Pirastro Gold Label (wound gut) tonal balance and opinions
My current favorite violin strings in the world are the Olivs, and they LAST forever (especially that G), contradicting the longstanding belief that gut doesn't last long.
That said, if the Gold Label strings are truly "bright" (that is, emphasizing higher frequencies/providing an open sound-not necessarily super loud under the ear) they MAY indeed be a good "value" string for what I am looking for.
I love all Pirastro wound gut strings so far, more or less in the following order: Oliv, Eudoxa, Passione Solo, Passione (the latter sounding "nicer" under the ear than the Solo, but I do believe the Solo may edge them out volume-wise). Eudoxa has a marvelous, warm sound, though not necessarily muddy/lacking clarity. Oliv has a nice edge that stays there for what seems an eternity, while still having plenty of richness, though certainly not a really "warm" string. Truly, all of them have nice qualities and for the most part have "beaten out" their useful-and sometimes also good sounding-synthetic imitators.
Are the Pirastro Gold label truly bright (tonal balance, rather than sheer power, much less shrillness) in any of your valued experiences? Basically I am not looking for Eudoxa warmth (and am most certainly NOT complaining about that beautiful string), but more higher frequency content/less "core". All opinions welcome-though I have read quite a bit already about them not being stable for some players, despite their good sound.
(I also do not expect Gold Label to be "as good" as Oliv, etc.-just wondering what their "real" tonal palette appears to be to some of you who may have used them or still do.)
Bonus question: anyone remembers how Pirastro's old -and discontinued-"black label" wound gut string used to sound like, and what was its place in their string line back then? I remember them still being available in the early to mid-nineties.
Replies
A fair assesment and a valid opinion, given he has used the string in question-however, it's not as tonally descriptive as I would have hoped. I'm fact, not much has been stated about them because they are not a popular choice (with the obvious e string exception), "good value" or otherwise.
http://www.pirastro.com/public_pirastro/pages/en/Gold-00006/
(I tried to copy/paste the above link on my first post-evidently it just made my font purple thereafter. Pirastro claims the set offers a "bright gut sound.")
I remember the Gold string as a lighter, brighter version of Eudoxa, but softer than Oliv. I liked them. If you play a wound A its a good altenative to the soft but good Eudoxa or the fragile Oliv. There aren't many others around these days, especially the wound A string.
Thanks for your reply as well, Mr. Hirst. If the Gold Label A is rather stable once stretched it may be worth investigating that option at some point (I have my concerns about volume, though who knows, it may project well). I think I have a better idea of Gold Label strings now... kind of bright but less intense than Oliv?
I wish I could find a repository of old Pirastro advertisements for their string products throughout history. Should be fun to know the year each was produced as well as their intended purpose at that time in string making history.
For some reason, I generally like Gold Labels better than Eudoxas. They do seem brighter and also less dull. I don't think they're very similar to Olives - they're generally lighter tension, and seemed warmer and less brilliant than Olives.
Just updating "my" thread with official information from Pirastro, in case it may help someone with similar questions in the future.
"You are right, the violin Gold string is brighter than the violin Eudoxa and the violin Passione Solo offers a greater projection than the violin Oliv. While the violin Gold string offers a bright sound, the violin Oliv string offers a more brilliant sound.
The violin Eudoxa Brilliant is more brilliant compared with the violin Eudoxa Rigid, but not so brilliant as the violin Gold or the violin Oliv."
I threw quite a few questions at them; the above represents just a few of their answers. Many thanks to Pirastro for taking the time to go over them and actually answering back.
Based on the above, I assume no Eudoxa is "brighter" than the Gold Labels, so they may be a good string to try. However, I do believe Mr. Robinson's account, having experienced a slight stability problem with a thick Eudoxa Rigid D some time ago, so obviously some gut strings can obviously be super stable, while others not so much. That said, I am still curious to compare them at some point on my violin, as I've already used both Eudoxa and Olivs.
Thanks! Interesting responses from Pirastro
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.
Violinist.com is made possible by...
Dimitri Musafia, Master Maker of Violin and Viola Cases
Johnson String Instrument/Carriage House Violins
Subscribe
Laurie's Books
Discover the best of Violinist.com in these collections of editor Laurie Niles' exclusive interviews.
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 1, with introduction by Hilary Hahn
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 2, with introduction by Rachel Barton Pine
February 24, 2015 at 01:12 PM · According to Nate Robinson, one of our professional players here, the Pirastro Gold Label G is terrible.
As said here by Nate on the thread I started:
http://www.violinist.com/discussion/response.cfm?ID=26568