Eastman AR372 and its pickup

[Rob MacKillop]

My current spending spree came to an end today (sorry, Archie!) with the purchase of an Eastman AR372 - their 175..ahem..'tribute'. In truth it sounds not like any 175 I've heard, but also in truth it's an amazing guitar in itself. I know, because I used to have the one-pickup version, the AR371, and can't for the life of me remember why I sold it!

The Eastman website shows two 372CE models (the 371 having been discontinued), one with humbuckers, and one - 372CE-P90 - with, you guessed it, two P90s. I chose the humbucker version.

The pickup they use is the Kent Armstrong HPAG-1, which has an Alnico V magnet with 8.9 D.C. resistance. They use the same pickup in both positions, neck and bridge. They claim that gives them "more attack and clarity than the lower-powered magnets often found in the original late-50s humbuckers, while still retaining that open, dynamic character."

It's not a bad pickup by any means, but when I had the 371 I got the notion of installing a Bare Knuckle Blue Note 90 - a P90 in a humbucker casing, as I quite like lower-powered magnets from the late 50s. From the Bare Knuckle website:

the bottom-end is fuller and high-end a lot sweeter, which has the effect of softening the mid range. High notes sing with a true, vocal-like quality while the mids have enough weight to punch through without ever sounding honky or nasal. Clean tones are balanced with lovely note separation and chime to each string

They achieve this with an Alnico II and 6.8 resistance in the neck, 7.5 in the bridge.

I've shared one or two of these videos this last week, which got me thinking about the guitar again. With the Blue Note 90 in place, it certainly does reflect their claim of "High notes sing with a true, vocal-like quality...lovely note separation and chime", so I will most likely do the same switch again - at least in the neck position, as bridge pickups are clearly for renegades and anarchists!

The above is in lieu of creating a NGD, as I'm not up to this level of playing just now (though slowly making progress!).

I'd be happy to hear from other 372 or 371 players about their experience with their guitars. I've been unable to demonstrate what the original pickup was/is like, but others might chime in. I think both pickups are good, and it's down to personal choice. And maybe someone else here has tried yet another pickup?

[Cunamara]

I've only played an AR371, which was not mine, maybe 10 years ago. I remember it as a very nice guitar and really liking the neck, especially the wider fingerboard as I have large hands. I remember it not sounding a lot like an ES-175 despite visual appearances, but I also remember being stupidly easy to get a really, really nice range of sounds out of it. There were no bad sounds in it. It is its own thing, not a cheap knock off of an ES-175.

Congratulations, Rob, and I hope that your new guitar is a wonderful help in regaining your chops. After all of your travails, you deserve it!

[Rob MacKillop]

Thank you, friend!

You make a good observation: it's its own thing. If I had the money I wouldn't think twice of having a classic Gibson 175 as well as the 371.

[Bflat233]

Rob -

I love that you've got another new 372! That's not a surprise, they are great, no bling guitars.

I've owned two 371s, both inspired by a Gibson Herb Ellis I owned but reluctantly sold. I couldn't get rid of a static electricty loop; neither could three techs in the region who tried to fix it. But that's another story.

With my first 371 - I swapped out the stock humbucker for a Lindy Fralin P92. Yup - you inspired that move! I sold it a couple years later and bought a rare blonde 371 and installed a Creamery-built Charlie Christian pick-up - another pick-up inspired by you. I sold that one to make room for my AR480 Pisano. It, too, is a remarkable instrument, similar in may respects to the 372/371.

A key feature of these 372/371 is its acoustic qualities - the guitar performs respectably unplugged, which is great for practice or even jamming in some situations. Plugged in it produces a big sound, lots of width and depth, and the highs can be dialed-in to your taste from the tone-knob on the guitar. I played it clean through a Quilter with a bit of reverb. Hearing it, people would remark about the tonal qualities.

For what it's worth, the Pisano shipped with a Seymour Duncan Seth Lover and I can't think of any reason to make a change.

[Rob MacKillop]

Interesting Bb (a.k.a A#). Haven’t seen a blonde one yet, but I like the sunburst. The latest option is red.

Yes, the Pisano has my interest, but one has to leave something to explore at a later date!

To be honest, I can’t remember the unplugged qualities of the 371, but I have a magnificent 910CE to swim around in. Those two guitars will keep me busy for a good while.

The Creamery CC is always an option I enjoy exploring, so that might happen too someday. That would be my third. What is the quality of the Lindy Fralin P92. I don’t think (I might be wrong) they are easy to find in the UK.

[Bflat233]

I love your enharmonic equivalent to my handle- I think I'll use that as my alter ego!

I believe it is similar to the Bare Knuckle Blue Note 90 you installed in your previous guitar. It's a P90 in a humbucker format, so it drops into a humbucker hole in the top. It's noise cancelling, and it has unique pole positioning. I think you're covered with the BN in your back yard. My Romeo had Stormy Monday's on board, and the tone was rich.

Here's a link to the Fralin page on the pups:
Fralin P-92 Guitar Pickups- Hum-Free P-90 Tone In A Humbucker Size.

[Aiq]

I like the 371 I’ve had a few months now, I wrote to Armstrong about the pick up, which I find to be fine.

“It is made in Korea and is my design that my partner follows faithfully . It is my idea of a full humbucker ... 42 gauge [wire] and a alnico 5 magnet..

Regards, Kent Armstrong”

[John A.]

Regarding the Kent Armstrong HPAG-1 pickups, I had those in my D'Angelico semi-hollow, and I was quite happy with them for years, and then I was less happy with the guitar's sound. I think it's because I had it refretted, and that made it brighter sounding and sharpened the attack (or something in my perception chaged). So I swapped them for a pair of Stew Mac Parsons Street pickups, which are alnico II and 7k (bridge). and 8k(bridge). It made a significant difference, much for the better IMO.

I've never owned an Eastman ar371 or 372, but I did play a 372 side by side with a 175. They definitely sound different.

[omphalopsychos]

You know I’m a fan of the ubiquitous 57 classic. I think it would tame any of the Eastman brightness and smooth out the tone. In your hands and with your technique I’m certain it sounds fantastic regardless of the pickup. Always love to hear you’re playing.

[Rob MacKillop]

Aiq - Good quote from Kent. He certainly designs good pickups. As I said, there’s nothing wrong with the stock pup, but one of the beauties of the electric guitar is that you can experiment (albeit at an ever-increasing price) with different sounds to find something that suits your playing better. And then after spending a lot of money and time, return to the original which was best after all!

[Rob MacKillop]

Hi John. I’m a fan of the Alnico II magnet as well, for a softer, more subtle sound.

Yes, they are different guitars. Both good.

[Rob MacKillop]

Juan - thanks. The 57 is a classic pickup, for sure. One day! For now the Blue Note 90 has the sound I like, but I don’t play gigs. So now I’m wondering if I’d want a different pup for gigging with. Hmm…A moot question, as those days are behind me, in a way thankfully - too much stress!

[Rob MacKillop]

Aiq, is that a couple of violin mutes placed between tailpiece and bridge?

[Average Joe]

Congratulations on the New guitar.

At the risk of derailing: several posts mention that they sound different from 175s. Could you possibly say a few words about that difference?

[Rob MacKillop]

It’s a good question, as in my limited experience not all 175s sound the same. So what exactly IS that ineffable 175 sound? Once we all agree on that, then we can test the 371/2 against it.

There’s also the influence that different amps, speakers, strings, pickup replacements, and personal techniques bring to the equation. And 175s from different eras sound different from each other.

I don’t know the answer, other than to say my 371 sounded more singing than the more percussive two 175s I tried. But they were through different amps, had different strings and different pickups…

[Aiq]

Aiq, is that a couple of violin mutes placed between tailpiece and bridge?

No, they are made for guitar - slotted for the strings - made by Ernie Ball. I got them from Guitar Center online.

[John A.]

Congratulations on the New guitar.

At the risk of derailing: several posts mention that they sound different from 175s. Could you possibly say a few words about that difference?

I've compared the two directly myself side by side through the same amp -- the 175 has much more midrange overall, and the attack is a sort of thump in the midrange. The 371/2 has a more scooped sound, with the attack more of a sharp/zingy/snap in the treble range than the midrange. The 175 is unmistakably an electric guitar, while the 371 has a bit of hint of an acoustic sound even plugged in (not quite, but shading in the direction of a carved top/floating pickup sound). The difference is probably due to the 175 being parallel braced and the Eastman being X-braced. I also know a guy who has both guitars, and this difference is evident (to me, anyway) with his playing/guitars.

[Jx30510]

The AR372 is X- braced?! I didn't know that
I thought the difference in their sound was because of the maple neck and much lighter build. Never heard they were X - braced.
Rob could you check inside yours? Wonder if they changed that over the years. If it's X - braced it's a major difference indeed.

[John A.]

The AR372 is X- braced?! I didn't know that
I thought the difference in their sound was because of the maple neck and much lighter build. Never heard they were X - braced.
Rob could you check inside yours? Wonder if they changed that over the years. If it's X - braced it's a major difference indeed.

I could be wrong about that. Maybe it's just an overall lighter bracing/build?

[Jx30510]

I'm not sure. The best way to know would be a quick look under the hood. If someone could take a look!

[Rob MacKillop]

I'll have to wait until it arrives on Tuesday or Wednesday..

[Aiq]

[Gustavo Eiriz]

First of all, the playing and sound is great i the videos. Congratulations! Beautiful.
What i can hear?

In my ears the eastman guitar you played blends the chords, the notes dont sound individually but as group, and this is the main difference that i hear, in love it. I love it better than the 175, and it has an attack thats more percussive, which i love too.
This kind of sound is what i.like from a L-5 Wes, how not reacts to other notes.
Maybe its the resonance? We all know that a 371 sounds acoustically louder than a thicker 175. Would that be the reason? Is not the pickup for sure.

[Sam Sherry]

This survey of humbucker-size "P90s" is worth the time even though its from 2013. Almost all of those pickups are still around.

The sound samples are much better than usual too.

FWIW I've had good results with Duncan Phat Cats and Gibson P94s, depending on the instrument.

[Rob MacKillop]

Well, I’m sorry but all the above suddenly has no immediate interest to me now, as I just got a great offer on a new Eastman 680 Pisano from the same seller, Mak’s Guitars. I think I’ll enjoy the mahogany back and sides. We shall see.