Any Advantage to Custom Lo-Rider SS Set?

Discussion in 'Strings [BG]' started by bgavin, Nov 30, 2012.

  1. Q to experienced Lo-Rider SS players:

    For a 34" scale SR5, is there any advantage to a custom set of SS sized as .40, .60, .85, .110, .135?
    My thoughts are for higher tension in the low register strings, and a bit less in the highs where it is not needed.

    I'm finger style only, no slapping, no picks.

  2. droppedurpocket


    Nov 11, 2011
    Plano, TX
    IMO that should do you well, I can't speak for the low B though ( I'm a 4 string guy ). I do .45, .65, .85, and .110 and all are quite tight to me, so the .40 and .60 should be what you're looking for.

    Edit: I'm sure Jason will pop in here soon enough to really give you some detail.
  3. FretlessMainly


    Nov 17, 2010
    I play mainly 4's, but I have a 5 and a 6 and that set does sound like it may feel more consistent tension-wise. A potential problem is that I've always felt that the G, and to a lesser extent, the D seem "thin" presence-wise compared to the lower strings (try playing a run all up and down the E string vs. string-crossing in one position). With even smaller gauges, I wonder if this "problem" (you may not have the same issue) will become exacerbated.

    For this reason, I favor adjustable-pole pickups. You can dial in just a little bit more oomph on the upper strings to create the illusion that the outputs are more even.

    Note: Sorry, not a Lo-Rider user; just opining on the gauges.
  4. My SR5HH is running the factory EBMM Slinky Bass, .45 .65. .80 .100 .130.
    My upper G string always sounds markedly more thin than the lower strings.

    The standard Lo-Rider set is .45 .65 .85 .105 .130, which might be just a bit tighter than the EBMM.
  5. Sponsored by: