It is currently Mon Mar 16, 2020 5:46 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
Post subject: Need Some Strat Pickup Advice
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 8:18 am
Offline
Roadie
Roadie

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:29 pm
Posts: 270
I need some pickup recommendations to go into a couple of CS orders and here seemed a good place to get peoples thoughts on the various options.

I think I have it narrowed down to:

- CS 50's
- CS 54's
- CS 69's

this is just based on general descriptions i have read (and by playing the TS and eliminating them). I think I know (from soundbites) how the 69's sound different than the first two.

I really could use some help in how the 50's and 54's are tonally different?

General characteristics/comparisons across the three would be very helpful.

I would actually like one recommendation for a set that might deliver a very clapton 70's tone - if you are familiar with his work during that period stuff like Live from the 70's or Just One Night - basically, the period where he was using Music Man amps a lot.

The second recommendation is for a more quintessential 50's strat sound (so I am assuming its one of the first two). With this set I would like to be able to your typical Strat rock and roll stuff but also get into the very biting, stinging blues stuff along the lines of buddy guy.

If one set of amps is actually best for both tones I have described let me know which but i am assuming there may be two different sets for each tone. thanks!


Top
Profile
Fender Play Winter Sale 2020
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 11:55 am
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:33 am
Posts: 8461
Location: Mars, the angry red planet.
The 54s are geared to a 'snappy' type, high end Strat sound whereas the 50s are more of a smooth yet still 'crisp' sound.

For the Clapton stuff to which you refer, it would be the 50s all the way.

With the 50s, The midrange is slightly expanded at the expense of the high end. This is a twofold good thing: The midrange has just enough more so you can get that nice Strat 'rip' from the pickup while at the same time, it will continue to sing like a Strat pickup without the ice pick aspects. The bass is present and adequate. Put this all together and you still retain excellent string separation with of course, the exception of that high polepiece for the G string. The common denominator here is that the 50s present the desired tonal characteristics of a what is deemed a superior Pre-CBS Strat pickup. Or to put it another way, the 50s sound like nicely aged 54s.

As always, this is merely IMO, YMMV.

_________________
You dig?


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:49 pm
Offline
Roadie
Roadie

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:29 pm
Posts: 270
Martian wrote:
The 54s are geared to a 'snappy' type, high end Strat sound whereas the 50s are more of a smooth yet still 'crisp' sound.

For the Clapton stuff to which you refer, it would be the 50s all the way.

With the 50s, The midrange is slightly expanded at the expense of the high end. This is a twofold good thing: The midrange has just enough more so you can get that nice Strat 'rip' from the pickup while at the same time, it will continue to sing like a Strat pickup without the ice pick aspects. The bass is present and adequate. Put this all together and you still retain excellent string separation with of course, the exception of that high polepiece for the G string. The common denominator here is that the 50s present the desired tonal characteristics of a what is deemed a superior Pre-CBS Strat pickup. Or to put it another way, the 50s sound like nicely aged 54s.

As always, this is merely IMO, YMMV.


martian,

thanks for such a prompt response - i was hoping the 'expert' (or, at the least, 'experienced') would provide some feedback!

just curious, are you familiar with the phase of clapton that i cited? i have a hard time describing the sound to others, as the low end is quite percussive or chugging (but in a trebly way) and the high-end is certainly biting but it is not thin or shrill. just curious how familiar you are with my reference.

what are your thoughts on the 69's? too 'dark' for what i want. i am curious because i think when they measure the output of the original Blackie pups for the replicas, i recall them being somewhere in the 6-7 range?? i am pretty sure 2 pups were original from the 50s and 1 pup was from the 70s...which maybe created some interesting tonal characteristics.

also, in terms of the more 50 'vintage' type of rockabilly or holly-esque rock and roll would the 54's be better for this or are the 50s actually better for this too...i am guessing the 54's might be better because they would be a little more twangy or jangly?

sorry, but last question...how would you describe the tonal qualities of old-school buddy guy? it seems thinner to me and almost obnoxiously abrasive in its stinging qualities and the way it just cuts...whats the best bet for this type of tone?

thanks a lot martian!!! just trying to get a sense of all the different options and their relation to some of the tones that i really love!


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:19 pm
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:33 am
Posts: 8461
Location: Mars, the angry red planet.
ufboy73 wrote:
martian,

thanks for such a prompt response - i was hoping the 'expert' (or, at the least, 'experienced') would provide some feedback!

just curious, are you familiar with the phase of clapton that i cited? i have a hard time describing the sound to others, as the low end is quite percussive or chugging (but in a trebly way) and the high-end is certainly biting but it is not thin or shrill. just curious how familiar you are with my reference.

what are your thoughts on the 69's? too 'dark' for what i want. i am curious because i think when they measure the output of the original Blackie pups for the replicas, i recall them being somewhere in the 6-7 range?? i am pretty sure 2 pups were original from the 50s and 1 pup was from the 70s...which maybe created some interesting tonal characteristics.

also, in terms of the more 50 'vintage' type of rockabilly or holly-esque rock and roll would the 54's be better for this or are the 50s actually better for this too...i am guessing the 54's might be better because they would be a little more twangy or jangly?

sorry, but last question...how would you describe the tonal qualities of old-school buddy guy? it seems thinner to me and almost obnoxiously abrasive in its stinging qualities and the way it just cuts...whats the best bet for this type of tone?

thanks a lot martian!!! just trying to get a sense of all the different options and their relation to some of the tones that i really love!


You're quite welcome.

I agree with your evaluation of the 54s.

Being an old fart, I'm familiar with Clapton's entire career. Consequently, any Strat he used back then was clearly Pre-CBS with aged pickups which brings me back to the CS 50s model being closest to the era of which you speak. The 69s are void of any midrange, most atypical for Clapton back then and are akin to Hendrix's type tonality.

I don't think I'd want a set of 54s in my Strat as they would just be too bright for all purpose playing, especially if I had an ash Strat and or a maple fingerboard. This is unless of course, like you said, I was playing all Rockabilly.

As to Buddy Guy, I'd still go with the 50s but with a higher level of treble on the amp.

_________________
You dig?


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 2:00 pm
Offline
Roadie
Roadie

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:29 pm
Posts: 270
Martian wrote:

You're quite welcome.

I agree with your evaluation of the 54s.

Being an old fart, I'm familiar with Clapton's entire career. Consequently, any Strat he used back then was clearly Pre-CBS with aged pickups which brings me back to the CS 50s model being closest to the era of which you speak. The 69s are void of any midrange, most atypical for Clapton back then and are akin to Hendrix's type tonality.

I don't think I'd want a set of 54s in my Strat as they would just be too bright for all purpose playing, especially if I had an ash Strat and or a maple fingerboard. This is unless of course, like you said, I was playing all Rockabilly.

As to Buddy Guy, I'd still go with the 50s but with a higher level of treble on the amp.


thanks so much martian!

so, it sounds like the 50's are the best bet for everything i want to be able to do.

although i like the idea of bright/twangy strat a la 50's i think you are right and it will be too limiting..

you are making it tough for me to justify getting TWO vintage vibe guitars (black and sunburst) if the pups would be the same in both!!!:)

i was quite happy with the meatier tone i was getting from my clapton electronics but lately (and repeated listenings of Live from the 70s and Derek and the Dominos Live at the Fillmore) i have really been craving the more old-school clapton tone:)


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 2:30 pm
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:33 am
Posts: 8461
Location: Mars, the angry red planet.
ufboy73 wrote:
thanks so much martian!

so, it sounds like the 50's are the best bet for everything i want to be able to do.

although i like the idea of bright/twangy strat a la 50's i think you are right and it will be too limiting..

you are making it tough for me to justify getting TWO vintage vibe guitars (black and sunburst) if the pups would be the same in both!!!:)

i was quite happy with the meatier tone i was getting from my clapton electronics but lately (and repeated listenings of Live from the 70s and Derek and the Dominos Live at the Fillmore) i have really been craving the more old-school clapton tone:)


As much as I like certain stacked HBs, IMO, NOTHING beats a 'period' correct, quality single coil for achieving THAT Strat type sound, NOTHING!!

Again, being an old fart, I've seen Clapton at the Filmore East a few times (and the Garden) so I know his tone up close and personal (and loud too). The CS 50s will indeed do you fine.

Not to further compound the issue and I hate to tell you this, but so will Seymour Duncan's SSL-1s. They have a HAIR less midrange and a HAIR more, "oomph" than the 50s. I used these for 8 years straight in my #1 Strat. I absolutely, positively duplicated the tones of which you seek and received I can't tell you how many compliments regarding same.

_________________
You dig?


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 2:49 pm
Offline
Roadie
Roadie

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:29 pm
Posts: 270
Martian wrote:

Again, being an old fart, I've seen Clapton at the Filmore East a few times (and the Garden) so I know his tone up close and personal (and loud too). The CS 50s will indeed do you fine.

Not to further compound the issue and I hate to tell you this, but so will Seymour Duncan's SSL-1s. They have a HAIR less midrange and a HAIR more, "oomph" than the 50s. I used these for 8 years straight in my #1 Strat. I absolutely, positively duplicated the tones of which you seek and received I can't tell you how many compliments regarding same.


i would have killed to see/hear some of that fire firsthand! Do you recall any of it?!?!:)

well, perhaps my best option is to get the 50's in the initial build and if still tempted later on, try the SD's?

Actually, not to get too far off my own topic but what amp recommendations would you have for that fillmore tone? i currently have a tweed twin reissue, which i love and will never part with (though god knows it IS complete overkill for my home use...but i love it even at lower volumes and it takes my OCD pedal well).

The 70's clapton seems to have a bit of a different sound to it, however - more than just the pickups i mean. i know he used fender showmans and music man amps. it seems to be more articulate than my tweed, it is not completely 'clean' but the notes sound less 'hairy' or something in the 70's recording.

I have thought about trying to pick up a used Music Man but dont know anything about the various models and am always a little hesitant about buying such things used over ebay. i didnt know perhaps if some sort of marshall or even some other type of fender reverb unit could fit this very nicely?

ideally, whatever next amp i choose could give me that 70's tone as well as that buddy blues tone that i mentioned AND maybe be a bit smaller than the tweed twin...i can just imagine my gf's face if she saw another moderate/large sized amp next to the tweed in the living room...sufficed to say, any stack (half or not) is out of the question if that is the recommendation!:)


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:46 pm
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:33 am
Posts: 8461
Location: Mars, the angry red planet.
In truth, yes. I was one of the few back then who wasn't into all that chemical stuff. Besides, when I went to concerts, I wanted to be at my peak in terms of a clear head so my senses could essentially, mentally record it all with perfect accuracy.

You've come up with a perfect solution with the '50s vs. the SSL-1s!

With the Fillmore, it was predominantly Marshalls and later on, I noticed he was on a Music Man kick. Reinforcing your statement, I did see a Showman head or two lit up though.

Your RI amp could be made to sound pretty close. To get rid of that 'hair' aspect, throw a Celestion in it. You'll get a perfect cross section of all three of Clapton's amp selections from it. I do have a bit of first hand experience with these amps as they were the 'standard' back in the day. Read on.

Back when I was playing all over the place, for the large venues, naturally, I used a Marshall 100W Super Lead but for the smaller venues, I used a Black Faced Twin or a Black Faced Super. Like you, I perceived that 'fizzy' aspect which really did become annoying, especially having been used to the Marshall. So, I removed all the OEM Fender speakers and replaced them all with Celestions. Man, if they didn't sound like mini-Marshalls! The other guitarist in my band used a Music Man. Prior to the Celestions, the Music Man blew my Fenders away tonally. After the Celestions, it was a completely different story! He promptly went out and bought a Marshall Combo just to compete. The point is, there are several ways to achieve the same end.

_________________
You dig?


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 4:07 pm
Offline
Roadie
Roadie

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:29 pm
Posts: 270
Martian wrote:

With the Fillmore, it was predominantly Marshalls and later on, I noticed he was on a Music Man kick. Reinforcing your statement, I did see a Showman head or two lit up though.

Your RI amp could be made to sound pretty close. To get rid of that 'hair' aspect, throw a Celestion in it. You'll get a perfect cross section of all three of Clapton's amp selections from it. I do have a bit of first hand experience with these amps as they were the 'standard' back in the day. Read on.

Back when I was playing all over the place, for the large venues, naturally, I used a Marshall 100W Super Lead but for the smaller venues, I used a Black Faced Twin or a Black Faced Super. Like you, I perceived that 'fizzy' aspect which really did become annoying, especially having been used to the Marshall. So, I removed all the OEM Fender speakers and replaced them all with Celestions. Man, if they didn't sound like mini-Marshalls! The other guitarist in my band used a Music Man. Prior to the Celestions, the Music Man blew my Fenders away tonally. After the Celestions, it was a completely different story! He promptly went out and bought a Marshall Combo just to compete. The point is, there are several ways to achieve the same end.


interesting, do you suspect that the Derke Filmore recording was using a marshall? Perhaps still using a similar rig to the Cream days that werent that far gone yet...

sorry for being a bit dense, but are you suggesting just replacing 1 of the twin speakers with a Celestion or both speakers? I do like the hair aspect of it, currently, so i dont think id want to lose it completely. or are you saying that there is some way i could have the best of both worlds with one amp? how would i control the tone across the spectrum we are discussing?

so, a blackface (e.g. PRRI, DRRI, etc.) isnt the right path to bark down for this tone?

im also curious about the tweed champ (as overpriced as it may be). i am concerned that it may be too similar tonally to my 57 reissue, only sound 'smaller'??

thanks again martian, very informative discussion for me!


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:23 pm
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:33 am
Posts: 8461
Location: Mars, the angry red planet.
ufboy73 wrote:
interesting, do you suspect that the Derke Filmore recording was using a marshall? Perhaps still using a similar rig to the Cream days that werent that far gone yet...

sorry for being a bit dense, but are you suggesting just replacing 1 of the twin speakers with a Celestion or both speakers? I do like the hair aspect of it, currently, so i dont think id want to lose it completely. or are you saying that there is some way i could have the best of both worlds with one amp? how would i control the tone across the spectrum we are discussing?

so, a blackface (e.g. PRRI, DRRI, etc.) isnt the right path to bark down for this tone?

im also curious about the tweed champ (as overpriced as it may be). i am concerned that it may be too similar tonally to my 57 reissue, only sound 'smaller'??

thanks again martian, very informative discussion for me!


I would think so. As a matter of fact, he was still using Marshalls with Blind Faith and believe it or not, he used a Tele with a Strat neck!

It's not you. I was a bit ambiguous. Initially, I was suggesting for you to change one OEM speaker of the two for the best of both worlds. Later on, I did suggest that if you wanted to take the total plunge towards a Marshall, replace both.

The tone across the spectrum was really a lot of fun because I set the Fenders with all Celestions closely to the way I set the Marshalls. When I had just the OEM Jensens in the Fenders, the settings were quite different. Meaning, with the Celestions, I had the midrange and the bass way up there and the treble way down. With the Jensens, I had the treble and mids on like, 8 and the bass on 4. Again, it's been what, close to 40 year ago so this is as I remember it. As we got more successful, all of that was left to our sound people where all I had to do was show up and be handed my Strat. Further, if I may go off on a tangent, we used a Heil (Sound) System. I was told it was the same system the Who was using (at the time). No one believes me when I tell them, all I knew about it was that I was in Channel 3 and that was it!

For the record, I can't comment with any degree of genuine expertise on any reissue amps at all. At the risk of sounding like a snob, I only use the original tube amps from back then. Naturally, all my Blackfaces were originals. The Twin was a '63 and I believe the Super was a '64. I used a '68 Silverface Deluxe Reverb (totally stock) for rehearsals and a '64? Blackfaced Princeton for backstage tuneups. I know it used to roar but the speaker was shall we say, 'tired'. After a while I couldn't crank it any more and to me, it wasn't worth the expense of a new speaker.

I only know the original Champ and to me, that model simply fulfilled the definition of an 'amp'.

My experience withe the three largest Fenders I owned was that many different players who plugged into any of my amps with my settings, for the most part, sounded extremely different. Yet, they were rapidly able to dial in my tone with them playing. So, this is one of those situations where I know you can definitely get it but I couldn't really tell you how. Besides, like I said above, I'm not up on all the new amps with their hybrid circuits and such. I essentially recused myself from them when they started transistorizing sections of them. To me, this was dangerous to the player and detrimental to the amp because they are mixing low voltages (transistors) with high voltages (power tubes). So, for better or worse, amplification wise, I'm solidly entrenched in the 60s. I also presume this is why Clapton and many others eventually abandoned Music Man because they were the first to go hybrid IIRC..

Of course, you're quite welcome. Sorry I couldn't be more informative this time around.

_________________
You dig?


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:50 pm
Offline
Roadie
Roadie

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:29 pm
Posts: 270
martian,

no need to apologize at all - every one of your responses has been informative and illuminating!!!

i suspect that i would also prefer true vintage amps as opposed to the reissues, however, only being an over the top home enthusiast i have to draw the line somewhere!

perhaps others will offer thoughts on the amp questions, as well. i think, ideally, i would like to keep the '57 twin as is, as i really love what it provides right now...and then figure out if a modest/moderate addition would cover the other color tone i can hear in my head and those great eric albums. my gut tells me some form of marshall could do it but i have even less familiarity with them than with fenders.

to be honest, part of me is even wondering if one of the newer modeling Champs (e.g. SCXD) or G-DEC should be considered.

i really dont have much experience with the '65 Blackfaces or the representative tones that they are meant to emulate...but i associate it with ultra clean, jazzy type stuff and not in the realm that i am hanging out in (or am trying to get to)??

perhaps i need to start a completely different thread on this topic:)


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 7:06 pm
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:33 am
Posts: 8461
Location: Mars, the angry red planet.
ufboy73 wrote:
martian,

no need to apologize at all - every one of your responses has been informative and illuminating!!!

i suspect that i would also prefer true vintage amps as opposed to the reissues, however, only being an over the top home enthusiast i have to draw the line somewhere!

perhaps others will offer thoughts on the amp questions, as well. i think, ideally, i would like to keep the '57 twin as is, as i really love what it provides right now...and then figure out if a modest/moderate addition would cover the other color tone i can hear in my head and those great eric albums. my gut tells me some form of marshall could do it but i have even less familiarity with them than with fenders.

to be honest, part of me is even wondering if one of the newer modeling Champs (e.g. SCXD) or G-DEC should be considered.

i really dont have much experience with the '65 Blackfaces or the representative tones that they are meant to emulate...but i associate it with ultra clean, jazzy type stuff and not in the realm that i am hanging out in (or am trying to get to)??

perhaps i need to start a completely different thread on this topic:)


The old Fenders were nice and clean until you started getting on them, volume wise.

I've found that the trick with the old tube amps is for the speaker or speakers to have a total higher wattage rating than the head's RMS wattage rating. Using this axiom, you get a fantastic harmonic distortion when cranking the amp where the speakers won't crap out on you like so many old tube amps would because of the under powered speaker(s).

I do think that starting a completely different thread on this topic is not only worthwhile but others who are surely, more 'in the know' would read it and enlighten you much further.

_________________
You dig?


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:54 am
Offline
Roadie
Roadie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 2:44 pm
Posts: 236
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Martian wrote:
Not to further compound the issue and I hate to tell you this, but so will Seymour Duncan's SSL-1s. They have a HAIR less midrange and a HAIR more, "oomph" than the 50s. I used these for 8 years straight in my #1 Strat. I absolutely, positively duplicated the tones of which you seek and received I can't tell you how many compliments regarding same.


To extra further compound the issue, I use Copperhead pickups (a set of the 1962s) to get the vintage tone you're looking for. Jeff basically winds his pickups vintage-correct based on 1954, 1959, 1962, and 1967 Stratocaster pickups - so if you want RWRP, or balanced output, you have to specifically request it.

Just an additional option to consider.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:42 am
Offline
Roadie
Roadie

Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 2:46 pm
Posts: 298
Can I jump in and ask how the Fat 50s differ from the 'ordinary' CS 50s.

Are all three pups a bit hotter?

I like the Fat 50s neck – on the sound samples I've heard it sounds nice ballsy, but without being too much so.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:12 am
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:33 am
Posts: 8461
Location: Mars, the angry red planet.
VerySlowHand wrote:
Can I jump in and ask how the Fat 50s differ from the 'ordinary' CS 50s.

Are all three pups a bit hotter?

I like the Fat 50s neck – on the sound samples I've heard it sounds nice ballsy, but without being too much so.


There is no 'ordinary' CS 50s model that I'm aware of. If you mean the CS 54s, these are of the glassy, snappy, ilk vs the Fat 50s which have a bit more windings to enhance the low end.

_________________
You dig?


Top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours

Fender Play Winter Sale 2020

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: