Strings for Chords and Octaves

[ojsmoothy]

I have been playing a lot of chords and octaves lately and was wondering if smaller guage strings would have more definition to them. Would flat wounds be too dull for chording?

[JimmyM]

I don't think flats are too dark for chordal playing if you change them when they go super dead. Not that the tone's bad, but they lose a lot of sustain as they go dead, and most chordal players like them to sustain more. But when they're new, for all intents and purposes they sound like roundwounds, so if you want that new roundwound sound, just change them more often.

Smaller gauge strings don't have more definition. They actually have slightly less, except where the B string's concerned. I've found that a lighter gauge string for the B actually clears up a lot of muddiness I used to get when I used a .130. Now I use a .120. But smaller strings are easier to chord on for sure.

[Jeff Moote]

Jimmy is more or less right on with the Flats, though I don't see why you would choose them over rounds for chording, unless this bass did double-duty for a style that really called for flats.

Originally Posted by ojsmoothy

I have been playing a lot of chords and octaves lately and was wondering if smaller guage strings would have more definition to them.

I do prefer small gauges for chordal playing, and in general for multi-faceted playing. I found TI Jazz Rounds very nice strings for chordal playing, even though they are not my string of choice for a bass that has to cover all the styles I play.

Originally Posted by JimmyM

Smaller gauge strings don't have more definition. They actually have slightly less, except where the B string's concerned. I've found that a lighter gauge string for the B actually clears up a lot of muddiness I used to get when I used a .130. Now I use a .120. But smaller strings are easier to chord on for sure.

Why would they have less? And why would the B be an exception to the rule? IME, the smaller gauges do allow for more definition, but require that you don't choke them out by overplaying them, since they are looser. For clarity, when I say light, I'm talking in the realm of 0.040-0.100 on a 4, with B strings of about 0.120. Obviously this varies a bit between different kinds of strings, but for regular roundwounds I find light sets like that speak very clearly, and moreso than a "medium" set such as 0.045-0.105

[JimmyM]

Originally Posted by Jeff Moote

Why would they have less? And why would the B be an exception to the rule? IME, the smaller gauges do allow for more definition, but require that you don't choke them out by overplaying them, since they are looser. For clarity, when I say light, I'm talking in the realm of 0.040-0.100 on a 4, with B strings of about 0.120. Obviously this varies a bit between different kinds of strings, but for regular roundwounds I find light sets like that speak very clearly, and moreso than a "medium" set such as 0.045-0.105

Fair enough. That's an accurate description, I s'pose. I'm in the process of switching to .040 string sets from .045 sets, and I do miss some of the extra thickness of the tone of the heavier strings, but I'm all about making it easier on myself these days, so now I will content myself with the knowledge that they are, indeed, clearer sounding.

Of course, we should mention that it's really not all that drastic of a difference, and the only one who will ever notice the difference is the player.

[Jeff Moote]

Originally Posted by JimmyM

Fair enough. That's an accurate description, I s'pose. I'm in the process of switching to .040 string sets from .045 sets, and I do miss some of the extra thickness of the tone of the heavier strings, but I'm all about making it easier on myself these days, so now I will content myself with the knowledge that they are, indeed, clearer sounding.

Of course, we should mention that it's really not all that drastic of a difference, and the only one who will ever notice the difference is the player.

I couldn't agree more with that entire post

[Jonah]

I tend to play play a lot of chords, and I prefer the tone (and feel) of light gauges. Currently I have .95-.40 (.95-.70-.55-.40) on my 32" scale, and they sound great. Especially on chords. High quality light gauge stainless steel strings should do the trick. Nickel strings sound pretty good on chords too, but go dead very quick.

Lighter strings have less overtones, and they sounds better (IMO) when playing chords. And of course, they are easier on the fretting hand. I suggest you buy two or three sets of different gauges and experiment. After 10 years of experimenting, light steel strings work the best for me. I have a extra light (.90-.30) SS set for a 4-string waiting to be tested, I'll try that next. If the result is exceptionally good, I'll let you know.

-Jonah

[Flying on Frets]

What about people who slap? What's good for slapping AND playing chords?

[Jonah]

Originally Posted by Flying on Frets

What about people who slap? What's good for slapping AND playing chords?

I slap. A lot. Light gauges, stainless steel.

-Jonah

[meev991]

Originally Posted by Flying on Frets

What about people who slap? What's good for slapping AND playing chords?

hahaha, anything that's not .110

I use 9120 flatwounds, and they're such a pain, they're so massive, as well as stiff. When I started out, I used .090 and it worked like a charm.

Beyond that, just choose whatever string manufacturer u like best, but thinner is definitely better

although, i can't guarantee that your strings will still be robust and tight after slapping them for a month.