Replace PU instead of buying new guitar

[progrmr]

I find that the stock electonics in my Epi Joe Pass are passable ( no pun intended lol) but are really not doing it for me.

So as I've begun looking for a new sound via a new guitar, I figured that I could probably get the sound I'm looking for with some new pickups instead of a whole new guitar - I really dig the Epi.

This is my clean machine - so clean jazz and blues with a warm thick tone is what I'm after. I was looking at P90 guitars because I've watched several videos and I'm hearing some really nice jazz out of P90 guitars. The only issue is that the Epi has humbuckers so the P90's need to fit. The P90's seem to deliver the sound I'm looking for.

I'm not against going with new humbuckers either - 57 classics or something that will give me the same warm sound.

What would you all recommend? Humbucker sized P-90's or Humbuckers? Recommendation on specific brands/models based on experience?

[FrankenFretter]

GFS Mean 90s. I hear nothing but good things about these, and Heywood has them in his Dot, and they sound great. They're a P90 in a full humbucker size package. You can't go wrong with these.

[otaypanky]

You never know until you stick 'em in there. It's like looking for the 'right' speaker. But that's half the fun, isn't it, that search for tone ?
The worst thing that could happen is you pull them back out and find a new home for them
Give 'em a try. :AOK

[progrmr]

Yea, I could look forever thinking about it - I probably just need to give them a go. The GFS Mean 90's have a nice price and I found a few videos - they sound good. I'm gonna go for it - have them installed this weekend and spend next week playing them while I'm on vacation :)

thanks!

[progrmr]

And bought... :) Cheaper than a new guitar that's for sure!

[Jimi75]

Actually, you can never go wrong with a classic 57 :thumbsup
If you want to go with a P90, I would recommend a Haeussel, which are currently the best P90 in hb format built.

http://www.haeussel.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=3&Itemid=27&lang=en

Another recommendation would be to go with a Benedetto pick up. Benedetto himself is a guitar building phenomenon and his pick ups are built to sound jazzy.

http://benedettopickups.com/products.htm

[wingsdad]

Why is replacing pickups so widely thought of as the immediate 'cure' to 'improve' tone when there are so many other variables in the equation?

[progrmr]

I think it's the easiest and fastest way to change tone - I've had new pickups added to guitars and basses, if the starting pickups are cheap the new ones are decent there is an immediate and significant improvement in tone.

My luthier tells me not to worry about the pots/caps in most of the instruments I take to them. If I don't find the sound I'm looking for the next step will be the amp.

What else would you recommend changing out?

[Heywood Jablomie]

Why is replacing pickups so widely thought of as the immediate 'cure' to 'improve' tone when there are so many other variables in the equation?
I often ask the same question. If changing, for example, from humbuckers to single coil (or vice versa), there's an obvious tonal difference. But the differences between different models of the same type of pickup are subtle, as shown by some interesting comparisons I've seen posted on these forums, where most listeners couldn't tell the difference.

To answer the "why" question: guitar forums and such publications as Premier Guitar convince people to buy (figuratively and literally) into the whole mojo/voodoo/BS thing.

Although I have no doubt that the "believers" are convinced that bulltique replacement parts are HUGE improvements, I also know that there are millions of people who believe that Extenze works.

[Eric]

Why is replacing pickups so widely thought of as the immediate 'cure' to 'improve' tone when there are so many other variables in the equation?
Hmm. Probably because people don't know any better. Take me, for instance: I've only replaced pickups once (same pickup type), but the main reason was because I didn't know of any other variables to look at. What sort of things are there that you'd recommend for improving tone?

I'm not a big upgrade person in general -- I just like things to work, and I'll move on if I don't like something. Still, it's good to know these things.

[Ch0jin]

Hmm. Probably because people don't know any better. Take me, for instance: I've only replaced pickups once (same pickup type), but the main reason was because I didn't know of any other variables to look at. What sort of things are there that you'd recommend for improving tone?

I'm not a big upgrade person in general -- I just like things to work, and I'll move on if I don't like something. Still, it's good to know these things.

Off the top of my head I'd think 'before' the transfer of energy from mechanical to electrical, that is, before the pickups, It's all mechanical changes. From the very core aspects like wood type, to setup options like pickup height and bridge setup. Anything that affects the overall resonance of the instrument and thus contributes to the strings vibrating should in theory alter the magnetic flux field the pickup has to work with.

To enable the pickup to do its job of transferring the energy, it forms part of a simple 'LCR' circuit where the 'L' is the pickup, the "R" is your volume pot and the "C" is your "tone cap". Without getting right into it, this is a tuned circuit, therefore altering any of these parts will alter the "sound" it produces. Thats why people often hear a difference when they change pot values or cap values. You are altering the resonant frequency of a tuned circuit. Also, your guitar cable has capacitance, and that also alters the tuning of the LCR circuit too. Thats why a "bad" cable, meaning one with a high pF/ft rating will "muffle" your sound.

So yeah does that sound about right?

Anyway I only have limited experience modifying just two guitars, but I'd guess that the three big tone effectors are PU's, pots and tone caps..... Is that a fair call?

[deeaa]

Ahh a thread to my liking...many of you have stated things I firmly believe in about pickups.

If you really study it, even small changes can make differences in pickup's sound. There's a lot of pickups out there with bad magnets and such, that sound curiously dark or bright for what you'd expect.

BUT in the end, there's no magic to how a pickup sounds, IMO. It's a pretty simple equation of magnet type, coil type and output strength. There's very very little difference if any between a lot of pickups with exactly the same type of magnet and comparable coil numbers etc. I really don't think you'll really detect any difference between, say a Seymour Duncan JB and a 57 and a similarly output-rated DiMarzio or whatever. It's mostly so tiny a difference I'd say it's in the listeners heads more than anything else.

In these cases, it's often more about the caps and the pots used - hell I bet even the wire used has some impact.

But, in reality, all these differences are very very small and in reality a slight change in pickup height, polepiece position and amp settings has way more impact.

If you want to change a dark-sounding no-name pickup to something else, you'll probably easily get a big change going to a known brand pickup.

If you want to change the pickup type or output level, you'll also notice big changes easily.

But, seriously...even with actives it seems to me if I for instance drop my volume a tad, I get pretty much exactly the same sound as any other humbucker ever did.

So to sum it up - is it in my opinion worth it to upgrade pups? YES if you're really changing the a.) type b.) output level c.) from a no-name unknown, strange-magnet one to a quality pup

BUT IMO it makes no sense whatsoever to take a perfectly good Gibson or a Seymour-equipped axe and just install whatever good pickup on it in the similar output range or style, I really don't see it is in any way a feasible answer to getting a change in sound.

I'm NOT saying there is no difference. Of course there is a difference, even between like active EMG 85's and 81's. Only that when you really think of it much, the differences in most cases are so slight it indeed makes more sense to change the tone caps than the actual pickup, or just adjust the amp.

Sometimes it has to be changed. On my guitars, I have changed an 81 to 85 simply because the guitar was a bit light in construction and lacked beef, and an 85 gave it much more balls and warmth. Conversely my Flying-V is pretty big and heavy and sturdy, and an 81 is quite ok on it.

AND to finish the ramble off, I haven't that much experience on single-coil mics, and it seems to me, on those the differences are a bit more pronounced than on humbuckers.

[deeaa]

Anything that affects the overall resonance of the instrument and thus contributes to the strings vibrating should in theory alter the magnetic flux field the pickup has to work with.

Indeed, and I have found the biggest things are - NOT whether it's bolt-on or glued or neck-thru OR even the woods used - it's the angles the strings have over their pivot ends on the guitar, and the materials and methods used on those spots where the string actually meets the guitar body. AND in some cases, the mixture of materials and/or said angles.

I know for a fact that simply changing body wood on, say, a strat, does very little to the sound, even if you change it to metal, stone, plastics, you name it, but there's no escaping that you just can't make a tiltneck gibson sound like a strat even with strat pups and all. It's the string angles for a large part, and in a very few situations, like the Les Paul maple cap thing, the woods have a somewhat magic-seeming affect on the sound.That maple cap upon I guess most anything seems to affect the tone quite a lot.

I don't claim to know anything about what sounds good and what not, but I'll say that any mention of 'tone woods' kinda makes me chuckle in disbelief, but still, if I see a guitar with a tiltneck and a maple cap over it's body, I can pretty much trust my expectations on what it might sound like.

[Ch0jin]

Here is some tasty techo info on pickups. No Mojo, just physics. The part about how the guitar cable and input impedance of the amp play a part in the overall "guitar" circuit is an excellent point.

Here's a quote "The integral "heliocentric" view on pickups: Pickup, pots in the guitar, cable capacitance, and amp input impedance are an interactive system that must not be split up into its parts. If you analyze the properties of the parts separately you will never understand how the system works as a whole. The sound material a pickup receives from the strings is not flavoured by the pickup alone but by the complete system. This includes the guitar cable."

Check it out, it's worth reading. He makes a great point about pickup resistance Vs Inductance too.

HERE (http://buildyourguitar.com/resources/lemme/)

[Heywood Jablomie]

Indeed, and I have found the biggest things are - NOT whether it's bolt-on or glued or neck-thru OR even the woods used - it's the angles the strings have over their pivot ends on the guitar, and the materials and methods used on those spots where the string actually meets the guitar body. AND in some cases, the mixture of materials and/or said angles.

I know for a fact that simply changing body wood on, say, a strat, does very little to the sound, even if you change it to metal, stone, plastics, you name it, but there's no escaping that you just can't make a tiltneck gibson sound like a strat even with strat pups and all. It's the string angles for a large part, and in a very few situations, like the Les Paul maple cap thing, the woods have a somewhat magic-seeming affect on the sound.That maple cap upon I guess most anything seems to affect the tone quite a lot.

I don't claim to know anything about what sounds good and what not, but I'll say that any mention of 'tone woods' kinda makes me chuckle in disbelief, but still, if I see a guitar with a tiltneck and a maple cap over it's body, I can pretty much trust my expectations on what it might sound like.
LOL. To me, that post is rather contradictory.

[Ch0jin]

Indeed, and I have found the biggest things are - NOT whether it's bolt-on or glued or neck-thru OR even the woods used - it's the angles the strings have over their pivot ends on the guitar, and the materials and methods used on those spots where the string actually meets the guitar body. AND in some cases, the mixture of materials and/or said angles.

I know for a fact that simply changing body wood on, say, a strat, does very little to the sound, even if you change it to metal, stone, plastics, you name it, but there's no escaping that you just can't make a tiltneck gibson sound like a strat even with strat pups and all. It's the string angles for a large part, and in a very few situations, like the Les Paul maple cap thing, the woods have a somewhat magic-seeming affect on the sound.That maple cap upon I guess most anything seems to affect the tone quite a lot.

I don't claim to know anything about what sounds good and what not, but I'll say that any mention of 'tone woods' kinda makes me chuckle in disbelief, but still, if I see a guitar with a tiltneck and a maple cap over it's body, I can pretty much trust my expectations on what it might sound like.

As far as tone wood goes I'm not as skeptical as you ;)

I think it probably comes down to how much difference there actually is in the resonant characteristics of different wood types. I don't know how to do the math, or if it's even really possible with an organic substance like wood, but my thinking goes like this.

Lets say a standard Strat body made of swamp ash has a primary resonant frequency of 440Hz for the sake of discussion. (it wont have, but hang in there)

The definition of acoustic resonance is "The tendency of an acoustic system to absorb more energy when it is forced or driven at a frequency that matches one of its own natural frequencies of vibration (its resonance frequency) than it does at other frequencies"

So basically at 440Hz, you'd expect a boost in output. Playing an A note on the 5th fret of the E string (which is 440Hz :) ) would probably sound louder than any other notes.

If we take exact same guitar and change only the wood type to mahogany which in my imaginary world has a resonant frequency of 82.4Hz (open E), then your open E sound should be more pronounced.

At this stage I'm hoping you get what I mean.

Basically I'm saying I think the wood type and shape form part of a mechanically resonant device that includes the hardware (bridge/saddles/nut etc) and the layout of hardware (string break angle, scale, string height etc).

Altering parts of that resonant device should alter it's resonant frequency and therefore alter the eventual "tone" of the instrument. This is certainly the case for an acoustic guitar in any case.

Now to return to my initial comment, if the delta between the resonant frequency of (for example) an Ash body and an Alder body is not great enough to effect the overall resonant frequency of the instrument, electronics aside, then I would agree there would be no audible difference in "tone".

There is FAR more to mechanical resonance in a guitar than I have described of course. You don't just have a resonant frequency, there are harmonics and so on to consider, and then there's the combination of woods used, I'm sure ebony and maple bonded together has a natural resonance different to maple on maple for example.

Anyway, thats just all theoretical stuff to illustrate my twisted thinking.

[rick04901]

Hi, Prgmr:

I recently changed out the humbuckers in my Epi Sheraton II With Seymour Duncan P90 Phat Cats. I'm very pleased with them. They're made to replace full size humbuckers, so there'll be no problem with fit. I think you'll be well satisfied.:digit

[progrmr]

I'm pumped - they've shipped with 2 day shipping so here by Thursday. I just hope they sound like I'm thinking they will.

[wingsdad]

Since my questioning the validity of a chicken-crossing-the road (i.e., because they're there) impulse to change pickups without considering first the interrelationship of a host of intrinsic variables (I think Ch0jin's 2 posts addressing the physics and pointing to how components of the "overall 'guitar' circuit all play together symbiotically backs my point, in detail) draws these requests:

... What else would you recommend changing out?
Changing out? Nothing. Changing? (a) Maybe the vol & tone pot(s) settings on your guitar, to regulate the signal from the pickup(s) before they hit (b) Maybe your cable connecting to your amp and then (c) maybe your amp's input pre-gain(s), eg/tone controls and output volume (post-gain) setting(s)

...What sort of things are there that you'd recommend for improving tone?
If diddling and futzing with all of the above doesn't yield tonal nirvana, then rather than doink with upgrading the axe or changing the amp, first I'd turn to acquiring a device like this:
MXR 10-Band EQ Pedal (http://www.jimdunlop.com/index.php?page=products/pip&id=248&pmh=products/mxr)
I've had one in its ancestral form (late 70's) - 10-band but without a stomp switch or pre and post gains - and it's always been my MVP...Most Valuable Pedal. Any guitar with any pickup into any amp or mixer with any speaker system in any room. I guess that's why they call it an 'Equalizer'?

Or, as I picked one of these up primarily for A/E guitars, I found that you shouldn't let the word 'Acoustic' in the name fool you on trying this (and apparently, so did Baggs, because they dropped it from the name)...this DOES have pre/post gain control, and can be operated to route the mono input signal out in stereo:
L.R. Baggs Para DI (http://www.jimdunlop.com/index.php?page=products/pip&id=248&pmh=products/mxr)

Either of the above can be had for about the same cost as a set of top-notch Duncans or DiMarzios, or about 3-4 sets of GFS and will be way more versatile since it will hook up with any or all of the guitar(s) you own and plug in, and you won't burn your fingers hooking it up.

[Ch0jin]

Funny you should mention EQ Wingsdad. For the last week I've been breadboarding a prototype for a stomp box sized parametric eq based on some circuits from my old textbooks. It came about because I was thinking that the unique ability of a para to boost/cut with a variable Q would offer amazing tweaking options for tone.

I guess when it's done I'll either be amazed there aren't more on the market, or I'll understand why there aren't more on the market :)

[deeaa]

LOL. To me, that post is rather contradictory.

I don't find it that way :-) What I'm trying to say, it ain't the woods - you can build a guitar out of plastic, metal, stone, cardboard, concrete - I've seen 'em all, and it still sounds very much like any electric guitar.

BUT the construction/wood or whatever layering, as in LP's maple cap - there is something to that. I don't think it's the woods per se, but something in the layering.

[deeaa]

Funny you should mention EQ Wingsdad. For the last week I've been breadboarding a prototype for a stomp box sized parametric eq based on some circuits from my old textbooks. It came about because I was thinking that the unique ability of a para to boost/cut with a variable Q would offer amazing tweaking options for tone.

I guess when it's done I'll either be amazed there aren't more on the market, or I'll understand why there aren't more on the market :)

I guess parametric EQ's, while they're musts in mixing, aren't so user-friendly and easy to use in guitars. But if you have some EQ'ing needs like a bad amp charateristic, or want to exaggerate just that singing lead note, a parametric will surely be very effective.

But in general, graphic EQ is much easier and more visual for most people, and allows for more varied curve shaping instead of just one focal point.

[deeaa]

Here is some tasty techo info on pickups. No Mojo, just physics. The part about how the guitar cable and input impedance of the amp play a part in the overall "guitar" circuit is an excellent point.

Here's a quote "The integral "heliocentric" view on pickups: Pickup, pots in the guitar, cable capacitance, and amp input impedance are an interactive system that must not be split up into its parts. If you analyze the properties of the parts separately you will never understand how the system works as a whole. The sound material a pickup receives from the strings is not flavoured by the pickup alone but by the complete system. This includes the guitar cable."

Check it out, it's worth reading. He makes a great point about pickup resistance Vs Inductance too.

HERE (http://buildyourguitar.com/resources/lemme/)

Nice, I totally dig that stuff, and I think he's got really good points and views too.

I also believe that simply changing a pickup or most anything doesn't do much, yet every little change _can_ have an effect.

The biggest change in my guitar sound this century was basically getting a true bypass pedal switcher. Bye bye compromising on pedal order and suffering from tonal loss thru many pedals - that seriously improved my sound more than any other mod I've done in a decade.

[Eric]

Or, as I picked one of these up primarily for A/E guitars, I found that you shouldn't let the word 'Acoustic' in the name fool you on trying this (and apparently, so did Baggs, because they dropped it from the name)...this DOES have pre/post gain control, and can be operated to route the mono input signal out in stereo:
L.R. Baggs Para DI (http://www.jimdunlop.com/index.php?page=products/pip&id=248&pmh=products/mxr)
Thanks for the tips. Just to fix the second link though, I think it's this:

L.R. Baggs Para DI (http://www.lrbaggs.com/paradi.htm)

[wingsdad]

Thanks for the tips. Just to fix the second link though, I think it's this:

L.R. Baggs Para DI (http://www.lrbaggs.com/paradi.htm)

Yeah, that's it...thanks, Eric ...I must've copied & pasted or overtyped wrong, forgot to check.

Seriously...my suggestion is to consider a tool like this or the MXR 10-Band as a 'fine-tuner' for your pickup output signals. Instead of sinking bucks into a pickup with a different frequency curve or resistances, that looks good on paper comparing specs and charts and all the other alluring voodoo that aftermarket pickups sell with, you can 'modify' any pickup at will with one of these without a crash course in electronics and a degree from MIT or paying a tech. And then finding out you wasted your money because the new pickup(s) didn't deliver the goods.

[wingsdad]

Funny you should mention EQ Wingsdad. ... I was thinking that the unique ability of a para to boost/cut with a variable Q would offer amazing tweaking options for tone.

I guess when it's done I'll either be amazed there aren't more on the market, or I'll understand why there aren't more on the market :)

It's just overlooked amid all the hype of other pedals and pups. How did I find it? I read an interview with Tom Scholz somewhere after the first Boston album came out. He described his rig. He said an MXR 6-band was his number 1 key to his tone. That and a chorus pedal, I think an MXR. He just tweaked the 6-band to suit whatever guitar he used, mainly his LP gold top with P90's.

When you get yours done, fiddle with how you curve the mid bands...hump them or dive them....and don't touch anything else. You may smile.

[Heywood Jablomie]

I'm pumped - they've shipped with 2 day shipping so here by Thursday. I just hope they sound like I'm thinking they will.
Obviously, you can't predict whether they'll "sound like I'm thinking they will", but I'm positive your JP will sound noticeably different, whereas different PAF-type pickups wouldn't (IMO) be all that different. Either P90, when played alone, may hum if you're real close to the amp, although you'd only notice it when not actually playing. The Mean 90s are RWRP, so they're hum-cancelling in the center switch position. With a full hollow, such as your JP, feedback is possible at higher volumes too close to the amp, but that can be pretty cool - years back, with a Gibson 330, I was able to get the feedback that Lennon got with his J160E for the intro to I Feel Fine.

As to the different tone discussion, my experience is that the amp (and effect pedals, I suppose, though I don't use any) is the clearly dominating factor. When I was at FrankenFretters, I was using his Vox Night Train, and played several guitars through it - my Mean 90-loaded Dot, his Gibson 57-loaded Tribute, his custom pickuped Agile, and his stock Epi Flamekat. What I mostly heard was Vox Night Train, not dramatic differences in the guitars themselves.

[Eric]

Changing out? Nothing. Changing? (a) Maybe the vol & tone pot(s) settings on your guitar, to regulate the signal from the pickup(s) before they hit (b) Maybe your cable connecting to your amp and then (c) maybe your amp's input pre-gain(s), eg/tone controls and output volume (post-gain) setting(s)
So on this point, I do have a question that may or may not be a stupid question.

Other than the whole gain-stage thing (where hitting a clipping gain stage with more input leads to more clipping...I think), why are the volume knobs on a guitar important? In other words, assuming a completely clean signal path with no distortion anywhere and a totally flat EQ, would turning your guitar volume down be any different than, say, turning down the volume using a volume pedal? The master volume on the amp? The output volume on one of those EQ pedals? Is there something in the guitar circuitry that changes the signal (other than amount of signal) coming out of the guitar when you roll off the volume?

Again, I know this probably seems like a stupid question, but I'm curious, primarily because of what you said about changing the "vol & tone pot settings on your guitar, to regulate the signal from the pickups before they hit". Is there a difference, depending on where you adjust the volume?

[Katastrophe]

Wow... Quite a few differing opinions here... and some great points.

I'm all for trying every possible combination before changing any equipment on a guitar, be it pots, caps, wiring, pickups, whatever.

When I got my Ibanez, I loved the tones for whatever I plugged it into. Mainly, I would just adjust EQ on the amph and let 'er rip. The stock equipment was fine. Then, I started playing heavier music, and no matter what I did to the rack system I had at the time (which had multiple EQs and parameter adjustments out the wazoo), I just couldn't get the lead tone I wanted.

So, I went out and had a Duncan Invader installed in the bridge. It turned that guitar into a raging, snarling beast on distorted settings. The difference was like night and day to my ears. Much more sustain, and a fuller, thicker sound than the stock pup. That guitar was my number one for years.

The amp, however, IMO, does provide the main coloring to the guitar's tone. BUT, the pickup determines what that sound is going to be like when it gets to the amp, and it does make a difference to my ears.

All this rambling leads me to this: Make sure you eliminate all the other factors for guitar tone before changing pups. After checking out all your available options, then slap a new pup in there and have fun with it!

[deeaa]

Katastrophe: that duncan probably had about twice the output of the Ibanezes...there's the reason. I had much the same with my Les Paul w/whatever it came with back then, but I opted to install an onboard preamp that gave me a nice boost instead of putting in new pups as I didn't want to change the original guitar any, just make reversible additions, and I ended up using it for 13 years as is, never needed another guitar.

I also halved the neck pup into two singles, so they were like strat 2nd position, which allowed me to play nice fendery cleans as well.

[deeaa]

Is there a difference, depending on where you adjust the volume?

I think you know the answer to that one, but it's indeed hard to visualize why.

I think of the signal chain as if it were a system of water pipes. Where ever it is wide and thick, constant sized pipes, the water flow is constant and you can just adjust the flow at any point, there's excess 'headroom' everywhere. Much as in recording mic/console/recorder/speakers signal path. The only important factor in the flow is you have to have enough water at every point so it doesn't get dry, or let the system's own noise become a factor, or let the water amass at some point too much (overload a part of the chain like a preamp).

BUT with guitars and such, it's pretty much always intentionally designed so that there are tight spots in the tubing, where the water is thus forced to run faster and even warm up due to friction. And most often it's not one big tube anyway but several tubes going the same way, which you can open up or close as you please.

Thus changing the water flow at any given point yields different results, adding flow at a point where there is little room in the tubes (input/preamp stage) generates a more rich in harmonics & distorted, strong-sounding signal (even when it's not sounding clearly distorted to human ear as of yet) and doing vice versa (dropping the volume before the preamp) lowers the distortion and yields a softer sound.

In addition to this there is the factor that power amps are also limited in output, and will create the harmonic distortion simply when working hard.

Thus whereas you get a clean signal with a path that keeps the volume most constant, you get different types of harmonic distortion depending on which point of the chain you increase the volume past the headroom. And conversely if you at any point decrease the volume significantly, you're making the next stage lose it's inherent harmonic distortion capabilities and most likely get a cleaner and less powerful tone.

So to sum it up, you either need to start out with a real strong pickup, or use a very thin tube like a diode amp in between to make it sound more distorted and stronger, and that's a balance every OD and DS pedal tries to work on, and since all pickups and amps have different gains and impedances, it's always guesswork and trial-and-error to find out what works with what...and even then it's a matter of taste as well.

[Eric]

I think you know the answer to that one, but it's indeed hard to visualize why.

I think of the signal chain as if it were a system of water pipes. Where ever it is wide and thick, constant sized pipes, the water flow is constant and you can just adjust the flow at any point, there's excess 'headroom' everywhere. Much as in recording mic/console/recorder/speakers signal path. The only important factor in the flow is you have to have enough water at every point so it doesn't get dry, or let the system's own noise become a factor, or let the water amass at some point too much (overload a part of the chain like a preamp).

BUT with guitars and such, it's pretty much always intentionally designed so that there are tight spots in the tubing, where the water is thus forced to run faster and even warm up due to friction. And most often it's not one big tube anyway but several tubes going the same way, which you can open up or close as you please.

Thus changing the water flow at any given point yields different results, adding flow at a point where there is little room in the tubes (input/preamp stage) generates a more rich in harmonics & distorted, strong-sounding signal (even when it's not sounding clearly distorted to human ear as of yet) and doing vice versa (dropping the volume before the preamp) lowers the distortion and yields a softer sound.

In addition to this there is the factor that power amps are also limited in output, and will create the harmonic distortion simply when working hard.

Thus whereas you get a clean signal with a path that keeps the volume most constant, you get different types of harmonic distortion depending on which point of the chain you increase the volume past the headroom. And conversely if you at any point decrease the volume significantly, you're making the next stage lose it's inherent harmonic distortion capabilities and most likely get a cleaner and less powerful tone.

So to sum it up, you either need to start out with a real strong pickup, or use a very thin tube like a diode amp in between to make it sound more distorted and stronger, and that's a balance every OD and DS pedal tries to work on, and since all pickups and amps have different gains and impedances, it's always guesswork and trial-and-error to find out what works with what...and even then it's a matter of taste as well.
Thanks. That's more or less what I thought -- that where you adjust the volume wouldn't matter if you were 100% clean, but since that rarely/never happens, the volume at each stage is critical.

[wingsdad]

deea's post sums it all up nicely :rockya

Eric, as a practical example, at least of how I use the guitar's volume knobs, when I check out a guitar at my Friendly Local GAS Station:

They have a 'practice' amp that's often been discussed here, a Peavey ValveKing Royal 8 (5W, all Tube, 8" fairly crummy but useful speaker) hanging around since I traded it in myself moons ago to score my Tech21 Trademark 60. Now, I don't give a rat or really know jack about what all the tech specs of the amp mean; I just like how the little thing is retro-simple to tweak to get usable sounds with my guitars...

I plug in my ASAT Bluesboy, say. I dime its vol & tone pots, set Royal 8's single Tone knob to flat (12 o'clock), put the 8's Pre-gain to around 4-5 o'clock, nice an 'hot', almost maxed to 6. I put the ASAT in the neck pup only mode, the Duncan SL55N Seth Lover PAF-type bucker. Then I sweep the 8's Vol pot up to the loudness level I want. The ASAT's sounding gnarly, just edgy, the sustain is what I like. I flip to the bridge only pup, the single coil. Now it's nasty, mean, crunchy, dirty.

Now I back off on the ASAT's vol pot...the more I back off, the cleaner it gets...but also the volume of the amp drops, so I goose that back up to the level I had dirty. I flip back to the Lover. Clean. I back to ASAT's Tone pot off, almost to 0... it gets smoother, fatter. Now I goose the ASAT Volume back up....and voila! SingingClapton Woman Tone with gobs of sustain...flip to the bridge pup...nastier, but singing and rich. Flip to the middle, both pups, bring back a bit more Tone on the ASAT and I've got a useful "Keef" Richards or Skynyrd Allen Collins rhythm tone.

But that's just me....