• 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 Super Bright nickel vs SIT Foundation nickle

R

regtan26

Mar 27, 2013
6
6
#1
I read a few posts that says the Foundation is SIT's version of Dunlop super bright. That they are both made with similar construction which is a thinner than usual hex core. So I got curious and I got both of them the other day and put them on my yamaha BB1200S and yamaha LB1JJ both are 45-105 gauge.

The dunlop goes on the LB1JJ to replace 2 years old Ernie ball cobalt flats 45-100 and the Foundation goes on the BB1200S to replace a 1 yr old daddario XT nickel 45-105. Both basses are neck through construction. The BB have a single reverse P pickup and a switch to switch between a passive (vol/tone) and an active (vol/bass/mid/treble) circut option. The LB have Jazz pickups and an active circuitry with (vol/blend/bass/treble). Both bass are setup identically, neck relief .005", string height from G to E 1.6-2mm

Tension
Tension-wise both have very similar feel. The Dunlop might have a little more give, more bounce, but it could be just my feeling.

Surface feel
On right hand I can feel that the dunlop definitely smoother, but I dont notice it on my left hand .

Tone
Dunlop is darker and more middy unplugged, while the Foundation is more scooped and zingy. This translate to the plugged in tone. This could be the fact that thy are on 2 different bass but from my observation the dunlop being smoother and more flexible somewhat might contribute to less zing.

Anything else you guys want to know just shout here and I will answer the best that I can. I've only been into bass since 2024, been a long time guitar player, but now I hardly touch my guitars since I enjoy playing the bass so much. Now I am obsessing over string type and brands. Did some experiment with flatwound last year on my other basses and still have multiple packs of flatwound from different brands that I havent got a chance to try yet. Need to buy more bass!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrentSimons, smogg and One Way
#4
tanr26 said:
I live in jakarta indonesia where humidity range from 70 to 90+ so im pretty sure itll take faster for them to age here.
Click to expand...
That's an excellent testing ground for any string. The question I always ask is NOT "how do they sound brand new out of the package?", but "how do they sound once broken in and how long do they retain that broken-in tone before they sound worn out?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: eriky4003, Kyle_S, BrentSimons and 3 others
#5
michael_t said:
That's an excellent testing ground for any string. The question I always ask is NOT "how do they sound brand new out of the package?", but "how do they sound once broken in and how long do they retain that broken-in tone before they sound worn out?"
Click to expand...
The Daddario XT that was in the BB1200S was 2 years old, but it was on another bass for about a year and then it was taken off and kept away until it was put back on the BB when I got it about 3 months ago. The E string was starting to get dull and reduced sustain, and the A, D and G still had a good amount of brightness and sustain. It doesnt really age with grace, its not old with character rather its just old and dead. But 2 years is good enough for a roundwound.

The Ernie ball cobalt flats was about 3 years old it was passed on from my p bass to the yamaha LB around 5 months ago. It was already settled by the time it was on the LB. I actually liked it very much but I miss the sound of rounds on the LB, such a great rock machine. the EB settled was mellow but not dead, sustain was very good and the tone was silky and smooth.
 
#7
3 MONTHS UPDATE

I had to read my posting again to remember which strings went where. The Dunlop on the LB1JJ is now stiffer compared to the SIT on the BB1200s.

I like the SIT on the BB. Its not dead in anyway. Still have decent amount of zing. The Dunlop have lost a little of its zing and has become less flexible and less alive. Im actually thinking of swapping it for a set of 40-95 SIT.

The SiT foundation is very responsive to the dynamics of my right hand. Will be trying another set for my jazzbass in the near future.

I will leave them on for a little bit longer and report back after 6 months.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrentSimons, eriky4003, One Way and 2 others
#8
Another update. I always felt the dunlop super brights on the LB1JJ was always stiffer than the SIT foundation especially on the low E. Today I was playing it unplugged and noticed that the screw that held down the bridge to the body on the bass side was protuding off the bridge pkate but not on the treble side. So I went to tightened it and it turned and now its flushed against the bridge plate. Then I noticed the low E is no longer as stiff as before. I guess because the screw was not tight to the body it was killing some of the vibration and now its vibrating freely.

It is now a bit looser and felt similar to the SIT Foundation on the BB1200S. Now that its like this I want to say that the Dunlop is now a little darker and more complex compared to the SIT. But they are very similar. Being they are both on 2 different bass I cant say for sure that if I swap the strings around they would feel and sound different. The Dunlop was more than twice the price of the SIT.
 
#12
7 MONTHS UPDATE

The SIT keeps its liveliness eventhough the highs have smooth out a lot but it still alive and well. The Dunlop feels more dampened compared to the SIT and have become very rounded but I would still use it. It started out darker compared to the SIT and have aged accordingly.

I think I would go for SIT Foundation next time considering the price difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tindrum, michael_t and One Way

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back