on SOD than usual.

Amp, amp settings and how the amp was micked on stage can really affect the timbre...especially in a live setting. He's playing with the ease of a studio session suggesting he could hear himself and the mix very well... when you can hear yourself and all the nuances, it's heaven --- Often, a "studio recording sound" is thicker, even with thin strings, than live work where they sound thin and don't cut through the mix. Unless you properly mic the amp live you may have to use heavier strings to cut through at the expense of touch. He's using a small Fender (type) jazz pick with a very light touch. You just have to play physically heavier than he appears when you put 12 -52 on a Telly - especially on the chord comping with fingers....at times he moves very quickly, subtly, and lightly - - again - we really should be asking him...what I'm suggesting is based on my experience and only my observation of him playing on SOD. Regards...

[Tim McNamara]

This has been a perennial and unsolved discussion. Looking at YouTube videos and trying to
discern string gauges is like reading tea leaves. The only person who can settle this is Ed,
unless he had a roadie which seems unlikely for a jazz musician. If Ed knew of this discussion, I
bet he'd chuckle and think "this is a topic of conversation?" IIRC it is in one of the video
interviews with his son that he mentions having sme arthritis in his hands, which might lead one
towards lighter strings.

On this video, the sound makes me think heavier gauge strings; His tone just sounds tighter, not
unlike his "Out of the Past" CD. The reflections of the lights on the strings suggest three
plain strings and three wound:

But the tight shots of his right hand seem unrevealing to me other than his touch with the pick is
very light, brushing the strings with the plane of the pick tilted downward (something Jim Hall
seemed to often do, as well). The low E string looks thin, though, but the treble strings aren't
really visible in those shots.

I sure wish there were more YouTube videos of Ed. As much as enjoy listening to his
recordings, watching him play is fascinating because his hands move like no one else I have seen
on guitar. Sometimes my ears and eyes seem to disagree with each other.

As far as timbre, my experiments with strings on my Teles suggest to me that he played light
strings (10-46) and tended to turn the amp up and the guitar volume down- having the effect of
rolling off some highs/twang and also getting the amp to fatten up a bit.

But this is all tea leaves and bullshit, isn't it? What really matters is learning to play the
music ourselves and this sort of thing- as interesting as I obviously find it- really isn't
advancing me that way.

[Gerry]

Post by Tim McNamara
This has been a perennial and unsolved discussion. Looking at YouTube
videos and trying to discern string gauges is like reading tea leaves.
The only person who can settle this is Ed, unless he had a roadie which
seems unlikely for a jazz musician. If Ed knew of this discussion, I
bet he'd chuckle and think "this is a topic of conversation?" IIRC it
is in one of the video interviews with his son that he mentions having
sme arthritis in his hands, which might lead one towards lighter
strings.
On this video, the sound makes me think heavier gauge strings; His tone
just sounds tighter, not unlike his "Out of the Past" CD. The
reflections of the lights on the strings suggest three plain strings
http://youtu.be/FuLPZ6HoP2s
But the tight shots of his right hand seem unrevealing to me other than
his touch with the pick is very light, brushing the strings with the
plane of the pick tilted downward (something Jim Hall seemed to often
do, as well). The low E string looks thin, though, but the treble
strings aren't really visible in those shots.
I sure wish there were more YouTube videos of Ed. As much as enjoy
listening to his recordings, watching him play is fascinating because
his hands move like no one else I have seen on guitar. Sometimes my
ears and eyes seem to disagree with each other.
As far as timbre, my experiments with strings on my Teles suggest to me
that he played light
strings (10-46) and tended to turn the amp up and the guitar volume
down- having the effect of
rolling off some highs/twang and also getting the amp to fatten up a bit.
But this is all tea leaves and bullshit, isn't it? What really matters
is learning to play the
music ourselves and this sort of thing- as interesting as I obviously find it- really isn't
advancing me that way.

What "really matters" is an endlessly shifting set of hierarchies. This
sort of thing is the mechanics of the instrument and not the mechanics
of music per se, nor the performance. Still the mechanics are just as
important as anything else between abstract conception over here, and
what eventually goes drifting into someone's ear over there.

I believe Ed changed his string gauges over the years, as I and 90% of
guitarists have, and likely for similar and different reasons. What I
think of as "the Ed Bickert sound" is not something I could ever get
with 10's. I use 12 to 50's now, not because of other guitarists and
their sounds but because of what I can wring out of them and how they
feel--as I pursue a general sonic ideal that Ed and Hall and Raney and
a half-dozen others set for me long long ago. I'm sure they used
different strings and guitars and picks and amps--just like me!

[van]

Post by Gerry

Post by Tim McNamara
This has been a perennial and unsolved discussion. Looking at YouTube
videos and trying to discern string gauges is like reading tea leaves.
The only person who can settle this is Ed, unless he had a roadie which
seems unlikely for a jazz musician. If Ed knew of this discussion, I
bet he'd chuckle and think "this is a topic of conversation?" IIRC it
is in one of the video interviews with his son that he mentions having
sme arthritis in his hands, which might lead one towards lighter
strings.
On this video, the sound makes me think heavier gauge strings; His tone
just sounds tighter, not unlike his "Out of the Past" CD. The
reflections of the lights on the strings suggest three plain strings
http://youtu.be/FuLPZ6HoP2s
But the tight shots of his right hand seem unrevealing to me other than
his touch with the pick is very light, brushing the strings with the
plane of the pick tilted downward (something Jim Hall seemed to often
do, as well). The low E string looks thin, though, but the treble
strings aren't really visible in those shots.
I sure wish there were more YouTube videos of Ed. As much as enjoy
listening to his recordings, watching him play is fascinating because
his hands move like no one else I have seen on guitar. Sometimes my
ears and eyes seem to disagree with each other.
As far as timbre, my experiments with strings on my Teles suggest to me
that he played light
strings (10-46) and tended to turn the amp up and the guitar volume
down- having the effect of
rolling off some highs/twang and also getting the amp to fatten up a bit.
But this is all tea leaves and bullshit, isn't it? What really matters
is learning to play the
music ourselves and this sort of thing- as interesting as I obviously
find it- really isn't
advancing me that way.

What "really matters" is an endlessly shifting set of hierarchies. This
sort of thing is the mechanics of the instrument and not the mechanics
of music per se, nor the performance. Still the mechanics are just as
important as anything else between abstract conception over here, and
what eventually goes drifting into someone's ear over there.
I believe Ed changed his string gauges over the years, as I and 90% of
guitarists have, and likely for similar and different reasons. What I
think of as "the Ed Bickert sound" is not something I could ever get
with 10's. I use 12 to 50's now, not because of other guitarists and
their sounds but because of what I can wring out of them and how they
feel--as I pursue a general sonic ideal that Ed and Hall and Raney and
a half-dozen others set for me long long ago. I'm sure they used
different strings and guitars and picks and amps--just like me!

Based on an actual quote from EB on what gauge he uses, I'm going to try using .010s on my Jazz Solid, if i have a small group jazz gig without a pianist. I've got a two month show playing 'Godspell' coming up, so I'll probably try this in April at the earliest. I'll use my B-120 with .011s for big band gigs.

[Gerry]

Post by van

Post by Gerry

This has been a perennial and unsolved discussion. Looking at YouTube>

Post by Tim McNamara
videos and trying to discern string gauges is like reading tea

leaves. The only person who can settle this is Ed, unless he had a
roadie which> > seems unlikely for a jazz musician. If Ed knew of this
discussion, I> > bet he'd chuckle and think "this is a topic of
conversation?" IIRC it> > is in one of the video interviews with his
son that he mentions having> > sme arthritis in his hands, which might
lead one towards lighter> > strings.
On this video, the sound makes me think heavier gauge strings; His
tone> > just sounds tighter, not unlike his "Out of the Past" CD. The>

Post by Tim McNamara
reflections of the lights on the strings suggest three plain strings>

http://youtu.be/FuLPZ6HoP2s
But the tight shots of his right hand seem unrevealing to me other
than> > his touch with the pick is very light, brushing the strings
with the> > plane of the pick tilted downward (something Jim Hall
seemed to often> > do, as well). The low E string looks thin, though,
but the treble> > strings aren't really visible in those shots.
I sure wish there were more YouTube videos of Ed. As much as enjoy> >
listening to his recordings, watching him play is fascinating because>

Post by Tim McNamara
his hands move like no one else I have seen on guitar. Sometimes my>
ears and eyes seem to disagree with each other.

As far as timbre, my experiments with strings on my Teles suggest to
me> > that he played light
strings (10-46) and tended to turn the amp up and the guitar volume> >
down- having the effect of
rolling off some highs/twang and also getting the amp to fatten up a bit.
But this is all tea leaves and bullshit, isn't it? What really
matters> > is learning to play the
music ourselves and this sort of thing- as interesting as I obviously>

Post by Tim McNamara
find it- really isn't

advancing me that way.

What "really matters" is an endlessly shifting set of hierarchies.
This> sort of thing is the mechanics of the instrument and not the
mechanics> of music per se, nor the performance. Still the mechanics
are just as> important as anything else between abstract conception
over here, and> what eventually goes drifting into someone's ear over
there.
I believe Ed changed his string gauges over the years, as I and 90% of>
guitarists have, and likely for similar and different reasons. What I>
think of as "the Ed Bickert sound" is not something I could ever get>
with 10's. I use 12 to 50's now, not because of other guitarists and>
their sounds but because of what I can wring out of them and how they>
feel--as I pursue a general sonic ideal that Ed and Hall and Raney and>
a half-dozen others set for me long long ago. I'm sure they used>
different strings and guitars and picks and amps--just like me!

Based on an actual quote from EB on what gauge he uses, I'm going to
try using .010s on my Jazz Solid, if i have a small group jazz gig
without a pianist. I've got a two month show playing 'Godspell' coming
up, so I'll probably try this in April at the earliest. I'll use my
B-120 with .011s for big band gigs.

Just make sure it has the same neck length...

[Tim McNamara]

Post by Gerry
What "really matters" is an endlessly shifting set of hierarchies.

True that!