Can't decide between two guitars.

[deathworlder]

I'd keep the one that gets me off more.

 

[László]

I thought it. But I felt like I had said too much already.

You never say too much! I say way too much.

My thoughts as well Laszlo!

PS
I mean the guitar choice, not that you are a terrible person

Oh but I really AM a terrible person! You can ask anyone.

On the other hand, I think you're making the right call here.

 

[Daryl Jones]

So here's the rest of the story

I'm recording originals only (no live playing, and if I did play live, I'd use a REAL guitar player!).

I only need/want one guitar now because as I'm fairly new to guitar playing (I'm a LONG time Drummer/Bass Player/Keyboardist), I'm not so guitar obsessed right now as I'm confident I'll eventually become

I also only need/want one guitar now because I'm mainly using it for ideas, and perhaps I'll get lucky and keep the guitar track, but regardless, I'll bring the song to my best friend who is a real guitar player (now HE'S the one who is guitar obsessed, and he has, just to name a few in his arsenal, Custom Shop Les Pauls/Strats/Telecasters/Suhrs/Nashs/Duesenburgs/Xotics/etc., and he'll listen to what I've done, and will either say "Let's try this instead", or he'll say "Sounds great to me, and I can't come with anything that will be any better".

The two mystery guitars are:

1) An AVRI '52 Telecaster (the first guitar).
2) A PRS SE 594 Double Cut.


So now that you know the rest of the story, which of the two guitars would you keep for now, and why?

OK, I'm no pro or outstanding player either, but for what it's worth, I'd stick with both if it's not a financial concern for you. As you grow with your skills I would bet money that the individual guitars will start to show their personalities with time and experience. I'm a long time Tele fan (as well as SG's) but being the owner of a 594 myself (not an SE but an S2) I would never give mine up for any other guitar. And a Tele is just a uniquely versatile guitar so it would have to stay as well. I can't say you should trust my $.02, but I'd sure give it plenty of time and serious thought before unloading either of them.

 

[Jerrydpi]

I am guessing you bought guitar number two because you love the way it looks and you hoped it would sound better than your current guitar. I can’t say I haven’t done the same thing. Sometimes I have returned the new addition because I couldn’t justify keeping it when it didn’t actually offer me anything I didn’t already have, except redundancy. Others I have kept. What I have found is that in time, the subtle differences start to sound more pronounced and I don’t think of them as being the same sound anymore. Sometimes it takes a little time to appreciate the unique qualities of a piece of gear. Usually longer than the return period.

You are 110% correct as to why I bought the second guitar!

 

[Rod/]

I'd have to agree. There's no real reason to have more than one if the two guitars sound pretty much the same.

Here's how I would decide (I've done this):

Record yourself playing each of the guitars. Don't use the EQ pedal, it introduces nonlinearities besides the EQ that affect the tone. Just go straight into your amp with both guitars. Play clean, play dirty, record both.

Keep the one that sounds better to you on playback. It can be difficult to make a decision about tone preference while you're playing - one's concentration is often too divided between playing and listening to choose wisely.

You might be surprised at the outcome!

You also might think this is a really dumb idea. I rule nothing out.

Hi Les. I’ve never liked the odd tones/harmonics or something I can’t describe from the Boss GE7 6 band graphic…
The Japanese Maxon graphic EQ version is much more musical to my ears and have used them for years. So these create nonlinearitites? Can you describe and explain what this is? Sometimes I’m a Luddite … Many thanks.. Rod

 

[Jerrydpi]

I'd have to agree. There's no real reason to have more than one if the two guitars sound pretty much the same.

Here's how I would decide (I've done this):

Record yourself playing each of the guitars. Don't use the EQ pedal, it introduces nonlinearities besides the EQ that affect the tone. Just go straight into your amp with both guitars. Play clean, play dirty, record both.

Keep the one that sounds better to you on playback. It can be difficult to make a decision about tone preference while you're playing - one's concentration is often too divided between playing and listening to choose wisely.

You might be surprised at the outcome!

You also might think this is a really dumb idea. I rule nothing out.

It's NOT a dumb idea Laszlo....................I LIKE it!

 

[Tony M.]

I would keep the one that doesn't need the EQ.

 

[László]

Hi Les. I’ve never liked the odd tones/harmonics or something I can’t describe from the Boss GE7 6 band graphic…

Most Boss pedals share a tone that I don't care for. It's hard to describe why, isn't it? But it's there!

The Japanese Maxon graphic EQ version is much more musical to my ears and have used them for years. So these create nonlinearitites?

The ideal in high fidelity audio amplification (including recording gear) is a straight wire with gain; what goes in is mirrored exactly in what comes out. That would be linear - - frequency response the same, distortion zero, etc. No one's ever achieved perfect linearity. All electronic circuits modify the signal even when they're not 'supposed' to. Thus, all audio gear sounds different, and two pieces of gear of the same model can even sound a tiny bit different.

There are amplification stages in all pedals (one source of nonlinearity in each stage) and this includes EQ, which often introduces additional nonlinearities like phase shifts.

Every part in an analog circuit contributes to a piece of gear's nonlinearities. Even the potentiometers. There are tolerances allowed in parts that make each item vary in tone a little.

This is especially the case in lots of inexpensive circuits, like pedals. It simply means there are distortions in each part of an analog circuit that pile on top of each other so that what comes out of the circuit is different from what goes into the circuit. Sometimes it's very significant and other times it's more subtle.

This is combined with inherent tolerance variations in every part used in the circuit. It's why two channels of an analog recording console often sound different from one another.

These nonlinearities are exactly what's actually wanted in lots of gear - a good example would be a guitar amplifier, a microphone with a certain 'character' or coloration, etc.

When it comes to guitar pedals, I'm not sure one even wants completely linear circuits. After all, coloration is their purpose.

To compare two guitars apples-to-apples, the idea is to level the playing field by eliminating all but the most necessary gain stages and other nonlinearities. So I'd bypass everything but the amp. With most graphic EQ pedals, they aren't true bypass, so it's best just to go straight in.

I had a Rane single rackspace graphic EQ, where the frequency band was divided into many more than 5 sliders, in my rack back in the late '80s and early '90s, They're great for certain things.

I prefer a parametric EQ these days - just personal preference. This isn't to knock the graphic EQs in racks or pedals. It's just a matter of what an individual likes using.

Finally, these nonlinearities aren't solved completely with digital gear, because significant nonlinearities are introduced by the AD/DA converters and the analog gain stages going into and coming out from the digital stuff. The AD/DA converters on a pedal obviously have to be inexpensive; high end converters used in major studios can fetch 5 figure money. In fact, even the separate and independent clocking systems designed to reduce 'jitter' in the AD/DA can go for that much (you find these mostly in mastering suites).

 

[Rod/]

Most Boss pedals share a tone that I don't care for. It's hard to describe why, isn't it? But it's there!

The ideal in high fidelity audio amplification (including recording gear) is a straight wire with gain; what goes in is mirrored exactly in what comes out. That would be linear - - frequency response the same, distortion zero, etc. No one's ever achieved perfect linearity. All electronic circuits modify the signal even when they're not 'supposed' to. Thus, all audio gear sounds different, and two pieces of gear of the same model can even sound a tiny bit different.

There are amplification stages in all pedals (one source of nonlinearity in each stage) and this includes EQ, which often introduces additional nonlinearities like phase shifts.

Every part in an analog circuit contributes to a piece of gear's nonlinearities. Even the potentiometers. There are tolerances allowed in parts that make each item vary in tone a little.

This is especially the case in lots of inexpensive circuits, like pedals. It simply means there are distortions in each part of an analog circuit that pile on top of each other so that what comes out of the circuit is different from what goes into the circuit. Sometimes it's very significant and other times it's more subtle.

This is combined with inherent tolerance variations in every part used in the circuit. It's why two channels of an analog recording console often sound different from one another.

These nonlinearities are exactly what's actually wanted in lots of gear - a good example would be a guitar amplifier, a microphone with a certain 'character' or coloration, etc.

When it comes to guitar pedals, I'm not sure one even wants completely linear circuits. After all, coloration is their purpose.

To compare two guitars apples-to-apples, the idea is to level the playing field by eliminating all but the most necessary gain stages and other nonlinearities. So I'd bypass everything but the amp. With most graphic EQ pedals, they aren't true bypass, so it's best just to go straight in.

I had a Rane single rackspace graphic EQ, where the frequency band was divided into many more than 5 sliders, in my rack back in the late '80s and early '90s, They're great for certain things.

I prefer a parametric EQ these days - just personal preference. This isn't to knock the graphic EQs in racks or pedals. It's just a matter of what an individual likes using.

Finally, these nonlinearities aren't solved completely with digital gear, because significant nonlinearities are introduced by the AD/DA converters and the analog gain stages going into and coming out from the digital stuff. The AD/DA converters on a pedal obviously have to be inexpensive; high end converters used in major studios can fetch 5 figure money. In fact, even the separate and independent clocking systems designed to reduce 'jitter' in the AD/DA can go for that much (you find these mostly in mastering suites).

Les, thanks so much for your detailed response…. Now I get it….Interesting stuff. I notice you use 5 different PettyJohn pedals.
You must like the quality of tones these have.

 

[pwrmac7600]

OK, I'm no pro or outstanding player either, but for what it's worth, I'd stick with both if it's not a financial concern for you. As you grow with your skills I would bet money that the individual guitars will start to show their personalities with time and experience. I'm a long time Tele fan (as well as SG's) but being the owner of a 594 myself (not an SE but an S2) I would never give mine up for any other guitar. And a Tele is just a uniquely versatile guitar so it would have to stay as well. I can't say you should trust my $.02, but I'd sure give it plenty of time and serious thought before unloading either of them.

I would add that for me. Having multiple guitars helps me when I am feeling uninspired. I regularly rotate through most of my guitars. It keeps things fresh for me. It's like when I go into a guitar store and try on guitars. I always seem to start playing these cool riffs when I am trying on guitars and I start to dig one. It kickstarts inspiration for me alot of times.

Oh and it's just cool to have a room full of guitars so you can pretend your a Rockstar!

 

[László]

Les, thanks so much for your detailed response…. Now I get it….Interesting stuff. I notice you use 5 different PettyJohn pedals.
You must like the quality of tones these have.

I do.

However, they’re a little different from most pedals. Not necessarily ‘better’, there’s simply a different sonic ethic involved that works for some, not others. Stephen Pettyjohn (the human being) is a mastering engineer by trade.

They’re reaching for a ‘recording gear’ sound, not always a ‘better version of traditional pedals’ sound. That’s why I also have a few more traditional sounding pedals on my board.

There is nothing at ALL wrong with traditional pedal sounds. It’s just a matter of what a player is looking for.

The PJ pedals are very transparent; more like classic recording gear than pedals.

Here’s a shot of the innards of one of their pedals. If you open most pedals this will look different due to the parts employed, etc. it looks more like what I find in studio gear.

Does that come at a cost? Yes, but it’s not all that much.

I would guess that PRS.also chooses parts that will give them what they’re looking for to meet their sonic goals without too many compromises.

As a person who gets most dirt from the amp, what I’m looking for is stuff that can get certain colorations and textures an amp doesn’t do on its own. So I use an overdrive to goose the front end of an edge of breakup amp a little, to add color/flavor instead of running a pedal into a clean amp to get the sound of the pedal.

However there’s no right or wrong way to achieve your sonic goals. This is simply the way I do it, YMMV!

I generally use the PJ pedals to shape my basic tone when I'm not relying on the amp alone, and then add modulation, delay and reverb as spices from several vendors.

 

[Rod/]

I do.

However, they’re a little different from most pedals. Not necessarily ‘better’, there’s simply a different sonic ethic involved that works for some, not others. Stephen Pettyjohn (the human being) is a mastering engineer by trade.

They’re reaching for a ‘recording gear’ sound, not always a ‘better version of traditional pedals’ sound. That’s why I also have a few more traditional sounding pedals on my board.

There is nothing at ALL wrong with traditional pedal sounds. It’s just a matter of what a player is looking for.

The PJ pedals are very transparent; more like classic recording gear than pedals.

Here’s a shot of the innards of one of their pedals. If you open most pedals this will look different due to the parts employed, etc. it looks more like what I find in studio gear.

Does that come at a cost? Yes, but it’s not all that much.

I would guess that PRS.also chooses parts that will give them what they’re looking for to meet their sonic goals without too many compromises.

As a person who gets most dirt from the amp, what I’m looking for is stuff that can get certain colorations and textures an amp doesn’t do on its own. So I use an overdrive to goose the front end of an edge of breakup amp a little, to add color/flavor instead of running a pedal into a clean amp to get the sound of the pedal.

However there’s no right or wrong way to achieve your sonic goals. This is simply the way I do it, YMMV!

I generally use the PJ pedals to shape my basic tone when I'm not relying on the amp alone, and then add modulation, delay and reverb as spices from several vendors.

I get it. That makes a lot of sense. The other guitarist in my old band had 3 different PettyJohn pedals but he bought them because they were expensive, not ever knowing how to use them. Good quality pedals though

 

[László]

I get it. That makes a lot of sense. The other guitarist in my old band had 3 different PettyJohn pedals but he bought them because they were expensive, not ever knowing how to use them. Good quality pedals though

I wasn't interested in their pedals until Pete Thorn did a nice demo of one of their early preamp pedals. It had an "adds a little tone color but is still transparent" vibe that reminded me of the way old recording gear preamplifies a signal.

From that point on, the PJ pedals were on my radar. I watched a few other videos and have bought the ones I think suit my needs. They just came out with another one I'd like, but - thank goodness - I have no room left on the pedalboard so I get to keep my $$!

 

[Jerrydpi]

If I swap the SE 594 for a 2018 S2 Studio, would that change any of your mindsets between it and the Telecaster?

 

[Mind Flayer]

Which one do you enjoy playing more? If your house was burning down and you had to run in and only had time to grab one, which one would it be? That’s your answer.

 

[ruger9]

The problem is, you're still in the honeymoon period with the PRS. It's "shiny and new". It's easier to be jazzed by new gear.

Tough call. I'd keep the tele, but I'm a tele guy. In my experiences over many years, I think you have to live with a guitar (or amp) for awhile to really know if it's for you... long enough to fall out of the honeymoon period, and that's too long for a full refund. The only exception to this is when you don't like something right out of the gate: I have found that doesn't change.

If you don't like it at first strum, send it back.
If you like it, keep it awhile and discover if you like it enough to keep it.
If you love it, wait for the honeymoon to cool off then re-evaluate.

Unfortunately, you lose the full-refund return window... such is life...

 

[Stephen J.]

If I swap the SE 594 for a 2018 S2 Studio, would that change any of your mindsets between it and the Telecaster?

There would have to be something about the Telecaster I really didn’t like to make that trade. The Studio is a cool guitar. It would be good to have in addition to the Telecaster, but not necessary instead of the Telecaster.