Interesting take on changing strings

I can see how someone that doesn't use the B string nearly as much as the others would benefit from this (cheaper to buy 4 string sets and a B every now and again); it makes sense.

 

I can tell you from experience of having had to change careers and move, and the gigs and bands came and went over the years, and playing other instruments as befitting the gig of the day, that I have a bass that I didn't change strings for several years, and only played it occasionally for a recording session or short (less than an hour) gig here and there. I estimate the strings were at least five years old, possibly older. I do have recordings. The strings did not age. They actually did have external rust on them, and I did finally change them for cosmetic reasons, but the tone was the same. The strings were GHS Progressives.

 

Everyone's body chemistry is different so they wear strings differently.
Everyone has a different ideal tone.

My instruments with Low B strings, the B string is usually first to go when playing rounds.

I have one six string that hasn't seen a strong change in years and another that sees a complete change every week.

 

I do this. On my 6- and 8-string basses, the C and F strings are the least played and sound good when they're slightly mellowed, so I'll often just replace the other strings and leave those to a simple DA soak.

 

I change my B string every other time I change my E,A,D,and G.
I change my F# string every other time I change my B string.

 

I have to believe economics drives this and not tone.

Low strings - particularly those that drop below the reproduction threshold - benefit from as much upper harmonic content as they can get. At low E and below no rig gives you any fundamental at all so EVERYTHING you hear is harmonics, and an old string is absolutely harmonics-compromised.

 

This has been my experience as well. I had considered buying a few single B-strings separately for just that reason.