-
You've nailed it!
Originally Posted by BeBob
Here the old rods measure 3.35mm (0.132"); the new ones 3.23mm (0.127").
And, LOL, the international scientific world is metric...
-
11-20-2017 11:05 AM
-
>> i really like the custom bracket that mounts on the end of the fingerboard. the fellow who made that should consider selling them. <<
>> … and modify the design to use countersunk screws for the metal tab that is attached to the end of the fretboard. <<
Thank you both!
I simply got sick from doing a complete new floating pickup installation every time I changed my mind (our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction), craving for a different floater.
Countersunk screws work fine. I'm still using small cylinder screws. The cylinders get buried into the little piece of cork I put between the pickup and the bracket sheet for... I_don't_know_reasons... maybe acoustic decoupling? I guess it calms me to see parts of my saxophones also on the guitars - guitophones!
The custom brackets start like this:
You can see the horizontal measurings of some floating pickup covers on the aide-mémoire: DeArmonds 1000/1100, DeA's 40 to 56, Kent Armstrong Humbucker, Gibson BJB, Bill Lawrence type A-400 or F 145 and Bartolini Jazz. The length of the metal sheets start according to these numbers - the rest of the procedure is standardized.
Only useless things are indispensable. - Francis Picabia
-
If Harry DeArmond would still be among us, I'd like to ask him something about that little rubberized tab on the treble side of the 1000/1100 pickup, that slides under the pickguard.
I believe that the press-fit of these pickups on the (short and long) rods was not only to move the pickup horizontally. Another function was to push the pu on the rod, turn the treble side with the tab diagonally upwards in the air - and then push the whole thing into the final position. This preloading holds the pu and the rubber tab firmly against the backside of the pickguard. No additional mounting between the pu and the pickguard, no felt pad, etc., should be necessary.
Maybe they didn't get this right on the Guild replicas... Blame it on the contractee or the actual manufacturer(s)?
-
Yes, I was thinking that. Instead of using panhead screws like those in the prototype, it would be better off to use a flat/countersunk screw and to use a countersink bit to cut the hole in the bracket. Originally Posted by Hammertone
-
But we're not buying repro DeArmonds because they're international or scientific. Originally Posted by Ol' Fret
We're buying them to get back to that vintage American tone.
-
I've wondered about this. On a proper fit, is the tightness of the pickup on the rod is supposed to be sufficient to hold the pickup in a cantilevered position, without any point of anchor at the pickguard end, and without any contribution to support at the pickup end? It sounds like you're saying that the tightness of the pickup on the rod should allow enough static force against rotation to allow the rubber tab at the pickguard end to apply force in the opposite direction, while still maintaining the positioning of the pickup. If that's the case then the rubber tip at the pickguard is working against an overwhelming rotational force being applied by the rod. Have I got it right? Originally Posted by Ol' Fret
-
Originally Posted by BeBob
But we're not buying repro DeArmonds because they're international or scientific.
We're buying them to get back to that vintage American tone.
Agreed on the first part - though here Guild or Korea or China seem to struggle with units of measurement!
However, ha, in some cases the second sentence must read: We're buying them to get back to that vintage American-German or American-Italian or American-German-Italian or whatever international tone.
For my part I'm happy that music as an amalgam doesn't stop on national borders and regulations. Wiser men of all periods have been trying to get things forward in the meaning of bringing together the best of all worlds. That process is still going on. Am I wrong to argue that that was once what made America great - voluntarily or enforcedly?
Of course, everyone is free to believe that "the best" could exclusively spin round the wonderful American orbit.
-
I didn't buy my Guild repro to get that 'vintage American sound'. I bought it to get the sound that I used to get out of my D'A and original RC-1000 played thru a PV Vintage with 2 12' SRO EVs. Originally Posted by BeBob
But we're not buying repro DeArmonds because they're international or scientific.
We're buying them to get back to that vintage American tone.
As it turned out, I got a p/u that got that vintage American sound, rather than a real DeArmond sound.
The video with Elferink proved that the repros are only half as powerful as the original DeArmonds.
Like SS said, you get what you pay for...
-
> Of course, everyone is free to believe that "the best" could exclusively spin round the wonderful American orbit.
I don't understand the attempts to internationalize it. The DeArmond pickup tone came out of Toledo, Ohio, USA.
Last edited by BeBob; 11-20-2017 at 05:39 PM.
-
Originally Posted by BeBob
DeArmond's intention when launching the 1100 pu in 1948 was to create an easy to installing/removing retrofit system for all these acoustic archtop guitarists lusting after amplification, very likely mostly in the DIY way, since guitar repair or custom shops were a bit more uncommon, back then.
Harry got this right: the players could accomplish the installation - or deinstallation when moving to another guitar - themselves; the pickguard had not to be altered, and the ready-to-use control unit demanded no soldering abilities. I'm sure that Harry was aware of the welcome oppression of that often overly "sympathetic" ringing of the strings (after the bridge) by screwing the control box in that position.
The disadvantage of the "monkey on a stick": it has to be bent properly for every guitar model (at least in most cases I've come across). The original metal rod, though not made of spring metal, and the press-fit forces of the 1100 housing are strong enough to keep the pu safely in the desired position with the tab pressing against the back of the pickguard.
In practice, however, the string clearance in the neck position is, more often than not, so small that the pu had to touch the guitar belly anyway. And the more frequently the long rod gets bent, the wobblier the whole attachment of the pu sytem gets. Add the fiddly original 1/8" cable jacks (screwed or plugged), and the not so cool overall look of the monkey system, and you know why Gibson didn't want to follow.
Btw., some folks like(d) to let the fretboard end of the long rod float somewhere in the nirvana. That's crazy, at least for all players who don't have the feather-light right hand touch (older guys don't). Some use an eyebolt screwed at the side of the fretboard; others have developed elegant, adjustable solutions with a single small screw in a oval-hole mini-bracket...
I think the disadvantages are the reason why the Guild folks launched only the short rod without control box on the actual pickups. These new rods are definitely not high quality parts and have to be handled with care during the installation. And the "rotation trick" doesn't work for a longer period - a felt or similar material support of the 1000/1100 is necessary.
Like some others I like to have the pickguards on my guitars mounted in a standardized way: aligned to the high E string Position from both the top and side view, and mounted 8 - 9mm below that string (side view), and - if somehow possible - without pickup notching. Often that takes some time.
-
I have a 1000 Rhythm Chief reissue on my Harmony Brilliant Cutaway. I too broke the mounting rod--it is very brittle and does not like being bent at all. I ordered a replacement from Ebay, which I installed without incident.
My pickup has felt circles on the back and fits snug against the pickguard without notching and rests on the guitar top on the felt. I have it wired to Schatten underpickguard tone/volume controls and then to an endpin 1/8" jack.
The installation is neat, the sound is good and I'm pretty happy with it overall. Personally, I think there are better sound options with a floater for the price, but for looks it can't be beat.
Re' the sound and output, I haven't seen any video, but I think I have read elsewhere it was an exact duplication of the original. I could be wrong. Sound is always in the ear of the beholder, but I find it fits the bill.
-
Originally Posted by BeBob
> Of course, everyone is free to believe that "the best" could exclusively spin round the wonderful American orbit.
I don't understand the attempts to internationalize it. The DeArmond pickup tone came out of Toledo, Ohio, USA.
May I help you: the best guitar pickup can only transport the signal it gets from the guitar. And some like to play vintage archtops that were not made in the US and combine them with American-made or Chinese-made DeArmonds, American Bill Lawrence pickups or German Willi Stich (Bill's original name)-Framus-Hoyer pickups, etc.. Or combine American guitars with certain German vintage Schallers, Rellogs (started in the early 1930s), Stars, etc. I've seen some flushing ears and heads in the past... but that's not what I'm after. Life is no contest. A fine archtop guitar is a fine archtop guitar, no matter if it was made in the US, in Germany or in China.
I'm not a pickup expert, but some of them tell that, from a technical point of view, the original DeArmonds were built in a quite sloppy way - hardly something I would be proud of. Their main secret would be the thin wire, involving a loose winding (no waxing), resulting in higher microphonics - not a bad solution for a moderate amplification of acoustic archtops. Soundwise there's surprisingly little difference between the special double winding single coil system of the 1000, and the oval plastic magnet of the 1100. Also, folks are hardly familiar with the transition from the lower impedance 1000/1100 (c.7 kOhm) to the higher impedance successors (c.13 kOhm), which happened somewhere in the mid 60's.
Many, including myself, like these pickups as a great sounding niche product, and welcome the much more decently priced reissues from China as much or even more than the Toledo_Ohio_made originals. Making pickups may be a demanding job, but can hardly match the demands of making a fine archtop guitar. It's obvious though, why so many pro guitarists in the big cities have jumped on the humbucker (or a single coil with a second blind coil) design when that became available. Yes, it was Gibson that eventually made the humbucker patent race, but Fred Gretsch, the son of a German immigrant, was hot on their heels.
See it or not, and like it or not - the whole (music) world is international!
- ...Bach is how buildings got taller. It's how we got to the moon, through Bach, through that kind of mind that made music up. That's the most progressive mind. - Charles Mingus
- Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel. - Samuel Johnson (a devout Anglican and committed Tory)
-
Red herring. That music does not know borders has nothing to do with the origin of the device.
-
Here are the pics showing attachment and alignment with the strings.
-
[QUOTE=Doctor Jeff;819205]Here are the pics showing attachment and alignment with the strings.
[/QUOTE
The biggest flaw of the original RC-1000 was that it wasn't large enough to pick up all six strings FULLY.
You could move it so that it would pick up the lower E or the higher E fully, but there was no way you could pick up both, fully.
The reason for the reputation of both the DeArmond and the D'A were the albums put out by Johnny Smith on Roost, and the albums put out by Burrell on Verve from the late 60s to the 70s when KB was using the D'A with the RC 1100.
When they switched guitars and pickups, they never sounded the same.
-
I have three original DeArmonds, two 1100's that are attached to a couple of vintage D'Angelicos with neck rods and a 1000 that I use with my third vintage D'Angelico with the Monkey on a stick setup.
Here are some thoughts:
The 1100 does have better string to string balance than the 1000
The neck rod is a more secure setup, but the monkey on a stick does let you use the same PUP on different guitars
There is a "sound" that a vintage archtop with a vintage DeArmond gets that simply will not be duplicated with anything reissue
There are better PUPs to be had than the reissues
The real thing costs a lot, but you do get what you pay for. Here is a video of me playing my 1948 D'Angelico Style B with a DeArmond 1100 on a live TV show from about 10 years ago (I can't think of a better tone):
-
I'd say that's Q.E.D. for the vintage pickup discussion! Originally Posted by stringswinger
-
Originally Posted by Stringswinger
I rest my case!
-
Shazzam! The sound I’m after! That lovely early ‘50s swing tone! And now my question is (since I do not have the $$$$ for a 48 Style B and a vintage DeA): short of replicating it does anyone here believe that I could get in the ballpark, say, with a Loar LH-600, Guild Savoy, Peerless or Eastman with a repro DeA 1100? Originally Posted by Stringswinger
Besides: lovely playing, from all the band! And, Marc, is this the guitar and pickup you’re using on “Jive at Five”?
-
That is the same guitar on the "Jive at Five video" Originally Posted by radiofm74
If money is tight, may I recommend a vintage Epiphone Triumph with a vintage Dearmond Guitar Mike. If you are patient, the pair can be had for about $2,000 and you will get a tone pretty close to mine. If you go with the repro Dearmond on a cheap Asian made archtop, you can get a decent tone, but it will never match the vintage stuff.
-
Thank you for the immediate reply and for the advice! The only old Epi I’ve been able to locate around here is a ‘40s Epiphone Zenith. I tried it and wasn’t thrilled – sound-wise or in terms of play. Originally Posted by Stringswinger
But probably I still have to develop an ear and a hand for acoustic archtops. My goal would be to be able to play 4-to-bar rhythm acoustically and to wind the volume up for lead (the band would be piano, drums, double bass, and horns in a fairly small club). The “floater” concept appeals to me because it would allow the acoustic sound to be louder and better. But having tried far and wide archtops that are considered “loud” (a ‘40s Gibson L-7, the Zenith, a couple of 17’’ Eastmans) I was not struck by any as especially “loud”. Maybe I confuse volume and projection…
Anyway, I stray from the subject. Thank you so much! I’ll probably go by degrees… get a vintage DeA for a cheaper archtop, keep an eye out for an old Epi (they are rare around here!) and when the moment comes, strike!
-
Two things: Originally Posted by radiofm74
1) Archtops often sound louder in front of the player. Listen to someone else play your acoustic archtop to judge it's volume and projection.
2) Setup is most important. Many vintage archtops are in dire need of setup and repair to play and sound their best. A Vintage Epi will need heavy strings (12's at a minimum) to sound right (I was using 13 flats in those videos). The Epiphone Triumph is on a par with a Gibson L-7, but can be had at a much cheaper price. I prefer the Gibson/D'Angelico neck profile (C shape). The Epiphone is a soft V.
Be patient and keep your powder dry (A vintage Dearmond Guitar Mike can be had for around $200 and a Triumph can be had for $1800 or so.)
-
Thank you! Besides, I’m listening to your wonderful record right now, and I am enjoying it immensely. Thanks again! Originally Posted by Stringswinger
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos