I love the 9050L set. I’ve used them on both top loader and through body basses. I’ve used 9050L, Chromes, and Ernie Ball group 3 all on my string through bass with so ill side effects.
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.
Fender Flatwounds 9050L String Thru Body
- Thread starter MattF007
- Start date
I've been exclusively playing with flats for 20 years, still trying different brands and gauges. Got my favourites for different styles and scale lengths.
I used all of them through body.. I cut all of them short for med/short scale basses and wind wound parts on tuner pegs.
I actually asked around this forums before trying expensive strings that way. All experienced players said; nothing happened to me yet but do it on your own expense.
I used all of them through body.. I cut all of them short for med/short scale basses and wind wound parts on tuner pegs.
I actually asked around this forums before trying expensive strings that way. All experienced players said; nothing happened to me yet but do it on your own expense.
D
Agreed. I'm sure it will work fine with many flats but SOME flats will definitely unravel over time if the break angle over the saddles is too steep and I'm not interesting in spending my own money to find out which. The only flats I wouldn't worry about stringing thru-body are TI flats. I don't see how it could be a problem with such flexible strings.
The ONLY point of stringing thru-body is to improve the break angle over the saddles. If the break angle is already sufficient with top loading there will be no benefits from thru-body (except maybe on a theoretical level). With most (nearly all) Fender basses the break-angle is already sufficient with top loading, so there will be no real benefits from thru-body stringing. I've seen people argue that the part of the string that goes through the body will somehow improve the tone by transferring vibrations into the body but that's just ridiculous. The whole point of increasing the break angle over the saddle is to ISOLATE that part of the string from the vibrating part of the string. Theoretically this could give you better sustain but only if the break angle was insufficient to begin with, which just isn't the case with most top loaded Fenders.
Some basses, like Danelectros, have a MUCH poorer break angle over the saddles than top-loaded Fenders. With Danos I'm pretty sure there WOULD be a noticeable difference between top loading and thru-body (if Danos actually offered thru-body that is...). But they still sound great. They can be slightly more difficult to set up properly though. The range between uncomfortably high action and poor tone (weird jangly overtones or even buzzing over the saddles) can be VERY narrow. But when set up correctly they sound great. Different, but great.
Of course the break angle matters. Some GUITARS even get their signature tone from a poor break angle over the saddles/nut, like the G-strings on most Fender guitars, Jazzmasters and some guitars with tail pieces.
But if the break angle over the saddles is already sufficient (like on most top loaded Fender P/J-basses) there won't be a noticeable difference from stringing thru-body. On a Fender bass I would be far more worried about the poor break angle over the A-string NUT slot. This is an actual REAL problem, on all Fender-style basses without a string retainer for the A-string. The tone of the open A will improve significantly with a string retainer to increase the pressure over the nut and get rid of nasty over tones (and potentially also buzzing). But top loading the bridge? Not an issue AT ALL on most Fenders IMO.
Last edited:
They will be fine. I have a couple of string through body basses including a '51 MIJ P Bass. Never had any issues and I play them regularly.
No idea about string through as my jazz bass doesn't have that, but regarding set up, I changed from D'Addario XL 45-105 to the 9050L set and didn't have to tweak the truss rod or do much of a set up.
Just adding this pic to keep a few of posters up all night clutching their pearls in horror.
I installed the strings, gave the truss rod just about 1/8 of a turn first. The action is fantastic, nice and low, no string buzz and no odd noise from the open D string that I was experiencing with the previous set. The strings seemed very pliable when I put them on and the tension is perfect. Not too stiff or loose. A little bright but I know they will tame down with some use. So far very happy. Haven’t had a chance to plug them in yet but so far so good.
Many early 50s Fender Custom Shop P bass models come from the factory with the ML version of those strings strung through-body. I've also used both L and ML sets on string-through basses and never had an issue.
I've had EB Colbalt Flats thru body on my Stingray Classic 5 for about 8 years. Never a problem.
Objectively I think the break angle causes the winding to separate, which compromises the durability of the string.
Subjectively it seems to me that stringing through the body and choosing flatwound strings would serve conflicting tone goals, at least if you want thump and rapid decay.
Those already have separations in the wind by design, so I think they behave more like a roundwound in this situation anyway. Excellent strings if a bit sticky.
You could follow some of the novels on this thread about hypothetical harm and benefits/drawbacks, but I've done this many times with both 9050's and Chromes, kept them on basses through years of hard playing, and never had an issue. I'd just go ahead and do it and move on. It will be fine.
Give them a few weeks to months the really settle into their sound. I’ve got a set that’s been in use since 2019 on my CV50s p and I swear they just keep sounding better.
While some brands of flatwound shouldn't be strung through body, Fender 9050's work fine. They are the right length and the construction of them allows them to string through. I've NEVER had one break on me.
Certainly; they're your strings, and it's your bass. Personally, I try very hard, not to tell people what to do with their stuff...
But, enough of that. You have questions, which I will try to answer as best as I can.
1. Flats on a thru-body bass. Far as I know, @HaphAsSard is correct; La Bella is the only company that advises against stringing their flats thru-body; and, they're also the only company that makes flats expressly for thru-body stringing. They're the ones that have a "TB" suffix. And, they also make flats expressly for Fender Mustang basses, which have to be strung that way.
2. Based on my limited experience with stringing basses thru-body (I only have one bass where thru-body is an option, and one new-to-me-bass that's thru-body only), here's the crux of the issue, far as I can tell. What causes the problem with flats, is their general inflexibility (compared to rounds), and the break angle coming up thru the ferrule hole, over the bridge saddle. It's a very acute angle on some basses, and, IMO, they're the ones most likely to have problems. Some, like my '06 Carvin LB-20, with it's Hipshot "B" bridge, have a comparatively shallow break angle, and probably wouldn't have a problem with most flats. Wouldn't want to try it with a set of Roto SH77LDs, though. They're pretty much bridge cables, right out of the package... My thru-body only bass is a '93 Fury Anthem lined fretless. The mad genius who built all the Fury basses and guitars by himself - in his basement - designed the ferrules with a slanted opening coming up thru the bridge plate, along with a fairly long, shallow break angle over the bridge saddles. I have Roto 88 Tapes on it, but it was obviously designed to have no problems with any kind of string...
3. The Fender 9050's. Those are the 9050Ls, and are some of my favorite flats. Personally, I'd have no problem stringing that Fender P-Bass thru-body with them - although, I do prefer to top load strings on any bass that gives me the choice. The Fender flats are pretty much average as far as tension and stiffness go (they are not the same thing). My '78 P-Bass has the optional-at-the-time "A" profile neck, which is basically a '78 Jazz Bass neck with dot fretboard inlays and a "Precision Bass" headstock decal. It wore Roto RS77LD's for years before I put the Fender flats on it, with no problem. And, it's wearing 45-105 GHS Precision Flats now - with no problem. As for the truss rod? You might have to give it a tweek - or, you might not. I've had the 9050L's on several basses over the years, and still have them on two of the 26 I currently own. I can't recall ever having to make serious truss rod adjustments on any bass I ever put them on. In fact, I generally had to loosen the TR a bit, because they had less tension than the strings they replaced...
So, bottom line? String your bass thru-body with the Fenders if you want. Chances are, you won't have a problem. As for adjusting the truss rod? It is always a good idea to run thru the set-up steps whenever you change strings - especially when you make serious string changes - like changing from rounds to flats. Some stuff might change; some stuff might not. But, you'll never know - unless you check...
Last edited:
