Dilemma about strings

rickengrowl · Post by **rickengrowl** » Sat Jul 26, 2003 1:06 pm

Hi,
I never really could understand whether, for a similar gauge, flats require more tension than rounds, or if rounds require more tension than flats. I read both (and contradictory) opinions about that. That was my first question.
My second question, regarding to the 4001 > 4003 evolution (justified by switching from flats to rounds), is : what may happen if one mounts flats on a 4003, that is supposed to be intended for rounds ?
I made searches on this forum and could not find accurate answers to my question.
Many thanks in advance,
All the best,
JL

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Sat Jul 26, 2003 1:43 pm

Jean.....basically its all rubbish and quite misleading.........

its like this......

If you take what is really the "normal" guage of 45-105 , and compare rounds to flats, flats put more tension on the neck.

There are exceptions to this, such as our good friend Rotosound. The Roto Jazz 77 monel flats exert slightly less tension than the swing 66 rounds, but playing wise they have a slightly stiffer feel. This i guess is due to the way the strings are made. The flat material makes them stiffer, even if they are less tension.

At the end of the day this is my tip based on "real world" experience: you can use any strings you want on any rick, JUST DONT USE REALLY HEAVY STRINGS.......LIKE FENDER FLATS!!! The rods in the 4001's and 4003's adjust differently but they can handle any strings.

A general rule of thumb is to NEVER use any string set where the G goes above 0.45

Using a 0.50 G on even a Fender feels too much of a strain on both bass and fingers.

Hope this helps,

Owen

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Sat Jul 26, 2003 1:47 pm

Oh, go to D addario's website -

they list tension in pounds (Ib's) for their strings

for example their flats (chromes) have a massive tension compared to stainless rounds (Prisms?)

oh and by the way, the D always seems to exert the most tension on the neck

dave4004 · Post by **dave4004** » Sat Jul 26, 2003 2:50 pm

John Hall has said that the RIC flats were low tension due to the unusually small core wire, that they were made for RIC by Maxima, and that the formula went to the grave with the former owner of Maxima.

Most modern flats are usually higher tension than rounds of the same diameter because the flats generally have a larger core wire for the outer size, and that's the primary factor in tension. There are exceptions, e.g. Thomastik-Infeld Jazz Flats are very low tension for their size. And of course there are noticeable differences between rounds from different manufacturers.

I avoid large diameter strings (above .045-.105) on any bass unless I know they are low or moderate tension.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Sat Jul 26, 2003 5:34 pm

4003's were not made only for rounds, they were made for all strings. 4001's were made for their low tension flats, back then about the only round wound string was Rotosounds which were higher tension than Ric OE flats, but everyone started using them and Ric had problems with some necks, so they redesigned the 4001's so they could bear additional tension such as in a rotosound string, which resulted in the 4003. 4003's were made for any string. And they sound great and play great with flats.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Sat Jul 26, 2003 5:35 pm

The only string I will really stay away from are Fender Med. gauge flatwounds, those things are like telephone lines.

dave4004 · Post by **dave4004** » Sat Jul 26, 2003 5:42 pm

Bob, somewhere around here I have a slightly used set of GHS Precision Flatwounds in .055-.105, they are even tighter than the Fenders.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Sat Jul 26, 2003 6:07 pm

Wow! those must have given your neck a workout. I had 2 Am. Jazz Deluxes a few years ago and put the med. Fen. flats on one of them and couldn't get the neck straight enough with those strings and it was nice before I put them on. They were too tight for even one of their own basses.
.55 is a big G string, isn't that the OE D string on a Ric?

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Sat Jul 26, 2003 11:20 pm

a .55 fender flat? thats truly scary.

I think its like this isnt it ?

judging stings readily available now, flats are higher tension than rounds. Only stings like old ricky flats are low tension.

Rotosound black nylon flats are VERY low tension. Thats why they are guages 65-115. But they are really very different and not your average string

rickengrowl · Post by **rickengrowl** » Sat Jul 26, 2003 11:56 pm

Thanks all,

All I wanted to know was if I will be able, at no risk, to mount flats on the 4003 S I wish to buy soon. I think I have the answer now. Your contributions were helpful, thanks again.

All the best,
JL

dave4004 · Post by **dave4004** » Sun Jul 27, 2003 4:51 am

Bob, yes, the OEM RIC D is an .055. I just looked at the package, these (GHS flats) are .055/.070/.090/.105. I remember that they felt even bigger and hurt my hands. If I start doing barbell exercises with my fingers, maybe I'll dare to put them on something again.

Owen, the black nylon flats are lower tension because the core is relatively small, the nylon outer wrap accounts for more thickness than a metal wrap.

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:59 am

I had the current issue Fender stainless steel flats on my last Rick bass, an '88 V 63, and it was fine. I probably would not put them on a 60s or 70s Rick, though.

bassman_bob · Post by **bassman_bob** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 10:14 am

I think I need to learn from all of you out there. I have 3 4001's and use a mixed set of Ernie Ball nickel roundwounds .05-.07-.08-.105. I find I need the larger G and D for fuller tone from those strings. I don't find them cumbersome to play or neck benders at all. They've all been set up by the same pro; perhaps he has mastered the Ric truss rods. Opinions anyone ?

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 10:39 am

Mastering the rods??? theres no real art to them once you get over the stigma of them apparently being "dodgy" i think. Robert - when i bought my 4003 used, it was strung with ernie's - stainless rounds. 50, 70, 85, 105. It was set up poorly, so i took it back and they ironed all the problems out. It was fine with the 50's - tho i went down to 45's purely cos they were a bit stiff for me, not because of any problems. Strangely enough I put the same Ernie's on a P bass and it felt like it was gonna rip the head end of the neck off!!! The D and G were really hand to fret on frets 1 thru 4. Weird huh?

I think that Rickys, even the old ones can handle the bigger strings better than most basses. I just dont like the big heavy strings.

Everytime you see a used 4001 in a store it always has rounds. Most of these basses are PLAYED and well worn. The neck is straight as an arrow and the necks fine. i reckon most of the problems are due to ppl not maintaining the rods properly.

bassman_bob · Post by **bassman_bob** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 11:10 am

Hey Owen ! Odd about that P-bass. I use Fender Nickels- medium gauge (.50 to .105) on my 1969 and 1976 P's and they're fine; haven't tried the Ernie Balls on the P's; I keep them reserved for the Rics. As to string gauge, I guess its personal preference, I hear a huge tonal difference between a G at .045 and a G at .05; always have. The extra tension is worth the extra
tone in my book.