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.
Double Bass Help choosing soft strings
- Thread starter bassvid75
- Start date
Ufff... It was a "hell" putting the Velvet Compas 180,but it really starts to fell some less tension.
I like them a lot,easy to play than the others,but i think i might need more low tension.
+1 for Corelli. The 370 F set is great, and the 380 M is highly underrated for the price. Not as much tone perhaps, but a good sound and great pizz and with the bow.
There is also a Compas 180 Solo set you can try. But I'm afraid that the power of the Compas 180 would be gone. Try to tune down your SUITs by a halftone. If you like that tension, get the Solos.
And the s42w compared to the Velvet compas 180 suit?
Witch is more low tension?
Thanks
Pedro
According to my understanding of the formula that accounts for the relationship between string tension, length and frequency, you can multiply standard (105cm) tensions by 1.048 to get tension at 110cm (i.e., 110/105.) I use those numbers because they're the lengths at which I suppose Velvet and S42 tensions are measured. When that factor is applied, the standard 25kg Velvet tension is still less than the lightest S42 string (G), and significantly lighter than the heaviest (E.)
There are several alternatives in about the same tension category as Velvet. I would be very surprised if there's anything much lighter, that would still be satisfactory for arco.
There are several alternatives in about the same tension category as Velvet. I would be very surprised if there's anything much lighter, that would still be satisfactory for arco.
I think that if you are finding the Compas 180 suit too tense, your bass itself is probably a tight player. I've used them on my tight bass and on my loose bass, and they followed the bass' characteristics to a tee.
I think the Velvet Suit are more or less the same tension than S42W Spiro Weich 4/4, at least the standard Compas 180 have a felt higher tension than S42W and maybe about the same when tuned down a half step (I pretty sure this is the tension of the SUIT).
But even on my 110cm scale I like the regular Compas 180, because the G and D Compas 180 strings are thicker than the Spiros. The regular Compas 180 have a lot of power.
Both are not the nicest bowing strings. The Compas 180 needs very light bowing. Personally, I would prefer the Spiro Weich for bowing, but maybe because I have grown up with Spiros.
But even on my 110cm scale I like the regular Compas 180, because the G and D Compas 180 strings are thicker than the Spiros. The regular Compas 180 have a lot of power.
Both are not the nicest bowing strings. The Compas 180 needs very light bowing. Personally, I would prefer the Spiro Weich for bowing, but maybe because I have grown up with Spiros.
What do you think of my math, in #28 above, where I came to the conclusion that even tuned at 110cm the standard Velvet tension should be less than S42W?
On further reading I see the 180 has a slightly higher tension, 26kg vs the 25kg I was working with - but the 180 SUIT is less, 24kg.
I focus on the measured tension here, as opposed to perceived, because the strings need to suit an old bass that apparently doesn't sound good with high tension strings, as I understand it.
I think mathematically you were wrong, because you used a linear factor where it is a quadratic relationship. I didn't read your posting #28 carefully because I got the impression you know what you said.
Since I am lazy sometimes, I think a Spiro Mittel 4/4 downtuned by a half tone has about the same tension than a Spiro Weich, which means Spiro Weich are in the middle between the Spiro Mittel and Spiro Solo (higher strings, lower are weaker in the Solo set). And the Spiro Weich has roughly about 8% to 10% less tension than the Mittel set.
The 5cm difference from 110 to 105cm is about a halftone fingered, so you might get about 9% more tension on the 110cm scale compared to the 105cm scale, which is almost twice as much as what you calculated (4.8%).
Since I am lazy sometimes, I think a Spiro Mittel 4/4 downtuned by a half tone has about the same tension than a Spiro Weich, which means Spiro Weich are in the middle between the Spiro Mittel and Spiro Solo (higher strings, lower are weaker in the Solo set). And the Spiro Weich has roughly about 8% to 10% less tension than the Mittel set.
The 5cm difference from 110 to 105cm is about a halftone fingered, so you might get about 9% more tension on the 110cm scale compared to the 105cm scale, which is almost twice as much as what you calculated (4.8%).
Thanks - I don't recall now where I saw the formula that made it seem simply proportional, but when I look for one now I get one that makes frequency proportional to the square of tension
f = (1/2L)√(T/μ
... which fits with your 9% estimate, actually for 110/105 that would be closer to 10%.
Which would make a standard Velvet G slightly higher tension than the S42W - 27.4kg vs 27kg (and this is probably unwarranted precision), but 180 SUIT would be less - and even 180 regular would be significantly lighter on the other strings, which with S42W go up to 31kg.
This puts a lot of faith in numbers, but as long as we're talking about the tension difference according to scale length, it seems an appropriate place for this kind of analysis.
f = (1/2L)√(T/μ
... which fits with your 9% estimate, actually for 110/105 that would be closer to 10%.
Which would make a standard Velvet G slightly higher tension than the S42W - 27.4kg vs 27kg (and this is probably unwarranted precision), but 180 SUIT would be less - and even 180 regular would be significantly lighter on the other strings, which with S42W go up to 31kg.
This puts a lot of faith in numbers, but as long as we're talking about the tension difference according to scale length, it seems an appropriate place for this kind of analysis.
NO. String tension varies as the square of the scale length. So whatever the rated tension is,(which is actually usually measured at 106cm, not 105) multiply that by 110^2/106^2 to get the effective tension on a 110cm bass.
I trust you read the following messages.
My general reference for tensions was [Invalid or Expired Link Removed], which unfortunately doesn't include tensions for the Velvet strings, but it consists of two charts, for 105 and 110cm. The 24/25/26kg figures for Velvet strings apparently comes from Velvet; if you've seen that tied to a 106cm scale, it would be interesting to know where.
I agree that Velvet does not list scale length. But the other big players who publish string tension specs, including TI & D'Addario, do publish their reference 3/4 scale length as 106cm or 41 3/4 inches, so I use that when computing tension for scale length. After all, why reinvent the wheel? I'm going to go with what I see, even if I have to import it, until the rest of the string companies get off their @$$#$ and actually give us something we can relate to, including especially Pirastro.
Now, that said, if you want to use 105cm, or roughly 41 3/8 instead, the difference is 106^2/105^2, or about 2%. I would agree that 2%, or roughly 1 pound or so difference in tension, is not noticeable, but 110^2/106^2, or about 8%, which is about 10% if using 105cm, or 4-5 pounds or so difference in tension, is noticeable.
So...who actually publishes 105cm as their reference scale length in their literature or on the manufacturer's website, not just the secondary chart?
I think the 105 figure was used because TI does list the range 104-106, so whoever first put the linked chart together used the middle instead of the full 106 as I believe it should be, here:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
D'Addario lists 1060mm/41 3/4 inches here (click on where it says, "Instrument Tension Chart"):
http://daddariobowed.com/BowedBass.Page?ActiveID=4488#
I prefer primary sources when I can find them, so I use 106 for 3/4 and 110 for 4/4, even if a scale length is not actually set forth by a manufacturer, because there is nothing else to use. The moment some of the other string companies publish their tension figures in conjunction with actual scale lengths, I'll be the first to re-adjust computations for different scale lengths accordingly.
UPDATE: I just checked the Pirastro website. They have updated their website. No tension specs yet, but they now list their standard 3/4 scale length also as 106cm:
http://www.pirastro.com/public_pirastro/pages/en/Technical-Information/
Now, that said, if you want to use 105cm, or roughly 41 3/8 instead, the difference is 106^2/105^2, or about 2%. I would agree that 2%, or roughly 1 pound or so difference in tension, is not noticeable, but 110^2/106^2, or about 8%, which is about 10% if using 105cm, or 4-5 pounds or so difference in tension, is noticeable.
So...who actually publishes 105cm as their reference scale length in their literature or on the manufacturer's website, not just the secondary chart?
I think the 105 figure was used because TI does list the range 104-106, so whoever first put the linked chart together used the middle instead of the full 106 as I believe it should be, here:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
D'Addario lists 1060mm/41 3/4 inches here (click on where it says, "Instrument Tension Chart"):
http://daddariobowed.com/BowedBass.Page?ActiveID=4488#
I prefer primary sources when I can find them, so I use 106 for 3/4 and 110 for 4/4, even if a scale length is not actually set forth by a manufacturer, because there is nothing else to use. The moment some of the other string companies publish their tension figures in conjunction with actual scale lengths, I'll be the first to re-adjust computations for different scale lengths accordingly.
UPDATE: I just checked the Pirastro website. They have updated their website. No tension specs yet, but they now list their standard 3/4 scale length also as 106cm:
http://www.pirastro.com/public_pirastro/pages/en/Technical-Information/
