Wawick Red Labels?? Really??

David_M

David_M

Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
81
Reaction score
1
Some days ago, I ordered a Warwick PS Streamer LX6 in ocean blue (one of the best 6 strings I've ever played hands down).

Of course, it came with the typical stock Warwick Red Label strings on it.

Based on past experiences, I also bought some Ernie Ball's to change them as I didn't really like the red's...

Man, what a mistake and waste of money, the Red's are absolutelly wonderful strings!! very balanced, all have the same volume, gorgeous 6th string...I can say I'm really in love with them!!

My question is...has Warwick upgraded their strings somehow??? I swear that some years ago I almost hated the Red Labels...and nowadays I love them to death... :x
 
First thing I did with my black lx6 ps is throw the red labels in the garbage can and replace them with Rotosounds.
Both my Steve Bailey sig 5fl and LX6 had bad strings, the E on the SB sig was bad and the G and C on the LX.

SB sig sounded like it had a resonating truss rod when playing the E, I had lots of fret buzz on the LX even with 4mm high action.
Also, the LX sounds a lot better with the Rotosounds. Better overall balance and more growl. The C in the redlabels was way too thin and sharp sounding compared to the other strings.

Red Labels have therefore been labeled "complete and utter junk" in this house.

Throw Black labels on all your stock basses please, Warwick!
 
I've found the only set to not completely suck was the heavy .105 set.
The rest of the Red Labels just sound a bit weak to me, and they hurt me fingers a little too.

Oh, and the D string ruined a tuner on my Corvette because of the stuipid windings at the end. :@
 
DiMarco said:
First thing I did with my black lx6 ps is throw the red labels in the garbage can and replace them with Rotosounds.
Both my Steve Bailey sig 5fl and LX6 had bad strings, the E on the SB sig was bad and the G and C on the LX.

SB sig sounded like it had a resonating truss rod when playing the E, I had lots of fret buzz on the LX even with 4mm high action.
Also, the LX sounds a lot better with the Rotosounds. Better overall balance and more growl. The C in the redlabels was way too thin and sharp sounding compared to the other strings.

Red Labels have therefore been labeled "complete and utter junk" in this house.

Throw Black labels on all your stock basses please, Warwick!
Click to expand...

I'm a die-hard DR Lo-Riders fan, but I have to admit that these Red's sound as good as the DR's, even better because the DR's "break" after a lot of uses to sound good, and the Red's break earlier.

Haven't tried the Black's, are they worth?
 
Gnermo said:
I've found the only set to not completely suck was the heavy .105 set.
The rest of the Red Labels just sound a bit weak to me, and they hurt me fingers a little too.
Click to expand...

Mine are the 25-45-65-85-105-135 set, maybe that's the key of the question, maybe the heavier set is better than the regular one... :?:
 
The roto's are 35-45-65-80-105-130. The C string obviously sounds fuller then with the red labels but the low B isn't as good as the .125 DR lo-rider that's on my Dolphin. Could be the bass itself being responsible for that though.

Anyway, I think 25 is really too thin for a C string.
 
I like the nickel yellow labels - Need some of those for my LX6 once the current ones wear out - Someone put GHS boomers on them and because it doesn't have a tapered B, I was barely able to get the bass intonation setup for that string
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top