I've been hanging out here for some time now and never seen any numbers being given out. I think this is a numberless club.
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.
Flatwound Club
- Thread starter Surprise Panda!
- Start date
I've been hanging out here for some time now and never seen any numbers being given out. I think this is a numberless club.
I have indeed played the 760FS and TI JF344 on the same basses, a Sandberg VS4, a Fender CS 59 P and a Fender MIJ 51 P.
Disclaimer: I like both set of strings. However, they are fairly different beasts:
Tension: 760FS has medium-to-high tension for a flatwound. Compared to a well-known flat, D'Addario Chromes, I'd say they are about on par with the ECB81 set, a bit lower than the ECB82 set. The TI JF344, on the other hand, definately has lighter tension than the 760FS, but in addition to that, they also feel looser, if that makes sense.
Feel: The plus sides for me with 760FS' tension and feel are that it allows me to dig in a bit, and it feels very much like I'm playing THE BASS. The plus sides for me with JF344's tension and feel are that it allows for vibrato, bends, and they are definately easier on the wrist and fingers than the 760FS. In a recent article by Ed Friedland, he described the TIs as having an "orchestral" vibe, IIRC. I totally agree.
Tone: 760FS has the classic, dark, full, thumpy flatwound sound once they are broken in. New, they are surprisingly clear and sparkly. They also become less "hi-fi" once the break in, and develop into a more "dirty" sound, if that makes sense. I personally can't tell the difference between 760FS and the Jamerson set, so I'd say you get that Motown sound if you want. For me and many others, the LaBella DTB flatwounds are the tonal archetype that other flats are compared to. Some say they have scooped mids, but bear in mind that pickup voicing, EQ settings and your amp also contribute. On my Fender CS 59 P played through my Ampeg SVT-VR amp and 810-AV cab, they certainly don't feel like they're lacking in mids.
The TIs have a different tone, definately. To me, they sound like they have an even better balance between lows, mids and highs than the LaBellas. Also, they have a rich, organic, "musical" midrange that few other strings have. It's hard to compare their sound to any other string, but being a nickel flatwound, Pyramid Gold and Optima flats have some of the same characteristics, IMO. The more I play Chromes, the more I seem to think there are some similarities to the TI's mid range, too, even though I'm surprised to hear it. Some say they have a lacking low end, I can understand that in a way, especially if you compare them to the LaBellas. On the other hand, it's the low mids and mid range that stand out in a mix, so my personal opinion is that they are well balanced, sound-wise.
Hope that helps. I can add that I love the sound of the TIs, but I have developed a taste for heavier gauges, so atm I'm mostly playing on Sadowsky black label flats, 045-105. But I'm missing the rich sound of the TIs from time to time, even though the Sadowskys are great strings in every way too. I have LaBella 760FMs on my Fender MIJ 51 P, as I like a bit heavier tension than the FS set.
While we're on this subject, I'd like to add my nickel's worth to what @Klonk said above...
My top three favorite flats happen to fit right in between the 760FS and the JF344.
- La Bella 760FL (43-60-82-104) - Thick, thumpy and old-school, just like the 760FS, except for slightly less tension and better string-to-string balance. Silky smooth finish.
- Fender 9050CL (45-60-80-105) - Similar tension and playing feel to the 760FL, but not quite as "polished and refined" as the La Bella. Less thump, but still full-bodied with some low-mid grind once broken in.
- Sadowsky SBF40 (40-60-80-100) - Very comfortable tension and playing feel, though not as flexible as the TI. Plenty of low end, but with rich smooth mids for clarity and articulation. Less thump and more punch than the 760FL, less grind than the 9050CL. The same silky smooth finish as the LB.
Finally strung the Fenders on my TMB, haven't really tried them yet but I can say they were super easy to install -my only other experience were EB Custom Gauges and they were a pita in comparison- and I liked that. They also fixed a buzzing it had around 16th fret and up.
Had to lightly file the nut, first time around with that but I did good, it took me all about 10 seconds. There has to be some pun about a G string fitting perfectly but I can't find it
Had to lightly file the nut, first time around with that but I did good, it took me all about 10 seconds. There has to be some pun about a G string fitting perfectly but I can't find it
Both of my 760FL and Sadowblk 40-100 are broke in well. I found the Sadow lost it bottom clearly especially 100E string, the 40G string sound thinner compare to the rest when in mix. Overall tone is in the Middle-range although i let the Tone pot range at 50% .All string output decrease.
Meanwhile, the 760FL is become thud and woody(not dead and muddy), it still keep the Lo and Lo-mid well. Tweak the tone knob around 70~80% and increase some hi-mid and treble at Amp ,it could bring some upper mid punch. Overall tone output is nice balance from string to string and keep great output volume.
The 760Fl handle to low note on E string better than Sadow, more focus and solid tone.
And....... Roll off the tone and add some overdrive, the 760FL sound really great with pick!!!!
Meanwhile, the 760FL is become thud and woody(not dead and muddy), it still keep the Lo and Lo-mid well. Tweak the tone knob around 70~80% and increase some hi-mid and treble at Amp ,it could bring some upper mid punch. Overall tone output is nice balance from string to string and keep great output volume.
The 760Fl handle to low note on E string better than Sadow, more focus and solid tone.
And....... Roll off the tone and add some overdrive, the 760FL sound really great with pick!!!!
Thanks for the update on the Sadowsky. Mine were on my P only for four months so I never did have a chance to do any meaningful long-term assessment. I would consider using them again, but only if I could get them in my preferred gauges, 45-60-80-105.
My P bass is now wearing the GHS Pressurewounds and I'm really digging the tone I'm getting out of them. Meanwhile, what I need is a second P bass so I can re-activate my 760FL for those occasions when I need the old-school thump.
By the way, I'm happy to report to you that my J is sounding fabulous now that it has the Fender 9050CL on it!
The .105-E is a huge improvement over the .100-E on the 9050L. 
Just an update...
It's been a couple of months since I put the Fender 9050CL on my J, and I couldn't be happier with the combo. DONE DEAL!
Meanwhile, it's been an agonizing two months for me as a die-hard flatwound enthusiast to have the 760FL just sitting there quietly in a Ziploc waiting for my next bass, which may not be here any time soon. This is not to say I haven't enjoyed playing my P with the Pressurewounds, but it all comes down to what gives me the most satisfaction and enjoyment as a low end specialist.
I will be playing my P with the PWs just one more time this weekend, then come Monday, it will be reunited with the 760FL. The PWs can wait for my next bass.
A flatwound junkie I am...
Easier said than done. It's a matter of priorities.
I need to save my money for a new amp and cabs first before a third bass.
What!?! You mean you only have two basses?! The situation is worse than I thought! I didn't realize that you haven't even been to third bass.
Last edited:
One wife, two basses (P & J) and three sons...
I'd be quite content even if these are the only two basses I'll ever play for the rest of my life.
One wife and 6 children.One wife, two basses (P & J) and three sons...
I'd be quite content even if these are the only two basses I'll ever play for the rest of my life.
I can't afford new basses so I keep buying strings.
I've been hanging out here for some time now and never seen any numbers being given out. I think this is a numberless club.
Numberless club, yessir.First time seeing this thread! I'll take number 344, as in JF344, thanks!
And if that's already taken......................too bad.
Anybody got a # list of members compiled?
On a different note ♪ I'm thinking pretty seriously about moving the LaBella FX's from my P to one of my J's. They were getting too dull for the P and should 'theoretically' work better on this J since it is a pretty bright bass.
That leaves the P open to finally put on the Sadowsky Black Label 40-100 Flats!
Thoughts?
That leaves the P open to finally put on the Sadowsky Black Label 40-100 Flats!
Thoughts?
JUST DO IT! Based on my experience, the Sadowsky should give your P the punch and clarity you're lacking in those La Bellas.
I absolutely LOVED the FX's on the P when they were newish! And the J is SO bright, it needs something to dull it a little. I'll do it tomorrow, thanks!
I've realized LaBellas are THE sound I was going for with all the other flats I've tried. Hope the Sadowskys are close enough in tone to the LBs!!
I've realized LaBellas are THE sound I was going for with all the other flats I've tried. Hope the Sadowskys are close enough in tone to the LBs!!
I would say the Sads are the closest thing to the LBs, except they do have slightly richer mids for punch and clarity. Coming from the same family, the Sads do share the same silky smooth feel as the LBs.
