Originally Posted by Ken Smith
Calvin (and anyone else reading this), I have read hundreds of posts and threads here and on TalkBass about desired sounds and how to get them. What I am going to tell you is what I truly believe.
Most people looking for the right bow or right string is actually lacking in the right bass and how to play it as well in many cases. This is several different subjects entirely but the same cries about 'how to'.
On the 'which string' problem I think that is usually the Bass itself because most basses, not some but most basses regardless of price are finicky and will only do certain things well with certain strings. They are 'limited' in what they can do. If all or most basses could do anything regardless of cost then the market would be much different price-wise because you could grab about any bass with any string and be happy. That is not the case though.
Even with the basses you have seen listed in my collection, only a few of them are close to being immune to string problems. The English Basses are usually less plush and sweet than the old Italians. Most of the Italians are too dark to have a clear low E with Pizz. So, you need an English E with an Italian G... lol
Ok, ok.. enough rant for the moment. I am sure this will be revived sooner than later.
On your Flex 92 question or Orig Felx in comparison let me tell you the basic differences I have noticed regardless of which Bass I put them on and they are too many to list here.
The 92s are sweeter sounding, especially on the top. The Orig. G is not as smooth as either the 92 or 92 stark G. Some basses with 92s need the stark E. The ext 92s reg E is actually thicker then the non ext. E. Call Pirastro and ask them. They will say they are the same. Then, measure a few of each and you will see that the 92E averages at about .097/.098. The 92E/C measures at about .100/101. Someone in the String room is cheating and making the Ext.E/C a tad thicker to compensate for its length. So, you know what? It's a good mistake to have. According to Pirastro, I can't measure correctly as they denied my findings!!
It is easier to learn this difference and embrace it than to ask them to make something different. They are nice people but my comments have always fallen on deaf ears when I respond with my findings. To make matters worse, the discontinued the Stark E/C a while back so I bought all I could find to have when I need it.
The Orig Flex A is HUGE in it's diameter as compared to the D and E. I think it's unmatched within the set and chokes the Bass a bit. When ever I've taken off Orig. Flex's and replaced them with 92s, reg or stark, the bass immediately felt and sounded more free, more sweet, more smooth and darker.
The 92s have a slightly thinner sound than the Orig's. The Starks are in between but with a bit of both qualities.
Now, back for a moment on 'the bass itself may really be the problem' theory.
Guys, you are making these string companies rich while going poor yourself. Make your string choices wisely and then leave the bass alone. Play it and deal with it. Spend that string money on a better bow or save for a better bass.
My two main English Basses are the Gilkes and the Hart. Master and Pupil but two very different instruments. Only the training of the makers are alike and the town they were made in. String wise, they change very little in characteristics with various strings. I can only alter the sound slightly with a different string but I can't make either one turn into an Italian bass no matter what I do. My 4/4 English Gamba Bass (aka Big Ben) has more of an Italian like deep growl and sustain but still has a bell like clarity. I have tried a mix of Orig Flex with Perm E, Eurosonic Orchestras and Evah Weichs. They all sounded good on that Bass with the Eurosonics the driest sounding and the Evah's the sweetest with the O.Flex/Perm mix in the middle. The Flex were the sweetest though and Bell like as well but the lighter tension Evah Weichs speak more free. Now I am having a C-Ext installed on it and will put my favorite 92s on it with an old Eudoxa Flat Chromesteel E/C, an oldie. The 92s are old as well but before wasting a brand new set of anything, I wanna hear these. I have a slightly used set of Evah regulars with an E/C that I might throw on there but I would rather play the bass with whatever decent used strings that are on it than spend time changing strings again. I like changing only when need be.
So Calvin, did I answer your question just now? Don't be afraid to ask me to clarify or to go into detail on anything we just touched on or anything that we missed here.
Ok, missed that one.. Ok..
The Orig FCs made today are the remake of the once made Eudoxa Steels. The Eudoxas were available in either gut core or steel core. The E/C I mentioned I have that is old is one of those actual Eudoxa steel strings I picked up a couple of years ago 'used' and saved it. I have had it on 3 basses at various times, the Martini, Gilkes and Hart. It is a little thuddy now but bows so so smooth and deep. I wish I had an entire set of them. Maybe that's how the Orig FCs will sound when they age.
I had a set of Original FC on my Gilkes about 3-4 years ago and this was before the bass was restored. Now after the restoration it's starting to sound deeper. I did notice however that the OFC G was not as smooth as the Flex 92 but was not as rough sounding as the Orig Flex G, blue silk.
Now about the playing problem. So many pros in Orchestra today are using and are happy with the Original Flex (with some of them using a different E). This might be a combination of their playing, the Bass and their bow. It works for them on the 'G' I guess or why would they use it? They cost way more than the 92s?
Anyway, we should all be practicing right now with what ever strings we have on the bass.. lol
|