A lot of the times, we buy things based on reviews. That includes not only guitars, but also cars, kitchenware, clothings, shoes, etc. Reviews are a helpful way to get an idea of how popular a product is, which most of the time means that thing is good enough for most people. Note: most. A product might work well for a great portion of the consumer, but that doesn't mean that you need it. That doesn't mean it'll work equally well for your application. I run into a lot of customers like this, buying loads of gear and then realise in only a matter of months that they don't need these things at all, or they're not suitable for their applications. This entry serves as both a reminder and a guide to all potential buyers out there, to think it through the right way, before you pull the trigger on any gear.
First off, what makes you not satisfied with your current rig? Many many times, people tell me they need a certain piece of gear, whether it be a Tube Screamer, a Boss distortion pedal, a new set of pickup, or even a new amp. I would almost always reply, "Well, what's making you not satisfied with your current sound?" Most customers can't name a proper or plausible reason for that possible purchase. If you can't put a finger on what you don't like about your tone/rig, you need to tuck that cash back into your wallet, go back home. And I'm not even joking! Sit in front of the rig, twiddle around with your settings, twist a few knobs. Answer yourself honestly, do you really need that piece of gear? Or was it that glowing review you read/heard/watched earlier made you want to own that piece of gear?
Lets move on to the main issue that I have put forward. Troubleshooting. Or in other words, what is the problem that you wish to rectify (no Mesa/Boogie pun intended) in your sound? Is the bass too flubby? Is the treble too piercing? Is the sound too dry? Not enough gain in the drive channel? The are many factors that can cause your tone to be unpleasant, or at least not appealing to your ears. Pigeonholing the problems is a common mistake that many people have done, myself included. Thinking that a problem can be solved by a pedal or two, we've all been there. Changing pickups because they don't sound "heavy" enough, hmmm.... Starting from the wrong spots will dig ourselves deeper into frustration and confusion.
List out everything about your tone that you're not happy with. Go into deep details of what's bugging you. Then only, the problems can be identified and the ideal solutions found, by looking at the big picture. A great starting point would be to reduce signal length to only guitar-to-amp. When you go guitar-shopping, this is how you try your guitars, straight into the amp. That's how a guitar or amp sound can be heard and judged. If the guitar and the amp don't compliment each other well, they're not going to cut it. If the pickup doesn't pair well with the guitar, they're not going to cut it. If the pickup doesn't work for your applications, for instance, having a set of vintage single coils in a Strat, but your band plays 80's rock, they're not going to cut it. If the amp doesn't work well for your applications, for example, having a JCM800 onboard, but your band plays funk, that won't go well either.
Only when the tone foundations are rightfully matched, great tone is achieved. Once the pairing is sorted, you are now happy with Phase 1 of your rig. You can then decide, whether or not to add Phase 2, which means pedals, into the equation.
Pedals are useful tools for working musicians and hobbyists alike. But if the pedal is not serving it's purpose on the board, why is it there? A lot of the times, people have some amazing tube amplifiers, and they kick back the gain, use a pedal to bring it back up. Quoting Joe Bonamassa's words, that's like using these tube amps as power amps only. As cliched as it sounds, a tube amp only sounds great when cranked. If you can help it, get an amp with channel-switching that can be operated with a footswitch. If you're playing through single-channel amplifiers, play with the volume knob for cleans.
Or, get a 2nd amp that works well for cleans and use an ABY pedal to switch between or use both.
If all the above are not options that you can consider, whether it be portability or financial issues, get an amp that works great for clean tones. That's your soundbed. Get a preamp pedal like those made by AMT, Tech21, etc. and kick 'em in when you need your dirt. They'll still sound sufficiently great. Unless you're going for a fuzz pedal, I personally don't recommend any distortion pedals not voiced to be like an amp sound. Amp-type distortions retain that organic amp sound, whereas a pedal distortion would have a distinct "pedal" sound, that might or might not be pleasant. Some are tolerable to me, like the Marshall Shredmaster, the new Jackhammer, Pro Co Rat, Suhr Riot, since they're all still based on the distortion of some amps. But just my personal opinion, I'll never catch myself buying a Boss DS-1, MT-2, Digitech Grunge, Metal Muff, that kind of distortion pedal. They just have a distinct "pedal" edge to them that I don't like.
If your amp has an amazing overdriven sound, get a transparent-sounding boost/overdrive pedal instead. Things like BB Preamps or OCDs will shine in rigs like this. set your amp gain to slight breakup, so that you can control your gain by just controlling your strumming technique. Pick light to clean up, pick hard to saturate. Unless your band plays funk, you can use that for your clean sound, and then kick in the boost/overdrive for your dirty sound. This way you'll have a wide tonal palette to play with, with all shades of gain in between easily accessed just by hitting the strings harder or lighter. A very dynamic, toneful sound is the pinnacle of guitar-playing. If you're not into that kind of stuff, clearly you are no tone snob. Not saying that's a bad thing though, but of course, having a responsive tone is way better than a flat, inert tone.
My own setup/tone has always come from the simplest, no-frills rig that involves only one or no pedal at all. Not because pedals sound bad to me, but because amps sound great to me, especially when you're letting them do all their job. That is my ideal rig to me. Some people might need pedals, but hey, if it's necessary, in that the existence/absence of the pedal may make or break your rig, try before you buy. Try to nail or get close to "that" sound without that pedal first, then only make the purchase. Not purchasing doesn't mean you're saving money. It means you've made the right choices for your rig, and there is no need to add anything more to it at the moment. It's perfect for the time being. If you did buy a pedal and it has improved your tone, you've made the right choices for your rig by adding an essential ingredient to complete your rig. Simple, huh?
That's all for this post, folks!
Friday 24 June 2016
Wednesday 20 April 2016
REVIEW: PRS SE Custom 24
People might have gotten bored from hearing another good thing about PRS guitars. And it's sad but true. There is barely anything wrong with any PRS guitar, barring personal preferences. And this review is the same. Except I've owned and been using this guitar since the start of 2012. So I believe I'm a legitimate user to give a review and can chime in on the playability, reliability, long term issuesm etc. So here goes!
The guitar is a PRS SE Custom 24 from 2009. Let's make out the differences between the old pre-2012 SE Custom 24 and the newer post-2012 SE Custom 24.
1. Body. My '09 has a flat top, while the new post-2012 ones have bevelled tops. The body is made from the same mahogany + maple top combo. However, the proportions are different. While the thickness is almost the same on both, the '09 had an approximately 7mm thick maple top while the new one has a considerably thicker one, as one can judge from the bevel and the natural edge binding. It's almost twice the thickness of the old SE's maple top, which may result in a different tone.
2. Controls. My '09 has a master volume, master tone and a 3-way toggle switch. The post-2012 model has a 3-way blade switch and coil split on the tone control. It's a change made in conjunction with PRS's USA line, which has also swapped out the 3-way toggle switch in favour of a 5-way blade switch, which gives the same config as the 5-way rotary switch circuit from the '90's PRSes.
3. Inlays. All standard spec PRS guitars now come with the bird inlays, including the SE line, excluding some signature models. My '09 had the moon inlays, which looked pretty cool, but what I wanted back then was the birds. They did grow on mr eventually. The moon inlays were actually quite unique, as no one else did that, and most guitars had only the regular dots. I applaud PRS for taking this approach instead of rolling with the regular dots on all their SEs. Obviously, it made no difference tone-wise, but it was worth a mention as most people think of them as deal breakers.
Here's the lowdown on the basics...
The weight was medium-light. Slightly heavier than the SE Singlecut I had tried while deciding between these two. The Wide Thin neck profile is possibly the best profile I've ever had in my hands. Either that or the Wide Fat profile. These necks are fine, real fine. The size is just nice, with a perfect blend of thickness and shredability. Rhythm playing doesn't feel tiring, and lead playing is like surfing on the frets. The 43mm nut width is great for most playing style. The lower frets don't feel as cramped up as regular Fender/Gibson neck profiles for people with thick fingers. One downside is the thumb-over-top fretting might be hard for people doing that John Mayer-ish stuff due to the 43mm nut width.
The vibrato system (or tremolo) is a great concept because the bridge mounting screws all have an anchor point for the knife edge of the vintage-style 6 screw bridge. Although the bridge is not hardened and milled like on the USA bridge, they're not too shabby at all. In fact they're still one of the best vibrato bridge I've tried on any standard shop-wall display guitars. No sharp screw protrusions from the saddle, and also the saddles won't budge to the side when forced, due to the "tray" design that fits all saddles perfectly. Vibrato arm is a push-in, as according to Paul, the screw in types tend to break off inside the arm hole and one can never get the other end out without a huge hassle. Paul's design utilised a rubber/plastic sleeve that tightens with a turn on the grub screw located by the side. The arm can be positioned wherever you want it, as well as being easier to remove. I believe the biggest improvement Paul has ever done to guitars, is not the pickups, not the wood, not the tuners etc, but the vibrato bridge.
The stock pickups were PRS SE HFS Treble and SE Vintage Bass pickups, which were manufactured in Korea as well, by G&B Pickups Co. and I gotta say they do sound great. Somehow, G&B was able to sort of nail 80% of that PRS sound, and still have a very affordable price. The HFS Treble pickups sounds just like what the name implies, Hot, Fat and Screams. The bass frequency is somewhat less defined, while the mids are honky fat. Treble frequencies are bright and has a really fast pick response, present in ceramic magnet pickups. Distorted, they do sound like they'll cover most grounds, lots of classic 80's metal/90's rock grind going on, with clarity retained all the way. Sounds like they're in the same tonal ballpark as a Duncan JB, but with less power/grain and also emphasising a different frequency. The Vintage Bass is a surprise. The original USA Vintage Bass had Alnico II magnets and is bright and clear-sounding. Now I doubt the SE version has Alnico II magnets, but it does have an Alnico V edge to it. Deep thumpy bass, less prominent mids and a bright treble. Classic Alnico V sound, so I'm betting it's an Alnico V magnet inside. In fact, it's quite a lot closer to a vintage humbucker tone than most people would believe. Vintage PAFs were brighter than most people would admit (I mean, that's what the tone knobs are for, right?). The Vintage Bass is bright but rounder around the edges. Kind of like a more refined, modern version of the PAF. Amazing cleans, amazing blues tone when distorted, just amazing.
However... My '09 (well, you can call her Cherry...) had undergone many pickup changes. I was looking for different tones all the time. I have replaced them (and also replaced the replacements, a lot!), since my musical taste has been constantly evolving and broadening. I had installed Dimarzio D Activators, Seymour Duncan Custom 5 bridge, Wilkinson Hots, PRS Dragon II Treble(I loved this one the most!) The current set of pickups fitted are Kent Armstrong RagTop/Convertible P90s in line with my current direction... They are KA's take on the Gibson P94 pickups, and boy do they sound good. But, I'm not here to talk about aftermarket pickups, so on we move....
Stock SE tuners were fine, but my D string tuner went bad about a year into owning that guitar. They're made by Jin Ho, which is also another respectable Korean factory. The rest of the tuners work fine, still, but the D string tuner was getting pretty scratchy. No big deal actually, but I replaced the whole set with some Dixon tuners for instant relief of my OCD. I believe those are made in China, but they're really good quality and had served me well till this day.
The nut used is a friction-reducing variant, and drop testing it shows that it is made of a pretty bright-sounding material, which is different from regular ABS nuts. However, it seems the nut slots were cut precisely for up to gauge 9 strings only. I could not put in gauge 10 strings without any tuning issues while using the vibrato bridge. Any off-the-shelf Graphtech nut can fit strings up to gauge 11 without tuning issues, so I can't understand why PRS cuts the SE nuts for 9s only. That's really the only issue in this very good guitar.
Other great features include a very thick padded gigbag, which is a plus for guitars this price. For comparison, a Fender MIM Standard or Blacktop (which is discontinued as of 2015) costs about the same price, but no gigbag. I can't imagine pitting an MIM against a PRS SE for value-for-money.
The dual-action truss rod design is also a plus. It's way faster to show truss rod adjustment effects than vintage single-action truss rods. The neck responds immediately to any turning of the truss rod, unlike some single-action rods which might need a day to show the full effect of the adjustment.
Lastly, I believe the factory-fitted strings were pure nickel strings. That's the first thing I noticed after I got my first string change. The stock strings were still fresh when it was changed, and I can hear a brighter sound as well as having a very slightly different feel.
The verdict is that, the PRS SE Custom really did live up to people's expectations. Great guitar, great value, great tone, great gigbag as well! For this price, there's not much one can complain about, apart from maybe the nut. Otherwise, they're just plain great. Underdogs, in fact, since shoppers would more likely buy a Fender/Squier/Gibson/Epiphone, due to the fact that they're the go-to brands. But for those who has a clear and open mind, who wants nothing but great quality and sound, who wants the best of both worlds in playability and tone, these are what you might be looking for.
This is Bernard, signing out!
The guitar is a PRS SE Custom 24 from 2009. Let's make out the differences between the old pre-2012 SE Custom 24 and the newer post-2012 SE Custom 24.
1. Body. My '09 has a flat top, while the new post-2012 ones have bevelled tops. The body is made from the same mahogany + maple top combo. However, the proportions are different. While the thickness is almost the same on both, the '09 had an approximately 7mm thick maple top while the new one has a considerably thicker one, as one can judge from the bevel and the natural edge binding. It's almost twice the thickness of the old SE's maple top, which may result in a different tone.
2. Controls. My '09 has a master volume, master tone and a 3-way toggle switch. The post-2012 model has a 3-way blade switch and coil split on the tone control. It's a change made in conjunction with PRS's USA line, which has also swapped out the 3-way toggle switch in favour of a 5-way blade switch, which gives the same config as the 5-way rotary switch circuit from the '90's PRSes.
3. Inlays. All standard spec PRS guitars now come with the bird inlays, including the SE line, excluding some signature models. My '09 had the moon inlays, which looked pretty cool, but what I wanted back then was the birds. They did grow on mr eventually. The moon inlays were actually quite unique, as no one else did that, and most guitars had only the regular dots. I applaud PRS for taking this approach instead of rolling with the regular dots on all their SEs. Obviously, it made no difference tone-wise, but it was worth a mention as most people think of them as deal breakers.
Here's the lowdown on the basics...
The weight was medium-light. Slightly heavier than the SE Singlecut I had tried while deciding between these two. The Wide Thin neck profile is possibly the best profile I've ever had in my hands. Either that or the Wide Fat profile. These necks are fine, real fine. The size is just nice, with a perfect blend of thickness and shredability. Rhythm playing doesn't feel tiring, and lead playing is like surfing on the frets. The 43mm nut width is great for most playing style. The lower frets don't feel as cramped up as regular Fender/Gibson neck profiles for people with thick fingers. One downside is the thumb-over-top fretting might be hard for people doing that John Mayer-ish stuff due to the 43mm nut width.
The vibrato system (or tremolo) is a great concept because the bridge mounting screws all have an anchor point for the knife edge of the vintage-style 6 screw bridge. Although the bridge is not hardened and milled like on the USA bridge, they're not too shabby at all. In fact they're still one of the best vibrato bridge I've tried on any standard shop-wall display guitars. No sharp screw protrusions from the saddle, and also the saddles won't budge to the side when forced, due to the "tray" design that fits all saddles perfectly. Vibrato arm is a push-in, as according to Paul, the screw in types tend to break off inside the arm hole and one can never get the other end out without a huge hassle. Paul's design utilised a rubber/plastic sleeve that tightens with a turn on the grub screw located by the side. The arm can be positioned wherever you want it, as well as being easier to remove. I believe the biggest improvement Paul has ever done to guitars, is not the pickups, not the wood, not the tuners etc, but the vibrato bridge.
The stock pickups were PRS SE HFS Treble and SE Vintage Bass pickups, which were manufactured in Korea as well, by G&B Pickups Co. and I gotta say they do sound great. Somehow, G&B was able to sort of nail 80% of that PRS sound, and still have a very affordable price. The HFS Treble pickups sounds just like what the name implies, Hot, Fat and Screams. The bass frequency is somewhat less defined, while the mids are honky fat. Treble frequencies are bright and has a really fast pick response, present in ceramic magnet pickups. Distorted, they do sound like they'll cover most grounds, lots of classic 80's metal/90's rock grind going on, with clarity retained all the way. Sounds like they're in the same tonal ballpark as a Duncan JB, but with less power/grain and also emphasising a different frequency. The Vintage Bass is a surprise. The original USA Vintage Bass had Alnico II magnets and is bright and clear-sounding. Now I doubt the SE version has Alnico II magnets, but it does have an Alnico V edge to it. Deep thumpy bass, less prominent mids and a bright treble. Classic Alnico V sound, so I'm betting it's an Alnico V magnet inside. In fact, it's quite a lot closer to a vintage humbucker tone than most people would believe. Vintage PAFs were brighter than most people would admit (I mean, that's what the tone knobs are for, right?). The Vintage Bass is bright but rounder around the edges. Kind of like a more refined, modern version of the PAF. Amazing cleans, amazing blues tone when distorted, just amazing.
However... My '09 (well, you can call her Cherry...) had undergone many pickup changes. I was looking for different tones all the time. I have replaced them (and also replaced the replacements, a lot!), since my musical taste has been constantly evolving and broadening. I had installed Dimarzio D Activators, Seymour Duncan Custom 5 bridge, Wilkinson Hots, PRS Dragon II Treble(I loved this one the most!) The current set of pickups fitted are Kent Armstrong RagTop/Convertible P90s in line with my current direction... They are KA's take on the Gibson P94 pickups, and boy do they sound good. But, I'm not here to talk about aftermarket pickups, so on we move....
Stock SE tuners were fine, but my D string tuner went bad about a year into owning that guitar. They're made by Jin Ho, which is also another respectable Korean factory. The rest of the tuners work fine, still, but the D string tuner was getting pretty scratchy. No big deal actually, but I replaced the whole set with some Dixon tuners for instant relief of my OCD. I believe those are made in China, but they're really good quality and had served me well till this day.
The nut used is a friction-reducing variant, and drop testing it shows that it is made of a pretty bright-sounding material, which is different from regular ABS nuts. However, it seems the nut slots were cut precisely for up to gauge 9 strings only. I could not put in gauge 10 strings without any tuning issues while using the vibrato bridge. Any off-the-shelf Graphtech nut can fit strings up to gauge 11 without tuning issues, so I can't understand why PRS cuts the SE nuts for 9s only. That's really the only issue in this very good guitar.
Other great features include a very thick padded gigbag, which is a plus for guitars this price. For comparison, a Fender MIM Standard or Blacktop (which is discontinued as of 2015) costs about the same price, but no gigbag. I can't imagine pitting an MIM against a PRS SE for value-for-money.
The dual-action truss rod design is also a plus. It's way faster to show truss rod adjustment effects than vintage single-action truss rods. The neck responds immediately to any turning of the truss rod, unlike some single-action rods which might need a day to show the full effect of the adjustment.
Lastly, I believe the factory-fitted strings were pure nickel strings. That's the first thing I noticed after I got my first string change. The stock strings were still fresh when it was changed, and I can hear a brighter sound as well as having a very slightly different feel.
The verdict is that, the PRS SE Custom really did live up to people's expectations. Great guitar, great value, great tone, great gigbag as well! For this price, there's not much one can complain about, apart from maybe the nut. Otherwise, they're just plain great. Underdogs, in fact, since shoppers would more likely buy a Fender/Squier/Gibson/Epiphone, due to the fact that they're the go-to brands. But for those who has a clear and open mind, who wants nothing but great quality and sound, who wants the best of both worlds in playability and tone, these are what you might be looking for.
This is Bernard, signing out!
Wednesday 24 February 2016
Behold! The Handwound Pickups!
The thing with musicians (or rather a niche group called tone snobs, myself included...) is that, we love details. We love the very little details of pickups, hardware, wood and that drives people mad. But for us, it's a pleasure seeking the right tone. We strive hard to get everything "right". And that's why handwound pickups matter a lot to us.
Now to get this straight, handwound pickups are not to be confused with hand-fed machine wound. Those are a different story. Handwound pickups are done, as it's name suggests, by hand. The coil wires are wound on the coils by hand. This is why handwound pickups are special. The tension of every coil wound around the bobbin is pulled at inconsistent tension, as well as the scattered positioning of the coils. Machine wound pickups are consistent in tension as well as having a very orderly winding pattern of the coils.
Okay let's face it, they're both the same materials and same method used, simply copper coil windings on a fibre bobbin. So how is it possible that there's a difference tonally? It's due to the coils having inconsistent tension as well as the scattered winding pattern that causes a really cool electrical phenomena (read "Mojo" y'all tone snobs!) to occur. The increased space or distance between the windings lowers the distributed capacitance, as in Seymour Duncan's words.
"When you scatter wind a pickup, you’re not placing the wire as close to itself on each layer as you would with a machine. The effect is to create more air space in the coil. This lowers the distributed capacitance. The best way to think of distributed capacitance is like a little tone control in the pickup. When the capacitance is lowered, the result is that more treble will come through and the resonant peak of the pickup will increase slightly. "
- Seymour Duncan
My first experience with handwound pickups are with Alexander Pribora pickups. The funny thing with most run-of-the-mill Fender pickups is that, they're really good pickups. They do the job covering single coil grounds, and the quality is consistent. But once you hear how the handwound pickups sound, you'd immediately notice the flaws in standard pickups.
Here's what I heard after comparing the handwound pickups 2 times with Fender pickups, one is a Tele, the other one is a Strat. The guitars were played clean only, paired with a flat-EQ-ed Fender Princeton amp, which has amazing warm cleans by the way. Pickups were set the same height, which is the bass side approximately 1mm above the pickguard, and the treble side set to 2mm.
- I was playing with the neck pickups first. The mids and treble on the handwound pickups were so "relaxed", but not "slacking off". Very smooth and sweet. Upon going back to the Fender pickups (namely, the CS Fat 50s in the Strat and American Standard Tele), I was greeted with nothing but harshness. The harshness could be attributed to single coils, I understand. But the Fender pickups weren't even loud. They're just harsh.
- The expression range. The handwound pickups handle that very well, taking hard strums easily without going into the middy braaannnggg, while every light pick makes the most musical notes, so crisp and clear, yet solid. The Fender pickups were compressing every strum, even light strums, into just braaannnggg. Picking was fine, I understand why most people like that glassiness. SRV and Hendrix were big advocates of that tone, but it was too much for me in a vintage Strat context.
- The all important inbetween positions. The American Standard Tele did an amazing job on the middle position. The handwound pickups in my friend's Tele was bigger on the bass notes, rounder on the treble, totally different character, both respectable. The Strat though, was a hit on me. The American Standard Strat with Fat 50s sounded plain awful. Too much clang, there's only treble and no body at all. I'll be honest, any ceramic single coil guitar with a 5 way switch can nail that tone. I tried turning down the tone knob, it helped a little, but it felt like the treble was just too prominent in any other settings. Turning down the tone knob made the tone fatten-up in the mids, but that's not what those positions were about. The handwound pickups, on the other hand, was pure bliss. That scooped, vocal-sounding Robert Cray sound was there, without any resetting on the amp. It was the guitar, my fingers on the strings, and that's it. Effortless job. I'm done here.
I'll let the video do the talking....
Shoutout to Alexander Pribora Pickups for making amazing pickups!!
For any stage-performers, maybe the nuances and expression range doesn't matter so much. But do yourself a favour and give these pickups a try. You'll be surprised.... And thankful at the same time! Who doesn't like a great tone anyways?
This is Bernard, signing out for the night.
Thursday 21 January 2016
Tone Talks: Pickup Magnet Types and What Do They Do to Your Sound?
Basic knowledge here... The earliest widely used guitar pickups were the P90s. They are also known as the soapbars, due to their appearance resembling a bar of soap, especially cream-coloured ones. These pickups were structurally bigger than most single coils we see today. Under the covers hid a big coil usually wound to around 8k, 6 adjustable steel screw polepieces and two long magnets powering it.
Leo had a different concept on his mind when he created the Telecaster single coils. Alnico magnet rods were used in place of steel polepieces, giving the pickups a voice which is more crisp and clear and "louder" in the treble frequencies, cementing both the pickup design and his name into the history of electric guitar. Now, there are many types of Alnico magnets. Starting from the weakest, the Alnico III, which did not actually have any cobalt content (but calling it Alni would have been weird), Alnico II, Alnico IV, Alnico V, and finally Alnico VIII. For some reason, the weakest Alnico magnet, Alnico 3 was chosen for the earliest Fender single coils. And they produce the sweetest Fender tones (in my opinion). Smooth in the midrange, not as thumpy as other magnet types and the sweetened treble makes it eardrum-friendly. I believe it was in '59 when they had revised the pickup design and switched to Alnico 5 rods in their pickups. During that period, the pickups were wound slightly hotter than the early 50's pickups to smooth out the excess treble. Leo was on a quest for the ultimate clean tone. A5 pickups had a distinctive mid scooped sound, due to the extended bass and treble response. A3 pickups were more balanced and had less ice-pick, which is important for clean tones in my opinion. Nonetheless, the A5 pickups were still being wound and they also hit the amps harder, resulting in the very popular glass-shattering "BRRAANGGGG" clean sound when paired to a Fender Blackface amp.
It's not hard for most trained ears to hear the difference between 2 identical pickups with different magnets. And this can be heard too in early Gibson PAFs, which are infamous for being very inconsistent in specs, yet each variation takes on different flavours that appeals to many. To examine the differences, let's start with the prototype PAFs made in the 1955. Seth Lover used Alnico IIs for the prototype humbuckers, and the design was the benchmark for Gibson's early tones. Read "benchmark", because although Gibson was supposed to use Alnico IIs only, they had somehow mixed in all types of Alnico magnets (in various sizes), presumably due to shortage of the perfect-sized 2.5" long A2s. It was '58 or '59 when they had slowly transitioned to using A5s, again resulting in a relatively more aggressive and brighter, scooped tone. The earlier benchmark A2 PAFs were sweet in the treble, fat and loose in the bass, which gives a very "gentle" clean sound, while the A5 PAFs were a lot clearer in a clean sound context, which was also the main aim for Gibson. In fact, all guitar and amp makers were aiming for the cleanest sound possible because country was the "in" thing back in their days. It wasn't until '61, that the pickup specs are standardised and only A5 magnets were used. Weirdly enough, some modern day pickup winders had utilised A4 magnets for the '61 inspired humbuckers, presumably learnt from their own experiences, that some '61 Les Pauls (they're SGs, I know) had A4 pickups.
Here's what I found out about each type of magnets through personal experiences and also loads of online reading....
Leo had a different concept on his mind when he created the Telecaster single coils. Alnico magnet rods were used in place of steel polepieces, giving the pickups a voice which is more crisp and clear and "louder" in the treble frequencies, cementing both the pickup design and his name into the history of electric guitar. Now, there are many types of Alnico magnets. Starting from the weakest, the Alnico III, which did not actually have any cobalt content (but calling it Alni would have been weird), Alnico II, Alnico IV, Alnico V, and finally Alnico VIII. For some reason, the weakest Alnico magnet, Alnico 3 was chosen for the earliest Fender single coils. And they produce the sweetest Fender tones (in my opinion). Smooth in the midrange, not as thumpy as other magnet types and the sweetened treble makes it eardrum-friendly. I believe it was in '59 when they had revised the pickup design and switched to Alnico 5 rods in their pickups. During that period, the pickups were wound slightly hotter than the early 50's pickups to smooth out the excess treble. Leo was on a quest for the ultimate clean tone. A5 pickups had a distinctive mid scooped sound, due to the extended bass and treble response. A3 pickups were more balanced and had less ice-pick, which is important for clean tones in my opinion. Nonetheless, the A5 pickups were still being wound and they also hit the amps harder, resulting in the very popular glass-shattering "BRRAANGGGG" clean sound when paired to a Fender Blackface amp.
It's not hard for most trained ears to hear the difference between 2 identical pickups with different magnets. And this can be heard too in early Gibson PAFs, which are infamous for being very inconsistent in specs, yet each variation takes on different flavours that appeals to many. To examine the differences, let's start with the prototype PAFs made in the 1955. Seth Lover used Alnico IIs for the prototype humbuckers, and the design was the benchmark for Gibson's early tones. Read "benchmark", because although Gibson was supposed to use Alnico IIs only, they had somehow mixed in all types of Alnico magnets (in various sizes), presumably due to shortage of the perfect-sized 2.5" long A2s. It was '58 or '59 when they had slowly transitioned to using A5s, again resulting in a relatively more aggressive and brighter, scooped tone. The earlier benchmark A2 PAFs were sweet in the treble, fat and loose in the bass, which gives a very "gentle" clean sound, while the A5 PAFs were a lot clearer in a clean sound context, which was also the main aim for Gibson. In fact, all guitar and amp makers were aiming for the cleanest sound possible because country was the "in" thing back in their days. It wasn't until '61, that the pickup specs are standardised and only A5 magnets were used. Weirdly enough, some modern day pickup winders had utilised A4 magnets for the '61 inspired humbuckers, presumably learnt from their own experiences, that some '61 Les Pauls (they're SGs, I know) had A4 pickups.
Here's what I found out about each type of magnets through personal experiences and also loads of online reading....
- Alnico II - Warm and loose bass response. Smooth highs and neutral mids.
- Alnico III - Tighter bass response than A2. Slightly rounded highs, but still bright. Neutral mids.
- Alnico IV - This one's a sleeper, weirdly. It's one of those things that you think, these are the perfect magnets for PAFs. It's basically A3 with more power, or an A5 with a less harsh high end, depending on which way you think of it.
- Alnico V - The most popular magnets, regardless of single coils or humbuckers. Presumably due to the availability of it. It's a strong magnet, that emphasises in bass and treble frequencies. Mids aren't actually lowered or scooped, but the boost in bass and treble sort of creates an "illusion" of the scooped mids.
- Alnico VIII - This one isn't that popular due to it being neither vintage nor modern. But A8 has been described by many as the best elements of ceramic and A5 blended together. Bass is tighter than A5, treble is sweeter than ceramic. Mids are strong but not as in-your-face as ceramic.
- Ceramic - Many people associate ceramic magnets with bad pickups. I'm here to dispel that belief. Ceramic magnets tend to have a harder edge in both bass and treble. They're not actually louder, but rather stronger and hits the preamp harder as they're very overwound more often than not, to tame the highs and thicken up the overall sound.
- Neodymium - Neodymium magnets are used to charge or uncharge all the magnets above. Need I say more? Yes, I do need to...Again, these aren't top shelf because they're too strong and dangerous to handle. But when they are used, the pickups produce a very strong tone. Bass is deep, mid is strong, treble is clear. Only few makers like GFS and Entwistle had attempted in selling Neodymium pickups, all of which I believe are made by Artec.
Before you run out and pull the ceramic pickups from your guitar, I would like send this important message to all of you. Please take all the above arguments and explanations with a pinch of salt. Why? Because all guitars are different, as are all guitar rigs. If you like your guitar sound, there's no need for any changes to happen. If you wanted to experiment though, just follow the general rule of thumb for choosing pickups.
Of course, do not base your search on only one factor like, certain magnets, a 7.8k winding, unbalanced coils etc. Remember, the sum of all parts is greater than the whole. A PAF pickup sounds like what it is because every structure and material matters. A humbucker won't sound like a PAF by just adding an A2 magnet, nor will changing the A2 for a ceramic make a PAF turn to a modern gain monster.
Make sure you do plenty of research before you proceed in the tonal direction you want. Some pickups are tricky. Ceramic humbuckers like Dimarzio Super Distortion may sound bright, but the treble is rounded. Dimarzio Tone Zone and JB may have A5 magnets, but they're not scooped sounding in any way. Just throwing it there to muddy the waters hahaha....
Anyway, pickups matter, and they are what's keeping tone snobs like us on our feet. The purpose of this post was to show how by understanding your pickup magnets, you can find out what you are after in your tone pursuit, and if you're handy with electronic jobs, you sure can try replacing magnets for different flavours. However, DO NOT EVER ATTEMPT TO SWAP IN/OUT NEODYMIUM MAGNETS. One little careless mistake can cost you your finger(s). That's how strong Neodymium magnets are. Peace out!
Saturday 2 January 2016
The Maple vs Rosewood Debate: When Will It End?
The reason why Leo Fender used maple wood to make the earliest Fenders was simple. Maple was abundant and easily obtained around the area Leo had set up his factory. And that production method had continued into the late 50's, where rosewood and maple fingerboards were made available as an option for the customers. Thick rosewood boards appeared on 1959 Strats (most famously played by Rory Gallagher), hence the term "slab board". Towards the end of Leo's ownership of the company (which CBS bought over Fender in 1965), Leo had experimented with laminating the rosewood onto the maple fingerboard, giving it a round-radiused bottom as well as being very thin, hence the term "round-lam board". Wait, you're confused about the terms and years... so where does that bring us? Back on the debated topic, of course.
Let's base these ideas off the fact that Leo Fender is no guitarist, and that he knows nothing about "tone", but rather playability, durability, cost, everything you can imagine of from a business standpoint. Now, maple was and still is, the most commonly used wood. Tell me, how often do you see maple-necked guitars, regardless of it being rosewood-boarded, ebony-boarded or just plain 1-piece maple, it's all still a maple-based neck. All the Strat/Tele-styles that you can think of out there, whether it's made in China, Indonesia, Korea, Japan, USA, Mexico etc, they're mostly fitted with maple necks. Back in the 40's though, not many guitars come with maple necks "fitted". Leo Fender thought it'd be a smart idea to bolt-on a neck instead of setting it in with glue. This saves manufacturing cost and labour hours. But the very popular mahogany wood during that time is a medium density wood which will not withstand being screwed in and unscrewed many times (which was supposedly the proposed function of a bolt-on design), so Leo had to choose a harder, higher density wood. Leo doesn't pick wood based on tone, he picks them based on how much do they cost, how easy is it to obtain them. So maple became the right choice of wood.
Along the way, Leo received some complaints from his customers, saying the pale colour of the maple gets worn and dirty-up very easily (as seen on many maple-boarded vintage Fenders), which led Leo to come up with another solution --- the tried and true rosewood fingerboard. By gluing on a slab of rosewood on the neck, there's no way for the fingerboard to look dirty and gunky anymore from far away. Just as Leo Fender thought he had solved the problem, there comes the complaints.
It appears to some customers' ears that the rosewood had dulled the treble frequencies a bit, resulting in less clarity and cut. They wanted the rosewood board to conceal the fingerboard mess, but still wanted the "tone" of the maple fingerboard. The year 1962, is the year Leo started implementing the round-laminated rosewood board. The thin layer of rosewood "shields" the maple neck from dirt, and at the same time, is too thin to have any effect on the tone.
However, the very thin round-lam boards weren't found on most modern Fenders anymore because at some point in the 70's, nitrocellulose lacquer was ditched and replaced by polyester finishes, not because they were better but rather because of the car industry changes. Car bumpers were made to flex upon impact, and nitrocellulose will crack even under the lightest tap from a car accident. Polyesters were able to absorb some minor shock and still maintain the surface gleam after flexing, so it worked for the car industry. Not for the guitar industry though...Guitars in the 70's were claimed to be "tone-suckers", although it's not entirely the finish's fault. The guitars seen in the 50's collected battle scars like nobody's business, but the 70's Fenders don't even dent at all unless abused hard. Which is also the reason why round-lam boards were gone. Polyester-finished maple necks won't get worn and dirty, and even if they do get grimy, a simple wipedown will get rid of the gunks. No more dirty-board woes. So naturally, only the slab rosewood and one-piece maple neck camp still existed.
So the next time you hear a difference between a maple fingerboard/rosewood fingerboard, check and see if it's a round-lam or a slab board. Check and see if you've been tricking your own mind with the "rosewood = darker/warmer" perception. Are you really hearing the wood, or does this particular guitar sound brighter/darker? Or is it the pickup doing it's own thing? You'll be surprised how a rosewood 'board guitar can be brighter than a maple 'board guitar. Been there, done that, and got my preconceptions thrown out of the window. AND have been preaching this truth to my friends ever since.
Pickups matter more.
This is Bernard signing out from my first post of 2016!
Let's base these ideas off the fact that Leo Fender is no guitarist, and that he knows nothing about "tone", but rather playability, durability, cost, everything you can imagine of from a business standpoint. Now, maple was and still is, the most commonly used wood. Tell me, how often do you see maple-necked guitars, regardless of it being rosewood-boarded, ebony-boarded or just plain 1-piece maple, it's all still a maple-based neck. All the Strat/Tele-styles that you can think of out there, whether it's made in China, Indonesia, Korea, Japan, USA, Mexico etc, they're mostly fitted with maple necks. Back in the 40's though, not many guitars come with maple necks "fitted". Leo Fender thought it'd be a smart idea to bolt-on a neck instead of setting it in with glue. This saves manufacturing cost and labour hours. But the very popular mahogany wood during that time is a medium density wood which will not withstand being screwed in and unscrewed many times (which was supposedly the proposed function of a bolt-on design), so Leo had to choose a harder, higher density wood. Leo doesn't pick wood based on tone, he picks them based on how much do they cost, how easy is it to obtain them. So maple became the right choice of wood.
Along the way, Leo received some complaints from his customers, saying the pale colour of the maple gets worn and dirty-up very easily (as seen on many maple-boarded vintage Fenders), which led Leo to come up with another solution --- the tried and true rosewood fingerboard. By gluing on a slab of rosewood on the neck, there's no way for the fingerboard to look dirty and gunky anymore from far away. Just as Leo Fender thought he had solved the problem, there comes the complaints.
It appears to some customers' ears that the rosewood had dulled the treble frequencies a bit, resulting in less clarity and cut. They wanted the rosewood board to conceal the fingerboard mess, but still wanted the "tone" of the maple fingerboard. The year 1962, is the year Leo started implementing the round-laminated rosewood board. The thin layer of rosewood "shields" the maple neck from dirt, and at the same time, is too thin to have any effect on the tone.
However, the very thin round-lam boards weren't found on most modern Fenders anymore because at some point in the 70's, nitrocellulose lacquer was ditched and replaced by polyester finishes, not because they were better but rather because of the car industry changes. Car bumpers were made to flex upon impact, and nitrocellulose will crack even under the lightest tap from a car accident. Polyesters were able to absorb some minor shock and still maintain the surface gleam after flexing, so it worked for the car industry. Not for the guitar industry though...Guitars in the 70's were claimed to be "tone-suckers", although it's not entirely the finish's fault. The guitars seen in the 50's collected battle scars like nobody's business, but the 70's Fenders don't even dent at all unless abused hard. Which is also the reason why round-lam boards were gone. Polyester-finished maple necks won't get worn and dirty, and even if they do get grimy, a simple wipedown will get rid of the gunks. No more dirty-board woes. So naturally, only the slab rosewood and one-piece maple neck camp still existed.
So the next time you hear a difference between a maple fingerboard/rosewood fingerboard, check and see if it's a round-lam or a slab board. Check and see if you've been tricking your own mind with the "rosewood = darker/warmer" perception. Are you really hearing the wood, or does this particular guitar sound brighter/darker? Or is it the pickup doing it's own thing? You'll be surprised how a rosewood 'board guitar can be brighter than a maple 'board guitar. Been there, done that, and got my preconceptions thrown out of the window. AND have been preaching this truth to my friends ever since.
Pickups matter more.
This is Bernard signing out from my first post of 2016!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)