Broad peak in the overall response question

[Scott Pope]

Well, it may actually have been a wolf. I thought wolf tones were more like a single note really sticking out or dying, not spreading through a range of a few notes. I shifted my jack bracket on my Full Circle from the A & D strings to the E & A strings, actually to make access easier, and lo, and behold, as I play, the peaking not only seems to have mostly disappeared, but I'm getting clearer and more balanced response from my E string overall as well. It is significant enough that my even my wife and 14-year old son can tell the difference, as they know my playing best. Thanks again for all your help.

Hmm. I'm starting to get asked for more gigs. I live in southwest Missouri, but not Branson. Word is getting out that I play, but because I'm not stuck in a bluegrass band, in an orchestra, or on the Branson strip, I'm getting asked to do a wide variety of gigs, from a barnwarming party a couple months ago to a contemporary lessons & carols church service, in jazz & funk style, as well as "conventional" dance band gigs this season. It's been awhile since I've had this many gigs in a row.

As this is my avocation, not my day job, I'm having a blast!

Here's the real kicker so far: last February my dance band played a local dance club's Valentine's Day party. Straightforward gig, decent pay, good time. This coming February we did not get the gig. But last week I got a call from the bandleader who is playing the gig and he asked me to play in his band for the gig!!! So I get to play it, anyway! Life is grand.

[Scott Pope]

Update: it seems to be on the open D string, but not a stopped D on any other string in any position. Even after all the above, since the last post, it was still ringing. To work on some arco, I put a set of Bel Cantos on, which have marginally higher tension than S42 Spiro Weichs at the standard 3/4 mensure. My bass seemed to "focus" a little better with the added tension, and really narrowed the resonance down to the open D string.

Here's the kicker: I recently played a gig with a rather warm stage. Every guy in the band was perspiring, and I had a brown washcloth with me to keep everything wiped down. I don't know why, but on a whim I stuck it part way in the lower part of the G side F hole. The resonance all but disappeared! But not at the expense of damping the projection of anything else! It's now about as even in its response as one can expect for a CCB.

Go figure....

[Bin Hire]

Originally Posted by Scott Pope

Update: it seems to be on the open D string, but not a stopped D on any other string in any position. Even after all the above, since the last post, it was still ringing. To work on some arco, I put a set of Bel Cantos on, which have marginally higher tension than S42 Spiro Weichs at the standard 3/4 mensure. My bass seemed to "focus" a little better with the added tension, and really narrowed the resonance down to the open D string.

Here's the kicker: I recently played a gig with a rather warm stage. Every guy in the band was perspiring, and I had a brown washcloth with me to keep everything wiped down. I don't know why, but on a whim I stuck it part way in the lower part of the G side F hole. The resonance all but disappeared! But not at the expense of damping the projection of anything else! It's now about as even in its response as one can expect for a CCB.

Go figure....

I found Bel Canto strings had less tension for pizz - too soft. Different basses, I guess.

[Terry McDougal]

Originally Posted by Bin Hire

I found Bel Canto strings had less tension for pizz - too soft. Different basses, I guess.

Yeah, I tried BCs. Not great for pizz.

[Scott Pope]

Don't confuse tension with feel, and don't confuse the tension of strings whose tension specs are quoted for 106 cm mensure with those quoted for 110 mensure.

Most folks by default use the 4/4 S42 set of Spiro Weichs, which are quoted for their tensions at 110 cm, which when you do the math to get the equivalent tension at 106 cm, difference in tension being the square of the difference in mensure, you actually come out about 14 pounds tension less than the Bels overall, with the Bel E string being almost identical in raw tension to the S39W string once tension is compensated for mensure. That's what I had on my bass to start with because I was doing exclusively jazz/dance band gigs.

HOWEVER, when you look at the Spiro 3/4 3885W set, quoted for 106 cm right off the T-I website, the quoted tension is a hair lighter on the G string and a hair heavier on the E string than the Bels. The Bel E string is too floppy to suit me, and that's why I went with a 3885.5W E string, which balances better on my bass. Your mileage will vary. My bass is very middy and growly in tone anyway; the Spiros almost sounded like Rotosound Swingbass electric bass strings. So the Bels on my bass are not as dark as they probably are on other basses. I even have my Fishman Full Circle mounted "upside down", or threads up, to get more fundamental than overtones to balance better (option 2 on page 2 of the Full Circle installation guide).

Feel, on the other hand, is a totally different subjective quality, having more to do with the overall string diameter, the flexibility of the core, set up of the bass, the ergonomics of the player, and so forth. What something feels like can have no relation to the actual tension of the string. And don't go there with how tension and feel may relate to such variables as overstand, tailpiece, afterlength, bow and hair differences, etc. That is a debate way too broad for Ken's bandwidth.

As far as the subjective judgments posted above regarding Bels and pizz, I agree with the objective part. They are dark relative to strings normally associated with pizz. If I was doing modern jazz, I'd immediately go back to the 3885W set. However, they are very easy arco, and that's what I'm working on at the present and for the next year, and the "standards" gigs I have coming up over the next few months will be fine with the darker pizz, and I'll just boost the upper mids on my combo amp a bit to compensate if necessary. But as set foth above, I probably won't have to.

It's not "good" or "bad." It's what's happening for the particular gig and the combination of bass/strings/player/repertoire. Ken knows that better than anybody.

In about a year or so, I'll probably be changing strings again as I work on arco. If I improve arco to suit myself, then I'll have a lot of studying to do to figure out where I want to go next, or just leave them on, and if I want to try to get into a formal setting for performing arco. But, being left-handed playing a conventional right-handed bass right-handed, if my right hand just doesn't take to arco, well, it will be back to a set of 3885W, and pizz on it.

WARNING: RANT AHEAD -- this is why I am frustrated that Pirastro won't give tension ratings. It leaves everything to a subjective, "Yes, it is," "No, it isn't," pizzing match like what almost happened above, except for the gentlemanly way I thank you all for tempering the comments, unlike elsewhere. When a guy says something like, "You know, I don't get quite the drive out of (certain lighter tension set), but (certain heavier set, or especially E string) tends to choke the table," then the numbers can help narrow the universe of strings to a few managable choices to consider.

[Richard Prowse]

Originally Posted by Scott Pope

Don't confuse tension with feel, and don't confuse the tension of strings whose tension specs are quoted for 106 cm mensure with those quoted for 110 mensure.

Most folks by default use the 4/4 S42 set of Spiro Weichs, which are quoted for their tensions at 110 cm, which when you do the math to get the equivalent tension at 106 cm, difference in tension being the square of the difference in mensure, you actually come out about 14 pounds tension less than the Bels overall, with the Bel E string being almost identical in raw tension to the S39W string once tension is compensated for mensure. That's what I had on my bass to start with because I was doing exclusively jazz/dance band gigs.

HOWEVER, when you look at the Spiro 3/4 3885W set, quoted for 106 cm right off the T-I website, the quoted tension is a hair lighter on the G string and a hair heavier on the E string than the Bels. The Bel E string is too floppy to suit me, and that's why I went with a 3885.5W E string, which balances better on my bass. Your mileage will vary. My bass is very middy and growly in tone anyway; the Spiros almost sounded like Rotosound Swingbass electric bass strings. So the Bels on my bass are not as dark as they probably are on other basses. I even have my Fishman Full Circle mounted "upside down", or threads up, to get more fundamental than overtones to balance better (option 2 on page 2 of the Full Circle installation guide).

Feel, on the other hand, is a totally different subjective quality, having more to do with the overall string diameter, the flexibility of the core, set up of the bass, the ergonomics of the player, and so forth. What something feels like can have no relation to the actual tension of the string. And don't go there with how tension and feel may relate to such variables as overstand, tailpiece, afterlength, bow and hair differences, etc. That is a debate way too broad for Ken's bandwidth.

As far as the subjective judgments posted above regarding Bels and pizz, I agree with the objective part. They are dark relative to strings normally associated with pizz. If I was doing modern jazz, I'd immediately go back to the 3885W set. However, they are very easy arco, and that's what I'm working on at the present and for the next year, and the "standards" gigs I have coming up over the next few months will be fine with the darker pizz, and I'll just boost the upper mids on my combo amp a bit to compensate if necessary. But as set foth above, I probably won't have to.

It's not "good" or "bad." It's what's happening for the particular gig and the combination of bass/strings/player/repertoire. Ken knows that better than anybody.

In about a year or so, I'll probably be changing strings again as I work on arco. If I improve arco to suit myself, then I'll have a lot of studying to do to figure out where I want to go next, or just leave them on, and if I want to try to get into a formal setting for performing arco. But, being left-handed playing a conventional right-handed bass right-handed, if my right hand just doesn't take to arco, well, it will be back to a set of 3885W, and pizz on it.

WARNING: RANT AHEAD -- this is why I am frustrated that Pirastro won't give tension ratings. It leaves everything to a subjective, "Yes, it is," "No, it isn't," pizzing match like what almost happened above, except for the gentlemanly way I thank you all for tempering the comments, unlike elsewhere. When a guy says something like, "You know, I don't get quite the drive out of (certain lighter tension set), but (certain heavier set, or especially E string) tends to choke the table," then the numbers can help narrow the universe of strings to a few managable choices to consider.

Really interesting about the 4/4 & 3/4 thing Scott.

I must say, though, that I'm not interested in how I can improve the sound of a string with amp setting. For me, the string must sound (and feel) how I want it to acoustically. I need to be happy with both the arco and pizz. sound. The attack of the BCs (pizz.) was too rubbery on my bass, when I tried them (for a considerable time). I guess there wasn't enough resistance.
I know the 'maths' is very important but, as a player - one who spends a lot of time with the big fiddle in his living room - I need the bass to sound good and feel good when I play it. I'm writing this quickly, and am not long up; apologies if I missed your point.

[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.