Yes, they are the same frickin strings! La Bella didn't come up with a new formula just for Roger Sadowsky
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.
Sadowsky flats vs. La Bella
- Thread starter basss
- Start date
Yes, they are the same frickin strings! La Bella didn't come up with a new formula just for Roger Sadowsky
Yes, they are the same frickin strings! La Bella didn't come up with a new formula just for Roger Sadowsky
Not sure by your smiley if you're kidding or not, but for the record they most certainly did come up with a new formula for him. They look and sound different, and Roger has said the same himself on many occasions.
Sadowsky have smoother surface than Labellas, tension is about the same (Sad regulars vs 760FL). Labellas are thumpier, Sads are punchier but not as midrangey as the Chromes. Tonally Sads are very similar to LaBellas, only a bit punchier - that is compared after more than a year of use. Strung new they are certainly brighter for a month or two.
FWIW, I have a 5kg vinyl bag full of dozens of old tested strings..
FWIW, I have a 5kg vinyl bag full of dozens of old tested strings..
Sadowsky have smoother surface than Labellas, tension is about the same (Sad regulars vs 760FL). Labellas are thumpier, Sads are punchier but not as midrangey as the Chromes. Tonally Sads are very similar to LaBellas, only a bit punchier - that is compared after more than a year of use. Strung new they are certainly brighter for a month or two.
FWIW, I have a 5kg vinyl bag full of dozens of old tested strings..
In my experience, La Bella flats are so inconsistent that any differences (tonally and visually) you are hearing/seeing are due to very loose manufacturing tolerances. Someone should call La Bella and ask if there are actually any formula differences -- besides leader color. My guess in the answer will be no.
FWIW I have a medium sized box full of old flats and rounds I have used/tested too.
I'm telling you, they are completely different in sound. LaBellas have a dead thump. Sadowskys are not even in they same ballpark, they are almost roundwounds.
FWIW, Sadowsky has inconsistency issues just as much as the standard LaBellas do. I have ordered Sadowsky flats 3 times, and every time there has been at least one string that's totally dead in the pack.
EDIT: I do want to add that Sadowsky has sent me new replacement strings every time free of charge.
I don't think La Bella have a dead thump at all (at least not in the light and standard gauges). They are bright out of the package, and settle in to a nice barky low-midrange when they break in.
Have you played the Sadowskys or are you just guessing?
I've put both new and broken in Sads on the same basses as new and old Labellas and the difference is obvious to my ears, there is no mistaking them.
Similar voicing but Sadowskys are growlier, and don't thump as hard. We probably have different definitions of thump because I consider Labellas to thump as hard as any flat in its similar guage. That bark of which you speak is way more present in the Sadowskys compared to the LaBellas
Roger has said on this board on a few occasions that he had them formulate a new string for his flats: whether it is construction, core to wrap ratio, metal alloy, or a combination of these things I don't know or care, but the result is plain to see or hear.
I know some strings are just re-branded and badged, but that is no reason to doubt others are reformulated for certain brands, whether to be made more or less cheaply or to have different sonic or aesthetic results. What's the big deal?
Finally, Roger's whole reputation is built on tweaking classic designs, particularly Fenders, and the Fender/LaBella combination is an all-time classic. Tweaking the strings to fit modern tastes and expectations fits perfectly with his other undertakings.
Normally I wouldn't care enough to rebut your comments in such detail, as I'm convinced of the difference myself, but I really think the Sadowsky flats are amazing and no one should be put off trying them because they mistakenly believe they are just re-branded LaBellas.
I use the .105 set Sadowskys and Labella 760FL and 760M sets, FWIW.
Also the Sadowsky flats are "standard" gauge
45-65-85-105.
Same as their Standard Nickel and SS Standard set.
My tastes and humble opinion is that Sadowsky Flats are the best pound for pound bass strings I've ever used.
A fresh set can rock very hard and have more sustain than any flat I've ever used...its a very roundwoundish Flat when fresh and they age well enough to be an excellent Motown string also.
Very versatile and the best do it all string I've tried.
Of course at $42 a set, putting a new set on every month can add up....but thats no fault of the strings. Steve Harris has to put a new set of flats on for every show.
I also really like the Sadowsky Nickel and SS Rounds. I know LaBella makes them but Sadowsky strings are all I use now for over a year and I have no desire to try anything else.
45-65-85-105.
Same as their Standard Nickel and SS Standard set.
My tastes and humble opinion is that Sadowsky Flats are the best pound for pound bass strings I've ever used.
A fresh set can rock very hard and have more sustain than any flat I've ever used...its a very roundwoundish Flat when fresh and they age well enough to be an excellent Motown string also.
Very versatile and the best do it all string I've tried.
Of course at $42 a set, putting a new set on every month can add up....but thats no fault of the strings. Steve Harris has to put a new set of flats on for every show.
I also really like the Sadowsky Nickel and SS Rounds. I know LaBella makes them but Sadowsky strings are all I use now for over a year and I have no desire to try anything else.
I agree. I have a set of 760FM's which are 6 months old (or maybe more). They sound wonderful. The pick tone is especially round and full. Coming from Chromes which sound clanky (or clicky) with a pick, this has made them a keeper on the bass.
I'm using both, they are the same string the only difference is the silk wrap.
They feel and sound identical and I even mixed the two on a bass I have.
The guy I buy my stings from told me as much too.
Nothing wrong with it, private labeling drives the string business and Sadowsky picked a good partner none the less.
They feel and sound identical and I even mixed the two on a bass I have.
The guy I buy my stings from told me as much too.
Nothing wrong with it, private labeling drives the string business and Sadowsky picked a good partner none the less.
Not in my experience. My LaBella 760FL's have a much smoother surface than the Sadowsky 45-105 set that I tried. I prefer the more organic old school sound of the LaBellas over the more modern sounding Sadowskys. And the LaBella 760FL set have a much richer midrange to them with better note definition than their heavier sets (FS, FM, etc.). My vote goes to the LaBella 760FL strings.
I found a good deal on a set of Sadowsky 100-40 and put them on my 4001. They are definitely not the same as the La Bella sets I have tried. Different sound and feel. I'm still undecided, they sound really good so far but I need to see how they age. My set of la Bella 760fx had the E and A string suddenly die. Out of nowhere almost all the top end and sustain are gone, just too dead and thumpy for me. I am currently soaking them in some denatured alcohol, hopefully that will bring them back to life again.
In the meantime, picked up a set of chromes 95-40 gauge. Definitely not as smooth as the others and a little stiffer. We'll see how they break in.
In the meantime, picked up a set of chromes 95-40 gauge. Definitely not as smooth as the others and a little stiffer. We'll see how they break in.
How could they be the identical when the guages are different (something I had forgotten)?
Why does the guy who you buy your strings from know this for certain? Who is he? is it not possible he heard Labella makes them, and made an assumption based on that? I've heard so much misinformation from shop owners and staff over the years I could write a book of BS.
I love to ask questions I know the answers too. And most of the time I get BS answers.
Sadowsky flats are different than La Bellas. And I think they are less harsh than Chromes. Chromes are too harsh IMO.
Little bump here.
I just got some Sadowsky flats. These strings are awesome and I haven't even fully gotten my bass setup. First off, I love the feel. With flats I tend to not be able to slide around as much, I sort of "stick" to the strings. Think of a car with a slick tire, which actually grabs more than a treaded one. The Sads have a little bit of roughness, like Chromes I suppose, you can feel the flat windings, whereas the Labellas are very smooth. I like the pick tone with Labellas but was finding I wanted a little more bite in the mix and wanted to try something besides Chromes.
I just got some Sadowsky flats. These strings are awesome and I haven't even fully gotten my bass setup. First off, I love the feel. With flats I tend to not be able to slide around as much, I sort of "stick" to the strings. Think of a car with a slick tire, which actually grabs more than a treaded one. The Sads have a little bit of roughness, like Chromes I suppose, you can feel the flat windings, whereas the Labellas are very smooth. I like the pick tone with Labellas but was finding I wanted a little more bite in the mix and wanted to try something besides Chromes.
I remember reading here on TB thats Sadowsky flats are made or were made by JR Coco (sp??).
I have both the Labellas and the Sadowsky flats..If I had to choose I would go with the Sadowskys....smoother to the touch and I really like the way they sound on my P Bass.
Regarding shipping costs... I cannot tell you how many orders ( from many different vendors ) I cancelled when the shipping costs where added to the total.
I have both the Labellas and the Sadowsky flats..If I had to choose I would go with the Sadowskys....smoother to the touch and I really like the way they sound on my P Bass.
Regarding shipping costs... I cannot tell you how many orders ( from many different vendors ) I cancelled when the shipping costs where added to the total.
Those would be the rounds, though I also remember he changed supplier for some or all of the rounds a few years ago. Not sure if he went to or from Cocco.
Thread revival.
Am now trying out a set of the Sadowsky .45-.130 flats, on a Sadowsky P/J. To calibrate, I usually favor R. Cocco nickelrounds, have kept a 4-string P/J strung with TI jazz flats for about 4 years (once my main axe, but now rarely used). and have used LaBella flats (and a lot of different rounds) in the past. The Sadowsky came with Sadowsky nickelrounds, but one of them was bad, and I frankly prefer the Coccos. I was about to buy a set of Coccos, but then decided to try the Sadowsky flats, somewhat out of laziness as the bridge was already set up for the exposed B-string core used by Sadowsky, and because the local bass bistro was out of Coccos.
I'm blown away by how good these strings are, particularly on this bass! On the Growlometer, they are real close to the TI's and leave the La Bella's far behind. On the Thumpometer, they approach the La Bellas and leave the TI's behind. The tension is somewhere between the La Bellas and the TI, which seems like a pretty good place. Surface feel is a wee bit grabby, but I'm loving the reduction in fret noise on slides. So it's like Sadowsky found a sweet spot relative to the other market leaders, and I like it. And the B-string is righteous and incredible, although I wonder if their .125 B-string might be a tad more continuous with the rest of the set.
The kicker is that these have a quickness of attack that I've never found in any flat other than the TI. AND they seem to have the pitch clarity and stability, particularly evident on chords and triple-stops, that I've only otherwise found on the R. Coccos, which is the main reason (along with great tone) that those have been my favorite strings over the last few years. AND when I favor the J-pickup and dial the tone control down by 60-70%, I get a sound with upper-mid bark, snarl and attitude that works great on Jaco-like staccato lines, which I love to have in my arsenal but can't get from all strings or all axes.
All in all, a great balance of virtues. I'm going to get a good set-up and stick with these over rehearsals/gigs in the coming month and then re-evaluate, but I can't wait to play them in familiar contexts with others. Excellent strings!
Am now trying out a set of the Sadowsky .45-.130 flats, on a Sadowsky P/J. To calibrate, I usually favor R. Cocco nickelrounds, have kept a 4-string P/J strung with TI jazz flats for about 4 years (once my main axe, but now rarely used). and have used LaBella flats (and a lot of different rounds) in the past. The Sadowsky came with Sadowsky nickelrounds, but one of them was bad, and I frankly prefer the Coccos. I was about to buy a set of Coccos, but then decided to try the Sadowsky flats, somewhat out of laziness as the bridge was already set up for the exposed B-string core used by Sadowsky, and because the local bass bistro was out of Coccos.
I'm blown away by how good these strings are, particularly on this bass! On the Growlometer, they are real close to the TI's and leave the La Bella's far behind. On the Thumpometer, they approach the La Bellas and leave the TI's behind. The tension is somewhere between the La Bellas and the TI, which seems like a pretty good place. Surface feel is a wee bit grabby, but I'm loving the reduction in fret noise on slides. So it's like Sadowsky found a sweet spot relative to the other market leaders, and I like it. And the B-string is righteous and incredible, although I wonder if their .125 B-string might be a tad more continuous with the rest of the set.
The kicker is that these have a quickness of attack that I've never found in any flat other than the TI. AND they seem to have the pitch clarity and stability, particularly evident on chords and triple-stops, that I've only otherwise found on the R. Coccos, which is the main reason (along with great tone) that those have been my favorite strings over the last few years. AND when I favor the J-pickup and dial the tone control down by 60-70%, I get a sound with upper-mid bark, snarl and attitude that works great on Jaco-like staccato lines, which I love to have in my arsenal but can't get from all strings or all axes.
All in all, a great balance of virtues. I'm going to get a good set-up and stick with these over rehearsals/gigs in the coming month and then re-evaluate, but I can't wait to play them in familiar contexts with others. Excellent strings!
