<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; "><DIV><DIV>On Apr 19, 2007, at 10:30 AM, Jeff Tanner wrote:</DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">What happened to the concept we've been preached to that wire fatigue is the primary cause of broken strings?<SPAN class="Apple-converted-space"> </SPAN>Is that now not the case?</FONT></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; min-height: 14.0px"><BR></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">Would a harder capo not contribute to wearing through the wire as it "saws across the capo" moreso than a soft capo would?</FONT></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; min-height: 14.0px"><BR></P> <P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="3" style="font: 12.0px Helvetica">Jeff</FONT></P> </BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>Hi Jeff,<BR><DIV><SPAN class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </SPAN>I don't get your question. You seem to be saying two opposite things. Wire fatigue is caused by bending and re-bending at a single point, not wearing out from abrasion. If abrasion causes string breakage, then a harder capo might contribute. Abrasion is not wire fatigue. But if it is flexing at the bearing point that causes breakage, then hardness doesn't enter into it. Flexing does cause wire fatigue.<BR><DIV><DIV>Regards,</DIV><DIV>Fred Sturm</DIV><DIV>University of New Mexico</DIV><DIV><A href="mailto:fssturm@unm.edu">fssturm@unm.edu</A></DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV></DIV><BR></DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV></BODY></HTML>