• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

False harmonic on F# string?

Your problem is most likely caused by too long exposed core past the bridge witness point. I had the same problem with Conklin SIT strings on my 7-string (Link Removed).

Longer exposed length and greater difference between full gauge and exposed core both messes up the harmonics alignment. String sounds like crap, and crappier the farther up the neck you play.
 
it's interesting how every one is saying that the exposed F# is not practical. I use exposed core .165 F# and .198 C# and I have none of the problems that every one else seem to have. I have no overtone problem(s) what so ever and I have recordings to prove it.


Plus before every one is so quick to plug their favorite brand,they should also note that ever ones feel is different,equipment is different as well as experience as to what certain low notes really sound like.

Some of the basses that people are trying to put these low notes on aren't even set up electronically to reproduce open low notes under the low B string let,let alone a F# or C#.


Lets be real.more goes into this than just a string.
 
All that's required to get a good F# is a rigid bass with decent mass, and a string flexible enough to present complete harmonic structure compatible with the balance of the string set. Nothing more.


Well why does your bass have a 39" scale? Couldn't you build a shorter scale bass that's rigid with decent mass?
Why do you choose the electronics that go into your basses? Why not just put any pickup(s) or pre in it? Why do you choose to make your basses active?

I'm not being sarcastic Skip but you know a whole lot more goes into a string sounding a certain way than the bass being rigid and having mass.

What about,

Harmonic re-alignment and phase variance?


When I took my low C# string concept to Dean Markley strings, I did my home work and me along with Jeff Landtroop and your business partner in Circle K strings David Brummet,who will tell you himself that it takes a whole lot more than just a rigid bass with mass.

Pretty much the same thing that goes into a F# string goes into a C# string with some minor differences here and there..

And Dean Markley has been very successful with the F# strings that they have been putting out. They just don't do a lot of marketing if any on it and it's light and very functional.
 
Well why does your bass have a 39" scale? Couldn't you build a shorter scale bass that's rigid with decent mass?

What about,

Harmonic re-alignment and phase variance?


When I took my low C# string concept to Dean Markley strings, I did my home work and me along with Jeff Landtroop and your business partner in Circle K strings David Brummet,who will tell you himself that it takes a whole lot more than just a rigid bass with mass.

Pretty much the same thing that goes into a F# string goes into a C# string with some minor differences here and there..

And Dean Markley has been very successful with the F# strings that they have been putting out. They just don't do a lot of marketing if any on it and it's light and very functional.

I have and will make instruments shorter than 39". And I'll make a few longer than 39". To this point they've all done 20 Hz just fine.

I'm a passive guy - harmonic realignment and phase variances are not issues I need to solve. It doesn't need to be that complicated.

The moment the first Quake was strung up it was done with strings I helped design. I can't have your experience - Dean Markley and SIT strings don't fit on my bass. I asked them and just about everyone else - for good money - to play along and was told no.

Truth be told, a good string is a good string. It doesn't matter if it's a .125, a .155 or a .195.

You should get in touch with David.
 
I have and will make instruments shorter than 39". And I'll make a few longer than 39". To this point they've all done 20 Hz just fine.


And we've talked about this in the past.

I'm a passive guy - harmonic realignment and phase variances are not issues I need to solve. It doesn't need to be that complicated.


I agree but the proper ingredients are required in reaching what ever an individuals goal(s) may be.

The moment the first Quake was strung up it was done with strings I helped design. I can't have your experience - Dean Markley and SIT strings don't fit on my bass. I asked them and just about everyone else - for good money - to play along and was told no.

I fully understand. That's why I'll always give Dean Markley,Jeff Landtroop,David Brummet and SIT strings props.

Truth be told, a good string is a good string. It doesn't matter if it's a .125, a .155 or a .195.

It's all how it works in the players hands in most instances.

You should get in touch with David.


Will do.
 
I don't have any experience with low F# strings other than my Conklin 9, which has Conklin SIT strings on and sounds fine.
My comments above were about exposed core strings in general. And my point was that if there is a length of exposed core past the bridge witness point, it wouldn't sound as good. Which makes perfect sense to me, and agrees with my (limited) experience.
Exposed core strings can certainly be good, and probably better, if the core is exposed only at the bridge witness point. Anything more than that, and it'll be like having a thin plain string together with a thick string, vibrating differently.
This can be heard just as easily without the pickups and electronics engaged, meaning that those are not a factor.
 
I installed a 175" (Dark Lord set from Warwick) on a ESP LTD F4 NS (35") Fitted nicely on my handmade trough body system, also on the nut (filled already for BEAD), but my amp does not know to translate such low frequency, especially on my Yamaha 1x10" cab. I will try again with my studio monitors and sub from KRK.
 
Last edited: