Tone A vs Tone B

[Jim Soloway]

Tone A vs Tone B. These are two very similar passages played on different guitars just to compare the tones. Preferences?

Tone A: http://www.jimsoloway.com/TascamDemos/JWvsCG1.mp3 (http://www.jimsoloway.com/TascamDemos/JWvsCG1.mp3)

Tone B: http://www.jimsoloway.com/TascamDemos/JWvsCG2.mp3

[Jman60]

I listened to both mp3's thru my PC speakers and thru my headphones. With my speakers I didn't really hear much other than the 2nd clip seemed seemed more out front sound wise. With my headphones the 1st one seems slightly darker. The 2nd having a little bit more chime to it and the chords seemed more pronounced than the 1st.

I liked the 2nd clip slightly more. By the way, very nice chord progression you played!!

[RickC]

I'll agree. #2 sounded brighter, clearer, chimier, less muddy, and just plain more appealing. The difference is especially noticable in the harmonics at the end.

/rick

[Bryan T]

Tone A is a bit muddier, but I think it suits this song well. For other things, I'd probably prefer tone B.

[bynt]

I seemed to hear more chime in clip B. For the record though, I really liked tone A a lot, too. I favor B but didn't think I would until I heard it, if that makes sense. Is B the mini hum?

[Jim Soloway]

I seemed to hear more chime in clip B. For the record though, I really liked tone A a lot, too. I favor B but didn't think I would until I heard it, if that makes sense. Is B the mini hum?

B is the Firebird mini-hum with a maple top. (Jason Lollar makes a strong point of noting that those Firebird pickups are much brighter and more single coil like than a typical mini-hum). A is my personal guitar (and probably my all time favorite guitar). It has a redwood top and a low output humbucker in the neck. I designed that guitar specifically to be a tonal replacement for a traditional ES175-type guitar. Playing live, that low output humbucker is a lot easier to control than the Firebird pickup. It's not nearly as dynamically responsive so you can get a much more even attack. On the other hand, the minis do seem to record incredibly well. The difference in the recordings may seem fairly small but in person, it seems huge. Ideally, I think I'd like to have one of each.

[james russell]

B is the Firebird mini-hum with a maple top. (Jason Lollar makes a strong point of noting that those Firebird pickups are much brighter and more single coil like than a typical mini-hum). A is my personal guitar (and probably my all time favorite guitar). It has a redwood top and a low output humbucker in the neck. I designed that guitar specifically to be a tonal replacement for a traditional ES175-type guitar. Playing live, that low output humbucker is a lot easier to control than the Firebird pickup. It's not nearly as dynamically responsive so you can get a much more even attack. On the other hand, the minis do seem to record incredibly well. The difference in the recordings may seem fairly small but in person, it seems huge. Ideally, I think I'd like to have one of each.

Hi Jim,

Which low output humbucker is in your guitar? I thought the B track was a little richer in the highs. What kind of control do you find lacking in the firebird mini-hum?

Thanks for posting. If I heard them alone I would think both were excellent.

[Jim Soloway]

Hi Jim,

Which low output humbucker is in your guitar? I thought the B track was a little richer in the highs. What kind of control do you find lacking in the firebird mini-hum?

Thanks for posting. If I heard them alone I would think both were excellent.

Thanks for the kind words. It's a DiMarzio EJ Custom, which is typically thought of as both very bright and low output.

The Firebird pickup is exceptionally responsive to picking attack. My right hand touch is VERY light and I've always been of the belief that a light attack is harder to control than a heavy attack. Among other things, I have to keep the amp cranked much higher than most players, so just small changes in attack can result in a large change in output volume. That makes any pickup with strong dynamics a bit harder for me to control and the dynamics in the Firebird mini are really stunning. On the other hand, with a little extra effort, those dynamics just sound wonderful.

[TaronKeim]

I really like both tones. Tone A seems a fair bit more traditional but I really like the body of the notes and chords... very thick/round but still defined. Tone B reminds me more of a "standard" Swan tone, chimey and defined with a tight/big ass end.

I think Tone A would be more suiting if you were doing a lot of single note lines because of the larger mids and thickness of the notes. Tone B is a bit more clear and lean sounding, while still keeping a nice bottom, and seems like it would be more suited to chord style and chord melody playing.

However for aggressive rhythm playing I would choose Tone A, once again because of the fuller sound and also because it seems to have more even dynamic response and would be less prone to spiking.

Great tones regardless. I consider the Swan more of a Modern Jazz guitar with a Modern tone in general... new sound for a new generation kind of thing - so as much as playing to traditions is nice, I prefer the idea of having a unique tone in the Jazz spectrum, brighter, with a big ass end, no furry/honky/hollow mids and the ability to get ridiculous sustain - my Swan is a huge part of me as a player and I'm proud of my unique tone.

Although I am very excited to see the evolution of your more hollow body instrument as I've thought of that MANY times for your guitar and think it will be a fantastic tonal development.

_TJK*

P/S Sorry for the Emporium thread de-rail, my e-mail is currently down/unreliable. I'll have to talk to you about a PITA retro-fit once it starts working again.