"Not meaning to call you out OP, its just mind blowing that this isn't accepted by all experienced guitarists at this point."I can't believe how often this topic comes up. Just go into a guitar store, grab 2 of the same model guitars, and play them back to back through a good amp at a decent volume. Even if you set the pickup heights the same, the difference in tone cannot be chalked up to electronic part variation. Not meaning to call you out OP, its just mind blowing that this isn't accepted by all experienced guitarists at this point.
At this distance I'd tend to think most of the difference belongs to the neck (for an interminable list of reasons). Many threads here about tone following the neck. My single experience, bright guitar / dark guitar, swapped the necks, tone goes with the neck....Perhaps the very thin neck on the RG means a different sound than the fatter JS neck...
Interesting. Paul Gilbert has same neck joint preference, and saw recently Suhr mentioned similar....The JS models have a traditional square strat-style neck heel / body joint, whereas most of the RGs have the current All Access neck joint. I recall reading somewhere that Joe preferred the square heel for tonal reasons...
It's funny, I have the exact opposite trigger for the same issue.The shock of realizing the crap they've been hoarding, very shiny crap...may be in some way sub-standard, inferior or in any way tonally compromised is just too scary..best deny/block it completely and hope it goes away.
nah its not ego..it's OCD caused by whatever causes that, plus some nice fear when they realize they got it so wrong.It's funny, I have the exact opposite trigger for the same issue.
I see people with cheaper gear, trying to justify how its just as good as a Collings, because they put Lollars in their Indonesian something. Not that you can't find some gems in lower price ranges, but there tends to be some animosity towards guys who have spent more on their guitars.
Either way, there are still debates here constantly on whether or not wood and construction matters for tone, and people will fight to the bitter end that you are just hearing pickups and wasting money on your ego, and hearing with your eyes.
The OP clearly said he hears the differences between the guitars. You and your fellow "golden ears" crowd continuing to say that only your experienced ears can hear these differences shows only that your reading skills are not in the same league as your supposed ears. It's a strawman argument."Not meaning to call you out OP, its just mind blowing that this isn't accepted by all experienced guitarists at this point."
The people who aren't accepting it are 1. people who can't discern changes in tone after putting necks on other bodies etc, 2. people who don't play, have most likely never been to a music store or to see a band..collect guitars and sit at home comparing their new purchases with other people who do exactly the same thing.
It's no illusion there are a LOT of people who just don't get it.
There are a lLOT of people who buy guitars, don't play them, sit online comparing/fueling their next OCD driven purchase..
There are a lot of people who cannot discern tone changes.
The rest of the people who are into guitars are these people called ' musicians'.
Please tell us which guitars have electronic components matched to within 0.1%. Fender doesn't publish manufacturing variation in pickup inductance, but quotes +/- 10% variation on DCR. Regular CTS pots have a specified tolerance of +/- 20%. So there's your "0.1%" out the window before we've hardly started.All the electric parts, signal chain and guitar setup can be equal with margin of 0.1%. It makes no difference.
Timtam, I don't need evidence that shows it's night-time.The OP clearly said he hears the differences between the guitars. You and your fellow "golden ears" crowd continuing to say that only your experienced ears can hear these differences shows only that your reading skills are not in the same league as your supposed ears. It's a strawman argument.
As far as I can recall you have never presented a single example of a difference that only you and your ilk can hear.
These threads are invariably about differences that we all agree we can hear. The discussion is about what those heard differences are due to. When addressing that actual issue, bring some real evidence.
Thanks for proving again that you're addressing the wrong argument. Try reading the OP again. You can try using your ears to read the post if you like.Timtam, I don't need evidence that shows it's night-time.
If it is indeed night-time, and I need evidence that it is, then instead of doubting other people CAN see, I'd declare I was blind.
It's a lot let messy that way.
You've involved yourself in an argument you simply can't win, because a win for you is getting people who can discern these things to declare they don't.
I can only suggest to you that you could perhaps go to a place where people are easily fooled- to the last.
This isn't one of those places.
You're outnumbered, outgunned and very clearly handicapped, ham-strung by a belief that simply counters all those who can hear.
You seem to delight in pasting links to scientific documents.
The problem with that evidence is that it's once again using eyes to measure sound.
You can either hear it, or you cant hear it, or you can't hear it and use evidence prepared by other people who can't hear it.
See what I mean about 'messy'?