Bookmarks

Yahoo Gmail Google Facebook Delicious Twitter Reddit Stumpleupon Myspace Digg

Search queries

emg pots knobs, roland sc 55 keyboard, bill lawrence pickups, sangen om bededag, carvin fatboy, all of you chord analysis, howard roberts fusion 3, john lodge wig?, ttompeten noten mit xallen , pica fierce faust cd

Links

XODOX
Impressum

#1: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 00:37:44 by Joey Goldstein

EMG active pickups, which are low impedance, come with a 25k audio taper
tone pot using a .1mf capacitor.

I find that this tone control doesn't make the sound of the neck pickup
(EMG-SA) dark enough for the jazz sound I like to hear (Lorne Lofsky,
who sounds great and uses the same stuff, notwithstanding).

So I'm thinking of trying different value caps on the tone control.

Anybody else out there doing anything like this with EMG's?

But, .1mf is the highest value cap I've seen and/or have around the
house. I'm sure they must make higher value caps (.15mf, .2mf, etc.) so
maybe I'll go have a look.

What happens if you wire two caps in series?
Is the new value additive?
Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.

Or is parallel better/different?

Or is all the above just bullshit?

--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#2: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 01:19:21 by Jim Anable

Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt; EMG active pickups, which are low impedance, come with a 25k audio taper
&gt; tone pot using a .1mf capacitor.
&gt;
&gt; I find that this tone control doesn't make the sound of the neck pickup
&gt; (EMG-SA) dark enough for the jazz sound I like to hear (Lorne Lofsky,
&gt; who sounds great and uses the same stuff, notwithstanding).
&gt;
&gt; So I'm thinking of trying different value caps on the tone control.
&gt;
&gt; Anybody else out there doing anything like this with EMG's?
&gt;
&gt; But, .1mf is the highest value cap I've seen and/or have around the
&gt; house. I'm sure they must make higher value caps (.15mf, .2mf, etc.) so
&gt; maybe I'll go have a look.
&gt;
&gt; What happens if you wire two caps in series?

Value is cut in half (1/A + 1/B = 1/T, where A and B are cap values, and
T is total capacitance). To add the values together, wire parallel.

&gt; Is the new value additive?

In parallel. Opposite of resistors.

&gt; Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.
&gt;
&gt; Or is parallel better/different?
&gt;
&gt; Or is all the above just bullshit?

Not B.S. at all. However...

For most guys, an ACTIVE EMG tone gives much better results. I'd
recommend the SPC, which will fatten up that SA, roll off the highs, to
sound more like a humbucker. And, of course, it is variable. So you
get to dial in how much of a mids boost you really want.

Report this message

#3: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 01:59:25 by Joey Goldstein

Jim Anable wrote:
&gt;
&gt; Joey Goldstein wrote:

&gt; &gt; What happens if you wire two caps in series?
&gt;
&gt; Value is cut in half (1/A + 1/B = 1/T, where A and B are cap values, and
&gt; T is total capacitance). To add the values together, wire parallel.
&gt;
&gt; &gt; Is the new value additive?
&gt;
&gt; In parallel. Opposite of resistors.

Ah. Parallel is what I need then for my little experiment. Thanks.

&gt; &gt; Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.

So .1mf + .05mf in parallel will give me .15mf, right?

&gt; However...
&gt;
&gt; For most guys, an ACTIVE EMG tone gives much better results.
&gt; I'd
&gt; recommend the SPC, which will fatten up that SA, roll off the highs, to
&gt; sound more like a humbucker. And, of course, it is variable. So you
&gt; get to dial in how much of a mids boost you really want.

I've already got an SPC on the guitar in question. Thanks.

--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#4: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 02:18:30 by Jim Anable

Joey Goldstein wrote:

&gt;
&gt; Jim Anable wrote:
&gt;
&gt;&gt;Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;What happens if you wire two caps in series?
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;Value is cut in half (1/A + 1/B = 1/T, where A and B are cap values, and
&gt;&gt;T is total capacitance). To add the values together, wire parallel.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;Is the new value additive?
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;In parallel. Opposite of resistors.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Ah. Parallel is what I need then for my little experiment. Thanks.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; So .1mf + .05mf in parallel will give me .15mf, right?

Yes.

&gt;
&gt;
&gt;&gt;However...
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;For most guys, an ACTIVE EMG tone gives much better results.
&gt;&gt;I'd
&gt;&gt;recommend the SPC, which will fatten up that SA, roll off the highs, to
&gt;&gt;sound more like a humbucker. And, of course, it is variable. So you
&gt;&gt;get to dial in how much of a mids boost you really want.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; I've already got an SPC on the guitar in question. Thanks.

Are you using the SPC already? And you want to roll off the highs even
more? ...then you are on the right track.

Report this message

#5: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 02:37:37 by mr.lurkermeister

Kind of off the subject, but you might be interested so ...

check out the wiring mods they sell at <a href="http://www.guitar-mod.com/" target="_blank">http://www.guitar-mod.com/</a>




The &quot;midrange master&quot; sounds interesting:

<a href="http://www.guitar-mod.com/s_wiring.html" target="_blank">http://www.guitar-mod.com/s_wiring.html</a>


I'm thinking of trying one out with my strat.

<a href="http://www.guitar-mod.com/mod_jumper.html" target="_blank">http://www.guitar-mod.com/mod_jumper.html</a>

Report this message

#6: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 05:23:51 by Joey Goldstein

Jim Anable wrote:
&gt;
&gt; Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Jim Anable wrote:
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt;Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;

&gt; &gt;&gt;For most guys, an ACTIVE EMG tone gives much better results.
&gt; &gt;&gt;I'd
&gt; &gt;&gt;recommend the SPC, which will fatten up that SA, roll off the highs, to
&gt; &gt;&gt;sound more like a humbucker. And, of course, it is variable. So you
&gt; &gt;&gt;get to dial in how much of a mids boost you really want.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; I've already got an SPC on the guitar in question. Thanks.
&gt;
&gt; Are you using the SPC already? And you want to roll off the highs even
&gt; more?

Correct.

&gt; ...then you are on the right track.

Thanks for the info. 'Preciate it.

--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#7: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 06:10:26 by mark2741

Joey Goldstein wrote:

&gt;
&gt; I've already got an SPC on the guitar in question. Thanks.
&gt;

Joey,

What do you think of the SPC? I bought my telecaster used (it was my
sole guitar for about 7 years until I recently picked up a 335 clone)
and it already had EMG pickups in it. I've always thought about
replacing them with something else, but I always get complements on the
guitar's sound and I've been playing it so long and it's the guitar I
learned on, so I'm kind of hesitant to swap out the pickups. But the SPC
is something I've considered in the past but forgot about.

I'm not really looking for any specific tone. I mainly play my 335 clone
with flatwounds on it anyway. But for blues jams I bring the Tele.
Anything that would keep the tone options I already have with the EMG's,
yet add some more, would be welcome.

mark
www.sixstringtheory.com

Report this message

#8: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 07:03:40 by Joey Goldstein

The SPC is a midrange boost. It's designed to make EMG-SA's and S's
sound a bit more like humbuckers and to drive preamps harder so they distort.

My guess is that your 335 already has full-sized EMG humbuckers on it.
Unless you want them morphed into super hot high-output midrange heavy
pickups the SPC is not for you.

&quot;mark (sixstringtheoryDOTcom)&quot; wrote:
&gt;
&gt; Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; I've already got an SPC on the guitar in question. Thanks.
&gt; &gt;
&gt;
&gt; Joey,
&gt;
&gt; What do you think of the SPC? I bought my telecaster used (it was my
&gt; sole guitar for about 7 years until I recently picked up a 335 clone)
&gt; and it already had EMG pickups in it. I've always thought about
&gt; replacing them with something else, but I always get complements on the
&gt; guitar's sound and I've been playing it so long and it's the guitar I
&gt; learned on, so I'm kind of hesitant to swap out the pickups. But the SPC
&gt; is something I've considered in the past but forgot about.
&gt;
&gt; I'm not really looking for any specific tone. I mainly play my 335 clone
&gt; with flatwounds on it anyway. But for blues jams I bring the Tele.
&gt; Anything that would keep the tone options I already have with the EMG's,
&gt; yet add some more, would be welcome.
&gt;
&gt; mark
&gt; www.sixstringtheory.com

--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#9: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 10:52:29 by Jim Anable

Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt; The SPC is a midrange boost. It's designed to make EMG-SA's and S's
&gt; sound a bit more like humbuckers and to drive preamps harder so they distort.
&gt;
&gt; My guess is that your 335 already has full-sized EMG humbuckers on it.
&gt; Unless you want them morphed into super hot high-output midrange heavy
&gt; pickups the SPC is not for you.

If you DO want even more output and more mids to push tube distortion,
it does work great. I use it with an 81 bridge on my Korina G-400 (SG)
for heavy tones and metal. With flat wounds, you'd get a very thick
sustaining tone. I like the RPC on the same guitar with 85 neck.

&gt;
&gt; &quot;mark (sixstringtheoryDOTcom)&quot; wrote:
&gt;
&gt;&gt;Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;&gt;I've already got an SPC on the guitar in question. Thanks.
&gt;&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;Joey,
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;What do you think of the SPC? I bought my telecaster used (it was my
&gt;&gt;sole guitar for about 7 years until I recently picked up a 335 clone)
&gt;&gt;and it already had EMG pickups in it. I've always thought about
&gt;&gt;replacing them with something else, but I always get complements on the
&gt;&gt;guitar's sound and I've been playing it so long and it's the guitar I
&gt;&gt;learned on, so I'm kind of hesitant to swap out the pickups. But the SPC
&gt;&gt;is something I've considered in the past but forgot about.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;I'm not really looking for any specific tone. I mainly play my 335 clone
&gt;&gt;with flatwounds on it anyway. But for blues jams I bring the Tele.
&gt;&gt;Anything that would keep the tone options I already have with the EMG's,
&gt;&gt;yet add some more, would be welcome.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;mark
&gt;&gt;www.sixstringtheory.com
&gt;
&gt;

Report this message

#10: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 11:51:51 by unknown

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Report this message

#11: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 12:06:33 by arthur

In message &lt;<a href="mailto:42CB0BB8.3C67292F&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">42CB0BB8.3C67292F&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt;
Joey Goldstein &lt;<a href="mailto:nospam&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">nospam&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt; wrote:

&gt;
&gt; EMG active pickups, which are low impedance, come with a 25k audio taper
&gt; tone pot using a .1mf capacitor.
&gt;
&gt; I find that this tone control doesn't make the sound of the neck pickup
&gt; (EMG-SA) dark enough for the jazz sound I like to hear (Lorne Lofsky,
&gt; who sounds great and uses the same stuff, notwithstanding).
&gt;
&gt; So I'm thinking of trying different value caps on the tone control.
&gt;
&gt; Anybody else out there doing anything like this with EMG's?
&gt;
&gt; But, .1mf is the highest value cap I've seen and/or have around the
&gt; house. I'm sure they must make higher value caps (.15mf, .2mf, etc.) so
&gt; maybe I'll go have a look.
&gt;
&gt; What happens if you wire two caps in series?
&gt; Is the new value additive?
&gt; Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.
&gt;
&gt; Or is parallel better/different?
&gt;
&gt; Or is all the above just bullshit?
&gt;

To add capacitors wire them in parallel. In series, the simple formula
is C = 1/(1/C1+1/C2), which for equal capacitors gives half the value.

When the tone control on a conventional pickup is at or near full cut,
the capacitor resonates with the pickup inductance producing a slight
lift around 400 - 600Hz and then a rapid fall. Ultimately the level
falls with frequency squared.

The EMG pickups have buffer amps within them and look to the outside
world like 10k resistors. There is no inductance to resonate so the
frequency response will be completely different. There will be no
resonant lift and the response will fall linearly with frequency
rather than with the square.

You will need some form of active module if you wish to fully emulate
the conventional tone response.


Arthur

--
Arthur Quinn
real-email arthur at bellacat dot com

Report this message

#12: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 13:16:00 by wereoboy

Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt; EMG active pickups, which are low impedance, come with a 25k audio taper
&gt; tone pot using a .1mf capacitor.
&gt;
&gt; I find that this tone control doesn't make the sound of the neck pickup
&gt; (EMG-SA) dark enough for the jazz sound I like to hear (Lorne Lofsky,
&gt; who sounds great and uses the same stuff, notwithstanding).
&gt;
&gt; So I'm thinking of trying different value caps on the tone control.
&gt;
&gt; Anybody else out there doing anything like this with EMG's?
&gt;
&gt; But, .1mf is the highest value cap I've seen and/or have around the
&gt; house. I'm sure they must make higher value caps (.15mf, .2mf, etc.) so
&gt; maybe I'll go have a look.
&gt;
&gt; What happens if you wire two caps in series?
&gt; Is the new value additive?
&gt; Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.
&gt;
&gt; Or is parallel better/different?
&gt;
&gt; Or is all the above just bullshit?
&gt;
&gt; --
&gt; Joey Goldstein
&gt; <a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
&gt; joegold AT sympatico DOT ca
Does anyone know the correct place where to send COMMERCIAL SPAM
REPORTS coming from this poster is? I've tried <a href="mailto:abuse&#64;sympatico.com" target="_blank">abuse&#64;sympatico.com</a> and
it got bounced back to me just now. So I've tried
<a href="mailto:postmaster&#64;sympatico.ca" target="_blank">postmaster&#64;sympatico.ca</a> and <a href="mailto:abuse&#64;sympatico.ca" target="_blank">abuse&#64;sympatico.ca</a> just like the author
says to try. Hopefully these will go through.

I've already taken care of the Lycos thing and that went through. Twice
in fact.

Hold on; I can also try <a href="mailto:postmater&#64;sympatico.com." target="_blank">postmater&#64;sympatico.com.</a> I'll let you know how
that goes. I think this commercial spammerboy Joey's a little slick.
But he won't be not too slick for the usenet security newsgroups I
guarantee you that.

Let me try to get through to <a href="mailto:postmater&#64;sympatico.com" target="_blank">postmater&#64;sympatico.com</a> now ... Sure, why
not, right?

Report this message

#13: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 13:17:58 by wereoboy

Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt; EMG active pickups, which are low impedance, come with a 25k audio taper
&gt; tone pot using a .1mf capacitor.
&gt;
&gt; I find that this tone control doesn't make the sound of the neck pickup
&gt; (EMG-SA) dark enough for the jazz sound I like to hear (Lorne Lofsky,
&gt; who sounds great and uses the same stuff, notwithstanding).
&gt;
&gt; So I'm thinking of trying different value caps on the tone control.
&gt;
&gt; Anybody else out there doing anything like this with EMG's?
&gt;
&gt; But, .1mf is the highest value cap I've seen and/or have around the
&gt; house. I'm sure they must make higher value caps (.15mf, .2mf, etc.) so
&gt; maybe I'll go have a look.
&gt;
&gt; What happens if you wire two caps in series?
&gt; Is the new value additive?
&gt; Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.
&gt;
&gt; Or is parallel better/different?
&gt;
&gt; Or is all the above just bullshit?
&gt;
&gt; --
&gt; Joey Goldstein
&gt; <a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
&gt; joegold AT sympatico DOT ca
Ok, I just forwarded the commercial abuse complaint to
<a href="mailto:postmaster&#64;sympatico.com." target="_blank">postmaster&#64;sympatico.com.</a> And I spelled it right, too! :-)

Report this message

#14: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 13:35:05 by wereoboy

wereo_gogg wrote:
&gt; Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt; &gt; EMG active pickups, which are low impedance, come with a 25k audio taper
&gt; &gt; tone pot using a .1mf capacitor.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; I find that this tone control doesn't make the sound of the neck pickup
&gt; &gt; (EMG-SA) dark enough for the jazz sound I like to hear (Lorne Lofsky,
&gt; &gt; who sounds great and uses the same stuff, notwithstanding).
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; So I'm thinking of trying different value caps on the tone control.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Anybody else out there doing anything like this with EMG's?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; But, .1mf is the highest value cap I've seen and/or have around the
&gt; &gt; house. I'm sure they must make higher value caps (.15mf, .2mf, etc.) so
&gt; &gt; maybe I'll go have a look.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; What happens if you wire two caps in series?
&gt; &gt; Is the new value additive?
&gt; &gt; Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Or is parallel better/different?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Or is all the above just bullshit?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; --
&gt; &gt; Joey Goldstein
&gt; &gt; <a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
&gt; &gt; joegold AT sympatico DOT ca
&gt; Ok, I just forwarded the commercial abuse complaint to
&gt; <a href="mailto:postmaster&#64;sympatico.com." target="_blank">postmaster&#64;sympatico.com.</a> And I spelled it right, too! :-)
Don't blame me! Here, look at what I just read from the Sympatico Abuse
FAQ-

Newsgroups / Discussion Forums

In addition to these Policies, while posting to newsgroups or any other
discussion forum, you are prohibited from conducting activities that
include, but are not limited to:

Posting advertisements, commercial or unsolicited messages of any kind,
unless expressly permitted by the charter or FAQ.

I would think that someone CONSTANTLY posting their own website which
seeks to elicit their own selfish financial gain constitutes
Sympatico's tough AUP Policies? Hmmm?

So don't turn around and go blaming ME for anyone's loss of account
around here anyone, ok? Thaaaanks haha ;-)

Report this message

#15: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 13:43:14 by Joey Jojo Junior Shabadoo

In article &lt;<a href="mailto:1120649705.385111.185490&#64;g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com" target="_blank">1120649705.385111.185490&#64;g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com</a>&gt;,
&quot;wereo_gogg&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:scottamerica&#64;ixpres.com" target="_blank">scottamerica&#64;ixpres.com</a>&gt; wrote:

&gt; Posting advertisements, commercial or unsolicited messages of any kind,
&gt; unless expressly permitted by the charter or FAQ.
&gt;
&gt; I would think that someone CONSTANTLY posting their own website which
&gt; seeks to elicit their own selfish financial gain constitutes
&gt; Sympatico's tough AUP Policies? Hmmm?
&gt;
&gt; So don't turn around and go blaming ME for anyone's loss of account
&gt; around here anyone, ok? Thaaaanks haha ;-)

don't worry - I've just counter-mailed to that address, sending to
Sympatico evidence that you're a bipolar loon who likes to disrupt
newsgroups.
--
making Usenet safer - one troll at a time!

Report this message

#16: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 14:44:23 by wereoboy

Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt; EMG active pickups, which are low impedance, come with a 25k audio taper
&gt; tone pot using a .1mf capacitor.
&gt;
&gt; I find that this tone control doesn't make the sound of the neck pickup
&gt; (EMG-SA) dark enough for the jazz sound I like to hear (Lorne Lofsky,
&gt; who sounds great and uses the same stuff, notwithstanding).
&gt;
&gt; So I'm thinking of trying different value caps on the tone control.
&gt;
&gt; Anybody else out there doing anything like this with EMG's?
&gt;
&gt; But, .1mf is the highest value cap I've seen and/or have around the
&gt; house. I'm sure they must make higher value caps (.15mf, .2mf, etc.) so
&gt; maybe I'll go have a look.
&gt;
&gt; What happens if you wire two caps in series?
&gt; Is the new value additive?
&gt; Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.
&gt;
&gt; Or is parallel better/different?
&gt;
&gt; Or is all the above just bullshit?
&gt;
&gt; --
&gt; Joey Goldstein
&gt; <a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
&gt; joegold AT sympatico DOT ca
Oh yes, I forgot to tell you. It also went to <a href="mailto:abuse&#64;sympatico.ca" target="_blank">abuse&#64;sympatico.ca</a> as a
cc: at the same time it went to <a href="mailto:postmaster&#64;sympatico.ca" target="_blank">postmaster&#64;sympatico.ca</a> .

I hope I've covered all the bases here. Now I'll just sit back and wait
for the results. If my efforts were fruitless, my next step to get rid
of this spammer is the alt.security groups .

Any suggestions, anyone?

Report this message

#17: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 17:07:56 by mark2741

Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt; The SPC is a midrange boost. It's designed to make EMG-SA's and S's
&gt; sound a bit more like humbuckers and to drive preamps harder so they distort.
&gt;
&gt; My guess is that your 335 already has full-sized EMG humbuckers on it.
&gt; Unless you want them morphed into super hot high-output midrange heavy
&gt; pickups the SPC is not for you.

Thanks Joey. I have EMG's in my Tele (I believe they are the EMG FT
(it's been a while since I looked it up...I have the silver text EMG's).
The neck pickup is excellent. I don't like the tone pot - it basically
just muddies the sound of the guitar when it is turned down, so I have
to leave it up fully open all the time. If the SPC is just a volume
boost/mid boost then it's probably not for me?

I have the stock ibanez Super 58's in my 335 clone. While I'd like to
and wouldn't mind changing those to PAF type pickups just to see/hear
the difference, I'll probably never bother.

mark

Report this message

#18: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 17:33:17 by Joey Goldstein

<a href="mailto:arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid" target="_blank">arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid</a> wrote:
&gt;
&gt; In message &lt;<a href="mailto:42CB0BB8.3C67292F&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">42CB0BB8.3C67292F&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt;
&gt; Joey Goldstein &lt;<a href="mailto:nospam&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">nospam&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt; wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; EMG active pickups, which are low impedance, come with a 25k audio taper
&gt; &gt; tone pot using a .1mf capacitor.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; I find that this tone control doesn't make the sound of the neck pickup
&gt; &gt; (EMG-SA) dark enough for the jazz sound I like to hear (Lorne Lofsky,
&gt; &gt; who sounds great and uses the same stuff, notwithstanding).
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; So I'm thinking of trying different value caps on the tone control.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Anybody else out there doing anything like this with EMG's?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; But, .1mf is the highest value cap I've seen and/or have around the
&gt; &gt; house. I'm sure they must make higher value caps (.15mf, .2mf, etc.) so
&gt; &gt; maybe I'll go have a look.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; What happens if you wire two caps in series?
&gt; &gt; Is the new value additive?
&gt; &gt; Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Or is parallel better/different?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Or is all the above just bullshit?
&gt; &gt;
&gt;
&gt; To add capacitors wire them in parallel. In series, the simple formula
&gt; is C = 1/(1/C1+1/C2),

Simple for you! &lt;g&gt;

&gt; which for equal capacitors gives half the value.
&gt;
&gt; When the tone control on a conventional pickup is at or near full cut,
&gt; the capacitor resonates with the pickup inductance producing a slight
&gt; lift around 400 - 600Hz and then a rapid fall. Ultimately the level
&gt; falls with frequency squared.
&gt;
&gt; The EMG pickups have buffer amps within them and look to the outside
&gt; world like 10k resistors. There is no inductance to resonate so the
&gt; frequency response will be completely different. There will be no
&gt; resonant lift and the response will fall linearly with frequency
&gt; rather than with the square.
&gt;
&gt; You will need some form of active module if you wish to fully emulate
&gt; the conventional tone response.

Are you trying to tell me that if I do add a cap (in parallel ... say a
..022mf cap) to my EMG tone pot (w/.1mf to begin with) that the sound
even when the pot is at 10 will be seriously compromised?

Or just that it won't work at all?

On another note...

The EMG system is much better than a passive ssystem when it come to
losing high end when turning down the vol pot. But still, there is some
high end loss.
Is a treble-bleed circuit (small value cap, perhaps with resistor,
across the lugs of the vol pot) possible with active pickups?
If so, what values might work?

On my passive guitars I've got treble-bleed circuits wired to a switch
so I can bypass the circuit when I want the high-end loss. The EMG
battery makes the control cavity much tighter (and I've already got got
a 25k push/pull pot for volume so i can use my neck and bridge p-ups
together, so it's *really* tight in there) but if I did install a
treble-bleed I'd also want the switch.

--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#19: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 17:35:40 by Joey Goldstein

wereo_gogg wrote:
&gt;
&gt; Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt; &gt; EMG active pickups, which are low impedance, come with a 25k audio taper
&gt; &gt; tone pot using a .1mf capacitor.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; I find that this tone control doesn't make the sound of the neck pickup
&gt; &gt; (EMG-SA) dark enough for the jazz sound I like to hear (Lorne Lofsky,
&gt; &gt; who sounds great and uses the same stuff, notwithstanding).
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; So I'm thinking of trying different value caps on the tone control.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Anybody else out there doing anything like this with EMG's?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; But, .1mf is the highest value cap I've seen and/or have around the
&gt; &gt; house. I'm sure they must make higher value caps (.15mf, .2mf, etc.) so
&gt; &gt; maybe I'll go have a look.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; What happens if you wire two caps in series?
&gt; &gt; Is the new value additive?
&gt; &gt; Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Or is parallel better/different?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Or is all the above just bullshit?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; --
&gt; &gt; Joey Goldstein
&gt; &gt; <a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
&gt; &gt; joegold AT sympatico DOT ca
&gt; Oh yes, I forgot to tell you. It also went to <a href="mailto:abuse&#64;sympatico.ca" target="_blank">abuse&#64;sympatico.ca</a> as a
&gt; cc: at the same time it went to <a href="mailto:postmaster&#64;sympatico.ca" target="_blank">postmaster&#64;sympatico.ca</a> .
&gt;
&gt; I hope I've covered all the bases here. Now I'll just sit back and wait
&gt; for the results. If my efforts were fruitless, my next step to get rid
&gt; of this spammer is the alt.security groups .
&gt;
&gt; Any suggestions, anyone?

Scott. Take your meds.

--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#20: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 17:46:51 by Joey Goldstein

&quot;mark (sixstringtheoryDOTcom)&quot; wrote:
&gt;
&gt; Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt; &gt; The SPC is a midrange boost. It's designed to make EMG-SA's and S's
&gt; &gt; sound a bit more like humbuckers and to drive preamps harder so they distort.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; My guess is that your 335 already has full-sized EMG humbuckers on it.
&gt; &gt; Unless you want them morphed into super hot high-output midrange heavy
&gt; &gt; pickups the SPC is not for you.
&gt;
&gt; Thanks Joey. I have EMG's in my Tele (I believe they are the EMG FT
&gt; (it's been a while since I looked it up...I have the silver text EMG's).
&gt; The neck pickup is excellent.

If those Tele p-ups are designed to sound like single-coils then the SPC
can help make them sound and behave somewhat like humbuckers and/or
super humbuckers.

But on a Tele the metal control strip has room for only two pots,
usually vol and tone, unless you drill another hole, and there may not
be room for this. So if you want the SPC you'll have to sacrifice your
tone control, which it sounds like, from what you say below, might not
be an issue for you.

Other things to consider:
The SPC has a little circuit board attatched to the pot's base. It may
not fit inside a Tele's control cavity, but it probably will.
The SPC requires a 9 volt battery which also might not fit in a Tele's
control cavity, but it probably will.

&gt; I don't like the tone pot - it basically
&gt; just muddies the sound of the guitar when it is turned down, so I have
&gt; to leave it up fully open all the time. If the SPC is just a volume
&gt; boost/mid boost then it's probably not for me?
&gt;
&gt; I have the stock ibanez Super 58's in my 335 clone. While I'd like to
&gt; and wouldn't mind changing those to PAF type pickups just to see/hear
&gt; the difference, I'll probably never bother.

The 58's have a pretty good rep. But I think they havce their own sound.
If you're after a more traditional sound then, yes, you might try some
other PAF-style p-ups. Working on electronics inside archtops is a pain
though. Have fun.


--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#21: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-06 19:11:36 by Jim Anable

mark (sixstringtheoryDOTcom) wrote:

&gt; Joey Goldstein wrote:
&gt;
&gt;&gt; The SPC is a midrange boost. It's designed to make EMG-SA's and S's
&gt;&gt; sound a bit more like humbuckers and to drive preamps harder so they
&gt;&gt; distort.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; My guess is that your 335 already has full-sized EMG humbuckers on it.
&gt;&gt; Unless you want them morphed into super hot high-output midrange heavy
&gt;&gt; pickups the SPC is not for you.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Thanks Joey. I have EMG's in my Tele (I believe they are the EMG FT
&gt; (it's been a while since I looked it up...I have the silver text EMG's).
&gt; The neck pickup is excellent. I don't like the tone pot - it basically
&gt; just muddies the sound of the guitar when it is turned down, so I have
&gt; to leave it up fully open all the time. If the SPC is just a volume
&gt; boost/mid boost then it's probably not for me?

I'm not Joey, but I also have an EMG equipped Tele (EMG T, gold script).

If all you want is to fatten them up, SPC will do that.

I decided to go with the EMG VMC, which is a quasi-parametric mids boost
AND cut. It has two adjustments on one knob (split shaft). It allows
you to adjust the center frequency from 300 to 3k Hz, then allows you to
adjust from -12dB to +12dB. You can get a multitude of tones out of it.
I often set frequency rather low, then a slight cut for a really nice
vintage bright Tele tone. But you can also boost low mids for a fat tone.

Be advised that the control cavity was about 1/8&quot; too narrow. I had to
take a very fine file and file about a 1/16th notch on each side, to
allow the board to slip in. Easy to do, but watch that you don't overdo
it so that you can see the notch with the plate back on! (You can NOT
see it on mine.)

&gt;
&gt; I have the stock ibanez Super 58's in my 335 clone. While I'd like to
&gt; and wouldn't mind changing those to PAF type pickups just to see/hear
&gt; the difference, I'll probably never bother.
&gt;
&gt; mark

Report this message

#22: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 02:19:02 by arthur

In message &lt;<a href="mailto:42CBF9BD.9CD22A2E&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">42CBF9BD.9CD22A2E&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt;
Joey Goldstein &lt;<a href="mailto:nospam&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">nospam&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt; wrote:

&gt;
&gt;
&gt; <a href="mailto:arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid" target="_blank">arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid</a> wrote:
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; In message &lt;<a href="mailto:42CB0BB8.3C67292F&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">42CB0BB8.3C67292F&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt;
&gt;&gt; Joey Goldstein &lt;<a href="mailto:nospam&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">nospam&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt; wrote:
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt; EMG active pickups, which are low impedance, come with a 25k audio taper
&gt;&gt; &gt; tone pot using a .1mf capacitor.
&gt;&gt; &gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt; I find that this tone control doesn't make the sound of the neck pickup
&gt;&gt; &gt; (EMG-SA) dark enough for the jazz sound I like to hear (Lorne Lofsky,
&gt;&gt; &gt; who sounds great and uses the same stuff, notwithstanding).
&gt;&gt; &gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt; So I'm thinking of trying different value caps on the tone control.
&gt;&gt; &gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt; Anybody else out there doing anything like this with EMG's?
&gt;&gt; &gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt; But, .1mf is the highest value cap I've seen and/or have around the
&gt;&gt; &gt; house. I'm sure they must make higher value caps (.15mf, .2mf, etc.) so
&gt;&gt; &gt; maybe I'll go have a look.
&gt;&gt; &gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt; What happens if you wire two caps in series?
&gt;&gt; &gt; Is the new value additive?
&gt;&gt; &gt; Eg. .1mf in series with .05mf results in .15mf? Etc.
&gt;&gt; &gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt; Or is parallel better/different?
&gt;&gt; &gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt; Or is all the above just bullshit?
&gt;&gt; &gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; To add capacitors wire them in parallel. In series, the simple formula
&gt;&gt; is C = 1/(1/C1+1/C2),
&gt;
&gt; Simple for you! &lt;g&gt;
&gt;
&gt;&gt; which for equal capacitors gives half the value.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; When the tone control on a conventional pickup is at or near full cut,
&gt;&gt; the capacitor resonates with the pickup inductance producing a slight
&gt;&gt; lift around 400 - 600Hz and then a rapid fall. Ultimately the level
&gt;&gt; falls with frequency squared.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; The EMG pickups have buffer amps within them and look to the outside
&gt;&gt; world like 10k resistors. There is no inductance to resonate so the
&gt;&gt; frequency response will be completely different. There will be no
&gt;&gt; resonant lift and the response will fall linearly with frequency
&gt;&gt; rather than with the square.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; You will need some form of active module if you wish to fully emulate
&gt;&gt; the conventional tone response.
&gt;
&gt; Are you trying to tell me that if I do add a cap (in parallel ... say a
&gt; .022mf cap) to my EMG tone pot (w/.1mf to begin with) that the sound
&gt; even when the pot is at 10 will be seriously compromised?
&gt;
&gt; Or just that it won't work at all?
&gt;
&gt; On another note...
&gt;
&gt; The EMG system is much better than a passive ssystem when it come to
&gt; losing high end when turning down the vol pot. But still, there is some
&gt; high end loss.
&gt; Is a treble-bleed circuit (small value cap, perhaps with resistor,
&gt; across the lugs of the vol pot) possible with active pickups?
&gt; If so, what values might work?
&gt;
&gt; On my passive guitars I've got treble-bleed circuits wired to a switch
&gt; so I can bypass the circuit when I want the high-end loss. The EMG
&gt; battery makes the control cavity much tighter (and I've already got got
&gt; a 25k push/pull pot for volume so i can use my neck and bridge p-ups
&gt; together, so it's *really* tight in there) but if I did install a
&gt; treble-bleed I'd also want the switch.
&gt;
According to the EMG data sheet, the output impedance of the pickups
is 10k resistive. There is no way that any amount of capacitance
across an EMG pickup can emulate the frequency response of a
conventional pickup plus tone capacitor (with the tone at or near full
cut). There will be no resonant peak and the ultimate slope of the
frequency response will be half as much. Roughly speaking, it won't
work at all. Its just that the conventional pickup, while it has
problems with cable loading and high frequency response, does produce
an attractive full tone cut sound. An ideal active pickup could have
an extra terminal connected directly to the coil before the preamp,
purely for the use of the tone control.

With a 10k pickup resistance and a 25k volume pot, the 0.1u tone
capacitor (at full cut) will already be rolling off at 222Hz, well
below the roll off frequency of a typical jazz guitar such as, e.g. a
Johnny Smith but the slower rate of fall and, in particular, the lack
of the resonant hump will simply not give the same sound.

An active filter to provide the required response is pretty simple so
I would expect that EMG have a module that would do the job.

On the subject of treble loss as the volume is turned down. A 10k
resistive pickup with a 25k pot in the worst case with even a 600pF
(20 foot) cable will introduce an extra rolloff at 33kHz so I would
guess that the reduction in high end that you perceive is caused by
the change in the frequency response of the ear as the level is
reduced.

From the point of view of frequency response, effective tone control
and simplicity, the best system would be conventional pickups and
controls with a built in unity gain buffer amp between the pickups and
the output jack - or an active lead. A switch to add an extra 300pF or
so across the pickups to emulate a standard lead would complete the
job.


Arthur

--
Arthur Quinn
real-email arthur at bellacat dot com

Report this message

#23: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 02:56:36 by Joey Goldstein

<a href="mailto:arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid" target="_blank">arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid</a> wrote:
&gt;
&gt;

First off, it's likely I don't understand much of what you're saying.
Apologies in advance.

&gt; According to the EMG data sheet, the output impedance of the pickups
&gt; is 10k resistive. There is no way that any amount of capacitance
&gt; across an EMG pickup can emulate the frequency response of a
&gt; conventional pickup plus tone capacitor (with the tone at or near full
&gt; cut). There will be no resonant peak and the ultimate slope of the
&gt; frequency response will be half as much. Roughly speaking, it won't
&gt; work at all.

You seem to be saying that the tone control that EMG supplies with their
pickup harnesses (a 25k audio taper pot with a .1mf cap) should not work
at all. Yet it does. It works very much like a typical tone control in a
passive circuit. The top end just stays a bit more prominent, at full
cut, than it does in a passive pickup circuit.

&gt; Its just that the conventional pickup, while it has
&gt; problems with cable loading and high frequency response, does produce
&gt; an attractive full tone cut sound. An ideal active pickup could have
&gt; an extra terminal connected directly to the coil before the preamp,
&gt; purely for the use of the tone control.
&gt;
&gt; With a 10k pickup resistance and a 25k volume pot, the 0.1u tone
&gt; capacitor (at full cut) will already be rolling off at 222Hz, well
&gt; below the roll off frequency of a typical jazz guitar

Well now you seem to be saying that the EMG tone control does indeed do
something. It's harsd to tell from your previous comment.
When you say &quot;rolling of at 222Hz&quot; do you mean that frequencies above
222Hz are being rolled back?
If so, thay might well be a good description of how this tone circuit
behaves. I'd like it to roll back these frequencies a few more Db, I
think. I also think that 222Hz might be a little low for the cutoff
point. Rolling things back above 500k might be more to my liking, but
still with a steeper rolloff.

&gt; such as, e.g. a
&gt; Johnny Smith but the slower rate of fall and, in particular, the lack
&gt; of the resonant hump will simply not give the same sound.

Well there *is* something sort of different about an EMG tone control
but it's still sort of normal too. It seems to me to just be a typical
passive old-style Fender tone control (except for the difference in pot
vlaue .... they used to use .1mf caps too) placed in the middle of an
otherwise active circuit.

&gt; An active filter to provide the required response is pretty simple so
&gt; I would expect that EMG have a module that would do the job.

Well I should probably look into one of their dual concentric pot type
tone controls. I think they've got a couple of different types of these.
I'd have to like it enough to abandon the normal tone control because
there won't be room for it plus a vol pot an SPC *and* a tone control.

&gt; On the subject of treble loss as the volume is turned down. A 10k
&gt; resistive pickup with a 25k pot in the worst case with even a 600pF
&gt; (20 foot) cable will introduce an extra rolloff at 33kHz so I would
&gt; guess that the reduction in high end that you perceive is caused by
&gt; the change in the frequency response of the ear as the level is
&gt; reduced.

I have an FX unit (24 bit sampling @ 48Khz) in my amp's FX loop using a
program where volume of the FX unit is controlled via MIDI continuous
control. I could just say that I have a vol pedal in my ampd FX loop,
but that would mean that some loss of high end would likely occur when I
lower the volume pedal. So, when I turn the vol pot on my EMG's down I
can trun my CC vol pedal back up so that there is no loss in actual
volume. The EMG's vol pot puts out less top end period when it is not at
maximum. It has little to do with the way the ear perceives changes in
level, AFAIKS.

&gt; From the point of view of frequency response, effective tone control
&gt; and simplicity, the best system would be conventional pickups and
&gt; controls with a built in unity gain buffer amp between the pickups and
&gt; the output jack - or an active lead.

Except that most passive p-ups don't sound all that good through a
buffer, even a real good buffer, especially if it's mounted at the guitar.

&gt; A switch to add an extra 300pF or
&gt; so across the pickups to emulate a standard lead would complete the
&gt; job.

&quot;Standard lead&quot;? Not following.

&gt;
&gt; Arthur
&gt;
&gt; --
&gt; Arthur Quinn
&gt; real-email arthur at bellacat dot com

--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#24: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 15:14:06 by arthur

In message &lt;<a href="mailto:42CC7DC4.3E7D88A5&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">42CC7DC4.3E7D88A5&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt;
Joey Goldstein &lt;<a href="mailto:nospam&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">nospam&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt; wrote:

&gt;
&gt;
&gt; <a href="mailto:arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid" target="_blank">arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid</a> wrote:
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;
&gt; First off, it's likely I don't understand much of what you're saying.
&gt; Apologies in advance.
&gt;
&gt;&gt; According to the EMG data sheet, the output impedance of the pickups
&gt;&gt; is 10k resistive. There is no way that any amount of capacitance
&gt;&gt; across an EMG pickup can emulate the frequency response of a
&gt;&gt; conventional pickup plus tone capacitor (with the tone at or near full
&gt;&gt; cut). There will be no resonant peak and the ultimate slope of the
&gt;&gt; frequency response will be half as much. Roughly speaking, it won't
&gt;&gt; work at all.
&gt;
&gt; You seem to be saying that the tone control that EMG supplies with their
&gt; pickup harnesses (a 25k audio taper pot with a .1mf cap) should not work
&gt; at all. Yet it does. It works very much like a typical tone control in a
&gt; passive circuit. The top end just stays a bit more prominent, at full
&gt; cut, than it does in a passive pickup circuit.
&gt;
&gt;&gt; Its just that the conventional pickup, while it has
&gt;&gt; problems with cable loading and high frequency response, does produce
&gt;&gt; an attractive full tone cut sound. An ideal active pickup could have
&gt;&gt; an extra terminal connected directly to the coil before the preamp,
&gt;&gt; purely for the use of the tone control.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; With a 10k pickup resistance and a 25k volume pot, the 0.1u tone
&gt;&gt; capacitor (at full cut) will already be rolling off at 222Hz, well
&gt;&gt; below the roll off frequency of a typical jazz guitar
&gt;
&gt; Well now you seem to be saying that the EMG tone control does indeed do
&gt; something. It's harsd to tell from your previous comment.
&gt; When you say &quot;rolling of at 222Hz&quot; do you mean that frequencies above
&gt; 222Hz are being rolled back?
&gt; If so, thay might well be a good description of how this tone circuit
&gt; behaves. I'd like it to roll back these frequencies a few more Db, I
&gt; think. I also think that 222Hz might be a little low for the cutoff
&gt; point. Rolling things back above 500k might be more to my liking, but
&gt; still with a steeper rolloff.
&gt;
&gt;&gt; such as, e.g. a
&gt;&gt; Johnny Smith but the slower rate of fall and, in particular, the lack
&gt;&gt; of the resonant hump will simply not give the same sound.
&gt;
&gt; Well there *is* something sort of different about an EMG tone control
&gt; but it's still sort of normal too. It seems to me to just be a typical
&gt; passive old-style Fender tone control (except for the difference in pot
&gt; vlaue .... they used to use .1mf caps too) placed in the middle of an
&gt; otherwise active circuit.
&gt;
&gt;&gt; An active filter to provide the required response is pretty simple so
&gt;&gt; I would expect that EMG have a module that would do the job.
&gt;
&gt; Well I should probably look into one of their dual concentric pot type
&gt; tone controls. I think they've got a couple of different types of these.
&gt; I'd have to like it enough to abandon the normal tone control because
&gt; there won't be room for it plus a vol pot an SPC *and* a tone control.
&gt;
&gt;&gt; On the subject of treble loss as the volume is turned down. A 10k
&gt;&gt; resistive pickup with a 25k pot in the worst case with even a 600pF
&gt;&gt; (20 foot) cable will introduce an extra rolloff at 33kHz so I would
&gt;&gt; guess that the reduction in high end that you perceive is caused by
&gt;&gt; the change in the frequency response of the ear as the level is
&gt;&gt; reduced.
&gt;
&gt; I have an FX unit (24 bit sampling @ 48Khz) in my amp's FX loop using a
&gt; program where volume of the FX unit is controlled via MIDI continuous
&gt; control. I could just say that I have a vol pedal in my ampd FX loop,
&gt; but that would mean that some loss of high end would likely occur when I
&gt; lower the volume pedal. So, when I turn the vol pot on my EMG's down I
&gt; can trun my CC vol pedal back up so that there is no loss in actual
&gt; volume. The EMG's vol pot puts out less top end period when it is not at
&gt; maximum. It has little to do with the way the ear perceives changes in
&gt; level, AFAIKS.
&gt;
&gt;&gt; From the point of view of frequency response, effective tone control
&gt;&gt; and simplicity, the best system would be conventional pickups and
&gt;&gt; controls with a built in unity gain buffer amp between the pickups and
&gt;&gt; the output jack - or an active lead.
&gt;
&gt; Except that most passive p-ups don't sound all that good through a
&gt; buffer, even a real good buffer, especially if it's mounted at the guitar.
&gt;
&gt;&gt; A switch to add an extra 300pF or
&gt;&gt; so across the pickups to emulate a standard lead would complete the
&gt;&gt; job.
&gt;
&gt; &quot;Standard lead&quot;? Not following.
&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; Arthur
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; --
&gt;&gt; Arthur Quinn
&gt;&gt; real-email arthur at bellacat dot com
&gt;

Sorry my explanation was unclear. I should not have used hyperbole
such as &quot;it won't work at all&quot; when what I really meant was that the
EMG tone control can not achieve the rate of level reduction with
increasing frequency nor the resonant hump in the frequency response
where the rolloff begins that a conventional pickup and capacitor can.
This sound is so characteristic, to my ear, that its unavailability is
as good as &quot;won't work at all&quot; to me.

The real problem is the maximum available rate of cut. In the EMG
system, you have one component, the capacitor, varying with frequency.
With an ordinary pickup you have two; the impedance of the capacitor
to ground is decreasing with frequency while the impedance of the
pickup (which is in series between the signal and the output) is
increasing with frequency. Ultimately, the conventional system can
produce a frequency response slope where the level is falling by a
factor of four per octave. The EMG system with just the amplifier 10k
output resistance and capacitor can never achieve more than a factor
of two per octave.

This is why the EMG tone control at full cut still leaves too much
treble. Making the EMG system start to cut at a lower frequency will
have little effect beyond an overall reduction in level because the
slope will remain the same.

In addition, the resonance between the tone capacitor and the pickup
produces a very characteristic sound at full cut in the conventional
system.

When the tone control in a conventional system is set to give only a
small cut, however, its behaviour is rather different. Analysis shows
that in this case the tone capacitor acts more or less as a short to
ground and the circuit reduces to the pickup inductance with part of
the tone pot resistance to ground. This combination has a rate of cut
which is the same as the EMG, which is why the EMG tone control can
emulate the conventional one at partial cut.

As to the treble loss when turning down the 25k volume pot, one would
expect this to be minimal, essentially inaudible, with even a long
cable. In fact, at very low volume there should be an increase in
treble but this will occur well above 20kHz. The only really
worthwhile aural test would be via a HiFi system where you can be
reasonably confident that the frequency response of the amp will stay
the same at different volume settings. If you are looking for small
variations, it is also important to match levels exactly.

Passive pickups are affected by the cable capacitance, which for a 10
foot lead is typically 300pF. Removing this load by using a buffer
preamp in the guitar can leave them sounding too bright which is why I
suggested that an extra 300pF switchable across the pickups would
complete the job.


Arthur

--
Arthur Quinn
real-email arthur at bellacat dot com

Report this message

#25: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 17:58:53 by Joey Goldstein

<a href="mailto:arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid" target="_blank">arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid</a> wrote:
&gt;
&gt;

&gt; Sorry my explanation was unclear. I should not have used hyperbole
&gt; such as &quot;it won't work at all&quot; when what I really meant was that the
&gt; EMG tone control can not achieve the rate of level reduction with
&gt; increasing frequency nor the resonant hump in the frequency response
&gt; where the rolloff begins that a conventional pickup and capacitor can.

Ah. I sensed that this is what you meant but I wasn't sure.

&gt; This sound is so characteristic, to my ear, that its unavailability is
&gt; as good as &quot;won't work at all&quot; to me.
&gt;
&gt; The real problem is the maximum available rate of cut. In the EMG
&gt; system, you have one component, the capacitor, varying with frequency.
&gt; With an ordinary pickup you have two; the impedance of the capacitor
&gt; to ground is decreasing with frequency while the impedance of the
&gt; pickup (which is in series between the signal and the output) is
&gt; increasing with frequency. Ultimately, the conventional system can
&gt; produce a frequency response slope where the level is falling by a
&gt; factor of four per octave. The EMG system with just the amplifier 10k
&gt; output resistance and capacitor can never achieve more than a factor
&gt; of two per octave.
&gt;
&gt; This is why the EMG tone control at full cut still leaves too much
&gt; treble.

OK. Thanks. Sounds like my little experiment would be futile at best.
Guess I'll pass.

I used EMG-SA's + an SPC for most of the late 80's and early 90's. I
always thought they were the most versatile pickup system available. But
somewhere around the mid 90's I got a jones for passive pickups and
EMG's were shit to me. I've spent countless hours and a small fortune
wiring various combinations of passive pickups together in an effort to
get the same type of versatility but with more vintage (for want of a
better term) tone.

Well, to make a long story short, I've come to realize that the EMG's
are still the most versatile system. It's also the most practical for
many reasons. So it looks like I'm back to using SA's on my jobbing
guitar. Y'know, those gigs when you have to switch back and forth from a
Beyonce tune to an Ellington tune. The only thing I'm not digging is the
dark jazz sound I'm getting. It's passable, but it still needs tweaking.

As well as the SPC I've used the EXG and the RPC. But I was using those
for the complete opposite effect. My ears had been telling me that the
SA's didn't have the sparkly top end of a vintage Strat pickup and I was
convinced that I wanted more top end. These days, with my present amp
I'm finding the SA's plenty bright. They certainly don't sound like vint
strat p-ups or Duncan SSL-1's in this regard, but I can pretend that
they do without feeling too guilty.

So maybe I'll try an EQ do-dad made by EMG to get what I need. But, from
looking at their web site, it looks like the only thing they make is the
BTC Control
&lt;<a href="http://emginc.com/displayproducts.asp?section=Accessories&amp;categoryid=33&amp;catalogid=104" target="_blank"> http://emginc.com/displayproducts.asp?section=Accessories&am p;categoryid=33&amp;catalogid=104</a>&gt;
which is designed for bass, and that worries me a bit. It may take up
too much vertical room in my control cavity too (it's pretty tight in
there now), but I can probably make it fit. It's a gamble but I might
try it.

&gt; Making the EMG system start to cut at a lower frequency will
&gt; have little effect beyond an overall reduction in level because the
&gt; slope will remain the same.
&gt;
&gt; In addition, the resonance between the tone capacitor and the pickup
&gt; produces a very characteristic sound at full cut in the conventional
&gt; system.
&gt;
&gt; When the tone control in a conventional system is set to give only a
&gt; small cut, however, its behaviour is rather different. Analysis shows
&gt; that in this case the tone capacitor acts more or less as a short to
&gt; ground and the circuit reduces to the pickup inductance with part of
&gt; the tone pot resistance to ground. This combination has a rate of cut
&gt; which is the same as the EMG, which is why the EMG tone control can
&gt; emulate the conventional one at partial cut.
&gt;
&gt; As to the treble loss when turning down the 25k volume pot, one would
&gt; expect this to be minimal, essentially inaudible, with even a long
&gt; cable. In fact, at very low volume there should be an increase in
&gt; treble but this will occur well above 20kHz. The only really
&gt; worthwhile aural test would be via a HiFi system where you can be
&gt; reasonably confident that the frequency response of the amp will stay
&gt; the same at different volume settings.

Well I can only tell you what my ears tell me in my own system, the one
I actually use, which is the only one that really matters to me. Yes,
the treble roll-off is way less noticeable than it is with a
conventional vol control. But a conventional vol control with a well
designed treble-bleed circuit works better to my ears. Of course a
treble-bleed circuit, with a resistor as well as a cap, usually screws
up the taper of the vol control.

One of my main reasons for going back to EMG's is the lack of the
capacitance effect when running through long cables and/or FX boxes.
With passive pickups, even with FX that have true bypass, I was losing
too much tone on the way to the amp input unless I had absolutely no FX
on the floor, or unless I put a buffer (I've got 2 real good buffers I
use sometimes) in front of any FX I do have on the floor. Neither of my
buffers (VHT Valvulator and Access Buf) will run on batteries. The
hassle factor all adds up to the point where I feel I'm better off with
the EMG's.

&gt; If you are looking for small
&gt; variations, it is also important to match levels exactly.
&gt;
&gt; Passive pickups are affected by the cable capacitance, which for a 10
&gt; foot lead is typically 300pF. Removing this load by using a buffer
&gt; preamp in the guitar can leave them sounding too bright which is why I
&gt; suggested that an extra 300pF switchable across the pickups would
&gt; complete the job.

Oh. That's interesting.
Are you aware of any well-designed, transparent sounding buffer/preamps
that are made to mount in, or at, the guitar?

I have this old PAX buffer that I used to mess around with. It simply
plugs into the guitars output jack. It was good for the capacitance
effect but it added a weird high-end artifact. Maybe your 300pF cap
trick could tame that type of system a bit?
Could the cap be placed in-line within a cable rather than inside the
guitar's control cavity? I wouldn't want the cap to be active unless I
was actually using the buffer.

Good info Arthur. Thanks.


--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#26: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 19:38:57 by Dave M

&gt; For most guys, an ACTIVE EMG tone gives much better results. I'd
&gt; recommend the SPC, which will fatten up that SA, roll off the highs, to
&gt; sound more like a humbucker.

I had an EMG setup w/a 60 (neck), an 85 (br), and an S, then
an SA in the middle. I never liked the balance between the
single and the other 2; the single just didn't have enough
umph. Eventually I removed them after deciding I didn't
care for the EMG sound: glassy high end, honky mids. (Once
at a band audition, the members remarked on how mid-rangey
my guitar sounded. I thought they were crazy. More than a
year later I heard a live recording of myself w/that guitar
and I realized they were right.)

I'll will say this, I liked that their low imp allowed me to
back off the vol to clean up the tone w/out losing highs.
That was nice.

Report this message

#27: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 19:47:13 by Jim Anable

Dave M wrote:

&gt;&gt; For most guys, an ACTIVE EMG tone gives much better results. I'd
&gt;&gt; recommend the SPC, which will fatten up that SA, roll off the highs,
&gt;&gt; to sound more like a humbucker.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; I had an EMG setup w/a 60 (neck), an 85 (br), and an S, then an SA in
&gt; the middle. I never liked the balance between the single and the other
&gt; 2; the single just didn't have enough umph. Eventually I removed them
&gt; after deciding I didn't care for the EMG sound: glassy high end, honky
&gt; mids. (Once at a band audition, the members remarked on how mid-rangey
&gt; my guitar sounded. I thought they were crazy. More than a year later I
&gt; heard a live recording of myself w/that guitar and I realized they were
&gt; right.)
&gt;
&gt; I'll will say this, I liked that their low imp allowed me to back off
&gt; the vol to clean up the tone w/out losing highs. That was nice.

Which pickup caused the honky mids? The EXG active tone would be the
cure for that. It boost highs and bottom at the same time.

Report this message

#28: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 20:13:59 by Dave M

&gt; Which pickup caused the honky mids? The EXG active tone would be the
&gt; cure for that. It boost highs and bottom at the same time.

I guess it was the 85. (I pulled those pups a few yrs ago
and the guitar's been empty since.)

Report this message

#29: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 20:26:56 by Joey Goldstein

Dave M wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt; For most guys, an ACTIVE EMG tone gives much better results. I'd
&gt; &gt; recommend the SPC, which will fatten up that SA, roll off the highs, to
&gt; &gt; sound more like a humbucker.
&gt;
&gt; I had an EMG setup w/a 60 (neck), an 85 (br), and an S, then
&gt; an SA in the middle. I never liked the balance between the
&gt; single and the other 2;

Of course not. Those pickups are not designed to be balanced werll together.

Steinbergers have an 89 SA 89 setup.
The 89 is a dual mode pickup. In single coil mode it's exactly the same
as an SA.
In full humbucking mode it's a high output sound like an 85 I believe.
In 5-way positions 2 and 4 you should have the middle SA coupled with
one of the 89's in single coil mode.

&gt; the single just didn't have enough
&gt; umph. Eventually I removed them after deciding I didn't
&gt; care for the EMG sound: glassy high end, honky mids. (Once
&gt; at a band audition, the members remarked on how mid-rangey
&gt; my guitar sounded. I thought they were crazy. More than a
&gt; year later I heard a live recording of myself w/that guitar
&gt; and I realized they were right.)
&gt;
&gt; I'll will say this, I liked that their low imp allowed me to
&gt; back off the vol to clean up the tone w/out losing highs.
&gt; That was nice.

--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#30: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 21:10:24 by Dave M

&gt; Steinbergers have an 89 SA 89 setup.

Did they have the 89 in '87?

Report this message

#31: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 21:24:19 by Joey Goldstein

Dave M wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt; Steinbergers have an 89 SA 89 setup.
&gt;
&gt; Did they have the 89 in '87?

As far as I know any Steinberger with two EMG humbuckers and a sing coil
EMG used two 89's.

To be more precise the neck p-up is an 89R which is just an 89 with the
two coils positions swapped in relation to the logo/wiring/etc.
I.e. With the reular 89 in sing coil mode the coil closest to the bridge
is active. With the 89R it's the coil closest to the neck that remains active.

89R's are next to impossible to order these days and you won't see much
info about them at EMG's web site.

--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#32: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 22:09:16 by Jim Anable

Dave M wrote:

&gt;&gt; Which pickup caused the honky mids? The EXG active tone would be the
&gt;&gt; cure for that. It boost highs and bottom at the same time.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; I guess it was the 85. (I pulled those pups a few yrs ago and the
&gt; guitar's been empty since.)

I can understand that. I much prefer the clean tone of an 85 when also
using the RPC active tone, which boosts highs.

Report this message

#33: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 22:19:02 by arthur

In message &lt;<a href="mailto:42CD513C.1F61DD24&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">42CD513C.1F61DD24&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt;
Joey Goldstein &lt;<a href="mailto:nospam&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">nospam&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt; wrote:


[snip]
&gt; Are you aware of any well-designed, transparent sounding buffer/preamps
&gt; that are made to mount in, or at, the guitar?
&gt;
&gt; I have this old PAX buffer that I used to mess around with. It simply
&gt; plugs into the guitars output jack. It was good for the capacitance
&gt; effect but it added a weird high-end artifact. Maybe your 300pF cap
&gt; trick could tame that type of system a bit?
&gt; Could the cap be placed in-line within a cable rather than inside the
&gt; guitar's control cavity? I wouldn't want the cap to be active unless I
&gt; was actually using the buffer.
&gt;
&gt; Good info Arthur. Thanks.
&gt;
&gt;
A Google search came up with
<a href="http://www.caesound.com/cgi-bin/cae/info?bufPreamp" target="_blank">http://www.caesound.com/cgi-bin/cae/info?bufPreamp</a>

How good it is, I have no idea. Possibly your PAX buffer would be just
as useful if you added 270pF or 330pF across its input to make the
input impedance look more like a standard 10 foot guitar lead.

Arthur

--
Arthur Quinn
real-email arthur at bellacat dot com

Report this message

#34: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-07 22:40:57 by Joey Goldstein

<a href="mailto:arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid" target="_blank">arthur&#64;invalid.co.uk.invalid</a> wrote:
&gt;
&gt; In message &lt;<a href="mailto:42CD513C.1F61DD24&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">42CD513C.1F61DD24&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt;
&gt; Joey Goldstein &lt;<a href="mailto:nospam&#64;nowhere.net" target="_blank">nospam&#64;nowhere.net</a>&gt; wrote:
&gt;
&gt; [snip]
&gt; &gt; Are you aware of any well-designed, transparent sounding buffer/preamps
&gt; &gt; that are made to mount in, or at, the guitar?
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; I have this old PAX buffer that I used to mess around with. It simply
&gt; &gt; plugs into the guitars output jack. It was good for the capacitance
&gt; &gt; effect but it added a weird high-end artifact. Maybe your 300pF cap
&gt; &gt; trick could tame that type of system a bit?
&gt; &gt; Could the cap be placed in-line within a cable rather than inside the
&gt; &gt; guitar's control cavity? I wouldn't want the cap to be active unless I
&gt; &gt; was actually using the buffer.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Good info Arthur. Thanks.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; A Google search came up with
&gt; <a href="http://www.caesound.com/cgi-bin/cae/info?bufPreamp" target="_blank">http://www.caesound.com/cgi-bin/cae/info?bufPreamp</a>

Hmm. Looks too large for a Strat control cavity.

Although they don't call them &quot;buffers&quot; EMG makes 2 do-dads that would
probably do the trick too:
the PA2
&lt;<a href="http://emginc.com/displayproducts.asp?section=Accessories&amp;categoryid=32&amp;catalogid=135" target="_blank"> http://emginc.com/displayproducts.asp?section=Accessories&am p;categoryid=32&amp;catalogid=135</a>&gt;
and the AB
&lt;<a href="http://emginc.com/displayproducts.asp?section=Accessories&amp;categoryid=32&amp;catalogid=69" target="_blank"> http://emginc.com/displayproducts.asp?section=Accessories&am p;categoryid=32&amp;catalogid=69</a>&gt;

What do you think? If set to unity gain would either or both of these
gizmos work as a buffer for passive pickups?
They might even affect the vol control's loss of treble, unless of
course I put your cap in between the output and the buffer. Ah ... Catch 22.

&gt; How good it is, I have no idea. Possibly your PAX buffer would be just
&gt; as useful if you added 270pF or 330pF across its input to make the
&gt; input impedance look more like a standard 10 foot guitar lead.

Ah. The cap's got to be in front of the buffer, not after. Got it.

I'll probably just stick with the EMG-SA's for a while. I suppose I
could probably get the dark jazz thing I need with an EQ pedal. And
because the EMG's are lowZ I won't have any signal degradation going
thru something like a Boss EQ7. Still, another f...... pedal on the floor.


--
Joey Goldstein
<a href="http://www.joeygoldstein.com" target="_blank">http://www.joeygoldstein.com</a>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca

Report this message

#35: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-08 00:08:37 by Dave M

&gt; 89R's are next to impossible to order these days and you won't see much
&gt; info about them at EMG's web site.

They're at the site.

Maybe I got bad advice, and 89s are what I should have had.
OTOH, the description says that in HB the sound is similar
to an 85. Seems like they need a single w/enough output to
match their HB'ers.

It's all academic, I've decided I'm just not an EMG fan.
Funny, my bass-playing friend started playing his P-Bass
again, after using a Modulus for many years. He was
enjoying the P-Bass, but something was still not right. So
he took out the EMGs in favor of the DiMarzios he'd used
before going active. He's much happier.

Report this message

#36: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-08 00:08:37 by Dave M

&gt; I can understand that.

Think of Van Halen's &quot;Summer Nights&quot;. That's a Steinberger
w/EMGs. Very Honky. Almost sounds like he's got the tone
backed off.

&gt; I much prefer the clean tone of an 85 when also
&gt; using the RPC active tone, which boosts highs.

That's got to be pretty hot. I mean, the EMGs have a lot of
output to start with, then you start boosting freqs... Back
when I used the EMGs I installed a little EMG preamp in my
other main guitar just so the output of the 2 guitars would
be similar.

Report this message

#37: Re: EMG's with different value cap on tone control?

Posted on 2005-07-08 02:59:46 by Jim Anable

Dave M wrote:

&gt;&gt; I can understand that.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Think of Van Halen's &quot;Summer Nights&quot;. That's a Steinberger w/EMGs.
&gt; Very Honky. Almost sounds like he's got the tone backed off.
&gt;
&gt;&gt; I much prefer the clean tone of an 85 when also using the RPC active
&gt;&gt; tone, which boosts highs.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; That's got to be pretty hot. I mean, the EMGs have a lot of output to
&gt; start with, then you start boosting freqs...

But you still have a volume control, right? ;^) Normal setting for
clean on my strat is usually around 7 on volume, even with little or no
tone boost. If I go much higher on my Super Reverb, it starts
compressing the preamp.

Back when I used the EMGs
&gt; I installed a little EMG preamp in my other main guitar just so the
&gt; output of the 2 guitars would be similar.

Report this message