Danelectro Volume Pot.

[Brian T. Williams]

Hi,

I've just bought a new Danelectro 59 reissue 12 string that I absolutely love and am now using for gigging in preference to my Gibson 335-12 (unbelievable but true).

I just have one small issue that I hope you can help with.

The volume pot responds from "off" to almost full volume over approximately the first 30% of travel, with very little audible difference over the remaining 70%; (the effect is the same, whatever position the pickup selector switch is set).

Is this a common issue on cheaper electric guitars or Dano's. in particular, or would it be a "feature" of the 59 clone specifications?

Whatever the case, is it just a case of replacing the volume pot with a better quality one?

Any help or advice greatly appreciated.

Thank you.........Brian

[Brian T. Williams]

Wow! I'm getting a bit lost now ;-)

I'm going to do as Rusty suggested, install the opposite of what is fitted (I've ordered an A500k pot today), stick with the treble bleed capacitor/resistor and "see how it goes"! (I'll let you know).

Thanks again for all the helpful advice.

[Russell Vance]

Thanks for you support Brian, I am sitting in the corner with a traffic cone on my head at the moment!

Rusty.

[David Collins]

If you're interested in spending an hour or so watching some pretty boring stuff, I recently put up a series of videos that should hopefully make the taper issue a bit more clear. 

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLO33g8sM_b8V2Z25rI2VPWFOb00X7...

[Russell Vance]

Thank you David, they are far from boring and explains (to me) why I arrive at combinations and configurations that defy standard wisdoms.  

I know what works in our guitar and amp combinations but up until now have been unable to adequately explain why - lot of it just didn't seem logical.

Of particular interest was your explanation and demonstration of the effect of the pickup loading and amp/front end effects input impedance on the tapers - this has been driving me nuts but was a problem I couldn't address because I was looking in the wrong place.

I work with players who use a lot of high volume clean channel driving natural power section overdrive and breakup/distortion  but we also have players who use digital/analogue boxes for completely shaping their front end and basically using the amp as a clean power amp. 

In the early days my guitars changed tone and output dynamics from amp to amp (and we have a lot of amps) and I had no idea why - we used to change pickups a lot to alleviate this and "fix" the situation or use a "drag" impedance control to get things back into shape -all sorts of band-aids really.  

We started working with linears with single volume controls (no tone circuit ) when we started using BKP heavies into high gain tube and they rolled back beautifully, lovely range and delicate touch......but, when I put the same linear setups into our low output pickups into clean/ overdrive channel stuff they went south quickly....treble bleed was another puzzle in the series of combinations I would sooner have just ignored as they again were unpredictable when everything got loud.

This is not to bore anyone, and I've been candid because I know a lot of my colleagues really struggle with this stuff -  but it's just off the clock when you try to match the standard theory with what practically happens. Your series of vids are superb - real little light-bulb moment (a number of moments actually)

Magnificent work David Collins, yr a lifesaver - where do I send the beer to?  You work with Hesh?

Rusty.

[Brian T. Williams]

Hello....

Thanks for all the good advice, I'm a real novice at electric guitar circuitry but I'm determined to get this right; it's a fantastic  guitar and deserves a bit of attention.

I am however having a problem sourcing best quality components but I'm still looking; (so far I've only found "Alpha" pots).

I've tried a A500k (audio) replacement pot with and without the treble bleed circuitry and various combinations with the original  B500k (linear)  and eventually found that the best result was obtained by replacing the original pot without the treble bleed components (as Len suggested earlier in the post).

I now intend track down some quality (CTS) pots, a decent three way selector switch and good quality cabling and then start the whole exercise  again !!

[Peter Poyser]

Brian.

I think the best way to try to understand and make sense of all this.

Is to first appreciate that the Human Ear and Brains perception of and sensitivity to Musical Sound, is Logarithmic in Nature.

It "changes its responsiveness", through a dramatic curve according to the Frequency of the Sound it is hearing and the Level of Amplitude.

Furthermore, the Frequency of the Sound and the Level of Amplitude are symbiotically linked and effect each other. In other words The Ear is more (or less) responsive to differing Frequencies, according to the Level at which they are being Listened to.

We see these differences in the Fletcher Munson Curve.

http://zesoundsuite.blogspot.co.uk/2010/02/fletcher-munson-curve-wh...

 

Perhaps you have seen Hi -Fi Amplifiers or Car Stereos with a "Loudness Button" which Boosts the Bass and Treble ends of the Frequency Spectrum.

These compensatory additional equalisers  exist to help the Human Ear overcome these particular Auditory Deficiencies, when listening at Lower Levels of Volume.

 

 

But the Salient Point to take on board, is that the way our Ears and Brain work, is Highly Logarithmic in their effect.

 

 

Secondly.

Because of this.

The way we Measure Sound Pressure Levels, and Adjust Professional Audio Equipment etc, is also reflected by a Logarithmic Method of Measurement.

We Measure and Adjust in Terms of Decibels. Now there are many different methods of Measuring Decibels, and each has a specific purpose. dBFS, dBA, dBC, all the way through to dBZ, although it's a little known fact.

Many of these are simply different types of "Weighting" areas of the Frequency Spectrum.

But the Salient Point to take on board, once again is that the way we Record, Adjust and Measure Sound Pressure Levels, is Highly Logarithmic.

 

 

Because of these facts.

To my mind, it is most in accord with everything to do with our Natural Physiology.

The way our Ears and Brains perceive and are sensitive to Musical Sound, and everything to do with how we Record, Adjust and Measure Sound, generally speaking.  

If when we fit Potentiometers to Electric Guitars, they work precisely the same way our Ears and Brains do, and the same way we understand the Measurement of everything to do with that Sound.

Now there are plenty of Expensive Electric Guitars around which for various reasons, usually due to the Sophistication of their Overall Circuitry, stray from this Principle.

However, for the Best, Most Historically Significant Instruments of Iconic Status, you will find that this Overriding Principle is a Strong Factor of their Design.

They simply work in the same way our Ears and Brains understand and perceive Musical Sound.

When this isn't the case, it seems wrong to how we want the Controls to Function.

 

 

Personally.

I have always found CTS Pots and Switchcraft to give an Outstanding Sound Quality, whenever I have used them.

However, I would warn against doing an internet search and buying CTS Pots from wherever you find is cheapest.

The thing is, that different Pots of the same value are graded according to whether their Tolerance  is Plus or Minus say 10% in Spec, or Plus or Minus say 20% in Spec.

So you might get a better quality, accuracy  and consistency throughout the Range and Travel if you pay a little more and buy from the best Supplier, and who has the Best Reputation.

There are also differences in Taper Percentages, and it can get a little complex, so this is another good reason to go the Best Suppliers, who probably already will know,  just exactly you really would be best to use.

Some people like "No Load Pots" for Tone Controls, that work normally and then suddenly cut all the extra circuitry out at the last part of the Tapers Radius. these tend to Boost Volume and Brightness overall, and add an extra adjustment.

 

Also if you have any concerns or questions you can usually ask a Good Dealer before you order, and clarify any details.

Here is the Detail Data Sheets for CTS Guitar Pots.

http://www.ctscorp.com/components/Datasheets/450g.pdf

 

 

Here are some other Links that may be of help.

http://www.seymourduncan.com/support/wiring-diagrams/schematics.php...

http://www.guitarpartsresource.com/electrical_ctspots.htm

http://www.stewmac.com/shop/Electronics,_pickups/Potentiometers/CTS...

 

 

Good Luck with your Guitar.

 

 

P

[Brian T. Williams]

Quote Russ "Your series of vids are superb - real little light-bulb moment (a number of moments actually)

Magnificent work David Collins, yr a lifesaver - where do I send the beer to?)" ......+1

Thank you P.P., some very interesting stuff and thank you also for taking the time to provide the links.

As usual, fantastic help and advice from you experts, on what must be the friendliest forum online. I am not a luthier or technician, just a player who likes to get the best from my instruments and my sincere thanks go to all of you!

Brian.

[Brian T. Williams]

So, I finally got hold of CTS pots and tried various combinations to obtain the best result.

I found the best result was with a CTS linear pot (fitted with a treble bleed kit) for the volume and an audio pot for the the tone.

This is how the Dano was originally equipped, but now with much better quality pots and this has definitely solved the issue.

From reading all the advice, I gather this goes against the general "rule of thumb" (audio pot for volume, linear pot for tone); but pehaps this configeration is what makes the Danelectro sound so special; and believe me, it does !!  I am very pleased to say....................problem solved!!

Cheers........Brian

[Russell Vance]

Hi Brian,

This is reassuring stuff, apropos my orginal advice.   If you watch the David Collin's vids you will find that the conventional wisdom's do not necessarily apply and he shows these affects clearly on the spectrum analyser.  He also describes  linear volume pots for volume applications and audio pots for tone (which is contrary to popular views). So it's been a learning experience all round this one - good work.

R. 

[Peter Poyser]

Hi Brian.

I'm extremely glad you found a satisfactory working solution to your problem.

Like you, I too have found that the CTS Pots and Switchcraft Gear do give a substantial Tonal Improvement.

It's also very reassuring indeed to know that by following the Manufacturers Design, you found the Best Sounding Solution to your Ears.

My experience has been that when a Manufacturer does its Research and Development correctly, and build for quality, that their Design cannot be bettered.

If it can be, its either because they haven't been thorough enough, prioritise volume over quality, have through cost cutting selected inferior parts, or a Singular Modifier is really looking to completely alter the Instruments Tonal Characteristics, and Change the Nature of the Beast fairly radically.

Obviously, there's no accounting for that last point as people often address some Inner Personal Dissatisfaction and Shortcomings in their Performance, as much as an Instrument Dissatisfaction per say, when they embark on that course, though naturally, they often don't see it that way.

However, what I find interesting, is that your post throws up some extremely demanding questions about what it is regarding different solutions, that is better here or there when applied, and why it is that different people do prefer different solutions, to this, quite basic issue?

Usually it comes back to the Loading of a Number of Factors that interact differently at different points throughout the Compass of their Range.

 

 

This is not an argument in any way at all.

Heaven forefend such a thing, more an exploration, of understanding some of the real issues.

Last year, I tried to buy four New Gibson 335 Guitars, and rejected them all for various build and quality problems, I deeply regret to have to write that, as a Lifelong Gibson Fan. Most of the people that berate the Company, do so simply disappointed because they really are Fans of the Designs.

One of the issues I had with every single one of them, was that when I turned One Pickup Off via the Volume Control and simply used the other Pickup Full On the Volume Control, suddenly there was No Sound at All! You had to have Both Pickup Volumes on to some degree, to make Either Pickup Work Properly and give any Sound.

Now you could say, why not simply use the Three Way Switch? But I was simply wanting to buy a New Guitar, and was in my critically observational "Take Nothing for Granted, Check Everything is Working Correctly Mode" and looking for a Properly Manufactured Instrument.  All my Instruments are Vintage so I am used to the Parson's St. Kalamazoo 335's, whose Controls worked completely independently for Volume, as all my Instruments do, so I immediately noticed the Global Effect differences in the ways, the Modern Models worked.

To be honest, my immediate thought was "They have used Linear Taper Pots in these Guitars and the various issues I am hearing are where they just don't work as I expect, which is Fully Independently, but I didn't expect that I dramatically lose ALL SOUND if the Potentiometers are in a Particular Position, and that could be a Problem in Stage Performance."  It was enough to make me decide I didn't want to own a Working Guitar that as an Artefact of its Current Electronic Design, FAILS COMPLETELY to WORK, simply by having the Potentiometers a Particular Way that they never did when the Instrument was a Top Performers Tool. There is enough to think about in every Stage Performance, without having worries like That!

My Best Friend bought me my first Gibson 335 forty two years ago, so I had foolishly imagined by now, I knew a little about how they should work, after flying around Europe doing T.V. Shows and Playing with them in Live Concerts. Clearly something had changed. So after I got home, I did a bit more Research, and found that, as I had suspected, the New Gibson 335's had Linear Taper Potentiometers. But Gibson additionally Manufacture far more expensive, Vintage Original Specification Models, that were fitted with the 500k Ohm Audio Taper Potentiometers throughout, for Volume and Tone for those that wanted these Vintage Style Instruments, Like me.

Unlike the U.S.A. in general, Dealers here are far, far smaller, you would probably laugh at them all, and the chances of getting a VOS Model in one close by, much slimmer than for most of you, so I didn't see much chance of getting one any time soon. But for me, A Performance Orientated  Musician, the notion of owning a Guitar that Live in Performance, could be set by the Player to give NO SOUND at ALL, even when one of the Volume Controls were set Fully Up on 10, was Completely Unacceptable to me.

This is not a Fault of Linear Taper Potentiometers per say, but rather a Characteristic of the Overriding Global Wiring Scheme that is commonly found to be accompanying Linear Potentiometers, more often than not these days.

But this is a Basic Wiring Design Point, on Many Modern Instruments, that strangely, no one ever seems to Question. Why not question it?

I see it as an Accident Waiting to Happen.

It is Murphy's Law!

 

 

To be honest, I have a preference.

Others will be different to me for their own good reasons no doubt and that is their Right and Privilege.

But I greatly prefer the Original Traditional Wiring the Fame of these Instruments was based upon, and the Manner in which their Audio Taper Potentiometers Work.

Not only do they work in a way I was taught was the Best Way to get the Best Recorded Sound from these Instrument by Highly Qualified Tonmeister Recording Engineers, the Volume and Tone Controls tends to Change Sound Quickly and Give the Sound I want easily, which is often a Large Change for a Small Movement, and Give a Warmer, Fuller Tone at the End of the Scale to my Ears.

The way all my Vintage Gibson's are wired from the Factory, is completely different to the way the Modern Gibson's are wired up. This allows for Greater Tonal Adjustment throughout the Potentiometers Range and alters the way both Volume and Tone Controls Interact Together compared to the way the Modern Instruments Sound throughout their Range. That, which it could be argued is more consistent, is of course another way of saying they don't change anything much at all, for a Great Deal of Movement.

That to me, is the problem with them.

 

 

The thing is, it's not a Gibson thing purely and simply, its a bigger issue with Wiring Design.

Whilst I like the way the Vintage Instruments Sound, which is how they were Originally Designed to Work and Sound. I actually Strongly Dislike the way most of the Modern Equivalent Instruments Work and Sound.

I actually find they Provide a Very Subtle Adjustment, what I mean by that is the kind of difference that a Non Musician would Not Even Notice. Whereas, when I adjust a Control Knob, I expect to quickly hear a Genuine Difference, that Anyone at All would Notice.

One thing I learnt from the Inventor of the Modern Recording Console, Rupert Neve, who was a Great Help to the Little Group I Played with years ago, was to appreciate how an Equaliser Works when you turn the Knob, he liked them to give an Easily Detectable and Noticeable Difference with Each Small Movement, and saw that aspect as Good, as do I.

http://rupertneve.com/company/honors/

As a General Point, I would say that Modern Guitars with Linear Potentiometers seems to give More Treble throughout the whole Compass of their Range at any given point, and the Change in Sound is also far more Gradual, and thus less Noticeable. Like Rupert, I would perceive that minimalism as a Bad Thing, but simply from a Musicians Practical and Functional Point of View.

I find many Modern Guitars on the Edgier, Tinnier Side as opposed to the Fuller Warmer Sound that Historically were a Hallmark Characteristic Tone of Gibson's, and why they were Sought After. For some extraordinary reason, the Vintage Models whose Sound I like, Appear to be Highly Desirable in the Guitar Community, Certainly Far More Expensive to Buy and Greatly Sought Out by Players today.

Whilst the Sonic Qualities and Playability of the Equivalent Modern Guitars are often laughably derided by Guitar Enthusiasts, in direct comparison to their Forebears. I would be of the Mind Set, that a Sonic Part of that displeasure, revolves around the New Configuration of the Electronic Design, the Specific Components Utilised, and the Working Manner in which a Player Must Interact with them. He has no choice but a lot of work to make a real difference , to my way of thinking.

 

 

I suppose I could sum up my general evaluations by writing that I feel that the Electronics on many Modern Guitars, have been Well Designed by Excellent Electronic Engineers, who have Designed them for Strict Adherence to a Best Technical Specification on Paper or a Test Bench.

Whereas, all of the Iconic Guitar Designs were originally Determined Overwhelmingly Simply by Ear, and their Useful Function in a Practical Application in the Task for which they were intended.

 

 

I was reminded of this fact a short while ago when I Modified and Upgraded a Vintage Precision Bass especially for Recording Applications.

I lined all the Internal Compartments with Copper including the underside of the Scratch Plate. Fitted a Vintage Precision Bass Pickup in along with CTS Audio Taper Potentiometers, and a Switchcraft Jack Socket.

I went to the Fender Site and Downloaded the Wiring Diagram for a Standard Fender Precision Bass. And used the Capacitor in the Design. Listening to it, it just wasn't right so added another of the Same Value, so doubling that, where upon it had that Perfect Vintage Tone I was after.

Later Downloading the Wiring Diagram for the Specific Year of the Basses Vintage Design, which is of course what I should have done first but took a while to find, I found that Leo Fenders Original Design was for a Capacitor that was precisely what I had eventually concluded was Correct, got to, by Very Careful Listening and Tonal Evaluation.

The Modern Basses use a 50 Microfarad Capacitor, whereas the Original Design calls for a 100 Microfarad Capacitor. I thought it a Strange and Wonderful thing that by going through a Similar Process to that which Leo Fender must have, by Trial and Error, I had eventually arrived at Exactly the Same, Final Result. Rupert Neve Designed his Recording Consoles, Listening to the Effect of Every Individual Component in Precisely  the Same Way.

What I am writing is that if we determine Sonic Values by Eye, Looking at Paper Graphs and Electronic Analysers, we can obviously learn a tremendously great deal about the effect of components and fully rationalise that as Intelligent Human Beings. But equally it is possible that we may in doing so, entirely miss the Most Important Issue of Pure Sonics of Sound and their Fundamental Practical Value to Working Musicians. And I suppose that for me, is the Sounding of the Division Bell, the Very Essence of the Matter.

I would love to write at length upon the manner in which Visual Stimuli alters the way in which we Perceive Sound, as our Brains Process the Sound quite differently dependent upon the Level and Type of Various Stimuli we are Absorbing at any One Time, Simultaneously.

The Brain also Changes Sound by altering the Harmonic Information as it Stores it in our Long Term Memory.

But am trying to be as brief, quick and concise as possible.

 

 

When I Record, I usually want a Clean Guitar Sound.

Unlike the masses that utilise Powerful Amplifiers with High Gain Input to Over Drive the Pre-Amp for Distortion. 

However if and when I do want Distortion, I find that using Smaller Amplifiers which for Recording are Far Better anyway, and furthermore allows you to Discern the Tone of the Guitar Pickups themselves, so More Satisfactory All Round to my Ear.  

As you push the "Sweet Spot "of such Amplifiers, (All Amplifiers have a Superior Tonal Output at a Particular Level), the Natural Distortion directly from the Speaker itself, Miced Up with a High Quality Studio Mic , gives a far more Characterful and Harmonically Pleasing to the Ear, Dynamic Quality of Sound. If it Distorts, it does, so with a Sweetness and Natural Musicality.

Furthermore, a Smaller, Less Powerful Guitar Amplifier opened up, will hit its Optimal Range, give its Finest Tonal Character, and Work Best in its Sweetest Spot too, but now at a Level that is perfectly commensurate with Ideal Operational Sound Levels in a Recording Studio; far better than a Highly Powerful Amplifier that is not fully opened up and operating way below its ideal range. It can never really give of its Best Sound that way.

Or indeed, opposed to an Overdriven Mush of High Gain Sound, that Totally Swamps, Disguises and Hides the Touch of the Player. Such Sound is so Over Processed straight from the Amp, it could be virtually anyone, Playing that Style of Sound.  Now obviously different Genres of Music, and Artistic Aesthetics can be argued for and against this point of view, I'm simply explaining mine, and others will do as they like.

However, it's worth considering  the fact that the Overwhelming Majority of Historically Great Guitar Solos by Legendary Players and Session Musicians, were actually Recorded Utilising This Simple Approach, with Very Good Guitars, Excellent Small Amps and Quite Basic Equipment.

 

 

The Very Antithesis of what is Commonly Encountered Today.

 

 

However.

High Gain, Deeply Compressed, Distorted Mush, has its advocates and devotees.

And from my perspective, I would say my observation has been that the mass and majority of Players that like Linear Potentiometers.

Generally come from a type of background, where they usually know too little about this and mistakenly think, High Gain, Heavily Over Driven Pre-Amps, Multi-Channel Direct Injection Taps and Hard Compression and Limiting, gives a Good Sound.

 

 

It does not.

It often, simply gives a Louder Sound, for All of the Time.

But it also Robs the Natural Dynamics of the Players Touch, and the Normal Responsiveness of the Amplifiers and Speaker.

It takes all those Beautiful, Entirely Natural Sound Waves, with their Striking Signature Transient Attack and squashes them flat into a Consistent, Sausage of Sound, that has Little to No Air and Dynamic Range at all.

 

 

Many C.D.'s Mp3's etc, are similarly processed.

But this effect is Completely Unnatural to the Human Ear and Brain.

It is Unmusical, in that No Acoustical Musical Instrument, gives this Compressed  Sound.

It Quickly Fatigues the Human Ear and Brain, so that people actively want the Sound to be Switched Off.

Vintage Analogue Recording Equipment allowed you to Push Levels somewhat and Tape provided a more Gentle, Natural Sounding Compression to Enhance Sound, Pleasingly to the Ear.

Modern Digital Prosumer Recording Equipment has a Clearly Defined Limitation, a Ceiling of Use, and Distorts Badly and Clips into Unmusical Distortion, if you try to push it in the same way, which people, of course do.

In point of fact, if you Record at - 6 dBFS, (which is far lower than most people will Record) it is almost a Mathematical Certainty that although this will appear to the eye to be a Safe Signal, Digital Intersampling Peaks will provide an Illegal Signal, that Distorts Badly and Sounds Terrible. -12dBFS is actually far better, but most people simply wouldn't take this on board.

Leaving Headroom is vitally important with all Digital Sound Equipment, and if you were to look over the Shoulder of someone like Nigel Godrich in the U.K. or Al Schmitt in America, when they are working, two of the Finest Producer/Engineers either side of the Atlantic, you would find they would aim for very surprisingly Moderated Levels for Tracking, with lots of Headroom, whereas most people, Max Everything Out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Godrich

http://alschmittmusic.com/

 

 

Just while I'm on the Topic, when you look at the Sound Wave in a Recording Sequencer.

It may seem that the Sound Waves show the Signal is Entirely Safe. This May Not be the Case At All in Reality.

What you are looking at, is In Truth the Unconstructed Sound Wave derived from a couple of dots, (a sample) as it would take far too much Computer Processing Power to give this Visual Information Fully and Accurately, (although it seems highly accurate) and you only encounter the Full Reconstructed Wave Aurally, at the point of Playback when it goes through the Convertors, so you can hear it.

This is why I state that it is almost a Mathematical Certainty that although Tracking Recordings at or Above - 6 dBFS will appear to the eye to be a Safe Signal, Digital Intersampling Peaks will provide an Illegal Signal, which when the Sound Wave is Fully Reconstructed, will provide Flat Sound Waves Peaks, and if you get enough of them, it will have an undesirable and measurable effect upon the Human Ear and Brain, even if you don't consciously perceive it.

"Listening to the Visuals" is an Big Problem, and one where most people, make basic mistakes.

"We're Getting a Great Sound Here, Come and Have a Look and See!"

This is no different to what at times can be happening.

With the Design of Modern Guitar Circuitry.

 

 

But.

This Compression Issue  is one strong reason why people simply don't Buy and Listen to Music, as much as they used to.

The Ear and Brain work in such a way that they Prefer to be Engaged and Released, Loud and Soft Dynamics, in each and every Note and Phrase.

It's a Natural  Characteristic of the Human Voice and entirely Natural to our Speaking and Singing. And as we have Grown Up, it's the way our Ears and Brains have Learnt to Perceive Sound.

 

 

It's the way Musical Instruments Work in Real Life.

 

 

The Truth is Sounding Extra Loud can Sound Great for a While.

But when Everything, is All at the Same Level, Maxed Out. All the Time, All the Way Through, it is Fatiguing to the Human Ear.

The Human Ear and Brain by Virtue of its Creative Design, prefers A Natural Sound and Dynamic Range to any other Form of Recorded Sound, or Live Sound for that matter. Al Schmitt has far more Grammy Awards for Music Recordings than anyone else on Earth in the whole History of Recorded Music. So you can take your pick on who to believe.

I've never known him pull more than 1 dB of Compression, on any Artists he Records, and it's just to catch the stray "over" that might occur, Riding the Faders as he does. For that matter, while I'm about it, he simply does not use any E.Q. on the Recording Consoles Parametric Equalisers either, whilst Tracking. There's nothing going on there at all. He gets the Best Possible Sound, by simply using the Best Mic's for the Sound Source, Choosing them Carefully and Placing Them Perfectly, in the Sweetest  Spot, for the Best Sound.

 

 

It's all Very Simple but Superbly Effective.

And just Requires Experience to Get it Right.

[Peter Poyser]

My observation in regard to how Linear Taper Potentiometers as are used by Younger Players.

Has been that most people, and I am thinking here, of especially the Modern Gibson Type Enthusiasts that use Linear Taper Potentiometers.

They do so, because they actually use the Volume Control, very much as if it were an Effect Control. To my way of thinking, this is an incorrect use of the Volume Controls Function.

In other words, they Push the Level of Gain into the Pre-Amp Higher, (Probably with a load of Sound Modifying Pedals in front) and achieve Distortion by turning the Hot Pickups Volume Control Up.

As they probably have some kind of Compressor/Limiter in line with all this it smooth's and balances things out, but the effect for them is that they get a Distorted Sound as they Turn the Volume Up, and a Clean Sound but not that much quieter overall, as they Back the Volume Down.

So in reality, what I am suggesting is that Players that follow this methodology, are really using the Volume Control as a handy Effect Changing Device, and not really as a Proper Volume Control at all. I simply wouldn't do things at way, because I believe there are far Better Sounding Ways to Create a Better Tone for both of these Different Types of Sound.

 

You can see why it's easy to do this for them.

If you don't have a Channel Switching Amplifier, Switching Box or some other Device.

 

Here's just one Better Solution.

But there are many different ways to do this.

http://www.compasspointstudios.com/lucas/dec/dec.html

 

 

Generally, I find simply using a Guitar and an Amplifier, Very Creatively, is the Best Way to Get the Best Sound without Highly Specialised Gear, like that Designed by Friends.

That the more Sound Modifying Equipment you use in any given Sound Chain of Equipment, as a General Principal, the Further and Further you get away from having the Best Possible Sound.

If you are having any trouble believing this. Then ask yourself why it is that so many of the Very High End Hi-Fi Amps have simply a Volume Control and little else at all, perhaps a Sound Source Selector Switch on the Front Panel. But no Tone Controls at all?

It's because as a General Principle, the Less Circuitry, and the Less Processing and the Less Modification  a Sound Source is pushed through, the Better it will Sound.

The Simpler the Chain, the Better the Sound.

 

 

I also take the view that it's a Helpful Aspect, of Good Transparent Sound Equipment Design, when the Function of the Available Knobs for Adjustment.

Closely Follow the Name Description that is actually on them.

Form Follows Function.

 

 

When they start to be used to do different things.

Than what they were originally meant to, everything can quickly become very messy and confusing.

To some, this may be the march and advancement of progress, but I have to confess, that watching the way many people do things today.

I personally have no doubt concluding, that they are quite simply, either merely confused, quite limited in their experience, or have never bothered to properly investigate or work with anyone that has Created Legendary, Classic Guitar Tone.

 

 

Where the Guitarists, Unique Playing, Touch and Tonal Voice, Shines Through!

 

 

It has been my experience, that there are at any one time.

Around perhaps half a dozen Guitarists, that ordinary everyday people that are not Players or Musically inclined.

Can Instantly Identify as Performing, when they hear but a few bars of Music, featuring the Hallmark Playing, Characteristic Touch and Dynamic Instrumental Sound, of those Iconic Figures.

In other words, these Particular Players have developed over time, a Strongly Distinctive Tonal Personality. To the extent that their Touch, Ability, Technique and Performance, has a Clear, Instantly Identifiable Musical Voice with a Boldly Consistent, Sonic Signature.

I am persuaded, that although they may own and have Played and Performed with a Great Many Different Types of Guitar over the years, and moved from this to that and back again at times, there remains for all of these Players, One Specific Guitar more than any other, which has become inextricably intertwined, and Indentified with Them, their Huge Success and most importantly, Their Instantly Identifiable, Sonic Signature Guitar Tonality.

Submerging all a Good Players Talent under a Sausage Like Mush of High Gain Distortion.

Seems to me the Worst Possible Form of Musical Production Betrayal.

Provided of Course the Player has a Unique Voice.

And is an Outstanding Talent.

To begin with.

 

 

I do understand that some people do things this way, and may prefer it, particularly if they started in Garage Studios, learning to do everything all by themselves. And they want a Distorted Bed of Electric Mush to accompany their Songs and need to carefully adjust through a consistent line of Mush.

But they have merely Followed a Trend that is Past, Not Set a New Trend for the Future, which is to my mind, what New, Modern Musicians should be all about. I'm simply explaining why I don't, why I think there's actually Far Better Ways to do all of these things, and why I think that if the Function of a Knob, follows its Actual Title, that everything is Clearer and Easier to Understand.

If you ever buy a New Car, and Selecting Forward Gear and Pushing the Gear Stick into Position One, you find that pressing your Foot on the Accelerator ,the Car Shoots Backward at Considerable Speed, you will Immediately Remember and Fully Appreciate the True Significance of this point.

The way I see it, the Big Problem Today, for Many Good Guitarists, is that none of them is Very Distinctive at all from one another.

If Everything is Distorted, Nothing is Very Clear.

They All Sound Very Much the Same.

Good News for Some!

:)

 

 

P

[Russell Vance]

Hello Peter,

You have covered a lot of ground here that is, on one hand well known with the recording and new wave of "heavy genus" technical players and techs, but on the other hand foreign to some/many.  

We should agree personal preferences may include bonecrushing SPL'S with heavily compressed/limited over the top front end and power amp distortion with a trainwreck sounding analogue pedal chain overlaid with power supply and crap batteries noise thrown in to boot, or it may just be a low gain pickup with a minimal circuit straight into a fully cranked non master volume amp etc.   Either approach is valid if that's what the punter likes and what time of the day or night it is and how much one has had.   So, we can get that out of the way.

These last two posts resonate well and I enjoyed picking through them - I particularly warmed to  the observation that the early sounds were achieved with "ear" evaluation and engineering and that subsequent popular technology breakthroughs have generally dumbed-down the tonal palette rather than enhanced the musical experience.  Most of the media based music I hear these days belongs in an elevator.  

But, recently I was asked to develop and build a particular class of 7 string heavies for the (very loosely termed) Djent, or progressive/technical player - after a long time away from that genus which I never really embraced in it's infancy.

Excellent idea: the top end of this style is now characterized by a dedicated and technologically well developed style and delivery that challenged how I looked at this stuff and my old world point of view.   These players understand high gain, headroom, string to string articulation, dynamics  low frequency tracking and the associated power requirements and the guitar formats required to deliver such things - and they go after their tone.  Another thing that I found had changed was the addition and musical exploitation of full spectrum complex chording which spanned from the  "subsonic" (it isn't, but it sounds good to say it) dropped tuning low stings right up to the skinnys - The last time I looked 10 years ago it was all 1st and fifth and octaves on the bottom three.

This contrasts with the set in concrete "classic rock" genre - nothing wrong with it, I grew up with it,  but it's the same 3000 songs and tone sets and instrument combinations played on constant rotation.  Widely supported by increasing levels of junk look-a-like instruments and re-issue of reissue cheap amps and "sound like your hero" pedals and modelling patches.  

So, Peter,  hidden away from general view are the below the radar "heavy" guys flying the flag for modern and progressive full range tone with both powerful and musical delivery.   This is coupled with a demand for sonic and technical excellence that would shame your average classic electric player  - seeing these new guys in action is a real shot in the arm.

Anyway, please excuse my avocation for this and it's probably a little left field for the forum - but it's one thing that has definitely renewed my enthusiasm and faith in the future of guitar slinging.

Regards,

Rusty.