Now that the deals can be had on Amazon, is anyone really paying $75 (let alone, close to $100) for a set of TI jazz flats? I paid a few bucks under $50 for a set. I also, judiciously waited, before buying a new set of TI round wounds for about $40 awhile back. I just bought a set of LaBella LTF's for $35 brand new from Chicago Music. I'm always amazed at how people will spend a fortune on an amp, a bass, pedals, or whatever but then complain about $15-$20 over strings they probably won't have to change for years.
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 Tension
- Thread starter Lo-E
- Start date
It's not hyperbole or exaggeration to indicate TI's are floppy. The fact that you are comfortable with their tension is great! However, compared to every other string on the market, TI's are floppy. @martinc has kindly posted a measurable example showing the huge difference in tension between TI's and a representative example of other strings. You, sir, are simply wrong or have a different definition of "floppy" than the rest of us (even those that love TI's and who describe them as floppy compared to other strings). I hope someone searching for comments on TI tension looks at every other post available on that topic because they will realize that you are alone in your opinion. Rock on!
I hope someone searching for comments on TI tension looks at every other post available on that topic because they will realize that you are alone in your opinion. Rock on!
That is not true and there are a great many threads here on TI Flats and there seems to be a 50:50 split, as in some people love 'em, some people hate 'em. The haters usually bring up words like floppy. Since there is no clear consensus, I finally caved and got a set to find out for myself. To me they are no more floppy than 45-100 roundwounds. Yes, they are certainly a lot more flexible than Chromes and probably all other flatwounds, but they are just as playable as light gauge roundwounds are. This is my experience. Because it does not match yours does not mean I am wrong or alone in my opinion. If I were alone in my opinion, I doubt Thomastik would bother to market and distribute them to a market size of 1. There's a reason why there is so much buzz about these strings and why so many people use them regardless if a public forum often calls them "floppy."
More importantly, those who are looking for flatwounds that are lower in tension that typical flatwounds but are afraid of this "floppy" tension should do as I did and forget about what a public forum says and find out firsthand for yourself. In my case I was rewarded with a set for flatwounds that are very comfortable to play, unlike many flatwounds, and have a particularly pleasing tonality. YMMV.
We can also look at another common argument here, that being LaBella strings are way too stiff, stiff like bridge cables. Is this true or is this more hyperbole? I see this all the time here concerning the 760FL set, and I am afraid to try them. I imagine a bridge cable to be extremely stiff and I can't imagine it even winding around a tuning peg. So, if LaBella strings are like bridge cables, are Rotosound flats like rebar?
Saying people love or hate TI’s is not the point — everyone has a personal preference for strings. Saying they are floppy in comparison to most (all, IME) strings is accurate. It is not a reflection on the string sounding good or it not being useable 
, it is a reflection that you’re probably going to have to adjust how you play, and possibly the setup on your bass, to avoid issues that result from the low tension. For full disclosure I think they sound great. I am a former TI user. The low tension was substantial however and didn’t give me the feel I wanted with the type of setup I typically run with.
As far as Labellas go, IME they are not bridge cables. Rotos are bridge cables. Labellas (I’ve used a max .105 set) I would rate in the normal to high normal tension range. YMMV.
, it is a reflection that you’re probably going to have to adjust how you play, and possibly the setup on your bass, to avoid issues that result from the low tension. For full disclosure I think they sound great. I am a former TI user. The low tension was substantial however and didn’t give me the feel I wanted with the type of setup I typically run with.As far as Labellas go, IME they are not bridge cables. Rotos are bridge cables. Labellas (I’ve used a max .105 set) I would rate in the normal to high normal tension range. YMMV.
I understand your point, I am hoping you are able to understand mine. Imagine a person who usually plays roundwounds and wants to try out some brighter flats. If someone calls TI Flats "floppy" others think of a roundwound string downtuned 2 whole steps. Now that yields a floppy string. So, that and the price premium one must often pay for TI Flats discourages anyone from trying these strings. So, they instead go out and buy a set of Chromes to avoid that floppiness. Now, the difference in feel between Chromes and roundwounds is very noticeable, especially on the G and D strings. But, TI Flats have more or less the same tension as a typical set of roundwounds. Thus, the term "floppy" has misled the end user into making a mistake that could have been avoided if "floppy" was better defined. This is true, because it happened to me.
As a favor to those coming here for information before making a purchase of TI Flats, I recommend we start telling people that TI Flats feel more or less like a set of roundwounds, while all other flatwound strings are usually more tight feeling under the fingers, some more some less. Compared to the thickest gauge Rotosound flats, or the Jamerson Labellas, TI Flats are going to feel "floppy." But compared to a set of roundwounds, there will be little difference. Doesn't that better define "floppy?"
I used D'Addario XL165's and 170's for many years (mostly Labella DTF these days). I found TI Flats to be considerably lower tension than either, and not useable for my purposes. So no, I don't agree with your assessment. I find Labella DTF L (43-104) to be closer in "feel" to the XL165 roundwounds - and not particularly stiff. Not sure where this "bridge cable" stuff comes from. ...maybe from the Jamerson set? Further eidence that "useability" is a pretty subjective term if we're talking bass strings.
Last edited:
I am imagining that person who hasn't tried them and wants to. As previously noted here, TI flats have tension ratings of 31-38 lbs. That is **way** below the ratings of other flat wound strings, many of which range from 40-50 lbs tension per string. E.g. The lightest set of Chromes (4 string) ranges from 37-47 lbs, and the heaviest (which is only the .105 E string) are 43-65 lbs. So, yeah, TI's are floppy in comparison - which has nothing to do with the quality or sound of the TI's.
As an offshoot, if you like low tension but need something just a bit more than TI's, I highly recommend the Labella Low Tension flats. Might still be too low tension for some, but these are a couple of steps above the TI's in tension and, IME, didn't compromise how I play (and they are Labellas and they sound awesome). I currently use either the Labella Low Tension flats or Dunlop flats (which a very supple, but more towards a light to regular tension string when using the .105's).
Something interesting to note...
"Tension" (as in pulling weight) vs. "tension" (as in stiffness/flexibility)... La Bella Low Tension Flats are actually "lower in tension" (as in pulling weight) than TI Jazz Flats (134.9 lbs. vs. 140.2 lbs.), but the TI's are the "more flexible" (as in playing feel) of the two.
We can talk about tension figures all day, but they don't always tell the whole story regarding how a set of strings actually FEEL under the fingers both for fretting and plucking. It's up to the subjective assessment on the part of the player. So, we just need to read between the lines when people use a hyperbole like "wet spaghetti" or "bridge cables".
Good to know
. I well henceforth refer to TI's as "wet noodles" and LTF's as "al dente". 
In this very thread there is another who feels the same as I do. I suspect most TI flats users will concur that TI flats are not wet noodles and are in fact very playable, very comfortable under the fingers, sound great and are at least worth a shot in the quest for the holy grail of flatwounds.
Guys, I see many threads on flatwounds and tension and I think there are way to many exaggerations when I suspect the real differences between various sets of flatwounds are less than what we read here. I tried TI flats because I don't really like the tension of the G and D strings of 45-100 Chromes. I really want to try DTB 760FL strings but way too many people here say they are like bridge cables. Should I believe them and never try 760FLs?
These are hard to find here in Italy. My next order to Thomann will include a pack of LTFs.
I really don't mind a little tension under my fingers and normally play 45-105 or 45-135 roundwounds on my jazz bazzes and others. I just don't want any more tension than the Chromes currently on a 5 string P bass. I probably will find a string I like better and eventually ditch the Chromes. I would like to try Labellas but there is the fear of too much tension.
The term "bridge cables" mostly refers to the 1954 Originals (aka "Jamerson"). I've tried the 760FL (43-104) and found them to be quite playable; in fact, they're better-balanced and more comfortable to play on than the D'A Chromes ECB81 (45-100), which I found to be very uneven with uncomfortably stiff G and D.
In this very thread another has commented that the 760Fls are high tension and quickly wore out his wrists. That is not very reassuring to me. But you are right in saying that usability is highly subjective because finding consensus on any given set of flatwounds is harder than getting a democrat and a republican to find consensus.
It’s not surprising though. Scale length, string construction, gauge & tension are about the only objective measures I can think of. Feel is subjective, tone is subjective, hand strength and picking style is wildly variable, and string life is inconsistent from player to player. I wouldn’t expect consensus, only opinions, and hopefully some information. It’s a lifelong quest. Just ask any DB player
Last edited:
It’s not surprising though. Scale length, string construction, gauge & tension are about the only objective measures I can think of. Feel is subjective, tone is subjective, hand strength and picking style is wildly variable, and string life is inconsistent from player to player. I wouldn’t expect consensus, only opinions, and hopefully some information. It’s a lifelong quest. Just ask any DB player
I think you are right, we all have our own particular preferences, playing styles and favorites. When someone makes a claim that sounds like hyperbole another must use common sense to decipher the truth. It's been fun guys, and I hope future readers of this thread get my point when it gets re-resurrected in another 10 years.
