Anyone try these on a short scale? I ordered some to put on a Gibson SG. I’m used to .049-.109 DTFs so I’m a little worried. I’m assuming I’m going to feel like a strong man for a few days till I get used to them.
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.
Dunlop Flatwounds premiering at NAMM
- Thread starter JimmyM
- Start date
Lower tension and more flexible. You will notice more definition and clarity. Will still thump though.
What’s up with these Dunlop flats going for $100 on EBay? The prices ranges from around $30-$100.
So, I’ve had the Dunlop flats on for a few days now. In regard to tension on my short scale Gibson, I’d put them here (Low to High/IME).
-La Bella Nylons (.050)
-La Bella DTFs (.043-.104)
-Jim Dunlop Flats (.045-.105)
-La Bella DTFs (.045-.105)
They aren’t as ‘loose/floppy’ as I was suspecting. Having gone from La Bella .049-.109 to Chromes Reg/Light to Rotosound Nylons to La Bella .043-.104 within three weeks, I can say they fit between La Bella .043 and .045 very comfortably. All in all, they are great strings, and I think I may be done looking for the right strings for this bass.
The ONLY downside, IMO, is that they do not thump as well as La Bella. Of course, nothing thumps like a La Bella (maybe GHS). But, when it comes to bridging the modern v. old, they nailed it, and satisfy my thumping needs well enough.
Ernie Ball Cobalts, Fender, and Chromes are fantastic strings in their own right, but the ability to have both a modern sound combined with the ability to go old school the way I want it to has been a tough bridge for me to locate. None of the recent aforementioned did it the way I wanted them to. The ability to simply roll the tone knob and bridge the gap hasn’t been perfect, IMO.
Basically, I wanted a La Bella with the capability to mimic a subdued round, a more modern sound for sonic versatility.
The Dunlop’s come close.....real close, if not perfect. They aren’t too bright, but with EQ can mimic a round, and do so very gently or not. For a flat, it’s the perfect mimic of a well worn round while retaining the physical reaction of a flat. Roll the tone off, put a sponge under the bridge, and you will have something close to a thumping La Bella.
The ability to be able to do what a flat does is crucial. To be able to copy both strings is gold.
Again, it’s not perfect (I’m a diehard La Bella fan on my Long Scales), but I’m going to call this one a win. In the description, Dunlop says something along the lines of being able to go from modern to Motown. I’d say that’s accurate....thank goodness because I’m sick of looking.
Strings I’ve tried on this Gibson.
1. La Bella .049-.109/.043-.104/.045-.105
2. La Bella Nylon .50
3. Rotosound 88
4. Ernie Ball Cobalt (Fits Well)
5. La Bella Quarter Rounds
6. D’Addario Chromes Reg/Light
7. Ernie Ball Slinky
8. Black Beauties (Was Awesone)
9. D’Addario Half Rounds
10. LS Fender Flats (Careful)
11. Sunbeams
12. GHS Precision Flats .095
13. Jim Dunlop Flats .045-.105
All fantastic strings. Just depends on what you’re looking for.
-La Bella Nylons (.050)
-La Bella DTFs (.043-.104)
-Jim Dunlop Flats (.045-.105)
-La Bella DTFs (.045-.105)
They aren’t as ‘loose/floppy’ as I was suspecting. Having gone from La Bella .049-.109 to Chromes Reg/Light to Rotosound Nylons to La Bella .043-.104 within three weeks, I can say they fit between La Bella .043 and .045 very comfortably. All in all, they are great strings, and I think I may be done looking for the right strings for this bass.
The ONLY downside, IMO, is that they do not thump as well as La Bella. Of course, nothing thumps like a La Bella (maybe GHS). But, when it comes to bridging the modern v. old, they nailed it, and satisfy my thumping needs well enough.
Ernie Ball Cobalts, Fender, and Chromes are fantastic strings in their own right, but the ability to have both a modern sound combined with the ability to go old school the way I want it to has been a tough bridge for me to locate. None of the recent aforementioned did it the way I wanted them to. The ability to simply roll the tone knob and bridge the gap hasn’t been perfect, IMO.
Basically, I wanted a La Bella with the capability to mimic a subdued round, a more modern sound for sonic versatility.
The Dunlop’s come close.....real close, if not perfect. They aren’t too bright, but with EQ can mimic a round, and do so very gently or not. For a flat, it’s the perfect mimic of a well worn round while retaining the physical reaction of a flat. Roll the tone off, put a sponge under the bridge, and you will have something close to a thumping La Bella.
The ability to be able to do what a flat does is crucial. To be able to copy both strings is gold.
Again, it’s not perfect (I’m a diehard La Bella fan on my Long Scales), but I’m going to call this one a win. In the description, Dunlop says something along the lines of being able to go from modern to Motown. I’d say that’s accurate....thank goodness because I’m sick of looking.
Strings I’ve tried on this Gibson.
1. La Bella .049-.109/.043-.104/.045-.105
2. La Bella Nylon .50
3. Rotosound 88
4. Ernie Ball Cobalt (Fits Well)
5. La Bella Quarter Rounds
6. D’Addario Chromes Reg/Light
7. Ernie Ball Slinky
8. Black Beauties (Was Awesone)
9. D’Addario Half Rounds
10. LS Fender Flats (Careful)
11. Sunbeams
12. GHS Precision Flats .095
13. Jim Dunlop Flats .045-.105
All fantastic strings. Just depends on what you’re looking for.
I didn’t care for the feel of Chromes. Not the texture, not the tension....the gauge combined with the tension is what threw me off. The .100 Chrome E is a stout string, but not too bad. The A, the same. The D, the D is something else. Very tight. That with its diminutive size throws me off. I like high tension if the string has some meat. I do not like high tension if the string is of a small diameter. I considered for a minute building a custom set of Chromes. I know deep down that Chromes probably sound awesome with age, but I just can’t stomach the break in.
Tension wise, I’d put Chromes Reg./L similar to La Bella .045/.105, maybe with a slightly more taut feel that could be a result of its smaller diameter. I would say without hesitation that these Dunlop’s are more flexible than both. Of course, I’m going on memory now.
Man, every time I hear Chromes or read it, I always think tension. That’s what gets talked about so much.
Dunlop Flats do not sound like Chromes.
Chromes cut through very well, and they sounded odd to me on the SG. I want my bass to fade into the mix. I don’t always want to be out front, not like that. I’d guess Chromes probably chill out eventually, but I never could stand having everything I do be heard that clearly. I gotta be able to get lost.
Being felt is important. Chromes never thumped right for me. The bottom end was sooo smooth. Too smooth for me. Playing back, they always sound great, but I don’t feel Chromes in the floor like I do La Bella. Still, I put Chromes on on two separate occasions. They were good enough I tried them twice. Patience kills me w/them.
Dunlop Flats do not sound like Chromes.
Chromes cut through very well, and they sounded odd to me on the SG. I want my bass to fade into the mix. I don’t always want to be out front, not like that. I’d guess Chromes probably chill out eventually, but I never could stand having everything I do be heard that clearly. I gotta be able to get lost.
Being felt is important. Chromes never thumped right for me. The bottom end was sooo smooth. Too smooth for me. Playing back, they always sound great, but I don’t feel Chromes in the floor like I do La Bella. Still, I put Chromes on on two separate occasions. They were good enough I tried them twice. Patience kills me w/them.
Flexibility:
For flexibility, on a scale between LaBella DTF .105 and SS rounds .105 (don't know which brand), the Dunlops are much closer to the SS rounds.
Dunlop vs DTF:
Holding the strings flat on a table and hanging about a foot of the ball ends off the edge, the ends of the strings end up about 5 inches apart, with the Dunlop lower = more flexible.
Dunlop vs SS rounds:
Repeating the test (which isn't fair this time because the flat is *heavier*, which would help it sag), the Dunlop still ends up about 2" lower. Dangling and jiggling the whole string, I guess the round is a little more flexible, but it's close.
Smoothness:
In terms of *uniformity of diameter* (drawing the strings between the fingers), the DTF are more perfect.
But, surprisingly, the gap between the outer windings (felt by dragging the fingernail) is much greater on the DTF. I thought I had read that the Dunlop was wound with a gap (and that that contributed to their flexibility), but no, not at all. So smoothness ends up about equal.
For flexibility, on a scale between LaBella DTF .105 and SS rounds .105 (don't know which brand), the Dunlops are much closer to the SS rounds.
Dunlop vs DTF:
Holding the strings flat on a table and hanging about a foot of the ball ends off the edge, the ends of the strings end up about 5 inches apart, with the Dunlop lower = more flexible.
Dunlop vs SS rounds:
Repeating the test (which isn't fair this time because the flat is *heavier*, which would help it sag), the Dunlop still ends up about 2" lower. Dangling and jiggling the whole string, I guess the round is a little more flexible, but it's close.
Smoothness:
In terms of *uniformity of diameter* (drawing the strings between the fingers), the DTF are more perfect.
But, surprisingly, the gap between the outer windings (felt by dragging the fingernail) is much greater on the DTF. I thought I had read that the Dunlop was wound with a gap (and that that contributed to their flexibility), but no, not at all. So smoothness ends up about equal.
This is something you may have read about the Ernie Ball Cobalt Flats.
What contributes to the Dunlop's flexibility is the small diameter of the core wire used just like their Super Bright rounds are very flexible due to the size of the core.
Thank you for replying again, michael_t.
Just info: if the core wire is the one that goes around the ball, then the Dunlop's core is thicker than the DTF's (measured with a micrometer). Surprised me.
Difference in sound between Dunlops and DTFs is just as I had read (now lets hope it's really what I want).
Tension? Dunlops (just the E string mounted, comparing to the others) might be a little less, but not by much. I'm glad because it's a short scale. EDIT: Any difference in tension is not noticeable.
Just info: if the core wire is the one that goes around the ball, then the Dunlop's core is thicker than the DTF's (measured with a micrometer). Surprised me.
Difference in sound between Dunlops and DTFs is just as I had read (now lets hope it's really what I want).
Tension? Dunlops (just the E string mounted, comparing to the others) might be a little less, but not by much. I'm glad because it's a short scale. EDIT: Any difference in tension is not noticeable.
Last edited:
Hmmm...this is interesting. Unfortunately, I no longer have a set of LaBella DTF's in long scale as two of them broke on me so I threw the other two out. But it would explain why I don't mind them on my Realistic violin bass while the Chromes that are on my Jay Turser violin bass kind of irritate me (that and the zing), as I'm a big low tension fan. But while the LaBellas do thump nicely when they're old as the hills, I think the Dunlop thump is every bit as thumpy when they go dead, plus they're a few bucks cheaper than the LaBellas, so my 09 P will be sporting a 40-100 set of Dunlops once they arrive. Doubt I'll replace the LaBellas on the Realistic and Longhorn with Dunlops, but I'll almost certainly replace the Chromes with Dunlops eventually. Used to love Chromes, but the love seems to have died.
I don't. I still think they're terrific strings. Cliff Williams uses them and he's very cool. But as for me, there's a new girl in town, and her name is Jim Dunlop
I can’t get along with Chromes. I’ve tried them a few times, once on a Gibson SG, then a set bounced around onto a P/Jazz/then to a Gretsch. No string has ever not worked for me like Chromes. I found them hollow, a smooth, mini-thumperous hollow void of notes, like playing bass into a can.I don't. I still think they're terrific strings. Cliff Williams uses them and he's very cool. But as for me, there's a new girl in town, and her name is Jim Dunlop
Dunlop’s are great, however. I put just about every brand of flat on my Gibson that I could find. Finally settled on La Bella....the very set I began with. My Odyssey did eventually lead me to Jim Dunlop where they were left on for awhile. I loved them at first and for the entirety, but I felt they didn’t have something that La Bella did, and I believe it was a slight variation in thump. La Bella does it better for me. Still, nothing but respect for Dunlop flats.
I thought about revisiting the Dunlops, but I’m done with all that. I must’ve spent about $500+ on strings in the past couple years. I’d buy, use for a month, sell, buy a new set. This repeated for two years and just about drove me nuts. Of course, TIs took $65 up of that $500+.
Now try doing that on an upright and you'd probably triple what you spent
I don't blame you one bit for bailing on the string tryouts. I've been very disappointed as much as I've been excited.No way, I’ve gotten wiser, I’d like to think. The first set I put on a stand up will be the only set to touch it till one breaks, then I’ll replace it alone. Of course, I’m wiser now so I know that’s complete bs.Now try doing that on an upright and you'd probably triple what you spent
Well I didn't get the 120 flat B because they're for my Precision, but the 120 B works a treat on my 5 with Super Bright Nickels. However, I did get the 40/100 set of flats today, 4 days earlier than expected. And if the 120 B is anything like the other strings, my educated opinion is if you can get used to the different tension on the 120, you'll love them in flats.
God I love these strings! Since I have a gig tomorrow morning, I hurried up and yanked the Chromes and put the Dunlops on and gave them a setup. All I had to do was ever-so-slightly loosen the truss rod, just barely move two saddles for intonation, and adjust down the G side of the pickup by half a turn, which I needed to do anyway. The longest part of the setup by far was getting the Hipshot Xtender set correctly. But I love everything about them, especially the low tension, and as easy as the 45-105 Dunlop flats are to play, I'm going to have a hard time going back to them.
Won't do a full review, but here's a handful of quick observations:
---They stay in tune great, even after repeated flipping of the Hipshot's lever.
---Usually I rub Eucerin cream on my strings to deaden them, but I couldn't get the D and G Chromes strings to settle down enough, even after repeated overnight coatings and sweating like a pig on them in the hot Florida summer sun. I applied a coat to the Dunlops once, wiped it off after an hour, and they're pretty darn dead already, even the D and G string, and although there's still some leftover brightness on them, they're way more dead than the Chromes ever were in a month and a half. If you try it, only use plain white Eucerin cream, not the special formulas.
---Just like the 45-105 set, these are the smoothest and least grabby flats I've ever used, bar none. They're almost like there's no windings at all.
---I had to give up the double stop lever on my Hipshot because they're low tension, and with the Fender keys I have (09 AmStd and 83 neck on 76 body), the lowest I can go is a slightly sharp C, so B is out of the question. Not a big deal, though...with flats I have no need to go lower than D.
---I strung these strings thru-body instead of my usual top loading for the lamest of reasons...the sliks at the ball end are slightly longer than the saddles would sit, and even though it doesn't affect sound or playability, I didn't want to look at it or trim the silks back. But the good news is they didn't break, so unless they break soon, I'll say they're fine with stringing thru-body, although it makes zero difference to the sound.
---And speaking of sound, I love the sound. Very bright and zingy when new, but that goes away quickly, especially with the Eucerin cream treatment. And then they settle into a nice full bottom end, somewhat reduced mid content from Chromes but not so much where you lose your note definition, and a very pleasing-but-reduced top end thwack when you use a pick that's not nearly as irritating as other types of flats I've used.
So now I have to decide whether I want the other two sets I have in 45-105 or replace them with 40-100. I'll probably keep using them since they're going on basses I don't gig very often...one set's on my parts PJ, and it might not be a bad idea to keep them on it so I have a workout bass. Might try the other set on my Jay Turser violin bass that has Chromes currently. It's short scale and uses medium scale strings, but the tuners are actual bass tuners and not guitar keys like the Hofners, so there's a good chance they won't break if I put them on. So I will probably try them. Probably going to keep the LaBella DTF's on my Realistic violin bass and Dano Longhorn, though. They're old and nicely broken in, and they sound really good on those basses. And they're basses where it just seems right to have LaBellas.
We'll see...as always, I reserve the right to change my mind
Last edited:
