# Tuning a 5-string bass to Low F#



## Desecrated (Dec 2, 2007)

I was thinking about getting this bass 

SPECTOR PERFORMER 5 CLASSIC BC - Svensk International Cyberstore

And tuning it F#BEAD.

Is this possible on a 35" bass or do I need to order SIT strings and make modifications to the bass ?
Also, what freq is that low F# note at ?


----------



## Adam (Dec 2, 2007)

Desecrated said:


> I was thinking about getting this bass
> 
> SPECTOR PERFORMER 5 CLASSIC BC - Svensk International Cyberstore
> 
> ...



The F#0 is 23.12 hertz, thats the F# below the lowest note on a standard 88 key piano which is A0-27.5hz


----------



## Crucified (Dec 2, 2007)

the warwick dark lord is a 35 inch scale IIRC so i don't see why not.


----------



## Ishan (Dec 2, 2007)

Get yourself a SIT .165 and you're set, no mod needed. I'm thinking on doing that on my soon to come Brice 6 strings.
Warwick should do a 4 strings set with a .175 too wich is certainly easier to obtain in europe, time to contact them hehe.


----------



## Apophis (Dec 3, 2007)

No problems I think, some thick string and done


----------



## Desecrated (Dec 3, 2007)

I had to check with behringer if there equipment can handle that low notes. There rack units handle 18hz to 30 kHz. I think I'm safe. 

I found a dealer in sweden that carries SIT strings. Now I just need to save upp the money to buy, so somewhere in April maybe. I have an order from apophis to deal with first


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Dec 3, 2007)

It's workable. My bass player tunes to a low G (as well as a low A) on his 35" scale 6-string Alvarez, with good results. And he used to tune to a low F! Which worked... but it is seriously, seriously low. Very tricky to amplify that low of a note. Articulation is the hardest part, but it does produce a usable sound.


You'd probably do a bit better with F#, as G seems to be fine, and A is perfect. He uses a .165 gauge string as well, although I don't recall what brand.


I think that string has lasted him 2 years.


----------



## Desecrated (Dec 3, 2007)

len 35.5" == 35.5"

D,, .040" NW == 20.68# ( 0.0525gm/cm 73.4hz )
A,,, .055" NW == 21.81# ( 0.0986gm/cm 55.0hz )
E,,, .075" NW == 22.51# ( 0.1814gm/cm 41.2hz )
B,,,, .105" NW == 22.43# ( 0.322gm/cm 30.9hz )
F0# .165" NW == 23.53# ( 0.6017gm/cm 23.1hz )
total == 110.96#

I was thinking something like that maybe.


----------



## Desecrated (Dec 3, 2007)

The Dark Wolf said:


> but it is seriously, seriously low. Very tricky to amplify that low of a note. Articulation is the hardest part, but it does produce a usable sound.



I think that digital setups works better then real amps when handling such low notes. But it's going to be a bitch to mix at first.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Dec 3, 2007)

Desecrated said:


> I think that digital setups works better then real amps when handling such low notes. But it's going to be a bitch to mix at first.



Totally.

I run his modeled signal from a Digitech bass pedal split out 2 ways -

1. into his bi-amped bass rig (100W 2x10 w/tweeter, 500W 1x15)
2. Direct into the PA.

The bass provides the punch, projection, and "oomph", if you will, whereas the PA supplies definition and presence. 

When we tuned to F, all of that was really, really necessary, and even then, that low F was a real pain. Like you say, hard to sit in a mix. It kind of disappears real easy, unless you really attack the string. But, you will 'feel' the note, and if you have a lot of bass projection, the F does sit under the guitars fairly well.

A classic bass sound, though? Difficult at that pitch is all I'll say, I guess. Naren knows.


----------



## Desecrated (Dec 3, 2007)

I'm going fully digital. 

bass pedal - tube preamp - tube eq - tube compressor - mixer - computer. 

I've never been asked to perform a score live so I don't think I have to tackle that problem.


----------



## Apophis (Dec 3, 2007)

With that low notes I  100%, digital setup can handle them much better that valve amp imo. Valve amps have their "breath" so sound muddy sometimes even with higher (but still lover than standard bass lowB) notes.


----------



## Durero (Dec 3, 2007)

Desecrated said:


> len 35.5" == 35.5"
> 
> D,, .040" NW == 20.68# ( 0.0525gm/cm 73.4hz )
> A,,, .055" NW == 21.81# ( 0.0986gm/cm 55.0hz )
> ...



Desecrated did you use the string tension calculator for these?
I don't think it accounts for multiple-wrap layers of bass strings - and therefore the string density & tension calculations should be off. But perhaps you know something I don't - am I wrong about this?


----------



## Apophis (Dec 3, 2007)

Durero said:


> Desecrated did you use the string tension calculator for these?
> I don't think it accounts for multiple-wrap layers of bass strings - and therefore the string density & tension calculations should be off. But perhaps you know something I don't - am I wrong about this?


 
If Desecrated used D'Addario Tension Chart it should be ok - I didn't count myself. But if not maybe those cauntings are wrong. I use those chart, but for the heaviest strings I use, it's not good, cause I use custom made strings with different core diameter and even with different windings (sometimes more, sometimes less)
Just my


----------



## Desecrated (Dec 3, 2007)

Durero said:


> Desecrated did you use the string tension calculator for these?
> I don't think it accounts for multiple-wrap layers of bass strings - and therefore the string density & tension calculations should be off. But perhaps you know something I don't - am I wrong about this?



Your completely right, I used the D'Addario Tension Chart to get those numbers. I suspected that it would be somewhat wrong.


----------

