# Low F# on 35": doable and which string?



## vansinn (Jan 19, 2011)

I resently bought a 7-string 35" bass made by Wolf in Korea, sold through Heke Vertrieb (HK on the bay). At &#8364;449 I can't complain:
7-ply maple/rosewood neck-through, ash/bubinga wings, Wilkinson tuners and individual saddles, Kent Armstring pups, active EQ.
It's tuned B to E, have great tone and sustain all over the board. Yes, I'll write a review later, when I have a Bit more experience 

I'm thinking of shuffling the strings one notch up for having a low F#, i.e. tuned F#, B,E,A,D,G,C(or B).

Which brand, type and gauge is recommended?
As this low F# will likely sound a Bit muffled, I'm thinking maybe a stainless would be good.
For the remaining strings, I'll likely switch to nanowebs, but feel unsure of which gauges.


EDIT: Attached a pic of the Wolfie


----------



## Varcolac (Jan 19, 2011)

I use a low G# on a 34" fretless using a D'Addario ProSteels .145, but I don't use the lowest string much. The same might work for F# on a 35", or alternatively try a Rotosound Drop Zone .175. The .175 will definitely do F#, it's what it's designed for. Still a stainless steel string, so still bright 'n clear. Tried it but it was a bit too much tension for me in G#.


----------



## vansinn (Jan 19, 2011)

Thanks for the suggestions. I too won't be using that low string too much; however, at the width of a 7-stringer, moving the strings up will ease the more normal play nicely, and I've already discovered I use the top plain E too little 

Since you mention the ProSteels.. would you mix Nanowebs with those, or will the tone differ too much?


----------



## SD83 (Jan 19, 2011)

Varcolac said:


> I use a low G# on a 34" fretless using a D'Addario ProSteels .145, but I don't use the lowest string much.


I got the same string type for a low G on my 35'', F# also works perfectly. The sound is great, not muddy at all. As for the nanowebs & the combination... I have no idea, sry.


----------



## Varcolac (Jan 19, 2011)

vansinn said:


> Thanks for the suggestions. I too won't be using that low string too much; however, at the width of a 7-stringer, moving the strings up will ease the more normal play nicely, and I've already discovered I use the top plain E too little
> 
> Since you mention the ProSteels.. would you mix Nanowebs with those, or will the tone differ too much?



I use a full set of ProSteels, 55-110, 145 on the bottom. Consitent tone across the neck. Never tried Nanowebs, or even a combination of different string brands/types, as I sometimes play the same lines in different positions on different strings and wouldn't want to change sound. I can't recommend mixing string brands, as I've never tried it, but I can definitely recommend a full set of ProSteels.


----------



## ixlramp (Jan 19, 2011)

I spent a couple of years experimenting with a D'Addario ProSteels .145 on a 35" scale. Personally I found G# to be the lowest tuning that maintained the strings excellent tone. However this is a matter of taste, some people like that super-detuned sound. It will be floppy at F#.

You will need the 'Super Long Scale' version for a 35" scale. Also I recommend the tapered version for a clearer tone. The only super long tapered 145 is this one:

XB145TSL Single XL Nickel Wound 145 Super Long Scale Tapered

The nickel plating will give it a smooth feel, the ProSteels 145s I used were rough.

However instead I recommend Circle K Strings. These are IMO the best designed strings for very low tunings. They are clear and super flexible, the sets are designed to have roughly equal tension on each string. They also sell singles, I recommend at least a .158 for F#. Note: These strings may not work with through-body stringing due to a short tapered section.

They sell 7 string sets such as:

7 String Set - Balanced Standard 166
.166 .124 .092 .068 .049 .035 .025 

7 String Set - Balanced Standard 174
.174 .130 .096 .072 .052 .037 .027 

7 String Set - Balanced Standard 182
.182 .136 .100 .076 .055 .040 .029


----------



## bostjan (Jan 19, 2011)

I've got a Dean Edge 6F with a low F#0. It's in my youtube Beaten with Sledges video. It could sound better, but it turned out better than I expected.


----------



## ixlramp (Jan 19, 2011)

Good to see a Wolf 7 string bass with humbuckers.

These Wolf guitars have weird ugly headstocks ... 






Nice 12 string ...






I love this 'spooky Steinberger' bodyshape ...






Wolf Guitars


----------



## bostjan (Jan 19, 2011)

Looks like sitar headstocks. 

I've got an idea for a a subcontra bass with a wider string spacing and a longer scale length. Made a paper mockup of the fretboard and I was surprised at how playable it was...the trouble would be convenience.


----------



## vansinn (Jan 20, 2011)

It almost sadens me to see those excerbs from their catalogue, as they aren't representative of what Wolf can do.
I've attached a pic of my 7-stringer to my OP, and wish I'd had a better camera (just using my Nokia X5) for showcasing the beatyful cocobola top.


----------



## josh pelican (Jan 20, 2011)

Anything is possible with the right setup!


----------



## vansinn (Feb 5, 2011)

I was just told about a new DR "DDT" set (or is it from RotoSound?), which should be made with a thicker core and allow F# with a mere .125 string.
Anyone know about those?


Another topic is that it's said that CircleK strings are nice'n'soft and build to allow them to vibrate more freely (as I understand it).
How does this work when playing with nails?

I also play classical guitar, that is, not classical music, but use this instrument for other purposes, and for such use nails. Fairly short ones, just an edge.

I'm having trouble seeing how such seemingly contradictory playing styles will work with thicker more vibrating bass strings like CircleK's, while the mentioned DDT's, being thinner, might work better for me with less physical vibrations.

Bear with me for my questions, as I'm not yet fully rehab'd to the bassy side of life


----------



## MTech (Feb 5, 2011)

You could get strings from LaBella made for it, they already make artists playing basses like this clear up to 270 gauge strings because they have so many strings and tune so low and I know one guy is using 170 for F on his (Stainless tapered of course)


----------



## anne (Feb 5, 2011)

I use the 166 Circle K's. They're quite nice indeed!


----------



## josh pelican (Feb 6, 2011)

Definitely go with Circle K.

I know one or two people who were using Rotosounds then converted to Circle K. I was using O4P, but I was converted as well. Try them and you'll see the light.


----------



## Durero (Feb 6, 2011)

vansinn said:


> How does this work when playing with nails?
> 
> I also play classical guitar, that is, not classical music, but use this instrument for other purposes, and for such use nails. Fairly short ones, just an edge.



Classical guitar is my main training but I've always loved bass as well. When I was studying classical guitar at university I had to give up bass because of how fast the bass strings wear down my nails and I had classical guitar exams to prepare and perform.

But more recently I've had my first band gig as a bass player and I've found that simply how hard I pick the strings determines how fast my nails wear down. I haven't noticed any strong correlation between string gage or tension and nail wear, perhaps bigger gages cause a bit more wear if they lead you to play harder.

I can practice bass every day for a week and have very little nail wear, then have one rehearsal with the band and because I'm really excited and digging in my nails are thrashed in one evening. Fortunately they grow back pretty fast.


----------



## ixlramp (Feb 6, 2011)

vansinn said:


> I was just told about a new DR "DDT" set (or is it from RotoSound?), which should be made with a thicker core and allow F# with a mere .125 string.



No, that won't work, a .125 F# will have extremely low tension, whatever the core size. Also, a larger core causes stiffness, which causes bad tone.

Tension at a particular pitch is determined by the 'unit mass', the mass of one inch of string. Unit mass is the mass of the core plus the mass of the windings, and is almost entirely determined by the gauge of the string.


----------



## nephilymbass (Feb 7, 2011)

I've done it on a 34inch warwick 5 string with the dark lord string set and a single D string it works great once the nut is either adjusted if its adjustable or filed out and the bass is properly set up. The biggest issues are you need a bass with an extremely stable neck, good electronics and a great amp. More often than not people that complain about a weak B string don't have the rig for it. F# requires serious power to have good results. I wouldn't recommend going down to F# though. G# is as low as any club PA or car speakers will normally go or as low as my ears can tell the difference between the notes for that matter. As mentioned already a 145 will work for G#. The huge stings needed for F# like a .175 go dead extremely fast and are expensive. I wore out a set in a single practice and was like to hell with that


----------



## OwlsHaveEyes (Feb 7, 2011)

My 7 string is a 34" scale and I am rocking a .165, it's a little bit looser than i'd like but I was just testing out string sizes. Next time I get new strings I'm going to go with a .175


----------



## ixlramp (Feb 7, 2011)

nephilymbass said:


> I've done it on a 34inch warwick 5 string with the dark lord string set [ ... ] The huge stings needed for F# like a .175 go dead extremely fast and are expensive. I wore out a set in a single practice and was like to hell with that



Perhaps try Circle K Strings? I have heard they last well.


----------



## vansinn (Feb 7, 2011)

WRT longivity (and hence price), I'm used to what to expect with guitar strings but not bass.
RotoSound nickelwound guitar strings fades tonewise in less than two weeks due to my type of sweat, while D'addario's lasts a long time.

For the higher price of bass strings, I'll of course want to avoid the same, so maybe someone who's used RotoSound and had the same experience can tell me that CircleK strings are different 
Else you've convinced me, and I'll get to it with those.


----------



## bostjan (Feb 7, 2011)

A .160" should suffice. Going to a huge gauge improves tension at the cost of harmonic content. The problem with strings of this size is cost- experimenting with seven different gauges can cost as much as the entire instrument.


----------



## ixlramp (Feb 7, 2011)

vansinn said:


> Another topic is that it's said that CircleK strings are nice'n'soft and build to allow them to vibrate more freely (as I understand it).
> How does this work when playing with nails?
> 
> I also play classical guitar, that is, not classical music, but use this instrument for other purposes, and for such use nails. Fairly short ones, just an edge.
> ...



The Circle K's vibrate more freely because they're more flexible. My experience is a flexible string is ideal for fingerstyle and varied techniques because the string is more responsive to a light touch.

They're also nickelplated so nice and smooth on the fingernails, the Rotosounds and Warwicks are steel.



vansinn said:


> Else you've convinced me, and I'll get to it with those.



Does the Wolf 7 string have through-body stringing? The Circle Ks have (for very good reason) a short tapered section of 1.625" that may not reach the saddle if the ball-end is a long distance from the saddle.

You should check the CircleKspecs pdf

However the option of a longer tapered section is possibly coming soon.


----------



## vansinn (Feb 8, 2011)

The Wolf 7 is using the same single bridge/saddles (ABT I think) as KnuckleHead is using on his Quake.
It's factory stringed through-body, but those saddles can be used both ways, so no problems there.

Yes, I've heard he's possibly getting into longer-tapered strings for through-body; I'll contact him about going with a suitable current set now, or await a possible new through set.

Thanks for all the good know-how-to-do-this'n'that so far 
I'll report back when I have new life-saving steel wires with obsene vibrations in it, haha..


----------



## ixlramp (Feb 8, 2011)

bostjan said:


> A .160" should suffice.



Yes. A CIrcle K .158 at F# on a 35" scale will have 31.2 pounds tension. Circle K recommend at least 30 pounds of tension for a good tone.


----------



## knuckle_head (Feb 22, 2011)

Sorry to be MIA - I'm the shipping guy now too. 

I'm inclined to suggest no thinner than a .166 - this will still feel loose.

Dark Lord strings are .175s - I do a .174 and this is what I'd recommend for a 35" scale length. As you're tuning in traditional intervals the balanced set is the best I can offer.


----------



## ixlramp (Feb 22, 2011)

knuckle_head said:


> Sorry to be MIA



He lives! 

I've been concerned about you Skip, stuff must be nuts at Circle K at the moment...  <-string winding smily.


----------



## vansinn (Feb 23, 2011)

knuckle_head said:


> Sorry to be MIA - I'm the shipping guy now too.
> 
> I'm inclined to suggest no thinner than a .166 - this will still feel loose.
> 
> Dark Lord strings are .175s - I do a .174 and this is what I'd recommend for a 35" scale length. As you're tuning in traditional intervals the balanced set is the best I can offer.



Thanks Skib - I also got your email reply 

based on your gauge and tension schemes (from the PDF), it looks like a 182 set will suit me just fine.


Now, mine is a 35" with zero fret + guiding brass nut (brand unknown), and outfited with ABT single bridges, allowing both through-body and bridge drop-in.

I'm aware that CircleK do not (yet) have strings for through-body.
It would seem I should choose a 182 Standard length set (34"-35"); correct?

Any word on through-body sets?

Actually, going for a drop-in set might be the better option, as this will ease swapping strings, if needed.
I'd welcome comments on such swapping frencies.
Also, I'd like comments on potential tone/sustain diffs between through-body and drop-in with those single bridges.


----------



## Durero (Feb 23, 2011)

It's my impression that holes in most through-body bridge designs are just not wide enough for such large gages. If so then there's really nothing Skip could do short of advising players to try drilling out their through-body holes to a wider diameter.


----------



## HaMMerHeD (Feb 23, 2011)

I'm a big fan of top-load bass bridges. I had a 6-string a few years ago that had both options, so I tried both and I'll be damned if I could hear a difference in tone or feel a difference in tension. The only detectable difference, to me, was that through-body stringing took a lot longer.


----------



## vansinn (Feb 24, 2011)

Top load it'll be then, which, apart from the practical side of life, will also ease on available string selections..
I read several entries over at talkbass where players would swap strings for certain jobs, so..


----------



## ixlramp (Feb 24, 2011)

The Circle K tension chart is for a 34" scale. To find the tension for a 35" scale multiply the tension shown on the chart by (35 / 34)^2.


----------



## Haunted (Apr 5, 2011)

I use circle K 190 for the low F (not F#) on my 35" scale Ibanez
works great and sounds meaty
I would go for something in that range like 180 or something for F#


----------



## SirMyghin (Apr 5, 2011)

ixlramp said:


> No, that won't work, a .125 F# will have extremely low tension, whatever the core size. Also, a larger core causes stiffness, which causes bad tone.
> 
> Tension at a particular pitch is determined by the 'unit mass', the mass of one inch of string. Unit mass is the mass of the core plus the mass of the windings, and is almost entirely determined by the gauge of the string.



The DDTs have an almost extra slinky feel to them, try it some time. The .125 is definitely getting nowhere near F though, you are dead on their. I use that set in standard tuning on my 34" and the B is amazing (first time I have ever said that, .135 on the B from other brands was alright though. 

You are incorrect about string tension. The winding doesn't hold the tension, only the core does. Winding is added to the core which is under the desired tension to alter the mass, which changes the pitch at that tension. The way strings are designed it is also fairly impossible for the winding to sustain tension, it would just pull apart.


----------



## ixlramp (Apr 5, 2011)

SirMyghin said:


> The DDTs have an almost extra slinky feel to them, try it some time ...
> 
> You are incorrect about string tension. The winding doesn't hold the tension, only the core does. Winding is added to the core which is under the desired tension to alter the mass, which changes the pitch at that tension. The way strings are designed it is also fairly impossible for the winding to sustain tension, it would just pull apart.



Yes I'm hearing that DDTs are very flexible, which is excellent. My apologies, vansinn posted that DDTs have a thicker core and I assumed this would mean a stiffer string.

Yes you are correct about the winding not holding tension, I didn't say that in my post


----------



## SirMyghin (Apr 5, 2011)

ixlramp said:


> Yes I'm hearing that DDTs are very flexible, which is excellent. My apologies, vansinn posted that DDTs have a thicker core and I assumed this would mean a stiffer string.
> 
> Yes you are correct about the winding not holding tension, I didn't say that in my post



Sorry, I guess I read it wrong, you did say unit mass. The core is indeed a bit heavier/bigger in DDTs, but those strings are freaking voodoo. I fought for a long time for a good low B, and couldn't always find EB power slinkies (50-.135) their .125 does an even better job. The strings are not as bright as ernies, but they are a bit middier, very focussed and stable. I really like them. They do well for any style, and are not overly stiff so tapping is still not an issue.


----------



## ixlramp (Apr 5, 2011)

ixlramp said:


> Tension at a particular pitch is determined by the 'unit mass', the mass of one inch of string. Unit mass is the mass of the core plus the mass of the windings, and is almost entirely determined by the gauge of the string.



Ah okay ... what I'm saying is the tension that must be applied to the core to bring the string up to the desired pitch is determined by the unit mass of the string. Tension is not applied to the wrap wire itself, but the mass of the wrap wire increases the necessary tension.

The tension equation is T = U * (2*L*F)^2 / 386.4

U = unit mass L = scale F = frequency

See here: http://www.daddario.com/upload/tension_chart_13934.pdf


----------



## Krucifixtion (Apr 14, 2011)

Does anyone know the biggest string I can put on my Ibanez 5 string without having to do any crazy mods or file out the nut? I'm not really sure if I want to try and do low F# or F on it. Even if the string is a little loose I'd like to just get a set that I could swap back to just a standard 5 string set in case I don't like it. Any recommends?


----------



## RichIKE (Apr 14, 2011)

I use a Ken Smith .145 and it works great i can tune down to G and still have medium tension, check those out too.


----------



## ixlramp (Apr 14, 2011)

Krucifixtion said:


> Does anyone know the biggest string I can put on my Ibanez 5 string without having to do any crazy mods or file out the nut? I'm not really sure if I want to try and do low F# or F on it. Even if the string is a little loose I'd like to just get a set that I could swap back to just a standard 5 string set in case I don't like it. Any recommends?



B slots are usually .135, however ...

It's a common misconception that once you file the nut slots wider you can't go back to thinner gauges afterwards. As long as the nut slot floor retains it's curvature, the downforce at the nut centres the string in the curve of the slot floor. Don't touch the slot floor with the file, to avoid deepening the slot.

I filed a slot out to .165 and afterwards used a .050 or something, no problem. I've used .007s in .032 slots too.

So I recommend doing it properly and filing the slots wider, then you can use a decent gauge for F# like a .166 from Circle K Strings. If you try F# with a .135 you will be disappointed.


----------



## josh pelican (Apr 14, 2011)

RichIKE said:


> I use a Ken Smith .145 and it works great i can tune down to G and still have medium tension, check those out too.


I would never use a .145 for F#. Or G for that matter. I've used them for G#, but that was low enough with that gauge.


----------



## RichIKE (Apr 14, 2011)

josh pelican said:


> I would never use a .145 for F#. Or G for that matter. I've used them for G#, but that was low enough with that gauge.



The G Rang pretty loud, but i am a fan of looser tensions so if you're looking for super tight i wouldn't recommend it.


----------



## josh pelican (Apr 15, 2011)

Your tension must be like me running down the stairs naked.


----------



## Krucifixtion (Apr 15, 2011)

Ok, my 5 string is a 34" scale. I was thinking of trying the Circle K 52-174 balanced 5 string set. I know the bassist for Tony Danza goes down to low E and uses a .200 for the low string on I believe an SR506 6 string with a 34" scale, but I personally wouldn't get any lower than F. Also, for a set like 52-174 would I need to file out the whole nut or just mainly the lower strings?


----------



## RichIKE (Apr 15, 2011)

I regularly only tune down to A I was just experimenting for this thread. If I were to stay in g or lower I would go up in gauge. It was quite playable though.


----------



## ixlramp (Apr 15, 2011)

Krucifixtion said:


> Also, for a set like 52-174 would I need to file out the whole nut or just mainly the lower strings?



5 String Set - Balanced Standard 174
.174 .130 .096 .072 .052

I think standard nuts are cut to something like 135 110 90 70 50 so the top 3 slots will only need very slight widening. Be careful not to deepen the slots, leave the lower part of the slot untouched so the slot floor retains it's curve. For a 34" scale be sure to order a 'standard balanced' set.


----------



## Krucifixtion (Apr 16, 2011)

ixlramp said:


> 5 String Set - Balanced Standard 174
> .174 .130 .096 .072 .052
> 
> I think standard nuts are cut to something like 135 110 90 70 50 so the top 3 slots will only need very slight widening. Be careful not to deepen the slots, leave the lower part of the slot untouched so the slot floor retains it's curve. For a 34" scale be sure to order a 'standard balanced' set.



Thanks for the advice. If I do this I will probably bring it to someone, because I don't want to screw up anything. I know a 35" or more scale would probably be more ideal than the 34" but with the right strings it can be done. Would there really be a lot more tension on the neck with strings like that considering your losing the higher tension g string for a possibly kind of lower tension F string considering the lower tuning or is my logic not right? I just don't want to mess up the neck either, but I doubt it will be much of a problem.


----------



## ixlramp (Apr 16, 2011)

Krucifixtion said:


> I know a 35" or more scale would probably be more ideal than the 34" but with the right strings it can be done. Would there really be a lot more tension on the neck with strings like that considering your losing the higher tension g string for a possibly kind of lower tension F string considering the lower tuning or is my logic not right? I just don't want to mess up the neck either, but I doubt it will be much of a problem.



Yep a longer scale helps but 34" is fine for F0, and even for the C#0 below it, the quality of the bass and strings are more important.

And no ... an F#BEAD set doesn't necessarily have more tension. The tension depends on the gauges of the set you choose. There is a finely stepped choice of gauges for any tension you want.

Assuming F#BEAD the .166 set is extra light, .174 medium light, .182 medium, .190 medium heavy, .200 heavy.

Circle K tech and SS.org Member knuckle_head recommends choosing a set that contains the E string gauge you prefer.


----------



## idunno (Apr 20, 2011)

I Have a six string bass and Id like to get circle K strings thanks to this thread, but their site seems to not be working when i put the strings in my cart, am I doin it wrong or something?


----------

