• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Real Gauge of Bass Strings - real gauge vs advertised gauge

Pier_

Pier_

Dec 22, 2013
1,820
1,750
Roma, Italia
#1
month ago I red here someone complaining that the DR Legend flats, lebeled as 45-65-85-105, measured actually 43-60-82-104, exactly like the Labella 760FL set.

the complaining was about buying a set for that gauge, and finding out that it was not in thas specific gauge.

well, I've noticed this thing comparing DR Hi Beams to other sets of strings; let me explain:

in March 2014 I was using a set of Rotosound Funkmaster, and once they died, I decided to buy a DR Hi Beam set in the same gauge, 30-50-70-90.
once mounted on the bass, I noticed that the G and D strings were "smaller", in a visible way, compared to the respective Rotosound strings, and the tension was way too low between the set: E and A had a similar tension compared to the Rotos, but D and G were too loose, and the gap was clearly noticable under the fingers.

a couple of months ago I bought an Hi Beam set for my Precision, in 45-105 gauge, and used it instead of my beloved Rotosound Swing66 (45-65-80-105).
I felt that the same thing of the 30-90 set: E and A had the right tension, but there was a noticable difference going to the D string and then to the G.

I'm obviously not talking about the round-core/hex-core difference, just to be sure anyone thinks about it. the difference in tension for the core is why I choosed to (re)try the Hi Beams.
what I talk about is the feeling of having a 40-60-85-105 set...

well, D and G on the Hi Beam set needed a saddle raising to not buzz on every single, when E and A were perfect with the same setup as the Rotosound.

once the DR died, I bought again the Swing66, and noticed that the tension on D and G was higher, and I needed to lower the saddle to not have them too high on the fretboard.

I then took the respective DR strings and put them beside the Rotos... the difference in gauge is VISIBLE (if I can I'll take a picture tomorrow, with the right light... in Italy is now 20:40...), and the two strings are clearly smaller than the Roto counterparts.

I tried to put on only the G from the Hi Beam set, and it buzzed all over the fretboard with the same setup of the Roto G.

I have here even a set of Elixir in 45-105 gauge, and they fell and "look" the same as the Rotosound gauge, and bigger than the DR's G and D.

honestly, I like the 45 G string because of it's tension and feel, and both the DR sets I owned gave me the problem of a loose G and D string, killing the overall tension of the set, and forcing me to set my bass in a different way to not have the buzz.

I'm curious to try a 45-100 Hi Beam set, and maybe it will be balaced in tension...
 
#2
Keep in mind that DR strings use a compression winding method that packs the windings onto the core tighter, so if you compare a DR to a regular string it could be smaller even though both strings start out the same size before winding. There are tolerances in strings, rarely will you see a set that measures exactly what it says on the package every single time. Dunlop Super Brights are another string made like this and they do indeed feel smaller than a normal string. It may start out as a .105 but might be a .104 or .103 after the winding process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: roccobass and HG1180
#3
actually, reading what's written on the DR's package, the string "starts" at .108 and ends as a .105, so what I should find in the box is a .105 E string.

if I buy a 45-105 set I expect to have a 45-105 set in terms of tension and feeling, and that's what I've always had with D'Addario, Ernie Ball, Fender, Rotosound, Harley Benton, GHS, Elixir...
with all these brands I've never encountered this "tolerance" :P always perfect tensioned strings, and changing sets never led me to different tension in strings compared to the previous set.

only with DRs I found that gap between the strings, and in different sets, so it's not a matter of tolerance. if it was like that, I shoud have found sets with a similar tension, compared to the other brands I've used.

finding out that the G is nearly a 40 and not a 45, when I expected the tension and feel of a .45 is not a deal, and the difference in tension between the set is, for my hands, something unbearable.
I mention in particular the G, beceuse is where the "big" difference is. that string in all the DR sets I've owned (a 40-100, a 30-90, three 45-105) always felt slinkier and like it was a lower gauge string.
the D string was more like a .63 than a .65, and the difference is small.

for my tastes and ideas fo what a string set should be, I'll probably never buy again the DRs... I don't like to buy a set that is different than what is advertised.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pjcarman
#4
mmbongo said:
Keep in mind that DR strings use a compression winding method that packs the windings onto the core tighter, so if you compare a DR to a regular string it could be smaller even though both strings start out the same size before winding.
Click to expand...

Actually, everyone does that. DR just puts it in print. Same with stating that their flatwounds are "polished."


mmbongo said:
There are tolerances in strings, rarely will you see a set that measures exactly what it says on the package every single time. Dunlop Super Brights are another string made like this and they do indeed feel smaller than a normal string. It may start out as a .105 but might be a .104 or .103 after the winding process.
Click to expand...

Aside from tolerances, I think a lot of the printed gauges are now more for marketing than anything else. Most everyone makes a 45-65-85-105 set, and if Company A came out with a new medium set that was 45-63-84-106, the general populance that buy their strings at a store (music stores still exist, right?) might find something wrong with that, and it would be a deterrent. We see it with guitarists all. the. time. so to have that kind of mentality that "Well, I play 45-105, why is this a 106?" isn't that much of a stretch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JamAdd85, roccobass and Arthur U. Poon
#5
and I can understand a tolerance that gives me a 104 instead of a 105, but not a 40 instead of a 45. the difference in feeling and sound is huge.

if they write 45-65-85-105 I expect to have a 45-65-85-105, not a 40-60-85-105 set...
by knowing it, I should have bought a 50-105 set, but being them advertised as 45-105, how could I imagine that they don't use the advertised gauge?

I'll stick with brands like Rotosound and GHS...

PS: I forgot to say that months ago I had a set of La Bella 760RL, the roundwound "light" set, wich is 41-58-83-106. I put it on after an Hi Beam set, and the feeling in tension was EXACTLY the same. [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
 
#6
IMO strings should be labeled according to their 'finished' size. Like tires- the customer needs to know what will fit.
Adding up core size (including hex, which the strings do not just rest across tips of the points) and wraps, maybe compressing, then printing the total is NOT the finished gauge.
I've found most strings to be very close to the advertised gauge- I 'mic' them here and there. .001- .0015 tolerance is acceptable. .005 is another gauge. Knowing that string manufacturers are not usually machinists, gotta give 'em a little slack, but .005 out of .045 or .060 in not excuseable.
Sometimes I 'mic' them if I run across a used set that that was not labeled, and after the gauge across the set is determined, s/s or nickel, ball colors, and tuner end wrap style, the make/style is nailed.
As far as flexibility goes, that's determined largely by construction method (hex vs round core, winding tension, # of wraps, type of wraps, etc) including gauge. A .065 is not just a .065 across different manufacturers, string style, composition mat's, etc.
 
#7
Oh where to start, first off, the stiffness of a string does not necessarily have anything to do with size (yes I know, that's what she said). Second, to compare tension between brands means absolutely nothing, you can't do it, there is nothing to say that they are supposed to be the same tension. Within DR 105's you can have multiple tensions depending on the construction of the string. Third, I seriously doubt that you can see the differences in size that you are talking about. If you can, I think you have different strings than you think you have.
 
#8
I've futzed around with enough strings to know to take the gauge labeling with a grain of salt.

Tone, stiffness, and tension (the only things that really matter in string choice) vary so wildly and unreliably (and generally not in an objectively quantifiable way) that presented gauges are really only useful in terms of figuring out where on a specific manufacturer's spectrum of "heavy" to "light" a particular string is.

E.g. I like how high tension Rotosounds are, so if I usually take a .50 Rotosound for G, I know when looking at another manufacturer I should be looking for a .55 at least. What the actual string measures under calipers is pretty irrelevant.
 
#9
The fly in the ointment is that the actual thickness (diameter) of the strings matters very little. The characteristic which counts is the mass, or, better, the mass per unit length of the string. That's what will determine the tension required to bring the string to the desired pitch. Therefore, strings which are compressed as described above might very well have the same mass as an uncompressed string which measures a bit larger. If this were true, both strings might well deliver the same tension for the same pitch, even though one measures larger than the other.

Raf
 
  • Like
Reactions: roccobass, /\/\3phist0, subdude67 and 5 others
#10
Raf Seibert said:
The fly in the ointment is that the actual thickness (diameter) of the strings matters very little. The characteristic which counts is the mass, or, better, the mass per unit length of the string. That's what will determine the tension required to bring the string to the desired pitch. Therefore, strings which are compressed as described above might very well have the same mass as an uncompressed string which measures a bit larger. If this were true, both strings might well deliver the same tension for the same pitch, even though one measures larger than the other.

Raf
Click to expand...

Nice explaination!
 
#11
mdogs said:
Third, I seriously doubt that you can see the differences in size that you are talking about. If you can, I think you have different strings than you think you have.
Click to expand...

actually, being using lots of different sets and gauges (I rarely use the same set, I like to change and try, depending on what I want and need at the time), I can easily distinguish a 40 froma 45... I have lots of used sets, and I can tell you exactly brand and gauge depending on details like the windings, the lenght before the taper, the colour of the plating or the steel winding...
being working with small things, a 0.005" is not that hard to notice... years ago I couldn't tell you the difference from neck reliefs, and I used feeler gauge. now I can do it with the bare eye with extreme precision.
don't think that if you can't do something, even the others shares your experience...

the stiffness of a string does not necessarily have anything to do with size (yes I know, that's what she said). Second, to compare tension between brands means absolutely nothing, you can't do it, there is nothing to say that they are supposed to be the same tension.
Click to expand...

I have written all those things in my posts, to avoid this kind of answers... :rollno:

I'm not comparing the tension on the SAME string, but the tension inside the set. with EVERY 45-105 set I've owned I've never found the difference like the DR Hi Beam sets, and it feels "LIKE" it's 40-60-85-105, with D and G too flabby compared to A and E.
with EVERY 45-105 set I've owned the tension inside the set, string to string was similar/the same with different brands. maybe one have a slighty stiffer/slinkier string, kind of "signature".
none of them has the extreme difference I found in many Hi Beam sets (as I said, a 30-90, a 40-100 and many 45-105). always felt the same, like it was a 40-105, similar to the La Bella 760RL I mentioned.

reading in other threads that actually many users found out that DR are advertised in a gauge, but once measured, they were different not by a 0.001, but 0.004 or 0.005, I understood that was not just my feeling.

actually I don't care, they are not in my top-five string choice, but I wanted to open a thread about it for future users.

if I knew that they felt that way, I'd have bought the 40-95, 35-90 and 50-105 sets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chip134
#12
:mad:
Pier_ said:
actually, being using lots of different sets and gauges (I rarely use the same set, I like to change and try, depending on what I want and need at the time), I can easily distinguish a 40 froma 45... I have lots of used sets, and I can tell you exactly brand and gauge depending on details like the windings, the lenght before the taper, the colour of the plating or the steel winding...
being working with small things, a 0.005" is not that hard to notice... years ago I couldn't tell you the difference from neck reliefs, and I used feeler gauge. now I can do it with the bare eye with extreme precision.
don't think that if you can't do something, even the others shares your experience...



I have written all those things in my posts, to avoid this kind of answers... :rollno:

I'm not comparing the tension on the SAME string, but the tension inside the set. with EVERY 45-105 set I've owned I've never found the difference like the DR Hi Beam sets, and it feels "LIKE" it's 40-60-85-105, with D and G too flabby compared to A and E.
with EVERY 45-105 set I've owned the tension inside the set, string to string was similar/the same with different brands. maybe one have a slighty stiffer/slinkier string, kind of "signature".
none of them has the extreme difference I found in many Hi Beam sets (as I said, a 30-90, a 40-100 and many 45-105). always felt the same, like it was a 40-105, similar to the La Bella 760RL I mentioned.

reading in other threads that actually many users found out that DR are advertised in a gauge, but once measured, they were different not by a 0.001, but 0.004 or 0.005, I understood that was not just my feeling.

actually I don't care, they are not in my top-five string choice, but I wanted to open a thread about it for future users.

if I knew that they felt that way, I'd have bought the 40-95, 35-90 and 50-105 sets.
Click to expand...

Well, I assumed that you weren't such an expert, on everything that you obviously are, because you asked a question on here. If you want balanced tension, then buy balanced tension sets, not sets that do not market themselves as balanced tension. But, I am sure you know that since you obviously know more about this than anyone else possibly could...:rage:
 
#14
can you measure the G and D of your set? those are the strings I'm talking about.

I need to buy that calibre :D as soon as possibile I'll buy one and post some pictures.

If you want balanced tension
Click to expand...

nope, I wanted the same balancing I find in every 45-105 set out there, except DR's . you are talking about a totally different thing :)
 
#15
Interesting- I actually had an opposite experience just last week when trying different strings on my Rickenbacker. My go-to strings are Sadowsky flatwounds in .045-.105 gauge, and I decided to try out a set of Medium Roto 66s as I hadn't tried them in years (and they DO sound phenomenal on a Ric!). The Rotos as expected were much looser in feel than the Sadowsky flats, but I was surprised to find the balance between the strings to be especially weird from what I'm used to- not just the weird .080 A string (vs. .085), but the rest of the set felt fairly unbalanced to me as well and required some odd intonation adjustments (usually the intonation difference between different kinds of strings is much more minimal after adjusting for neck relief differences).

I then tried a set of DR Lo-Riders in the .045-.105 gauge a couple days ago and found them to feel and setup almost identical to the Sadowsky flatwounds. I expected maybe a minor raise in tension vs the Rotos, but it felt like a pretty significant raise (which was a good thing for my taste). Given that a gauge of flatwound string actually has more metal in general than a comparable roundwound because of the flat wrap vs. round wrap, it suggests that the compression winding of the DRs really does pack more metal into the string than a standard roundwound (or at least the Rotos in this case).

Ultimately I went back to my Sadowsky flats just yesterday from the Lo-Riders, and was amazed to literally not have to adjust the neck relief OR intonation more than a hair.

I realize that the Hi-Beams are round-core vs the hex-core of the Rotosounds, so perhaps that is where this particular feel difference is arising for you? I'd be curious to see the caliper measurements of both strings to know for sure- given the different design of the DRs (both the round core and the compression winding), I don't know that you can honestly do an apples-to-apples feel comparison between them and most other roundwounds. I would also expect the gauge tolerances to be a little more loose given the method by which DRs are wound, though I expect they use approximately the same amount of metal and same size wire for core and windings from set to set of Hi-Beams so there should be a general tension consistency at least within the type. Perhaps Fat-Beams or Lo-Riders would suit you better? I also found the Hi-Beams to feel too loose for my tastes in general, though not inconsistently so across the strings.
 
#16
I have already explained that the core has nothing to do in this case. I chose the Hi Beam because I like the single string tension .
I only find that their 45-105 set feels, in term of balance between the strings of the set, like a 40-105, and it was not what I want.
Knowing it I should've bought a 40-95 or a 50-105 set.
Having had that "problem" with every set of Hi Beam that I have owned , I can say that is not a matter of tolerance.

I'm curious to see what the digital caliber has to say :)

However, talking about intonation, I saw that every brand has its own "typical" setup. For example , with the GHS I always have the D saddle as the more forward near the neck, with the G a bit behind, more like the A saddle.

In these days I've switched several times from Rotosound to DR, and their setup was identical, except for the need to raise the G and D saddle in height.
Intonation and truss rod nearly the same.
the Elixir 45-105 set I tried two days ago needed a turn of the truss rod to tighten it, and every saddle needed to be moved backward.
 
#17
Pier_ said:
I have already explained that the core has nothing to do in this case. I chose the Hi Beam because I like the single string tension .
I only find that their 45-105 set feels, in term of balance between the strings of the set, like a 40-105, and it was not what I want.
Knowing it I should've bought a 40-95 or a 50-105 set.
Having had that "problem" with every set of Hi Beam that I have owned , I can say that is not a matter of tolerance.

I'm curious to see what the digital caliber has to say :)

However, talking about intonation, I saw that every brand has its own "typical" setup. For example , with the GHS I always have the D saddle as the more forward near the neck, with the G a bit behind, more like the A saddle.

In these days I've switched several times from Rotosound to DR, and their setup was identical, except for the need to raise the G and D saddle in height.
Intonation and truss rod nearly the same.
the Elixir 45-105 set I tried two days ago needed a turn of the truss rod to tighten it, and every saddle needed to be moved backward.
Click to expand...

I guess it's a matter of translation- my suggestion is that it IS in fact the difference in the core possibly combined with the "compression wrapping" that makes Hi-Beams feel differently balanced than what you consider to be normal across other roundwounds. For comparison's sake, have you tried any other round-core roundwound strings that haven't had this issue? There aren't very many round-core roundwound strings to compare with, so I would guess not. I know I've never played a round-core roundwound that wasn't a DR, though I've never considered them inbalanced- they definitely don't feel the same as hex-core strings.
 
#18
in terms of roundwound no, but I've played the Pyramid Gold and the Thomastik JF344.

the fact is that, as stated before, E and A string are similar in tension and feel to other strings with hex core, and are equally "balanced". then there's the step down going to the D string and the G.

now, being that I've tried more than one gauge (30-90, 40-100 and 45-105), I can say that the problem is not in the single strings alone, but is inside the set.

the 43 G of the Thomastik feels more like a .45 hex core flatwound (I've had the D'Addario Chromes, the Fender 9050, Rotosound Jazz77 and Labella 760), not that big difference from the others. a slight difference in overall tension, but not like it's a 40.

strings are not produced for what they are going to be tuned, because a .070 can be a light A or an heavy D. but a .070 A string from DR feels like a .070 A from Rotosound, and the .050 D in the DR set does not feel like a .050 D in the Rotosound set.

the same for the G and the E. the .090 Es felt the same, the .030 Gs didn't feel the same. to me it makes sense only if the sets by DR are "made up" with not actual gauge, or if their strings are not the declared gauge.

maybe we'll find out that the problem is the opposite, with maybe a .050 G in the usual hex core strings like D'Addario, GHS or Rotosound, and DR is the only one producing the exact gauge :P

I'll get a digital caliber and measure all the strings I have at home as soon as possible.

combined with the "compression wrapping"
Click to expand...

actually, basing on what they say on their site, the "tite fit" should make the strings feel tighter than they actually are, not slinkier. more material compressed in a smaller diameter makes a metal harder, not softer...
 
#19
Pier_ said:
in terms of roundwound no, but I've played the Pyramid Gold and the Thomastik JF344.

the fact is that, as stated before, E and A string are similar in tension and feel to other strings with hex core, and are equally "balanced". then there's the step down going to the D string and the G.

now, being that I've tried more than one gauge (30-90, 40-100 and 45-105), I can say that the problem is not in the single strings alone, but is inside the set.

the 43 G of the Thomastik feels more like a .45 hex core flatwound (I've had the D'Addario Chromes, the Fender 9050, Rotosound Jazz77 and Labella 760), not that big difference from the others. a slight difference in overall tension, but not like it's a 40.

strings are not produced for what they are going to be tuned, because a .070 can be a light A or an heavy D. but a .070 A string from DR feels like a .070 A from Rotosound, and the .050 D in the DR set does not feel like a .050 D in the Rotosound set.

the same for the G and the E. the .090 Es felt the same, the .030 Gs didn't feel the same. to me it makes sense only if the sets by DR are "made up" with not actual gauge, or if their strings are not the declared gauge.

maybe we'll find out that the problem is the opposite, with maybe a .050 G in the usual hex core strings like D'Addario, GHS or Rotosound, and DR is the only one producing the exact gauge :P

I'll get a digital caliber and measure all the strings I have at home as soon as possible.



actually, basing on what they say on their site, the "tite fit" should make the strings feel tighter than they actually are, not slinkier. more material compressed in a smaller diameter makes a metal harder, not softer...
Click to expand...
That's interesting you find the TI flats to feel more or less like a standard flatwound string, because to me the whole set (including the G string) feels significantly slinkier than any .045-.105 flats I've played (and I've gone back and forth between the TIs and several other sets of Medium and Light gauge flats on the same bass or different basses and nothing else feels as slinky). I've always attributed this to the combination of low gauges on the low strings combined with the round cores. Pretty much my findings with DR Sunbeams and Hi-Beams as well- for me the Sunbeams have a great tension for fretless playing tuned a half-step down, where I would likely order a lighter gauge in a hex-core round to get the same feel.

Perhaps the compression winding on the DRs makes the E and A strings feel tighter than they otherwise would, vs making the D and G feel looser.
 
#20
I have taken the precise measures with a digital caliber:

Rotosound RS66LD 45-65-80-105, two sets:

one set has a .048 G string, a .063 D string, a .082 A string and a .103 E string

the second set has a .046 G string, a .064 D string, a .082 A string and a .102.5 E string

the DR Hi Beam 45-65-85-105 set has: .045 G string, a .063 D string, a .084 A string and a .103 E string

I've measured a Thomastik JF344 and an Elixir 45-105 set:

Thomastik JF344 43-56-70-100: .043 G string, .056 D string, .070 A string and .100 E string (awsome! perfect gauge!)

Elixir Nanoweb nickel 45-65-85-105: .043 G string, .063 D string, .085 A string, .103 E string.

now we have real arguments :D

basing on what I red, I can say:

1) Thomastik wins for extreme precise gauge, so we can say that it's a new justification for the price.

2) Rotosound has a wierd "actual" gauge, wich probably leads to what I consider a "balanced" set, and probably that's why I've always prefered them over other strings. the gauge is similar to the sets advertised as "balanced" in many brands, with a thicker G string (I'll soon recieve two new sets, so I'll measure even those to be sure), smaller D and A and "almost there" E string.
actually the G in the first set felt a bit tighter, but lowering the saddle hid the thing a bit, and it felt similar to the .046 of the other set. I even understand why the Billy Sheehan set has a .043 G :P

3) in the DR set the G string is actually .045, so I was wrong about considering it a .040. I find really strange that the Elixir G is a .043, because it feels almost like the Rotosound one.
perhaps I understand why te set felt strange to me: the G is the slinkier (comparing the string "inside" the set, not comparing the other sets), and being the D string similar to the others brands, there's the gap.
the .103 E string is what I expected, because I find it similar to the Rotosound and Elixir one.

now everything is clearer, and we can speculate about gauges in a better way :)

I'll update the topic with the incoming Rotosound sets and maybe with other sets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FyllingenOy, Iristone and roccobass

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back