-
I just discovered the 208s this week. Simply amazed by the pick.
Originally Posted by nado64
At first it was having a go-to guitar for certain tones.. then go-to amps.. now go-to picks
-
11-29-2009 11:59 PM
-
I was thinking that, too, but noticed most of the attention in this thread was on the guitar/pup. Half your sound is the amp, right? I would think the VOX AC4TV would break up early and have that Vox "chime" which could work against a traditional jazz sound. It's a fun amp to have though, if you want to do the tube thing at home volume levels: Originally Posted by derek
-
I am pretty familiar with equalizers. I have had them on my stereo system for years. I use them primarily to fix problems on the "other side" of the music: room acoustitcs, speaker bias, amp aging, etc. I had thought about putting an EQ in the system but or reasons that may not be entirely valid, I feel like the PUPs should be my next change (or, as cosmic gumbo so eloquently pointed out, I am probably just clueless). Originally Posted by randyc
As I indicated in the original post, I am new to the electric quitar world and on at the beginning of a learning curve. Thanks to a great deal of help from the fine folks on this forum I have made a good start. So, if I make a mistake, well I am sure I will learn from it and that is just fine with me. I am not ruling out an EQ in my future.
-
One of my problems is that "take it to a store" is a 225 mile (360km) round trip. I felt I was getting a lot more for the time spent out of the these forums and kind of trusted a body of opinions to help make a decision. I like what I have bought and think it is going to work just fine. I only use the amp at home for solo practice, so I can operate in the "sweet spot". Even though I still feel the overall output is too bright, those bright highs are very clear and I can make each note really "sing" nicely. The bass is a bit muddy, but I also have all the tone pots as dark as possible to keep the brightness down as much as possilbe. I hope I can eventually put them in a more normal position and get better definition on the lower end. Originally Posted by derek
(FYI, I really like this forum, the info is usually well thought out and the contributers are courteous. I read a lot of others but this is the only one I post on because I just don't care to be exposed to the vitrolic and bad atitude the pervades others.)
-
I wasn't suggesting that an equalizer reside permanently in your signal chain - I was pointing out the utility of the equalizer as a diagnostic tool ... Lacking more sophisticated instrumentation - an audio spectrum analyzer - it's possible to derive useful information from this simple effects box. Originally Posted by tonedeaf
Inserting the equalizer into the signal chain, if you find that you can obtain a satisfactory sound from your guitar by adjusting the graphic equalizer, you have a good starting point toward determining the items that need to change to obtain the sound you desire. Just look at the settings on the EQ and construct a curve that describes them.
Using the EQ curve and the known characteristics of your pickup (making the assumption that you can either look them up or - unlikelier - measure them), you can then look at the characteristics of other pickups. The desireable pickup would be the one whose characteristics represent YOUR current pickup PLUS the EQ curve of the graphic equalizer.
It doesn't have to be an exact equivalent, BTW, just within the capability of your guitar tone control, amplifier tone control to provide sufficient adjustment to suit you.
If you "see" by examining the eq settings, that there is a definite "slope", and not a pronounced "curve" or an "S" curve", then it's entirely possible (as mentioned by cosmic gumbo) that you can obtain the desired tone by simply modifying the values of either the tone control potentiometer or the tone control capacitor.
I hope that this is comprehensible.... it's mostly a discussion about how to get around the lack of instrumentation (costly instrumentation) by using an inexpensive device and some common sense to determine how to get from "A" to "B".
At any rate, if you'd care to try this technique, do so and post the settings on the graphic equalizer that produce "your" tone. We can then discuss the next step.
cheers
PS: I'm presuming that you're not an EE, from your questions. (In a way, that's an advantage, since traditional jazz guitars are about mechanical structures and secondarily about their amplified characteristics.) Anyway, there are lots of EE's here, all helpful, and you've already obtained advice from several of them that aren't well-conversant in english BUT conversant with your problems. Kudos to you for noting and appreciating those guys !Last edited by randyc; 12-02-2009 at 02:46 AM. Reason: add PS and correcting the miscommunications between finger/brain
-
You are probably correct, I was focused on the "fixing" aspect of an EQ and kind of ignored the diagnostic aspect. Sort of that "if you have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail" midset. Thanks for expanding on your initial comment. Originally Posted by randyc
(BTW, your are correct, I am not a double E but a software engineer. A lot of my work was programming automation equpiment that used servo driven DC motors and I have spent a lost of time look at the frequency response plots of the system behavior. So, I feel pretty comfortable with audio frequency plots.)
Guess that means I get to have some more "stuff"!
-
Oh, not at all. Given your background, I'd suggest considering "virtual" instruments. Most computers include sound cards (which are simply analog/digital and digital/analog converters, as you doubtless know). These sophisticated and CHEAP devices are used as the basis for many sophisticated "virtual" instruments: Originally Posted by tonedeaf
Oscilloscope
Spectrum Analyzer
Distortion Analyzer
And many more. One requires a rudimentary amount of knowledge about how to use the "real" analog instrument as well as the limitations of the technology that makes possible the A/D - D/A converters. The main limitations are those associated with input levels, sampling rates, data interpretation ... all the stuff that familiarization (with the individual application) will bring.
We old-timers prefer analog instruments (while appreciating the economy and portability that computer simulation/emulation makes possible). If I were uncertain of my future interest in the subject, and not necessarily eager to invest ... I'd do some internet research on virtual instrumentation.
If one decides that one HAS to have the classical analog instrumentation, well they're also available at a fraction of the original cost ---- on the internet.
cheers
-
tonedeaf,Don't you have any other amps?
-
No. This is my first amplified instrument, so I have not been collecting gear for very long. Originally Posted by kawa
I understand that the amp is an important element in what I am trying to achieve, but I don't think I know anywhere near enough about my current gear to start replacing it. (I am having great fun learning and someday I might know enough to have to make that decision.)
It would be fun to try more stuff but the nearest guitar shop is a 5 hour round trip.
-
OK,I understood.
Please listen the jazztone amps sounds by your guitar at the good shop.
(Specially,Listen to the Polytones 1E and 2B tone)
I could get my tone (my is important) for long years.
Please check the past my comments in other threads about setting etc.
Also you can get the more round 1E tone by replacing the speaker of AC4TV with only low cost.
Enjoy the your music life.
Best regardsLast edited by kawa; 12-06-2009 at 07:28 PM.
-
I have been busy trying out your various suggestions and I seem to be making progess (at least I am learning a lot about the guitar).
I have tried a few more sets of strings and I have found a set of flat wound 12s that I like. They have a very consistent response across all the strings. They have a less bright tone and I find them very comfortable to play.
I got some 206 and 207 picks. They definetly produce a more round tone with more managable sustain. I still find the stiffness somewhat clumsy but they seem worth the trouble of learning how to use and I am starting to get used to them.
I feel I have gotten pickup height, pole height and bridge height adjustments that are getting me closer to the sound I am looking for.
I have gotten a much better feel for how the various electronic adjustments work and I am now making more meaningful refinements towards my tone goal and making fewer wholesale changes just to see "what will happen".
Thanks for your continued help.
-
It's always nice when someone checks back in with a progress report, very cool !
happy holidays,
randyc
-
I also intended to say that I am working on recording and sound analysis. I have been comparing wave forms from my playing with stuff from players whose tone I would like to emulate. Not a whole lot of progress yet -- working on some technical issues. Started thinking about strategies for applying some EQ. Originally Posted by randyc
-
Well, I have come to the conclusion that the epiphone pickups are just not going to make it for jazz (as nado64 suggested early on).
I have made hundreds of adjustments to the pickup height, poles, bridge and tone controls (maybe even thousands if you count tone controls). I have tried 6 or 8 different strings. In the end, the best I can manage is an OK sound (I completely gave up trying to get "my tone"). To get an OK I had to keep all the tone controls at their lowest position (not much versatility); the quality was very uneven across the various strings and positions on the fretboard; minor variations in pick control caused huge sound changes; sometimes areas of fretboard would just sound dead; and I could never get rid of the infernal "jangly" sound.
What I finally decided is the the pickups are just not responsive enough for subtle music. The resaons I came to this conclusion are:
1. In order to get a decent sound, I have to maintain a constant minimum energy level to the pickups. If they go to their rest (or zero energy state or whatever you call it), it takes a real bang with the pick to get them going again.
2. Soft passages or coming back for a silent section just sound terrible.
3. The best sound I could get was using "rolling thumb" naked finger-style picking (where the enery level never falls below of certain level).
4. The sound in the 12th and higher frets is somewhat like fingernails on a blackboard, it goes from dead and unmusical to deafeningling bright and loud. I have to force myself to practice in this range.
5. Based on what I know about marketing and cost control to hit a target audience, I think it is safe to say the small group of jazz players ain't in the target group. The majority of buyers (for several different epihpones that use this pickup) are probably in the classic rock and blues type groups where the music naturally has a higher energy level (string energy) than in a jazz solo. So the minimum priced pickup is designed for this group.
6. Quite a few comments on the various forums and review sites talked about changing the pickups because they are too bright (I think "jangly" is a better word because if they were simply too bright, you could probably EQ it out).
I did some recording and sound analysis that seems to support these subjective impressions:
1. The first thing I noticed on the sound plots was that the waveform from my guitar looked like a funnel, while the one from a recording of a jazz player I really like was more of a teardrop shape -- it had some rise time and decayed at a non-linear rate. I think this is the source of the jangly tone and it is probably due to the fact that the pickup is not responding to the initial rise of the plucked note. It then decays too rapidly as the string energy falls off and contributes to the dead feeling.
2. The second thing I noticed as I zoomed in on the waveform was a huge difference in the harmonics between the two. Again, I think the lack of sensitivity of the pickup results in very minimal harmonics being picked up. Even taking into account the difference between my amature recording setup and a professionally master recording, the difference was substantial. I think this results in the lack of a natural, musical sound.
So, I am satisfied that a full electrical transplant using the good stuff is appropriate. SH55s, orange caps, CTS pots and switchcraft stuff are on the way. Hopefully I can report a successful surgery in a few weeks.
(I also think I need a little fret work, so when the transplant is done I am taking to a luthier -- any recommendations in the Denver area?)
-
I have finally completed the replacement of the Epi p-ups with a set of Seth Lovers. I have to say that I am quite happy with the results. It has really changed the character of the quitar from one that I wa thinking of selling to one I really enjoy playing.
The high notes are clear and clean with plenty of harmonic complexity. The bass notes are powerful but well behaved. Across the fretboard the notes have a very consistent response -- I can use picking technique for emphasis without having the notes explode or disapear (with the old p-ups I had to vary my pick energy considerably to get a uniform volume).
I can actually use the tone and volume controls to get different and desirable tones, I am not stuck with one setting that minimizes the wretched jangliness of the stock p-ups.
The response from the 10th and up frets is extremely improved -- I had given up even trying to play these frets.
I did some recording an analysis with the new p-ups and the wave forms are nicely non-linear and show a massive increase in harmonic complexity.
So, thanks to everyone who contributed. I learned a lot and certainly made a better informed decision. Without your input there are definetly things I would not have tried, many of which have been very beneficial with my new setup.
So, thanks again from a happy guitar owner!
-
I'm glad that everything worked out for you. I have an Epi ES 175, and I don't know if I got lucky or what, but, from day 1, this thing has performed really well. The set up is perfect, PUPs (even though they are a tad brighter) are well balanced, intonation is perfect. If I change anything, I will probably put flat wound 11's (guitar came with round wound 11's). I purchased this brand new in December, 2008, and was generally quite surprised at how nice she plays. She holds her own with my Gibson ES 135, Heritage H575, and (recently purchased) Guild X 170. I realize it is all very subjective though. I will also say that I have a very nice Epi DOT, that I run through a SD Pickup booster...it gives me just enough ooommph that I don't feel I need to change out the PUPS. Have fun with your ES 175...it's a sweet guitar!
-
Before I bought the ES175 I spent a lot of time looking at the online comments. It seemed like everyone really liked the guitar and thought it was a good buy. (This is my first electric and I live in a remote area so I rely a lot on the reviews. I buy a lot online so I think I can tell the difference between a meaningful review and someone just spewing.) Originally Posted by Jazzophobe
Of the people who commented on it, about half thought the p-ups were fine and the other half thought they needed to be replaced immediately. After working with mine I thought that maybe the groups might fall into players who were primarily rythm players doing rock/aggressive blues or similar stuff. And the other group was lead players who relied more on the sound of a single picked string.
My other thought was that the p-ups might be very amp sensitive, with some amps being able to use some of the more subtle stuff that other amps loose. Maybe tube vs. solid-state amps?
Do you fall into any of these groups?
When I replaced the electronics I got a good look at some of the quality issues and I was very impressed. It isn't a $3,000 guitar and compromises had to be made, but the attention to detail even in the hidden areas is quite good. So I would be surprised if the p-up build quality would be as erratic as the comments might indicate.
PS: I like everything about the guitar which is why I spent the effort to get it to where it is now. The looks of the thing just grow on me every day. And I think the action is great (given the price especially).Last edited by tonedeaf; 03-23-2010 at 10:30 AM.
-
Well, I play lead and rythmn. All of my archtops have a personality all their own (that's why I have 4...no more for now). Also, I tend to play with a "touch" of chorus and reverb (I kind of like that Pat Metheny sound from about 1978). With regard to amps, primarily, I play my archtops through my JC77 (solid state) and the sound is wonderful! When I'm too lazy to roll it out and hook it up, I will play through my Blues Junior (tube...a little more noise, but still a cool sound)...I use the Fender mainly for solid body rock and blues though. Again, I don't know if I was lucky or what, but I ordered the Epi ES 175 sight unseen, and was truly impressed by what I got. Originally Posted by tonedeaf
-
I play a 1977 ES-175...57 classics with 12 A'Addario Chromes...sound is very much a Herb Ellis sound.
Before I got my 175, I had an epi...nice guitar for the money..I would defintiely go for the 57's and you MUST change your pots to better quality gibson pots and better wiring..it will make a HUGE difference in sound...the taper of the pots is better. Epi uses really cheap pots
-
I just wish the Epi 175 was available in natural finish rather than just the sunburst.
-
I thought the same thing when I was looking to by one. I have done a lot of high-end woodworking and almost always prefer a natural finish. But the finish on the Epi 175 is really well done and there are lots of nice features of the natural wood that come through. I now really like the finish, it has grown on me tremendously. Originally Posted by woyvel
-
So-is the wisdom to put in a pair of Gibson 57 classics? Not a classic + on bridge? Mtynext job with my 175 is to change out the pups. I have a top-quality harness on order from America. I was going to get Bartolini PBF55 and PBF57's for her. Would the classics be a better "fit"? I mean-they'd suit this quite-bright guitar better?
-
The classic 57s show up most often in the online reports of people who have made the switch (people from this forum seem to favor the 57s). The Seth Lovers also show up frequently. I used the Seth Lovers because of the regular tales of poor detail quality in Gibson guitars and I was afraid that might extend to p-ups. They are very similar. I am new to this game and I took the safe (popular wisdom) route and I am very happy with the result.
I haven't looked closely at the 57s but (especially compared to the Epi p-ups) the Seth Lover build quality is quite good.
If I was better aquainted with other p-ups and what they sound like in different style guitars, I might have gone another way.
I am not sure the quitar is "quite bright". The Seth Lovers mellowed the ES175 out tremendously and I suspect the Epi p-ups are the source of the brightness (I found it so annoying I think the word "jangly" fits better).
-
I become less inclined to "lecture" (or argue, as my wife would say) regarding topics like this one. It's hardly worth the effort since people will ALWAYS buy the cheap stuff; heck a guy has to have his beer money right?
I do have to say this: It isn't difficult to manufacture a decent guitar pickup, but if cost is the paramount consideration then it's easy to manufacture a bad one. Bear with me and I'll offer an example.
The after-market topic reminds me of my serious interest (when younger, healthier and more foolish) in competitive off-road motorcycling. Alternatives to Japanese dirt bikes were/are sparse, so we (U.S. riders) bought Japanese products but replaced critical performance parts with after-market stuff (made here). Everyone was happy - the Japanese manufacturers, the after-market manufacturers and the riders (huh?) that dropped a lot of bucks on both products. In the beginning it is doubtful that any REAL improvement was achieved by replacing the original Japanese-designed/manufactured parts but stay with me for a moment …
Typically, the exhaust system was the first to be improved ($120 or so) and then breathing improvements (carburetor re-jetting + lots of time, maybe $30 in parts). Suspension improvements could cost as much as $200 ... at that point most of us were satisfied. I could see it, in a way - everyone wants to personalize the initial purchase and everyone wants to improve performance. OK, so we're talking about $300 aftermarket improvements to an $8,000 product!
Calculator not handy? That's a value-added investment of about 4 percent. What's not to like? U.S. riders thought they were making improvements, the manufacturer (observing the trend) relaxed standards on the parts that were being routinely replaced, which cut costs and improved profits. Nice.
The average MIC guitar owner, from what I read here, spends maybe $500 on his MIC guitar and then might plunk down another $125 to $200 (EXCLUDING labor costs) to upgrade "something". So the value-added investment just shot up to about 35 percent, get my drift? Both motorcycles and MIC guitars lose money over time but one EXPECTS a product with moving parts to lose money - we're conditioned to expect it (planned obsolescence).
Lots of us like to tinker with our instruments (like me) and that's about the best reason I can think of to buy one of these Epiphones - for fun and experience. I bought one, once, and here are my experiences with it (photos of the internal details included):
https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/guitar-amps-gizmos/6265-emperor-regent-darn-near-good-gibson.html
It's not worthwhile to discuss "value" because we probably have different definitions. Older musicians tend to prefer certain brands/types of instruments and maybe that's a mystery to younger musicians. Certainly there is an advantage in disposable income for those with established careers. My contemporaries have rarely varied their purchasing habits, even when inexpensive instruments from Asian manufacturers became available few of us were tempted.
BUT … curiosity compelled me to buy and examine an Epiphone Emperor Regent (the magazines were providing rave reviews at the time). But it wasn't a cheap experiment - at the time that I bought the Epi for $700, I also bought a new Gibson ES-135 for $900. I still have both guitars. Inspection of both instruments suggests some differences (about which many of you are critical).
Workmanship - this is the BIG one. Most of you are really, really concerned about this. Oddly many guitarists pay lots of money for Fender guitars that are apparently chain-whipped to imitate a well-used condition. Gibson also offers finishes that suggest frequent usage of an old instrument.
But that's not what you want. Maybe you want an impeccably finished instrument, glossy and perfect in appearance from every aspect and you're willing to pay about $500 for it, right? Well, the Epi that I bought for $200 less than the Gibson is prettier, no doubt about it - there is a good polyurethane finish that resists everything but a blowtorch.
There ARE other considerations regarding value though. Most of you know this but the automatic defensiveness kicks in after buying something. And that applies to me too - it's common for all of us to defend a purchase that (maybe) we didn't put that much thought into … internetractiveness ?
Which makes me wonder about the pickup replacement topic … I can't imagine replacing the pickups on my "cheap" ES-135 - why would I? They are the real deal
Seems to me that a great deal of emphasis is placed on purchasing a NEW guitar (from the "wall") rather than considering the many wonderful opportunities - daily offered - from quality manufacturers. WHAT'S WRONG WITH A USED GUITAR? They don't wear out - even a twenty year old instrument will likely have good frets. And NOTHING needs to be replaced on a guitar that was properly made.
I'm waiting for someone to torch me, LOL ! (Not really - because we're civilized and courteous here.)
Cheers,
RandyC
-
Speaking for myself-there's nothing wrong with older/second user guitars. I have a couple. But-brand spanking new or old as the trees-I treat every instrument as a working tool, and therefore make them as good as they can be-within reason. That means I'd happily put 300 bucks into a guitar if it added to playability and tone. For example-I have a second hand Fender 12 string. Got it from an American chap who had problems playing a 12-string, but he'd looked after it. It was in good nick, but needed a new saddle,nut, and didn't sound great amplified. Action was as high as an elephants eye, putting it sharp when fretted. So-put in a fishmans, put a new graphtech nut, saddles and bridgepins in it, lowered the action and now it's great. See-I could see through the shortcomings. I don't care about resale value-all I care is does it play and sound better than it was-noticibly better. Is it good enough for me, playing out with?
I don't think I'd buy a new guitar with the thought-ah-I can do this with it. It'd have to have something about it that I liked. Say this ES-175--even though it was "free" (not really free-I swapped it for a 600watt HK Audio PA system), I'd not have swapped it if it couldn't have been played right out of the box. In fact-I used it last night for a gig, and it was fine. It can be finer, though!!
So-the way I look at it is-here's this guitar at so-and-so price. If I put this amount of money into it, is it going to be as good or better than the other guitars of this style in the shop, new or old, for the combined price of the guitar and "upgrades" ?
What I NEVER think is "Will my Epi ES-175 be as good as a Gibson ES-175 if I put Gibson and other good bits on it and do some work on it?." I don't care about that-I just want it to be the best that it can be, in it's own right.
Reply With Quote
Anyone know who made this? goodwill
Today, 05:22 PM in For Sale