|
|
Post by treguiers on Nov 18, 2009 22:08:08 GMT -5
Here's a section of an article I found on harmony central on tone caps.
Has anyone tried really small values caps? Do they make the guitar too trebly? Do they work over a greater sweep of the pot?
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Nov 18, 2009 23:12:29 GMT -5
3g, As I'm sure you've read from the rest of the thread preceding this post, it's all a matter of personal preference. Suffice it to say, that H-C poster is in the vast minority. You can use a small-value cap if you wish, the only thing you'll miss is the ability to back off the treble a bit. Or to put it another way, you won't notice much of anything happening, almost no action at all, with a value of 1/10 th of normal. That only stands to reason when we do the calculations governing the interaction between the cap, the pot, the pickup itself, the amp's input circuitry, a bunch of things that all go into making up our tone. (IOW, the H-C poster either has extremely sensitive ears, or else he's bogarting that smokable stuff again!) JohnH can show you plots of what happens when you use these caps, but the real proof is in the pudding. Fortunately, you waste nothing more than time to experiment in this fashion, so go to it!  Second thoughts:Do you suppose E.C. would have accomplished his "woman tone" if he had to rotate the tone all the way down every time? He gets it by twitching the control down to 8 or so, not by wasting two beats to work the bleepin' knob through 270° of rotation.  Remember, that was before he started using active electronics, his guitars were still bone-stock Strats. Summary:Unless your signature tone is comparable to an ice pick, you'll probably want to maintain your tone control's ability to deliver a wide range of sounds.  HTH sumgai |
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Nov 19, 2009 4:29:18 GMT -5
JohnH can show you plots of what happens when you use these caps, but the real proof is in the pudding. Fortunately, you waste nothing more than time to experiment in this fashion, so go to it! ;)sumgai Yes I could, but if you want to investigate, you can try my spreadsheets which show you visually how frequency response and tone vary with different values of pots and caps: GuiterFreak - Frequency response calculatorOf course, that doesn't tell you how it sounds, but you can see how changing values does or does not make a difference. I actually like really small tone caps on a couple of guitars, usually the Strat types. I find that with tone pots set in the 5-10 range, the value of the tone cap makes very little difference whether its high or low - the tone pot is more significant. But as you approach zero on the pot, a peak is created, and that depends on the cap value and the pickup inductance. Try it on the spreadsheet - you can see it, then try it on a guitar! John |
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Nov 19, 2009 13:14:00 GMT -5
Thanks John, I'd plumb forgotten that spreadsheet thingie of yours! I'd better bookmark that for future reference, eh?  Speaking of nothing in particular, I thought this'd be a good time to throw out the fact that early Jazzmaster guitars had 1MΩ pots and a 0.03µf cap. (Whereas the Rhythm circuit used different values, discussed below.) While I'd always been under the impression that this was due to Leo using stock inventory from his amplifier parts bins, I recently read that this ain't necessarily so.  When the Jazzmaster came out (in 1958), Teles and Strats were using 500KΩ pots, but the JM came with 1Meggers. Turns out this is due to the Jazzmaster being designed for use with flatwound strings as their primary signal source. And we all know that flatwounds are much duller than roundwounds, right? So Leo "compensated" for that inherent lack of highs with pots that affected the highs to a lesser degree. Seems like a good "alternative" explanation to me.  Ah, but the proof would be in the pudding, no? Look at the Rhythm circuit - here we find a 50KΩ pot, and a 0.05µf cap!!! Now if that doesn't knock off the highs before you even get started, I don't know what will. It's been a long time since I've had a stock JM in my hands (even considering as much as I lust after another one), but I can clearly remember the action of that Rhythm circuit, and the fact that I never liked it. Now I know exactly why I used to mod the switch to a phase-reversal, first chance I had. Yes, our friend Leo worked overtime for yours and my enjoyment of finely, some would say exquisitely, crafted instruments. No wonder these things just don't go down in value like the proverbial car being driven off the showroom floor. sumgai |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2011 1:50:29 GMT -5
Hello guys, just a quick question before i dive into more serious reading.
Will the specs/brand of the tone capacitor affect the sound when all dials on the pots (volume and the two tone pots) are on 10?
Will it affect the tone for the non-tone-controlled bridge pickup?
Thanx!
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Feb 1, 2011 4:09:59 GMT -5
Hi pyrros - the answers are no and no.
With all knobs at 10, even the value of the tone cap makes negligible difference. As you turn down the tone, the upper part say 6-10 is mainly just to do with the pot setting, and the tone cap only really comes into play below that.
If there's no tone control on the bridge, as on a standard Strat, it is unaffected by any tone cap.
John
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2011 4:26:16 GMT -5
Thanx,
it is that my new strat (its a project involving a loaded strat body i bought from ebay USA and a YJM copy maple scalloped neck (this one is cool!!) i bought from ebay China. The pickups were already loaded on the body, single coil, measuring 8/7.5/7Kohm at the bridge/middle/neck respectively. It has this ultra thin-tremble sound, which is ok for playing e.g. Dire Straits or Deep purple, but not so good for the more heavier stuff.
So, as i understand the capacitor will not affect the tone. Next step is upgrading the pickups, i suppose.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2011 14:59:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by newey on Feb 1, 2011 20:38:27 GMT -5
But the capacitors in that example are not on a tone control. He has a tone control with whatever value capacitor on it, set at 10 for a fair test. The caps he is testing are wired around a rotary switch, so that the pickup signal goes through the different caps as the switch is rotated. This is like a Varitone set-up (not exactly, but similar), and is completely independent of the tone control. The purpose of this demo is just to illustrate the effects of various caps on the pickup signal. How do I know this? Well, if you click on the "link to mp3" in that post, you'll find that the title of the mp3 file is "Varitone with Black Beauties". Black Beauties are a brand of capacitor. QED. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2011 0:11:55 GMT -5
aha, thanx.
Anyways, some people write that the tone capacitor (and the tone potentiometers) are still part of the circuit. Of course when the pot is at 10 (250++ Kohm) no signal will leak to the cap, that's for sure, i am just asking why they say that.
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Feb 2, 2011 3:56:54 GMT -5
pyrros, First, lemme just say Hi, and  to the NutzHouse! Anyways, some people write that the tone capacitor (and the tone potentiometers) are still part of the circuit. Of course when the pot is at 10 (250++ Kohm) no signal will leak to the pot, that's for sure, i am just asking why they say that. They're saying that because your statement about no part of the signal leaking to the pot is untrue. The tone pot and the cap aren't just "still part of the circuit", they're always part of the circuit. Let me repeat that - unless the pot (or the cap) is disconnected, perhaps with a switch, then they are always part of the circuit, and they will always affect the tone (the output signal). This is a basic tenet of electronics, that every single component has an effect on the rest of the circuit. The effect may be minimal, but it is there, to be sure. Sorry to have to jump on you like that, but it's better to squash bad information before it gets repeated so often that people start regarding it as if it were the truth or something..... HTH sumgai |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2011 4:44:34 GMT -5
Sorry to have to jump on you like that, but it's better to squash bad information before it gets repeated so often that people start regarding it as if it were the truth or something..... This is the classic weapon of any empire my friend. Repetition till we all agree we are totally brainwashed Anyways, I guess your criticism should target the answer "no and no" by John, above. Obviously *one* of you is more "correct" than the other. |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Feb 2, 2011 6:13:53 GMT -5
There's no disagreement there. JohnH said "negligible difference", and that's all sg is pointing out. If it's of concern ( and it probably shouldn't be), then a switch to take it out of the circuit is one option, or one can use a "no-load" pot. Bear in mind that having the pot in circuit makes more of a difference than the cap does. Also, the choice of tone cap is not merely a question of tone, but of control-ability (i.e., usefulness) of the tone pot. That is, assuming one ever turns it down from 10. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2011 6:43:00 GMT -5
I rewrote (slightly more emphasized) what John wrote, and SG tagged it as "untrue".
Of course i corrected my sentence it should have been "Of course when the pot is at 10 (250++ Kohm) no signal will leak to the cap", instead of "Of course when the pot is at 10 (250++ Kohm) no signal will leak to the pot", but even then it was obvious what i meant.
So John simply stated that with all pots to maximum resistance 250 Kohm, (to 10) *even* the value of the cap makes negligible difference and also said that in the standard strat wiring the bridge pickup *is unaffected* , while Sumgai emphasized on the exact opposite, stating that everything from the pots to the cap affect the signal, that this is electronics basic theory, and characterized "what i supposedly heard" as bad information that i better stop "repeating".
Do you consider that as an agreement? In my book, this is the definition of disagreement.
Anyways, one should test by himself.
|
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Feb 2, 2011 11:08:19 GMT -5
In Bridge position on a normal strat neither tone control is connected at both ends. They are not in the circuit and do not have any effect on anything.
Playing around with JohnH's GuitarFreq calculator, you do see very minimal changes in the response curve as the tone cap value is varied. The extent of this effect seems to be inversely proportional to the value of the tone pot. Bigger pots isolate the cap more, so the cap value has less effect.
The link above doesn't really give any detail re: the test procedure, but it reads as though he is switching tone caps. I've only listened on my iPhone speaker, but it doesn't much sound at all like the caps are in series. There'd be a noticeable drop in bass with those values. It also doesn't sound like a parallel cap, which would have the same effect as a tone pot set to 0, and would reveal drastic differences. I can't draw any real conclusions from this listening environment, but the differences must be subtle, to the point where they might be accounted for by changes in his playing technique.
ChrisK often went off on the ways that this type of "taste test" are invalid. It really means nothing unless we're sure that test signal is exactly the same all the way through.
Anyway. Pot value and the cable attached to the guitar both have a much greater effect on your "10 tone" than cap value. If cap value matters little, cap type matters even less.
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Feb 2, 2011 14:21:30 GMT -5
pyrros, I'm thinking here that your confusion is nothing more than a slight "glitch" in your understanding of the English Language. There's a difference between "no" and "negligible". When one states "no signal will leak..." that's an absolute.... it means that 100% of the signal will be unaffected. When one states "a negligible amount...." that means that what little does leak through will be of no concern to the listener. It will be there, but it won't bother us, it's so little an amount. In both the English Language and in Electronics, the difference is important enough to point out. One must use the correct term to properly communicate one's intentions, I'm sure you'll agree. (But Holy Smokes, until this moment, I would not have believed that English isn't your native tongue - you write a very good post... good enough to have fooled me!) Now, why am I making such a fuss here? Because on the Internet, there are many, many people who will read something somewhere, it doesn't matter where, and they will take that as the Gospel Truth. You're right, they should test it for themselves, but they don't, sad to say. That's where the trouble starts. Even your statement above, that will be indexed by Google and other search engines, and it will be cached and held for a long time. If anyone, just one person, reads that and re-posts it on another site, the damage is done. They didn't read the whole conversation, and they didn't come to a full understanding of all the important points. They then spread a half-truth, and the rest of us have a more difficult time, trying to re-teach people the correct facts. See what I'm saying here? I'm not worried about you, I think you're gonna be a valuable part of the team here in the NutzHouse. I'm worried about the guests, the lurkers, the 15-second readers from a search engine.... the ones who will go out and do something harmful to their guitars (or to themselves!), and then blame us, because they "read on that GuitarNutz2 forum". That's what I'm most afraid of here. I trust this has cleared up any misconceptions. If not, then don't hesitate to ask for clarification. ;D HTH sumgai |
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Feb 2, 2011 14:34:36 GMT -5
There's no problem here people. Move along now.....
|
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Feb 2, 2011 15:06:51 GMT -5
pyrros - Have you adjusted the pickup height at all? Maybe I misread, but it sounded like this was a pre-assembled pickguard that you dropped in. It may not have been set up quite optimally for your guitar/tastes. It's a cheap and easy thing to try and might help.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2011 0:41:53 GMT -5
ashcatlt, yes of coursei raised the pickups, thanx for the tips.
Sumgai, that is definitely true. My mother language is not english.
The question here is simple : Should an all-10 shredding type of guy bother changing the tone cap when all the below :
a) 80% of the time he plays with the bridge pickup
b) 18% of the time he plays with the neck pickup
c) 2% of the time he plays with bridge/middle pickups
d) 100% of the time the tone/volume pots are on 10
are true?
I guess the answer is a mere no.
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Feb 3, 2011 4:04:25 GMT -5
pyrros,
When you ask a specific question like that, it's easy to answer. ;D In fact, you've already answered it the same way I would - no, a shredder probably won't benefit at all from modifying the values of the tone pot or the cap. But he/she might benefit from another kind of mod, the simple removal of the tone circuit altogether. This could be easily done with the switch I mentioned, or the no-load pot newey mentioned. It works because what the user hears seems to sound like "more than 10".
Easy enough to try, and if doesn't give you what you want, you can remove the mod and put everything back the way you had it before you started.
HTH
sumgai
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2011 4:55:27 GMT -5
The no-load pot sounds really nice idea! thx! Is this supposed to fit tone + volume positions? PS Anyways, i just received two large, fat and expensive caps i had already ordered last week: a) 0.33 uf 630V for electrical shock protection as per the "star grounding" instructions (which is going to replace a cheapo 0.33uf 400v 0.20 euro i already have in this position) and b) a super orange 0.047uf 400v (yes i know the voltage figure is too much here to fit the tone cap position. Anyways, next mod is to fit a cheap used malmsteen dimarzio 217 (neck) i found yesterday from another greek city, and to consider no load pots! thx! |
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Feb 3, 2011 5:10:47 GMT -5
Hmmm...
Well...I've played around with tone and volume controls of various times and got different results with different guitars and 'effects' from them.
My recent guitar project has gone through a lot of mods so I have heard it without a tone control and with various caps.
I've had very small caps in there and all the control is in the 1-2 area and almost cuts all frequencies...like a volume control and pretty useless at least on this guitar. I eventually settled on a 22 with 500K pot as a master tone on an HSS strat and a 500K volume.
I don't use a tone control often, but have been very impressed with some of the things a guy like Beck does with them and combining pickups with separate tones on some guitars.
I have a tele that has a 1Meg pot volume, I think the tone control is unconnected still! This makes it extremely bright and I generally play it on 8-9 volume to cut back on the treble and have no treble bleed circuit.
Lot's of shredders have removed tone controls...EVH for example treats his volume control as a tone control...it's even marked as such on his sig guitars...LOL
There is a use for them, but each guitar and pickup...and probably player, have different requirements. Danny Gatton used his for wha and organ effects and required a special taper and I thin small caps to achieve that effect.
...
As for ice pick strat pickups...cheap single coils will often give this effect. I tend towards wanting a quiet guitar and while not liking very overpowered PUPs...I tend towards the medium range and my strat has stacked JB Noiseless in it for a smoother though distinctly SC sound without hum.
I did do the MR mod and perhaps you might consider a wiring mod that puts your pickups into series making a bassier and more powerful sound.
It's probably unfair to put all "shredders" in the same basket. I recently saw a couple talking about their PRS guitars and using jazz pups to get clarity and note definition with distortion sounds. EMG pickups have been traditional favorites for similar reasons...they are not overly powerful but have a lot of output due to their preamps...again a better tone and note definition with power.
Too powerful a pickup and things can get pretty muddy, especially if you ever want to clean things up. EVH had a great 'sound' with a standard, possibly faulty, gibson Pup from a 335 in his famous frankenstrat thing...so we aren't talking death invader from mars overwound specials in that thing either.
There are tone controls and such on amps...even more you can do with modeling if you are in that school. Perhaps even preamping.
If you have no treble bleed circuits, you can get the effect of smaller pots by just turning the thing down a little.
As people have kind of been saying also, there is a bit of a difference if only slight by having these controls in a guitar. While someone might not use a tone control, perhaps that slight difference is a part of what they are after...in the original PRS guitars, he added a 'sweet switch' on there as suggested by carlos santana. That's a commitment )possibly not a great one) to drill into those flame tops as a standard feature. The whole purpose of this switch was to give the effect of a long guitar lead!!! WHy, cause carlos went wireless and missed that sound option...everyone else wants to lose that capacitance and retain brightness.
I can't really speak to exotic types of caps in guitars. I looked in my original '69 gibson and saw they had "bumble bee" caps in there...wouldn't say they are special tone controls...they will do the traditional muffled woman tone thing. I did a new LP recently with 22 caps and 5ook pots...just cheap green things...much better range or tones in that guitar.
It is so easy to get sucked into the hype. Living in the country and facing the need to order parts, even little caps...I was tempted to spend a couple of dollars for some of these exotic things...till I found a spare one lying around. Probably will if I replace the pots some time and have to order. I really think that the fact that the control says "tone" on it is enough to send people into hype mode as much as anything.
...
On the thing with Leo Fender...interesting about the JM...I suspect the pickups too are a little dull. But from my reading such ideas that Leo just used what was in his parts draw does him a disservice. The guy was a constant tinkerer and was making thousands of guitars and buying sizable yachts with cash on a whim from the proceeds...not to mention taking the advice and ears of a lot of players as well as his own. He had a particular sound he was looking for and he would adjust things as required to achieve those ends and remarkably successfully.
We all might not agree with his vintage choices and music changed a lot from what he originally envisaged his guitar as being used for (still...hendrix used standard strat pickups...no custom high powered pups in those days...and got fairly heavy)...and there have been plenty of mods over the years and continue to this day.
But Tradition has largely set in. Why a strats second tone isn't wired to the bridge pup to tone it's ice pick sound down as standard I'll never know (JB wires his that way). In the old days, tone caps were used and envisaged to make a fake "bass guitar"...till Leo invented such an instrument for real.
Most of the abominations from the big two Gibson and Fender came from the new owners, Norlin and CBS anyway. Fender went off and made G&L and you can see how he continued his "tinkering" in those instruments.
Anyway...he was an interesting character and I doubt very much was just a cynical try anything in the parts draw decision...sure he raided his parts draw to try any number of variations...but one in production, I doubt he was that strapped he couldn't have got the value of his choice.
In the very early days he did have to make use of what was available to create the ideas that he wanted...the blade selector came from old telephone exchanges for instance...but then hardware was rare and these things were revolutionary in their time...and persist today of course!
...
If I had a question it would be is there any "data" on the effects different pickups might have with a tone control...and how exactly would you make a 'no load tone pot since it was brought up?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2011 5:24:08 GMT -5
The no-load pot sounds really nice idea! thx! Is this supposed to fit tone + volume positions? this was a dump question. The ideal "no-load" volume pot should have infinity resistance on 10, so that ideally all signal goes through the jack->amp and none is wasted to the ground. Or no vol-control at all, which IMO is too much. A vol is needed. 4real very interesting, i'll have to study later what you write. |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Feb 3, 2011 6:33:23 GMT -5
There are no dumb questions, although there are often dumb answers!
As you have surmised, the "no-load pot" can be used for Volume as well as Tone controls. But it's "no-load" because the resistance at the end is close to 0, not infinite.
What 4real is saying, essentially, is "to each his own". And different pickups will be different as to how such a mod affects their tone.
My philosophy is that one can always use the controls to take out some brightness, but if the brightness isn't available to begin with, it can't be added.
Remember that removing controls from the circuit will add both output (volume) and affect the tone by making it brighter overall.
As to the no-load pots, these can be purchased (Fender uses them on some guitars and there is an OEM Fender part). Or, they can be made from a regular pot by disassembling it and scraping away the end of the resistive track. JohnH has a tutorial on how to do it around here somewhere, not sure if I can find it as it was several years ago that he posted it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2011 7:08:52 GMT -5
There are no dumb questions, although there are often dumb answers! As you have surmised, the "no-load pot" can be used for Volume as well as Tone controls. But it's "no-load" because the resistance at the end is close to 0, not infinite. As per : www.diyguitarmods.com/volume-pot-wiring.php i was under the impression that the volume pot is a variable resistance sitting IN PARALLEL (not series) between the pickup/switch output and the ground. So 0 resistance means most signal travels to the ground using the shortest path (the pot). Max resistance (250 or 300 Kohm as is in my 2 strats) means min signal leaks to the ground. i am gonna verify this theory with the volt-amp-ohm meter this weekend. |
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Feb 3, 2011 10:38:27 GMT -5
newey's got it backwards. A "no load" pot is cut at the "high" end so that when turned up to 10 there is no connection between the wiper and the grounded lug. The resistance is infinite and the tone control is essentially out of the circuit.
This works for a tone pot because it's not actually being used as a potentiometer. It's a variable resistor to ground with a cap along the way.
A volume control is a true potentiometer - a variable voltage divider. When it's set to 10 it is a resistance in parallel with the output, but when you turn it down some of the resistance is in series and the rest parallel. It requires that all three lugs be connected. The pickups will be connected to either the "high" lug or the wiper with the hot output connected to the other of these. If we cut the track at the "high" end and then turn the volume down, there is suddenly infinite resistance in series between pickups and jack, and thus silence.
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Feb 3, 2011 14:11:01 GMT -5
.... the "no-load pot" can be used for Volume as well as Tone controls. But it's "no-load" because the resistance at the end is close to 0, not infinite. newey's got it backwards. A "no load" pot is cut at the "high" end so that when turned up to 10 there is no connection between the wiper and the grounded lug. The resistance is infinite and the tone control is essentially out of the circuit. ash got ya there, newey. I see your point - when the pot is "cut out" of the signal path due to the wiper's sitting on a non-conductive area of the track, the signal can go on to the Vol control without any hindrance. But unfortunately, it already was doing so - there never was any resistance between the pickup and the incoming terminal of the Vol control! There is/was only an additional path to ground, that being the Tone circuitry. Said circuitry is normally always in play, but as we've discussed (to death), the signal is normally not divided in any audible manner that we can discern. At least not until we start rotating the Tone control, and bringing the capacitor into play. That's in contrast to a "no-load" pot, where the upper end is rendered so as to be "inoperative" - the wiper now acts like a switch, taking the resistance element and the cap completely out of play. Yes, there's now no additional path for the signal to partake, but in point of fact, the original path (from pup to Vol control) is not changed in any way - it's still a straight wire. Speaking in a resistive load kind of way, of course. But keep it up - your way of thinking keeps the rest of us on our toes! ;D HTH sumgai |
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Feb 3, 2011 14:26:39 GMT -5
If you are interested in testing the idea of a no-load tone pot, the easiest way to hear the effect is to disconnect one end of your standard tone pot. Then put it back after if you wish. if you like it, you can then buy one or make one. The bought ones (I think - ive never seen one)) have a slight detent before the no-load part, while ones that you make would not.
|
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Feb 3, 2011 15:46:49 GMT -5
Exactly...and each guitar and player will want something a little different.
Thanks for the No-load things as well...such a pot might be good say for some versions of the "spin select" thing I've been working on...but the newer versions and the volume control on the MR scheme for instance use both sides of a pot...so it's not universal.
There are no "hard and fast rules" but there are principles to get what people want to achieve. That is one admirable thing about this forum, there are many things that have my head scratching and sometimes having to ask "why would you want that"...but then I have done a lot of things or wanted to that I didn't realize were a bit, well...not so wise...and still do. But exactly, to each there own and around here people make an effort to achieve the results desired regardless.
This is quite different from a lot of sites that perpetuate all the mojo and myths that this site tends to try and dispel. There are so many and the "cap" thing is a big one.
But one doesn't want to completely destroy the "magic"...as guitar geeks (and it doesn't get much geekier than spending time talking about different kinds of tone caps) we revel in such things...and so if it gives pleasure, enjoy I say.
But keep one foot on the ground, be aware of such guilty pleasures and try not to mislead and perpetuate these things...till they become some kind of "tone" law and even become 'exploitative' (your guitar is no good if it doesn't have a "vintage" spec component for instance).
The 'greats' didn't think like that and while I was coming up playing it was the birth of that whole guitar mod thing where people were ripping out "vintage" pups for "super distortions", putting brass on everything for more "sustain" (even though in reality it is a "tone sink" in many respects)...even the idea of "sustain" is one of those hot words.
All of these kinds of things, words like "sustain" or "tone" lose meanings in the hands of guitar players for some reason and it only holds people back. All functional guitars have "sustain" and "tone"...how does one discuss such vague things. What makes something better...more sustain...more tone...more pup output....faster playing...etc
Such concepts have so many "layers". Sustain for instance is something I've had a lot of experience in and discussions about for many, many years. My tele for instance was left on as a test on it's own once...and was still playing itself for 3 days!!! Now, that's sutain...LOL. In working on sustainers, some tried to say that when sustaining like that it doesn't sound like the natural vibration of the string...of course not, it isn't natural to sustain for 3 days. And really, would anyone want it too.
I ahve similar problems with tremolo systems. I've played both Jazzmaster trems and bigsby's and to me they suffer considerably as trem systems compared to others like the fulcrum strat systems. It is more about the cool factor and the associations than anything else. I'm back t9o the strat now set really stiff...but I have several Kahler trem guitars...the association of this device with 'shredders' and the fact that it can go from slack to string breaking high has raised eyebrows with them. But the reality is that I use them because they are silky smooth and always come back in tune....and work. They are not necessarily "better"...I think I prefer the old 'strat' type set up right. You can alter the 'sound' of the guitar of course with such things...but this is because you are cutting great holes in ones guitar, or adding a huge amount of mass, or changing the bridge materials, or mounting the strings to a giant steel block over the wood...etc.
With systems like that found on the JM...I think leo was thinking about a bunch of angles...getting that arm away from the bridge as it is on a strat, giving a long tailpiece string length behind the bridge, trying to make something that would lock.
As for using different pots and such...well, leo was a bit of a nutz and not much of a player himself...but he did have some idea of sound that he was after in the end product. Those old JM pups probably could have used a brighter sound from a 1meg pot. His wacky 'strangle switches' and tiny 'tone circuits' he probably was looking to try and make things a bit more 'extreme'...and you have to have "bright" in order to tame it. But the whole thing had flaws and faulty thinking...and that's a part of their charm...till the strings pop out...or you are fussy about intonation that goes way off with a tilting bridge...LOL...but I digress...it looks cool!
...
Getting back on subject...
I think what one would more objectively want for a tone control is it do what you want for it for what you want it to do. The only superior thing is that it works for the task.
It may be that one player doesn't have any use for it...and there are lots of other things one could use a rotary control for on a guitar like a strat...some kind of series/parallel mod is probably possible with a rotary 4pdt switch that would be invisible!
Pups don't "sound better" for going straight to the jack...in fact they are generally designed to sound a certain way connected to controls. But maybe you like that super treble sound. Thats the sound I get with a 1meg pot on my tele, but by turning it down a touch, you get the more useful sound of taking off that 'edge'.
My philosophy is that one can always use the controls to take out some brightness, but if the brightness isn't available to begin with, it can't be added.
Exactly...it's a tele with a bright HB in it...but I wanted it to be capable of that super bright cutting tele sound when I want it...the 1meg pot achieves that.
On tone pots...I think the more essential aspect is the pot taper and how the control works along the range. I saw Danny Gatton's vid the other day (telemaster) and he does a bit a chat about his volume and tone pots ...saying he searches high and low for particular pots to his needs. He wants his volume pot to be a smooth even taper throughout the range...but for a tone pot, he wants the opposite, all the affect on one end and fairly 'extreme'...no discussion of a particular construction of cap at all. He wants the tone pot to make a distinctive "wha" sound in a short amount of travel and to be able to quickly roll off all the treble to create his "organ effect" with a trem pedal.
Now my tele's pickups were designed for more standard 250-500k pots and do sound "better" with that. In my strat the hot fender noiseless were designed for 250k's apparently...but 500ks bring out more of the single coil sound and character (not just brighter but that grainy hollowed edge).
We all have 'preferences'. I like my string gauges and action to be fairly consistent between guitars...but I like them each to have their own character and sound, and this goes for things like wiring and components.
...
I think the most rewarding thing is to think like a player and work out an idea of the sound and capabilities you want from a guitar. I don't think you really can make a 'swiss army knife' from an instrument with any amount of wiring. It is a good idea to go nutz with a cheap instrument and work out your own needs and lose a few fetishes after you've explored them a bit.
An interesting thing is that many people want some kind of "vintage sound" and have a fetish for 'vintage components' and mojo. Many of these great instruments and players created the template for great electric guitar sounds. But for me, and when listening to music...I seek out great, distinctive and iconic sounds that sets them apart...not sounds exactly the same as X.
That's why I like playing about with the wiring and setup and components to get something like that out of my instruments. I don't expect a single guitar to do everything, in fact I want a guitar to inspire a different approach when I play it, come up with some different ideas. Similarly with the wiring stuff and sound options...what can you do with a very phased sound ('superstition' like clavichord sound), or the tone control rolled all the way off (woman tone)...
With so much stuff being 'recorded' these days...it is these unique and often "bad' sounds in combination that make the magic on a lot of great bands....check out the layered sounds of a Led Zep or Queen...some of those individual tracked sounds are pretty nasty on their own.
...
People are right though here to try and dispel the myths that are perpetuated everywhere else...they keep me in check. There is a lot of BS and effectively meaningless talk about things..."you will lose/gain tone" for instance...what does that mean, only that you might change tone, not gain or lose some necessary "good".
There is a reason why a lot of players like say a SRV play a strat over a LP...because they want that distinctive percussive thing that 'super sustainy guitars' can't do. It isn't better or worse, just in service of the music and the player and musics own needs. Knophler loves his hollowed strat tones and you could do it, but his choice of a classic LP for brothers in arms...perfect!
|
|
|
|
Post by newey on Feb 3, 2011 19:02:17 GMT -5
OK, mea culpa. I did have it backwards. Thanks for the clear explanations Ash and sg. EDIT: Here's a link to the no-load 250K Fender pots, your choice of solid or split shaft. They're in the second row down. Guitar Parts Resource |
|
Remember, that was before he started using active electronics, his guitars were still bone-stock Strats.
