bowyn
Meter Reader 1st Class
That boy ain't right...
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
|
Post by bowyn on Oct 16, 2012 9:40:32 GMT -5
I know there have been posts on this subject, and I've read what I've found, but I'm still not quite able to necessarily translate the terms used to describe the differences... What I've recently done is order some bar magnets of various makes, sized for humbuckers. I ordered: 3 AlNiCo II 2 AlNiCo III 3 AlNiCo IV 5 AlNiCo V 2 AlNiCo VIII My first test subject is a set of pickups I got on my Xavier XV-599. They are Guitar Fetish Crunchy Pat Humbuckers. Bridge 14k DC Res Neck 10k DC Res Isotropic ferrite ceramic magnets and a single row of adjustable nickel plated screws. Here's the thing, they sound pretty decent, but I've got an ax with an active HB, one with some Dimarzio D-ActivatorXs in it, and one with a Seymour Duncan Invader if I want to really push an amp hard and play some heavy tunes. Now I'm not all about metal or anything, but occasionally I do like to crunch. So, anyway, I switched out those pickups in my XV-599 for a set of GFS Mean 90s (which are awesome, btw) and figured I might as well use these for a project in an area where I have very little experience... Magnet swapping. Kinda sounds dirty. I've got nothing against Ceramic magnets. Hell, I've unknowingly used them for years, but recently I've read some opinions and I'm wondering if I'm missing something. Hence the magnet order. For humbuckers this appears to be a pretty easy process. Loosen a couple of screws, poke the existing magnet out, shove the new one in, tighten screws, evaluate. Am I right? That said, here is what my understanding is of the different common magnet types in my own words (understand that this is (probably incorrect) "book knowledge" and not from experience). This is just off of the top of my head as it's not very helpful for me to just quote a bunch of websites: Ceramic: - Powerful magnets - Less string pull than AlNiCo V - No tonal "coloring" - Brighter than AlNiCo V - "Brittle" high end (not sure exactly what that means) AlNiCo II: - Fairly powerful magnet - Less string pull than other magnets, except AlNiCo III - More "musical" (again, what does that mean?) - Articulate - Less forgiving for sloppy playing - "Spongey" bottom end (huh?) AlNiCo III: - Weakest of the common pickup magnets - Originally used in Telecasters? - Lower output - brighter high end AlNiCo IV: - I know virtually nothing off the top of my head about these except that I rarely see pickups using these. The Tonerider AlNiCo IV humbuckers seems to be unusually popular, though. AlNiCo V: - Powerful magnets - Very good for driving a tube amp - Rounder, warmer sound (I understand these terms but I'm still having trouble identifying the sound of this) - Scooped mids? - Punchy (again, a much used term, and I get the idea, but would love to actually hear a demonstration of what someone refers to as "punchy" AlNiCo VIII: - Very powerful magnet - That's about it. So, tone-wise, is there someone on here who feels educated enough on these differences to put it in "dummy" terms for me what I might expect to hear from swapping magnets? I've listened to multiple "demos" and they all seem to be so colored with reverb or chorus or camera mics that just don't capture the nuances, and so they all end up either sounding about the same to me. Just one small example of my confusion: I was reading about AlNiCo IIs and someone was suggesting a pickup with AlNiCo V in the bridge and AlNiCo II in the neck. To me that seems like putting a brighter pickup in the brightest position and the less bright pickup in the un-brightest position. That doesn't make good sense to me. I would think that you'd end up with an Icepick in the bridge and a bucket of mud in the neck. Anyway, would love to hear any opinions and I'll try my best to amend this with my magnet swap testing when I get them.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Oct 16, 2012 12:00:29 GMT -5
First, you have to back the 6 pole piece screws out a bit so they're clear of the baseplate. Then, loosen the two bobbin screws to slide the magnet out. This assumes that the HBs in question are a) uncovered and b) not epoxy/wax potted; if either of those assumptions is incorrect, your job just got harder. There's a tutorial on removing covers in the Reference area. If it's potted, well, probably best to find another HB on which to experiment. Now, this is all well and good if you're just using one HB to test various magnets. If the testing is going to involve 2 HBs (and assuming you want the two pups to be able to be combined together), then you can't just swap magnets willy-nilly without potentially ending up with the HBs out of phase. If the test is going to involve 2 pickups, it's best to check the polarity of the original magnets with a known N or S pole, and then mark the original magnets and the test magnets accordingly, so that phase can be maintained. as you swap all these magnets in and out. Perhaps the goal was to obtain the biggest tonal variation between the two. As far as I know, you may be the first to do such extensive testing of different magnets on the same underlying pickup. This is the problem with all those YouTube videos- not just different mics, etc, but different pickups. Keep in mind that magnets aren't the only, and probably not the most important variable, in a pickup's sound. Wire diameter, and number of windings, also come into play. A manufacturer might couple weaker magnets with more windings to obtain roughly the same output, for example. If I had to guess (and that's all it is, as I've never done any such tests), I would bet that you would be able to hear an audible difference between the ceramic magnet and any of the flavors of Alnico. I doubt whether a true blindfolded A-B test of one Alnico composition versus another would yield consistent, reproducible differences in tone. In other words, the only true test is (using the same pickup, same guitar, same amp, etc, and changing only the magnets), can a group of listeners who are not told in advance which Alnico they are hearing reliably pick out the Alnico V from all the others over a series of, say, 5-10 trials? My guess is, "No, they can't". And, all the terms you are questioning ("warm", "brittle", etc.) are vague precisely because the whole topic is so subjective. There's a lot of pseudoscience out there on this topic, mostly from people who want to sell you their pickups. If it isn't accompanied by a blind test (ideally, a double-blind set-up, better still) then taking it with a bit of salt is in order.
|
|
bowyn
Meter Reader 1st Class
That boy ain't right...
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
|
Post by bowyn on Oct 16, 2012 14:52:40 GMT -5
VERY good info! Thanks for the heads up about polarity. Seems obvious, but my brain hadn't even visited that particular nugget. This whole thing started with a video demo I saw concerning the Seymour Duncan SSL 52, EAD are AlNiCo V and GBE are AlNiCO II and whether it's just Joe's amazing skill, his equipment or that pickup in particular, I was absolutely floored with the sound. I've got one in the bridge position of a guitar I'm currently finishing the neck on, so I haven't had a good listen to what mine sounds like in the bridge yet. It got me interested in what I might be missing out on by not paying attention to that detail of my guitar builds. Here's another one that blew my mind: Then people raving about Tonerider AlNiCo IV humbuckers. Then again, it's also got to do with the fact that if I build/buy anymore guitars I'm going to have to start sleeping on them, so I'm kind of turning my focus inward a bit on making the ones I have sound better, practice my set-ups (which I am rather crap at), and such. God help me if I ever have a decent work space and a router. I might vanish from the grid, whispered sitings around the campfire, blurry photos of me chainsawing various trees in search of Toooooooonewoods... GuitarFoot. Does he truly exist?
|
|
|
Post by darkavenger on Oct 16, 2012 16:40:51 GMT -5
I'll be very interested in the project! Take some sound clips! It may also be useful to be able to measure the output consistently between different magnets.
I'm going to guess the biggest change you'll notice is going to be the output level and sensing area relative to the strength of the magnet used. Ceramic may also have a slightly different character versus the alnicos.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Oct 16, 2012 18:09:54 GMT -5
I smell mojo all over this one...
If you are going to do this, select one pickup and in one guitar and swap out pup magnets making sure that the distance from the strings amp setting and everything is consistant. Then, best yet, record the thing well into a digital recorder that can do a spectrum analyisi, be sure that the pick strike also is consistent...etc, etc,...scientific method.
Then, instead of subjecting stuff like 'brittle and punchy' you will have an actual graph showing the differences in power and freqencies and be able to observe it...still going to be a hazy comparison any way...
The thing, IMHO, is that a magnet is a magnet. Some are stronger than others and so the 'shape' of the field (how strongly it is attracting the filed back into the other pole) will be different and so then the sensing area of a string and so the frequency content and filtering between two coils in different places, as in an HB pup. It's also going to change the impedance of the whole device and all that too, all of which play a part, etc...
The thing is that the sound of a pickup is a combination of factors that all interact. A proper design will ahve set out to find a particular quality that is desired or thae market thinks it wants or for bragging rights. The reality is that you could use a very strong magnet and less coil and vis a vie and all those kinds of things to design perfectly good pickups with all kinds of materials and coil 'resistances' and such.
Anyway, it might be some fun to play with and all, but it's not going to be conclusive or show much I suspect, though swappping mags will make a difference obviously. It's still going to be subjective with so many variables and even if you find some that you 'prefer' it's not going to be something I like, say.
The whole youtube thing is reall a bit of a joke as well...
The second one that you listed is impressive because of the processing for instance. here is a heap of effects and playing techniques to do that, nothing magic in the pups. The thing that makes this work is that it uses a pickup that is not overwound and over maged that makes for a muddy bottom end...and typical of the metal crowd that seeks excess and easily swayed by concepts of 'more powerful' and all that. One can hit the amp harder with a preamp, found in any effects box, but if you have pups that are already filtering the sound down to mud, then there is no getting it back. Many real metal players actually go the other way with things like EMG's in fact, as these low mag/impedance pups have a very broad flat frequency response that takes effects and such well, and as they are preamped, can muster far more volts out than any passive pickup can if that's what one wants...without the mud. This means you can use the tone controls and effects to shape the sound how you want.
Anyway, there is a heap of mojo and the magnets are a big part of it. ANything one can 'label' one can use to brag about it's quality. Anything with a number after it, can be turned up to 11 and beyond LOL...
|
|
|
Post by long813 on Oct 16, 2012 23:31:20 GMT -5
I enjoy your experiment and and looking forward to what your your result end up being. Just for some more 'insight' the seymour duncan forums have a few threads of 'combo pickups' I think they call them, which if I read properly, is the coils of one pickup w/ the magnet of another. Similar to what you are doing, maybe researching their outcomes may provide you with some insight. Maybe.
Cheers,
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 17, 2012 0:49:04 GMT -5
..... Toooooooonewoods... GuitarFoot. Does he truly exist? Runwalker, the original ToneWood Nutz, would be proud of you! ;D However, if yer gonna go down this road, be sure to check out "the other white meat".... Runewalker's classic post on TonePlastic!!
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Oct 17, 2012 1:15:28 GMT -5
That's a very cool thread there and enjoyable reading and important in many ways if you engage in it on so many levels...it's also not a discussion that leads to a 'conclusion' or to score points, which is why in general, GN2 is such an amazing forum for that kind of thing...and can make you think and perhaps reveal our little pet guitar 'fetishes' that we all have. I'm going through many of them now as I consider a new guitar and noticing all those aspects and considerations coming up, and how much of those things are a fallacy, if that make sense. If I like that guitar with a flame maple back and sides, you know, perhaps that aesthetic is worth a compromise or whatever. Much like the compromises many will make with a completely silly pointy shape that is impractical for all kinds of reasons...because it looks mean is often enough!
On magnets, there will be differences but what might not seem to 'work' with one set of coils may be great with some other kind of wiring and the designs from the 1950's that we cherish still, a half century later, is not the only way and never was. At best a different magnet and such, all seems to be minor tinkering around the edges of a fairly antiquated format. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not that big a deal or step forward, none of it make one 'play better' I am sure...
|
|
bowyn
Meter Reader 1st Class
That boy ain't right...
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
|
Post by bowyn on Oct 17, 2012 10:14:29 GMT -5
I'll be perfectly honest, I don;t expect to hear a huge difference, especially since I'm using some pretty hot wound pickups for testing... It's more that I HATE not having a better understanding of the nuances of the different parts of my guitars. I absolutely love guitars to a stupid extent and as I learn more and more about what makes them sound the way they do, I realize how much I don't know. I aim to, one day, be able to Master Build a guitar that is, from the very start, exactly what I intend to build with knowledge of all aspects of it. Might not ever happen, but it'll be a fun trip, none the less. What I plan on doing is to start with the pickups and their stock Ceramic magnets. Make a sound recording of clean notes, clean chords, somewhat overdriven notes and chords, and hard driven notes and chords. I doubt I'll be able to perfectly replicate my playing each time, but I should be able to get some comparative results, regardless. Then, using the same guitar, same strings, same amp, same amp settings, etc., switch magnets, both Bridge and Neck, and go through the process with all of the same settings/setup. Since this will involve restringing each time, it's not going to happen quickly, but by using the same equipment and settings, I should be able to eventually provide some quasi-useful data. I know the only way to do this "properly" would be to use a wide range of pickups on several different guitars (ie. ceramic humbuckers on a les paul vs. alnico hbs on the same les paul, ceramic tele pickups on a tele vs. alnico picxkups on a tele, strat stuff, etc.), but to hell with all that No way I have that kind of time and patience. Still, I think will at least provide some examples of limited usefulness.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Oct 17, 2012 14:24:55 GMT -5
Better yet would be a tester guitar. I have/had (needs repair after last move) such a guitar, a cheap but plays ok, bathtub route strat, without the pickguard and a socket to basic electronics, one can stick pups in place with dounble sided foam tape and hear differences and placements and such along the string length and wire electronics into a mock guard and controls to test that they work. It was primarily done for that sustainer work, but would be a cool thing for something like this and has beeen a valuable bit of test gear from time to time.
An alternative would be a bit of strong wood with tuners and rough bridge attached and hole right through so you can mount pups from the back perhaps...
On recording, others would know more, but other than 'playing' it, a recording in digital form where the notes and frequencies could be analysed with a spectrum analyser could better show the differences and be shared with a screen shot of the graph. This will show the amplitude and amount of frequencies along the spectrum...
I still think that it might just encourage more 'mojo' than it might solve...plus, it is looking at and changining one aspect in a design, presumably for the ceramic mags. It's the interaction of various elements of a design that defines it's character and electronic values (the resistance is not really a value of my value, it's the impedance that counts)...so, your tests may show this general attribute, but can't be definite because perhaps with a different set of coils/mag set, it will be quite a good sound. Remember too that a lot of the 'quality' of a sound is subjective, what you might find to be 'better' may not appeal to an Albert Collins who desires an 'icepick' tone. If it makes a sound, one can make music with it, after all....
|
|
bowyn
Meter Reader 1st Class
That boy ain't right...
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
|
Post by bowyn on Oct 17, 2012 22:11:19 GMT -5
Tell you what, after posting this: guitarnuts2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=guitar&action=display&thread=6580...I've almost entered a Zen-like state... all is truth and nothing is truth. I'm absolutely lost as to how any evaluation I could make with these magnet swaps could possibly matter when I've put three different sets of pickups in a $165 (retail new) guitar and had it sound better, each time, than my expensive guitars... I'm not sure I believe in Mojo, but if Mojo exists, that guitar has been tea-bagged by it. It's completely inexplicable to me. Way too many variables which I have no foundation whatsoever to base expectations on. Kind of a humbling experience in a way. It means to me that no matter what I know is supposed to sound good, sometimes a guitar is going to sound amazing no matter what the hell it's made of, and some are going to sound like shite even with all the expected "tone-words" in play. That may sound incredibly basic, but the reality of it is very eye-opening to me. Still, I'm going to have fun playing with magnets, purely for the hell of it. I'm like your idea about a tester guitar and such, will make life MUCH easier. I'm also going to take the results with a big grain of salt after recent epiphanies.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Oct 18, 2012 5:05:27 GMT -5
+1 to you for that last post and encouraging some thought into this phenomenon with this guitar...
The 'mojo' things are often counteracted by the reverse of course, in most things there is a little 'truth' but you need to get the balnace right and look at the bigger issues. So called 'tone woods' are really about woods and materials that are traditional to gutiar making and make the sounds that we associate with an instrument to some extent (in acoustics even more so, along with trad bracing and things).
But, the reason that these kinds of materials were chosen traditionally was a more practical purpose than 'sound'. Instrument woods need to be very stable. Typically for some things strong as well. For things like fretboards, hard wearing. The concept has been 'coopted' by the marketing mojo to a great extent and you just cant get the kinds of materials that you used to. Personally it is time to make a move to some alternatives. Imagine a machine cut epoxy fretboard, perhaps with carbon fibre for stiffness and support for the neck against warping and twisting for life, perhaps moulded or pressed with the fret slots. No, lets go further, imagine how nuts one could do with inlay concepts and such. Ebony is good, but hard to work with and scarce and under some embargo...embrace the new frounter
However, there is history that goes the other way. Leo Fender makes a fantastic study. The original concept for much of the fender range was expediency. The 3(now5) way switches were telephone exchange surpluss, never envsaged to be used this way and antique then as technology changed...it was a cheap and inventive solution. But the original tele shows some of his short comings as well. He envisaged the bolt on neck as a replacable part. If it needs refretting, throw it away and get another. One neck warps, you don't scrap the whole gutar. He used pine originally for bodies...but more than that, he did not believe that the original tele needed a truss rod either! The result is where they debuted at NAMM, all of the necks warped. He wasn't thinking 'tone wood', anything will make a sound, but he perhaps could ahve and did change to more stable woods and adjustable necks pretty quick. The kind of cheap woods of his time, swamp ash and such, are now considered 'tone woods' because fender largely made them so by expediency.
...
Something that people seem not to discuss though, which I think is very important in considering things and perhaps what is going on here.
The gutiar string vibrates at the fundamental (the lowest name of a note) in large part, but a heap of harminicss within that note. There are all kinds of dampening factors high end and certainly guitar pickups are a huge 'filter' of this content.
But, there is also the issue of attack and decay, not just on the overall note, but the evolution of these harmonics. A tele will often explode in attack with a huge burst of high frequencies and then settle down to a largely fundamental, fairly smooth tone. If one 'violins the note and takes of the attack you can hear this. An LP is a very solid gutiar and style withy a set neck and often very heavy woods. The result of all these things, is a kind of 'bloom' typically. A slower attack rather than the tele's 'burst' effect. Some of the strats tone is because it is virtually a hollow body with all those cavities and bridge on a spring. All ahve an effect on the attack and decay.
Bear in mind that preference is personal and in contest to what you want to play on it. Perhaps you need that 'burst' for quick country runs, while perhaps you want an LP to sustain notes and have them swell and evolve over a longer time. Perhaps you want is 'smooth' all over....lots of gutiars will do different things, regardless of the pickups that are in large part filtering what you can hear of these things.
So, perhaps, with this 'magic guitar' what you are hearing, regardless of pups, is the overall 'shape' of the note whioch appeals to you. Something to consider anyway...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2012 9:12:41 GMT -5
Tell you what, after posting this: guitarnuts2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=guitar&action=display&thread=6580...I've almost entered a Zen-like state... all is truth and nothing is truth. I'm absolutely lost as to how any evaluation I could make with these magnet swaps could possibly matter when I've put three different sets of pickups in a $165 (retail new) guitar and had it sound better, each time, than my expensive guitars... I'm not sure I believe in Mojo, but if Mojo exists, that guitar has been tea-bagged by it. It's completely inexplicable to me. Way too many variables which I have no foundation whatsoever to base expectations on. Kind of a humbling experience in a way. It means to me that no matter what I know is supposed to sound good, sometimes a guitar is going to sound amazing no matter what the hell it's made of, and some are going to sound like shite even with all the expected "tone-words" in play. That may sound incredibly basic, but the reality of it is very eye-opening to me. Still, I'm going to have fun playing with magnets, purely for the hell of it. I'm like your idea about a tester guitar and such, will make life MUCH easier. I'm also going to take the results with a big grain of salt after recent epiphanies. that is so true... maybe even very cheap guitars are able to sound amazing as long as the player invests a lot of work on them. I mean if you add all the hours you work on an instrument and do the multiplication, the result will be a very high number. I guess when you buy an expensive instrument, you buy the setup, the fretwork, the PLEK, etc.... It is one of the most weird open problems for all guitarists, without a concrete answer yet.... i have heard many people (especially from my country) calling various guitars as "firewoods", but if you put substantial work into the "firewood" you may turn it into starwood! Also tastes differ, so what is good for you (and cheap) may not suit the next guy. So it is also put into perspective. So, lets say company X wants to design a model that will sell good and expensive, they want to make as many people happy with this, both comfort-wise, tone-wise and quality-wise, so this instrument must have all good features (your xavier's good characteristics probably included) + good ergonomy + good testing + good setup and quality control + services and.... oopppss price go off the ceiling !!
|
|
|
Post by newey on Oct 18, 2012 12:11:37 GMT -5
Amen to that.
Danelectro has legions of fans despite being made of Masonite over a pine frame. That's really all anyone needs to say on the "tonewood" debate.
|
|
|
Post by Runewalker on Oct 18, 2012 13:10:06 GMT -5
..... Toooooooonewoods... GuitarFoot. Does he truly exist? Runwalker, the original ToneWood Nutz, would be proud of you! ;D However, if yer gonna go down this road, be sure to check out "the other white meat".... Runewalker's classic post on TonePlastic!!Wow SG, its nice to be remembered. I am trying to wean myself off of toneplastic and on to tonebourbon. Not as resonant but very warm.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 18, 2012 14:08:10 GMT -5
RW, I am trying to wean myself off of toneplastic and on to tonebourbon. That wouldn't be due to any influence from a certain stogie-chomping sonosonny, would it? ;D I'm sure that depends on whether you are bouncing off the walls or the floor - each has different resonance characteristics. Although the tones you might make after drinking bourbon are certainly more melodious than those you make after drinking beer! ..... I can see it now: ToneBourbon©! Making your Mojo sound as big as Texas since 1949!! ..... As noted by 4real above, it's kinda hard to simply forget memorable posts like yours - The link for that is stored in a special file on my hard drive, along with other little goodies like John's Dreaded Tone Suck, Chris's Brain Scanning Through The Nostril.... you get the idea. sumgai
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Oct 18, 2012 15:55:59 GMT -5
Thanks for those links Sum, they are fun and enjoyable and says a lot about this community, in a good way! Rune, you are not forgotten when these posts are in the file bank I'm sure, enjoyed that thread again... Plus things like the 'ground loop' thing are so entrenched and repeated for so long, when a little testing and experience and rationality can 'debunk' this kind of 'law'...good stuff. I supect there is much the same surrounding 'magnets' and such. These 'materials' are not magical, they creates a magnetic field of various strengths and shapes, the magnetisim is the same though and just one part of a whole bunch of things that 'interact' to produce a subjectively 'better' result. Sure, danoelectro, though the build quality sometimes didn't live up to the passage of time. Anything that makes a noise can be used to make valid music, sometimes having to struggle with an instrument and limitations, can force new ideas, often you don't want things to be too easy. And if there were some 'perfect' pickup or guitar, then we'd all have the same and need one, not mod anything and generally all sound generic to each other. I know some people specifically collect 'interesting' instruments for just this kind of purpose. It casn be fun to try and find the music in even the cheapest guitar. Plus there are things one might do to a cheap guitar you would never attempt with a good one Yeah, well that's when you know you are talking to kids LOL. It's just adopting that kind of bigotry, is it not. I've seen that lately while looking at acoustic gutiars lately, there are all these people with amazingly expensive gutiars, then along comes a carbon-fibre instrument and they are all over that...it's plastic, so the complete opposite to what they say and think aobut other instruments, but put that magic 'fibre' in it and charge enough money...hmmm. Reality is, that they too make a sound and can be just as valid in the right hands and in some places, about the only thing that will survive the climate! I know I am a bit of a cynic, but I don't think the 'companies' can be relied on, especially for things like set up and such. More and more they are just churning out the basic 'thing' and it's up to the buyer to do the time consuming hand work of things like set up. Often without the specialised skills or experience to do it right, which includes me! Most guitars leave the factory, or so it seems from adjusting a few, without any tension at all on the truss rod, etc. Nuts are high on the excuse (oh, that's so the end user can adjust to taste) even though the result is hard to play and impossible to play in tune even with a basic open chord! Cost and brand name means little... But hey, it's not jsut that, market forces and all that too. That is where the 'mojo' and 'tradition' comes in to be manipulated... Is that what we are really seeing? We've gone through and will continue to make some silly stages and fashions, and mostly that kind of thing drives the 'market'. So, are we seeing more and more 'ergonomic' guitars...no, we see silly 'shapes' with pointy bits to look 'mean' but contribute little to anything as far as playability. Innovators tend to be squashed except for the smallest most obscure consumers, meaning scale is low and so you are looking at a more expensive product for a smaller market, so price is going to be more. Most of the 'greats' of the past used all kinds of 'stuff'. Pages use of dano's, the first to LZ almums telecasters as is the solo on stairway...plus tiny amps. We 'think' marshall stacks and LPs. Hendrix, stock strats (as he burned through a few) turned up side down...etc... They were not futzing over the type of magnet in the pups or even the 'appearance' of a guitar, or when they did, they did things like painting the things like Claptons SG or lennon's epiphone...these days, you can buy things reliced at a price so it will look like someone played the thing (with a belt sander presumably) at a premium! If you think aobut the kinds of things you'd really want in a guitar and put the tradition and other stuff to one side, what would you end up with. Part of Leo's genius (despite making a lot of failures along the way) was perhaps because he was not a guitar player, but consulted with them and thought out of the box. And so, you get a stratocaster with ergonomic curves and construction techniques to make them cheaper and reliable and offer more and more features...the thing must have looked completely alien in the hands of a buddy holly back then, not how we see it now. Some of the traditional things though do work, some can be subtly 'improved'. If one puts a lot of this other 'stuff' aside, what is the kind of 'features' that are important to you. For me with my later electric things, it's been things like locking tuners (why tie strings on?) and no noise. Follow that through and you might find that any decent, perhaps cheap guitar, will out play for you and in general, than anything one might 'buy' off the shelf. I really think that a lot of the pickup fetish thing is just that in general and much of this 'market pressure' has taken things down some anti-intuitive kinds of places IMHO. In pickups, especially! Anyway, through the materials used and the constuction there are qualities to different guitars regarding things like attack and decay and even thing about how it feels that will appeal and suit different approaches to make music and different expectations. Most things that we debate are tiny things, things that your average person is going to roll their eyes and hear no difference, you know? A guitar sounds 'distorted', lay people do not think about the kind of vintage transistors are in play. Who cares what tone caps are in a guitar (especially if you always play with the tone on 10 and so make no impact), not your average music lover! A lot of this stuff, just holds things back! Often I expect a lot of this is an avoidance of the work requried to play, I see and feel it in myself particularly lately. It's a personal deficiency that often we seek solutions in things. It is perhaps a particularly male thing, perhaps we are wired to be like this. For the young particularly, the idea that if only I had 'x' I'd be so much better, and easily convinced as we live more and more in a market place of manipulating needs and deficiencies and so offering 'solutions'. The guitar is no different than any other area of 'marketing' and looking to make who we are by what we 'own' that little incrimentally 'better'. Meanwhile...I am looking again for a gutiar, for exactly the same reasons that i've just written to be causious of...oh well, no one is immune!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2012 3:48:18 GMT -5
Guys, the scientific part in me wants to believe in runwalker's positions... however when you have guitars with so different sounds , however with "normal" similar sounding "common" pups.. i dont know...
particularly i am puzzled in the "harmonics" department... some guitars can squeel out some unbelievable harmonics at some specific positions of the fretbord/techniques while others can do similarly but in DIFERRENT positions!!.. i mean, is this due to the pup??? or the wood?
OTOH i have the Carvin dc135 which screams at artificial harmonics, in high E, high frets.... unplugged ..... (you can only imagine the situation when plugged).... now tell me that pups are 50% responsible for this.... this thing will scream like there's no tomorrow , no matter what the pup... i have tried the original, super distortion, B&L l500, same sound... same squeels
wierd stuff!!!
mankind has made amazing advances in many areas of science, but we still cannot explain how a guitar works!!
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Oct 19, 2012 4:16:07 GMT -5
Position of pup along the string...when plugged in
Resonance of the whole structure and dampening factors
All kinds of factors make a difference. In general, pickups are 'filters' in a lot of ways. Likely to get the most 'harmonics' a very wide range typically low impedance pickup with low magnetic pull (also a dampening factor) hence why many employ EMG pups for instance, teh opposite of over wound high mag passive pickups which typically result in a very narrow midrange 'filter' on the sound.
There are lots of factors and are known, but many strategies to maximise some qualities have had mixed results. The steinberger guitars from all graphite and EMGs were inctredibly stiff with few dampening factors...so maximising sustain and harmonic content, no dead spots and with PUPs capable of evenly picking up those frequencies. The result was that many people found these things 'sterile' and lacking in 'character'...
Some high harmonics are also out of tune with the equal temperment of our tuning and intonation, amps typically too, are not designed for such a high frequency range. So, a high mix of high harmonics might also have some disonance to it. Some filtering, especially to favour the midrange, is often something people prefer and defines the 'sound' of the electric guitar for many.
There are all kinds of dampening and reinforcement factors in a guitars construction, it's not just 'wood' and certainly not 'magical' qualities, or teh pups. I mean, many pup manufactures had, if tehy don't still, will sell a pup on it's 'sustaining' qualities..but reality is that the string will only vibrate in accordance with the energy in and the dampening qualities of the guitar's construction and materials. Clearly, a pickup won't result in 'sustain' in any way. Harmonics, perhaps some will be able to sense a more select range. Some are better than others, but the HB is a pretty wide sensing pup by design, definitely a factor too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2012 5:30:42 GMT -5
but reality is that the string will only vibrate in accordance with the energy in and the dampening qualities of the guitar's construction and materials. Clearly, a pickup won't result in 'sustain' in any way. tell that to the greek bozo "top-dog" who was claiming that sustain is not important, that good jazz axes have no sustain whatsoever, and that the amp, compressor pedal/sustainer pedal will do the trick!!! I was explaining the same thing to him... If the string does not vibrate, then all the amplifiers/pedals/processors of the world cannot produce something that is not there. As a matter of fact my "bad relation" with the particular "top-dog" started with the sustain question, he thought sustain can be made of ... pedals..... Then some 2 months later i came back and attacked him on his "ideas" that truss rod adjustment does not impact higher frets (i mean, i simple push/pull of the fretboard by hand with no adjustment can demonstrate the behavior of up-bow/back-bow or the lack of it...) But what you said about the steinberg guitar was very interesting... in the era where every signal can be digitally processed, why not let the guitar produce as many frequencies it can, and filter the signal later, making one guitar "general purpose", and thus limiting the number of guitars to one!!! That's the idea of the whole "modeling" movement. of course same thing with SumGai's adventures with Roland VG8, one guitar many sounds.... ahhhhhhh we are so confused!!! tradition and technology !!! or modern technology which in the future will become tradition!!! ahhhh a real confusion !
|
|
bowyn
Meter Reader 1st Class
That boy ain't right...
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
|
Post by bowyn on Oct 19, 2012 9:51:02 GMT -5
particularly i am puzzled in the "harmonics" department... some guitars can squeel out some unbelievable harmonics at some specific positions of the fretbord/techniques while others can do similarly but in DIFERRENT positions!!.. i mean, is this due to the pup??? or the wood? I hear you there. I've got a guitar that, when I'm playing with some gain and barre chords, I can lift my fingers a bit during the "non-accented" chugging and it just rings out with this amazing metallic muted-harmonic type of sound. I barely have to even try. First time I heard it, I was almost drooling. Nothing special about the guitar, but other very good quality guitars with the same type of body woods and very similar pickup setups, that, while sounding nice, I can't count on them to do the same, and certainly not as effortlessly. Same with pinch harmonics. Some of my guitars will just squeal like Ned Beatty while others I have to work to get them to squeak a little. Every time I think I have something figured out, I remember that I can't even explain the simplest aspects of the sounds my guitars make In a weird way, though, I kind of like this. Everything today seems to get so analyzed and explained.. the magic kind of gets taken out of it. I like that my guitars each have their own inexplicable "magic" to them... as long as it's not the "magic of sounding like crap," that is... I can live without that. ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2012 10:06:08 GMT -5
ha ha !!
+1 from me!
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Oct 19, 2012 18:26:46 GMT -5
Some interesting explorations and learning, but there are a lot of things that open up even more aspects to other things...and in the end, what does one want out of the or an instrument...of what ca one get out of the instrument that we have to make it better suit you. What is often left out of any of these such discussions and projects, is to step right back and outline what you want, why you want it and what strategies one might go more in that direction. See, there are some fundamentals and mis-conceptions, perhaps one has not actually played a good jazz box or understood why they were developed and what the music is about that might make someone want to go in that direction. Generally they have a fast attack for rapid fire licks, a full 'body' to the sound, often with the higher frequencies rolled right off al-la wes, acoustically they attempted to get projection, listen to the sound and style of a django and what He wanted and needed, it was not 'sustain' but a sound that would cut through acoustically in a noisy environment...etc... As for teh pedals, you can't amplify what is not there, but you can make the tiniest signal that is there last for the entire time of vibrationa nd with a loud amp, feedback to endless sustin. Any 'distortion box' is an extreme compressor, this kills all dynamics and is not an attractive thing to me. Similar to 'modelling', it is not everything one might wish for and any presets are completely overblown and affected by NR and compression and other things that kill aspects like dynamics and evolving character and all that side of thing. We are so used to hearing that 'bee in a jam jar' sound of production and distortion that many have lost the ability to hear what a guitar can sound like. Also, when we here things in context on some crappy format like MP3, radio and esp YT we think that is 'the sound'. I highly recommend listening to some isolated tracks and hearing what the gutiar really sounds like as recorded, or other instruments in a track...eg Well, yeah, it's a thought though there are important aspects as I have explained that have a huge impact on the way we percieve the sounds of things, especially the attack of notes. There is not going to be "one guitar" and understand, that while there are a lot of great things a synth like guitar can do, there are limitations to things like modelling and things that they tend not to do well. The reality is that they work from set algorithyms and such, and that means a consitency that is not 'natural', for want of a better word, nor reacts to a players technique as well. Now for most of us, perhaps that does not matter or might even be an 'improvement', perhaps a fine compromise for the versitlity that one might gain. I don't know the guitar, but if it has say, a solid metal floyd with hardened steel saddles and such, this will produce this kind of effect typically. A strat has similar qualities typically because you have the strings strung to a metal block, attached to the body via springs, this is going further. Don't think I am not prey to such effects or that my guitars, or instruments I might wish for, don't have a certain 'magicical' aspect to them, they certainly do. Though, I tend to try and understand so that one can move more in one direction or another to suit the direction musically I might want to explore. There are compromises all along the road, hence different instruments can have real benefits, a single instrument approach too ahs enormouse rewards as well... Largely though, it is the romantic in me, the association of time with an instrument and all that I suspect. An instrument should become a very personal thing and become a part of you, know what I mean. If you 'practice' or play a lot, you spend a lot of time and the guitar is a particular instrument that you really 'hug' if you know what I mean, physically you are a lot closer than one gets to a 'piano' for instance, and you get to know every grain and the feel of the thing and little idiosycracies. But gutiarists and so the guitar market, are curiously consrvative and other than a few variations on 'shapes' and some weirdness to fashion (reverse hockystic heads and such, so you can't get to the tuners properly and the strings no longer run straight over the nut, which is locked anyway with a full floating trem, etc), a lot of potential is not explored because it is held back by all this 'guitar law' and frankly 'fetishness' of things and the 'tradition' and history that goes with it. These days it is a mess with the same people holding contrary views quite often, and as I suspect, are talking in different ways about a different phenomenon and giving it some broad 'dumbed down' term like 'tone' or 'sustain'...etc. These things are picked up in the initiation process, often in forums and then get handed down and repeated without the basis to verify such things. A lot of things are completely silly, and a biot of 'thought' might reveal these things. Consider the old fender or PAF pups. These were hand wound by women who may have a background in sewing, and wound without counters or precision. The magnets too varied a bit, so you get a random inconsistency in the originals. No doubt, some sounded better than others, some randomly got zebra coils if they were matched later from a different batch. But really, this was all happenstance and who of the makers, certainly the users, have really heard a real PAF that turne dout really well and analysed it so it can be reproduced. Even by ear, what are people comparing things to in reality? Even then, the amps and music and everything else has changed, different guitar...is it necessarily going to sound 'magical' or is this just a call to a heritage and misinformation, peer pressure and predjudice? It might seem to take all the fun out of it to look at things a bit deeper. The same reaction comes to the idea of music theory. "If I knew what was going on, the 'magic' would disappear". But I don't think so, you just move 'deeper' into things. But if you ask a question, then an explanation other than it's 'magic' will get you a lot further I believe, and save you from a lot of exploitation and being a part of conveying mis-information IMHO. By far the biggest thing that affects the feel and sound of things is in the player. A player such as EVH there, is underated by many. In this take and typically, he plays great rhythm parts, has a lot of light and shade from a basic guitar, uses dynamics well and even does the solo's live (the background there is a scratch track he's playing to that will be erased later or replaced with a new one). These days, people will play till they get one bit right, cut and past enad duplicate that, record the solos later, etc...that can be cool too, but a different approach again... There's a lot to learn from these things. You can see the 'sharp' attack of a real guitar on the recorder for instance, the dynamic range of MKs tracks. Compare that to a lot of 'metal' things, most noticably metalica say, and it is just a block of 'sound'... So yeah, look beyond the gear and even the recordings as a whole and dig deep into what is really going on...it too can be fun.
|
|
bowyn
Meter Reader 1st Class
That boy ain't right...
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
|
Post by bowyn on Oct 19, 2012 22:57:52 GMT -5
I just had to respond to this. I dig the thought you put into your posts, but this one really hit home in several places: I tend to try and understand so that one can move more in one direction or another to suit the direction musically I might want to explore. I respect that. If I had a better analytical mindset I'd probably feel the same way. As it is, I consider myself a reasonably intelligent person, but most often I go from "Oh, wow, I think I understand this!" to "What in the hell was I thinking?" It's weird, I do the same thing with cooking. I'll maybe follow a recipe the first time, but most often I'm thinking on the fly and measuring by feel. I won't say I have an "instinct" for it, I'm not that pretentious, but I do make out good far more often than not. Same thing with the guitars I build. I know about 50% of what I'm doing and the rest is pure feel and, while I should have produced a number of duds, I've only got 1 or 2 I look at now and think "I should be ashamed!" Honestly, guitars are so damn forgiving, I can't take too much credit. Main point being, my "working by feel" anbd/or taking a crapshot at an idea, etc, is not something I consider a talent or skill so much as I consider it a poor substitute for actually knowing what I'm doing This should be Guitar Gospel. Seriously. +1 for this alone. Again, very succinct point. I've got this neat little Telestar guitar.. probably made by Teisco... old Japanese thing from the 60s. It's got a great sound to it, but for some reason, and I've seen this with a lot of old Japanese electrics, the body is tiny, thin, and it looks a bit comical being played by me. So, my thoughts at the moment are to get a new body for it and transplant everything except the bridge and the not-quite-intact tailpiece/vibrato (it works, but it's missing the cover and arm and looks like it was an extremely cheap piece of hardware anyway... I'll replace it with either a good condition piece from the same general time period or one of these: www.guitarfetish.com/Vintage-Style-Surface-Mount-Whammy-Bar-Hofner-Vibrola-style_p_839.htmlBUT, before I completely lose my point, heh, how this relates tom your comment is, I don't just want to stick the stuff on a Tele, Strat, or Les Paul body. Firstly, if I add another Tele or Strat (unless it's a G&L for whom I will make a 1 time exception ) to my collection, I'm going to need professional help. Same with Les Pauls... I'm bored with the same 6 or so body designs. At the same time, I'm not interested in something with 10 spikes radiating out from it :/ I'm still not completely jaded on Jaguar/Jazzmaster body styles and I might consider a Firebird style body... but lately, yeah, I'm just bored with what's being mass produced (ie. not super expensive). Hell, say what you (not you, specifically, 4real) will about First Act, but as far as body designs go, they've at least had the balls to throw some creativity out there. I've got 2 of them I've bought for super-cheap for projects. One, the Volkswagon special model, took very little modding on my part to sound pretty darn good. The other was a custom order job a lady got for her kid, but I think the kid turned his nose up at it. Fine by me: How I got it: What I did with it: Some lipstick tube pickups and a 3 band active EQ and this thing is a monster, not to mention fairly unique looking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2012 23:42:20 GMT -5
4real, definitely EVH was a mythical player, a real innovator, such a great guitarist. In this class i would put also Uli Roth by Scorpions, and of course the great Django! Django was just unbelievable, granted he lacked 1 left finger or so...
But, what i think, is that, the moment an electrical circuit processes a signal (be it digital/modeling/analog unit, .... or the ancient amp that Django used), this is called artificial in my book. Truth be told, "line 6" e.g produces more artificial signal than Django's amp, but they both sound artificial to a traditional unplugged tamburas player from the balkans.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Oct 20, 2012 1:24:55 GMT -5
I saw a recent django documentary recently, could probably find it on YT and includes some rare footage of his playing that was really inspiring...he only used an amp in the very later years of his life (and you could just here how his style changed with the ability to have sustain and a different tone and still be heard. Maccafelli who made the guitars was really interesting and some interesting ideas for those acoustics, but he made his fortune with the all plastic guitars in the staes much later. I'm glad the ramblings are of interest, my views and not necessarily 'right' you understand, but the idea is to think I guess. I can type as fast as I talk, so thats all this is, me sharing a conversation. There are lots of experiements one can do to make a 'shape' that appeals. I am sure we all sketch out things from time to time, think aobut making a mock up out of cardboard, or chipboard or the like, perhaps some ply and stick a neck on it. In my youth, you could gett these cheap jap disposable gutiars, usually in parts, at the flea market for next to nothing, and I'd make all kinds of things back then. I remember making a semi acoustic flying V, after all it has straight edges, a bit of wood for the bridge and box it in with ply, bit of putty and then spray with red glitter pint. Take a few cheap single coils apart and attach and wire together under perspex to make an HB...I know, cause I ahve boxes of these bits and pieces and saw that pup recently, LOL. I even made my own 'Jazz guitar' a long way back. I was still using teh LP, but I'd have to be sitting, the LP is heavy and valuable and...well. I got some old wood and joined it together, a veneer wood on top, an old HB (now in my latest guitar) and a cheap neck, still floating around, and a bit of a bridge and tailpiece thing. Ok, not the greatest guitar, but it did play and sound ok for what it was and what I could build at the time. The shape of it was an oversized LP, the reason for this was simply becuase I was playing sitting down and needing a better posture to reach those jazz chords so, I just made a bigger lighter LP shape that would sit higher in the lap to play. It's inmportant to futz around and play with these things, I did it when younger and there is a lot one can do and just ahve fun with it, discover what works and doesn't and all that. With wiring, I think everyone with a mind to thinks they want a complete 'switchmaster' every option, as many pickups as possible kind of thing, and should do that. Get it out of the system, find out what all these options sound like, hear the limitations, be frustrated with the thing...then later, step back and go, you know...I just need this and this and a switching system that looks like this...etc. Interestingly, in teh acoustic world, there is a rash of innovative ideas taht are kind of cool...like all carbon instruments that could be made in any shape, to these kinds of details... This takes the sharp edge off an acoutic for the right arm and gives sound ports directly up at the player, plus looks cool. There are thigns like double topped nolex things and a reassesment of the way such things might be made. All this in a very traditional market, but there are such things making inroads. What one might like to see on an electric instrument, hard to tell. Something really light and thin might be cool...the parker fly had a few good points though some elements of teh 'shape' didn't really appeal, a lot fo the ultra light carbon reinforcement that allowed all kinds of other materials to be used was kind of cool and practical. I used to play in a band and the other guitarist had an ovation breadwinner which in it's own way was kind of cool (if a bit bendy with that long unsupported neck) and similar to teh klein guitars that some really like. But, a lot is a fashion thing I suspect, that or tradition. Plus, there is a reason taht the strat and it's many variations is the most commmon thing, it actually is a very comfortable guitar...would ahve looked completely outrageous in it's day though, I'm sure...but it just plain works!
|
|
|
Post by newey on Oct 20, 2012 8:35:47 GMT -5
Noooooo! If this is in more or less playable condition (excepting the vibrato) it's collectable and worth some money. The '60s era Japanese guitars have become sort of the "poor man's collectable", for the guy who wants a vintage axe but can't bankroll a '59 Goldtop. If you don't want it, I'd suggest seeing what you could get for it before any dismemberment. You might be pleasantly surprised. The vintage piece goes to a good home, and the $$ then can be applied to the project of your choice. If you just want the sounds of those pickups, etc, buy previously parted-out ones for installation in the project of choice. The fact that yours is still intact makes it worth more than the sum of its parts. My first guitar, circa 1969, was a "Norma", made in Japan by Kawai, as I later learned. Single pickup of the "gold-foil" type which are all the rage these days. I bought it for $21.95 brand new, and sold it a few years later for $15. It had crappy tuners and wouldn't hold tune very well, and a baseball bat neck. I've been sorry ever since that I sold it. Saw one exactly like mine, playable but fairly beat-up looking, selling for $250 on Ebay a while back. Of course, I don't know if the seller actually got that for it, but just by way of illustration I point that out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2012 13:08:17 GMT -5
I remember making a semi acoustic flying V Way cool! Plus, there is a reason taht the strat and it's many variations is the most commmon thing, it actually is a very comfortable guitar...would ahve looked completely outrageous in it's day though, I'm sure...but it just plain works! I think the explanation is that Les Paul (the other major rival) stems from the hollow acoustic which in turn, stems from the classic guitar, which was never meant to be hanging from a man's shoulders but rather played while seated. I can feel it in my extra-modern (or not so...) ibanez.... when i leave the left hand, the thing tends to fall on the left. The strat sat there just perfect. Also, in companion to the (very nice) post you wrote about the guitar being a part of the body, i think the strat "folds" around the body (with all the ergonomic cuts) better than the LP. The LP was, is and will be just a classic guitar shape.
|
|
|
Post by costahilbert on Jun 1, 2013 19:03:50 GMT -5
First, you have to back the 6 pole piece screws out a bit so they're clear of the baseplate. Then, loosen the two bobbin screws to slide the magnet out. This assumes that the HBs in question are a) uncovered and b) not epoxy/wax potted; if either of those assumptions is incorrect, your job just got harder. There's a tutorial on removing covers in the Reference area. If it's potted, well, probably best to find another HB on which to experiment. Now, this is all well and good if you're just using one HB to test various magnets. If the testing is going to involve 2 HBs (and assuming you want the two pups to be able to be combined together), then you can't just swap magnets willy-nilly without potentially ending up with the HBs out of phase. If the test is going to involve 2 pickups, it's best to check the polarity of the original magnets with a known N or S pole, and then mark the original magnets and the test magnets accordingly, so that phase can be maintained. as you swap all these magnets in and out. Perhaps the goal was to obtain the biggest tonal variation between the two. As far as I know, you may be the first to do such extensive testing of different magnets on the same underlying pickup. This is the problem with all those YouTube videos- not just different mics, etc, but different pickups. Keep in mind that magnets aren't the only, and probably not the most important variable, in a pickup's sound. Wire diameter, and number of windings, also come into play. A manufacturer might couple weaker magnets with more windings to obtain roughly the same output, for example. If I had to guess (and that's all it is, as I've never done any such tests), I would bet that you would be able to hear an audible difference between the ceramic magnet and any of the flavors of Alnico. I doubt whether a true blindfolded A-B test of one Alnico composition versus another would yield consistent, reproducible differences in tone. In other words, the only true test is (using the same pickup, same guitar, same amp, etc, and changing only the magnets), can a group of listeners who are not told in advance which Alnico they are hearing reliably pick out the Alnico V from all the others over a series of, say, 5-10 trials? My guess is, "No, they can't". And, all the terms you are questioning ("warm", "brittle", etc.) are vague precisely because the whole topic is so subjective. There's a lot of pseudoscience out there on this topic, mostly from people who want to sell you their pickups. If it isn't accompanied by a blind test (ideally, a double-blind set-up, better still) then taking it with a bit of salt is in order. I am currently winding a bridge pick up (because I always hate how bright and twangy they are) with Alnico 5's for the top 3 poles and Alnico 2's for the bottom three (unwound string) poles. Hopefully this will soften up the 'Twang' but keep the bass punch.
|
|