Not another "what PRS is closest to a Tele sound" thread!

[shinksma]

I was just watching a rig-rundown video with Steven Wilson where he was discussing the use of a telecaster through a H&K ("Haitch and Kay") practice amp as his core "sound" on his last album. The main riff/chord progression for "People Who Eat Darkness" is the epitome of the tone, as he demonstrated.

I got out my RL SH Vela, selected single coil bridge pup, and ran it into my H&K practice amp. Close, but a little too, I dunno, "refined".

Swapped over to a cheap tele I have that has the standard tele bridge pup, and it nailed the tone right away.

The Vela is certainly the most "tele-esque" of the PRS line up, IMHO. But somehow isn't as close to a T-style as the DC3 is to an S-style, for example (and obviously the Silver Sky went all the way, very on purpose).

So...what makes a tele have that sound? That raw, gritty, thrashy, gnarly sound?

The Vela has a similar bridge but it isn't string-through-body like my tele. Is it the pickup? Why don't strats sound like teles on the bridge pup - because of the trem bridge? Is it that big metal "tray" at the bridge? My tele is relatively thick and heavy - solid ash body - I don't know if it is thicker than a "standard issue tele". Is it the "sum of the parts"? i.e. that pickup with that bridge with that solid-type body (thickness and weight) with a maple bolt-on neck?

With the release of the Silver Sky there is an opportunity to "improve upon" the "other" F model. It certainly isn't an unpopular model out there, and there are a number of non-Fender manufacturers playing in that space (therefore the target players don't complete eschew the "clones").

Just some musings...

 

[markd21]

So...what makes a tele have that sound? That raw, gritty, thrashy, gnarly sound?

​

There seem to be a couple of things that are unique to the "Tele recipe" that seem to NEED to be there.

1) Whether string-through-body, or "back-loaded" the pickup has to MOUNT in the bridge. It's not enough to just BE a flat bridge with brass saddles, like the Vela bridge.

2) The brass base plate on the bottom of the bridge pickup. This plate is used to fatten up the tone and attenuates the highs of the bridge pickup somewhat.

A "good" tele tone has some muscle under it. It's different than a humbucker sound, obviously, but there is a "snarl" on the low end with a "snappiness" on the high end. In my opinion, that is what makes the Vela only "tele-esque". It's missing that something "extra" - the low-end snarl with the high-end snap.

My experience tends to equate the Vela as being more like a "Tele meets Gretsch" hybrid. It jangles more than it snarls, and when the Vela does snarl, it more resembles the filtertron (or Dynasonic, obviously) than the bridge-mounted Telecaster single coil. People often forget - or just don't know - that while a Filtertron looks like a humbucker it is actually a single coil.

The Vela has a similar bridge but it isn't string-through-body like my tele. Is it the pickup?

Yes. The actual pickup has A LOT to do with it.

Why don't strats sound like teles on the bridge pup - because of the trem bridge?

Yes. That is a big part, but not the only. The strat has the pickup mounted in plastic, whereas the tele has the pickup mounted in a metal plate. There is also the difference of the vintage telecaster bridge pickup having the brass plate on the bottom. I have heard strats where a base plate is added to the pickup and the sound is almost instantly "improved".

Is it that big metal "tray" at the bridge? My tele is relatively thick and heavy - solid ash body - I don't know if it is thicker than a "standard issue tele".

Yes. The big metal "tray" is essential to the sound.

Is it the "sum of the parts"? i.e. that pickup with that bridge with that solid-type body (thickness and weight) with a maple bolt-on neck?

Yes. Leo got it right the first time. It's really one of those things where the sum of the parts came together perfectly the first time, and any real attempt to "improve" it have only ended in variations, not replacements. For instance, the Stratocaster was intended to REPLACE the Telecaster, but the Tele maintained such popularity that it could not be "phased out".

With the release of the Silver Sky there is an opportunity to "improve upon" the "other" F model. It certainly isn't an unpopular model out there, and there are a number of non-Fender manufacturers playing in that space (therefore the target players don't complete eschew the "clones").

Just some musings...

Good musings. In my opinion you can't improve upon the Tele formula - only create a variation. Once you know how to use it, there is a charm in the primitive simplicity of a Telecaster that is perfection.

 

[bodia]

I thought my first 594 got more Tele-y, by knob fiddling and pulling, than the RL Vela I had.

 

[pac90]

I think I know why on this one.....your teles may be very close to each other

I remember the thatpedalshow video he did, and he said something along the lines of for creativity he just grabbed a MIM tele which he had left propped in a corner and got inspired from the difference to his regular guitar.

I would definitely be in the market for an S2 tele though, i love the feel and tone of teles, I still monitor the usual places for semi-hollow velas. I have a mim strat which I also love but it required a lot of upgrades to get just right, well except for the fretboard edge which isn't yet rolled, and jars each time I go to it from my prs

 

[jak3af3r]

My semi-educated guess is the pickup/bridge assembly.

The pickup in particular because of the baseplate (all mine are copper, not brass) which, depending on the material, can affect the magnetic field. Then again, I have one Tele pickup without a baseplate and it's a twang master.

The bridge matters a lot too because if it has been screwed to the body where the edge nearest the neck has a gap you can either get the holy grail of sustain or the worst feedback-prone instrument.

Also the saddle material, saddle fasteners, and shape (I'm my experience) make a big difference.

The string through part plays a role but I find it to be overstated. One of my teles has a bridge with holes to do both and the most noticable difference is the string tension. It still twangs and screams but the bass notes don't have the same oomph. But I can run the top 3 strings top-loaded and the bottom through the body as a compromise and it works well.

Oddly enough, I can get my McCarty to get into convincing Tele territory with some heavy compression and eq shaping.

 

[drdoom8793]

I've always gotten really great Tele tones from my CE24 when I split the bridge pickup. That being said, I've always thought it would be neat for someone to grab a Vela and stick a Lollar Novel T pickup in the bridge.

 

[gush]

A good telecaster is the only fender.that even begins to grab my interest.

 

[Mozzi]

I think my 509 bridge is quite 'tele' sounding but the issue is what is a tele sound?

Tele's have been made with numerous pick-up combinations and in different styles of music so what 'tele' sound are you looking for?

I am not necessarily the best person to know what a 'tele' sound is as I don't own and never have owned a tele. With the many pick-up options my 5 PRS guitars offer - for example 9 options with the 509, 12 options with the PRS Special, 8 with 594, all of which offer a 'tapped/split' bridge and neck PU, I think I could get 'close enough' for my needs. Obviously the HBii and Cu24 don't allow individual split coil tones and the distance between PU's on the Cu24 isn't likely to be as close to a tele sound as others - although the brighter neck may help in the double split position. Again though, I am thinking more about getting close to the double Single Coil tele and not one loaded with Humbuckers or P90's.

The Tele though has been around for many many years and built with numerous Pick-ups that have also changed over the years. A new Tele may not sound exactly like the vintage tele with the same PU combination. It maybe close enough to be instantly recognisable as a tele but whether PRS have a model that in a 'blind test' could pass as a tele. For me, the guitar that made me think of a Tele when I heard it, was the 509. I don't think of a 'tele' when I hear my 594 split or my Special 22 with the tapped Humbuckers either - again that maybe because I am not as familiar with Tele's.

I can't comment on the S2 or CE line as I haven't really played a lot or heard a lot from them. What I have heard hasn't made me think that the sound was 'tele-like' but again that is most likely down to my lack of experience with Tele's and these PRS lines.

 

[veinbuster]

I agree that there is a wide range of tele sound. I have three (it was an accident, really).
First was a scratch and dent bargain SSH. Each pickup switched in or out with a mini toggle. The humbucker mini toggle could be hum or single. Neck + single bridge struck me as most traditional tele like.

Second is in my mind the consummate tele, set up like

Non of my PRS really sound like this, but I’ve never really tried to get there.

The third some might have seen elsewhere is my Thorn E ‘hubcap guitar’ with a pair of GT90s (Ron’s P90). Killer guitar, but not quite your traditional tele sound.

 

[xjbebop]

Markd21 = nailed it.
Want a proper Tele tone? Play a proper Tele... end of story.

 

[shinksma]

Hmm, having issues responding/posting.

 

[shinksma]

So I agree that it is likely the bridge/pickup combo.