False harmonic on F# string?

[Geðrven']

I restrung my bass (Ibanez BTB) F#-B-E-A-D, using a .150 Snakeskin from Conklin. It's a bit floppy and muddy, but the real problem I'm having is that there's this nasty dissonant false harmonic (at least, I think that's what to call it) over the entire string, that gets worse the higher up I play. It sounds like another note an octave or two, plus a half-step, above the note I'm playing. The result is that anything below C or so is too distorted to count as a note, and anything above is relatively clear but sounds awful.

The only thing I can think of is that the string has an extreme amount of taper at the bridge end, causing the tapered section to resonate at a frequency that happens to be very dissonant with the rest of the string. The softer I play the string the quieter it is, though it's always there.

Any ideas what's causing it and how I can cure it? Surely Conklin wouldn't sell a string (or a bass with it, for that matter) that sounds this bad?

FWIW, the bass has a pretty clear sound everywhere else, including on the B-string in its original (1st) and current (2nd) positions.

[BeerBeer]

maybe intonation issues? try to tune the string very exact and then see if you're having the exact octave on your 12th fret. if not, change the length of the string at the bridge

[greenboy]

All the worst F# strings I've used have either an exposed core, or too exaggerated a change from the full-wrap section to the taper, or too long a taper (that can be solved by using a spacer at the ball-end that puts the taper around 1/4" from the bridge barrel). And they've all done that same thing. Soon Circle K strings (Knuckle) will have their F# strings out. In the meantime, I'd say the Warwick .175 is the least objectionable of the ones that are readily available, though I haven't tried octave4plus yet.

[Geðrven']

I don't see a way to use a spacer on this bridge (Monorail II), but it sounds like that's indeed my problem - tapered section is too extreme and too long. IIRC it's in fact about 3cm. I guess it's designed for Conklin bridges that secure the string at the end, not the Ibanez that has the ball nearly at the saddle.

I appreciate the recommendation; I was having a hell of a time finding any string >.135 other than Conklin.

They make a .270?

[greenboy]

A lot of ERB guys have complained about the Conklin design over at http://forum.extendedrangebassist.com/ and elsewhere. You are not alone ; }

[Ric5]

This is a simple problem ... the string is too close to the pickup and the magnetic field of the pickup is changing the way the string vibrates creating a false out of tune harmonic. I had the same problem when I used really strong rare earth magnets on pickups too close to the strings ... it really sounds weird.

[greenboy]

That's only a small part of it, but related. As OP surmised (and the reason some of the F# strings are notorious for this) it is because of the too fierce taper or exposed core length presenting an entirely different string division in addition to the normal node division. The huge discrepancy of mass on either side of that point makes for imperfect division of vibrating areas on the string, and that makes content that is not harmonically related to the fundamental's natural overtone series that's presented by a string with equal mass for its entire length.

[Geðrven']

I know what strings too close to pickups sound like (mostly on guitars). This doesn't sound like it. The new F# is actually slightly farther than the old B was, which never had any issues like this.

My intonation is pretty close to perfect. I need a staggered nut to help frets 1 and 2, but nothing higher.

Sending emails asking about the taper, but it'd be good to hear reviews of the Warwick and octave4plus strings. How do they feel and sound?

[greenboy]

Probably should ask that on http://forum.extendedrangebassist.com/ because about the only prototype or production F# string I haven't tried is octave4plus, and maybe some of them have.

The Dark Lord F# was better than the Conklins but not as good as a Labella .185 I have, but that one never saw production. These have one less layer of wrap wire which makes them a little less choked, provides more midrange. The best yet is the Knuckle .175 or .185 prototype which will be available any day now. In spite of having nickel-plated final wrap it's got more definition thoughout its range than any of the others, and feels smoother. Its taper is shorter and less pronounced in difference, which makes a decided improvement in the musical overtones factor, and it's probably going to be more affordable. Mine has last many months without noticeable tone degradation.

[greenboy]

Hey Geðrven'

Here's a bookmark for you: http://www.circlekstrings.com/ - they could be ready for e-commerce any day now.

[JAUQO III-X]

There's a lot of ingredients that go into a string so heavy being able to sound correct.Don't put it all on the string alone.

Untrained ears,pickups,pre's,quality of neck construction,etc.

[Geðrven']

Originally Posted by greenboy

Hey Geðrven'

Here's a bookmark for you: http://www.circlekstrings.com/ - they could be ready for e-commerce any day now.

I'll be on the lookout, thanks.

Meanwhile, octave4plus got back to me and said they'd basically build me a set of strings to whatever spec I like - core size, taper dimensions, the works. Now it's more an issue of having too many options that I don't know what to do with .

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

There's a lot of ingredients that go into a string so heavy being able to sound correct.Don't put it all on the string alone.

Untrained ears,pickups,pre's,quality of neck construction,etc.

Sound quality is one thing. But when I play, unplugged, a C0 and hear less of that than a bonky, metallic C#2, while the rest of the instrument is pretty much perfect...

Whatever you have to suggest regarding what I'm trying to do, I'm all ears.

[Solarmist]

Originally Posted by greenboy

Probably should ask that on http://forum.extendedrangebassist.com/ because about the only prototype or production F# string I haven't tried is octave4plus, and maybe some of them have.

The Dark Lord F# was better than the Conklins but not as good as a Labella .185 I have, but that one never saw production. These have one less layer of wrap wire which makes them a little less choked, provides more midrange. The best yet is the Knuckle .175 or .185 prototype which will be available any day now. In spite of having nickel-plated final wrap it's got more definition thoughout its range than any of the others, and feels smoother. Its taper is shorter and less pronounced in difference, which makes a decided improvement in the musical overtones factor, and it's probably going to be more affordable. Mine has last many months without noticeable tone degradation.

I know you're a brilliant guy, but doesn't his amp/cab play a role in this too relative to F#?

[greenboy]

Originally Posted by Solarmist

I know you're a brilliant guy, but doesn't his amp/cab play a role in this too relative to F#?

What are you trying to say? The rig doesn't have much to do with whether the string speaks well by presenting the natural overtone series without undue inharmonic content, has a good feel, or reacts well to dynamic touch.

[dmusic148]

Originally Posted by Geðrven'

The only thing I can think of is that the string has an extreme amount of taper at the bridge end, causing the tapered section to resonate at a frequency that happens to be very dissonant with the rest of the string.

And that IS the problem, been there.

[Solarmist]

Originally Posted by greenboy

What are you trying to say? The rig doesn't have much to do with whether the string speaks well by presenting the natural overtone series without undue inharmonic content, has a good feel, or reacts well to dynamic touch.

I've read threads in the Amps/Cabs forum regarding bass rigs, and F# you posted in, and know you have a great deal of knowledge. I was just wondering if his rig had anything to do with it - that's all.

[greenboy]

Ah, Ok, I'm getting it now. Thanks, Solarmist.

As I see it there are several apsects to the low string and/or increasing prevalance of downtuning. First there's the strings. On shorter scales like 34" it's tough to achieve a string design that speaks with clarity and emphasizes the first decade or so of harmonics so that there is no gap in the key energy areas, yet still present some articulation in the next decade or so of natural overtones without faking that by introducing spurious inharmonic content derived from main body inflexibility (too may wraps is a big offender when you get into the larger gauges) and long radical tapers or exposed cores that disturb the string's unity.

Then there's pickups, which I won't even get into here.

Finally, heads/preamps and cabs. I'll skip right to enclosures which are the bottleneck for extended and even performance. Provided you have a string that presents itself well acoustically - before any electronics are even introduced - you've won most of the battle because electronics can be had right now at decent prices that can deal with the demands. But bass enclosures: many of them don't even really have good parity for the low B string, or excursion capabilities that allow performance levels without adding a lot of muddling distortion. They don't necessarily present the strongest areas of energy the instrument and strings are speaking with fully.

So there are definitely obstacles that challenge the status quo when you begin to want low pitches represented - and a lot of them are ignored by the companies rather than acknowledged and researched. Solutions tend to be warmed over variations of what has gone before, long on marketing and short on actual progress.

[greenboy]

Geðrven',

Looks like Circle K has some e-commerce up now.

http://circlekstrings.com/store/index.html

[Solarmist]

Greenboy - on a side note can one string a 34" scale 6er with a low F# or will it be to floppy? Thanks

[greenboy]

Once you get to a good .175 or .185 F#0 on 34" scale I don't think there is an issue of floppiness - at least not with the core-to-wrap ratios the Circle K strings are presenting... Go too large on 34" scale and the F#0 string becomes too dead and inarticulate from lack of flexibility, too small and one needs to rein in their playing style.

In either case I think adjusting the rest of the set to a more balanced string-to-string tension makes it easy to acclimatize. I always found that most factory sets prior to using F# had too much tension on the A and D strings especially, which tended to make one's touch on the newly emerging first-gen F#0 strings (.150 and .165) seem wrong somehow, the floppy feel then a matter of contrast with tenseness on the higher pitched strings.

The current approach to balancing sets without making them too light seems to fit the larger F#0 strings as well as can be had on 34" or 35" scale. It also seems to make them more amenable to using passive on-board electronics as well as active ones. Previously it seemed like you needed to use onboard preamps just to force a better tonal matching between the F#0 and the rest of the strings.