Which flatwounds for my Beatle bass

[HaphAsSard]

Thanks for the info. Very even pull on the strings!

Ayuh. In this case the simple math (adjacent strings in 4:3 ratio -> same tension when tuned a perfect 4th apart), pretty much surefire with plain strings, is confirmed by tension data of wound strings, a sign that there's no skip in the proportion of one or the other layer in the innards of the respective strings.
However, to be fair, the usual #640 Pyramid Gold set for Beetle basses doesn't have a .075" but a .07". So it's either a typo by the String Guy (or Pyramid), or one should expect a li'l bit less pull from the A string. Probably not an uber-significant difference.

 

[Haroldo]

I am both in need of education and lazy. From the website you employed, we've got 5 different sets of bass strings, with only the Pyramid Nickel Flat Shorts giving even pull. There's a fair bit of variance in the other 4 sets. Why is it obvious that the Pyramid shorts would adhere to simple maths? What is different about the other 4 sets? Thanks.

 

[HaphAsSard]

I am both in need of education and lazy. From the website you employed, we've got 5 different sets of bass strings, with only the Pyramid Nickel Flat Shorts giving even pull. There's a fair bit of variance in the other 4 sets. Why is it obvious that the Pyramid shorts would adhere to simple maths? What is different about the other 4 sets? Thanks.

View attachment 3154986

That set is the only one where the ratio between gauges of adjacent strings is 4:3 (or very close to it), which is the same ratio between any given pair of frequencies a perfect fourth apart (but of course the gauge proportion and the frequency proportion are inverted: thickest string in the pair, at the same tension and scale, has less Hertzes). 55.000Hz (A1 note) divided by 4 times 3 = 41.25. Note that equal temperament intervals aren't perfectly corresponding to the simple Pythagorean ratios between frequencies (low E1 of the equal temperament scale is actually 41.203Hz).
Also note that that very same ratio is found between vibrating lengths of the corresponding frets of the perfect fourth interval, on the same string. Let's take low E and A again (respectively open fourth string in standard tuning, and 5th fret on the same string): 34" divided by 4 times 3 = 25.5", which is (not exactly but close to, because equal temperament) the (nominal, with no saddle compensation for string stiffness) distance between the 5th fret and the bridge.

 

[Pimpernel Smith]

HaphAsSard:

Crikey, mate, maths and logic. I've used the Pyramid strings on my Hofners because that's what Hofner intended. Phew!

 

[HaphAsSard]

HaphAsSard:

Crikey, mate, maths and logic. I've used the Pyramid strings on my Hofners because that's what Hofner intended. Phew!

Care to reread? I didn't bring up tension nor even tension myself, only answered TBers who asked/commented, both times.

 

[Haroldo]

That set is the only one where the ratio between gauges of adjacent strings is 4:3 (or very close to it), which is the same ratio between any given pair of frequencies a perfect fourth apart (but of course the gauge proportion and the frequency proportion are inverted: thickest string in the pair, at the same tension and scale, has less Hertzes). 55.000Hz (A1 note) divided by 4 times 3 = 40.25. Note that equal temperament intervals aren't perfectly corresponding to the simple Pythagorean ratios between frequencies (low E1 of the equal temperament scale is actually 40.203Hz).
Also note that that very same ratio is found between vibrating lengths of the corresponding frets of the perfect fourth interval, on the same string. Let's take low E and A again (respectively open fourth string in standard tuning, and 5th fret on the same string): 34" divided by 4 times 3 = 25.5", which is (not exactly but close to, because equal temperament) the (nominal, with no saddle compensation for string stiffness) distance betwediffereen the 5th fret and the bridge.

That inverse proportionality is well known, thanks. However, I am truly curious about all this and would like to discuss it further (in particular, what are the design tradeoffs, etc., that result in the deviations from the idealized string. (Another, more grounded, sort of string theory.)

It seems a private conversation is the way to go, if that is amenable to you. If not, or perhaps as an adjunct to it, can you recommend a text or two that goes into string theory and fabrication? Thanks again.

 

[ScottTunes]

Ok that makes sense, I have used the 96-39 set and the tension is very slightly higher than TI Jazz flats, the 96-39 set feels looser than the Pyramid gold short scale set although I don't know how they compare in terms of actual physical tension.

Pyramid makes OE Hofner strings. Only difference I know of is the packaging (with brand and logo).

 

[fermata]

Overall, I like the light La Bella set, although the .039 G is a bit on the thin side (and prone to twang, initially). The .045-.095 GHS Precision flats have a similar feel, overall, but I like the G better. (GHS short scale strings are designed to fit Hofners, something I only recently learned.)

 

[seilerbird]

Yikes! Speaking of misinformation. This post is filled with it!
And, BTW, owing a German made Hofner has nothing to do with being a gear snob.

I wish you would point out the misinformation in my post.

 

[seilerbird]

I admit i am a bit late replying to this post but this is not entirely true, his Hofner was not dirt cheap, the price he brought it for accounting for inflation was around the price of an MIM Fender (£30 that he brought it for then in todays money works out to around £500) so it would have been a mid range instrument, they were certainly cheaper than buying Fenders back then as Fender basses outside of the us were very expensive and also the fact that he was buying a German instrument in Germany would have brought the price down.

Nope, Paul paid L45 for it in 1961. At that time a Strat costs about $300.

"The Beatles played a series of gigs in Hamburg, Germany in early 1961, and while they were there, original Beatles bassist Stu Sutcliffe decided to leave the band. Paul McCartney, then 18, was tapped to move from piano to bass, which meant he had to get an instrument of his own. “Eventually, I found a little shop in the center of town, and I saw this violin-shaped bass guitar in the window,” he told Tony Bacon for a BP cover story way back in the summer of 1995. McCartney recalled buying his first Höfner 500/1 violin bass, a right-handed model that he turned upside down, for the equivalent of $45. Unfortunately, his 1961 Höfner was stolen in the late ’60s."

 

[shoulderpet]

Nope, Paul paid L45 for it in 1961. At that time a Strat costs about $300.

"The Beatles played a series of gigs in Hamburg, Germany in early 1961, and while they were there, original Beatles bassist Stu Sutcliffe decided to leave the band. Paul McCartney, then 18, was tapped to move from piano to bass, which meant he had to get an instrument of his own. “Eventually, I found a little shop in the center of town, and I saw this violin-shaped bass guitar in the window,” he told Tony Bacon for a BP cover story way back in the summer of 1995. McCartney recalled buying his first Höfner 500/1 violin bass, a right-handed model that he turned upside down, for the equivalent of $45. Unfortunately, his 1961 Höfner was stolen in the late ’60s."

I stand corrected, Macca said it was 30 quid (pounds) , anyway the point I am making is that although it was much cheaper than a Fender it still wasn't especially cheap if you take into account inflation, Fenders at the time were ridiculously expensive outside the usa.

I'm always skeptical about his claim about buying a right hand bass and turning it upside down as all the photos I have seen show him playing a left hand bass.

Anyway one thing I can agree with you on is that the newer Hofner basses are better made than they used to be


"Eventually I saw a bass in the window of a shop in Hamburg, this violin-shaped bass, the Hofner. It was a good price, because my dad, as I say, had always said I shouldn’t do the never-never, but we were earning reasonable money. I liked its lightness. So I bought it, and I think it was only about 30 quid."

 

[seilerbird]

The Beatles were basically living on the poverty line in 1961, the Hofner was about the only thing he could afford. Most all the photos you see of his bass are of the 1963 models he had, which were left handed. I have never seen him holding a right handed Hofner so I think he is having a bit of a memory loss. Here is a rare photo of me and Paul with his 61.

 

[ScottTunes]

Macca converted John's Hofner Club guitar to bass, which was a right-y... But he claimed the violin bass was symmetrical, and therefore didn't look "daft" as a lefty. I'm fairly certain his first Hofner 500/1 was a real lefty as well.