-
As a new member of the ES-175 club, I've been curiously following the topic of the neck pickup in a couple of threads. Should it be reversed, does it impact the tone, why did Gibson make this mistake, etc . . .
Having played my guitar for a couple of weeks now, I have come up with a theory.
First, I believe the angle of the neck pickup is purposeful, not a weird mistake. After all, they've made these guitars for a long time and could have easily made the correction decades ago. Also, the Epiphone 175 does not have this unique configuration.
So what could be the purpose of the pickup angle? Tone? Maybe, but I believe some of you are of the opinion that reversing the neck ring doesn't have much impact on the sound. So my theory is that it was done to make the guitar easier to pick. I often play with my right hand right over the neck pickup, and some of my guitars have had significant wear on the pickup surface. So Gibson angles the pickup away from the strings, giving more room for my fingers (or pick) right where I play the most. That's my theory anyway.
I think it's a quirky interesting detail of the guitar's design.
-
12-23-2017 03:25 PM
-
I don't know if it's intentional, which might be giving Gibson too much credit, although who knows. But I have the exact same problem with 175's, and sometimes even a half turn of pickup height makes a difference between pick-clicking or not. Interesting theory!
-
There has definitely been a change in the configuration of the neck pickup on the ES-175 over the years. Here is the pickup on my '68:
You can see that the pickup and ring are parallel to the strings and the neck. This is ideal for a comfortable playing position--no banging into the pickup with your fingers or the pick.
By comparison, look at this 2016 ES-175. Clearly, the neck pickup cants the wrong way. The edge of the pickup nearest the fingerboard is apt to get in the way of picking, producing clicks, etc.
Why the switch up?
-
I have a Gibson Howard Roberts Fusion 111 and being a one guitar guy, anything that's not right
with the instrument means everything's not right with my inner music world.
So I had the same issue of the neck humbucker being angled in its mounting ring as shown above and it really was pissing me off.
I felt the p/u was not getting as much vibration across the whole width of the p/u and most annoyingly I was getting
pick click [hate that] so I tried using a thick pick wedged in the gap between the p/u and its mount to hold the thing
parallel to the strings.
...Sort of worked, but was distorting the mounting ring's shape.
Decided I'd take it to my luthier friend....who took one look and while I communed with his
large friendly black Alsatian who keeps him company in his workshop he'd whipped the mount off my guitar and simply flipped it around the other way....sorted.
Cost.....couple of beers....not while he was on the job....and a learning experience for me.
Old Japanese saying : To not know and ask is but a moment's shame....to not know and not ask is a lifetime's shame.
[Rough paraphrase]
As someone posted above....I wouldn't credit Gibson with doing this p/u angling thing with some practical end in mind.
In the 50's or 60's maybe.
So while the OP advances a nice theory.....I can't go along with that.
Next
-
The PU bezel does not quite work in either direction for the modern 175. The fix is easy (like crazy easy and incredible that Gibson does not do this - maybe more “typical” than incredible come to think of it).
The bezel can be sanded on the bottom surface for a much better alignment with the strings.
Incredible that this lack of care can become a “feature”.
-
If only someone who worked at Gibson was on this forum.....
-
It's as though they are not using the correct pickup ring anymore. Clearly, it's not the same one they used to specify.
-
You know, Long Ways, I think you might have a point.
I for one, couldn’t live with the misaligned pickup so I flipped the ring 180 degrees, cursing Gibson out the entire time (those springs are a pain to deal with). When I flipped the ring the pickup leveled out perfectly.
Last night while I was playing Giant Steps, I noticed a fair amount of pick clicking. I tend to try and find “the guitars” sweet spot and not rely on my routine picking spot. Generally, that puts me directly above the pickup. I lowered the pickup and no more clicking.
But I think with the pickup cocked like it was, that just might be purposely engineered into the design.
See, Gibson does care about us after all..
i think you might be in to something..
Joe D
-
One more thing. Hasn't the pickup position migrated subtly towards the fretboard? Look at my two pictures above.
-
Oh my God. Can a guitar be any more beautiful than this? It’s good that I wouldn’t actually see this while playing it. Too much of a distraction. I’d never get anything done.
Originally Posted by Greentone
up?
-
i would say yes. Maybe by about an 1/8 to 3/16 inch. Originally Posted by Greentone
-
I asked James Culberson about this. L5’s are crooked also. Gibson does this for 2 reasons and on purpose.
1. It produces less feedback. 2. The pickup is meant to follow the hump curve not the string horizon.
Mr.Culberson is the new Hutch at Gibson Crimson.
I am sure many will argue no feedback problems flipping the ring but I am siding with Gibson and leave them as the come. My crooked pickups produce glorious tone and never feeds back.
Gibson has the ability to make the ring anyway they want. I think they know what they are doing R/D wise. Just the QC guy falls asleep a lot. They have been doing the crooked ring since the 57 classic.
-
It's lovely wood, but for some reason, I like a plain top 175, with a sunburst. Originally Posted by Max405
-
i'd be shocked if gibson moved away from their classic 24th fret node/polepiece placement...looks more like the fretboard is ever so slightly extended on the natural Originally Posted by Greentone
cheers
-
I’m going to put mine back the way it came from the factory next string change. Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
-
Thanks Vinny! That's super interesting information Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
-
On my 96 Tal the neck pickup is already reversed with the thicker part facing the fretboard, I also did the same on my former tinkered Emperor Regent when I routed a humbucker at the neck.
I had a 2006 Gibson SG with a batwing pickguard with no pickup ring and the bridge pickup was not parallel at all to strings, that was teasing my OCD too much.
I ended up putting some dense foam underneath the back part of the pickup so when screwed it down, it was 100% parallel to string.
-
The pickup should be parallel to the strings. If it is not, something is wrong. The pickup ring should be mounted so the treble-side top surface is parallel to the pickguard (underneath, the part you can't see). The part you can see is as it is and it bothers some people I guess.
There are no 'guitar police' so if someone wants to mount the pickup askew or have the pickguard touching the ring at a single point there is no punishment.
-
A flame top blonde 175 is indeed a thing of beauty. Must be why I now have two of them. One beautiful wife and many beautiful guitars has worked well for me for many years. And it is much easier than it would be if it was the other way around. Originally Posted by Max405
-
Great! Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
why didn’t you tell me that BEFORE I lost a couple more hairs switching mine? Just kidding.
I don’t play out now so I think lowering the pickup does the same thing. And now that I filed off the baking soda and replaced real bone powder, I guess I’m ok.
Thanks Vin.
-
So there is an explanation that this is an intentional tilt to the PU that, through some unidentified phenomenon, reduces feedback. That is great if it works, somehow, for a given player.
Likewise if there is some unidentified principle by which the PU fares better by following the top contour, AND by using an angled bezel (thus not following the top contour, but nevermind) this feature and its associated (if inexplicable) benefits are achieved, that is equally great.
A satisfied player making successful music is the goal.
Can you imagine a Benedetto, Sadowsky, or Collings guitar with such slovenly attention to detail and such a pant-load of “explanation”?
No personal offense to any post or poster here intended at all. I certainly understand that there are varying views on this, and that a reported view from a Gibson employee is very important to many.
Personally I find views that are consistent with actual principles associated with the claimed benefits, can be more important than the personal associations of the source of the views. But this may be a very inconvenient and irritating comment to make, especially regarding the Gibson brand.
What works in terms of a satisfied player making music he/she loves is what counts.
-
Or has the fretboard after the last fret gotten a little more length thus making it seem the pu got closer to it? Originally Posted by Max405
-
Would that mean they have been doing it wrong all those years before the advent of the '57 Classic....? Originally Posted by vinnyv1k
-
On the 175 the neck PU has never been under the imaginary 24th fret. It's closer to the bridge. On the L4 and L5 (and most other gibson archtops) it's under the 24th fret. That's one of the reasons for the different sound of the 175 and the L4 - and why the L4 approximates the L5 in sound (though not being quite there). BTW Joe Pass' last custom 175 had the PU placed like on the L4 - thus the more spread and lush sound as opposed to the more compact and midrangy sound of the stock 175. We are not talking about dramatic differences here but it's audible. Originally Posted by neatomic
-
Your point is correct, but excuse me for being a nitpicker: it IS the 24th fret (I recently dug into that). Originally Posted by oldane
With the L4 and L5 it is the 22nd fret (as with my Ibanez AF55, reason why I investigated). Look at the picture below, the L4 CES has a 20 fret neck and the pickup sits against the fretboard under the 22nd en 23rd fret. With the ES175, ES335 and ES125 it sits under the 24th and 25th fret.
But of course this does not affect your point, you are absolutely correct that the position of the pickup is responsible for a large part of the difference in tone!
Reply With Quote
Grant Green, What is This Thing
Today, 01:59 PM in Ear Training, Transcribing & Reading