Flatwound Tension

[GIBrat51]

The SM77 I have installed on my jazz bass, with its highly sensitive neck to high tension strings, don’t feel like bridge cables at all.
Somebody in another thread suggested that they may be considered a cheaper alternative to TI JF344 and I have to substantially agree with this statement.

Sorry; I was thinking of the RS77s. The Roto SM77's tension is listed on Roto's chart as 178.57 lbs. total. Which, while not nearly as bridge cable-y as the RS77LD's on my Gibson T-bird (214.41 lbs.), is, IMO, either at the top of "medium high", or the bottom side of "very high". They pull 35 lbs. harder than the TIJFs do, in any case. Personally? I'd consider the Fender 9050L's to be a much better substitute for the TI's. An Eastwood Magnum Bass (with 9050Ls) is an unlikely A/B comparison with an Alembic Epic (TIJFs), but, to my ears? They sound surprisingly similar. The 9050L's tension is no worse than the Roto SM's (probably less, actually). And their tone is remarkably similar to the TI's. Maybe a little more bottom end, and a little less high end, than the TIs, but... pretty much the same. I had them on my '78 P-Bass (with the Jazz spec "A" neck) for several years. Never a problem, neck-wise. They'd be there yet, but I wanted a more "vintage" P-Bass sound, and the GHS P-Bass Flats are as close as I can get to the original factory Squire Flats sound. So, it wears those, now. Oh, and before the 9050Ls? For the first 8 or so years I owned it, when it was my only bass, it wore those bridge cable RS77LDs. Never had a problem with those, either...

 

[JMacBass65]

Papuzzo: At close to 100 bucks US (with tax) for a set of 4 TI flats, I would say a potential buyer would like to know all the pros and cons before gambling that kind of money on an experiment. Maybe our posts will help.
Fortunately, the bass string world has dozens of excellent alternatives for around 30 bucks.

Nothing sounds or feels like TIs. Been using them since 2010 and they spoiled me for anything else. If the OP bought a set for $100 and didn't like them, I'm sure he could unload them for $75 without much trouble.

 

[Tim Skaggs]

I read through the thread with some amusement about TI Jazz flats and tension. The published tension numbers for JF344’s are accurate as far as I know, so the tension to bring each string up to standard pitch of the note the string was designed for, is the published value.

The listed tension value would be for a specific scale length, and most likely that would be 34”. To get the same strings up to pitch on a shorter scale would take less tension, and to get them up to pitch on a longer scale would take more tension. This is a common phenomenon that can be observed in a lot of circumstances other than strings on a bass (zip lines, clothes lines, etc)

As far as how TI Jazz flats feel, that is going to vary based on neck relief, nut slot height above the frets / fingerboard, and bridge saddle height. It’s likely that TI Jazz flats would feel like “noodles” to most players if they were installed & tuned to pitch on a Fender Jazz bass with .003” of neck relief measured between the 8th fret and a long straight edge sitting on the 1st fret & 17th frets.

Same strings, same bass, no other changes except the neck relief adjusted to .025” measured the same way as described above. It’s likely most players would find the strings no longer feel like noodles, and some would find the strings actually feel tighter than medium tension.

Of course, the perception of the player holding the bass is a huge variable.

So, in the discussion of how TI JF’s feel, everyone can be equally right, (or wrong) depending on their bass setup and their perception.

 

[JRT64]

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.

I agree. I also use the Labella DTF 760FL, and they are not IMO high tension or "bridge cables" in the least. I can't speak to the higher gauges Labella has but, the 760FL's are quite nice feeling to play, and sound great as do the Dunlop flats, and EB Cobalt flats. I have also used light gauge Chromes on a few of my basses and they have been fine as well. I have never used TI's, but from all the sound demos, and reviews I have heard, I don't think TI's would be to my liking, and I will not spend that much on a string experiment. But if I ever did, I would be much more more inclined to try the Optima RB flats.

 

[Gianni "Orlandez" Orlati]

Sorry; I was thinking of the RS77s. The Roto SM77's tension is listed on Roto's chart as 178.57 lbs. total. Which, while not nearly as bridge cable-y as the RS77LD's on my Gibson T-bird (214.41 lbs.), is, IMO, either at the top of "medium high", or the bottom side of "very high". They pull 35 lbs. harder than the TIJFs do, in any case. Personally? I'd consider the Fender 9050L's to be a much better substitute for the TI's. An Eastwood Magnum Bass (with 9050Ls) is an unlikely A/B comparison with an Alembic Epic (TIJFs), but, to my ears? They sound surprisingly similar. The 9050L's tension is no worse than the Roto SM's (probably less, actually). And their tone is remarkably similar to the TI's. Maybe a little more bottom end, and a little less high end, than the TIs, but... pretty much the same. I had them on my '78 P-Bass (with the Jazz spec "A" neck) for several years. Never a problem, neck-wise. They'd be there yet, but I wanted a more "vintage" P-Bass sound, and the GHS P-Bass Flats are as close as I can get to the original factory Squire Flats sound. So, it wears those, now. Oh, and before the 9050Ls? For the first 8 or so years I owned it, when it was my only bass, it wore those bridge cable RS77LDs. Never had a problem with those, either...

Uhm .. the two features I liked about the Fender’s were the low buying price and that they are very sturdy ..
For the rest they are very stiff strings (don’t know about tension) which made them difficult to play with a muffled sound without many notable characteristics, so I put them in reserve.
The feel of Rotosound SM77 (surface texture) is actually quite similar to that of TI and even their stiffness although TI are slightly more flexible; TI’s tone is more complex but not necessarily better, it depends on the purpose one has.
What I found very interesting about the SM77 is their price .. very low for the overall strings quality.
As of today I have 4 basses with 4 different types of flatwound strings installed .. TI, LaBella DTF 760FL, Chromes and SM77.
I installed on each bass what I found was capable of better pairing with the instruments’ pickups without being too much on the high-tension side.

 

[Geogio]

I rarely change strings. I've only had one string ever break and that was on a fretless and it broke down by the bridge in the middle of a song and I never figured out why but those were probably Ernie Ball, which got me off of those, even though I thought they were okay strings. If you desire to have less flop on your Low E then I suggest maybe getting about a half an inch metal tubing smooth it out and then thread your strength through that before you put it on a top loader, I think through body stringing might tighten that up a little bit for you as well.

Short scale basses are less floppy as well.

Another suggestion I have is that you get a hold of experienced Luthier who has changed lots of strings on lots of guitars and basses and probably has much more experience then say perhaps me who changes their strings once every year maybe.

 

[Discount Bassy]

Kudos to the necromancer who resurrected this thread after it lay fallow for eight and a half years.

 

[GIBrat51]

Not the oldest one to be resurrected, by any means... I've done it myself a time or two. Sometimes, if it's a subject that comes up often (and I doubt that anyone would say that "flatwound tension" doesn't), it's easier - and makes more sense - to hitch your wagon to an existing thread. Of course, if you just like the thrill - such as it is - of starting a thread of your own? Then hey; go for it...

 

[Geogio]

Kudos to the necromancer who resurrected this thread after it lay fallow for eight and a half years.

The first go-round of this thread didn't get a whole lot of traction, Plus in the eight years between origination and re-firing there's been a lot of technological changes in string technology, or at least more options for the enthusiast.

I'm glad when people use old threads because it gives you an idea what people were talking about whenever the thread first came into being.

 

[Discount Bassy]

Recycling at its finest. I wonder how many threads there would actually be without the rampant redundancy of topic.

 

[mexicanyella]

I’ve only tried D’Addario Chrome flats, but had read here on TB that the tension ran higher with those for a given gauge...so I decided to drop slightly in gauge in hopes of keeping the same basic playing feel.

I went from Dunlop .045-.105 rounds to the chromes in .045-.100, and was happy to find they felt familiar and good, surface texture difference notwithstanding.

 

[bassdude51]

TI Flats are around 141 lbs pull.

D'Addario Chromes 40-95 are around 163 lbs pull.
" " 40-100 172 lbs " .
" " 45-100 177 lbs " .