Argentine Savarez Strings on a Non-Gypsy Archtop?

Django Newbie

Gentlemen,
First, let me say that I absolutely love Argentine Savarez 11s. I have what I believe to be an exceptional Gitane DG-255 and can not put it down because it plays so well and sounds so beautiful.

I also have a Loar LH-600-VS that I bought to play swing-era tunes and Western Swing stuff. Anyway, I don't like the mellow, jazzy or muted sound that is produced by the strings used on most archtops. It's just my personal taste. For example, I've played the Eastman's. They're great guitars, but they sound too jazzy and mellow for my taste. I want an archtop that sounds bright and snappy, but not barky like a Selmer-type guitar.

That's a long lead up to a short question. Has anyone used the Argentine Gypsy strings on a traditional archtop? If so, what did you think? Any other string suggestions that might give me what I want will be appreciated.

I put Elixir phosphor bronze on the Loar and they are not quite what I'm looking for. $14 down the drain. I know I'm going to try the Argentine strings regardless of what anyone tells me, but I don't want to spend a ton of money trying strings for 30 minutes and then changing them out. Again, any input will be appreciated.

Dix Bruce plays a Gibson L-7 that has the sound I want. Before submitting this question I did a search and it appears he uses D'Addario medium phosphor bronze strings. I'll definitely give that a try.

Thinking about this, I realize that what I'm trying to do is make my archtop sound like my 000 Martin. So, why did I buy an archtop? Because I'll look cool playing it! And, because I like the looks and size of the archtop guitar.

Thanks,
Gene

MichaelHorowitz

Generally bronze strings sound best on acoustic archtops...Savarez strings are just too light for archtops which have a shorter scale and thicker tops. They need a lot more downward string tension to make them sound their best. Argies are just too supple..

'm

Campusfive

I generally like Martin SP 80/20 strings for my Eastman 16" non-cutaway. Phosophor Bronze sounds raspy and brittle to me, whereas the 80/20's sound zingy without being shrill and artificial. The Martin SP's seem to have a decently long life as well.

And please don't waste a set of argies on your archtop. It will be a total waste.

Also, if you want more punch out of your archtop try using heavier strings and raising the action a bit. You want more downward pressure to drive the top. Putting 11's on one just won't be able to deliver the goods. I generally use 13's, and I sub the .013 and .017 for a .014 and an .018. Plus, the action is pretty beefy. But, my Eastman 805 is really, really loud as a result.

Django Newbie

Thanks for the input. I won't waste a perfectly good set of Agentine strings now. I'll give the D'addario EJ17s (mediums) a try and the Martin SP 80/20s. (again, mediums)

klaatu

I totally agree with Jonathan and Michael. Archtops require bronze strings, generally the heavier the better. I used to have an Eastman AR805CE. Great guitar. Unfortunately, the stock pickup was not balanced for bronze strings, so if you set it up for electric playing with nickel or steel, it went somewhat dead acoustically. Put on a good set of bronze 13s, like the Martin 80/20, and it sprang to life (but of course was unbalanced electrically).

I now have two Epiphone archtops. The 1946 Triumph is set up strictly for big band rhythm (in my poor imitation of Freddy Green style), with D'Addario bronze 14s, the 1945 Blackstone has a set of nickel 12s for electric playing.

Django Newbie

Ben,
Thanks for the input. I've got a set of EJ17s to try this weekend. They're mediums, 13 thru 56, I think. Also, I think the action is too low currently. Mediums should raise it some so I'll see where it is after the string change.

I've noticed that when I pick up the Loar and play it for a while, I'm pleased with the sound. However, if I play the Gitane with Argentines and then move to the Loar, I'm not pleased for several minutes. That's my problem, not the guitar's.

They are just different tools, designed for different jobs. I like them both.

Thanks again,

Gene

klaatu

You're welcome, Gene. The right strings can make all the difference. You'll probably never get the Loar to sound like your Martin, nor should you want to. They're completely different instruments, each has its own pleasures. Enjoy them both for what they are.

badjazz

Old thread, but I've been looking again at different strings for my acoustic archtops (both 16" non-cutaways: a Loar 700 and an L5-based guitar by Eichi Sumi). In poking around a little on string history, it seems that the earliest common metal strings on an archtop were steel core with silver-plated copper windings. To my knowledge, that is what Argentine's are, right?

I understand that Argentine's typically are lighter than what one would desire for an archtop, but I see that La Bella makes a similarly constructed string at heavier gauges--http://www.labella.com/products/700m/

I've also been messing around with Martin Tony Rice signature monel strings, which are of a type which I also understand to predate bronze & 80/20 type strings. So far the monels are really harsh sounding, although maybe they will sound better once they get dull.

Jeff Moore

It looks like:
Silver plated copper strings with a silk or gut core date back to 1650. La Bella still makes em.
Steel wire strings start around 1830.
http://www.acousticmasters.com/Acoustic ... rings1.htm

La Bella has the silver plated copper (SPC) over steel core in (.09-.50) (11-52) (13-56)
I've tried everything on my Selmacs that don't over tension the top. Why not!
SPC is an awesome string and like stated above, the Argies aren't likely high tension enough, but you've got options with La Bella. You probably already know that SPC doesn't give even results with a coil pickup. But they give a great old school sound different than anything else.

Al Watsky

I was using Savarez Argentines on my 34' Epiphone Deluxe for a few years. I wanted the feel of the Argentines but at the time didn't want to drop any dollars on a GJ guitar.
It more or less did the trick but ? wasn't Ideal.
Not bad , but not ideal.
I had the action high, quite a bit higher than it would have been with a normal archtop set and compensated the nut and saddle for the correct intonation.
It worked, but most folks would not want an archtop set up that high.
I was playing strictly rhythm and when I played lines was using typical oud picking technique, the result was a very "ethnic" sound. Loud, not much low end and with a shimmering quality that was at least "interesting".
Some folks thought the set up sounded good for old timey American music. Which was about the last thing I was using it for in my case.
I was using the guitar set up in this way for Yiddish, Russian,Moldavian and Rom tunes . It was OK.
When I set up an arch top guitar for acoustic use , which is something of a rarity these days, I might try Phosphor Bronze 13's or 12's . Thats what I have on my 34' these days. Its loud and bright with a good balance of lows and highs, but its a "real" acoustic. Most of the arch tops you see are set up for round wound steel or flat wound strings. Very low actions are the norm. Some folks even use unwound G strings !
The LaBella copper wound with steel core might be fun to try. I would guess that they would work fine on an arch top and with the heavier gauge would sound fine, but with out the low tension bendability of the Savarez .