Electronics, The Use Of...

Doctor J

It seems the vast majority of modern guitars are still shipped with electronics from the 50's, whereas the electronic options on a lot of modern basses are almost endless. Guitarists, what is your attitude to the use of active pre-amps in your axes, have you ever considered it? Is it a case of the amp providing the tonal changes? Is it just a case of "If it ain't broke don't fix it"? Do you leave it to pedals? Does the prospect of a mid boost switch or the ability to cut and boost bass and treble at your fingertips leave you cold? Have you ever even thought about it?

I'm a big fan of the tonal variety of a good preamp on a bass but, then again, I do love the simplicity of just plugging in and letting my hands do the dirty work. Preamps are something I've glanced at for guitar (excluding piezos, they're a different subject altogether, I'm talking about regular magnetic pickups here) but there don't seem to be that many available.

So let's hear it, why don't yiz want them, ye bleedin luddites? :pac:

Karl Hungus

Largely, I'd welcome things like a mid boost, or other functions. I do get the sense that guitarists in general are very closed-minded, especially considering the reactions to the Moog guitar for example, and EMGs are about as adventurous as the mainstream will go, so to speak. I've always thought Neal Moser's electronics work for BC Rich back in the day was extremely intruiging, but most guitarists seem to spit on the idea.

I would like to see some more variety and some interesting new things in guitars, but with that said, I seem to get by ok tonally as it is.

Doctor J

I always thought a sweepable mid cut/boost would be an invaluable thing on a guitar but it seems folks just prefer EQ pedals, by the looks of it.

Dord

I think they're very much close minded as KH says. I know a lot of people dislike an instrument if they find out it's active. Personally I love the extra tone shaping abilities.
Out of 4 of my basses, 2 are active. 1 has a preamp with regular vol, tone but also has a varitone. The other (pics next week) has an Audere preamp with Bass, Mid and Treble controls and some more.

I'd rather have the bass/mid/treble controls on the instrument than in a pedal on the floor. You can switch or adjust them on the fly, much better IMO.

Voodu Child

Guitarists are traditionalists, most are still trying to replicate sounds from the 60's/70s. You only need to look at all the guys playing LPs and Strats, because that's what Jimi or Jimmy or whoever played. Im not saying that's a bad thing, just the way it is.

And the big brands are anything but adventurous. You only have to look at all the re-issues and 'relics' and all that craic....they're more interested in making stuff they already made decades ago than coming up with something new.

So its kind of a never ending loop, you've got the guys buying Gibsons and Fenders because they want to sound/look like their heroes, and you've got Gibson and Fender happily satisfying that market.

Sure, theres the odd innovation or adventurous brand, but for the most part, I guess its pretty difficult to sell a new idea to guys so stuck/happy in their ways..

smellslikeshoes

Think Voodoo_child has hit the nail on the head as regards guitarists, but why do Bass players players generally push the boat out further?

boycey

I kinda prefer things nice and simple- generally the old two volume/two tone set up is all I need. Having said that I find master volume/tone arrangements to be too simple!! Sometimes too many options on hand are a distraction to me and I spend more time tweaking than playing. So having said that and with a collection of Gibsons and Fenders I guess Im very much stuck in my ways/a traditionalist!! (Gibson and Fender love me for it though, screw you guys:D)

Dord

smellslikeshoes wrote: »

Think Voodoo_child has hit the nail on the head as regards guitarists, but why do Bass players players generally push the boat out further?

Well, I think a big part of it (IMO) is that bass players generally tailor their tone to the situation at hand but guitarists are more likely to pick a tone and stick with it. However bad it may suit the situation. YMMV.

eoin5

Dord wrote: »

Well, I think a big part of it (IMO) is that bass players generally tailor their tone to the situation at hand but guitarists are more likely to pick a tone and stick with it. However bad it may suit the situation. YMMV.

Guitarists are supposed to have their signature sound, even if it means plowing a square block into a round hole

fish-head

When it comes to guitars, I am an unashamed luddite. It worked and got great tone 50 years ago and still does now.

Doctor J

I don't believe an active circuit would hinder vintage tone, surely the ability to fine tweak it would be a good thing, no? I might look into it, see if there's anything out there and try it on the black strat, even adapt a small bass circuit if there's nothing for guitar.

smellslikeshoes wrote: »

Think Voodoo_child has hit the nail on the head as regards guitarists, but why do Bass players players generally push the boat out further?

I think it's because the amp plays a much, much bigger role with guitars. A lot of the bass you hear on CD's or at gigs is DI'd - ie you're hearing the signal from the bass before it gets to an amp. With bass, you're just hearing the instrument alone a lot of the time. A lot of guys like to have the ability to tweak their tone whether they're amped up or not. With guitar, it's unlikely you'll ever do a gig without an amp (or a pod, etc, something with effects and tone shaping) so perhaps it's not as crucial, plus guitars generally have more pickups, your average P bass requires a bit of skill to get big tone changes, it's a lot easier to play your way and have some electrickery do the hard work :pac:

68 lost souls

Ive always been a fan of experimenting. My last tinkering left me with a sort of passive tonal system which has all sorts of bells and whistles. Over 100 different tonal options from three seymourduncan single size humbuckers. Put it into a strat and the only difference lookswise to the layout of the electronics is the 5 way is repaced with 3 mini toggles.

Karl Hungus

You know, this thread has got me thinking. The one thing I find very handy these days is my modded tubescreamer, which I use as a clean boost. If I had that, built into the guitar, less controls than on the actual tubescreamer itself, maybe just a single knob for tone, and a pull/push pot for on/bypass, it would be fantastic.

Dord

Karl, guitar fetish makes a drop in tubescreamer as one of their modboards.

Patricide

Well imo, i think that basses have too many optins available. Now im usually big into finding somthing that fits me lik a glove but at times i can feel like the whole market has too many options. I still think guitars should have certain things like an active eq on board though.

Great to see comanys like manson guitars are pushing the envelope though.

Karl Hungus

Dord wrote: »

Karl, guitar fetish makes a drop in tubescreamer as one of their modboards.

I actually shot off a message to the dude who modded my pedal about it, he makes his own pedals as well, so could probably whip up something incredibly good.

nyarlothothep

Im by no means knowledgeable about guitar tech stuff but Im all for new features in guitars, they add new dimensions to what you can create, new sounds open up different tonal possibilities, you can write really interesting stuff as a result. Thats what I would consider the modern electric guitar sound to represent back in the day, it wasn't acoustic, it was distorted, totally new sound, great music results. Pianos, violins, technological advancements move things forward. The amount of people playing gibsons and teles is unreal. I prefer my Ibanez and assortment of pedals, don't care much for purity, its a relative concept in my mind.

Also must add that bass guitars have funkier designs on average. I would like it if there were more modern strange looking guitars.

sei046

TBH I think the advancement in basses as more to do with the nature of the instrument. Bass has to fit in, It has to be in the pocket, there is nothing worse than a bass that isnt doing its job. I am waiting for a hail of abuse saying this but in reality 90% of bass performances are in a supporting role to vocals or guitar or something.

In a lot of bands guitar can be one of the principal sound.

I dont agree about using strats and LPs because of the greats. When I look at a setlist/recording I am playing on I look at what needs to be done and how i can do that. A strat just isnt going to do what a LP can do and vice versa, and then it may work out, as it has a LOT that neither can do what a JP6 can do. So no i dont pick my guitars because of the greats by any means, its all a means to an end.

As for twiddly bits I have used the fernandes sustainer, active EMGs, Piezo and stacked buckers just off the top of my head.

My LP is in getting a roller bridge and coil tap done. My HSS MM4 is in getting a tap wired to the bridge bucker so it can be eased in and out with the tone control.

TBH I think a lot of the time people go for all these features and what happens is you start to introduce problems when things arent ideal. If its a good instrument to begin with its probably easier to rely on its own tonal merits. I know plenty of times lads have filled in for someone with me or i have filled in in other bands and guys have their "settings" on their guitar or preamps and everyone is wondering why it sounds so weird until they realise he has a few really unneccesary processes going on.


I sound as If i am saying its a bad idea but thats not it at all. Its just that there is no pointing in wanting a different sound just for the sake of it. With over 50 years of electric guitar its rare your going to find a tone radically different than whats gone before but to me tone is just a tool. I dont have ONE tone. I have a tone for the job.

Doctor J

sei046 wrote: »

TBH I think the advancement in basses as more to do with the nature of the instrument. Bass has to fit in, It has to be in the pocket, there is nothing worse than a bass that isnt doing its job. I am waiting for a hail of abuse saying this but in reality 90% of bass performances are in a supporting role to vocals or guitar or something.

In fainess though, there hasn't been a pocket in 60 years that a Fender P or J doesn't fill. Bass technology has moved on a hell of a lot, I wouldn't say fitting in is the reason at all.

sei046

Im not saying your wrong but is every other bass using preamps to emulate what a P or J can do anyway? If thats the case then surely everyone should just play them!

Doctor J

I think bass playing has moved on from just sitting in the pocket. Granted, almost every player out there is primarily keeping a groove but there are a lot of musical forms where bass is a lot more to the fore and, perhaps, the ability to manipulate tone on the fly has been required. Music has moved on since the 50's, there are new ways to play bass which didn't exist when the instrument was first created. For example, the pop and slap technique generally favours a bit of a high end boost, an extra bit of zing, which may not sound great playing regular basslines. The advent of electric jazz has opened a lot of doors for bass as a lead instrument too. Funk and Hip-hop both largely require an up-front bass presence, it's frequently the lead rhythm instrument.

What I'm getting at is that bass has moved on as an instrument, even within a traditional band context. It's not just about sitting in a pocket and making a guitarist sound good anymore. Yes, keeping the toes tapping is still the biggest part, but there's a lot more to it than that these days.

sei046

But wouldnt a P and a J do that so?

Doctor J

Not to the extent that you could jump from a tone suited to pop and slap to some fat thumping finger style sound at the flick of a switch, no.

That's why they invented the J-Retro :pac:

Dord

Doctor J wrote: »

Not to the extent that you could jump from a tone suited to pop and slap to some fat thumping finger style sound at the flick of a switch, no.

That's why they invented the J-Retro :pac:

The J-Retro is cool, but pretty expensive.

I should be getting my new bass back from Derrick Nelson soon and it has an Audere JZ-3. Much better! It's got Vol, Mid/Bal, Tre/Bass and a Z-mode switch which is basically some sort of impedance selector. Not quite sure, but it changes the sound. :pac:

Doctor J

I had a look at them a while back and went with a Noll which has all the J-Retro and Audere had (except the mysterious Z switch), plus a working passive circuit with a real passive tone for those old school moments. No poxy LED either

Dord

Actually the Audere's led only comes on when its starting up to advise you of the battery level, after that it goes off. That Noll one looks pretty nice, makes the plate look stock from the outside. :cool:

Doctor J

Yeah, it's absurdly complicated on the underside though :pac:

A stacked push pull pot is like an iceberg, you only see a very very small part of it above the surface.

John

Although I play a fairly old fashioned guitar (as I love the sound of the Gretsch), I'm always surprised that there are not more options available on/in guitars. When it is done, it tends to be gimmicky rather than sounding good. While most people pooh-pooh those Line 6 modelling guitars from a few years ago, I have heard them being used well and I'm keeping a careful eye on the new Moog guitar as it is a company like that which will pull off something interesting (as the traditional companies are more interested in finishes and celebrity signatures on the headstock).

Ravelleman

I secretly covet a BC Rich Mockingbird with all the electronics. That is, I believe, what makes a Mockingbird a Mockingbird - a guitar with the options to create so many different sounds. Although they did (and do) use the myriad of switches on other models too.

Karl Hungus

John wrote: »

(as the traditional companies are more interested in finishes and celebrity signatures on the headstock).

I wouldn't knock celebrity signatures tbh. Sure, there's the likes of Dean who are pumping out as many different Dimebag sigs as they can, I think that quite often, artists can bring little innovations to the field. Clapton's mid boost for example.

John

Yeah but can't they just do that without putting the celebrity's name on the headstock and charging for the privilege? By all means, great guitarists should be giving a lot of feedback (both in terms of ideas and guitar noise) to guitar companies and getting more out of instruments. I don't these innovations only have to be on celebrity endorsed guitars.

Karl Hungus

John wrote: »

Yeah but can't they just do that without putting the celebrity's name on the headstock and charging for the privilege? By all means, great guitarists should be giving a lot of feedback (both in terms of ideas and guitar noise) to guitar companies and getting more out of instruments. I don't these innovations only have to be on celebrity endorsed guitars.

The way it seems to me is that most guitar companies aren't bothered to innovate without an artist kicking them up the butt, so to speak. I remember asking on the Ernie Ball forums if they'd ever introduce another 7 string, and the answer was that they wouldn't even have a 7 in their lineup at all if it wasn't that Petrucci wanted it.