Low G recommendation - different application

bsfloyd

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2017
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
127
Hello everyone - I have several ukuleles tuned in fifths tuning. I’ve been using the Aquila 31U (CGDA). Of course these are linear tuned, and after tuning one of my standard reentrant tuned concerts down to a reentrant fifths tuned CGDA (yes, quite floppy strings tuned down that low for the G and C strings), I very much liked the reentrant vibe in fifths.

It was recommended here (thanks Jim Hanks) to just use a standard low G string set and reverse the C and G strings, tune the E down a step to D, resulting in a reentrant CGDA. This brings me to the purpose of this thread. I am looking for non-wound recommendations for a thinner diameter low G. I am wanting to keep this reentrant attempt to use all non-wound strings, but am trying to not have a G that is so much larger in diameter than the others. Also trying to avoid the tubiness of a larger diameter non-wound string. Any recommendations? It can be a complete set, or just a single string. Anyone? Thanks!
 
I think your best bet might be the Living Water set. It is slightly smaller (the same .036 - sorry for misinformation) than Worth or Uke Logic. The PhD set might also be an option though I can't find a spec on that one
 
Last edited:
Thanks once again, Jim. I will look into the Living Water and PhD sets.
 
Savarez has a line called Allience KF Carbon, they come as single strings in 1m or 2m length so you don't have to order a set. They offer all kinds of gauges in rather small steps so you could pick one according to what you have in mind.
 
Thanks for the replies everyone! It seems safe to assume that flouro carbon is going to be thinner than any other non wound string, correct? I have to admit I do like the tone (and feel) of nylon, but I’m sure they are thicker in diameter than carbons. I will certainly look into the above postings, but that .029 of the Living Waters might be hard to beat. Will need to try and find a spec for the KoAloha brand…
 
Thanks for the replies everyone! It seems safe to assume that flouro carbon is going to be thinner than any other non wound string, correct? I have to admit I do like the tone (and feel) of nylon, but I’m sure they are thicker in diameter than carbons. I will certainly look into the above postings, but that .029 of the Living Waters might be hard to beat. Will need to try and find a spec for the KoAloha brand…
Yes, nylons will almost always be thicker than flouro.

The specs are on the Koaloha site
it seems odd that both the G and C strings are listed at .029. Not sure what to make of that
 
Thanks for the replies everyone! It seems safe to assume that flouro carbon is going to be thinner than any other non wound string, correct? I have to admit I do like the tone (and feel) of nylon, but I’m sure they are thicker in diameter than carbons. I will certainly look into the above postings, but that .029 of the Living Waters might be hard to beat. Will need to try and find a spec for the KoAloha brand…
I don't think that there are plain nylon low G strings. Fluorocarbon are the thickest low G strings and wound the thinnest. Aquila Red are somewhere in between.
 
Yes, nylons will almost always be thicker than flouro.

The specs are on the Koaloha site
it seems odd that both the G and C strings are listed at .029. Not sure what to make of that
Jim, I have a Low G set of these strings on my concert KoAloha (and love ‘em!). Athough I’ve never personally measured the strings, I did notice after they were installed that the Low G string actually looks thinner than the C string...which I found quite surprising. So I think the information on the packaging is probably accurate.
 
Thanks for the information everyone! That is interesting in the link, Jim. They also show the G to be higher in the register than the C, which would make more sense for a High G - a Low G would be a several ledger lines below the C. From what Jan D is stating though, it may be true about the diameter (thanks, Jan D). Must be a change in formula/composite for this to be true then? If so, this would put the KoAloha on par with the Living Water.
 
1648550191689.png

Interesting - I found this on Ken's site. 0.91mm calculates out to .036". Perhaps this is from an older link of his? Unless I'm reading this wrong...
 
After further reading on Ken's site, I see there is an option for a low tension Low G string - perhaps this is the .029"?
 
After further reading on Ken's site, I see there is an option for a low tension Low G string - perhaps this is the .029"?
. O29 is typical diameter for wound strings, I don't think you can go as thin with a plain. The regular Worth low G are 0.036 and higher tension 0.043.
 
Last edited:
Oh, oh, I think I posted some misinformation. 0.74mm / 25.4 = 0.029 so that's the C string . You're quite right that the G string is 0.036 which puts it on par with the other flouros except maybe the PhD or Koaloha. So sorry 😣
 
Oh, oh, I think I posted some misinformation. 0.74mm / 25.4 = 0.029 so that's the C string . You're quite right that the G string is 0.036 which puts it on par with the other flouros except maybe the PhD or Koaloha. So sorry 😣
No worries at all! Just making sure I was seeing it correctly. Kind of a bummer though because I’ve read so many good things about Living Water strings. But, the KoAloha and possibly PhD might still be options. But as merlin666 mentioned, still might not get down to that .029 common wound diameter. Even if not, .036 is still not terribly large - still smaller than a plain nylon string ;)
 
Thanks for the information everyone! That is interesting in the link, Jim. They also show the G to be higher in the register than the C, which would make more sense for a High G - a Low G would be a several ledger lines below the C. From what Jan D is stating though, it may be true about the diameter (thanks, Jan D). Must be a change in formula/composite for this to be true then? If so, this would put the KoAloha on par with the Living Water.
Yes, the G is notated as a High G, but directly above the diagram it says ”1 octave lower.” So I think the placement was for convenience only, as they would have needed a larger diagram to notate the Low G wheres it generally sits, several ledger lines below the C.
 
Yes, the G is notated as a High G, but directly above the diagram it says ”1 octave lower.” So I think the placement was for convenience only, as they would have needed a larger diagram to notate the Low G wheres it generally sits, several ledger lines below the C.
I totally missed that note - thanks for pointing that out Jan D!! I know I need to give this string set a go :)
 
Top Bottom