an emulation circuit?

[dunkelfalke]

Hello forum

somehow a crazy idea comes to me every night before I can finally fall asleep.

I know about cabinet simulators and how they work (more or less). I also know that active pickups like EMG SA and so on have got a quite linear, nearly HiFi output. So I am thinking about a circuit with, say, 5 EQ presets which emulate the sound of well known pickups, thus creating a poor man's version of Line6 Variax.

The idea seems so obvious that I cannot believe nobody has done it yet.

[JohnH]

Do you mean like a 5-band graphic equalizer?

You could try that on your PC, by recording a piece of playing as a .wav file. Then open up windows media player and play with the built in graphic EQ. Easy to try - I dont know hoe effective it would be.

With normal pickups, I think the two most significant sound shaping characteristics are:
1. Where the coils are placed/how many are active - no simple analogue way to mimic that
2. The electrical characteristics of resistance, inductance and capacitance, which lead to a frequency response for the system. This is generally level up to a certain frequency, then a bit of a peak followed by a sharp fall

After that are all the many more subtle characteristics of magnet type, pole placement, body characteristics, mojo and voodoo magic etc.

My point here, relative to electrical characteristics, is that if you can shift that resonant peak, you get a strong change of voicing. Ive been playing with active buffers to cut out the guitar lead capacitance. Suddenly my series Hbs were sounding almost bright as a single coil. Then I started adding capacitance before the buffer, and the voice came right down, like a smooth and mellow jazz sound. It is similar to 'varitone' tone controls, where a series of caps are switched in.

John

[dunkelfalke]

I know what you mean but it surely won't work with active PUs.

What I am thinking about is a bit different. Imagine you've got pickups with a more or less linear sound output over the whole spectrum. And after the guitar you've got 5 EQ stomp boxes, each with a different preset, for example one is with a bit reduced heights, but with a nice midrange boost (like your typical humbucker), another one with midrange cut, a bit bass boost and a lot of height boost (for the stratish sound) and so on and so on.

And when you play you just chose which stompbox to use for achieving your sound. That is what I have in mind, an active EQ circuit inside the guitar, with a couple of typical presets which you can change by turning the second tone knob

[sumgai]

dunkelfalke,

What you posit is pretty much what John called the 'varitone' circuit, as found in Gibson's EB3, ES345/355, LP Recording, etc. But all those were passive, so they were limited in how much effect they had.

Now an active filter system, that's got possibilities. Do you perchance have any electronics training? Where we go from here (what advice I offer) will depend on your level of comfort with things that have moving electrons and stuff. Hint: think "switched capacitor" opamp circuitry.


sumgai

[dunkelfalke]

sorry, zero training. i can solder very simple things but i don't have the understanding

[CheshireCat]

You don't need that much training or experience. If you research it, it can be built for you.

Specifically, I'm doing the same thing, with an octave divider and other things, and having it done in an SMT format, which stands for Surface Mount Technology. That's the technology that allows you to miniturize circuitry so that you can fit it in a guitar. In some cases, it can be a reduction factor of 10-fold. That's what EMG uses.

Well, the way you can have that done is thru Pad2Pad.com. You download their software, design your circuit, send the file to them, and for a relatively nominal fee (compared to what it would cost to bid this out), you can get exactly what you want. That's what I'm doing with the octave divider and a bunch of ther circuits. In fact, Craig Anderton has an EQ you might be able to use for this, and you can simply make up several preset versions of all this.

Also, I don't know a great deal about electronics either, at least on this level, so I'm using this opportunity to educate myself. I definitely know how to connect the dots, which is how I was able to come this far. Now I get to learn more about the dots themselves.

You can do the same.

Incidentally, you might look at doing this with piezo. Also, see about experiementing with some of EMG's circuits to this effect. That would be educational.

Chesh

[sumgai]

dunklefalke,

What Chesh says is good advice. Pad2Pad has a pretty good reputation for low prices, quick turnaround, and high quality workmanship. In fact, you could buy several boards and sell the ones you don't use to other musicians. If you charge them just a little more than you paid, you'll effectively get your board for free, or nearly so!

If you go this route, and decide to integrate several simple combinations of resistor/capacitor values with a switch, we'll be here to help when you need it. Besides, this will be lot quicker than if I take you an guided tour through Electro-Land in order to design a custom circuit! ;D


sumgai

[sumgai]

CheshireCat,

......
Incidentally, you might look at doing this with piezo.

Chesh

Adding a single piezo pickup would be OK, but it would entail an additional cost in time, effort and materials in order to match the impedance, balance the tone, filter out the sonic improprieties, etc. And if you were thinking of making that a hex piezo pickup (Roland-ready guitar, anyone?), you'll have to do all the above for each string, then balance the individual string volume levels, and cap it all by adding a summing amplifier to the circuit. Whew!

But having done this very thing not just once, but several times, (I am a confirmed Roland gear user), I have to ask you, what would this do to the tone? It's my experience that most piezo pickups bring out a near-acoustic guitar tonal quality. It is neat, no doubt about it, but will it add good tonality to the mix with the mag pickups? That's a question I'd like to see answered before we send dunklefalke on such a quest. Got any references we can look at, or any mp3's posted somewhere we can listen to?


sumgai

[CheshireCat]

sumgai said:

CheshireCat,

......
Incidentally, you might look at doing this with piezo.

Chesh

Adding a single piezo pickup would be OK, but it would entail an additional cost in time, effort and materials in order to match the impedance, balance the tone, filter out the sonic improprieties, etc. And if you were thinking of making that a hex piezo pickup (Roland-ready guitar, anyone?), you'll have to do all the above for each string, then balance the individual string volume levels, and cap it all by adding a summing amplifier to the circuit. Whew!

But having done this very thing not just once, but several times, (I am a confirmed Roland gear user), I have to ask you, what would this do to the tone? It's my experience that most piezo pickups bring out a near-acoustic guitar tonal quality. It is neat, no doubt about it, but will it add good tonality to the mix with the mag pickups? That's a question I'd like to see answered before we send dunklefalke on such a quest. Got any references we can look at, or any mp3's posted somewhere we can listen to?

sumgai

First, welcome to the forum. Second, interesting info on piezo. Third, what samples? What are you referring to?

[UnklMickey]

hi Sumgai,

you joined up, and started giving advice, rather than asking for help.
so, i guess nobody noticed you were new to the forum.



so:


WELCOME ABOARD!



most of your advice and opinions seem reasonable.

but i'm gonna take issue with this one:

sumgai said:

... In fact, you could buy several boards and sell the ones you don't use to other musicians. If you charge them just a little more than you paid, you'll effectively get your board for free, or nearly so!...

IMHO, you're being too conservative.

anyone who would work-up a circuit, do the layout, buy maybe a dozen boards, (build and test at least one), keep say, two, should figure things out so the sales of the remaining 10 would at least cover the boards AND the cost of the components to fill his two.

when you amortize the the costs, over the remaining 10, it would still mean that the customers get a tested design, didn't have to lift a (brain)finger, and the cost is about the same as buying a singleton.

heck, even if it was MORE than a singleton price, since there was no effort involved other than opening up the wallet, they should consider that a bargain!

assemble them, and sell them complete? well, that effort should equal at least one kept for one sold.

the guy who does the work gets his for free and the guys who buy the product, still get a reasonable price, and have the work already done. everybody wins.


unk





EDIT: i see Chesh posted while i was writing this one, but i'll leave that welcome in anyway.

since they were late in coming ya get to keep both.

[CheshireCat]

unklmickey said:

i'm gonna take issue with this one:

sumgai said:

... In fact, you could buy several boards and sell the ones you don't use to other musicians. If you charge them just a little more than you paid, you'll effectively get your board for free, or nearly so!...

IMHO, you're being too conservative.

anyone who would work-up a circuit, do the layout, buy maybe a dozen boards, (build and test at least one), keep say, two, should figure things out so the sales of the remaining 10 would at least cover the boards AND the cost of the components to fill his two.

when you amortize the the costs, over the remaining 10, it would still mean that the customers get a tested design, didn't have to lift a (brain)finger, and the cost is about the same as buying a singleton.

heck, even if it was MORE than a singleton price, since there was no effort involved other than opening up the wallet, they should consider that a bargain!

assemble them, and sell them complete? well, that effort should equal at least one kept for one sold.

the guy who does the work gets his for free and the guys who buy the product, still get a reasonable price, and have the work already done. everybody wins.

unk

Unk, Sumgai was concurring with what I was talking about with pad2pad.com, where you can design a circuit board using surface mount technology, and then have them make it for you. Dunkle wouldn't actually be building the board himself, but rather ordering one custom made for himself.

SG's idea was to order enough to get a better rate per unit, and then sell the rest off, breaking even and effectively getting his unit for free.

Of course, that would involve a lot of work and a lot of presales in order to make it feasible. Still, if you've got some friends who would be interested in this, it's worth a shot.

One advantage of SMT, however, is that you can get as big and as involved as you like, and then shrink things down to a tenth of it's size, assuming simple caps, resistors, and basic op-amp IC's and what not. Of course, anything more exotic than that and the teeny-tiny parts get a little harder to come by, but, still, it's workable.

Not only that, but you can go up to 22 layers thick.

That being the case, Dunkle can experiement with regular, full sized components on breadboards until he has something he likes, and then start scaling things down.

That's what I'll be doing.

Chesh

[UnklMickey]

cheshirecat said:

...Unk, Sumgai was concurring with what I was talking about with pad2pad.com, where you can design a circuit board using surface mount technology, and then have them make it for you. Dunkle wouldn't actually be building the board himself, but rather ordering one custom made for himself....

yes Chesh, i was quite aware of that.

my point was in reference to the up-front work of designing the circuit and the work of doing the layout.

that takes thought and time. and that's worth something.

i'll reiterate:

IMHO, Sumgai's thoughts of setting the pricing on the boards so that Falke would just get one board "free, or nearly so" was too conservative. anyone unwilling to pay a couple of extra bucks for a tested design should do the work, and come up with their own.


P.S.

22 layers doesn't impress me.

this isn't a microprocessor board we're talking about here.

anyone who needs more than 2 layers to do an audio board needs to go back to school.


unk

[CheshireCat]

unklmickey said:

cheshirecat said:

...Unk, Sumgai was concurring with what I was talking about with pad2pad.com, where you can design a circuit board using surface mount technology, and then have them make it for you. Dunkle wouldn't actually be building the board himself, but rather ordering one custom made for himself....

yes Chesh, i was quite aware of that.

Ah. That wasn't clear. Makes sense now.

unklmickey said:

my point was in reference to the up-front work of designing the circuit and the work of doing the layout.

that takes thought and time. and that's worth something.

Well, I would concur

i'll reiterate:

IMHO, Sumgai's thoughts of setting the pricing on the boards so that Falke would just get one board "free, or nearly so" was too conservative. anyone unwilling to pay a couple of extra bucks for a tested design should do the work, and come up with their own.

Well, I would concur. However, that said, I don't know how enterprising Dunkle is on this point.

I totally agree that that time and energy is worth something, but here's the deal. If he wants this, he gets to do the work anyway, regardless of if there are any later sales. His payment for his time and energy is actually having the thing that he wants to have happen, happen. That's his payoff . . . being able to execute this.

Also, he is trading his time and energy in teaching himself how to do this and doing the research in exchange for the opportunity costs implicit in having someone else do the work, which would probably cost him a significant amount more. Not to mention, unless he can work a really good deal, he's probably looking at the person he would contract to do the design work as owning the intellectual property by default. Something along the lines of the old saying that "possession being 9/10ths of the law". IOW, he would have to work out some contracts for intellectual property if he wanted to have a clear shot of marketing this. Then he would have to find a designer to collaborate with.

So, he could deal with all that, or do the research himself. Remember, he's in fact his first customer, and he's paying himself in money saved on doing it himself.

So, just being able to have this happen justifies his time.

Now, that said, if he does the research and gets a working prototype up and running, and the circuit is circuit-worthy, to coin a term, and it's a definite winner, then yeah, if he can interest other players that this is a worthwhile project, and raise the capital to have several made in SMT form so that it can comfortably fit into a guitar, then yeah, sure, he should definitely "charge what he's worth" in that respect. I would totally concur.

However, it would have to happen in that chronology for it to be doable in terms of getting presale "investors" because if he had a few extra boards made with the hopes of selling them, then he might be sitting on them for some time unless he moved them at just above cost. I'm not sure if SG was taking that approach, or if was suggesting a presale before committing to a production run of more than one board.

unklmickey said:

P.S.

22 layers doesn't impress me.

Well, for basic EQing, me neither. EMG-VMCs and BTCs are just 1.5sq", double-sided. That's not what I had in mind . . .

unklmickey said:

this isn't a microprocessor board we're talking about here.

anyone who needs more than 2 layers to do an audio board needs to go back to school.

. . . I have a lot of stuff to be made, and a very small cavity to put it all into - specifically at a point where a great deal of beveling and odd angles converge . . . the top surface is even on radical angle. Any space saving advantages are definitely useful. Extra layers and all the advantages they afford is definitely a plus.

Chesh

[dunkelfalke]

wow now that is a cool discussion
as i have absolutely no knowledge in electronics i sent this idea to a guy who already sells some self made guitar circuits on ebay. we'll see if he can prototype and build an implementation of my idea, which he actually finds quite fascinating. in the mean time i'll settle for the artec exp and artec qdd2

i am not a businessman, neither i want to be one. i am just a software developer and i like it that way ;D

[UnklMickey]

dunkelfalke said:

...i am not a businessman, neither i want to be one....

maybe not Falke. but if you have someone else doing the work to design the circuit and prototype your idea, you don't need to be a businessman. kudos pal. keep us posted.


unk

[ChrisK]

These digital guitar/PU simulators do indeed exist. I have one in the form of a Godin w/ RMC piezo saddles and a 13 pin interface. I use a VG-88 w/ it, which allows individual string level setting, retuning, etc. It also allows one to "build" guitar/PU models that can be saved. These include body types/resonances and PU types, location, and phase.

Also, the Line6 Variax guitar (had one for 2+ years), in conjunction with the Workbench (had one for ~1 year), allows one to "build" and save models in the Variax guitar itself.

The analog modeling concept (for sensors, of which a PU is just one case) is interesting, I've been working on it for some years now (30+). As a result, I'm not willing to give much advice on this specific topic (I have a significant IP restriction in my employment contract).

I took a look at doing a digital modeling guitar some years ago (I'm well versed in embedded DSP development), but figured that if I did most of the work myself, I was still looking at about a $300,000 to $500,000 investment (less marketing costs). At the time, I had at least that much invested in a start-up (that eventually was successfully acquired), so I didn't have the bandwidth to do much else. I think that Line6 probably spent at least 10 times this on the Variax development.

In essence, passive PU makers are doing this by material and winding practices. Active PU makers already do it internally.

The real issue is that the passive characteristics of passive PUs in passive volume/tone circuits are hard to fully mimic without adding or (gasp) subtracting "tone coloration". There is the inherent multi-pole filtering afoot in passive PU's which goes to multi-pole phase shift issues (while the least pole-efficient, Bessel rules in some cases). These effects are suBtle (heh heh). In theory, a transfer function is a transfer function, but there's more to it (we use incomplete models). There are ways/circuits that don't adversely affect passive PU's....

If you want to fool around w/ modeling SW, go to Linear Technologies web site and search for switcherCAD. Its internal engine is pSpice, which can model a lot of electronic circuits. The hard part will be building a realistic model of a passive PU! I would invest significant time in SW modeling before I started pouring "$ignificant cement".

If you do want to proceed w/ some developments, I've spent the last 30 years doing embedded controls companies, so I have a "fair" understanding of what the pitfalls are as well as the shortcuts.

Ask away.

[dunkelfalke]

www.sugardas.lt/~igoramps/article57.htm

not really what i had in mind, but still an interesting read (and yeah, russians are also reading guitarnuts)

[UnklMickey]

interesting? it certainly is.

i only looked it over briefly, but i like what i see so far.

controlling the gain by various bypasses on the source resistor of j1 is mostly standard stuff. but that "resonator" (j2) is a bit different from conventional thinking.

i don't speak russian, so i don't know what i'm missing on those links. but, the english ones are to some good authors: R.G. Keen, Lemme, and who's that? J. Atchley!

i guess russians are reading guitarnuts.

on that subject, more good news. i looked a John A's site yesterday. there's a new contest up AND he's re-established a link to GN2.



unk

[sumgai]

Ahem, aaahhheeemm.

May I interject here, please? Thank you.

Guys, thanks for the welcome. How can I beat two in a row, that's kind of you both.

Now that I've been outed, it behooves me to make a few introductory remarks. One, I'm an old fart. I mean, old enough to have to start fighting with Social Security this year, or maybe next, depending on a few other obstacles in my financial path. Two, I'm an EE, of long ago education, but still valid. I didn't ask for help when I got here because I pretty much have no questions on any topics addressed here on this forum. So why am I here?

Because Three, I play a Strat. Not well enough to earn any moolah, but it keeps me off the streets and out of trouble. Now, I do enjoy solving puzzles, and I've got a few diagrams to post, eventually. But for now, I'm anticipating that I will be coming around only about half as much as I'd like. (Seems like I'm always getting "volunteered" to perform some job from the mysterious Honey-Do list.) I'll try to make it more consistent as I give up other things like sleep, food, the fireplace, playing with the grandkids, you know, the usual stuff life throws at you when you're making other plans. ;D

I read pretty much everything before I started posting, and while I've got opinions about some of the things I read, I'm gonna leave 'em alone. Some were merely mis-guided, others were atrociously wrong, but nothing was harmful to equipment or one's life/health, so I'll not pick on them. That's my guideline - if it's dangerous to your fingers or your wallet, I'll pipe up, otherwise, have at it, there's no reason for me to get all anal about it, right?

OK, that's enough about me. Time to get down to the nitty-gritty. Unklmickey, CheshireCat was closer to my wavelength when he spoke to my 'business plan'. You can certainly consider my suggestion conservative, I've got no heartburn with that. But what you'd have dunklefalk attempt to sell is 9 (or more) boards that you call "a tested design", but that were made by a self-admitted raw rookie. Do you think that one should pay engineer rates for rookie work? If I were to design such a beast, then yeah, I'd expect to charge enough to cover 2 1/2 or 3 boards. But I'd also guarantee them to work as advertised. I don't think dunklefalk wants to be put in the position of making promises that may he may not be able to back up.

And enough of that, too. Hey, dunkie, have you d/l'ed that Pad2Pad software yet? Need any help translating it, oder can Sie auf English das programme richtig übersetzen?


sumgai

[dunkelfalke]

as i said, i don't have any knowledge for electronics and no time for learning them till late summer (lot of work at my job and final exams at the college) and i don't want to sell anything anyway (except of my ibanez talman guitar, but that's a different story)

so right now i am waiting for a guy who can take this idea, make it real and sell it himself

p.s. babelfish translation is baaaad

[sumgai]

dunklefalk,

p.s. babelfish translation is baaaad

Ach, für Gottes willen, Ich blick nicht durch! It was 2 o'clock in the AM when I posted that, and I'm not getting any help from an aching tooth. After 34 years, I no longer speak or write German, and it shows. Where I wrote 'can', I should have written 'kann'.

Entshuldigen Sie mich, Bitte!


sumgai

p.s. Und jetzt Ich benötige einen Zahnarzt, ab sofort!

[sumgai]

dunklefalk,

..... I know about cabinet simulators and how they work (more or less). I also know that active pickups like EMG SA and so on have got a quite linear, nearly HiFi output. So I am thinking about a circuit with, say, 5 EQ presets which emulate the sound of well known pickups, thus creating a poor man's version of Line6 Variax.

The idea seems so obvious that I cannot believe nobody has done it yet.

Well, now that I've re-read your initial post (above), I see where ChrisK was inspired to make his speech at the top of Page 2. He's correct, modeling a pickup's tonal characteristics is no kid's game. While I have a pretty fair understanding of magnetics, I wouldn't go so far as to say that the engineering world has a complete lock on modeling things magnetic, at least not where they interface with things electronic. (Meaning, a pickup). Chris is also correct in saying that our models for such things are incomplete.

(BTW, I also use a VG-88. Chris, are you by chance on any of the Yahoo groups regarding that fine machine?)

FWIW, I think that I'd be less than honest if I told you that "Sure, we'll just add some capacitors and resistors, maybe an inductor or two, and you're all set". That's less than half the picture, and a poor half at that. Obtaining a particular "emulation" would entail building a circuit that completely replaces the tonal characteristics of the on-board pickup, then switching it into, or out of, the guitar's output circuit. That circuit will necessarily be active, or else there will be significant signal losses before we even get to the volume control, let alone getting out of the guitar and down the cable.

I'm not saying it can't be done, but I do have to raise the cost issue here. R&D costs, manufacturing costs, etc., all the stuff that Chris mentioned..... it all adds up. Perhaps not a half a mil, but more than the average guitar player has sticking out of his back pocket. The big killer here will be the costs of R&D vis-a-vis modeling not just your current pickup, but all the ones you want to imitate/emulate. That work has been done by several companies, Roland being the most well known, but it won't be shared with the rest of us any time in this century. We'll have to do it all over again, and even then, the results are subject to what we call 'peer review' for correctness. It gets daunting, doesn't it?

I think you're gonna be better off looking for, and fooling around with, analog solutions to obtaining different sounds than what you now have at your disposal. D@mn sight cheaper, easier on the ol' noodle, and probably more fun anyways.


sumgai

[ChrisK]

sumgai,

Indeed welcome. I've only traveled to this site (repeatedly) since thinking IS the best way to travel. I love crossword/cross number (and all) puzzles, no clues please, just a word/function list.

As to the VG-88, I fooled w/ it when I bot it 2 years ago for about a month (w/ a MIM Nash Power Tele w/ the GK2T whatever PU). I then stuck it in my warehouse (left over from a start-up) and look at it occasionally.

I bot a Godin 13 pin gitar about a year ago, but never have hooked it up to the VG-88.


I very rarely actually DO (develop) anything lately. I did a lot of things (start-ups) while an EE and businessman, but only consult internally now. I'm no longer allowed to draw schematics, layout PCB's, build prototypes, etc. at work. I spend the vast majority of my time thinking about things to think about, and then thinking about them (Research Fellow).

R&D are orthogonal to each other (if you don't know the difference, you don't know the difference). This doesn't mean that I know everything (hopefully something), only that I realize that I know very little. I do know that there's a wee bit of research involved here.


If it were my nickel, I could/would do it cheap. Something like this would cost around $25K to $50K including some meager marketing. If it's someone else’s nickel (no part/equity ownership), I bill at $200 an hour long-term. The last start-up we did had 15 people, 10 of which were engineers (3 HW, 7 SW, a normal ratio). Our "burn rate" was around $2 million a year. A Senior or Principal Engineer (someone who has made most of the small mistakes already) runs around $100K per year and up, "unburdened".


My point is that "dreams are expensive" if you can't implement them yourself.


What is being discussed is a hardware analog circuit (cement, dams, foundations) as opposed to software (Velcro). You better know most everything upfront. (It helps if you build the forms before pouring the cement.)

We just had a PCB (4 layer 2.5" by 6") layout done by a design house. We did the schematic in PADS, built all of the part macros and the BOM, and did the initial placement. The layout alone was $3,800. Speaking of models, the model for a design house is that of a taxi driver or a h@@ker. There are no discounts, or free optimizations that are in your best interests.

Like most things technical, if this was easy, it'd be available "off the shelf."

The design/development (drilling the well) is fairly linear and is the easy part.

The research (knowing where to drill the well) isn't. I've been doing hardware design for about 40 years (starting w/ tubes and early transistors in my father's lab). I've done MIRV tracking systems. (really) high energy directed beam weapons, and 25 years of embedded product development, and I still don't know how to do this easily, and daily struggle w/ sensor models.

And, while the Variax is very neat and powerful, it still ain’t “quite right” (incomplete models) unlike the real gear.


But, if it's low voltage.........


So sumgai, when you drink, do you prefer sake, or gaigin?

(It's like a puzzle or something.)

[JohnH]

dunkelfalke said:

www.sugardas.lt/~igoramps/article57.htm

That SAGE circuit has some great ideas. The tone control acts as a variable capacitor, like being able to dial from 0.001 to 0.01 cap value, but controlled by a pot. Its cool. I rigged up a version of it on pSpice using my buffer circuit from my LPmax. it is going to work - I need to test this on a breadboard.

Basically I will have two simple buffers, each with a 1M pot. both getting input from the pickups One will drive the output as a normal buffer. The other will have a 0.01cap between its output and its input, which is the pups This second buffer will act as the tone control. Can't wait to try it. The simulations looks very interesting

John
.

[UnklMickey]

chrisk said:

...I still gots a box of CK722's!...

maybe some CK703's, 2N110s, some Galena, and Cat's Whiskers too?

[dunkelfalke]

well, i bought that artec exp and let me say you, the sound is celestial
this is the perfect circuit for all those folks who like the low noise of active PUs but sometimes wish different sounds

and now my guitar is not only active, it is hyper-active ;D

[sumgai]

dunklefalk (1st post):

The idea seems so obvious that I cannot believe nobody has done it yet.

ChrisK (22nd response):

Like most things technical, if this was easy, it'd be available "off the shelf."

We sure have jolted a lot of little electrons to get from Point A to Point B haven't we? ;D


sumgai