• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

LaBella LTF-4A Low Tension Flat love thread

The only change they made to the LTFs since they were introduced is the gauge for the A went from .070 to .075. According to La Bella, this was done after too many people complained about the .070 rattling and buzzing in the standard nut slot that was too wide for it.

View attachment 4560952View attachment 4560955

No change otherwise (that I'm aware of) going from "Low Tension Flexible Flats" to "Low Tension Flats".

That .070 A string on TI flats is one of the reasons I'm interested in trying the La Bella LTFs.
 
I rather enjoyed that bass playing. FWIW.... yall could sell that music sans singer too. I'm not making fun of the singer, I just enjoyed the rest of the mix that much.

Info: I recently emailed La Bella about break angle, and got an answer I wasn't expecting. I think he misunderstood me. But La Bella said their LTF can handle a 90 deg break angle at the bridge if "massaged" at the bend. So for those that use tru-body.... go for it.
I have a bass enroute, supposed to get here next week. It’s one that can only be strung through the body.
I may have to try the LTF set on it, now that i know they’re good for that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PrairieThunder13
The only change they made to the LTFs since they were introduced is the gauge for the A went from .070 to .075. According to La Bella, this was done after too many people complained about the .070 rattling and buzzing in the standard nut slot that was too wide for it.

View attachment 4560952View attachment 4560955

No change otherwise (that I'm aware of) going from "Low Tension Flexible Flats" to "Low Tension Flats".
What's still puzzling to me about this is that they made this change without changing the (published) tension of the A string. My understanding is that tension is proportional to mass, and surely an .075 string has more mass than a .070 string. But maybe the core wire is the critical component for tension, and they kept that the same while including bigger wrap wires? Seems like this would still contribute to at least somewhat higher tension, but maybe not? Or maybe they just "forgot" to update the published tension figures? I remain puzzled.
 
  • Like
Reactions: michael_t
What's still puzzling to me about this is that they made this change without changing the (published) tension of the A string. My understanding is that tension is proportional to mass, and surely an .075 string has more mass than a .070 string. But maybe the core wire is the critical component for tension, and they kept that the same while including bigger wrap wires? Seems like this would still contribute to at least somewhat higher tension, but maybe not? Or maybe they just "forgot" to update the published tension figures? I remain puzzled.

I'm with you on this. Tension is calculated based on "unit weight" not based on just the core size. When I inquired about this, La Bella insisted the tension figure for the A string didn't change because the core size remained the same when the gauge was increased from .070 to .075. I'm not totally convinced about the validity of their reasoning.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mastermold
What's still puzzling to me about this is that they made this change without changing the (published) tension of the A string. My understanding is that tension is proportional to mass, and surely an .075 string has more mass than a .070 string. But maybe the core wire is the critical component for tension, and they kept that the same while including bigger wrap wires? Seems like this would still contribute to at least somewhat higher tension, but maybe not? Or maybe they just "forgot" to update the published tension figures? I remain puzzled.
If, as La Bella claims, tension really stayed the same despite the raise in gauge, the latter may indeed be due to some juggling of core wire vs. winding, but actually reducing the core gauge and using wider-gauge intermediate windings might net them more airgaps, less mass; alternatively, a larger amount of silk around the core, with the rest of the components kept the same, could do the trick. Or, at least, I think I've read the LTF have a silk inlay (like Thomastik-Infeld Jazz Flats, and like orchestral strings).
If.
 
So far my experience lately with the LTF set is in comparison to the GHS precision flats 45-95. I really like the tone and feel of the LTF’s until it gets humid out or I start to sweat and then they become extremely sticky as all get out, forget sliding up and down the neck I’m just trying to get through the songs at this point. Not good when I’m on a 3 set gig, so I’ll quickly grab my backup Jazz bass with the Precision flats, and although a little grabby nothing like the LTF and feels like the tension is about the same. So I ordered another set of the Precision flats and putting LTF set on a bass I don’t play too often. Too bad but only cost me $40 to try out I guess..
 
So far my experience lately with the LTF set is in comparison to the GHS precision flats 45-95. I really like the tone and feel of the LTF’s until it gets humid out or I start to sweat and then they become extremely sticky as all get out, forget sliding up and down the neck I’m just trying to get through the songs at this point. Not good when I’m on a 3 set gig, so I’ll quickly grab my backup Jazz bass with the Precision flats, and although a little grabby nothing like the LTF and feels like the tension is about the same. So I ordered another set of the Precision flats and putting LTF set on a bass I don’t play too often. Too bad but only cost me $40 to try out I guess..
I’ve spent a lot of money trying out strings over the years. It’s still cheaper than buying new basses!
 
Revisit the LTF4A on Squier CV50P again.
From cobalt flat 45-100 to LTF4A. Less than quarter turn (counter clockwise) on truss rod to get same neck relief and action. That's mean the cobalt flat 2814 can group to low tension flatwound bass string department too.
The silk colour are notable different than few set I play in past. This one has wine red silk rather than purple.
IMG_20220302_003757.jpg
IMG_20220302_003820.jpg
 
Last edited:
Revisit the LTF4A on Squier CV50P again.
From cobalt flat 45-100 to LTF4A. Less than quarter turn (counter clockwise) on truss rod to get same neck relief and action. That's mean the cobalt flat 2814 can group to low tension flatwound bass string department too.
The silk colour are notable different than few set I play in past. This one has wine red silk rather than purple.
View attachment 4604522 View attachment 4604521
I’d increase the A-string angle with the headstock surface by lowering its coil around the tuning peg … just a suggestion
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yahboy
Thanks for the suggestion.

Actually I cut the A string length 15cm for more wind on tuning post ( others are 11cm ) , but the angle still not low enough than I expect. Anyway, no open string rattling or buzzing issue happened on the A nut slot.
I’d increase the A-string angle with the headstock surface by lowering its coil around the tuning peg … just a suggestion