Author Topic: PYRAMID Strings (Read 1002 times)

sparechaynge · « **Reply #15 on:** September 25, 2012, 05:35:12 AM »

I certainly will get a set now. Thanks!

Wolf I have seen photos of your Guilds, and I am really impressed. I hope to do something similar to a hollowbody bass in the future. Perhaps not a real starfire, but something close enough.

sonicus · « **Reply #16 on:** September 25, 2012, 04:14:59 PM »

sparechaynge , Perhaps a wild half -sized Bass Violin ! LOL !!!

sparechaynge · « **Reply #17 on:** September 25, 2012, 05:32:37 PM »

LOL! What about a ES-335 with 2 strings missing? All the shape, none of the features, at one great low price! Better yet, a 40 scale neck attached to a hall closet as an acoustic chamber. Tone the size of a house!!

But I digress,
I had an Eastwood or a Hagstrom viking reissue in mind as platform. They look cool, are short scale, and have lots of space inside for electrical craziness. I was considering a Craig Anderton super tone control because I could probably put that together myself, and it is close enough to a SF-2 for a beginning project like this. I would like to get a SF-2 anyway, for use in my regular rig, but having something like it on-board has a certain...Over-the-top-ness that I find way cool.

sonicus · « **Reply #18 on:** September 25, 2012, 06:16:20 PM »

An out board SF-2 is a great idea and can be utilized with any axe ! If I decide to do an acoustic bass guitar project next time it will be long scale with wider string spacing then a Starfire. I would like something that I can play arco (bowed) with a bridge and fingerboard that will permit that. I am thinking 1/4 - 1/2 sized Bass Violin. The strings of course would be flat wound . Think 1/4 sized Bass violin played on your knee while seated!

sparechaynge · « **Reply #19 on:** September 26, 2012, 06:23:54 AM »

That sounds really cool. Perhaps an acoustic Classico? I have no experience with classical instruments, not even a fretless bass, so my understanding of such instruments is limited. you suggest a long-scale bass guitar that can be played with a bow, right? Sorry the 1/2, 1/4, etc. sizing is hard for me to grasp.

One day I hope to have an Alembic pre->SF-2->McIntosh->hard truckers cabs. I'm building a six string bass that is similar to an Excel/Modulus Quantum, and I really want to have something nice to play it through.

sonicus · « **Reply #20 on:** September 26, 2012, 04:52:07 PM »

1/4 sized would be about 35.5 inch scale. I hope that you put together your dream system soon. The SF-2 to F-2B works swell. That front end could nicely complement a Pyramid Gold string choice.

sparechaynge · « **Reply #21 on:** September 26, 2012, 06:15:02 PM »

Ah ok. sorry for my ignorance. I bet that would sound really cool, especially bowed.

I have read a lot about Phil's systems, and amplifiers in general, and this seems like they best way for me. It's only a few components, and will be as versatile as I need it to be. I hope to be able to hear a club members setup, so I can decide in person what combination I should plan towards. Always with Pyramids, or maybe Labellas for 72-001 sounds.

edwin · « **Reply #22 on:** September 26, 2012, 06:39:06 PM »

Well, if you ever make it to Colorado, I'd be happy to give you a tour of my rig: Guild/Alembic or SI shorty->SF2->F2B->QSC CX1202V->Fearful 15/6/1. I know that I'm not running a Mac or Hard Truckers but I don't think they are as necessary as the front end. I have a MC2105 which sounds nice, but it's just not worth lugging the weight around. 20lbs for 2200 watts vs. 60lbs for 270 watts makes it a no brainer.

Offer stands for anyone here!

To keep it on topic, my Pyramids just arrived from Strings and Beyond, so I am looking forward to checking them out tonight!

edwin · « **Reply #23 on:** September 26, 2012, 07:30:12 PM »

first impressions:
A lot more tension than TI flats. I'm going to need to tighten up the trussrod probably 3/4 of a turn. I haven't had to adjust it in years.

It seems like the brightness decreases as you go from G string to E string, along with the tension.

There is a definite defect in the outer winding on the E string around the 10th fret.

Acoustic tone seems very nice, although not incredibly balanced. I'll have to see what it sounds like plugged in. With the winding defect, I'm a little skeptical of leaving them on for my gigs this weekend. I guess I can just keep the TIs on hand and see how it goes. I'm hoping that the strings will all meet in the middle and sound more like each other as time goes on.

sparechaynge · « **Reply #24 on:** September 27, 2012, 05:35:01 AM »

Thanks for the offer, Edwin. If I'm ever out that way I'll be sure to let you know. I agree that the Mac and HT's are less important than the front end, and that weight is certainly an issue.

Interesting review of the Pyramids. I had a feeling that the tension was drastically different compared to the TI's, and its good to know for sure. The brightness/balance thing is by design according to Pyramid. I don't fully understand why, but with time they do get a little better. The difference in tension between the strings I have is pretty normal, except the G is really tight compared to everything else.

Too bad about the winding defect.
Maybe contact S&B or Pyramid for a replacement string.

edwin · « **Reply #25 on:** September 28, 2012, 09:49:05 AM »

Big props to Strings and Beyond for sending me a replacement E string right away! Really excellent customer service.

sparechaynge · « **Reply #26 on:** September 29, 2012, 02:59:18 PM »

Just put a set of Pyramid flats on my Esquire. WOW, these are so much better than the GHS flats I was using. They're much more responsive, and feel better on when both fretting and picking.

edwin · « **Reply #27 on:** September 29, 2012, 03:07:19 PM »

From my Talkbass ramblings at 4AM this morning:
OK, after night one with the Pyramids my attitude towards them is cautiously optimistic. They are VERY different from the TI strings. They've gotten a bit more consistent from string to string, but there is still a progressive sense of tension and brightness going from the E string to the G string. The G string is much twangier than the others. The E string could be considered a lot more dead sounding. However, if I worked it as a feature rather than a bug, I could get very different tones by playing in different parts of the neck. It did take a while to dial in the tone, so that there was sufficient low end but without the sound being muddy. I run each pickup in the bass through an Alembic SF2 channel and an F2B channel. The F2B on both channels was run with the bass at about 11 o'clock, the mids about 1 and the treble at 12. Bright switch off. The SF2 added some very deep lows on the neck pickup and the other channel I played with depending on the sound I wanted. I also experimented a lot with the onboard filters and could go from a pretty bright twangy sound to a much thicker, deeper tone. Some of it was almost upright-like in the lower registers of the E and A string.

One thing that I seemed to notice, but I'm not sure if it was all about the string, is that it seemed like the lack of the TI boxy mids allowed the guitars to have more space in the mix. Also, it seemed like the onboard filters worked a bit better with the Pyramids, especially playing with the different Q amounts.

Physically, they're more work to play and I did have to tighten the truss rod a fair amount to get the neck to go back to where I'm used to it. With the TIs, the truss rod was pretty loose.

As far as comparing to the 60s tone from recordings of the Guild/Alembics I've heard, the Pyramids sound and feel a lot closer. I can hear how those tones were achieved. The TIs are similar, but there are some aspects that are pretty different, once you start playing with them and the way they interact with tone controls. There are still some differences, but they have a clarity that the TIs don't seem to have.

We'll see if I feel the same way after tomorrow.

sparechaynge · « **Reply #28 on:** September 29, 2012, 05:09:19 PM »

Very cool, I haven't played them at gig-volumes yet (broken amp), and it's especially interesting to hear your thoughts on their interaction with the filters.

I totally get the 60s tone thing, when I watch these Hot Tuna videos and them play it sounds much closer than the Ernie Ball flats do, especially the parts where Jack walks up and down the neck in Mann's Fate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJ0onxQIY_w

Interesting that the Pyramids sound clearer than the TI's I would have suspected the opposite. Maybe because of the tension difference?

mario_farufyno · « **Reply #29 on:** September 30, 2012, 07:08:49 AM »

Interesting discussion about consistency...

In fact, I'm a GHS's Bassics long term user just because they make a set with a heavier E (.102) then expected to be seen along with a light G (.040). This is the only way I felt them well balanced on tension. Lighter E make it floppy and increases fret noise, heavier G makes it too stiff (and I don't like it since I love to bend them all the time).

So choosing a right string set for me has been quite a quest (as is the right amount of crispness/brightness related to lifespan).

I would love to get the smooth feel of a Flat, but they always end to be too muffled for my taste. Tried the Elixir, great feel, but there was the balance issue (all you get is .040/.090 or .045/.100) and lacked the hight top sparkle (not to mension the peeling factor when age - remember, I love to bend). In the other hand, Steel strings sounds too agressive. Even GHS super steels, that gets easier on finger tips then other brands, zings too much on Alembic (IMHO).

So I'm always interested in new string sets and how they behave on Alembics, thanks for everyone's input. Still on quest...