Dilemma about strings

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 11:55 am

Robert, im sure you dont wanna hear me say this ( i will say it anyway) , but i have found Ernie Ball's bass strings to be real ******. The tone and feel are spot on - but the sweat seems to get to them real quickly. I used the stainless ones (bothe regular and hybrid) on my 4003 since i got it in december. I did 5 gigs and like 30 rehearsals and jams with it, and a set of the Ernie's lasted my about 5 sessions before they just totally died and went real muddy. Same with the nickels on my P bass. I switched over to Rotosound's. Exactly the same , just last longer. Here in the UK, Roto swings are the cheapest and best around (they are made here).

Id say try the nickel version of the swingbass they make - but if you want a 50 and 70, you get a 90 and 110 too. The nickels only come in the basic 45 to 105 anyway so....this info is useless

anyhow thats my opinions and stuff.....

rickfan63 · Post by **rickfan63** » Mon Aug 18, 2003 2:09 pm

I use Rotosound Jazz 77 flats on my 4001V63 and my 4003,and had never had any problem. The necks on both basses handle the strings just fine with no problems at all. Pyramid flats have moderate to high tension, and I've heard other Rick players rave about them. So I think if you use regular guage strings (45 to 105 or lighter) you're pretty safe.

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Mon Aug 18, 2003 10:59 pm

yeah Randy, all 45-105 sets seem fine, some feel a little stiffer than others but they are all "safe" i think. Although Fender 9050 flatwounds are totally ridiculous- MASSIVE tension

rickfan63 · Post by **rickfan63** » Tue Aug 19, 2003 6:18 am

I agree Owen. I never have liked the sound of the Fender flats, they are way too thumpy and dead sounding for my liking. The tension is like you said, way too high. I'll stick with the Rotosounds, they work just fine.

rickfan63 · Post by **rickfan63** » Fri Sep 26, 2003 10:32 am

I have since returned to using SIT Power Flats on my basses. I had started having problems with the Roto 77's. Several sets I had bought had bad D and G strings. They would not intonate properly, and lost tone and volume very quickly. Since they are rather pricey,it was time to change. The SIT's are very well balanced,and the tone and consistancy is excellent. The price is much more reasonable and the guage is lighter 45-100, so is the tension.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Fri Sep 26, 2003 5:40 pm

I bought two sets of the Roto flats several years ago and the G was dead within one hour with both sets. I had heard that they had instituted better quality control since then, apparently not.

rickfan63 · Post by **rickfan63** » Sat Sep 27, 2003 11:56 am

The first couple of sets of Rotos I got were great. I really liked them, they sounded great on my V63. But then I started getting D and G strings that sounded, like you said Bob,dead after a single show. They did not work well at all on my 4003. The SIT's work very well on both basses and are MUCH less expensive. As high as the Rotos are, I can't afford to get bad strings.
I guess the lesson here is, if you find something that works,stick with it. The SIT's work, and in all the years I've used them,both rounds and the Power Flats,the consistancy has been great,and I've never gotten a bad string. The sound is much more powerful than the Rotos too. My mistake-at the price the Rotos are, I shouldn't have been so fast to switch from what I knew worked. I won't do that again.

ojobob2 · Post by **ojobob2** » Sat Sep 27, 2003 2:17 pm

i dont think the roto flats are up to much. The set i tried had very uneven balance. The D and G were good, but the A and in particular the E were twangy and hollow. They have low output too