• 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.

mids

#46
tekdiver500ft said:
Awesome! Thanks so much, that's exactly what I needed.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind this is a BP shootout from 2004, so some things have changed, and some newer products won't be there. In fact, none of the Fender string descriptions are accurate anymore (So just look at the D'Addario descriptions to see what the those are like ;) ).

Edit: Just noticed that there is little to no GHS presence in there, what gives?
 
#47
tekdiver500ft said:
Wow, that's the first time I've ever heard that. You've always given me good advice, so I'll have to take it in consideration, but it does throw me. All I hear is how Chromes are a scooped string. Just got done listening to Garth Fielding on YouTube raving about the scooped tone.

I wish there were a chart or something where you could compare all the strings, and have definitive answers as to tonality of them. I've spent many hundreds of dollars trying strings, and it gets old, you know?
Click to expand...

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f16/chromes-scooped-not-974944/
 
#50
I wish I had noticed this thread earlier: the new Fender 9050CL flats have really good growly midrange that can be tamed at will, or boosted as preferred.

For steel rounds, the GHS Super Steels have more mids that some of the other popular steel rounds, and are a little bit smoother on the top end.
 
#53
tekdiver500ft said:
I had some, loved the tone. They had great mids, but were too stiff for me to play well. That's why I have Sadowskys right now. They aren't quite as nice tonally, but are eminently playable.
Click to expand...

What gauge are the Sadowsky's that you use? I'm looking into some flats myself. I've tried the chromes and I didn't like the stiffness. So I'm looking at the Sadowsky's or GHS Precisions. I just don't want to spend a lot of money on strings I don't like.
 
#55
In theory this is something that could be objectively tested with a plucking machine and an oscilliscope. But of course technique plays a factor, so a mid-heavy string might suit some people more than others. And after that electronics and bass resonances also play a factor. I find on one bass with am MM pickup and my fingerstyle techniques TIs are a bit much in the mid range and I have to scoop on the EQ a bit, for example.
 
#58
_asdfgh_ said:
In theory this is something that could be objectively tested with a plucking machine and an oscilliscope. But of course technique plays a factor, so a mid-heavy string might suit some people more than others. And after that electronics and bass resonances also play a factor. I find on one bass with am MM pickup and my fingerstyle techniques TIs are a bit much in the mid range and I have to scoop on the EQ a bit, for example.
Click to expand...
Actually, a spectrum analyzer.

It's not just that a string has mids or doesn't. As set forth above, it's the entire package from fingers or pick to out front or recording deck. And it's not just amount of mids, but the frequency, amplitude and bandwidth.

For example: my favorite Fender 9050CL flats sound great on an alder and swamp ash body bass (of course), very full spectrum with growl or mellow at will. But on my Ibby SRA305, the agathis body resonates in a different bandwidth, and as a result the same strings do not sound good on it, so I need to find a different set of flats for that bass. Experiments are ongoing.

Likewise for every other detail in the signal chain.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back