• 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.

Rounds or Flats - Can You Tell?

Along the "inspiration" line of commenting.... when I play flats, the tone, the thump, inspires me to play a certain way...when I use rounds, I tend to play into THAT tonal space, and will change my style accordingly. I have no religious addiction to either, although I do tend to go with flats more often. Neither is "better"-- they're distinctly different. I love playing bass!

Good for you - your “inspiration space” is bigger than mine. That’s a good thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: groovepump
There are some sounds that you simply can't get with rounds. As I say above for example, the sound of flats with a pick with the highs up so the attack is pronounced. Very different with flats than with rounds. With flats you get the click/thunk on the attack, and then the tone is "softer" or "rounder" after the attack. It's one of the classic bass sounds, actually--think Carol Kaye, gobs of 60's/70's stuff, "cop show" bass, etc.
With rounds with a pick and the treble/tone dialed up, well you obviously get the zing or "buzz" in the note, even with old strings. Live in a setting where it's not that demanding you can cop the flatwound vibe for sure (I do it all the time with dead rounds and a foam mute) but it certainly sounds different. In the studio there's no substitute for flats if you're going for that sound. To think that flats are simply all about a bassy tone with no high end is overlooking what really differentiates them from rounds.

I agree. That's the sound I usually go to with flats. The pick + flats with the tone up is unique to flats. first, only flats have that precise pick attack. In comparison, round wound pick attack sounds like a mess. Second, if you crank up the highs with round wound strings, you get a lot of incidental noises, which you make or may not like. That said, I've gone from using flats 90% of the time to using them about 30% of the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trothwell
Along the "inspiration" line of commenting.... when I play flats, the tone, the thump, inspires me to play a certain way...when I use rounds, I tend to play into THAT tonal space, and will change my style accordingly. I have no religious addiction to either, although I do tend to go with flats more often. Neither is "better"-- they're distinctly different. I love playing bass!
It always comes back around to, "what does the music call for?". Not, "I will use what I prefer and shoehorn it in there". That said, there's plenty of times more than one kinda bass tone will work in a given setting. As usual, it just depends.
 
  • Like
Reactions: groovepump
For those with experience with the Ernie Ball Group Flats, do you find they have more presence / mid / growl whatever you want to call it than Labellas? I always end up favoring Labellas, but really digging the sound that Love Orsan is getting out of that P. In the past I've preferred Labellas over chromes for what to me sounds like a stronger / more solid fundamental. Looking around though it seems the Ernie Ball group flats are quite similar to chromes.
 
For those with experience with the Ernie Ball Group Flats, do you find they have more presence / mid / growl whatever you want to call it than Labellas? I always end up favoring Labellas, but really digging the sound that Love Orsan is getting out of that P. In the past I've preferred Labellas over chromes for what to me sounds like a stronger / more solid fundamental. Looking around though it seems the Ernie Ball group flats are quite similar to chromes.

I have the Group IV (40-95) on my P bass. Yes, they have a nicer midrange clarity compared to the La Bella DTF, "smooth and mellow" instead of "thumpy and thuddy". Less grind/growl than Fender 9050 and less metallic edge than the Chromes; if anything, they're closer to the Fender in their tonal character than the Chromes.

I've tried the La Bella 760FL (43-104), the Chromes ECB84 (40-100) and Fender 9050L (45-100) in the past. I would take the Ernie Ball over the La Bella and the Chromes any day. The only reason why I wanted to try the Group IV over the Fender is the 9050 flats don't come in 40-95.
 
Yeah the picked parts sound more like flats in that video for sure. May have to try a set of those Ernie Balls at some point. Right now I'm running an experiment - after a decade of exclusively playing flats with the tone knob wide open, I've been trying out some TI Jazz Rounds on my P. With the tone rolled way down and some muting they get a very classic flats vibe but with a little something extra. It's like warm and soft on top but with a nice even presence in the mids and lows. Pretty nice.

Sometimes with flats (especially live) I feel like there's just something missing that's hard to fix with eq. The thump is there of course, but dialing in mids and treble would get clacky / honky but not more present, and more volume often just gets messy. The effect is progressively worse with distance, so right in front of the amp it can sound pretty good but +10ft away and through the house its just muddy/soft. I've always wondered if switching to rounds would provide a better DI signal for the house. At higher volumes in bigger rooms, in my personal experience and when watching other bands, flats are too easily lost.

Interesting to note is that I just realized that it seems Nick Movshon, one of the main NYC session guys of the "contemporary soul" revival that occurred over the last decade or so actually uses old rounds. For years I thought he had the definitive "P with flats" sound (of this era) but could never quite dial a tone that matched. Here's an example that shows his sound and some nice playing.