Moving on From My Pickup Thread...

I find this thread interesting...and I believe some of my recent experiences will allow me to respond intelligently.

Back in the 1980's, I had this big, killer tone from my DT555. After it was stolen in 1989, I never, ever felt like I had the same tone.

Here is what I did not know at that time - The DT555 was a 24.7" scale and the Ibanez V2 pickups were 16.2k ohms.

Somehow, I just never figured this out.

28 years later, I find myself discovering new things - like why I prefer the 24.7" scale - and then I think about guitarists that I admired for their tone - Doug Aldrich, Rudold Schenker & Matthias Jabs - and realize that they all use pickups with very high ohms ratings - Doug Aldrich's Suhr Signature Set is 17k ohms and Rudolf & Matthias have used Dommenget Musclebuckers - a full 20k ohms - in their guitars since around the time of their 'Lovedrivet' recordings - the first album which Jabs played upon.

In fact, both Schenker and Jabs have stated that Boris Dommenfet was ghost building Gibson's for them and providing custom pickups since the late 1970's.

So now, at 51, I am going back to what I was doing in 1984.

I think the pickups have much more to do with how an amp sounds than wood, or aluminum tailpieces.... :)

DT555 Pickups.jpg
 
Last edited:
RVA said:
I own every type of tone wood you would want to play in almost every combo. Few have agreed to take the tonewood challenge, none have succeeded. Hell, a few weeks ago we did a blind Goldtop P90 LP v. Standard Strat test. No one guessed right. I am reminded of those wise words "Just shut up and play the guitar!"
Click to expand...

Loudly....
 
I love the ebony fretboard on my Gibson SG Special. I chose it over a black SG Standard with rosewood FB. Ebony fretboards are awesome and I'm just in love with mine. Ebony FB's are just the best...period!


;>)/
 
BlackSG91 said:
I love the ebony fretboard on my Gibson SG Special. I chose it over a black SG Standard with rosewood FB. Ebony fretboards are awesome and I'm just in love with mine. Ebony FB's are just the best...period!


;>)/
Click to expand...
Well aren't you just the cutest!!
 
RVA said:
Agreed. It is my favorite fretboard woods in terms of feel and on some guitars for looks. However, it lacks the interesting grain the rosewood can have. However, I think ebony wood is generally died dark, so it does not have to be so uniforly dark

http://www.stewmac.com/Materials_an...Tints_and_Stains/Black_Fingerboard_Stain.html
Click to expand...

That's true...ebony is died black but it is a closed cell wood like maple. Rosewood is open wood and I don't mind it at all. I have an American standard Strat (1998) with a rosewood FB that I ebonized with ebony wood stain. I stained it a few times overnight and it looks and feels fabulous. I don't why Fender doesn't make ebony fretboards on their guitars?


;>)/
 
I am in the process of having a replica built....I bought mine new in 1984 for $659.00 and today, they go between $1,500 and $3,000...
 
Like some have already pointed out here, I believe a good setup is imperative if a guitar is to produce good sounds. However, I believe the single most important component is the pickup. If the guitar is well set up, the pickup can shine. Now, naturally, the other electronics are important as well. Whether you use a .22 or .47 or whatever value will give you different results, bad pots will affect the sound, crap soldering and shielding can affect the guitar. But given that you use quality components, I think the pickup is by far the most important part.

As for wood, I think RVA summed it up nicely. It might have something to say theoretically, but in real life it is completely negligible in an electric.
 
As others have said, I think the pickups are the most important contributor to sound. The other electronics are important, but they affect how the electrical signal is "seen" by the rest of the system; they can't make the pickups do something they aren't capable of doing.

Of course, as others have pointed out, there are many factors that all play a synergistic role, including setup.

But, if I had to put my finger on one single piece that affects tone more than anything, I have to say the pickups.
 
Ummm I have long heard that tone was in the player's fingers.

Rory, Malmsteen, Schenker, West, Herndon... if any of them had ANY of my guitars, they will have the tone of themselves, NOT somehow sound like ME.

Another factor is how much tone and sound we hear is from Recording studio influences vs our exact response to hearing their performances live and thus the sound as heard by the man at the sound board etc. I am sorry I add fuel to this debate, but I can't help add my input to put as complete a spin on the debate as possible.

I can attest to this experience from my own unprofessional ears too. One of my most enjoyed bands both on album and live is RUSH. However, in my last couple experiences seeing them live, I saw them in an outdoor venue called Nissan Pavillion/Jiffy Lube Live in Bristow Virginia, and then also at the Baltimore Arena indoors. Both myself and my blind friend who has heightened sensitivity of hearing, reacted the same at Nissan. We feel this venue just plain sucks for acoustics. When we saw RUSH, it seems as if we were losing our hearing and the MIX sucked. The sound was muddy to the point where Alex, Geddy and Neil's notes sound very OFF considering I am sure their sound guy has many years of experience making them sound good.

Contrast that to the indoor venue. No muddy at all.
Another thing can affect how we sound to ourselves, is Ourself. I mean like an audience hears a peformer way different at a distance than the player hears coming from his amps or PA.
Just food for thought.
 
chilipeppermaniac said:
Ummm I have long heard that tone was in the player's fingers.

Rory, Malmsteen, Schenker, West, Herndon... if any of them had ANY of my guitars, they will have the tone of themselves, NOT somehow sound like ME.

Another factor is how much tone and sound we hear is from Recording studio influences vs our exact response to hearing their performances live and thus the sound as heard by the man at the sound board etc. I am sorry I add fuel to this debate, but I can't help add my input to put as complete a spin on the debate as possible.

I can attest to this experience from my own unprofessional ears too. One of my most enjoyed bands both on album and live is RUSH. However, in my last couple experiences seeing them live, I saw them in an outdoor venue called Nissan Pavillion/Jiffy Lube Live in Bristow Virginia, and then also at the Baltimore Arena indoors. Both myself and my blind friend who has heightened sensitivity of hearing, reacted the same at Nissan. We feel this venue just plain sucks for acoustics. When we saw RUSH, it seems as if we were losing our hearing and the MIX sucked. The sound was muddy to the point where Alex, Geddy and Neil's notes sound very OFF considering I am sure their sound guy has many years of experience making them sound good.

Contrast that to the indoor venue. No muddy at all.
Another thing can affect how we sound to ourselves, is Ourself. I mean like an audience hears a peformer way different at a distance than the player hears coming from his amps or PA.
Just food for thought.
Click to expand...

A great point hidden here...one of my biggest struggles is to capture what my ear hears on a recording. I-Pad videos don't count here...I mean on a bona fide studio recording.

I've had to put mic's in cardboard boxes, lace them under the amp's carry handle and let them dangle against the grill cloth, and everything else you can imagine, just to get the same tone my ears hear onto the recording.

Maybe it's my ears that are the problem here???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top