• 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.

GHS Pressurewound VS. SIT Silencers

#21
michael_t said:
As far as I know, the SIT Silencers use the standard nickel-plated steel for the wrap wire, while the PWs use Alloy 52 (nickel-iron), the latter being more magnetically active
Click to expand...

That is correct sir. The PWs have a final wrap that is more magnetically active. I'm sure there must be some interaction between that and the PUs. Maybe that was the difference I was hearing initially. (a little more like flats, a bit more "thump" in low /lowmids) I'm not sure if that really has to do with the nickle- iron being "more magnetic" or that it's just different than nickle plated steel?? Or chrome plated or coated strings for that matter. All strings I'm sure have different characteristics with their own voice.

michael_t said:
It will be an interesting comparison swapping them between an active bass and a passive one as to how these two sets would interact with different pickups
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that would really make a difference magnetically , as the magnetic part of the interaction would be at the PUs, pre electronics. Or did I misunderstand? I'm really good at that.:rolleyes:

michael_t said:
I would also be interested in the longevity of these two sets in your experience. My expectation is the PWs have a longer useful life.
Click to expand...

I can't say at this point, as this is my first time using either of these particular strings.
 
#22
funkinbottom said:
Or did I misunderstand?
Click to expand...

No, I don't think you misunderstood anything I was saying.
I was just casually tossing around a few ideas that would make this comparison interesting because of some of the differences between the GHS and the SIT.

I have no experience with the SIT, but I'm a huge fan of the PWs. I find them "extra crunchy" and dynamically responsive on my J and I'm assuming that has something to do with the magnetically active nature of the special alloy.

In terms of longevity, my last two sets of PWs both lasted for one year with still some life left when I took them off. That's why I'm curious about the SIT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arthur U. Poon
#23
I love GHS Pressurewounds, lately I've had a tendency to try out new strings from other brands ie Ernie Ball Cobalt Flats (hated them) and Dunlop Super Brights (i dig them, but not on all basses!) but I always end up back at PressureWounds! I recently had a set of Super Brights on a Cort Artisan Custom SP and they didn't marry well with the bright electronics and tonewoods used in that bass. It sounded harsh in the high end section, so i put some Pressurewounds on to try and counteract this. Although GHS Pressurewounds didn't have the high mid & treble sizzle of Super Brights, They have a beefier bottom end and way more growly low mids which give the bass a big presence. I now have the whole EQ section of the bass with lower settings than i did with Super Brights on. I usually find with Pressurewounds i can get about 10-12 months out of them for their roundwound qualities. After 12 month they become more and more of a flatwound in nature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: minimalist freedom, dagrev, Arthur U. Poon and 1 other person
#24
funkinbottom said:
Just put the pressurewounds on my other bass. I like these a lot also. My first impression is they seem a little bit warmer, more like flats, in the low end without sacrificing mid range punch and clear highs. Also a bit less fret noise than the SIT's. Of course noting is as quiet as flats but flats. I'll have to live with them for a while to really compare. Also, not an even comparison being as though my Spector is active and my Fender (PJ config.) is passive. Probably after a week or two I'll swap them from bass to bass and that should give me a better idea. At this point I feel both sets are very similar with slight differences. Both are excellent quality and sound great with plenty of definition. I'm very happy with both sets. I guess only time will tell which ones I prefer.
Click to expand...

It's good to know the Silencers are similar in tone to the Pressurewounds. Should the folks at GHS ever decide to discontinue making Pressurewounds, I'll start using Silencers.
 
#30
michael_t said:
The PWs are slightly stiffer than the typical rounds of similar gauges. Based on my experience, the ML7200 set (44-58-80-102) is fairly close to the 9050L in terms of overall stiffness.

In terms of tension, the ML7200 weighs in at 169.3 lbs.
Click to expand...

Just to add to my earlier post...

I've switched back and forth between the ML7200 and the 9050L on my Fender Jazz with virtually no truss rod tweak.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yahboy, DavidEdenAria and Linnin
#32
Not used the SIT strings.

I just took off a set of GHS Pressurewounds that had been on my bass for a few years. I've also used the Ken Smith equivilants before (spacing on what they are called right now). Very nice strings that function as you describe, a move back tonally from flatwounds (which I love), but not an abandonment of that feel or palate either. You should try a set.

That said, I've recently put on DR Sunbeams and honestly, they don't feel especially more roundwound to me than the Pressure Wounds do. They are at least as soft under the fingers and have beautiful tonality that can be easily darkened or brightened with pickup and tone controls on my bass or with eq. There were a few alternatives like Dunlop Nickels that were recommended to me as similar, but I haven't tried.

I'm not promoting these over your choices, just giving you contrast with where I went from there. I kept the GHS strings and may come back to them at some point, they're very good strings.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Arthur U. Poon
#34
TroyK said:
Not used the SIT strings.

I just took off a set of GHS Pressurewounds that had been on my bass for a few years. I've also used the Ken Smith equivilants before (spacing on what they are called right now). Very nice strings that function as you describe, a move back tonally from flatwounds (which I love), but not an abandonment of that feel or palate either. You should try a set.

That said, I've recently put on DR Sunbeams and honestly, they don't feel especially more roundwound to me than the Pressure Wounds do. They are at least as soft under the fingers and have beautiful tonality that can be easily darkened or brightens with pickup and tone controls on my bass or with eq. There were a few alternatives like Dunlop Nickels that were recommended to me as similar, but I haven't tried.

I'm not promoting these over your choices, just giving you contrast with where I went from there. I kept the GHS strings and may come back to them at some point, they're very good strings.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the suggestions, I honestly appreciate it. I would gladly use the Ken Smith Compressors, but I think the B-string is taper wound, which I'm not a fan of, but I should at least try a set out.

How are the mids with the DR Sunbeams? And are they a higher tension string? I really like big midrange, and higher tension. I've meant to try a set of DR Nickel Lo-Riders out, so those will be added back to my list.

Best regards, A.P.
 
#35
Arthur U. Poon said:
How are the mids with the DR Sunbeams? And are they a higher tension string? I really like big midrange, and higher tension. I've meant to try a set of DR Nickel Lo-Riders out, so those will be added back to my list.
Click to expand...

For punchy mids and higher tension, the Nickel Lo-Riders are definitely better than the Sunbeams. I once tried them back-to-back on my J and couldn't get used to the round-core flexibility of the SB. Very comfortable for fretting but a little too loose under my plucking fingers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Selim and Arthur U. Poon
#36
Jon Moody said:
I can't guarantee that. As much as I'd like to keep everything we've ever made, numbers are going to influence what stays/goes. I'm not one to put out a set that cannibalizes another, so there's that.
Click to expand...

This post from another thread is why I'm looking around at other options. I've only tried one set of round core strings, and I just couldn't bond with the looser feeling under my fretting fingers, so if the current set of PW's are changed to a round core, or discontinued, I'm jumping ship.
 
#37
michael_t said:
For punchy mids and higher tension, the Nickel Lo-Riders are definitely better than the Sunbeams. I once tried them back-to-back on my J and couldn't get used to the round-core flexibility of the SB. Very comfortable for fretting but a little too loose under my plucking fingers.
Click to expand...

I've heard great things about the lifespan of DR's strings, so after I try a set of Silencers, I'll check out a set of nickel Lo Riders.
 
#38
Arthur U. Poon said:
I've heard great things about the lifespan of DR's strings, so after I try a set of Silencers, I'll check out a set of nickel Lo Riders.
Click to expand...

Knowing your taste for the Boomers and the PWs, you will probably like the Nickel LRs. I found them more punchy than zingy. I also like them for their smoother-than-average surface texture - somewhere halfway between the Boomers and the PWs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arthur U. Poon

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back