- May 6, 2003
- 5,272
- 160
- 64
- Disclosures
- Proprietor Fifth Avenue Fret Shop. Technical Editor Bass Gear Magazine
In addition to my mike not sounding right and the pickup sounding really good I've noticed something else.
The Stark E is now somewhat of a hindrance. It's slower to speak and the fact that it needs more effort pizz and arco to get it moving is starting to trump the subterranean power I get from it. It's got a subwoofer effect to it, and in fact the whole bass does when it's on there. That effect isn't there with a mitt E.
I've had a regular Spiro Mittle E on it (in fact a regular Spiro red set on it) for 2 weeks and it has more balance across the strings, and more punch, especially on the low E. I don't get that teeth rattle or huge box shaking low end, and I can overdrive a Spiro Mitt pretty easy, however I do get a bit more upper mid cut through with the Mitt. The bass is a whole lot easier to play and even with the string height up a tad 7-11mm it's not fatiguing at all. Arco is way easier across all the strings.
Jury's still out because it's hard for me to give up that low end. It's addicting. That low end is really only there on low E through G, then it's just a tough string to manage above that. The mitt is clear and has plenty of booty down there, just a bit cleaner and less over the top.
Both strings sound great. On the recordings I don't notice much difference at all. The fellas in the shop whom I bore with these trivialities, don't notice the subterranean thing with the Stark as much as they do the low mid clarity with the Mittel. It comes through the pickup real well and up against my body the Stark E really feels great on the bass. I'm just not sure that's right in the overall picture though.
Funny little things I'm left with. Really small stuff now.
What a bass!
The Stark E is now somewhat of a hindrance. It's slower to speak and the fact that it needs more effort pizz and arco to get it moving is starting to trump the subterranean power I get from it. It's got a subwoofer effect to it, and in fact the whole bass does when it's on there. That effect isn't there with a mitt E.
I've had a regular Spiro Mittle E on it (in fact a regular Spiro red set on it) for 2 weeks and it has more balance across the strings, and more punch, especially on the low E. I don't get that teeth rattle or huge box shaking low end, and I can overdrive a Spiro Mitt pretty easy, however I do get a bit more upper mid cut through with the Mitt. The bass is a whole lot easier to play and even with the string height up a tad 7-11mm it's not fatiguing at all. Arco is way easier across all the strings.
Jury's still out because it's hard for me to give up that low end. It's addicting. That low end is really only there on low E through G, then it's just a tough string to manage above that. The mitt is clear and has plenty of booty down there, just a bit cleaner and less over the top.
Both strings sound great. On the recordings I don't notice much difference at all. The fellas in the shop whom I bore with these trivialities, don't notice the subterranean thing with the Stark as much as they do the low mid clarity with the Mittel. It comes through the pickup real well and up against my body the Stark E really feels great on the bass. I'm just not sure that's right in the overall picture though.
Funny little things I'm left with. Really small stuff now.
What a bass!