Strings on a '72 4001

lyle_from_minneapolis · Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:16 am

I'm going to post here because I'm more concerned with this bass's age when I ask this question.

Being almost finished with some resuscitation work, I plan to string this bass with D'Addario Chrome flatwounds, bassed (sic!) on good reviews I've read here.

My question: Light or Extra Light?

This bass has been a warhorse over the years and has stood up to some serious abuse. Even so, after a slight adjustment, the neck is flat.

Is there a tonal difference between extra light and light? Does higher tension equal better sustain? And should I keep it as light as possible simply because, as basses go, it is a senior citizen?

Thanks!

jps · Post by **jps** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:59 am

It is a senior citizen and was not designed for high tension strings, therefore go with the Super Soft set 40-95. If you want, you can replace the D string (.060) with a single .055 like I do which gives more even tension across all the strings.

AFA tonal differences, in general, lighter guage strings have better and more extended overtones as lighters strings are more flexible, and will intonate better.

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 12:53 pm

I second what Jeff says, .040-.095 will be fine. TI Jazz Flats if you want the flat sound, I use GHS Boomers in that gauge for roundwounds.

lyle_from_minneapolis · Sat Dec 30, 2006 1:06 pm

To be honest, I don't know what the flat sound is! But 3 months of reading these Rickenbacker sites just leads me there. You could say I'd like to sound like McCartney on Sgt Pepper, rather than Chris Squire on Fragile.

But tell me this, would you go for those TI Jazz Flats over D'Addario Chromes? And why?

(Waiting for the post that tells me they are the same strings...)

Thanks!

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 2:38 pm

Flats = Revolver/Sgt. Pepper/MMT sound.

TI (Thomastik-Infeld) are Austrian(?)made, a great string and low tension; I have them on my 1972 4001 LH.

I've never tried D'Addario Chromes on a bass, but I can assure you they aren't the same....

lyle_from_minneapolis · Sat Dec 30, 2006 3:05 pm

Flat is where its at! Who wouldn't want to sound like that? That's exactly how I want to sound, and I also want young girls to scream at me.

Wait...I have two daughters...

Okay, nevermind, it's already covered.

Thanks, John, I believe I'll try both strings, in time, and tell you about the difference someday.

ram · Post by **ram** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 4:50 pm

I have a '74 4001 and have run D'Addario EXL170s since the the eighties. They are called Regular Light Gauge 45/65/80/100. I know they are not flats but thought I'd throw it out as a reference. I think the tensions of the rounds may be a little more that the flats. I have never had a problem with them.

rickenbrother · Post by **rickenbrother** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 6:22 pm

Erik Kutzler just brought me a set of D'Addario Chromes super light gauge .040 - .095 which are going on my '75 4001FL tomorrow. I think the regular light gauge 45/65/80/100 Chromes might have a little too much tension for that bass. This is my first set of flatwounds in about 26 years!
Thanks Erik!

leftyguitars · Post by **leftyguitars** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:39 pm

This is my first set of flatwounds in about 26 years!

Joey, you change your strings as often as I do ! heh heh heh.

72rick · Post by **72rick** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:15 am

Hey guys,

I'm going to weigh in on the other side of the prevailing fence here.

I've had my '72 Fireglo 4001 for ~25 years now and have used Rotosound "almost" exclusively.
The only significant change has been going to "Billy Sheehan" BS66's (110-43) when they were first introduced, from standard Swing Bass 105's (105-45).

As for your suggestions on lower tension strings, I'd like to know why?

I just measured the string height at the 12th fret (3/64th inch) and 20th fret (1/8th inch) on my Bass.

The laquer at the fretboard headstock joint is not cracked on either side, nor is the lacquer at the neck body joint cracked at any point.
My Bridge shows absolutely no "lift" at the tail what so ever.

I am certainly with you in reverence for these gorgeous Basses.

I guess I'm just against the Tide when it comes to thinking of and treating these Basses like some frail old thing that could fall and break a hip at any time.

Mine has never performed like an old geezer and I just don't think it ever will.

Flatwound-Roundwound aside, what's your real point?

jps · Post by **jps** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:48 pm

Flats feel better, IMHO.

ratso · Post by **ratso** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:26 pm

TI Flats were on my '68 when I got it and I fell "head over heals" for their feel, playability and tone!

lyle_from_minneapolis · Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:13 pm

Well, I reckon my '72 doesn't play like a geezer either. Blasts like a roaring dragon now, with this crazy new high gain from Sergio. Good golly miss molly!

I agree with the gist of what you're saying, Garret, and so far I've found the same to be true for me. Dual truss rods and great design and finishes make these basses marvelously durable. But all that won't stop entropy, so I don't mind exercising too much caution and care as the years wind out. I definitely played rough with it in the early 90's, when I considered it a beater. It used to have a badass bridge with rounds, medium gauge, and it was played hard. Now it has a Ric tailpiece and extra light chrome flats. I like the change, it sounds great.

rickcrazy · Post by **rickcrazy** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:21 am

"...with this crazy new high gain from Sérgio." Haha! I can tell you like my pickup, Lyle. Let it rip!

leftybass · Post by **leftybass** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:56 am

I have TI flats on one of my '72s as well, and I really like them. I'm getting another set soon for another 4001 of mine.