worth clears vs. Martin fluoros? any difference?

Captain America

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Messages
538
Reaction score
3
Just wondering if you've tried them both, and your impressions.
 
I think it's important to note that there are different versions of Worth clears. So it'd need to be narrowed down more to get a fair comparison. I have played strings by both makers. I can't say I can tell enough of a sound difference in the ones I tried to consider that as a huge factor. The main factor for me would be which set I like better as far as diameter and string tension. I most often choose the worth clear lights. Those have less tension than the Martins if I remember correctly... Not sure how the worth medium or hard tension compare. Maybe someone else can chime in there.
 
I have used both extensively. To me, Martin seems to be middle of the road. Worth clear is a bit brighter. But they are similar enough that I can only tell the difference if I know which is which.
 
In my opinion the sound difference between the two is negligible, with the Worth Clears (the CT's) being a bit more balanced around the highs and the Martin fluorocarbons being a bit brighter.

Worth CT's, however, are the only fluorocarbons I've used that don't fray after a week of playing. For comparison, the Martins frayed after just two days of playing.
 
... ...Worth CT's, however, are the only fluorocarbons I've used that don't fray after a week of playing. For comparison, the Martins frayed after just two days of playing.
I use Martin M620 a lot on one of my tenors. I've never had any problem with them, whatsoever, even after 4-5 months of usage.
 
I use Martin M620 a lot on one of my tenors. I've never had any problem with them, whatsoever, even after 4-5 months of usage.

Me too with over a years play on a couple of them. Great strings.
 
I also think that the Martins sound a tad brighter than the Worths but they are very similar for sure. Of course, I assume here that the comparison is made with Worth medium tension string, i.e., CMs, CTs and CBs. In my experience, Worths have ever so slightly less tension compared to the Martins which might be because they are indeed a bit thinner.

For some reason, I've experienced some slight intonation issues with the Martin fluoros and even with the Martin premium strings. Same uke with Worth strings and the intonation was perfect. I've no idea why this is. It's probably the main reason I prefer Worths. If I was able to solve the intonation issue I could go with either one.
 
I found the Worth Clears, both Low-G and High-g, to be a little easier on my fingers than the Martin fluoros. Not sure why, but the Martins always felt like I was trying to play wire cheese cutters. Not as bendy I suppose.

However, I thought the Worth clears were less bright.

I prefer Worth Brown mediums which seem a little warmer. But Living Waters are my favorites.

Did have a burr on one of the nuts fray an E string Martin 620. But a little brown paper smoothed the slot and never had an issue again.
 
Last edited:
Huh, that's interesting. So regarding the Worth soprano/concert strings, only the C string is thinner than the Martin one. I guess it kinda threw me since it's so much thinner.
 
I put a set of Martins on my Dolphin, and wow, it became a much more playable, better sounding uke, than with the Aquilas.

My wife uses Worth Clears on her 8 string, and it makes a wonderful mandolin like ring!
 
Top Bottom