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.
Whats the heaviest strings you ever used? It seems like you should be able to use really heavy strings to get the fattest sound. Its not like you need to do any bending or anything. Why not get the biggest size available?
I've used a .265 - okay for what it was.
Heaviest I use at present is a .190.
My experience is a little different than yours, and to a degree I agree with some of what you suggest.Actually, it tends to work the other way around - lighter gauge strings tend to give you the more aggressive, hefty sound. Heavier strings instead tend to add mellowness to the tone because of the higher tension. You don't get the sharper attack and the fundamental is generally a little more prominent.
I guess it depends somewhat on what you mean by "fat" - to me that means a hefty midbass with a good pop-like attack. For that, you want light gauge strings.
For a smooth sound with well defined fundamental, heavy gauge strings can contribute to that a bit, but then you have the higher tension to deal with and a little less versatility (i.e. if you want aggression when you dig in).
LS
I was working through gauges appropriate for C# and octave down B with La Bella a few years back. We ran a number of gauges with the .265 being the thickest. On a standard scale bass the tension to pitch made the .265 technically right for B. On my bass it worked for 13.75 Hz A. It even registers consistently on my old cassette-style Korg DT-1 tuner (I still have the string on a 5 string Quake that I need to deliver to a very patient client).A .265!?? What the heck was that?![]()
Are you interested in 4, 5, or 6 strings?
Flat wound, half- or round wound?
What type of bass are you considering the strings for?