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.
I think Chromes sound hollow, and I also agree that they are clanky. I’ve never been able to stomach them for long.
I'm curious how the EB E-string feels alongside the Labella set. I'm a fan of both sets, but never tried them both at the same time. I've always felt the EB set was a little softer on the fingers - what do you think? Soundwise, I find the EB's a little brighter, so I can see how the combo works for your issue. Are their relative volume levels about the same?
Word. When I find a set I like, I stock up on multiple sets and extra E strings, because string companies are so prone to discontinuing sets because bean counters overrule player reps if the profit margin is not there. I understand that companies have to make money, but string companies deal in the performing arts, not just corporate widget profits, and need to look more long term to loyal customers. OK, my rant for the day.
Exactly. That is why early Fender sets had a 50 G string and a tight D string, for tone and volume balance, but had lighter A and especially E strings, to retain flexibility and tonal consistency, than the numbers might indicate. It is a limitation of string technology. Fortunately, companies like GHS and D'Addario are revisiting this issue because we bass players are a picky lot: we want consistency of all three across the fret board: tone, volume and feel. Also, basses are different, with generally flatter fingerboards than historical examples. That is why the D string is particularly tight on "traditional" sets: to get more mass to interact better with the magnetic field of a flat pickup, like a J-pickup, with an instrument that had a 7 1/4 crown radius. When set up, the D string was significantly farther away from the pickup than the others. Since the magnetic output varies as the square of the distance from the string to the pickup, this made sense in the early 60's. But with basses, especially 5-ers, which have a significantly flatter crown radius, say, 14-16 inches, this is not the issue it used to be. But in spite of that, very few strings manufacturers, like GHS and D'Addario, have actually taken steps to address the issue. Jon Moody of GHS goes on about how they have changed the construction of their E strings to attempt to regain the tonal consistency, and I can tell you from playing both gauges of the new Balanced Pure Nickels that they have succeded, and are applying that technology to my favorite strings for my 4002, the Progressives 2.0, which I am patiently awaiting. Rotosound very quietly did that in the early 2000's with their famous Swingbass strings, especially the E strings, essentially double wrapping them to retain flexibility and the low-end edge. They did this about the time I had a show gig in Branson and talked to the Rotosound rep about sending me some strings to get some TV exposure, and we discussed this very issue: tapings for the shows were over a period of days, with cuts and edits, and I had to have continuity of tone and could not afford an E string to die prematurely. The rep delivered in spades.
The way to find out is to take an E string you already have, tune it to pitch, mark where it reaches the nut, mark the back of the nut, and mark where it reaches the center of the E-tuner string post. Ideally, a string needs to have a long enough speaking wrap to clear the back edge of the nut so it will seat and tune properly, but then taper down just before or at the centerline of the E string tuner post so only the leader wraps the post, lessening any risk of breakage. Obviously, the E string is the issue, because the rest of the tuners are far enough above the nut, and the strings are lesser diameter, so it doesn't matter.
