Have you tried EB Cobalt flats? If so, how do they compare? Sound wise, I would describe them about as you have here, but without the hand agony.
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.
Rotosounds change over the years?
- Thread starter TheArchitect
- Start date
LOL!! I tried that once. Didn’t work. I had a budd that boiled his Fender flats once. About a week later they started show evidence of corrosion from the inner wrap. He said they were the best sounding strings ever.
I bought a few sets of those in the early 80’s, and I was very impressed with them. The sets that I used ether tapered down over the bridge saddles, or were exposed core over the bridge saddles.
They were kind of hard to find locally in those days.
This gauge of this string is what is on my GL Jazz right now.
I wonder if the rough feeling comments come from those using heavier Rotos (i.e. 45 and up). I do not find this to be the case with the lighter gauges (although I will go as high as 40-100 depending on the application).
Roto Swingbass 66 is a superb string. That is probably my go-to at this point.
My recently installed BS66-basically Swing Bass just as well-were gray/dull looking in the new package (have used them before in the older packaging as well.) Forgot if before they were shinier, but definitely much duller than the stock nickel plated strings of a new bass they replaced, which were less deep sounding and much thinner. Because of the still excellent mids, definitely very clear strings, very colorful and "alive,", which are their main strength in my view. Not sure if the "brightest", but certainly very "there".
I tried heavy Slinkys briefly few months ago on another (failed) bass, and it could have been the instrument-not so sure-but they sounded more average "good" than the Rotos, though of course they are well-regarded. I can no longer use them because I cut them for a different, L/L, R/R headstock, but do not miss them too much, despite them being "new". Rather keep using these BS66s for this particular bass-awesome thunder, clarity, and a great, great E tone.
Cannot comment on the 70s/80s/90s, sadly. Just think they are sounding great today, even compared to other more modern brands.
D
I totally agree about the mids. That's what Roto 66 steels are all about IMO. I know a lot of people buy them for the brightness and complain about Rotos going "dead" too fast but for me that's a good thing. I don't want the "zing", I want the Roto mids. Which means at set can last YEARS for me. Anyone looking for the fresh, bright Chris Squire tone will have to change them regularly though, probably every 1-2 weeks with regular playing. It's a good thing Rotos are cheap!
I've often seen people on this forum recommend DR Hi-Beams as a longer lasting alternative to Rotos and I honestly don't understand this at all. The DR Hi-Beams are completely lacking the mids that make Roto 66 steels so unique. The Hi-Beams are great strings but the only thing they've got in common with Rotos is the initial, bright, zingy, stainless steel highs. ANY stainless steel strings can do that. The Hi-Beams sound mid-scooped compared to the Roto steels.
Personally I love the current Rotos and find them every bit as good as the ones I used in the early 90s. Maybe they were different in the 60s/70s but I can certainly get a perfect Entwistle tone out of current Rotos through my Hiwatt (this will obviously require a FRESH set!!!).
The shortscale Roto sets are useless though.
They should make several different tensions for short scale instruments available, IMHO. I did use RS66 for my short scale eons ago, at a specialty tension I do not think they sell or make anymore. They were thick and nice. Now they just take medium and make it shorter. Same with RS77. I love Rotosound-no hate from me, but wished their short scale strings worked better!
Though very different, the DR Sunbeams work well with that short scale bass, despite the low tension, lack of gauges, and high pliability due to the round core. I do wish the RS66 were a better fit, though.
Mids represent most of the musical content in (at least) 4 string bass-Swing Bass are great due to this! They will cut through.
(Adding that it is not so much that Rotosound use the same tensions for short scales, but they are also made a bit differently at the same tension. Very odd-at least from my point of view as a player, rather than string maker.)
Last edited:
I can't seem to find the nickel plated RS66 sets in stores anymore...only online for a whopping $30 CAD/
Bleh, those were my favourite strings to use. I am currently trying the RB45s on my 2nd P and they just...don't feel the same.
Bleh, those were my favourite strings to use. I am currently trying the RB45s on my 2nd P and they just...don't feel the same.
You are correct! Definitely rounds. I still have a set somewhere. I tried them but took them right off. They had a coating or some kind of finish on them, whatever Linea was. They just didn't compare to the 66s that I had been using. I have a bad habit of keeping strings when I change them. Some are very old HaHa!!
D
Very interesting! I was starting to wonder if I was imagining things...
I've had the same experience. RB45 (Rotobass) don't feel/sound even remotely like Nickel 66s to me. They don't last nearly as long either. I've had several lengthy discussions with other talkbass members about this. It seems like someone at some point have made the claim that Rotobass = Nickel 66s without the silk. Unless all the RB45 sets I've tested were faulty that simply can't be the case.
In my experience the 66 Nickels are much higher quality strings. The Rotobass strings don't sound/feel like classic Rotos to me and in my experience they don't last nearly as long as the nickel 66s (which actually stay bright considerably longer than the steel 66s, go figure!).
A Rotosound rep also once told me via email that Rotobass have "different spec wire" than 66 Nickels. I had sent Rotosound an email, asking about RB vs Nickel 66s because they felt and sounded so different to me. Unless that person at Rotosound was either lying or misinformed they're NOT the same strings.
Their website also describes them differently with RB made in "computer controlled winding machines" and 66 Nickels "hand made by highly skilled engineers on James How’s original machinery". Of course, this type of marketing talk should always be taken with a grain of salt.
I can only know for certain what my ears and fingers tell me: Unless all the Rotobass sets I got were faulty they are most definitely NOT the same strings as the Nickel 66s. They do NOT have the classic Roto tone and they go dead considerably faster (and not in a good way like the 66s, we're talking DEAD-dead, not "broken in"-dead).
Last edited:
D
I've used the Roto 55s for decades and they've haver had exposed cores or tapered ends???
Are you sure you're not referring to Rotosound 99 PSD (Piano String Design)? These are the only Rotos I can ever remember seeing with tapered/exposed cores at the saddles. The Roto 99s were discontinued a couple of years ago. Probably because the procedure of installing the ball ends was a PITA. The cores would often break unless you nailed it at the first attempt. Getting it right at the first attempt was very difficult with a full set and the ball ends REALLY needed to be in the correct positions or bad things would happen to your tone. I remember the instructions said something about trying again if you didn't get it right at the first attempt but trying again usually ended up with a broken core in my experience.
When installed correctly the Roto99s were great sounding strings for that ultra clear/bright "piano" tone but it got too expensive buying two sets every time I needed to replace them: One set that would most likely break when figuring out the exact position of the ball ends and one set to actually install correctly and play.
Last edited:
Maybe I’m wrong that they had taper core, but I’m pretty sure that they did. I bought 2 sets, probably in ‘83 or ‘84. I’m pretty sure they were Solo Bass 55’s. I believe the package said something about them having a “Linnea Finish” or something like that.
D
I guess the specs may have changed over the years. I didn't try the 55s until cirka mid/late 90s. I'm pretty sure they've not had tapered ends or exposed cores since then.
I've never seen Rotos with "Linnea Finish" so that was definitely before my time! What was that exactly? Some kind of coating?
In the early 2000's, when I was playing a show in Branson, I complained to the Rotosound rep that my Swingbass E strings were dying prematurely. He said they were reformulating certain gauges, including my preferred 105. He sent me a few. No, they didn't really feel any different, but yes, they did seem to last longer between changes.
I have been playing roto66 for a long time now. I put a new set on a bass and played it 3 hours a day for 3 weeks and they still sound great like the day they were installed. I do a wipe down after practice.
Since early 70’s… the only string I’ve ever put on my basses. I’ve even had a shop put on another brand once, that they put on because they were out of 66’s and didn’t ask me if ok. Well…. I just left with no strings on my Jazz. “These sound better”, “we’ll give you the set at cost”….. nope.
I’ve kept my own supply for many years now.
I know what I like and I’ll leave it at that
I’ve kept my own supply for many years now.
I know what I like and I’ll leave it at that
