[Scott Pope]

Quite alright. Yes, the math is only a means. If it doesn't sound as it needs to out front, then it's all just a...well, you know.

BUT...without the math, there is no good way besides subjectivity to narrow down the universe to a manageable set of choices.

I have always said that specs for anything having to do with music are not like an engineer's project manual in that if you specify a certain criteria, then you run the numbers and come up with the structural application. I have tinkered with electric instruments, guitars, basses, etc., since 1975. It amuses me that someone will say, for example, "My Strat pickup was supposed to measure 6.1 kohms, but it only measures 6.05!" With manufacturing tolerences, "Just noticable difference," etc., get over it!!! The wood and the player are much more important. Likewise, even before putting them on, by listening closely, the bass itself will tell you what strings are most appropriate. I seriously enjoy Ken's comments and essays on the basses that come through his shop and how different strings react differently. I just wish I had the means to go visit his shop and play the various basses to experience the magnificent diversity myself.

Rather, the numbers are useful like a naturalist's field guide. You use a field guide to get you to the general vicinity, then use your own tools and experience, like binoculars trying to find a particular bird species, to narrow down to the most likely places to see what is being sought.

That's what tension figures are for: to help narrow the universe. Since there is such a wide variety of string construction, and an even wider spectrum of players, genre and repertoire, there is way too much to try to sample everything. Over on TalkBass you'll run into guys who have spent hundreds, nay, thousands of dollars chasing "The" set of strings. Likewise, on the brass forums, you'll run into guys chasing "The" mouthpiece, etc.

WARNING -- BIASED OPINION FOLLOWS: I believe that the reason Pirastro does not publish tension specs is because they don't want to "lose" customers. But in this global day and age of internet, and since computers bring out the "spec" guy in all of us, what they don't realize is that if they publish the specs, like TI and other companies do, they are more likely to get even more customers as they peruse the specs, then do the research on forums (or, in classical Latin, fora), their teacher, and their colleagues, to focus on a few viable choices, which would generate even more sales. We must move beyond relying only on subjective criteria, bias, entrenched opinion, and the ever-dreaded, "Well, we've always done it that way," as an excuse rather than a point of departure. If there are good objective reasons that it's always been done that way and should continue to be done that way, great! Otherwise, it's an excuse bordering on bigotry.

No spec, especially tension, is the "be-all-end-all" of string choice. To the contrary, it is probably the last criterion that should be consulted. Nevertheless, it should be out there for the reasons I stated above so the player can have another point of reference, after the recommendations of the string company, the player's private tutor, the conductor of the ensemble, and of colleagues and section/stand mates playing the same or similar instruments and repertoire, to help make the right choice, given the expense of a set of strings.