does anybody have experience (or an opinion) regarding .165 or .195 Strings?

[Graham Monette]

Hey guys, I think the .135 is low enough, but there are single strings available that I'd like to try out, however they're COSTLY! for just a single. the sizes are .165 and .195
http://www.conklinguitars.com/accessories.html

does anybody have any experience with strings THIS thick, how does it sound, how does it play.. and can the pickups/amps handle this insane amount of low end?

thanks guys

[rsautrey]

go to the site extendedrangebassist.com

there is a forum there where there is a strings section.

[JAUQO III-X]

Graham,I'm the Bassist that conceived the Low C# string and the .195 string that SIT offers(that is being sold under the SIT/Conklin package)and I worked very closely with SIT on the .165 if you have any questions in regards to these string feel free to let me know.

Hear are some sound bites where I'm using my the .195 and.165 SIt string.

http://myspace.com/jauqoiiix

Some aspects of my Low C# string Theory
http://www.jauqoiii-x.com/JK_pages/JK_lowc.html

The instrument that I conceived along with the Low C# string.
http://www.adlerguitars.com/basses/s...subcontra.html

[Ron Now]

I have a .165 on a Ibanez ATK 305 it works and sounds great. It is more of a feeling over sound, I like it that way. But Jauqo probably has a lot better answers since he is pretty much responsible for its creation.

[JAUQO III-X]

Originally Posted by Ron Now

I have a .165 on a Ibanez ATK 305 it works and sounds great. It is more of a feeling over sound, I like it that way. But Jauqo probably has a lot better answers since he is pretty much responsible for its creation.

Thanks Ron,I posted in this thread not out of ego but to properly inform because there really is a lot of misinformation out there about the Low C# string and what it takes to properly/accurately hear it etc.

[Ron Now]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

Thanks Ron,I posted in this thread not out of ego but to properly inform because there really is a lot of misinformation out there about the Low C# string and what it takes to properly/accurately hear it etc.

If it seemed as if I was calling out ego or something it was not my intention, I know of you and respect you as a musician/gear expert. I was just pointing out that I just have my bass tuned pretty low with a .165, it works for me I just don't know any specific mechanics behind it, and that a more specific answer would be better found in your post.

[JAUQO III-X]

Originally Posted by Ron Now

If it seemed as if I was calling out ego or something it was not my intention, I know of you and respect you as a musician/gear expert. I was just pointing out that I just have my bass tuned pretty low with a .165, it works for me I just don't know any specific mechanics behind it, and that a more specific answer would be better found in your post.

No no not at all Ron,I know you weren't I was just making the statement in regards to how some people may take my post as being ego.

[greenboy]

Unfortunately there aren't a lot of readily available string choices for super low pitched strings, and what might work fine on one bass might be done better on another were a few more available. I'm talking taper length, construction, core-to-wrap ratios, etc.

The one I've liked the best so far on both of my fretlesses has been a Labella TAPERWOUND in .185, but it's not yet in production and who knows if it will ever be easily available... Partly why I think it does a better job is that instead of being EXPOSED-CORE - it has probably more than 50% the mass of wound string going over the bridge before tapering out to final wrap just after the bridge (that's a problem too as many bridges have less or more distance there). This for me gives a better and more flexible volume and tone envelope as well as minimizing non-harmonic overtones further up the neck. I also like it because it is more flexible than say the .165 in spite of the diameter because of its larger wrap wire and less wrap layers - which at low pitches can translate into more consonant and well-placed overtone balance.

ERB needs more choices in strings - no bout a doubt it. Many pages of discussion about this very elemental part of extended range bass guitars takes place on the aformentioned website.

[JAUQO III-X]

my comment below is not at all geared towared you Greenboy.

When I had SIT make my Low C# string it was for me and i never inteded for any one to dig it but works perfect for me and as we speak I'm working on another version of it.Now I'm sure that my C# string doesn't work for some but in all honesty no one Bass string works for all Bassists any way.I'm very proud of what I set out to do and I'm glad I have a string company that stands by my side and allow me to be me.I've been approached by a couple of other string companies for my assistance in helping them with they're own Low C# string but I've chose not to work with them,I also think it's interesting how these companies are sprouting up with they're version of a Low C# string and I have yet to hear besides myself and Garry Goodman do any thing with it,I'm sure that's one of the main reasons we are not seeing companies other than SIT put out a Low C# string.

where are the Low C# users ?

and for the record the first company to work with me on the Low C# string was Dean Markley(Jeff Landtroop and David Brummett).

[Garry Goodman]

Originally Posted by Ron Now

If it seemed as if I was calling out ego or something it was not my intention, I know of you and respect you as a musician/gear expert. I was just pointing out that I just have my bass tuned pretty low with a .165, it works for me I just don't know any specific mechanics behind it, and that a more specific answer would be better found in your post.

Hi Ron
The .165,usually tuned to F#0 is around 23Hz ,and within the audio band. It should sound pretty good, and it's great to read your post.

Something funny happens just 3 Hz lower, at 20 hertz. Many believe humans just stop hearing anything below 20Hz. I have seen/heard a few video clips where a player hits, slaps plucks etc. an F#0, .165 string, and a big thud comes out. So it's clarity seems to vary from person to person
Low E0 and below enters into the realm of special set up.

[greenboy]

Jauqo, no slight intended. Part of the point of my post is much like what you added - that different players are going to want, or their intruments will, different approaches toward string construction. More choices are definitely needed.

As far as C#, I haven't even tried it because I liked the Knuckle QUAKE approach of using more scale length for lower pitches, and being an octave below standard 4-string tuning. And though that required a couple of specially-commisioned strings, it seemed like the acoustic/physical properties of the 39.5" scale length made string construction and electronics less of an issue to get a nice even harmonic series that responded to either a light or hard touch - I seriously dug the FEEL and tension that came with that.

[JAUQO III-X]

None taken at all Greenboy,I understood your post and I'm glad we have the choices we have today in regards to the instrument that we love so much.

we need more open minded luthiers like Skip(Knucklehead Basses).

[greenboy]

I always liked Skip's conceptual daring (just as I appreciate ERBers in general). But after playing his first and prototype Quake for six weeks or so, I also think he's a hella builder! Not only does the bass work well, but the balance and ergonomics and detail work are superb. And it merely feels like playing a 35" scale bass with a couple of extra frets before the nut, if you follow me there - no big deal!

[greenboy]

Originally Posted by Garry Goodman

Something funny happens just 3 Hz lower at 20 hertz. Many believe humans just stop hearing anything below 20Hz. I have seen/heard a few video clips where a player hits, slaps plucks etc. an F3,.165 string, and a big thud comes out. So it's clarity seems to vary from person to person
Low E0 and below enters into the realm of special set up.

Yep, and technique and training the ear to respond to pitches never that familiar enters into it too, as you've noted before.

It hasn't been a problem for me to go pretty darn low in terms of bass rigs, because I was thinking alomg those lines when I researched for my first bass rig anyway. But a lot of people are going to come up short with what they currently use, and for them I recommend getting a set of decent bass-centric headphones like the Audio Technica ATH-D40fs just to get acclimated and to begin to have an idea what it could sound like through a good extended bass rig.

[Afrokid]

hate to get off topic but JAUQO III-X, your band is totally insaine....lovin every minute of it.

[JAUQO III-X]

Originally Posted by Afrokid

hate to get off topic but JAUQO III-X, your band is totally insaine....lovin every minute of it.

Thanks

[Jay Terrien]

Skip Fantry rules! I'll never forget getting assaulted by his 39" inch Quake at NAMM Nashville a few years ago. God, that doesn't read very well, does it?

I want to see an ERB "Kilt" model with a low C#!

Thanks again to guys like Jauqo, Gary, Skip, all the string guys, etc. etc. for pushing the envelope in the ERB world. Your efforts do not go unnoticed.

Originally Posted by greenboy

I always liked Skip's conceptual daring (just as I appreciate ERBers in general). But after playing his first and prototype Quake for six weeks or so, I also think he's a hella builder! Not only does the bass work well, but the balance and ergonomics and detail work are superb. And it merely feels like playing a 35" scale bass with a couple of extra frets before the nut, if you follow me there - no big deal!

[JAUQO III-X]

Originally Posted by Jay Terrien

Skip Fantry rules! I'll never forget getting assaulted by his 39" inch Quake at NAMM Nashville a few years ago.