Newbish question

[Kodiak3D]

Is it bad to remove all the strings on your guitar?

I've read conflicting reports on this. Some people say when you're changing strings to do them one at a time because taking them all off can damage the guitar. I've read other things that say this is nonsense, especially since all the strings have to be removed for most work/repairs.

Anyone know the truth?

[Lev]

I think it may be bad to remove all at the same time (ie suddenly loosen all the strings and take away all the tension). But you'd need multiple hands to do that anyway. Removing one string at a time until all are off is fine.

[Rocket]

There is no problem with removing all tension for short periods ie. changing strings. All guitar manufacturers agree. It's very difficult cleaning and preserving frets & fretboard unless all the strings are removed.
I've owned & played guitars for 45 years with no such issues and I have several 50's & 60's electrics & acoustics that have not suffered any damage from removing strings for maintenance & cleaning.

[Kodiak3D]

That's what I thought. I've got some new pickups for my X-33 and I wanted to make sure about this before I got to work on it this weekend (hopefully with StreetMusic, since he IS an electrician). I need to do a little polishing on the frets too.

Can't wait to see how the GFS 60's-70's Greybottoms sound :bravo:

[Rocket]

Well, it's common sense.
How else would people change pickups, reset neck, perform bridge, neck, fretwire repairs, saddle & nut changes & repairs, etc. without removing strings for some period of time longer than a string change would take?

[Plank_Spanker]

Agreed - it won't hurt them a bit. Some players approach their guitars as if they're made of delicate blown glass. Guitars are actually pretty rugged instruments in the grand scheme of things.

[Brian Krashpad]

One reason for the "don't take all the strings off" idea may be less apparent, but is an exception to the general rule: on some archtop electrics, the bridge "floats"-- meaning it is not glued down or otherwise affixed to the top of the guitar. The only thing keeping bridges on such guitars in place is string tension. IF you have such a guitar, taking all the strings off won't damage it, but it will mean you have to position the bridge all over again, which I would guess could be a pain in the behind.

[Rocket]

One reason for the "don't take all the strings off" idea may be less apparent, but is an exception to the general rule: on some archtop electrics, the bridge "floats"-- meaning it is not glued down or otherwise affixed to the top of the guitar. The only thing keeping bridges on such guitars in place is string tension. IF you have such a guitar, taking all the strings off won't damage it, but it will mean you have to position the bridge all over again, which I would guess could be a pain in the behind.
I scribed a light outline mark around mine just for that reason.

[marnold]

One reason for the "don't take all the strings off" idea may be less apparent, but is an exception to the general rule: on some archtop electrics, the bridge "floats"-- meaning it is not glued down or otherwise affixed to the top of the guitar. The only thing keeping bridges on such guitars in place is string tension. IF you have such a guitar, taking all the strings off won't damage it, but it will mean you have to position the bridge all over again, which I would guess could be a pain in the behind.
Another tangentally related reason would be if you are using a floating Floyd Rose. Although, almost everything I've read on changing strings on a Floyd says to temporarily block the bridge first in some way. I've done it both ways with my Speedloader. If you take all of the strings off you definitely have to block it. The Speedloader comes with a built-in blocker, although it's a bit of a PITA to engage.