Rickenbacker International Corporation - Forum
http://rickenbacker.com/forum/

Dean Markley SR2000 strings
http://rickenbacker.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16318
Page 1 of 1

Author:  prowla [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 1:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Dean Markley SR2000 strings

Hi.
I'm fortunate enough to own a '64 (DA s/n) and a '72 (LJ s/n) Ric 4001.
I've owned them for many years and have used Rotosound Swing Bass strings.
However, when I had them serviced last year, the store put on Dean Markley SR2000 strings 46-102.
They are great strings and I do like them, but I've been reading about string tension issues and it would be great to get your steer on this.
Would you be good enough to let me know whether the Dean Markley ones are appropriate for use on Rics?
Many thanks!
Paul

Author:  iiipopes [ Mon Apr 03, 2017 10:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Dean Markley SR2000 strings

For the same gauges, round wounds actually have less tension than flatwounds due to the space between the windings on a roundwound, where ribbon wraps have solid contact. So a set of typical '45's in rounds will have similar tension to a typical '40's set in stainless flats.

But you were using rounds all along. What gauges of Rotosound did you use on the basses? Stainless steel is stainless steel. For the most part, if the gauges are similar, then the tension will be similar, and there is no need to worry.

I used GHS Boomers 45-65-85-105 for years on my '76 4001 to no detriment. Nickel plated strings, due to the plating being over a softer steel, can actually have more tension string-for-string, gauge-for-gauge than stainless steel. This is usually because in order to get the maximum zing out of the string, the core on a stainless steel string may be a thou or two lesser in diameter, and therefore lesser in mass, so that the string will be more flexible and therefore have more overtones.

You are probably using a slightly higher gauge on the G string than before, but a little less (unless you were using a .100 E string) on the E string. The worst that can happen is that you may need to tweak the G string side truss rod an 1/8 to 1/4 turn, using the old traditional approach of setting the neck, then tightening the truss rod nut, then letting everything come together and then tune up the G string.

Final note: I have used Dean Markeley SR2000's in the past. Good strings. My tonal direction with the bands I now play with indicates a little mellower approach, and that is the only reason I don't use them now.

Author:  prowla [ Mon Apr 03, 2017 12:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Dean Markley SR2000 strings

Thanks for the reply - I think I may have been using 40s in the Rotosounds (and even had Superwounds at one stage!).
I've always used roundwounds on my Rics (I do have flats on a couple of other fretless basses, non-Ric).
My two Rics lived in the loft for over 10 years and when I got them out they were still in tune!
But I decided to get them professionally set up anyway and the bloke did a really good job.
(The '72 had a Badass II bridge on it, but it never really worked well in all honesty, so I swapped it to a Dipshot, which is really good.)

Author:  prowla [ Mon Apr 03, 2017 10:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Dean Markley SR2000 strings

Dipshot???? D-i-p-s-h-o-t!

Hey - I type the word with a "H" and it gets displayed as a "D"!

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/