-
I gotta say that the James Culberson comments via Vinnyv1k strike me as close to a definitive inside Gibson position on the intentionality and intended function of the design. There is probably more to the story as well. But for me, this pretty much settles the question of on purpose vs accident.
I know that many here prefer the flat to the slanted pickup, and understandably so, and some are quite passionate about their preference. That's all great. It's just an interesting topic of friendly discussion.
-
12-29-2017 01:39 PM
-
Originally Posted by Longways to Go
You know, I never realized the pup on my 175 was slanted until I read this thread. Thanks! Also made me realize that the top on the 175 near the end of the neck slopes down a lot more on the treble side, I guess to meet the sides in the cutaway. Whereas the slope is symmetric on either side of the neck on the L5, which is thicker in the cutaway. I bet that has something to do with the angle of the neck pup.
Ren
-
Originally Posted by Ren
I'm not especially passionate about this, it's just an interesting design question and I was surprised that both my 5 ES1x5 type guitars (2 Epiphones) and my L5ces had the pickup oriented, one way or another, to the 24th fret position. I doubt you or I will lose any sleep over this!
Cheers, and have a great New Year!
-
Originally Posted by lawson-stone
John
-
Just for clarification, I never reversed the pickup ring on my Tal, it came this way; I just set it straighter to the strings using the half pick trick.
I don't question whether or not a crooked pickup might have an effect on tone, but it had one on my esthetic OCD that's itLast edited by vinlander; 12-30-2017 at 09:03 AM. Reason: typo
-
Originally Posted by vinlander
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
-
Just had a Lindy Fralin P90 in a humbucker put in my 175. Oh my it is sweet.
The guy that did the work took it upon himself toe swing the pick up mount around so that it is intuitively correct (or maybe naively)and .... dam my plectrum hits it all the time. It has to go back to the Gibson way.
Oh and the pole pieces are in the middle of the pick up and it sounds did I say it sounds sweet? A big step towards that Kenny Burrell sound without sounding like a clone. Love it.
-
In Adrian Ingram's book on the ES175 (1994), Chapter III the PAF Models 1957-64, he quotes Gibson's instructions and diagrams for humbucking pickup adjustments. These specifically state that the distance from the underside of the string to the top of the pickup when the string is depressed on the last fret of the fingerboard should be approximately 1/16 inch. Should you change the action height by adjusting the bridge or by changing string gauge then you should re-adjust the height of the pickup.
No mention of pole piece adjustments!
More significantly for this thread regarding pickup tilt, the accompanying diagram shows the top of the pickup to be absolutely parallel to the strings.
All this seems a far cry from what we see on the more recent 175s with their peculiarly angled pickups.
It would be nice if Gibson issued updated instructions explaining their new philosophy and what occasioned their change of heart.
The cynic in me suspects that the new arrangement is by accident rather than design.
I've a feeling that all this has already been mentioned in one of the many threads on 175 neck pickup placement but I can't seem to find it now. Apologies if I am repeating what is common knowledge.
-
Originally Posted by Fusionshred
-
The pickup ring can be adjusted. Some sandpaper on the guitar top does the job, and the ring can be moved on it to make the bottom match the guitar top, at any desired angle. It's work though, and too much work for many people, including me for most guitars. I do have a couple that I've made the effort to match, and they look better for it. I don't notice any difference in the sound, though.
Grant Green, What is This Thing
Today, 01:59 PM in Ear Training, Transcribing & Reading