shinksma
What? I get a title?
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2014
- Messages
- 5,318
My apologies in advance for a long discussion post, but I found something interesting tonight, and I want to explore and discuss it...
As I may have mentioned, I play in a Celtic-Fusion band where we mix lots of traditional Irish, Scottish, Old Time, and Traditional music with more modern singer-songwriter stuff, some good old rock'n'roll, and a little bit of prog rock (care of me!)
I have most recently been using an acoustic guitar (PRS SE Angelus Custom) for the full blown acoustic stuff, and a Spruce Hollowbody with piezo for anything that involves a mix or just pure rock'n'roll stuff. I use an acoustic simulator with the piezo to get a reasonable facsimile of what an acoustic guitar with piezo pickup may sound like through the PA. (Aside: I use an amp modeler pedal to get a bit of an amp sound when using dirt pedals, etc, since there is no room for a proper electric guitar amp, both physical-space and loudness wise.) Anyway, it works, and the rest of the band is happy with the sound I produce. Well, except the percussionist - either I'm too loud in the monitors, or my syncopation is throwing him off, or both.
Tonight I began experimenting with my other PRSi, to see what I can use in place of the Hollowbody for variety. I read up on what is typically the difference in a piezo signal vs. a mag pickup signal, frequency-response wise, etc. A cut to the mids, and a boost to the highs and a mild boost to the bass seemed like a good place to start, using a 6-band EQ pedal.
I started with my trusty Core model 2002 CU24 with 5-position rotary. I found the middle position to give a nice balance of both pickups, and I could get pretty well the same acoustic simulation as the piezo of the HB - not quite exactly the same, but probably just as close but in a different way, and certainly close enough for it to work for what we play. Indeed, I cut the mids (low-mid most, high-mids not as much) a fair bit, boosted the highs a slight bit, and kept the lows/bass part of the EQ pretty well level. I was pretty happy: the CU24 with EQ and Acoustic Sim pedals was pretty darned close to the HB piezo with just the Acoustic Sim pedal.
So let's see what I can do with the other guitars - if I can get a good sound from the SE7, for example, maybe I can use that for some of our songs where I typically break out the MM Baritone. And maybe the other guitars will have a good sound that varies it up.
Next up was my SE-7. I couldn't get a good sound out of it at all - I attributed that to perhaps the SE pickups, limited three-way switching (although it does have push-pull for splitting the pups), or maybe the maple neck. Or some combo. Or just random stuff that makes the SE line more affordable, but shows weaknesses in cases like this.
So I got out my SAS - swamp ash body, maple neck and fretboard, five position with push-pull. I could get closer, but still not quite. I used my looper to record a passage of a song using the CU24, with a gap in the recording just as long as the passage, and then looped it so I could play the recorded song fragment part of the loop, play live with a guitar for comparison during the silent part of the loop, and repeat over and over, to compare back-to-back-to-back. The CU24 played back-to-back with its own recording sounded exactly the same, so I knew it was a valid test.
The SAS was OK, but seemed lacking - I might have gotten it a bit closer if I had tweaked and tweaked, but I don't think I would have achieved what I got with the CU24. The SE7 was worse, as previously noted. My Akerfeldt was closer than the SE7, bit still seemed off. The SE Spalted ZM was closer, but still no cigar.
All of the guitars sound great as electric guitars, through dirt/effects or just straight into my Archon or Fender HRDX. But to simulate an acoustic guitar into PA, other than the HB piezo, only the CU24 could get really close.
One thing I noticed right away - the CU24, even with pickups mounted fairly low, were louder than the SE pickups. I had the CU24 at 8 or 9 on the volume, and I had to put the volume knob at 10 to get a similar signal level with the SE guitars - and their pickups are generally raised more, closer to the strings.
The CU24 seemed to elicit more of that top-end springy-spankiness/reverb that you associate with the soundboard of acoustic guitars - I just couldn't seem to get the same level of toppiness in the other guitars. I suppose I could have cranked the "top" control of the acoustic simulator pedal, but I find cranking any of those controls tends to create a very fake sound.
So, is it the CU24's pickups? The traditional hog-maple body with hog-rosewood neck? The SE7 has a maple neck, the Akerfeldt has a maple neck and ebony board, the SAS has swamp ash body and maple neck+board, plus the neck is bolt-on, of course. The ZM, should have sounded closest, and I guess it did (although very different from the SAS), since it has the semi-hollow cavity in a hog/maple body with hog/rosewood neck.
The CU24 has HFS + VB pickups. Are they responsible for the highly accurate match of a piezo signal when pout through the EQ?
The CU24 and the SE7 have wide-thin necks. The SAS has a pattern regular neck, or possible even narrower width-wide. All others are WF necks, including the HB. As a result, I can't see how that would be an impact.
This is also interesting to me because I want to get a P24 eventually - in theory, it would be an almost ideal combo of my CU24 and HB piezo. I was considering whether I wanted to get an ebony fretboard, or perhaps a rosewood or maple neck, as part of an AP upgrade. I didn't want to "settle" for a hog neck and rosewood board if some other tonewood was going to get me a different but still quality sound. And I was experimenting with which neck profile would work best. I can play them all, but the Wide Thin (Pattern Thin) seems to be the one I can play fastest.
But now, I wonder whether the old tried and true hog/RW neck/board is the default combo because it does just sound so good, and naturally allows the guitar to sound more "acoustic". Or will using the piezo not really matter, tonewood wise, and the use of alternate tonewoods would mostly be heard through the mag pickups? Anyone got a bunch of P24s for me to try out, all with different tonewood combos?
Sigh...yes, actually one of the bigger PRS dealers has quite a few. But I can't exactly drive there, it is well out of state.
Anyway, opinions and experiences would be much appreciated!
As I may have mentioned, I play in a Celtic-Fusion band where we mix lots of traditional Irish, Scottish, Old Time, and Traditional music with more modern singer-songwriter stuff, some good old rock'n'roll, and a little bit of prog rock (care of me!)
I have most recently been using an acoustic guitar (PRS SE Angelus Custom) for the full blown acoustic stuff, and a Spruce Hollowbody with piezo for anything that involves a mix or just pure rock'n'roll stuff. I use an acoustic simulator with the piezo to get a reasonable facsimile of what an acoustic guitar with piezo pickup may sound like through the PA. (Aside: I use an amp modeler pedal to get a bit of an amp sound when using dirt pedals, etc, since there is no room for a proper electric guitar amp, both physical-space and loudness wise.) Anyway, it works, and the rest of the band is happy with the sound I produce. Well, except the percussionist - either I'm too loud in the monitors, or my syncopation is throwing him off, or both.
Tonight I began experimenting with my other PRSi, to see what I can use in place of the Hollowbody for variety. I read up on what is typically the difference in a piezo signal vs. a mag pickup signal, frequency-response wise, etc. A cut to the mids, and a boost to the highs and a mild boost to the bass seemed like a good place to start, using a 6-band EQ pedal.
I started with my trusty Core model 2002 CU24 with 5-position rotary. I found the middle position to give a nice balance of both pickups, and I could get pretty well the same acoustic simulation as the piezo of the HB - not quite exactly the same, but probably just as close but in a different way, and certainly close enough for it to work for what we play. Indeed, I cut the mids (low-mid most, high-mids not as much) a fair bit, boosted the highs a slight bit, and kept the lows/bass part of the EQ pretty well level. I was pretty happy: the CU24 with EQ and Acoustic Sim pedals was pretty darned close to the HB piezo with just the Acoustic Sim pedal.
So let's see what I can do with the other guitars - if I can get a good sound from the SE7, for example, maybe I can use that for some of our songs where I typically break out the MM Baritone. And maybe the other guitars will have a good sound that varies it up.
Next up was my SE-7. I couldn't get a good sound out of it at all - I attributed that to perhaps the SE pickups, limited three-way switching (although it does have push-pull for splitting the pups), or maybe the maple neck. Or some combo. Or just random stuff that makes the SE line more affordable, but shows weaknesses in cases like this.
So I got out my SAS - swamp ash body, maple neck and fretboard, five position with push-pull. I could get closer, but still not quite. I used my looper to record a passage of a song using the CU24, with a gap in the recording just as long as the passage, and then looped it so I could play the recorded song fragment part of the loop, play live with a guitar for comparison during the silent part of the loop, and repeat over and over, to compare back-to-back-to-back. The CU24 played back-to-back with its own recording sounded exactly the same, so I knew it was a valid test.
The SAS was OK, but seemed lacking - I might have gotten it a bit closer if I had tweaked and tweaked, but I don't think I would have achieved what I got with the CU24. The SE7 was worse, as previously noted. My Akerfeldt was closer than the SE7, bit still seemed off. The SE Spalted ZM was closer, but still no cigar.
All of the guitars sound great as electric guitars, through dirt/effects or just straight into my Archon or Fender HRDX. But to simulate an acoustic guitar into PA, other than the HB piezo, only the CU24 could get really close.
One thing I noticed right away - the CU24, even with pickups mounted fairly low, were louder than the SE pickups. I had the CU24 at 8 or 9 on the volume, and I had to put the volume knob at 10 to get a similar signal level with the SE guitars - and their pickups are generally raised more, closer to the strings.
The CU24 seemed to elicit more of that top-end springy-spankiness/reverb that you associate with the soundboard of acoustic guitars - I just couldn't seem to get the same level of toppiness in the other guitars. I suppose I could have cranked the "top" control of the acoustic simulator pedal, but I find cranking any of those controls tends to create a very fake sound.
So, is it the CU24's pickups? The traditional hog-maple body with hog-rosewood neck? The SE7 has a maple neck, the Akerfeldt has a maple neck and ebony board, the SAS has swamp ash body and maple neck+board, plus the neck is bolt-on, of course. The ZM, should have sounded closest, and I guess it did (although very different from the SAS), since it has the semi-hollow cavity in a hog/maple body with hog/rosewood neck.
The CU24 has HFS + VB pickups. Are they responsible for the highly accurate match of a piezo signal when pout through the EQ?
The CU24 and the SE7 have wide-thin necks. The SAS has a pattern regular neck, or possible even narrower width-wide. All others are WF necks, including the HB. As a result, I can't see how that would be an impact.
This is also interesting to me because I want to get a P24 eventually - in theory, it would be an almost ideal combo of my CU24 and HB piezo. I was considering whether I wanted to get an ebony fretboard, or perhaps a rosewood or maple neck, as part of an AP upgrade. I didn't want to "settle" for a hog neck and rosewood board if some other tonewood was going to get me a different but still quality sound. And I was experimenting with which neck profile would work best. I can play them all, but the Wide Thin (Pattern Thin) seems to be the one I can play fastest.
But now, I wonder whether the old tried and true hog/RW neck/board is the default combo because it does just sound so good, and naturally allows the guitar to sound more "acoustic". Or will using the piezo not really matter, tonewood wise, and the use of alternate tonewoods would mostly be heard through the mag pickups? Anyone got a bunch of P24s for me to try out, all with different tonewood combos?
Sigh...yes, actually one of the bigger PRS dealers has quite a few. But I can't exactly drive there, it is well out of state.
Anyway, opinions and experiences would be much appreciated!
