Tighter and Mellower than Corelli

SirFunk · #1 12-18-2005, 08:47 AM

Hi there, I'm wondering if someone can offer me a suggestion on strings. Currently I'm using Corelli Tungsten mediums. I used to LOVE these strings, they do sound good on my bass. Originally my only complaint was that the G-String was very bright, the others were fine.

Recently, however, I had my fingerboard re-plained by Guy Harrison in Ottawa (Highly recommended). Now i can have extremely low action. and i like it liek that. With the Corelli's though, they feel kind of floppy at low action, they feel like sometimes when i'm playing fast the string hasn't snapped back into posiotion yet.

I'm wondering if anyone can suggest a string that might be a tad less bright but is more tense, more snappy.

I play mostly solo classical stuff, I don't play much jazz anymore (unfortunately

) And i'm not very concerned about my orchestral tone.

I'm also not a fan of huge-gauged strings, A lot of people in my studio use Obligatos, they feel a little fat (physically) to me, i guess i'm also looking for something a little lighter gauge than the Obli's.

Anyway, suggestions greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Jeff Utter

**Francois Blais** · #2 12-18-2005, 10:15 AM

The first string that comes to mind is the Pirastro FlatChromesteel. (the "new" ones, not the Original FlatChromes)
Thin guage, warmer and tighter than Corellis, yet clear tone, and good for both arco and pizz.

KSB - Ken Smith · #3 12-18-2005, 12:03 PM

Try a regular Flexocor G string. It feel great to me and is not a thick gauge at all. Bows smooth and sweet and pizze nice as well.

**Francois Blais** · #4 12-19-2005, 06:08 AM

The Flex G is indeed the warmest steel G around, but I don't think it'd mix nicely with Corellis though!

Take care, Ken.
François

kwd · #5 12-19-2005, 07:09 AM

Consider the Jargar strings. I switched out a Corelli TX G for a Jargar Forte. I found the both pizz and arco to be more gratifying. The Jargar wasn't as thick as I had feared and it had less flop. The medium gauge Jargar might be a suitable switch for the medium Corellis.

The Jargar Forte E and A were kind of ambigious for jazz, I would expect even less clarity with the mediums. Keep that in mind.

As always YRMV.

MarkH · #6 12-19-2005, 11:38 AM

Would you say the FlatChromesteel string is brighter or darker than original Flexocor?

I recently did a concert with the C.B.S.O and the principal had a set of FlatChromesteel on his Hill and they sounded great, particularly when he played pizz.

I have a flexocor G (95% pizz) and have tried the original Flexocor, but found it a little bright on my, admittedly much younger, English Bass.

Thanks.

**Francois Blais** · #7 12-19-2005, 07:17 PM

The FlatChrome G is IMO brighter than the Original FlatChrome (or Original Flexocor, as these strings are 95% identical), but not by a great amount.
You can always use the rubber tone filter with your G steel string.

greitzer · #8 12-19-2005, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwd

Consider the Jargar strings. I switched out a Corelli TX G for a Jargar Forte. I found the both pizz and arco to be more gratifying. The Jargar wasn't as thick as I had feared and it had less flop. The medium gauge Jargar might be a suitable switch for the medium Corellis.

So you're still using the Corelli TX's for the other three strings? Or did you switch the whole set to Jargars?

If you're mixing them, do the Jargars blend pretty well with the Corellis?

chipsas · #9 12-20-2005, 02:21 AM

jargars and corellis...?! hmm, i think this mix is not a very good idea, 'course these strings have different tone color.. corellis- bright, jargars- dark..
1 thing they have similar though = they both bow very easy and not bad for solo.

reedo35 · #10 12-21-2005, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirFunk

Hi there, I'm wondering if someone can offer me a suggestion on strings. Currently I'm using Corelli Tungsten mediums. I used to LOVE these strings, they do sound good on my bass. Originally my only complaint was that the G-String was very bright, the others were fine.

I'm wondering if anyone can suggest a string that might be a tad less bright but is more tense, more snappy.

Anyway, suggestions greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Jeff Utter

You say you are using the mediums. I liked them too, but found them the same as you did. Maybe you would like the fortes, or the forte TX, they are a little stiffer and still bow well.

shwashwa · #11 12-21-2005, 10:26 AM

i have to agree with this poster. i have 3 basses, and each one has a different gauge correlli on it. the heavier gauges are definately more tight than the mediums. they're not bright once they settle in... i have one set on for over a year and a half now and they sound perfect. nice mellow tone for pizz and arco. i play jazz and solo classical as well, i 'm not interested in an orchestral tone. the correlli's give a nice smooth solo tone and you can really play with great agility on them. easy to bow to. my $.02

Quote:

Originally Posted by reedo35

You say you are using the mediums. I liked them too, but found them the same as you did. Maybe you would like the fortes, or the forte TX, they are a little stiffer and still bow well.

LouisF · #12 12-21-2005, 12:32 PM

Don't laugh but.... the Pinnacle solos I used a couple of months ago (by default) were suprisingly good -- and I've got Jargar mediums and Corelli 370TXs on both basses at home. Clear, warm, not too heavy, and worth a look.

Louis

kwd · #13 12-21-2005, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greitzer

So you're still using the Corelli TX's for the other three strings? Or did you switch the whole set to Jargars?

If you're mixing them, do the Jargars blend pretty well with the Corellis?

I ended up switching the whole set. They would blend okay though. The Jargars are a little creamier under the bow.

edit: I don't want this to be interpreted as an endorsement to mix Corellis and Jargars. After replacing the G, I replaced the D. There was a discernable difference in arco sound going from the G/D to A/E so I replaced all of them. I think the Jargar/Corelli mix was acceptable for jazz and I might revisit that combo in the future.

Johnny L · #14 01-09-2006, 11:41 AM

I just put on a set of corellis on by bass (the forte...I couldn't resist the orange color), and these are awesome strings. They bow as well or better than any other strings I've tried right out of the package and they have plenty of pizz sustain for my needs. And man, they are nice under the fingers!

Why aren't these strings completely destroying the competition?

**Francois Blais** · #15 01-09-2006, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny L

I just put on a set of corellis on by bass (the forte...I couldn't resist the orange color), and these are awesome strings. They bow as well or better than any other strings I've tried right out of the package and they have plenty of pizz sustain for my needs. And man, they are nice under the fingers!

Why aren't these strings completely destroying the competition?

The Corellis are indeed very nice strings, and I'm currently revisiting them. Before, I was thinking they were too bright.
I started with 380Ms, and presently have 370Fs, which already much better pizz friendly.
But I'm in the process of upgrading to the TX gauge, although I may keep the 370F for the G, I'm not sure.
More to come later....

Johnny L · #16 01-09-2006, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by francois

The Corellis are indeed very nice strings, and I'm currently revisiting them. Before, I was thinking they were too bright.
I started with 380Ms, and presently have 370Fs, which already much better pizz friendly.
But I'm in the process of upgrading to the TX gauge, although I may keep the 370F for the G, I'm not sure.
More to come later....

Neat yeah I, for one, would like to hear your experience with the TX.
I read on Bob Gollihur's site that he didn't notice a difference but in the string diameter with the F and TX gauges.

shwashwa · #17 01-09-2006, 06:15 PM

i find the tx's alittle tighter than the F's , but the bass that has the F's has a shorter string length, so that may add to the soft feel. (shorter string length means you have to thghten the string less to get it to pitch.)

**Francois Blais** · #18 01-09-2006, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shwashwa

i find the tx's alittle tighter than the F's

I concur that!
They're a bit thicker and tighter.

Johnny L · #19 01-10-2006, 07:13 AM

Well if the TX's are tighter I'm glad I didn't go for them. I've already got plenty of tight strings on my shelf to choose from LOL

**Francois Blais** · #20 01-10-2006, 08:22 AM

Well I said they're tighter than the F, but that doesn't make them very tight if you compare them to other brands. They're still quite easy to play.