-
But why do you want the acoustic sound to be a reference point? The acoustic sound is not necessarily the best standard for judging the amplified electric sound. These are two different ways of playing the instrument. If you want it to sound acoustic, better to explore other methods of amplification than a humbucker and amp.
Originally Posted by El Fundo
Obviously I'm trying to bring reason to what amounts to a religious doctrine. So I'll back off on this.
-
05-05-2018 10:42 PM
-
I agree with grahambop regarding the big impact of picking technique and pick angle on the tone you achieve. Also, the pick itself can make a huge difference in tone. A thinner pick tends to accentuate trebles. A thicker pick (I love ProPlec 351s, 1.5mm) produces a fatter and warmer tone, especially when picked at a slight angle.
-
I completely agree with you Lawson! For judging the electric/amplified sound and behaviour you need to plug it in. Originally Posted by lawson-stone
-
The other point he makes that I agree with is that if you want to retain the acoustic sound but just wish it be louder, use an acoustic guitar mic, and an amp that is super 'clean'. Originally Posted by Little Jay
(or get an archtop that has such a built-in mic; E.g. the Yamaha guitars that Martin Taylor was promoting).
-
First of all, the OP has obviously left the building, so now the topic of this thread has turned into a debate.
I have an Ibanez AS153 with Seths that I thought about selling recently, since it is an inherently bright-sounding guitar. I’m sitting here right now playing through my PRRI with the treble knob on zero and the bass knob on 3. I sat and played it for a few minutes unplugged: bright—a big hump in the upper mids. I plug in to the Princeton and with the tone knob set to ten it’s an ice pick in the ears. I turn it down to 2 and the upper mids are still present—still very trebly in the upper strings. Down to zero and it’s muddy and unusable but I still hear the bright treble strings, albeit somewhat muffled. I turn the tone knob back to about 2 and then start a/b-ing between the amplified and acoustic tone and it essentially sounds the same. The acoustic characteristics of the guitar determines the amplified sound as my experiment proves. The Ibanez has been relegated to playing rock and blues, which it sounds great on, but I would never use it for straight-ahead jazz gigs. What makes this guitar so bright is the wood and the way it is constructed. I will keep it since I still do rock and blues gigs.
-
Yeah, I've seen this before - someone asks a question, gets lots of good advice, but never replies back. Weird
-
I hope his silence is because he’s doing his homework per my suggestion in an earlier post. He’s listened to a few contemporary guitar players, all of whom get quite different tones—yet this seems to be his only reference point. It takes years of listening to jazz—and I mean players of a variety instruments before one can conceptualize and begin to achieve what his personal sound and style will be. I myself get as much out of listening to Lester, Miles, Billie Holiday, Hank Mobley (the list goes on and on) as I do from listening to guitar players. Pat Metheny was my gateway into jazz almost 4 decades ago, which hardly provided me with any kind of benchmark for tone in the grand scheme of things. The more I listened to jazz in general, the better idea I had of what it means to find my own personal sound and style. But I will also admit to going through many guitars, amps, picks, strings, pickups, etc. trying to find the holy grail. My point is, there’s no real simple solution for finding that sound. Knowing what a beautiful sound is is essential, however. Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
-
I agree, but a "thank you" never hurts
-
Would I be totally wrong if I had the impression that people who vehemently insist that a guitar's acoustic tone does not play a role in it's electrified sound are used to playing with potted pickups?
-
Maybe he realized he opened Pandora’s Box and is now running away as fast as he can! Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
I agree, but a "thank you" never hurts
-
I think there definitely is a link between acoustic sound and amplified sound, but the acoustic sound is not always a good reference for the amplified sound. Too many variables: construction, pickups, picks, strings, playing technique, pots & caps value, etc. So it’s not easy to predict the result. Originally Posted by BeBob
In my experience it’s not easy to predict what pickup will sound good in a guitar. I once put a Seymour Duncan 59 (now called SH-1?) in my Epiphone Sheraton thinking a higher end pickup would do it good. It did not! While that pickup sounds superb in a dark sounding Les Paul, it enhanced the mid dip and bright trebles the all maple Sheraton apparently had from itself. And acoustically I did not really hear that in that particular guitar, so I did not expect the result. But it’s a semi - in a carved top archtop it’s maybe easier to hear.
Hence: while acoustic sound surely plays a role in how the guitar will sound amplified, the only real way to find out is to plug it in and with trial and error find out what pickup sounds best in that particular guitar.
(My Sheraton ended up with Stew Mac Golden Age humbuckers, that - although much cheaper- have more mids and less treble and compensate for the guitar’s inherent sound profile.)
-
And it's that whole "trial and error" (especially the "error") part that gets people down. Subbing parts can be expensive and is in any case time-consuming and without special skills difficult. Most folks want a turn-key solution and the complexities of archtop amplification preclude that. Frustration ensues. I think that's a big reason some of us end up with piles of guitars and amps. That, and the fun of it! Originally Posted by Little Jay
-
I can understand it. Asking a question on this forum (or any other, for that matter) can be a bit like trying to drink from a fire hose - an awful lot of information comes at you mighty fast, much of it seemingly contradictory. It can be a bit much for a beginner to take, I would think. And of course, if they happen to have already made up their minds and just want validation, well.... Originally Posted by jorgemg1984
-
-
I apologize I’m late to the thread and didn’t read the 64 previous posts, answering directly to the Opening Post.
You could try reducing the cap of your tone knob so that it only reduces the very top frequencies. Before doing a mod you could try to play with an EQ pedal (borrow one or record yourself and EQ in a computer) and see if you like the tone by reducing only the very high end.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
-
That’s certainly worth a try! I would start with a .01uf cap. Takes away the top end sizzle but leaves a lot of clarity. Originally Posted by blille
-
fat jazz sound...what it's mean?
-
A few years ago, I asked Lindy Fralin for a pickup for a "fat warm" sound. He said: "Either a P-92 with 8500 turns or a regular humbucker with A3 mag wound to 8.2. These would be fat and round. Lindy"
-
Had a new experience yesterday.
In my big band I had a line with the trumpets. The leader told me my tone was too trebly and wasn't blending. I ended up turning the tone control fully down on the Comins GCS-1 which, to my ear, has a pretty dark sound to begin with. The amp had the bass most of the way down, mids at noon and treble at 10. I didn't have to change the amp settings, but he didn't like the guitar sound until the tone control was all the way down.
Ordinarily, I never roll it down all the way. In years of playing with horns, nobody ever said anything before. Interesting.
-
I might have tried lowering the treble on the amp before going to zero on the guitar, but I wasn't there.
-
I like to keep my approach to getting that fat Jazz guitar sound simple without an e.q., or multiple amps but with only a reverb pedal or amp type reverb. What was said earlier is good info re: choosing warm or bright chord voicings as needed. Learning that and where they fall on the entire fretboard can produce a self-generated form of e.q. We all do this without paying much attention to it, but start paying attention to what these actually sound like and practice and think about which of those may or may not work in ensemble playing.
One thing I do tweak is to tweak my pickup for a bass sound which emphasizes the 6th. string in lieu of the missing bass player at home practice sessions. Hence, all of my neck pickups (Seth Lover, 490R) are adjusted for it. I raise the treble side also to compensate, but still retain that low warm feel across the strings. I was always advised to play with a brighter sound than you want to in a band situation.....that's probably why the sound man gave the word that you were too muffled. Get used to playing brighter at home practice to get that sound in your head. You can compensate that brightness somewhat by adjusting (again) your chord voicings. I play a hybrid picking style with a medium flat pick and two fingernails to create those voicings.....I find I have way more voicings just with simple barred chords that I'll ever need; just with this hybrid style. I never put my tone controls on zero. I put them to where the tone is riding that area between articulated and subdued. Picking pressure changes can then produce the bright peaks that might be needed now and then.
Listen to the sound people, even if you think they are incorrect...as they hear more of what your audience hears than
you do on stage and keep your tone control in that area you scoped out and ready to tweak one way for brighter and the other for darker.
Classicplayer
Reply With Quote
Grant Green, What is This Thing
Today, 01:59 PM in Ear Training, Transcribing & Reading