Fender flats on a 4003?

cornishmusic · Post by **cornishmusic** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:01 am

Anyone tried Fender flatwounds on a 4003?

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:36 am

Yes, they work fine but I would try med lights first as they are high tension strings, sound good though.

maplered · Post by **maplered** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 2:30 pm

I tried fender flats on my 4001C64. They sound great but they bent the tailpiece. I used a light gauge, too. If you do it, keep an eye on the tailpiece.

charlyg · Post by **charlyg** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 2:40 pm

Try Chromes, they have less tension, Also Ti flats work well.

rikk · Post by **rikk** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 4:15 pm

I tried Fender flats and the tension was way too much. I swear the bridge lifted 1/8 in the month or so I had them on.

gray · Post by **gray** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 5:57 pm

I've been seriously considering getting TI flats for my 4001.

cornishmusic · Post by **cornishmusic** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 7:35 am

I've been using Rotos, so I thought the Fenders would be less tension?

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:18 pm

But be be careful, although I even had them on a 4001 for a while with no problems, they sound great, nice and punchy as they are taut. They blow Rotos away in the sound dept too.
They have your traditional flatwound sound. Nice and thumpy with a trebly click especially if played with a pick.
Just my opinion but Roto flats have to be the worst sounding flats I've ever heard, they have little bottom and a tinny high end.

edski · Post by **edski** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 1:01 pm

I had Fender 9050 ML's on my 4001 for years, and I had no issue with bridge lift, just high action from some neck bow. The neck is fine now that I have some low tension RW's, but I don't like the feel or sound as much. I plan to go to flats again, maybe trying Carvin's - I hear they are fairly low tension. The 75 4001 needs low tension, as it has had some neck issues.

The sound was utterly fantastic to my ears. I could dial in as much punch as I needed with my capped bridge PU and the tone pots, and could get really rumbling lows with no effort. They are very high tension as Bob Young says - you can get punch from them because of that tension. And there's really nothing "medium light" about the 9050 ML set - 50, 65, 85, 100.

As any good flat should, they tended to get better with age, and just when they seemed to be deader than dead playing without amplification the sound would just explode when I plugged it in.

charlyg · Post by **charlyg** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 1:05 pm

I prefer the tone of Chromes for flats. I think they give you the best you can get without overtones.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:34 pm

Chromes have a lot of overtones that's what they are trebly, on the other hand: "As any good flat should, they tended to get better with age, and just when they seemed to be deader than dead playing without amplification the sound would just explode when I plugged it in." Amen! That was the same experience I had with my 4001 and med. light SS Fender Flats.

zoomduck · Post by **zoomduck** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:03 pm

I had old Fender flats on my 77 4001 . I mean OLD . Thay were great ! Thoses strings went through about 5 basses and just kept getting better . Still have them on a Hofner clone .

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:10 pm

I am re-assessing my opinion of Fender flats. I took a set of med gauge Chromes off of one of my basses and put Med. light Fender SS flats on it and the neck actually flattened out a little which mean that they have less tension than regular chromes.

jps · Post by **jps** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 4:07 pm

I use the Super Soft set of Chromes and I replace the .060 D string with a .055 single, to give me .040 - .055 - .075 - .095. Try that, Bob, and call me in the morning.

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:18 pm

Oh I like the chromes, I've just been saying that Fenders are ultra high tension for so long I figured I should set the record straight. Is that set softer than a set of TI's?