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.
I’ve still got a set on one of my P Basses- Really liked the more pronounced mids (over the Swingbass 66), but I’m not liking the “feel” as much, they’re not rougher than my usual Rotos, but something makes them grabbier and not as smooth to move around the fretboard.
I recently got a set of the Swingbass 66s ( my 1st ones in the new single envelope packaging) and think they are their best ever.
When I first used them in the 1980s I’d replace a set every month, the last set I had on for over a year. Not as bright as new, of course, but almost improved with being broken in.
Been skimming the thread here. My only question at this point is, would someone give a quick, concise Subaru of the differences between the Rotos 66s and the Ultramags? Also, would the. 40-100 sets have a bit less tension? I do some strong bends in bass lines, and over an evening I don't want to press it too hard. Just thinking about long term hand health here.
Thanks!
Thanks!
Compared to the stainless steel Rotosound 66 set...
- The Ultramags feel smoother. Not like flatwounds or GHS Pressurewounds, but smoother than the 66s.
- The Ultramags sound pretty similar to what I would consider broken-in-but-not-dead 66s. Maybe like what the 66s sound like after, say, 15 hours of playing, when the initial chimey zing is gone, but they still sound (in my opinion) good.
- The Ultramags do a lack a particular nice midrange tonality that the 66s possess, so they're not identical in tone, even compared to broken-in 66s. But close.
- The Ultramags retain that tone for a good while, perhaps 50% longer than 66s.
Your hands and ears might tell you something different, but that's my take on them.
The 40-100 set is noticeably more flexible than the 45-105 set. Only you can say what's comfortable for you, but I can suggest this: I don't do much bending, but if I did, I would definitely prefer the 40-100 set.
Last question... I'm at the Sweetwater site, looking at an SM66 set... The 66S is a short scale set, I'm looking to fit my Epi Thunderbird, a long scale.
The specs say the SM66 is for 32" or 34" scale, which is fine. But it's still the same formula string, right?...
The specs say the SM66 is for 32" or 34" scale, which is fine. But it's still the same formula string, right?...
The same strings, different gauges, different winding lengths.
SM66 (40-60-80-100) = "long scale" = 37" ball end to taper/silk.
RS66S (40-50-75-90) = "short scale" = 32.25" ball end to taper/silk.
Does this mean to where the taper begins! In other words, that's not the end of the string, right? It has to make a couple windings on the post of an Epiphone neck-thru Thunderbird.
"Taper" is where the full winding ends and the string gets thinner, or where the silk starts. Ideally, only the tapered/silked end should wrap around the tuner post. There will be plenty of the tapered end for wrapping around the post, so no worries there.
I just tested a 40-100 Ultramag set. I've read that the 45-105 set is higher tension than some so I tried the 40-100. Coming from a fresh set of Rotosound Swing Bass Nickel 45-105, I found the Ultramag 40-100 tension to be as high or slightly higher than the Swing Bass Nickel 45-105. Also, the Ultramag has less top end sizzle, and is slightly warmer than the Swing Nickel set. Surprised that the Ultramag 40-100 tension is as tight as it is. I prefer the Swing Bass Nickel and Stainless sets over the Ultramag.
I have .040-.100 Ultramag sets on two of my basses. I'm totally sold on Alloy 52 for bass strings... I only wish it were more accessible. More options, etc.
Funny you should post this at the very moment I was thinking of ordering a set to try.
As I posted earlier in this thread, I'm a big fan of Alloy 52 and have been a regular user of GHS Pressurewound. Some of us have been patiently waiting for the updated version of the Progressives (2.0), but our hope is starting fade quickly as there has been no word from GHS on them for the last 3 yrs.
Yeah, I became aware of those too, and was sad to see they seem a bit dead. Ultramags don't seem too popular either... It's sad, I hope they don't totally get discontinued. They sit in a nice place... more mids than nickels, less of the annoying zing of steels, and they last for a good long while without losing their character.Funny you should post this at the very moment I was thinking of ordering a set to try.
As I posted earlier in this thread, I'm a big fan of Alloy 52 and have been a regular user of GHS Pressurewound. Some of us have been patiently waiting for the updated version of the Progressives (2.0), but our hope is starting fade quickly as there has been no word from GHS on them for the last 3 yrs.
I once had GHS Progressives 40-100 with 130B (old version) on my Yamaha TRBX505 for eight months and really liked the way they sounded on that particular bass. I managed to stock up on a few of the 130B (exposed core), so I figured I might as well give the Ultramags a shot as the closest alternative to the Progressives.
I went ahead and ordered a set of the 40-100 this morning.
String By Mail. Matt there arranged a special discount for me as a long-time customer.
Invalid Link Removed
I've never cared for 45-65-80-100 with any brand or type as I always ended up with a tight D and a loose E. I think I'll be fine with the 40-100.
Here are the actual tension figures...
UM40:
G 040 - 39.50 (lbs.)
D 060 - 38.68
A 080 - 43.80
E 100 - 33.40
UM45:
G 045 - 48.27 (lbs.)
D 065 - 51.30
A 085 - 47.06
E 105 - 38.60
