Closer in tone (flats): Labella/TI or Rotosound/TI?

[Groover]

Not considering tension in the equation, which flats would you say are closer in tone to the TIs... Labella Deep Talkin' Flats or Rotosound 77 Monel?

[lmfreeman9]

When you talk LaBellas remember there are 5 different gauges and the FL's are somewhat closer to the TI sound and feel. Ive only used the Rotos for a second due to the high tension, but they have a somewhat similar sound to the FL's.

But really nothing is like TI's.

Mike

[GeneralElectric]

Neither.

[bertbassplayer]

That's almost like saying "What tastes more like an orange, an apple or a pear?"

[Groover]

I'm wondering because I'm using the E, A, D from a TI set as A, D, G, and currently matched with the Labella .109 as E. As much as those strings are different in construction, configured this way, I found that the recorded difference between the strings wasn't too far off.

I'd want to however bump up the E as much higher in dimension as possible, while retaining somewhat the same tension as the .109, cause tension-wise the strings fit, dimension-wise, I'd like the E to be just a tad bigger to make it feel a little more "familiar" when jumping to the A (the .100 TI) from the E.

I know this sounds bizarre, but the TIs strung this way have about the same tension as a set of 9050M, but still that TI tone (thumpier though) and the Labella E gives the thump and energy lacking from the E on the TIs

It's just an experient that I've only been playing around at home. Once I fine tune it, I'll will try live and see how it goes in the real world

I'll probably just leave the .109, unless someone feels that the Labella .110 has a slightly stronger high/mid and not-as-dark sounding as the .109.

As far as Roto's go... I tried those a very long time ago, so not sure anymore what to expect from the .110 E.

Thanks again.