TI Flats ?

[coolhandjjl]

Trying to find TI Flats for my 4003. Are these called the Jazz E-Bass 4-string set Flat Wound- Nickel Flat Wound Roundcore JF344 long scale 34" medium ?

[bassduke49]

Hi fellow cheesehead. Here's where I get mine:

http://www.juststrings.com/toi-jf344.html

[coolhandjjl]

Thanks Paul. From what I have been reading, these are the best for deepest fundamentals that still make a Ric growl like it should?

[cassius987]

That's a pretty subjective statement John--anything that includes "best" is. They're just strings like the rest of 'em, but they do have quite a following. I think they have a nice tone but the A string is too floppy for me so I can't use them. There is a recording I did with TIs two years ago that I hate to go back and listen to because any time I plucked the A string on the recording I notice it; the note is less defined and more growly than the others and it just sticks out to me. Others noticed it too, without my prompting them.

As far as flats go, I've played these, Pyramids, D'Addario Chromes, GHS steel flats, and LaBella DTFs all on my various Rics. I got the best results with D'Addario for clean, punchy warmth that could turn moderately aggressive when needed, and with LaBella for angry chainsaw bass noises (they growl like rabid dogs). The others probably won't make it onto my basses again.

Since you are concerned about fundamental, I'll comment that I think that's actually a big part of your setup. Flats tends to "show" the fundamental better than rounds because they may have a more complex interesting character in the lower register that draws your ear, and there are fewer highs to distract you. However 99% of strings should be able to generate a good low-end oomph, especially on a Ric with a neck pickup. I'd really encourage you to A) set your bass up and B) think about the limits of your rig if you aren't getting enough fundamental. Rics are great at fundamental.

[coolhandjjl]

I understand, 'best' is probably not a good term. I was looking for a string with deeper fundamentals, while still retaining some brightness and Ric growl. (Now how's that for subjective terms )

Ones that come up most highly regarded are LaBella Flats and TI Flats. Floppy for me is my Ric E string. I don't really like it. If the TI Flats seemed floppy on one of the strings as you mentioned, maybe I should look at the LaBella's. Growling like rabid dogs sounds cool to me.

[NFB-418]

I like this La Bella set a lot:

http://www.juststrings.com/lab-760fl.html

I also had a good experience with this set of D'Addarios:

http://www.juststrings.com/dad-ecb84.html

I didn't like the TIs.

[cassius987]

Ones that come up most highly regarded are LaBella Flats and TI Flats. Floppy for me is my Ric E string. I don't really like it.

The G, D, and to a lesser extent E strings of the TIJF344 set all have enough tension for me not to complain, but the A string is in my opinion quite a bit floppier than any E string I ever played from a Ric string set. But I haven't played a Ric set for two years.

[coolhandjjl]

LaBella Flats 'Light' at .043/.060/.082/.104
LaBella Flats 'Med' at .049/.069/.089/.109

How does one select?

[FretlessOnly]

You left out the one set that I think is best, and closest to the standard RIC gauges (760FS). I left a pretty good description over here:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=395801&start=15

While TI JFs have great fundamental, they do not provide much, if any growl (and they are just plain too soft for my playing style). Best of both worlds, go with the LaBellas.

As to light vs. standard; you'll get more fundamental from the 760FS than the 760FL while still retaining similar growl.

[cassius987]

Since the standard Ric string set is 45-55-75-105 (I think) wouldn't the light set be the best match? As long as we're assuming the tension per diameter is the same, although I suspect "TPD" is higher in the LaBellas.

[FretlessOnly]

I suppose you're right, but I've always rather thought that the greatest "influence" on tenstion, from a twisting standpoint, is exterted by the E and G strings. From an over tension standpoint, the FL set is a bit lower in the E and G and somewhat higher in the A and D (bit < somewhat).

The FS set has exact matches in the E and G string and are higher in the A and D. So overall, the FL set wll have more similar total tension, but the FS set just feels more "right" to me. If we are talking a 4003, then the tension differences between FL and FS shouldn't make too much difference, but you will get a bit more fundamental from the FS over the FL while retaining growl.

[cassius987]

I suppose you're right, but I've always rather thought that the greatest "influence" on tenstion, from a twisting standpoint, is exterted by the E and G strings. From an over tension standpoint, the FL set is a bit lower in the E and G and somewhat higher in the A and D (bit < somewhat).

The FS set has exact matches in the E and G string and are higher in the A and D. So overall, the FL set wll have more similar total tension, but the FS set just feels more "right" to me. If we are talking a 4003, then the tension differences between FL and FS shouldn't make too much difference, but you will get a bit more fundamental from the FS over the FL while retaining growl.

If it feels right to you that's good. However, 65/85 D/A strings are actually a little too big to tensionally match most 45/105 G/E sets. RIC probably came up with their stock gauges that way, although I think they may have overcorrected for my tastes.

Most conventional strings will follow a four-thirds rule of tension, so that the string tuned a fifth down from the string before it will be 4/3 larger (133%) if it is going to match tension closely. This helps translate to tonal balance as well but when you get down to E and B strings you have to worry about getting too large and dulling the tone of the string. I used D'Addario's in-house numbers after I calculated on my own what sets would likely be best and indeed their numbers agreed with me that sets such as 45-60-80-105 will be very highly balanced (much, much more so than the sets sold in stores). 40-55-70(75)-95 is another good set of gauges to consider. Finally it's good to remember that variations in gauge by .001'' (such as .104'' vs .106'') or so will have less effect on the tension of a larger string than a smaller one.

[coolhandjjl]

You left out the one set that I think is best, and closest to the standard RIC gauges (760FS). I left a pretty good description over here:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=395801&start=15

You're right. I took that info from a reseller's site, they must have been out of the 760FS

[scott_s]

I suppose you're right, but I've always rather thought that the greatest "influence" on tenstion, from a twisting standpoint, is exterted by the E and G strings. From an over tension standpoint, the FL set is a bit lower in the E and G and somewhat higher in the A and D (bit < somewhat).

The FS set has exact matches in the E and G string and are higher in the A and D. So overall, the FL set wll have more similar total tension, but the FS set just feels more "right" to me. If we are talking a 4003, then the tension differences between FL and FS shouldn't make too much difference, but you will get a bit more fundamental from the FS over the FL while retaining growl.

If it feels right to you that's good. However, 65/85 D/A strings are actually a little too big to tensionally match most 45/105 G/E sets. RIC probably came up with their stock gauges that way, although I think they may have overcorrected for my tastes.

Most conventional strings will follow a four-thirds rule of tension, so that the string tuned a fifth down from the string before it will be 4/3 larger (133%) if it is going to match tension closely. This helps translate to tonal balance as well but when you get down to E and B strings you have to worry about getting too large and dulling the tone of the string. I used D'Addario's in-house numbers after I calculated on my own what sets would likely be best and indeed their numbers agreed with me that sets such as 45-60-80-105 will be very highly balanced (much, much more so than the sets sold in stores). 40-55-70(75)-95 is another good set of gauges to consider. Finally it's good to remember that variations in gauge by .001'' (such as .104'' vs .106'') or so will have less effect on the tension of a larger string than a smaller one.

As an unashamed geek, I armed myself with those wonderful D'Addario tension charts years ago, and put together hypothetical string sets that would be much more balanced than the sets they offered (like your 45-60-80-105 bass set, or a 0.012-0.056 guitar set). And that got me thinking -- why DO they offer the sets they do? Is it so that the output from the pickups is more balanced?

- Scott

[coolhandjjl]

Well I just ordered the LaBella Flats 760FS. Bassduke49 lives not too far away, so when I go to see his National Ric Forest, I'll bring along my new strings to make sure I get them set up properly. Never changed strings before.