• 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.

b-string on a sadowsky

S

sandmann

Dec 27, 2005
236
4
#1
hello,

sorry if this has been discussed before.

i would like to know what you guys think about the b-strings on sadowsky basses. i own an ultra vintage ash/morado and a lakland usa joe osborne and - using the same tapered strings - find the b-string on the lakland better than on the sadowsky. nothing one would ever hear in the mix but there is a difference (maybe because of the 35"-scale of the lakland?).

any idea how to improve on that (ok i know how to string correctly)?

thanks!

sandmann
 
#4
ElMon said:
IMO the Sadowsky kills a Lakland in an actual live mix. Yes, the Lakland sounds deeper by itself, but when blended with a band, the sadowsky just cuts more IMO. All that 'deep piano fundamental' gets lost live IME.
Click to expand...

Kinda +1.... I don't know if the Sadowsky kills that Laklands, which obviously have great B strings, but I do like the Lakland B better in solo, and the Sadowsky B MUCH better on the gig.... much more like an even extension of the E string, versus the 'big boom' of some other's.

Both sound great to me, but different.
 
#5
I don't know about kills, but I do agree a little with the above statement that all the piano like craity of a 35" does little to out do most 34" when mixed with multiple melodic instruments. I find them a little more growly for sure, but at that point its that real low creamy smooth bass tone that I love about a B string that get from a Smith, Sad, Roscoe or whatever.

Although there are times when it can shine through for sure. As for getting it to be tight like on a Lakland, good luck on that. I would think it be a better use for your time to get used to the 34" b than to make it something else.

that said, Lakland, MTD and Roscoe just have a B that you can pound and it still comes across sounding awesome, my touch with my Fender and previous Sads that I have had just had to be restrained a little, but not much.
 
#6
KJung said:
Kinda +1.... I don't know if the Sadowsky kills that Laklands, which obviously have great B strings, but I do like the Lakland B better in solo, and the Sadowsky B MUCH better on the gig.... much more like an even extension of the E string, versus the 'big boom' of some other's.

Both sound great to me, but different.
Click to expand...



+1 'Kills' might be too strong of a word and a response, but then again I am a guy who uses a Rick James Album cover as his Avatar, so don't listen to me!!!!!:hiding:
 
#7
In all honesty, I did feel that the B string on my Lakland DJ5 was slightly better than the B string on my Sadowsky UV70.

On the other four strings, though, the Sadowsky was the clear winner, and I play those other four strings the vast majority of the time.

+1 to the comment that it matters a lot less in a band context. I would say most of the advantage of the Lakland was in the "feel," which is no doubt predominantly due to the scale difference. Tonally, in the mix, it was only a very slight difference, and I really prefer the tone of the Sadowsky overall.

I'd also try fooling around with different strings. Different brand/tension B strings will give a vastly different sound. Some might sound better on the Sadowsky.
 
#8
As others stated, there is a slight difference in B string feel and tone (in the Lakland's favor), but you can't hear it in a band setting. Some nights the Lakland sounds better during sound check, other nights it's the Sadowsky.

Where I disagree is solo, that's where I really prefer the Sadowsky.
 
#9
I'd say it boils down to preference. I'm pretty familiar with both of these, and especially the Sadowsky now, and yeah, there's a diff, but I can't say one is categorically better, and I do think the scale length difference is a big part of it... especially since both manufacturers use superior neck designs yielding very stiff and consistent necks (IMHO, the KEY to a great B string).

I agree with Ken that the Sadsowsky sounds a lot more like a natural extension to the E string... that's a great way to put it. On the Lakland, it's gonna' be a bit more emphasized, and have a slightly different overtone sequence emphasis as well, which I think a lot of people hear... maybe without even realizing specifically. Some fretless players prefer 34" scales for this reason, in fact.

So I vote for "preference and familiarity" will determine which is best for each player on these two. I think the only absolute thing that can be said about both is they both withstand close scrutiny very easily and impress people on a regular basis. :)
 
#10
sandmann said:
i would like to know what you guys think about the b-strings on sadowsky basses. i own an ultra vintage ash/morado and a lakland usa joe osborne and - using the same tapered strings - find the b-string on the lakland better than on the sadowsky. nothing one would ever hear in the mix but there is a difference (maybe because of the 35"-scale of the lakland?).
Click to expand...

You're comparing one Lakland to one Sadowsky. All this means is that you prefer the B string on one bass to the B string on the other. It's not valid to draw any larger conclusions, such as Lakland versus Sadowsky, 35" versus 34", etc.

I've owned a number of fivers in 34" and 35" scale. Best B string of all (sustain, clarity, intonation, similarity to other strings) belonged to the Modulus Quantum, and IMO that's due to the graphite neck, not the 35" scale.

Of the wood-necked basses I've owned, my 34" Warwick and Sadowsky B strings are (or were) every bit as good as my 35" Lull and MTD. IMO, increasing scale length makes tone different... "better" is in the ear of the beholder. I prefer the tone of 34" B strings to longer scales because they sound more traditional, and less like a piano. Some will of course disagree... to each his own.
 
#11
Fuzzbass said:
You're comparing one Lakland to one Sadowsky. All this means is that you prefer the B string on one bass to the B string on the other. It's not valid to draw any larger conclusions, such as Lakland versus Sadowsky, 35" versus 34", etc.

I've owned a number of fivers in 34" and 35" scale. Best B string of all (sustain, clarity, intonation, similarity to other strings) belonged to the Modulus Quantum, and IMO that's due to the graphite neck, not the 35" scale.

Of the wood-necked basses I've owned, my 34" Warwick and Sadowsky B strings are (or were) every bit as good as my 35" Lull and MTD. IMO, increasing scale length makes tone different... "better" is in the ear of the beholder. I prefer the tone of 34" B strings to longer scales because they sound more traditional, and less like a piano. Some will of course disagree... to each his own.
Click to expand...


not sure I completely agree, but I also don't disagree :cool:

the MTDs, Roscoes, and Laklands I have had all seem to have somewhat near the same type of B for me, and also the same kind of feel on the strings.

I will agree that sometimes its not so consistent, cause there has been one Rosce and one MTd I have felt that didn't seem that way. But, the rest of them seemed to be similar in feel, with the MTD obviously having an assymetrical profile, but all three of the really feeling equally nice and usable in my hands, and sporting near the same B.

I hear stiffness of neck is a big contributor, and probably none of those dudes lax on that front either. So maybe its all about the stiffness on the neck rather scale length? Maybe some of these guys just bribe the gods of the B string occassionally to make it right. That is what I would do....
 
#14
Fuzzbass said:
You're comparing one Lakland to one Sadowsky. All this means is that you prefer the B string on one bass to the B string on the other. It's not valid to draw any larger conclusions, such as Lakland versus Sadowsky, 35" versus 34", etc.

I've owned a number of fivers in 34" and 35" scale. Best B string of all (sustain, clarity, intonation, similarity to other strings) belonged to the Modulus Quantum, and IMO that's due to the graphite neck, not the 35" scale.

Of the wood-necked basses I've owned, my 34" Warwick and Sadowsky B strings are (or were) every bit as good as my 35" Lull and MTD. IMO, increasing scale length makes tone different... "better" is in the ear of the beholder. I prefer the tone of 34" B strings to longer scales because they sound more traditional, and less like a piano. Some will of course disagree... to each his own.
Click to expand...

+1... good post and point. I too believe that if you are looking for pure, clean, accurate low B fundamental tone, that Modulus B string is up there with the best (and I too attribute it much more to the graphite than the slight increase in scale length).

Also well put on 'traditional B string' sound versus 'piano'. I too like the sound of a B string that is a subtle extension of the E versus the 'massive B' tone that many love... and virtually all the Sadowsky J's I've played do that. The Sadowsky Modern model B string is closer to the Roscoe, etc. tone to my ear.
 
#15
sandmann said:
i own an ultra vintage ash/morado and a lakland usa joe osborne and - using the same tapered strings - find the b-string on the lakland better than on the sadowsky. nothing one would ever hear in the mix but there is a difference (maybe because of the 35"-scale of the lakland?).

any idea how to improve on that (ok i know how to string correctly)?
Click to expand...

I went from Lakland Skyline JO5 to a Sadowsky MV5.
Using my beloved DR HiBeams on both basses, I noticed the exact same thing.
I put Sadowsky Stainless Steels on the Sad, and the B string on that bass really came alive! Maybe it was the tapered desing of the Sadowsky strings?
Usually I prefer conventional designed strings, but this string on that bass simply is better!
 
#16
gillento said:
I went from Lakland Skyline JO5 to a Sadowsky MV5.
Using my beloved DR HiBeams on both basses, I noticed the exact same thing.
I put Sadowsky Stainless Steels on the Sad, and the B string on that bass really came alive! Maybe it was the tapered desing of the Sadowsky strings?
Usually I prefer conventional designed strings, but this string on that bass simply is better!
Click to expand...
Try DR "Longnecks". Seriously!
 
#17
KJung said:
The Sadowsky Modern model B string is closer to the Roscoe, etc. tone to my ear.
Click to expand...
Well, at least on the one I got from you, the diff is nowhere near what it was on my Roscoe. My LG-3005 had such an intense B I actually had to play around its power, which actually became kind of a hassle (tho initially, it was so impressive I was having fun with it :)).

I really don't get that from this one. If this B string has a tendency to be a bit too strong, maybe I'm just having a little better luck with it... I really don't notice it. Seems very nice to me.
 
#18
My Sadowsky has as good as or better B than every other bass I`ve played, including MTD and Modulus. But only with Sadowsky strings. Labella and Ritter is almost as good, but all other brands, DR included, is no good. With Sadowsky strings I get a piano-clear tone all the way from open B and up.
But I`m shure many of you prefer a different B tone than me. I`m not into that huge B-tone, I want it clear like the other strings.
 
#20
My Skjold and Zons are pretty darn stunning too, and from a true musicality standpoint, not just volume or whatnot.

In other words, yeah, here we go again with the B string thing... :D

Bottom line is, I think it's safe to say the B strings on Sadowsky basses are great.

Whether it's the "best" (ugh) or not, is up to each of us based on taste (yeah, that old broken record phrase again... :))
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back