I don’t know but I made an error previously
The Chromes set I always use is 50-70-85-105
I understand some people don’t like the D string(?)
The LaBella flats I like are 45-65-85-105
Anyone use the 5 string Chromes set? What’s the 100-132 jump like?
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
D'Addario Chromes User Group- Chromeys Speak Out!
- Thread starter Rip Topaz
- Start date
I don’t know but I made an error previously
The Chromes set I always use is 50-70-85-105
I understand some people don’t like the D string(?)
The LaBella flats I like are 45-65-85-105
Anyone use the 5 string Chromes set? What’s the 100-132 jump like?
I have the 5 string set on my 5 string P bass and the string to string transition doesn't bother me at all. There is, perhaps, a bit more stiffness in the D and G strings but after one or two songs I find my hands adjust. The B string is nice and tight and doesn't feel too big.
Guilty as charged. They do offer a 45-105 round nickel set, but that’s a relatively recent development. 45-100 was their standard for years and years. Maybe they’ll come around with the Chromes.
I'm a life-long D'Addario guy, and as long as I've played bass, Chromes are my go to string. I've tried other brands and types of strings, but I always return home.
I never miss a chance to encourage others to give them a try -- whether on Talkbass or in person -- by being honest and plainly describing what they do, I do not sugar coat or make stuff up as far as I know. Along the way I've converted a few friends to flats by letting them try my bass or giving them a spare set.
EDIT: Talkbass moderated a 4 letter word I carelessly used to "poopie". I apologize to the moderator, I always avoid cussing. Thanks.
I never miss a chance to encourage others to give them a try -- whether on Talkbass or in person -- by being honest and plainly describing what they do, I do not sugar coat or make stuff up as far as I know. Along the way I've converted a few friends to flats by letting them try my bass or giving them a spare set.
EDIT: Talkbass moderated a 4 letter word I carelessly used to "poopie". I apologize to the moderator, I always avoid cussing. Thanks.
Last edited:
sorry for the double post, but I currently have all 5 of my basses strung with 50-105. That is my favorite gauge.
All my basses are Fender Precisions, except for my Fretless Hohner PJ Precisions (it's basically a P copy with Dimarzio P/J pups, and a fantastic ebony neck).
Usually I'll have my other Fretless bass, a MIM converted to fretless with black nylon tape-wounds, but it has Chromes and they work really well with the Lollar "vintage" pup.
I just switched my old vintage '66 Precision from 45-100 chromes that were on it forever to 50-105's after a semi-brief experiment with DR Pure Blues. The 45's set sounded great but they came with the bass, 50's are still new-ish but sound dope.
All my basses are Fender Precisions, except for my Fretless Hohner PJ Precisions (it's basically a P copy with Dimarzio P/J pups, and a fantastic ebony neck).
Usually I'll have my other Fretless bass, a MIM converted to fretless with black nylon tape-wounds, but it has Chromes and they work really well with the Lollar "vintage" pup.
I just switched my old vintage '66 Precision from 45-100 chromes that were on it forever to 50-105's after a semi-brief experiment with DR Pure Blues. The 45's set sounded great but they came with the bass, 50's are still new-ish but sound dope.
I use the 132 B string with a Sadowsky Black Flats 45-105 set for maybe 12 year or so(?)
I’ve yet to use a full set of Chromes 5 string but it’s the 100E that’s got me hesitant
I've used the 5-string set on a few basses, currently have them on a jazz 5 and they work well for me.
Hi @Kyle_S --
was the original problem with the G string was a defective string?
I'm sure you may have heard or can expect, they will gradually mellow-out but even as they age they'll keep their definition. What strings were you using prior and have you made any discoveries? Did you adjust your EQ or have you found anything new in your technique.
was the original problem with the G string was a defective string?
I'm sure you may have heard or can expect, they will gradually mellow-out but even as they age they'll keep their definition. What strings were you using prior and have you made any discoveries? Did you adjust your EQ or have you found anything new in your technique.
It feels okay to me, same kind of jump with TI flats for their 5-string set. I just string them up and play them.
Yeah, the G in the first set was definitely defective. New set is perfect.
I was using La Bella LTF's for the few weeks I was waiting on D'Addario customer service, and I liked those a lot, too. They sounded a lot more like what I expected from a flatwound, which is cool because I love that sound for blues and R&B. The less cool part is it felt a bit silly playing anything but blues and R&B with the La Bella's. With the Chromes, I get less of that traditional flatwound thing, but a lot more versatility. I can turn up the tone on my P-bass and get more of a punchy rock sound, or roll the tone off, throw on a mute, and get something closer to the old-school Jamerson vibe.
Another interesting thing is that even though I'm used to playing a 50-105 roundwound set, the 40-100 Chromes don't feel radically different.
La Bella LTF are notorious for the old school flat wound sound I suppose, they are great strings, but what you said about the Chromes is exactly why they are my favorite -- their versatility is amazing. I'm a punk hard rock n roller at heart, and those Chrome strings always deliver and respond when I dig in for something aggressive, say something like Nirvana's Aneurysm or QOTSA, they bark n' growl just right and if Im looking for something smooth, like Sade, they are right there without changing more that my right hand technique.
Cool that you like the lighter set, wondering if it's because the tension is similar to your heavier rounds. Tension is an often discussed topic on TB.
Personally, tension and stiffness is noticeable for me maybe when I warming up if I haven't played in a few days, but not a huge concern and that all goes away after I warm-up and overall, I prefer the heavier "medium" gauge ECB82 (.050-105) because there seems to be just a bit more overall oooomf with those, and the D & G comfortable than the lighter D & G strings on the Regular Light ECB81M (.045-.100) sets. Great strings also, I had a set of those on my 1966 Precision and only took them off to try some rounds, instead of putting the .045's back on I put the .050's to see if I like them, and if they sound good on that bass and they do. I will say, the .045's sounded special on that bass, I kept them in case I wanted to put them back on.
Last edited:
Fellow, Chromeys. What do you think are the chances of D'addario doing a few tweaks to the Chrome range. Replacing the 032 with 030 and putting in an 035. Then from 110 doing a 115 120 125. Replace the 132 with 130 and then add in a 135 and 140. End up with increments of .005" all the way from 030 to 140. A neat 23 string gauge library. Personally I have every gauge of Chromes except the missing 6 gauges. And to me it makes no rational sense having a 032 instead of a 030 and a 132 instead of a 130, and gaps in the gauge range
I always wanted a 45-65-85-105 set for flats and half rounds. That gauge just seems like a no-brainer to me but D'addario seems to avoid it all the time.
"Will be interested to see how their sound changes with time"
I have two sets and one is 17 yrs old. Sound is very dry and hard..lots of mid range. Play back from a concert recently and I could have been playing bridge PU only on a J bass.....Its made my simple ole P bass very usable.
I have two sets and one is 17 yrs old. Sound is very dry and hard..lots of mid range. Play back from a concert recently and I could have been playing bridge PU only on a J bass.....Its made my simple ole P bass very usable.
Well D'addario seems to have no problem doing it from 040 to 110. So it can't be a technical issue. Rotosound 77 singles go up in increments of .005 from 030 upwards to 130, although a few gauges are missing in the range ie no 055 070 090( available in medium and shortscale) 115 120. Can't be demand driven either, because downtuners are plentiful and many would no doubt love a Chrome 140 for B on a 34" scale bass instead of the current 132 and extended rangers would be the same way with an optional 030 for C
I think it's just a case of habit that D'addario doesn't do this with Chromes. Well habits can and do change. I emailed D'addario about the anomalies in the Chromes range. Probably been brought to someone's attention before. Gotta keep knockin to get someone to listen
Last edited:
AFAIK available gauges are just those from the available long-scale sets, plus one (the CB83, gauges 55-75-90-110) that was discontinued before the D'Addario website (est. 1996) started being captured for posterity in late '97.
Sources:
Wayback Machine
and especially (you'll pardon my excitement) this 1982 catalog included in the records of a US Senate subcommittee hearing, of all Internet places!
SBA's Economic Development Programs: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on ... - United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Small Business. Subcommittee on Urban and Rural Economic Development - Google Libri
Wow, what a find. I see your point about the singles issuing forth from sets. But some were still added like the 032 and 132. Which I still think are anomalous, given they were pumping out stuff with .005" steps in Chromes gauges as far back as 1982 ie should have been an 030 or 035 even and a 130. Anyhow, all D'addario has to do is add 6 measely strings to the Chromes lineup and alter 2. A 135 or 140 B string would be exciting. TI do a 136 flat, which I think is the thickest gauge in the flats universe. Personally I'd take a 140 Chrome over a 136 TI jazz flat for the feel of a B string I would prefer
Last edited:
I use a 45-65-85-105 set of Chromes and to be fair to Daddario, its too high in tension for mass appeal — its the same as a 50-110 set of Rotosound rounds, and feels it.
The D'Addario 032 and 132 Chromes are available because (standard-tuned) 5- and 6-string basses were introduced in the meantime.
[Warning, guess-fest ahead:]
I have no explanation for the high C specific gauge, other than the possibile intent to offer a gauge that could work passably alongside both the 040 (against which a 030 would be about equally tensioned, but a 035 would be noticeably tighter) and the 045 (compared to which a 030 may feel too loose) G strings.
Regarding the low B, the difference between a 130 and a 132 is too small to matter, both slot-width and tension-wise, so I don't make too much of it; the non-round figure may be the result of the choice of specific calibers of core, underwindings and flat ribbon that they already use, but it's just an unsubstantiated guess of mine.
Now, why not go fatter than that?
The fact that no mass-produced flatwound low B larger than the Thomastik-Infeld Jazz Flat 136 exists is revealing. It is very possible that, given the inherent stiffness of flats due to the reduced flexibility of the flat ribbon, there are diminishing returns in terms of tone, and inharmonicity up the neck, vs. tension. This, combined with the lower demand of flats in general, 5/6-string sets (or low-B singles) in particular, and very large gauges at the end of the day (except from the low-tuning metal playing camp, who do not tend to choose flats anyway), apparently makes manufacturers decline to develop larger yet functional gauges.
T-I gets away with their 136 because their flats have a silk inlay that contributes little mass therefore tension, and because of other construction details: a thinner, round core, and maybe some trickery applied to the ribbon as well - a flat octagonal section, for less lateral contact? a narrower ribbon, like La Bella LTFs? I wouldn't know, never held a JF low B in my hands.
Likewise, Garry Goodman's Octave4Plus, the sole source of flatwounds of 140 gauge and larger that I'm aware of,
(vd. Sub Contra Flatwounds - per the page, they also make flats in 150, 160, 170, 175, 180 and 188 gauge, plus a C#0 string of undisclosed diameter)
has devoted significant R&D to make building decently-working flatwounds with such gauges feasible.
Finally, why not make 115, 120 and 125 singles?
After all, the 055, 090 and 110 aren't currently included in sets - and haven't for who knows how long, as we've seen - and are therefore only produced in order to be offered as singles.
Well, I do concur it would be nice to have them.
(As it would to have the short- and medium-scale 080 and 100, at least, available as singles.)
I suppose they don't deem it as worth it to cover that gap as they do those other three gauges: perhaps they get little or no demand for a fatter low E than 110, ditto for a lighter low B than the sole gauge they make.
Once again, merely a W-A-G ( = "guess", not "girlfriend") of mine.
Last edited:
