Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2013 5:37:58 GMT -5
Hello, in my strat-build i ended up, getting rid of the dimarzio super-distortion in the bridge, i moved HS-3 from the neck to the bridge position, and put back the original stock cheap SC in the neck, keeping the old cheap SC in the middle which never left this position.
In the old configuration (neck : dimarzio HS3, middle : cheap SC, bridge : dimarzio super distortion), the setup was not balanced at all. The neck HS3 was way too underpowered, the middle cheap SC was considerably hotter than the HS3, and the dimarzio super-distorion blew up all of the rest in sheer power. This way i had full crunchy sound for riffs with the super-distortion, and a *fantastic* sound in 2 position (bridge-middle) *with no* coil splitting whatsoever. Normally for super-distortion in series mode, one should connect and insulate black and white and connect red to hot and green/bare-zebra wires to ground. With this wiring position 2 (bridge/middle) sound weak and ugly (out of phase). But with connecting and insulating green and red, and connecting black to hot and white/bare-zebra to ground made the trick! It still was not coil-split. It was the full in series fat humbucker in parallel with the middle cheap SC. And this was a fantastic combination i really loved.
However, this was not a balanced guitar, +i sort of started disliking the fat humbucker look, and decided to make it single-coily. (i will move the super-distortion back to the carvin). So, now i have the old cheap true SC in neck/middle and the HS-3 in series humbucking mode. The result is quite good, i kind of like the bridge distorted, and positions 3/4/5 (middle, middle-neck, neck) clean or distorted (fantastic pups, considering i got them loaded with the strat body i bought from ebay for 120 euros).
Now the problems : 1) I do not like the hs-3 (bridge) clean so much (it is in series mode, hard-wired) 2) the hs-3 (bridge) is considerably weaker than the other 2 cheap SC. 3) i do not like position 2 (bridge-middle) so much as i did with the super-distortion (and the same middle SC pup).
I am thinking of either a) coil-splitting the hs-3 with a push-pull pot, for stand-alone use, i heard when coil-split, this increases presence and output (i will use the upper coil) or b) just scrap the bottom coil, and use it in split coil mode for both positions 1 (bridge) and 2 (bridge-middle).
Considering the trouble i had with the super-distortion, at first getting out of phase circuit, should i apriori, do the same exact wiring with the hs-3 as well? (just to minimize the times i will open the pickguard)?
What do you think ?
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jan 3, 2013 5:50:05 GMT -5
I would say so. Both DMs would presumably be wired the same, so if the other was OOP, this one would be as well.
The best way, however, is to always test beforehand to be sure.
I assume the two cheap-o SCs (neck and middle) are in phase with each other already, correct? Assuming so, it is therefore easier to change the one HB than two SCs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2013 6:15:38 GMT -5
I would say so. Both DMs would presumably be wired the same, so if the other was OOP, this one would be as well. The best way, however, is to always test beforehand to be sure. I assume the two cheap-o SCs (neck and middle) are in phase with each other already, correct? Assuming so, it is therefore easier to change the one HB than two SCs. Thanx! Thing is, currently the HS-3 with standard/official in-series wiring (black-white connected and insulated), i do not get this ugly tone i got using the exact same colors with the super-distortion. It still is a good sound, just a little muddy. But thanx!, maybe i should try that before anything else. How could i test phase with a VOM? About the two cheap-o SCs, yes they are in phase. Position 4 (middle-neck) gives no hum at all (well position 5 (neck) does not give much hum distorted either, thanx to the ultra shielding back in GN dayz!!!, finally the whole shielding thing paid off, and with the noise-gate dialed at 4-5, the end result is great). So i will experiment with the HS-3, which is just a overwound upper coil, with a completely inactive bottom coil, this design is from 1980, no so modern. Modern dimarzios SC noisless designs (virtual solo, etc...) are way better, in sound/output/noise/presence/etc.... lets see!
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jan 3, 2013 6:48:34 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2013 6:59:00 GMT -5
thanx a lot, great article, i don't have an analog VOM lets see how it'll go.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 3, 2013 7:17:41 GMT -5
For an alternate for single coil like sound with noise cancelling, perhaps try parallel. Some have found way over powered pups to be really good in this mode and wire them that way permanently. Personally, I'm not keen of super hot pups...they are not really louder (anyway, amps ahve volume controls) and tend to just overload the inputs, espeically of things like digital or even analog effects. If you use a distortion pedal, you hear the sound of this more than pickups anyway and generally they have a 'gain' control. I play 'clean' anyway, but tend towards aiming for the best clean sound as you can always dirty that up. Beisdes, I'd say that for things like 'shredding' and fast or percussive playing, and you seem to be discovering this yourself, you actually want a fast responsive wider ranging pup and guitar, rather than one that 'blooms' like an LP does. Again, this is the ASDR aspects of things mentioned before, the 'shape of a note'... Play with pup heights as well. true single coils, even 'stacked noiselss' have a lot of 'throw' and need to be backed of a bit, HB's are the reverse and work better real close. An HB has both oples right next to each other and if you see the 'shape' of the magnetic field you will see the difference between the two designs and the 'drag' effect of the magnets on the strings and nodes of vibration. The other thing to consider there as well is playability. I tend to want my middle pup lower as it is where my hand normally falls to pick and I don't want to be hitting the middle pickup... This side view gives a bit of an idea of my strat's set up...the action is medium and I think the angle is making it look higher than it should., The middle pickup is lower. I use the middle pup also as a kind of 'flavour enhancer' so, on mine you never have a middle alone option, prefering neck and middle. The prefered split is the 'white' inner coil of the SD JB HB in the bridge, a little bit less 'brittle' but the variable control allows for a mix and several 'flavours there'. By default, the middle 'tone control' does the splitting to this coil and generally for 'balance' between all the selections I ahve about half of the other coil mixed in. This kind of system gives a bit of noise cancelling too, and you can use that control to and midrange and volume turning to full hb if required. As all my pups are noise cancelling, it is only the 'splits' that ahve any slight noise at all, otherwise, my guitars tend to be very quiet/silent. The classic strat sound is 'classic' and mine certainly sounds 'straty' but the choice of pups were chosen to give a bit more 'body' to the sound than 'jangle'. Lower powred pups tend to have this more classic strat sound too, far more 'clarity'. Previous to these pups, it was fitted with a 'duncan designed' HB (JB replica) and two squier SC's with alnico poles that sounded very good. The worst sound though, IMO, was the M+B(HB) that was standard...this produced this really bright brittle kind of sound that I was not keen on. Generally this is the case unless the selector has the ability to also split the HB I've found. All this strat talk has made me want to get this guitar out again and restring it even...they are such comfortable and versitle gutiars...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2013 7:26:30 GMT -5
^^^ true and the clean notes are so nice. You can even shred on the strat unplugged !!! i like yngwie malmsteen's early albums (alcatrazz) where he sounded like he is playing with minimal distortion, the notes were almost clean, yet he managed to sound so good. I dunno, the cheap SCs on my blue strat seem to outperform the EMG81/60 in clarity and beauty. once you get one strat straight, its hard to look back.... i was so hooked to the Ibanez arz800 (LP style, just more modern) for 4 full months, till i got back to the strat. PS talking about position 2, (bridge+middle), the sound i got with unsplit full super-distortion + cheap middle SC was so stratty and so close to dire straits (six blade knife, waterline, etc...) if only i could get this back somehow
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 3, 2013 7:47:38 GMT -5
The 'problem' with a strat is that that 'sound' of a clean strat is so ubiquous...hence my 'strat' is a different take on that kind of sound. Previously I played the tele exclusively...but again, the pups and set up are quite 'different' from the usual tele thing.
You can do a lot with 'setup' though, that pic of my guitar shows how extreme one might take things and that action is higher than most would probably like it (though, not as high as it looks in that pic), my guitars are not for 'shredding' like that, I want the strings to 'spring back' and the notes to be very clean, not crashing into frets and such.
It also shows the trem in JB style 'full float'. There is some thin leather around the trem block to stop any 'knocking'. It's not that I really ever 'bend up' either, but there is a different feel that I like and the required slight back tilt on the neck to do that feels more comfortable to me as well.
Remember too that guys like hendrix played completely stock CBS strats, not the renown 'vintage' things and sounded great.
A strat to me is pretty much a 'hollow body gutiar' with a plastic top. With the spring and pickup routes, there is little wood in there and as a result, they tend to have a bit more harmonic complexity, sharp attack and less sustain (especially with a bridge on springs!) compared to say something like a real LP). I tend to hear these things more than I do the 'pickups'...
I grew up when the 'super distortion' things came out and they were always over power 'mush machines' and the start of all this crap 'mojo'...and from a different era. This was a time when people wanted to over power valve amps to get those smooth LP like sounds of a player like kossof/bad company or say santana...'shredding' had not been invented yet effectively.
Also, as I've red it. EVH's frankinstein thing used the pup out of his 355 (so PAF style) and also, was reputabley 'broken' (possibly wired in parallel) and pots of which he only used one, do make a big difference. Again, lower power pups, clearer result, more dynamic range, faster attack...all the stuff you'd want for that kind of play!
One problem with strats is the PG thing, getting inside and all that. One solution can be to extend the pup wires under the gutar and do all the wiring n cardboard and install when happy with the end result...just a thought...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2013 8:04:34 GMT -5
Yeah, another option to just loosen up the strings and then unscrew the neck, i mean putting back 4 screws is less trouble than restringing 6 strings, but its a PITA anyway you see it.
|
|
|
Post by D2o on Jan 3, 2013 8:22:06 GMT -5
Yeah, another option to just loosen up the strings and then unscrew the neck, i mean putting back 4 screws is less trouble than restringing 6 strings, but its a PITA anyway you see it. Good idea (and Amen to the PITA). When I do this I wrap masking tape once around the neck (and strings) at the nut or the first fret - it holds the strings roughly where they should be and makes for a slightly lower PITA factor, but light tack masking tape isn't sticky enough to gum anything up badly. Cheers, D2o
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2013 8:45:16 GMT -5
masking tape is the way i do it as well! i do not think about it, just grab whatever is closest to me, cause most of the time i work in extreme stress, trying to get the job done from 7 oclock in the morning till the rest of the house wakes up , also i have developed methods to reach my tools without generating much noise .... TOTALLY NOISELESS work ;D
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Jan 3, 2013 14:25:18 GMT -5
Just on the digital multimeters and the screwdriver pulloff test.
I tried this the other day, and it did indeed work, using a 200mV setting on my cheap yellow meter. When you do the pull off, it sees the pulse and all kinds of digits are produced for a secnd or so, but the phase relates to whether or not the '-' symbol also appears at the left of the display, and I was able to use this to check relative phase.
4real A question or three on your variable coil-splitting pot: What value is it? lin or log? and do you find with that value, that you get a smooth variation or is it mostly at one end of the turn? ie, do you think what you have is the best value in there?
cheers John
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2013 14:28:16 GMT -5
Just on the digital multimeters and the screwdriver pulloff test. I tried this the other day, and it did indeed work, using a 200mV setting on my cheap yellow meter. When you do the pull off, it sees the pulse and all kinds of digits are produced for a secnd or so, but the phase relates to whether or not the '-' symbol also appears at the left of the display, and I was able to use this to check relative phase. Thanx i'll try that.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 3, 2013 21:05:53 GMT -5
PRO TIP: Use a freaking capo, not masking tape gunking up the strings, sheesh! And yes the neck comes off or enough with 4 big screws... Generally these things are not supposed to come apart that often nor need to be...even though my strat has a rear control cavity, there is absolutely no way one could work on it without pulling everything out...you can't be just poking around blindly with an iron and do a good job IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jan 3, 2013 21:42:41 GMT -5
Yeah, I can't see taking the neck off just for easier electronics access, eventually the screws will round out the holes. Unless one has the threaded metal inserts and machine screws for the neck joint, it's best to leave the neck alone, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Jan 3, 2013 21:56:43 GMT -5
I would not want to be removing the neck for any reason other than than it really needed to be removed. Screw holes in wood get weaker with repeated removal and reinsertion, and screws get burred etc.
Having to remove the strings is a good control to combat Compulsive Rewiring Syndrome - because you have to play through a set of strings until you have a good reason to change them and tweak the wiring again.
John
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 3, 2013 23:31:26 GMT -5
Well, all my electrics and looking at doing my acoustic soon, have locking tuners...not that I take them apart very often at all. So the strings can come off and on in a few seconds if required. My Kahler guitars can do even better, though I don't need to do that when set up. The trem will depress the strings so far to slack, that you can just unhook the top loaded ball ends, cap on the neck and you are good to replace in the same way!!
I have found that setting up my fenders I've had to take the neck on and off a lot of times to get it shimmed just right though. One 'trick' is to rub the screws with a cake of soap and only ever use the appropriately sized/style large hand screw driver, not an electric drill and don't over tighten. I also DS tape the shim in, it only needs to be a tiny amount to make a big difference over the neck and once I've got it, I'd like to be sure it does not fall out or move when putting it all back together.
|
|
|
Post by Runewalker on Jan 4, 2013 0:42:57 GMT -5
... "Now the problems : 1) I do not like the hs-3 (bridge) clean so much (it is in series mode, hard-wired) 2) the hs-3 (bridge) is considerably weaker than the other 2 cheap SC. 3) i do not like position 2 (bridge-middle) so much as i did with the super-distortion (and the same middle SC pup).
...
What do you think ?"Pyros Son-o and I have experimented with HS-3s and the older brother, HS-2s as well... All the way back in 2006 they were referenced in this design thread: guitarnuts2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=schem&action=display&thread=3157That build is still a sweet unit and Son-o pulls it out regularily. On that build we used a HS-3 and set up some switching to use both the bottom and top coils in combos with the neck or mid. We used either the top or bottom to achieve humcancelling with its corollary neck or mid pup. Given that the bottom coil was far away from the strings it provided some interesting sounds... a dummy coil when combined with a surface pup, but even alone it would produce output. I traded a customized guitar I built from parts laying around to a guy for a very nice mid-80's Japanese strat that somewhere in its life had been customized with an HS-2 neck pup, and get this, a X2N (Dimarzio) in the bridge. If you know that pup, the X2N pours maple syrup on Super distortions and eats them for breakfast - a kind of insanity pick up and very loud. The array with an HS-2, stock single and a crazy-power humbucker caused all sorts of volume balance issues. We also found some output/loudness balancing issues in the one with the HS-3. Our approach was pretty low tech. We adjusted pup heights until the preferred vol balance was achieved. That brings up the issue of preferences on sonic qualities related to pup to string proximity, but at least high amplitude variance in loudness was trimmed. Finally, the advantage of that design was the separate volume controls for combos that allowed dialing in the relative volumes. As an aside, Eric Johnson reportedly had HS-2 pups that he used only the top coil on because he preferred their vintage tone quality over actual single coils. Can't confirm that obviously, but we used to go see him back with the Electromagnets, then later with his own three piece, nearly every Sat in the late 70s early 80s, ($2 to $3 cover, and $2 long necks) and if they were top coil HS-2s they sounded pretty d@mn good. I kept both the HS-2 and X2N and have them set aside for specific builds ... one of these days... RW
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2013 5:02:15 GMT -5
Runewalker, thanks for the link. For some reason i am not so sure i like the HS-3 (when it was in the neck and now in bridge) better than the stock no name cheap SC i have now, in the neck/middle. Those cheap ones sound more full and real. Distorted its almost i can hear the sound of it. So it is a rare situation when distortion does not skew the original sound. OTOH HS-3 sounds so dead and generic. Distorts rather nice but its clean is so and so. Maybe its personal taste. I will definitely try Eric Jonson's trick of treating it as SC, keeping just the upper coil, or just revert to the original setup with the 3 no name cheap SCs in all 3 positions. I mean if a simple cheap SC can sound *so* good, why pay 50 EUR (i bought the HS-3 used) for the dimarzio?
maybe i will have to make some clips. My daughter got an ipad, i'll try that, since its been ages since i last recorded to a computer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2013 7:00:37 GMT -5
Ended up using the upper coil, and i like it a little better now, both in bridge position and middle-bridge. A little more power to balance with the cheap SC in middle/neck. One advantage it might had in SC mode over the cheapos i have noticed, is the extra grounding zebra wire and the fact that even in non-hum-canceling mode (SC mode) it produces slightly less noise than the 2-wire SCs. Also, checked out phase in position 2, works good. Might keep it this way.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 5, 2013 7:19:13 GMT -5
I wonder what 'parallel' might sound like on it...less power but still humcancelling. One of the problems with overwound pups is to fit all that wire on it, it needs to be thinner...the result is generally mud!
Kinmans have a cage and magnet structure, more core in teh low end and different impedance. It is using this lower coil for noise cancelling.
In things like the fender noiselsss and SCn (and so bill lawrence who designed them) the upper coil is separated by rare earth magnets that pull the magnetic filed in and isolate it a bit as well as a smaller lower coil with more 'core', etc...
Things have progressed a fair bit from the old simple 'stack' of yore and from where 'noiseless' did get a bad name.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2013 9:32:30 GMT -5
I wonder what 'parallel' might sound like on it...less power but still humcancelling. One of the problems with overwound pups is to fit all that wire on it, it needs to be thinner...the result is generally mud! Kinmans have a cage and magnet structure, more core in teh low end and different impedance. It is using this lower coil for noise cancelling. In things like the fender noiselsss and SCn (and so bill lawrence who designed them) the upper coil is separated by rare earth magnets that pull the magnetic filed in and isolate it a bit as well as a smaller lower coil with more 'core', etc... Things have progressed a fair bit from the old simple 'stack' of yore and from where 'noiseless' did get a bad name. definitely, this design (HS-3) is from 1980. Just a thought, if with proper shielding and the noise gate at 4, i am getting almost to zero hum, even with generous amount of distortion, maybe the distance between true-vintage-noisy SC and noiseless SCn is getting smaller.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 5, 2013 15:49:12 GMT -5
Noise gate = evil LOL If you are using some kind of digital effects, you are getting a very wrong impression I'd suggest, especially about things like noise... Certainly you can get a very quiet guitar with SC pups, sheilding and such is a big thing here obviously, but you won't get 'silent'. For me though, this is important and in this 'noisey electric world' and increasingly so and unpredicabley, it is even more important. A tleast to me, others may not 'care'... But no, I don' think that this is so. Hwever, there has been dramatic improvements in recent times regarding noiseless single coil pups. Thye are not longer the simple 'stacks' as in the eighties, but far more SC pups with included 'dummy coils' separated by various means. Oh...found this pic of HS-3 so a smaller lower coil but none of the kinds of things that separate them as more modern designs tend to do. The lower coil is often wound with thinner wire and so can be smaller and really the top coil is what is largely producing the 'tone' and the lower the noise cancelling. I'd be interested to know how a parallel option might sound...but what ever works for you is fine. Remember the 80's was a long time ago and also, an era of excess and mojo and marketing hype. Perhaps your tastes in things are evolving as well, that tends to be a good thing too...
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Jan 5, 2013 17:26:24 GMT -5
Noiseless pickups seem lke interesting things. I havent tried them, but I note how some of them are advised to be used with higher value pots, in view of their greater impedance.
I could see how with design development, these things could be quite good with normal wiring. But how about our schemes where we are doing series wiring? I could imagine that they could get much muddier sounding than if using simple sc pups. Any views on that?
Also, if the humcancelling coil has a low impedance, in a design where it is in series with the main coil, I would think it would greatly cut down the output if used in parallel. Experimentation is needed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2013 1:24:52 GMT -5
Also, if the humcancelling coil has a low impedance, in a design where it is in series with the main coil, I would think it would greatly cut down the output if used in parallel. Experimentation is needed. that's my suspicion as well.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 6, 2013 2:33:45 GMT -5
I quite like them, at least the idea but the good ones do take a lot of design work and some sound stellar. The old 'stack' things though tended to let down the concept...they cancelled noise but didn't "deliver the sound"...some like kinmans though make great pups (but you have to pay) that are very 'authentic'...the neck pup in my tele (a fender SCn) is the best of it's style thatt I've ever heard! I've not ever tried wiring them in local parallel. Yes, often one will want to use higher value pots, even if they say they are not required it seems, I use 500K on my fenders. But yes, an intersting 'experiment, sespacially if one is going to not use the noise cancelling feature. These things are not necessarily a 'drop in replacement' and pots and wiring can make a difference to the way thigs perform. Obviously 'mixing' types can cause problems having everything work to the optimum 'tone'... But I really, really demand that a guitar be as noiseless as possible. Anything like 'noise reduction' and such really effects the dynamics and of course, only works when there is no noise, usually cutting off the end of the note or trailing in noise and the like. Most digital boxes have the NR permanently on, even when it is off in the programing as they have noise and ADC problems and such. For a lot of people it is perhaps 'not a problem' but if one can advance the technology and get good sounds, I'd go with that. Especially gien the amount of noise making devices in the environment these days. Noiseless pickups seem lke interesting things. I havent tried them, but I note how some of them are advised to be used with higher value pots, in view of their greater impedance. I could see how with design development, these things could be quite good with normal wiring. But how about our schemes where we are doing series wiring? I could imagine that they could get much muddier sounding than if using simple sc pups. Any views on that? Also, if the humcancelling coil has a low impedance, in a design where it is in series with the main coil, I would think it would greatly cut down the output if used in parallel. Experimentation is needed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2013 7:00:02 GMT -5
Noise gate = evil LOL If you are using some kind of digital effects, you are getting a very wrong impression I'd suggest, especially about things like noise... Can you pls elaborate? Where exactly is the wrong impression, on what, under what conditions etc???
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2013 8:02:38 GMT -5
Most digital boxes have the NR permanently on, even when it is off in the programing as they have noise and ADC problems and such. Mine (boss me-25) has a sensitivity setting from 0 to 10. 10=complete silence (your notes included ), 0=buzz-hum-hell. Usually, setting this to 3-4 is adequate for SC. With HB i can go to 0 or 1.
|
|
|
Post by 4real on Jan 6, 2013 14:14:06 GMT -5
Noise gate = evil LOL If you are using some kind of digital effects, you are getting a very wrong impression I'd suggest, especially about things like noise... Can you pls elaborate? Where exactly is the wrong impression, on what, under what conditions etc??? Sorry, time difference, stuff to do.... bear in mind it is my preference and opinion for what I want out of these things...but there is reasoning behind it...it might matter to you, it might not! So...while these things can make things a lot easier to me, for what I want and am listening for, a lot of these things are a 'cheat' and rob you of the finer details. Now, effect makers and other things try hard to make 'presets' that will not only demo the 'extremes' of their devices but also to flatter the potential buyer and user. Often they will sound much the same regardless of what the gutiar is pretty much. (In which case getting carried away abut the 'mojo' of the guitars pups or wood is a little mute)... ... Ok...so things like Noise gates, compressors and distortion are dynamic effects. A compressor will lift any signal up in volume till it falls below a threashold. Distortions do much the same, especially at extremes...it lifts the signal up and cuts the top of the waves off sharply to create something resembling a 'square wave' making that sound. Noise gates sort of do the opposite then, whena signal falls below a certain level, it cuts out all sound, and so also the noise...it turns it off. Now, you can set it so it only tirggers when the signal is practially inaudible...you'd here this as a bit of 'hiss' at teh end of a quiet not and then a sudden 'stop' in all sound. While the signal is playing, there is no change, so all the noise in the signal is there regardless of the NR, it is only in the silences that there is any effect. So, right here, you have a heap of noise in your signal, largely masked hopefully by the much louder gutiar signal, but noise all the same! Also, you can get this 'sucking' kind of noise when the noise gate triggers...kind of like the note trailing out then hiss then ~ suck...the NR closes to silence. As a note decays the signal level may well fall below the 'noise floor' and so you get this hail of 'hiss' or whatever and and then sudden silence. You can also get that on the attack as the gate needs to have a bit of time to trigger to the signal. It can't know till you play that it is time to 'open' and let the signal (and so the noise too) through. So...you ahve a delay on the attack and a cut off or hiss trail at the end and you ahve noise all the way through the signal while you are actually making sound...hmmm.... An noise gate that is a simple 1-10 thing is not a very finely adjusted kind of thing, a very basic control compared to what could be done. However, many if not all manufactures have things like this permanently on to some extent...also compression...because they know that without something, it would sound liike a wall of hiss just being plugged in ...so selecting zero may well not be nil. Now, you might think the 'effect' is worth it, or make it a part of your sound...like a phil collins reverse 'gated' snare so popular in it's day. Nothing wrong with that, I've many effects though I rarely use them. If you play in a bnad, perhaps the band or other stuff will comver the noise (in which case, why bother gating the noise out ~ go punk!) ...there are even some people that insist that the SC noise of a strat is a part of it's 'sound' which is fair enough too. ... So...for me...the reason in recent years I've gone more 'clean' and pay a lot of attention to things like 'noiseless pickups' and all that I might drivel on about or care about is that dynamics matter to me. That means I want 'silence' where there is silence and everything in between. As a player, I want to have control of the dynamics ( the loud and soft and silence) and I want the gutiar to sound as intended and not mixed with a fair amount of 'white noise'. Generally too, I don't want it hyped up to a 'square wave' and boosing all the harmonics regardless of what I play either. With that approach then, I don't want noise in the signal as far as possible, I want things to react as soon as I play and as loud as I choose to or not, and I want to let notes naturally trail away...in short I want to be able to control the shape and sound of a note and of the silences in between. If not, then a lot of things mean very little as far as the mojo and the modding that many crave as all teh subtlties start to disappear. Musically too, distortions and the like create a lot of intermodulation when you play more than one note at once...so with distortion you can play wide intervals like octaves and fifths but thirds just turn to mush. Well, taht is a very big restriction. So, you are effectively limiting what the gutiar can play to the most basic of 'horn sections' which in a lot of music, that is exactly the musical function of the 'big distored gutiar' sound if you think about it. However, even a good horn section in jazz say, while having a more 'squae wave' type sound, can play closer intervals being separate instruments and control for intonation and intermodulation (beating, etc) and so play more complex things...not just 'power chords' of fifths and roots. Not that there is anything wrong with that either. I've always found that I've had to cover more than one guitar or instrument part when playing (recordings alone tend to have layers and layers of gutiar tracks). Most of my playing is done 'solo' you know, there is no 'band' and it is less about making a lot of noise now as it is about the 'detail' in things. Not everyone listens to detail, so perhaps it does not matter, but as I play for myself then, I've got a right to be as pedantic as I like LOL! S0, when I said that it is because NR has to open (which means that it has to react after there is signal) will let all the noise through as ever behind your sound (so, it is noisy anyway) and then at some point it will 'close' when the signal to noise reachers a threashold decided from a very basic 1-10 setting...plus...there may well be NR as a global effect, just to make the effect box quiet regardless! My 'solution' if you will is to aim for quiet if not completely 'silent' noiseless gutiar. Many times I've had a guitar on a stand for ages at a very loud volume and yet, not even know it is on nor there be any signal for the thing to feedback on itself (though to be fair, it is loud but clean generally). If you look back or listen to 'isolated tracks' of classic rock too, youmight be surprised at how little 'distortion' and more 'crunch' there is or how a player can control not only the 'dynamics' but allow the amp ton naturally break up with teh dynamics of playing or the volume control of the guitar. This is also why I am not keen on over powered pups. They don't thave the 'clarity' and the means to generate more signal (more wire, thinner wire, more magetisim)_will all affect the frequency trange more into the midrange and so 'muddier' side. The pups act like filters always, the more high end one takes off the less of the choaracter of the harmonic mix it can reproduce. If the pup is powerful all the time, it will overload the amp. But then, this efect only really works with things like valve amps...more effects and SS amps and such do not like the inputs being overloaded. many effects inputs have compressors or limiting sections to make sure this does not happen. Well, if you've made your guitar so that it will overload anything...the more this effect will be triggered, or at least the less you can avoid overloading the input ofr effect by playing 'louder'... ok, ther eis a very early morning thought on such things. If one is going to be so 'fussy' to make a multi page discussion on things like pickups then, you might well be interested in the finer details of the sound you are making. You seem to be evolving in that direction and seeing that even cheaper SC pups that have a lower output are picking up a wider frequency range and harmonic detail...but you are also finding you are having to wind up the NR. Now, imagine tha tthey were in fact 'silent'! Not only that, when you do add effects, you are not adding effect noise to guitar noise as well as it's signal...so that is a double win!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2013 1:21:31 GMT -5
i dont think people today design noise suppressors by implementing Fourier transforms or anything of the analog signal processing maths of the pre-90s. Today, the designer will simply detect noise-hum by its footprint, engaging techniques similar to speech recognition, pattern matching, image comparison. Programs for mobile phones like Shazam, soundhound, etc... work this way. I have managed to make one of them recognize my singing of "War Pigs". So, you can have pretty much a very decent result even with noisy pups. Also, i kind of disagree on the "all guitars sound the same with those digital effects boxes". I see huge difference with my guitars at least. Especially in this partsacaster build, i can almost hear the tone of the SC even distorted. And the cut/spark (and low output) of SC make all that difference. But in the end of course, yes, one can sound good with any combination. Even my daughter's short scale electric guitar (80 euros) does not sound bad. But there is indeed a drawback to SC noisy low output pups. : Harmonics. Long lasting Harmonics heard 3-5 seconds after the note is played. Not artificial/natural/etc... but those who are just part of the sound and are sensed e.g. after 3-5 seconds after the note is played. At least in my guitars, the HB equipped ones seem to deliver those better than SC ones. e.g. G on 8th fret B-string. It seems that as you said, there is a race between the noise and the signal. And after 3-4 seconds the noise starts to gain ground. So sustain suffers because of the noise. Noiseless SC, is the next step Thanx for that advice!
|
|