Labella, Rotosound, T.I. Flatwounds - On Fretless Jazz

[Groover]

Hello, I have a mid 90's MIA Fender Jazz Body with original everything, matched-up with a 1970's P bass Fretless Rosewood neck.

I've been using Labella Deep Talking Flats (Medium, .45-109), and as much as I like the looks and feel of them on the bass, not sure if they are the best match for my bass combination. Seems as if the sound is too dark.

After reading a ton of TB posts on flatwounds in trying to figure out how to make my bass "sing" a little better, I decided to try the Rotosound 77 Jazz flatwound (.43-.105) on the same bass. Well, a few problems with this, the main being difficulties intonating the bass. I know intonating fretless is a strange concept in itself, but I'm having a hard time intonating say the 5 frets to all be somewhat inline throughout the strings. To top all that, not really too happy with the zingy sound of these strings, and what seems to be a lack of thump. The D and G strings seems very coarse too.

I honestly haven't given the rotos a fair chance, but the fact that I can't intonate the bass properly is the deciding factor on making want to switch again.

My question now is.... should I try T.I., or some other string?

I'd like to stick with flats on my fretless, and if all possible, I'd want to keep stock pups and electronics too (I've gone down that road before on other basses....).

Are T.I. smooth and brigher that labella, but not as zingy as Rotosounds?

Thanks.

[Groover]

Ok, getting the hang of the RotoSounds. I tweaked the neck a little and got better intonation.

The strings sound ok with less zing as I was getting on the first day and still sound much brighter than Labella's on my bass, but still very low output overall. Have to really up the volume on my amp to get something substantial.

[drums_n_bass]

You're right about intonating on a fretless. Maybe this could help a little bit:

"Fretless intonation is a simple thing that players seem to want to
complicate. To illustrate, if the intonation is set the same as it
would be if the frets were on, then a perfect note would sound out
when played exactly from the same spot where the fret would have
anchored the string! Nothing more simple than that. Having this
as a standard establishes that the same fingering technique
will achieve a properly intonated note throughout the fretboard.
Yes, it can look like the finger may be a little this way or that, but all
fingers are designed different and some are rounder, harder, flatter,
stronger, weaker, softer etc, but the actual string anchor point dictates
that well intonated note. But we know exactly where that point is
when the bass is intonated as if it were fretted. The mechanics of
this is constant and predictable.

If a player wants to redesign the bass to accomodate his/her refusal to adjust to the proper fingering then let it be so. I generally stay away from such things because its simply to darn subjective and quirky. I ship the bass with intonation set to the fretlines. To achieve that I place my fingernail on the string over the fretlines and intonate. In my
experience, most pro players would be uncomfortable on a bass
that deviated from this setup method."

--H.G. Thor

I personally don't like flatwounds, but maybe you could give D'Addario Half Rounds a try if you're looking for a brighter sound.

[Larry Holloway]

Originally Posted by drums_n_bass

You're right about intonating on a fretless. Maybe this could help a little bit:

"Fretless intonation is a simple thing that players seem to want to
complicate. To illustrate, if the intonation is set the same as it
would be if the frets were on, then a perfect note would sound out
when played exactly from the same spot where the fret would have
anchored the string! Nothing more simple than that. Having this
as a standard establishes that the same fingering technique
will achieve a properly intonated note throughout the fretboard.
Yes, it can look like the finger may be a little this way or that, but all
fingers are designed different and some are rounder, harder, flatter,
stronger, weaker, softer etc, but the actual string anchor point dictates
that well intonated note. But we know exactly where that point is
when the bass is intonated as if it were fretted. The mechanics of
this is constant and predictable.

If a player wants to redesign the bass to accomodate his/her refusal to adjust to the proper fingering then let it be so. I generally stay away from such things because its simply to darn subjective and quirky. I ship the bass with intonation set to the fretlines. To achieve that I place my fingernail on the string over the fretlines and intonate. In my
experience, most pro players would be uncomfortable on a bass
that deviated from this setup method."

--H.G. Thor

I personally don't like flatwounds, but maybe you could give D'Addario Half Rounds a try if you're looking for a brighter sound.

Umm, but aren't you a drummer ?
Sorry, couldn't resist. Actually, everything you said is correct (I think). That's why I prefer fretless without lines. Makes me use my EAR
I too couldn't do the Roto 77's. Just too twangy.
Thomastiks sound very nice. Warwick strings sound good too. Guess it depends on sound you want, but for me, the Warwicks & Thomastiks are easier to play in tune.

[Groover]

Thanks guys. I was also intonating according to the dots (where the frets would be). The main problem that I was having (still having a little) is that I was pretty much maxed-out as far as pulling the saddles back, yet I was still getting sharp on the D and G strings notes.

I played a little with the relief and height of the saddles.. a little better, but not as good as when I had the labellas. With those strings It seemed to me that the bass was intonated almost perfectly and consistently, whereas the Rotos are/were driving me nuts with the intonations.

Maybe they needed to break-in a little, because they seem more cooperative now.

Larry: Warwick Flats? Never heard of them... They seem decent strings if your comparing them to TIs. Do they have higher tension than the TIs?

Thanks.

[Larry Holloway]

Originally Posted by Groover

Larry: Warwick Flats? Never heard of them... They seem decent strings if your comparing them to TIs. Do they have higher tension than the TIs?

Thanks.

Yea, they came on my Warwick fretless. Red silk wrap both ends. I'm still trying to figure out which model they are. I presume they are the Red Labels but not sure. They feel slightly stiffer than the TI's. I could use some help on this one also. Warwick says they ship the Black Labels on all new basses, but the Black Labels have no silk wrap. I think the Black Labels are round wound (?).

One opinion I read said Warwick strings only sound good on Warwick basses. I'm not agreeing with that, but the Warwick flats on my Warwick fretless are sweet.

[Mottlefeeder]

Originally Posted by Larry Holloway

Yea, they came on my Warwick fretless. Red silk wrap both ends. I'm still trying to figure out which model they are. I presume they are the Red Labels but not sure. They feel slightly stiffer than the TI's. I could use some help on this one also. Warwick says they ship the Black Labels on all new basses, but the Black Labels have no silk wrap. I think the Black Labels are round wound (?).

One opinion I read said Warwick strings only sound good on Warwick basses. I'm not agreeing with that, but the Warwick flats on my Warwick fretless are sweet.

The Warwick site has no mention of flatwound strings, in its Red, Yellow or Black string ranges.
http://www.warwick.de/modules/frame/...et.php?lang=en.
Could they have been fitted by someone else?

[Larry Holloway]

Originally Posted by Mottlefeeder

The Warwick site has no mention of flatwound strings, in its Red, Yellow or Black string ranges.
http://www.warwick.de/modules/frame/...et.php?lang=en.
Could they have been fitted by someone else?

Yea, my mistake. The salesman at Guitar Center told me they were Warwick strings. Come to find out they're not. Now I have no idea what's on my bass. I shoulda known better than to believe a GC salesman