I agree with every word Bobbe said. On 6-string guitar, I can tell whether or not I want a particular one by playing it unamplified - I set it up, tweak it out, then play it and listen to the way it reacts. It either has it - to my tastes - or not. This is because I've played hundreds if not thousands of guitars over 40 years and have learned to detect "that thing" I'm looking for. If it ain't there without the amplifier, no amount of pickup tweaking, EQing, effecting, and tubey or solid-state goodness is gonna put it there. Of course, "that thing" I'm looking for depends on the context I want to use it in. No point comparing a Tele with a jazz archtop, flattop, or a Les Paul for that matter. IMO.

I can hear obvious tonal (timbre) differences playing diffferent steels acoustically, but I haven't been at it long enough to distinguish the thing I'm looking for yet. But I do like to play them unamplified just to actually hear what sounds I am making - unadorned, straight-no-chaser. The thing I directly manipulate and control - the first thing in the chain - is the guitar and strings. I want to get to know that intimately.

This is not to say that the pickups and amp don't add their own voice to the proceedings. They shape the tone in many ways, but never change the signature. I think it has to do with the fact that acoustic resonances are so bloody rich and complex. In comparison, the responses of electronic devices like pickups, amps, and EQs are relatively simple - I think it's possible to hear what they are doing and separate them to a large degree. They are a filter - for me, generally a relatively simple one - through which we hear the complex acoustical signature of the guitar. At least that's the way I prefer it. I agree that it's possible to do mind-numbing amounts of processing and distortion so that the original guitar signature is masked to the point of non-recognition, but I generally don't like that. It's one of my pet peeves in the guitar world. At that point, it's essentially a synthesizer, not a guitar.

------------------
Bobby Lee (a.k.a. b0b) - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6) My Blog

quote:

---

Like English, Eskimo languages have more than one word to describe snow. Yupik, for example, has been estimated to have around 24. This may seem impressive until one realizes that English has at least 40, including "berg", "frost", "glacier", "hail", "ice", "slush", "flurry", and "sleet".

---

Girthy, meaty, crunch, punch, grind, growl, boom, balls, dirty, gritty;
rich, liquid, natural, transparent, solid, creamy, open, clear, violin-like, bell-like;
spanky, scooped, sparkle, chime, glassy, throaty.

Although tone can apparently be gritty and dirty, I have not yet heard of a tone that is silty, sandy, or loamy. Much is made of tones that are singing, and violin-like, and throaty, but I have yet to hear any described as raspy, howling, shrieking, whiny, flutey, or hiccupy, even thought I've heard plenty of guitarists sound that way. Other terms that seem out of favor (at least among reviewers who work for magazines that are in the business of selling ads) are:

muffled, muddy, thumpy, squeally, gassy, farty, grunting, whimpery, and phlegmy. You might use these to describe someone else's guitar, amp, fuzzbox etc., but never your own?

I have a friend who likes his Mesa/Boogie better than my Mesa/Boogie, because he thinks his amp has more "ass"?; I don't even want to know what that means.

Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

[This message was edited by David Mason on 30 October 2006 at 09:47 AM.]

quote:

---

I put a Barcus Berry fiddle pickup on my ShoBud and it sounded just like a Stradivarius. I didn't want that sound so I tried a Fishman piano pickup - and guess what - it sounded just like (a) Steinway.

---

Some say that "you can't make one guitar sound like another"; that you can't, for instance, make a Mullen sound like an MSA. But, but we can use a simple little device and make an Emmons push/pull sound like....

a Dobro???

I'd like you all to think about that real carefully!

You're talking about a signal-processing device, not a pickup. A Variax is also a signal-processing device.

quote:

---

Pat Burns huh? Hey, if they have 20 names for white snow, how many names do they have for yellow snow? I have a couple.

---

Ihat's interesting and I don't doubt you - it WAS what the Line 6 guys touted at NAMM for a few years though, and a side-by-side with a Variax 500 (mine) and an AS Tele with the stuff installed yielded identical sounds down to the slightest nuance (or annoyance, in the case of the lousy Mastertone patch!).

Now Jim S. don't get your panties tied in a knot, but as an individual who has worked in the audio field for over 40 years, I would like for you to classify a magnetic guitar pickup, if it's not a signal processing device.

Edited to add:
"Even before you plug your guitar in, its character is determined greatly by the type of construction material used, construction methods, string gauges, etc. It is this
basic character that the pickup picks up, adding its own colouration." I don't believe this statement is even subject for argument. However if one believes the pickup, and the entire signal path to the amplifier loudspeaker does NOT affect the TONE one hears with their ears, you possibly need to reconsider your thinking. Certainly it does IMO.

Tighten the neck screws too tight on an Emmons guitar and you'll swap it for Carter Starter immediately. Why? Because you've affected the resonance of the basic
constructed guitar itself. Read those posts on this Forum and you'll see I'm not out in left field. Besides I've tried it on my 66 Emmons.

For instance, do you really know the entire reason a single coil pickup is more "bright" than a humbucker type? Consider this: a single coil pickup usually is constructed around single magnet poles that "samples" a small physical amount of the string vibration whereas a humbucker type usually is manufactured with two
coils side by side around the magnet and the physical size of "string sampling" is much longer. Gives you a much different electrical energy being converted. You can see this on any Frequency Spectrum Analyzer.

Here's one for you; cut a small piece of 1/16 inch sheet iron about 1/16 inch wide and 1/2 inch long. Read the analyzer before the strip is placed on a series wound
magnet and you'll see a very sharp rise and fall of the signal at the vibrating frequency. After placing the iron across the magnet, parallel to the string, and you'll see a lower amplitude signal but the bandwith will be much larger with still a peak at the operating frequency of the string. Meaning? The signal produced will be lower in amplitude and it will sound "muddier" than the other experiment. These are facts we've seen here. Perhaps some of the above might be the reason for the statements that single coil pickups have better "string separation" (whatever that means) than the humbucker style pickups.

How about this? If a pickup is moved too close to the strings, the magnet itself will exert a "damping effect" on the string vibration and will certainly hamper the
"sustain" feature of the output signal. You think these things are not true, hook the output signal up to a Frequency Spectrum Analyzer and give it a go. We've done
just that.

I've heard it said in a seminar held by a very knowledgeable gent on this forum, given the proper equipment, the components needed to manufacture a processing
device, the time to experiment, he can make an electronic processing device to imitate and reproduce the tone from any and all guitars. I believed him then and I still
believe it's so.

Phred

------------------
"From Truth, Justice is Born"--Quanah Parker-1904

[This message was edited by Fred Shannon on 01 November 2006 at 02:45 PM.]

In some cases I have swapped pickups and there was just a small change in the highs of lows. In a few cases when I swapped pickups, I ended up with a drastically different sounding guitar, totally different in character. Don't believe a pickup can do this? Try Putting the 2 coils of a humbucker out of phase with each other and see what happens.

Phred

------------------
"From Truth, Justice is Born"--Quanah Parker-1904

His results on pickup frequency response look like simple second-order linear filters, both amplitude and phase - look here.

This type of lumped linear system analysis also goes for phase reversal and EQ. Nobody said that filtering like this can't be used to significantly change the sound, but I don't think it cancels out the inherent response of the instrument. Why do I think this?

First, the acoustical resonances in a structure like a wooden guitar are usually far more complex than a lumped linear filter. Hollowbody acoustic resonances are very strong even at low frequencies, but even solid body instruments tend to have complex resonances. These are distributed-parameter systems governed by partial differential equations. There may also be significant nonlinearities. IMO, the level of complexity in the response is usually far greater than a simple lumped network. Again, Steve Errede's course notes back this up with some practical frequency responses of guitars - look here.

But second, and perhaps more importantly, IMO, is the fact that I can usually distinguish the sonic character of my own varied instruments after changing pickups, amps, EQs, or other filters. One can make, for example, a PRS do a passable "Strat-like" tone, or fatten up a Strat to do a passable "Les Paul-like" tone, but side by side, there is no comparison between the sounds. The human ear and brain are well developed to detect side-by-side differences. If one listens closely, the sonic character of the instrument is there. Guitarists have generally always acknowledged this, and we probably do a lot more linear and nonlinear signal processing than most pedal steel players. IMO, the sonic signature of a guitar is not cancelled by any chain of lumped linear filter transfer functions. IMO, of course.

Instead, what I think happens is that certain big components in the frequency response can be altered, to give a reasonable facsimile of a "type of tone" - a hollowbody has certain major aspects to its tone, a Strat has another, a Les Paul another, and various construction techniques in a steel no doubt give different major signature components. One can manipulate these to hit the major signature components. But if one sits down and listens to the detail, each is different. Again, IMO.

[This message was edited by Dave Mudgett on 01 November 2006 at 05:49 PM.]

Have you ever been at a concert to see your favorite Steel Guitar player, or even a Piano, Bass, etc... and you listen and think to yourself...man, if I could just play on a 12 foot Steinway Grand Piano I would sound just like the pros, or maybe even better. I really think all this running around we do whether you play Steel or any other instrument, we of course want to do our absolute best, and to do that we need to remove any obsticals that get in our way... This "we think" affords us a similar environment that the pros play in. We think it puts us on the same playing ground...and removing all the stops "so to speak". I hope this makes sense to you. But...when it's all said and done, as Bobbe has said many times, it is our hands, fingers, and finesse and the smoothness of each note that creates our individual tones...just like we all look differently, we all sound and play differently too... Hey, try this, "Be yourself" and create a new tone, others will want to sound like you too...

------------------
Sho-Bud LDG, Nashville 1000, Hilton Volume pedal, Lexicon MPX100 Processor

It would seem that sometimes we trick ourselves into thinking that a better "this", or a newer "that", will take our playing abilities to a new level. It won't.

What it CAN do is INSPIRE us to TRY to get to that next level. To me, inspiration is the fuel powering the engine of practice. When I hear Buddy, or Weldon, or any of the many masters of the steel, play those amazing things on their guitars, I get inspired to try to play like that...practice.

In my opinion, no one can excel beyond what he has studied and practiced. Sure, a very poor quality guitar can IMPEDE our progress, but not stop it. The only thing that can stop our progress is ceasing to study and practice.

Inspiration can come in many forms. We would do ourselves a great favor by determining what it is that inspires us to practice more. Then, when we feel down about our progress, we can use that inspirational tool to re-energize our enthusiasm.

Now, couple that inspiration with tenacity, and there are few playing obstacles we can't overcome.

------------------
Bobby Lee (a.k.a. b0b) - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6) My Blog

------------------
Sho-Bud LDG, Nashville 1000, Hilton Volume pedal, Lexicon MPX100 Processor

Thanks for bringing that up Gary.

------------------
Sho-Bud LDG, Nashville 1000, Hilton Volume pedal, Lexicon MPX100 Processor

1.) Alder: full and rich, with fat low-end, nice cutting mids, and good overall warmth and sustain. Alder is generally considered to be one of the "traditional" Stratocaster body woods.

(2.) Ash: exhibits a "snappier" tone with a bright edge, but with a warm bass and long sustain. It is often considered as the other "traditional" Stratocaster body wood.

(3.) Poplar: one of the softer hardwoods, nicely resonant with a meaty tone. Many guitar manufacturers as a substitute for alder are using this wood, as it is quite similar in tone.

(4.) Basswood: the principal wood used on many Japanese made instruments. This is due both to its tonal response, (once again, very similar to Alder) as well as the fact that Basswood is much more readily available to the manufacturers in Asia.

(5.) Mahogany: deep warm mids, good sustain and nice "bite"

(6.) Maple: punchy, bright, and has a nice bite on the high end. Often used only as a laminated top instead of an entire body, as it tends to be a particularly heavy wood.

It'd be interesting to see steel manufacturers work with different woods from a purely tonal aspect. Each will impart a different timbre on an instrument. It doesn't seem very normal in steel manufacturing - but I've had Teles made of every wood listed above plus several others (koa, pine, rosewood, a few laminates of different types, and chambered ash and alder) and each, even with the same pickup, had an entirely different tone. They all sounded like Teles - but with a different timbre, and enhancement (and/or softening) of difetent frequencies.

The metal endplates, changer and other basic structural parts of a steel will be part of the instrument's natural tone, so endplate alloy changes would likely have the same effect as wood types.

Pickup changes (also bridge changes, fret work or changes, saddle swaps, changes of string types, tuner changes, circuit mods, pickup additions...or subtractions...,even pickguard changes in some cases; and of course setup - screw/bolt adjustments, changing neck screws to a bolt system, neck pocket work, bridge fitting, saddle angle changes, saddle screw end contact, saddle spring changes), would "massage" the tone( yes, each of those DOES make a diference to some players, who can recognize that a change has been made without being told or it being visible) and pickups/circuits could significantly change the output level - but in each case the guitar sounded like the wood it was made of (with variances between ash guitars, for example, based on weight, density, grain pattern, etc).

On a steel, changes in rod and other mechanical part alloys would be akin to tuner/pickguard, fret and associated changes on a 6-string.

Basically, I would spend about a week on a "setup" for a good player, and it could make a huge difference in the quality of the response, the sustain, and the feel. But it would nnot change the inherent tone of the guitar at all.

In each case, the tone of a guitar defines it - it's unique and can't be fundamentally changed. It can be "improved" (or detracted from), but those changes will never alter the inherent, natural tone of a particular instrument.

Players bring me guitars they don't like the tone of. If I pin it down to minor things, setup or parts changes can take care of it. But if what they don't like is the natural tone of the instrument and expect "parts chasing" to "fix" it, they need to save money in the long run and buy an instrument that sounds "right" to them to start with.

I've watched a lot of guys waste hundreds...even thousands...of dollars on a guitar trying to "fix" the tone, when what they are trying to "fix" can't be achieved.

[This message was edited by Jim Sliff on 12 November 2006 at 08:04 AM.]

(This was Bobbe's answer when I read it to him over the phone),

b0b - "Jim, you're wrong about how the Variax works. The "samples" are actually 6 digitally controlled equalizers, one for each string."

Could you explain how an "equalizer" does a 12-string effect with variable detuning? Or the sitar "decaying buzz"?

Assuming you're right, please point me to the source for the info - I'd really like to read it. It relates to this thread and others regarding that technology in a steel.