I was wondering what the purpose of the silk wrappings are on strings.

Any pros or cons??

They help prevent scraching of the tuner posts. Plus they look real purty......

Good question! I was wondering myself. I recently bought a Warwick Streamer 5 string, which was strung with Warwicks own strings, which are (in my opinion) uneven, coarse, rough and spongey, so I bought a set of my usual elites (40-100s) plus a 125 for bottom B. First thing I had to to was cut off the bindings at the bridge end as the B & E wouldn't fit through the holes.

Is this a conspiracy by Warwick, to make us use their nasty strings?

how come all guitar stings dont have silk things, and ernieball strings dont have them eather.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Muttluk:
how come all guitar stings dont have silk things, and ernieball strings dont have them eather. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They probably don't put silk on to save money.

I agree with membranophone, the cheapest strings in the world (Rouge Strings which are made by Gibson... they are like $5 for a set of 4) don't have the silk wrappings either. :O

------------------
"What do you mean there is too much bass?"

DR strings (at least the sunbeams) don't have silks, and they are very nice (and expensive) strings. I Do think the silks are mainly for looks with a very small minor side benefit of maybe protecting the posts, but so far I have not seem any post damage on my bass and I have been using DR's for over 6 months.

-KB

I always thought they were to protect the strings from rough edges on the tuners.


Lord help me I'm just not that bright http://www.talkbass.com/ubb/wink.gif