String gauge for acoustic guitar

Johnnyseven

My colleague at work is learning to play acoustic guitar and asked me what replacement strings to buy. I don't play acoustic so could someone let me know a good gauge of string would be suitable for a beginners, steel strung, acoustic guitar?

Lewy

I'd say a standard "light gauge" - i.e. .012-.053 (sometimes .054) would be the way to go. There are lighter gauges available but I'm not sure it follows that lighter is better just because they are a beginner. There are considerations around building strength and endurance to take into account too.

Johnnyseven

Thanks, i'll pass the info on.

crunchman

I'd go 11s rather than 12's.

There are several threads in this section debating the merits of different string gauges with various opinions.  You won't get a consensus.

The other thing to think about is what alloy to get.   I generally use phosphor bronze.  I like the tone, but more importantly it seems to last longer than some of the other bronze alloys.  You won't go wrong with D'Addario phosphor bronze in your gauge of choice. (Look for EJ16 for 12s, or EJ26 for 11s.)

richardhomer

For someone new to the instrument - assuming their guitar has a 'normal' scale length - 12s will be pretty hard going. 

11s are probably a better starting point - though generally heavier gauges tend to sound better - but that's pretty academic if they are so hard to play they put you off picking the guitar up.

ICBM

richardhomer said:

For someone new to the instrument - assuming their guitar has a 'normal' scale length - 12s will be pretty hard going. 

11s are probably a better starting point - though generally heavier gauges tend to sound better - but that's pretty academic if they are so hard to play they put you off picking the guitar up.

Absolutely. If it's the difference between enjoying playing the guitar and so wanting to learn, and giving up because it hurts your fingers too much, put 10s on it and ignore anyone who says they don't give a good tone, for now. That can come later.

It's also worth having the guitar looked at by someone who really knows how a guitar should be set up, because what looks like a very minor problem with the action height - especially at the nut - can make a *huge* difference to how hard it is to fret and how much it hurts your fingertips. A well-set-up guitar with 12s can even play more easily and hurt your fingers less than a badly-set-up one with 10s.

Johnnyseven

Thanks chaps.

elkay

ICBM said:

Absolutely. If it's the difference between enjoying playing the guitar and so wanting to learn, and giving up because it hurts your fingers too much, put 10s on it and ignore anyone who says they don't give a good tone, for now. That can come later.

Totally agree. Very few of those I know who have started learning the guitar have actually continued past the preliminary stage, and those who have given up, without exception, all cite the inability to get past the pain factor as the reason for giving up.

Lewy

elkay said:

ICBM said:

Absolutely. If it's the difference between enjoying playing the guitar and so wanting to learn, and giving up because it hurts your fingers too much, put 10s on it and ignore anyone who says they don't give a good tone, for now. That can come later.

Totally agree. Very few of those I know who have started learning the guitar have actually continued past the preliminary stage, and those who have given up, without exception, all cite the inability to get past the pain factor as the reason for giving up.

People say exactly the same thing when they give up learning electric with .009s too. So I don't think gauge is really the critical factor...far more likely to be set up as ICBM identified, or just losing interest because it's not as easy as it looks regardless of gauge.

McSwaggerty

Lewy said:

it's not as easy as it looks regardless of gauge.

 Totally agree with Lewy.
When l was a young guy trying to learn guitar, l quickly found out it was a lot more difficult than l had thought. But as l was young and keen to play something, play in a band and become the next big rock star l switched to bass. I stupidly thought 4 strings would be easier to master than 6 strings !
Now as we all know, it's just as difficult to become a really good bass player as it is to become a good guitar player, but it did break my fingers in and gave me sense of timing and  rhythm which really helped when l went back to guitar.
l am not suggesting that one should learn to play bass first, that's just the way it worked for me.

ICBM

McSwaggerty said:

When l was a young guy trying to learn guitar, l quickly found out it was a lot more difficult than l had thought. But as l was young and keen to play something, play in a band and become the next big rock star l switched to bass. I stupidly thought 4 strings would be easier to master than 6 strings !

Now as we all know, it's just as difficult to become a really good bass player as it is to become a good guitar player, but it did break my fingers in and gave me sense of timing and  rhythm which really helped when l went back to guitar.
l am not suggesting that one should learn to play bass first, that's just the way it worked for me.

I don't think it's any easier to be a *good* bassist than a guitarist, but I think there's some truth in it being easier to be a *passable* one, at least in a basic rock band.

I'm a bassist as well, so that isn't meant as a put-down. And it certainly does give you a head start for timing and rhythm.