Setting up a bass for F#

Josh Pelican · #1 05-13-2009, 03:17 PM

I know there is a lot of arguing of using F# and how it's completely unnecessary, or how most amps won't produce the sound, but that is not the point of making this thread.

I have several basses, but there are two of them I'm stuck deciding on which I would like to experiment on. I have a 5-string Yamaha RBX, and an ESP B206 that I just bought for dirt cheap. My question is, what would be more reasonable to set up for F#?

I had the 5-string set up for G# (Ab) last year as I am playing in a technical deathcore band. We were playing in G, but decided to tune up half a step. Recently, my guitarists decided to get 8-string guitars because they want to play heavier music (I'm sure you all know Meshuggah). I have decided that I would like to experiment and tune to F# with them.

I am interested in setting up the 6-string moreso as I will still have the regular strings the 5-string would, plus the lower note. I think it would be better suited to have all of the strings for tapping and the occasional sweep.

I don't need to read "you won't be able to hear it through the amp" and whatnot. I don't need to hear it, I need to FEEL it.

What would you kind folk on TalkBass recommend without getting into such politics?

-josh

Fieldy Snuts · #2 05-13-2009, 07:37 PM

Your going to need the appropriate gauge string for an F#, then your probably going to have to file your nut slots (or make one from a blank), maybe some slight modifications to the bridge to fit the F#, then you adjust the usual neck relief, string height, intonation etc. (so if you're fairly experienced with set ups and such, it's actually fairly simple, if not then you might need a tech)

EDIT: I just noticed now that misunderstood your question, sorry about that........

walterw · #3 05-13-2009, 09:50 PM

according to the internets, the esp is 35" while the yamaha is 34", so the esp is going to have a better shot at being remotely useful.

whether you "feel" the low F# is kinda the issue, as you won't really be getting much of the fundamental.

you'll need to play it with a pretty light touch, as that loose of a string will go way sharp with any kind of hard playing.

what the hell, "G" was only a half-step higher, so if you could deal with that you can likely deal with this.

Josh Pelican · #4 05-14-2009, 03:29 PM

What gauge string would be best for an F#? I am tempted to order from Conklin. I am pretty sure I used a .145 B string for tuning to G/G#. Would a .150 F# suffice, or would a .165 be better?

What about the Dark Lord .175 F#?

chrapladm · #5 05-14-2009, 07:18 PM

if you have any questions regarding strings you should contact Garry at Octave4plus.com. He is the man in getting large or very thin gauge strings for YOUR bass.

JustDavid · #6 05-14-2009, 07:55 PM

I think it can be natural for bassists to sidebar when the F# or C# topics come up. But those are different forums than this one.

Basically it's just the nut slotting. You might need to drill out the bridge hole for the larger string. Neck relief tasks don't change between different stringings; just set it up.

Life might be easier with the tuner having distance from the nut so the step-downs hit the tuning machine instead the whole width of the string.

Also, I'm GUESSING there MIGHT be a chance that your bridge saddle won't go back far enough for proper intonation.

mat666 · #7 05-14-2009, 08:04 PM

I would suggest the longest scale you can get for better tightness than order a .165 F#0 minimum.

I used a 35" scale with F# and it was ok but now I have a 36" = lot better

dont worry about electronics they will all do the job some better than other

JAUQO III-X · #8 05-14-2009, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mat666

dont worry about electronics

That's a big myth.

Electronics are very important.

mat666 · #9 05-14-2009, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

That's a big myth.

Electronics are very important.

well IME even with my crappy BRICE electronic I could get a decent tone in a death metal live gig. of course my custom laporte with lane poor + aguilar is way better but what I meant is not to worry about electronics first.

JAUQO III-X · #10 05-14-2009, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mat666

what I meant is not to worry about electronics first.

The electronics are extremely vital and not to be taken for granted.

In the long run bad electronics will catch up with the overall level of sound quality in a much bigger way..

mat666 · #11 05-14-2009, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAUQO III-X

The electronics are extremely vital and not to be taken for granted.

In the long run bad electronics will catch up with the overall level of sound quality in a much bigger way..

do you really think it's a necessity right now in his situation?

first he must find the right bass to do the set up than he can think about electronics if it's an issue.

like I said you can still get a decent sound even if the electronic is not the best.

JAUQO III-X · #12 05-14-2009, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mat666

do you really think it's a necessity right now in his situation?

To a degree yes. But lets hear what he has to say if he gets the F# string set up on his bass and he hits the first open note.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mat666

like I said you can still get a decent sound even if the electronic is not the best.

Decent means different things to different players.

JustDavid · #13 05-14-2009, 09:04 PM

I presume you are talking bass' electronics, i.e. pickups. Amplification & reproduction seems an obvious point.

Any quick & dirty explanations of what's up, or entry-level concepts like (guessing, likely wrongly) Barts=good, EMGs=bad?

mat666 · #14 05-14-2009, 09:21 PM

I didnt like the warwick MEC pickups - I think I prefer soapbars. I tried basslines and lane poor. both are great. I dont think you would go wrong with either barts or emgs. if you want to go safe get a bassline asb6 with the STC-3 set.

but other TBers will probably have better knowledge in this than me

walterw · #15 05-14-2009, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josh Pelican

What gauge string would be best for an F#? I am tempted to order from Conklin. I am pretty sure I used a .145 B string for tuning to G/G#. Would a .150 F# suffice, or would a .165 be better?

What about the Dark Lord .175 F#?

the problem here is that you run into the other wall, string stiffness. the thicker you make the string, the less flexible it gets. this makes the upper harmonics start to really go sharp in relation to the fundamental, making for a sour, "inharmonic" string.

chrapladm · #16 05-15-2009, 12:46 AM

I am no expert on setting up a bass for a F#....but I have heard "other," fellow bassist who try and use the F# string with bad electronics and it sounds like crap. I am an audiophile nut so I am all about the quality of the sound, so just call me stupid but I think you need to first get a bass that is built for the bigger strings.(F#+C#)Then custom made electronics that are meant to reproduce these strings CORRECTLY. When you have all these things together than you get an awesome sound that is what the string was intended for and not a thick mud sound. I have heard maybe 3 or 4 popular bassist whose bass guitars have the F# and lower strings that sound what I feel is what the string was intended to sound like. Jauqo III-X is one of them and so is Garry Goodman. So I would ask them for any info you can.
BUT, if you want a thick muddy dark sound that shakes/rumbles everything and potentially damages speakers than any .150 gauge string or bigger with a bass equipped with EMG's or Bartolini's will work. Its all about what sound do you want to achieve.