LaBella 760FS vs 760FM

Metal Mitch · #1 10-31-2010, 03:11 PM

I've been searching posts about the 760FS (and there's a lot). Mainly they get compared to the 760FL.

But I'm finding a lot more posts about the 760FM, they seem to be more popular than 760FS.

So how do the 760FS compare to 760FM?

Metal Mitch · #2 11-03-2010, 05:30 PM

48 views and no replies... looks like these 2 sets attract players looking for different things. I'm gonna take a wild guess and say FS are used by players that want a more balanced sounding version of the FL, and FM are used by players wanting a lower tension version of the Jamerson set.

Prove me wrong!

jasper383 · #3 11-03-2010, 05:50 PM

Just from watching Talk Bass, it does appear that the FS and FX sets are the least popular, not sure why.

I have used the FS set and liked them quite a bit. They are similar in feel to the FL set; maybe people like the lower stiffness.

I haven't seen a comparison between the FM and M sets; I would think they are very close, although the Jamerson M set seems to occupy a different world from the others.

Pilgrim · #4 11-03-2010, 08:23 PM

Labella Deep Talkin' Flats are my strings of preference - really love the sound. I use the FL (.043-.104) and FS (.045-.105) strings. They feel very similar to me, and I like the playability. I also have the Hofner flats (.050-.100) on my Rogue VB-100. GREAT strings!!

The FMs are larger in diameter (.049-.109) and to me it makes an appreciable difference in feel. For my touch the FMs and the even larger Jamerson sets are just too heavy for comfort.

lmfreeman9 · #5 11-03-2010, 08:34 PM

I used both the FMs and Fs for a while and they sound great but were too stiff.
I prefer the FL's or TI Jazz Flats.