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.
Quite right. The "You apparently didn't see that it says .1100" made me chuckle.you apparently didn't do so well in math class 5string5fingers.
.110 vs .100?
.110 goes to eleven....
you apparently didn't do so well in math class 5string5fingers.
I think that smaller strings would be better. For example, say you took a 60 and tuned it to the standard low E, it would be loose and not very bright, right? Correct me if i'm wrong though, just my $0.2.
I know it would be way to floppy, but that was just an exagerated example.René_Julien;8273273 said:Uhm.... that would be WAAAAAAAAAAAAY too floppy.
If you even get it to vibrate, it will CLANK a lot on your frets.
I prefer heavy thick gauge of strings, for more definition.
Then you have more tension, more of the fundamental note.
Less tension results that your string's vibration is infuenced more by the vibration of the body, bridge and nut. And so adding a bit more of small chorus and vibrato effect from the wood body of your bass.
I don't notice a significantly brighter tone in heavier strings.
Can be in some cases as floppier strings don't have such pronounced upper harmonics.
This is what happens when you make a joke post, it starts going serious.