What strings for G# F# B E A tuning?

[syndroam]

What strings for G# F# B E A tuning? I will probably need to cut a new nut for my bass too?

[knuckle_head]

Which G#?

[ixlramp]

Interesting tuning, a sequence of fourths with a string missing. Is this standard BEADG modified B-3 E+2 A+2 D+2 G+2 semitones?

[ehque]

Originally Posted by knuckle_head

Which G#?

+1...

[pig]

He must mean C# but a C# that low would be barely audible? I've heard of low F# on like conklin basses and what not but never a C#? low B is muddy enough but a minor 7th below that is nuts.

[ixlramp]

C#0 is in use successfully on many basses, and there are strings available for the G#00 below too.

[ehque]

I've not seen G#00 strings for 34" scale yet... I've done rough approximations, and the string itself would weigh about half a pound.

[FunkMetalBass]

Originally Posted by ehque

I've not seen G#00 strings for 34" scale yet... I've done rough approximations, and the string itself would weigh about half a pound.

Octave4Plus. I believe Gary even has a soundclip too.

[ehque]

Originally Posted by FunkMetalBass

Octave4Plus. I believe Gary even has a soundclip too.

Hrm. Isn't 0.240 very light for a G#00? IIRC Circle K's 0.200 is meant to be tuned around the E0 range, with their 0.254 tuned at C0 or B00, which makes a G#00 at comparable tension around 0.300(?) knuckle_head, any input on this matter?

[knuckle_head]

It's my understanding Garry has wound to beyond .300 for the sake of G# - I've neither seen the string nor know much about its construction.

There are two approaches to going low - make a stiff string that can be detuned and not feel horrible, or use a flexible string and raise it to standard tensions.

The stiff string approach is characteristic of the original subcontra sets that Jauqo IIIX and many others use.

It is my belief that a stiff string limits tonality in that it is not flexible enough to let the full harmonic content come forward. I believe the same thing of an overwound string.

At some point it will take an extraordinary instrument as well as an extraordinary string to press much beyond C# - just my opinion.

[ehque]

Or a 9' speaking length, i guess. The OP has not clarified which G# he is talking about.

[JAUQO III-X]

Originally Posted by knuckle_head

The stiff string approach is characteristic of the original subcontra sets that Jauqo IIIX and many others use.

Skip for the record the low C# string that I use is not stiff at all. As a matter of fact it is very flexible. That is one of the reasons it sounds the way it does live and in the studio. a this is on my 34 and 35" scale sub contra basses.

Originally Posted by knuckle_head

It is my belief that a stiff string limits tonality in that it is not flexible enough to let the full harmonic content come forward. I believe the same thing of an overwound string.

Skip I do not like stiff strings at all. When I conceived the C# string I have always chosen take the not stiff approach.

[Jim Nazium]

I'm sure it's been said before, but I'll say it anyway: the fundamental of G#00 is about 15hz, which is far below the ability of any bass guitar amp or PA subwoofer to reproduce.

[knuckle_head]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

Skip for the record the low C# string that I use is not stiff at all. As a matter of fact it is very flexible. That is one of the reasons it sounds the way it does live and in the studio. a this is on my 34 and 35" scale sub contra basses.

Skip I do not like stiff strings at all. When I conceived the C# string I have always chosen take the not stiff approach.

Yes they are stiff - SIT makes a very rigid string. They won't feel that way given the tensions you play them at but they are.

Tune your .195 C# string to E0 and let me know how it feels. If you still have any of the strings I gave you at NAMM you should put them side by side on the same bass - the difference will be readily apparent in that circumstance. While at it, downtune my .195 to C# - I bet it rattles like mad at your tensions.

[knuckle_head]

Originally Posted by Jim Nazium

I'm sure it's been said before, but I'll say it anyway: the fundamental of G#00 is about 15hz, which is far below the ability of any bass guitar amp or PA subwoofer to reproduce.

The second harmonic sits just below standard B, and the third harmonic well within a standard rig's reach.

It isn't about the fundamental, it's about the timbre.

I have no idea what a note this low actually sounds like given proper physics, but I will by NAMM. And I will have a rig available to me that is capable of it in the form of a Bag End Infra. I'll get back with you once I've had my fun - I, too, have my doubts.

[JAUQO III-X]

Originally Posted by knuckle_head

Yes they are stiff - SIT makes a very rigid string. They won't feel that way given the tensions you play them at but they are.

Tune your .195 C# string to E0 and let me know how it feels. If you still have any of the strings I gave you at NAMM you should put them side by side on the same bass - the difference will be readily apparent in that circumstance.

Skip the string that SIT and I worked on is not stiff at all. The reason I continue to use them is because they work for me and remember these are strings made for me in collaboration based off of my concept of the C# that no company was making before I introduced the low C#.


The first company to make the C# string for me was Dean Markley and your business partner David Brummet worked on the string with me.


Please Skip,every bass players touch/feel is different.

I like what I conceived and the SIT strings work for me.

[knuckle_head]

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

Skip the string that SIT and I worked on is not stiff at all. The reason I continue to use them is because they work for me and remember these are strings made for me in collaboration based off of my concept of the C# that no company was making before I introduced the low C#.

The first company to make the C# string for me was Dean Markley and your business partner David Brummet worked on the string with me.

Please Skip,every bass players touch/feel is different.

I like what I conceived and the SIT strings work for me.

Jauqo, don't misunderstand what I am saying here. I like the work you've done with what you had created for you, and I understand that it works well for you. I also know WHY and HOW it works for you.

You run with 12 to 15 pounds less tension on your strings than most other bassists - there is a very limited number of ways with which to pull off how you do what you do. It doesn't make you wrong - nor does it diminish your accomplishment - but it also doesn't make your approach necessarily right for the rest of us.

I helped Everly develop subcontra strings, and then La Bella after that. Circle K is my third go at this, and I have a pretty good grasp on what I'm doing at this stage.

[JAUQO III-X]

Originally Posted by knuckle_head

Jauqo, don't misunderstand what I am saying here. I like the work you've done with what you had created for you, and I understand that it works well for you. I also know WHY and HOW it works for you.

You run with 12 to 15 pounds less tension on your strings than most other bassists - there is a very limited number of ways with which to pull off how you do what you do. It doesn't make you wrong - nor does it diminish your accomplishment - but it also doesn't make your approach necessarily right for the rest of us.

I helped Everly develop subcontra strings, and then La Bella after that. Circle K is my third go at this, and I have a pretty good grasp on what I'm doing at this stage.

Skip where did the C# string come from? It did not exist on any ones bass until I came along. I remember the Everly strings. They first asked me to work with them on my C# string concept because of my then connection to your business partner at Circle K Dave Brummett who still works at Dean Markley.Me and David has had the conversation several times that since he is in the string making business and has been for many years that he had never ever heard of a low C# string before and that was one of the reasons he was so happy to work with me on the C# string along with Jeff Landtroop. The Everly strings really were poorly made. The core was very weak to say the least and the overall winding was not properly or tightly wound. Wouldn't you agree?

Skip name me one bass player that has spent more time than me actually playing a C# string live or studio. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest but my experience is legit. And my idea/concept is at least legit for me because it is my baby.


Skip what was your real reason and purpose for making a C# string?


Skip with all due respect when I did the low C# string in all honesty I did not think of how it would feel for any one but myself. The string was for my own personal creative use and, and that is how I use it.


Someone listening to me live or on a recording has no clue how my string works with my playing but they do say they like the way it sounds.





Skip as you know, no one string will work for every player.

[knuckle_head]

Exactly my point as well, Jauqo.

[NateS]

Originally Posted by Jim Nazium

I'm sure it's been said before, but I'll say it anyway: the fundamental of G#00 is about 15hz, which is far below the ability of any bass guitar amp or PA subwoofer to reproduce.

i love how this comes up in EVERY thread about super-sub-contra that i've read , in my very exhaustive search on here on the subject, and it continually gets proven wrong by people on here - jauqo and another person who i cant' remember at the time.

people don't want to change any type of preconceived notion, and bassists must be people after all.


knuckle_head, what string would you recommend for a G# C# F# B E tuning? how about a C# F# B E tuning? I want to do this, and will when i have the money to buy a second bass (i couldn't do this to my current main player, after all, it would become a different instrument in my eyes).