Tension in modern and older flatwound strings including 9050Ls

[9050L]

Hello
As one might imagine from my username, I am a fan of 9050L strings. My set was bought in the 1980s, and sounded pretty good. The neck on my old Precision was nowhere near as strong as I would like, and the set of Jamerson flats I bought made such a large bow in the neck that it became unplayable. The 9050Ls I had on there had a tension that was acceptable. Unfortunately, someone who had my bass for a while threw away the original set, and so I have lost my reference point. The original set was (IIRC) 40 - 95, and I have a few questions which will help me work out what strings to put on the bass. I have a few questions for those that are familiar with that original set from the 1980s, and would very much appreciate some info.

1. How does the original 40 - 95 set compare tensionwise and soundwise with the new 45 - 100 9050L set ?
2. How does the original 40 - 95 set compare tensionwise and soundwise with the equivalent LaBella set (whatever that is ?)
3. What other flatwound string sets are as low tension as the original 40 - 95 9050Ls, and how do they compare soundwise ?
I am trying to work out whether there is a set of new strings that will have the same tension as my original set and have the right sound characteristics, or whether I am going to have to try to find a set of the originals, either N.O.S. or played in if anyone happens to have an old set lying around that they have taken off a bass.
Many thanks !

 

[winston]

No answers, but subscribing as I recently got the new 9050L 45-100 set, and like them more than most other flats I've tried.
They feel like they have less tension than Ernie Ball Group III and Chromes of the same gauge.
Would love it if they made a 40-95 set again!

 

[michael_t]

I'm not at all familiar with the Fender flats from the 80's, except to know they were very different from the current ones.

As far as a light set of flats that is similar in tonal character to the current Fender 9050, I might suggest the Ernie Ball Group 4 Stainless Flats (40-95). At 153.02 lbs. they would be definitely lighter than the 9050L.

Another option is the GHS Precision Flats 45-95, which are closer to the original Fender flats from the 60's made by V.C. Squier. A little more old-school than either the current 9050 or EB Group 4, they weigh in at 163.2 lbs. One of my Fender J's wears the 9050L, and I've used the Group 4 on my Fender P in the past (and possibly will again in the future).

 

[HaphAsSard]

Hello
As one might imagine from my username, I am a fan of 9050L strings. My set was bought in the 1980s

Unless you end up trying and liking the current set, you may have to change your username then.

The (Mexican manufacturing era) Fender 9050L stainless steel flatwound set (45-60-80-95) appeared no earlier than spring 1997.

No trace of it on the Fender website in February
FENDERWORLD: PRODUCT INDEX
first mention on the Frontline catalog no. 21
https://it.scribd.com/document/736391162/Fender-FMIC-1997-Frontline-Vol-21-Spring-1997#content=query%3A073-9050-003%2CpageNum%3A37%2CindexOnPage%3A0&page=37
and in a June 6 capture of the website
Bass Strings, 9050

Needless to say, no 9050 anywhere during the Eighties:
Invalid Link Removed

 

[Coerced]

Hello
As one might imagine from my username, I am a fan of 9050L strings. My set was bought in the 1980s, and sounded pretty good. The neck on my old Precision was nowhere near as strong as I would like, and the set of Jamerson flats I bought made such a large bow in the neck that it became unplayable. The 9050Ls I had on there had a tension that was acceptable. Unfortunately, someone who had my bass for a while threw away the original set, and so I have lost my reference point. The original set was (IIRC) 40 - 95, and I have a few questions which will help me work out what strings to put on the bass. I have a few questions for those that are familiar with that original set from the 1980s, and would very much appreciate some info.

1. How does the original 40 - 95 set compare tensionwise and soundwise with the new 45 - 100 9050L set ?
2. How does the original 40 - 95 set compare tensionwise and soundwise with the equivalent LaBella set (whatever that is ?)
3. What other flatwound string sets are as low tension as the original 40 - 95 9050Ls, and how do they compare soundwise ?
I am trying to work out whether there is a set of new strings that will have the same tension as my original set and have the right sound characteristics, or whether I am going to have to try to find a set of the originals, either N.O.S. or played in if anyone happens to have an old set lying around that they have taken off a bass.
Many thanks !

Seems like the light 3025 GHS precision flats might be similar to what you had. 45-95, 163.2 lbs.

 

[9050L]

Unless you end up trying and liking the current set, you may have to change your username then.

The (Mexican manufacturing era) Fender 9050L stainless steel flatwound set (45-60-80-95) appeared no earlier than spring 1997.

No trace of it on the Fender website in February
FENDERWORLD: PRODUCT INDEX
first mention on the Frontline catalog no. 21
https://it.scribd.com/document/736391162/Fender-FMIC-1997-Frontline-Vol-21-Spring-1997#content=query%3A073-9050-003%2CpageNum%3A37%2CindexOnPage%3A0&page=37
and in a June 6 capture of the website
Bass Strings, 9050

Needless to say, no 9050 anywhere during the Eighties:
Invalid Link Removed

Excellent detective work HaphAsSard ! So given I acquired the bass over 40 years ago and definitely put Fender flats on no later than 1982, a set which I bought new at the time, what model were they ? I do not think they were the even older F80 set. I have also seen other posts here on the forum that discuss the 80's model. FENDERWORLD: PRODUCT INDEX is a great link. I have a feeling that the 80's set I had could have been the 950 or the 980L. All the Fender sets I put on always had that sea green/turquoise winding on the machinehead ends. Seeing pictures of the set covers will probably help reboot the memory properly. I don't think I'll change the user name just yet - I am still in the realm of how many country and western singers does it take to change a light bulb (or in this case a set of bass strings)

 

[iiipopes]

It is most regrettable that your "friend" trashed a classic set of the flats we all knew and loved the tone when younger, that woody, organic, luscious goodness that was the foundation of countless recordings over the decades of all genres. Condolences.

There is nothing in current manufacture that is even close in tone. Yes, whatever the gauges, if you knew what the gauges were, then any set that is similar in gauge will be similar in tension because the construction of core/ribbon wrap of flats doesn't vary that much from manufacturer to manufacturer. The current Fender flats are made by D'Addario to Fender specs, and have more growl and bite compared to the classic "golden era" flats. I like them, but not everyone else does after the change.

If you want a similar tone as well as tension, you may have to go to another manufacturer. Ernie Ball stainless flats have less growl than current Fenders, but with good body of tone; the question is the gauges, which are strange, although you can get singles. That is what I would do: get singles in your preferred gauges, and you will be close. Very close. GHS are the current "luscious chocolate" flavor of flats. DR are round in tone and get darker, and darker, and.... but are good strings, although their standard gauges are heavier than the current Fender 9050L's. La Bella has "ping" in the articulation, but are also great strings. Optima RB's have that round, almost hollow tone of the British Invasion (yes, guess what "RB" stands for!)

I wouldn't try Rotosound for the same reason you lost the original neck: the monel alloy has more tension, and I also broke a truss rod on one of my basses with them. To my ears, Thomastik-Infeld flats are sloppy rubber bands with no definition. D'Addario Chromes start zingy and fade to worthless thump.

 

[9050L]

It is most regrettable that your "friend" trashed a classic set of the flats we all knew and loved the tone when younger, that woody, organic, luscious goodness that was the foundation of countless recordings over the decades of all genres. Condolences.

There is nothing in current manufacture that is even close in tone. Yes, whatever the gauges, if you knew what the gauges were, then any set that is similar in gauge will be similar in tension because the construction of core/ribbon wrap of flats doesn't vary that much from manufacturer to manufacturer. The current Fender flats are made by D'Addario to Fender specs, and have more growl and bite compared to the classic "golden era" flats. I like them, but not everyone else does after the change.

If you want a similar tone as well as tension, you may have to go to another manufacturer. Ernie Ball stainless flats have less growl than current Fenders, but with good body of tone; the question is the gauges, which are strange, although you can get singles. That is what I would do: get singles in your preferred gauges, and you will be close. Very close. GHS are the current "luscious chocolate" flavor of flats. DR are round in tone and get darker, and darker, and.... but are good strings, although their standard gauges are heavier than the current Fender 9050L's. La Bella has "ping" in the articulation, but are also great strings. Optima RB's have that round, almost hollow tone of the British Invasion (yes, guess what "RB" stands for!)

I wouldn't try Rotosound for the same reason you lost the original neck: the monel alloy has more tension, and I also broke a truss rod on one of my basses with them. To my ears, Thomastik-Infeld flats are sloppy rubber bands with no definition. D'Addario Chromes start zingy and fade to worthless thump.

Thanks for your thoughts iiipopes. Actually the original neck is still intact - the Jamerson set stayed on there for a day or so before I took it off again, thank goodness. I did try the Rotosound flats at one point - I did not get on with the sound or the tension, and they stayed on for a few hours tops. As a result of reading your post above and some of your other posts here, and also the post above from HaphAsSard with some great info and links, I know that the strings I liked came either from the pre-1997 era (but not as far back as the 1960's when the 80 and 850 sets were the only flats available AFAIK), or the Mexican production era which HaphAsSard indicates is the start of the 9050L set. I will try to get some N.O.S. sets of both, or if anyone has any played-in sets they can let me know about, better still. I will then shoot out with the LaBella LTF4 set (DTF tension is too high IME), and maybe I will try some of the Ernie Ball flats - what gauges would you suggest I get ? Pyramid flats are another possible contender. If anyone has any leads on played in Fender 9050Ls from the Mexican era, or other sets from the pre-1997 era, please let me know. Thanks !

 

[HaphAsSard]

Excellent detective work HaphAsSard ! So given I acquired the bass over 40 years ago and definitely put Fender flats on no later than 1982, a set which I bought new at the time, what model were they ? I do not think they were the even old 80 set. I have also seen other posts here on the forum that discuss the 80's model. No, I don't think I'll change the user name just yet - I am still in the realm of how many country and western singers does it take to change a light bulb (or in this case a set of bass strings) . All the Fender sets I put on always had that sea green/turquoise winding on the machinehead ends. The links you provided are really useful.

Thanks for your thoughts. Actually the neck is the original and the additional bow was temporary - that Jamerson set lasted about a day before I had to take it off. Thank goodness I did. After reading HaphAsSard's post above and his links (very helpful), I remembered that the sets I likes had that rainbow stripe on the cover. From what I can make out from some of your other posts, that packet design could have come from the era from 1972 till 1997 or the Mexican production areas. The were definitely not the '80 set, because I remember always

Thanks for your thoughts iiipopes. Actually the original neck is still intact - the Jamerson set stayed on there for a day or so before I took it off again, thank goodness. I did try the Rotosound flats at one point - I did not get on with the sound or the tension, and they stayed on for a few hours tops. As a result of reading your post above and some of your other posts here, and also the post above from HaphAsSard with some great info and links, I know that the strings I liked came either from the pre-1997 era (but not as far back as the 1960's when the 80 and 850 sets were the only flats available AFAIK), or the Mexican production era which HaphAsSard indicates is the start of the 9050L set. I will try to get some N.O.S. sets of both, or better still if anyone has any played-in sets they can let me know about, better still. I will then shoot out with the LaBella LTF4 set (DTF tension is too high IME), and maybe I will try some of the Ernie Ball flats - what gauges would you suggest I get ? Pyramid flats are another possible contender. If anyone has any leads on played in Fender 9050Ls from the Mexican era, or other sets from the pre-1997 era, please let me know.

To be clear, and in reverse chronological order:

- the current Fender string line, with white sleeves and big numbers depicted on them representing the gauge of the highest string in the set, surrounded by a coiled string, is outsourced and probably made by D'Addario;

- the preceding package featured a big "F" in a coloured circle, with a black background; with the content of the package being probably the same as the current. They were designed by TB member @hasbeen in 2009, and outsourced, as said. The 9050 flatwounds in particular feature thin, hex cores;

- Fender 9050 flatwounds were round-core before that, i.e. between 1997 and 2009 (the Ensenada plant was closed in 2008 and the company relied on end-of-line stock until the above-discussed relaunch) and, rather distinctively, featured silk (of a shade of green darker than both ensuing phases) only at the bridge end;

- pre-1997, Fender flats were already made in Mexico (before the Ensenada facility opened ca1986, it had been local contractors supplying strings to CBS-era Fender), but were not named "9050". They came in two lines, the regular and the 980 ("Studio Bass Flatwounds"). Whether either was hex- or round-core is unknown to me. Both were stainless steel;

- before the Mexican era, Fender strings were made in the VC Squier plant in Battle Creek, Michigan. The plant was shut down in July 1981. Both the regular and Studio Bass flats were hex-core but, whereas the former were stainless steel in middle-to-late Seventies, the latter (introduced no later than June 1979) were originally pure nickel:

- at least between 1971 and late 1974, the regular, or better said sole existing, Fender flats were pure nickel themselves (pricelists from that period spell out as much). During this time or slightly earlier, their construction was very peculiar, with a silk inlay between core and inner winding (à la strings for violin-family instruments), and a simplified rope core with three filaments. This was revealed by TBer @TwototheValley, who acquired an early CBS-era set:

- also per TwototheValley, sets from the early to middle Sixties were more conventional, round-core affairs, probably also pure nickel. Flatwounds first appeared in Fender literature in 1959 (before that they only had roundwounds, despite the internet vulgate: as we've seen, misinformation was also spread by Fender themselves at that June 5, 1997 link I posted above).

 

[9050L]

To be clear, and in reverse chronological order:

- the current Fender string line, with white sleeves and big numbers depicted on them representing the gauge of the highest string in the set, surrounded by a coiled string, is outsourced and probably made by D'Addario;

- the preceding package featured a big "F" in a coloured circle, with a black background; with the content of the package being probably the same as the current. They were designed by TB member @hasbeen in 2009, and outsourced, as said. The 9050 flatwounds in particular feature thin, hex cores;

- Fender 9050 flatwounds were round-core before that, i.e. between 1997 and 2009 (the Ensenada plant was closed in 2008 and the company relied on end-of-line stock until the above-discussed relaunch) and, rather distinctively, featured silk (of a shade of green darker than both ensuing phases) only at the bridge end;

- pre-1997, Fender flats were already made in Mexico (before the Ensenada facility opened ca1986, it had been local contractors supplying strings to CBS-era Fender), but were not named "9050". They came in two lines, the regular and the 980 ("Studio Bass Flatwounds"). Whether either was hex- or round-core is unknown to me. Both were stainless steel;

- before the Mexican era, Fender strings were made in the VC Squier plant in Battle Creek, Michigan. The plant was shut down in July 1981. Both the regular and Studio Bass flats were hex-core but, whereas the former were stainless steel in middle-to-late Seventies, the latter (introduced no later than June 1979) were originally pure nickel:

- at least between 1971 and late 1974, the regular, or better said sole existing, Fender flats were pure nickel themselves (pricelists from that period spell out as much). During this time or slightly earlier, their construction was very peculiar, with a silk inlay between core and inner winding (à la strings for violin-family instruments), and a simplified rope core with three filaments. This was revealed by TBer @TwototheValley, who acquired an early CBS-era set:

- also per TwototheValley, sets from the early to middle Sixties were more conventional, round-core affairs, probably also pure nickel. Flatwounds first appeared in Fender literature in 1959 (before that they only had roundwounds, despite the internet vulgate: as we've seen, misinformation was also spread by Fender themselves at that June 5, 1997 link I posted above).

Much useful background info HaphAsSard thanks. I would love to get my hands on (literally) a set of 1959 strings and put them on my '63 Precision. That would be awesome. Does not have to be N.O.S. An extra bit of info that might be helpful in tracking down my set is that the packet cover had a set of rainbow stripes at the bottom. Any thoughts anyone ? Also the 950 set, when was that introduced ? Do you happen to know the model numbers you term "the regular" made in Mexico in the post above ?

 

[HaphAsSard]

Do you happen to know the model numbers you term "the regular" made in Mexico in the post above ?

80 (intr. 1959), 850 (ante 1966), 950 (May 1969).
Plus the 700 (short-scale 6-string bass, ante 1962, discontinued post 1974) and 900 (short scale, ante March 1968, discontinued in 1986).

Studio Bass flats were, as said, those marked 980: the L and M and also (but only until 1986) the H, and the short-scale 900M.


By the way, it appears the (at the time new) website wasn't up to date in February '97: the 9050 series were already mentioned on Frontline no. 20 (fall 1996), replacing the 80, 850 and 950.


EDIT - I believe the package with the rainbow strip was the one current in the Eighties (the late Seventies one had a picture of a sunset on the sleeve).

 

[winston]

In my searches through TB string forum in last few months, I came across at least one thread where the person who designed the latest 9050s for Fender posted.

That's user @hasbeen
I recall them saying they went by feel more than tension measurements which I found somewhat odd, and that Fender was thinking of discontinuing flats altogether around the time (2010-ish) as they weren't selling well. So there was a compelling reason to change it up from previous versions.

In other news I find the new 9050Ls have a "singing" quality when set up with low action I haven't really experienced with other flats (on my G&L SB-1, and Momose '70s-style J bass).
That is borne out by this video I just happened upon of this guy playing Bach cello suites on a '63 Fender Precision: with 9050Ls:

 

[michael_t]

I find the new 9050Ls have a "singing" quality when set up with low action I haven't really experienced with other flats...

This is the first time I've read about the Fender 9050 flats as having a "singing quality"; I've always thought that description was reserved for the TI Jazz Flats. But I guess any string can "sing" if you can play like the guy on the video.

 

[rockear]

...If anyone has any leads on played in Fender 9050Ls from the Mexican era, or other sets from the pre-1997 era, please let me know. Thanks !

Man... if you find a source for Ensenada 9050s please let me know too! I've got a 21 year old set on my #1 Precision and I've had no luck finding them anywhere. And not for lack of trying.

Reading this thread with great interest in all the knowledge being shared.

 

[9050L]

Man... if you find a source for Ensenada 9050s please let me know too! I've got a 21 year old set on my #1 Precision and I've had no luck finding them anywhere. And not for lack of trying.

Reading this thread with great interest in all the knowledge being shared.

We can live in hope. If I hit a major seam of gold I will let you know.

 

[iiipopes]

[M]aybe I will try some of the Ernie Ball flats - what gauges would you suggest I get ?

I suggest the same gauges as the current 9050L set.

 

[9050L]

Thanks iiipopes. I still have questions about the tension of all the different options, but am still hoping that some folks here with experience of the original 9050L set from Mexico, can answer my questions 1 and 2 in my original post, with the slight alteration in gauge of the G which it appears I have not remembered correctly as pointed out by HaphAsSard (quoted below).

The (Mexican manufacturing era) Fender 9050L stainless steel flatwound set (45-60-80-95)

So my questions 1 2 and 3 should now read
1. How does the original 45 - 95 set compare tensionwise and soundwise with the new 45 - 100 9050L set ?
2. How does the original 45 - 95 set compare tensionwise and soundwise with the equivalent LaBella set (whatever that is ?)
3. What other flatwound string sets are as low tension as the original 45 - 95 9050Ls, and how do they compare soundwise ?

And is there anyone out there who has had an original 9050L set and then went to the new 9050L set, and is in a position to answer question 1 ?
Another question in detective mode - for the 80, 850, 950, and early 9050Ls, did they have green silk at the bridge, and did they have green silk at the headstock ? And what did the packaging look like ? (string envelopes as well as the set cover). Please can you upload photos if possible Thanks all !

 

[hasbeen]

To be clear, and in reverse chronological order:

- the current Fender string line, with white sleeves and big numbers depicted on them representing the gauge of the highest string in the set, surrounded by a coiled string, is outsourced and probably made by D'Addario;

- the preceding package featured a big "F" in a coloured circle, with a black background; with the content of the package being probably the same as the current. They were designed by TB member @hasbeen in 2009, and outsourced, as said. The 9050 flatwounds in particular feature thin, hex cores;

This is all correct HaphAsSard. I may have mentioned it earlier in this thread, but many of the strings I moved to the new production house didn't have to be redesigned. The "fly in the ointment" was that the new producer wouldn't do round cores. There were a couple of string sets (one was a nickel guitar set IIRC) and the other was the bass flats. That's why I had to re-spec these sets. Fender was encouraging me to discontinue the flats all together. Their thought was that flats were dead in the market. This was true during the 80's and much of the 90's. I saw a resurgence of the sales of flats starting in the late 90's and growing quickly. That's why I kept them in the line. A little trivia- It was in the height of managing Genz Benz that Fender asked me to rework their string business. It was an incredibly busy time for me because of that. It was however, the most rewarding part of my career.

 

[hasbeen]

This is the first time I've read about the Fender 9050 flats as having a "singing quality"; I've always thought that description was reserved for the TI Jazz Flats. But I guess any string can "sing" if you can play like the guy on the video.

I've never heard the "signing" quality assessment either. They do have nice sustain compared to old-school, thumpy flats. Maybe that's what is being described.

 

[michael_t]

They do have nice sustain compared to old-school, thumpy flats. Maybe that's what is being described.

Agreed. That's what I like about the 9050 flats, ie not too thumpy or thuddy. A nice middle-of-the-road all-purpose flat. I just have to work on my playing skills for them to "sing" better.