Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral


  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. OK, I realize I was dead wrong about the G force tuning down. That being said I will have to leave the board as surely everything I say from this point on will be tossed in my face as if I am wrong about everything which is absurd. The issue on saddle positions to intonation is correct. Now to explain my brain fart on the G force. First off I am completely new to the Les Paul and the G Force unit. I have been playing Strat type 6 in line tuner guitars for 40 yrs. I got screwed in my cabasa watching the G force tune, because my friends the tuning machine are opposite to my Strats. When you turn the key away towards the neck top Strat's go sharp but on the G force it is opposite, that warped my brain as it seemed like it was tuning flat into pitch. SO my bad. I apologize. I've been an idiot on this matter. I tested the unit trhoughly today with an external unit and indeed you are right, I was wrong about the G force. Now why it does not hold tuning still is a mystery to me. So friends, saddle step to intonation is correct, test it. G force, I was an idiot. Since I care not to dwell on castigation or have that thrown in my face from now on I leave you.
  2. Nope, sorry bubbha, that is just not right, after a few hundred guitar setups and a million observable examples of strobed out guitar bridges. You are just not in tune, sorry man, live and learn. I offered this insight merely to help out those who have problems getting things intonated or perhaps a starting point. ALL guitars follow the same basic pattern it has do with string length, thickness and mathematics. The notion that a thick string is going to be closer sharp to the guitar nut, sans the three step pattern, is just impossible. Don't hate me because I am pretty. Been playing and setting up guitars longer than you have lived.
  3. His tech showed he gets these custom made 7s. Interesting gear he uses these days, has changed a lot over time. I love Billy Gs playing style, he is one cool cat. I really like when he brings out a real Les Paul like the old days, most of those customs he uses just do not appeal to me much. One reason I still dig Pagey is he never left the LP and Bonamassa stays with an LP most of the time. JB seems to keep the same pickup settings and tends to sound the same probably bridge wide open. Part of the magic for me is the constant volume and tone adjust and that glorious mid blend position. Something about the LP that has always been the pinnacle guitar look and tone for me. Took me a long time to actually be able to get one. I played custom built Strats for ages with 10s to Eb pitch. Now back to 9s on the LPs and loving it. Got to love a guitar that makes you want to play. I find myself picking one of mine several times in the late night just to jam a little unplugged. I cannot seem to pick up my other guitars anymore. Still a D'Addario user myself, been the most consistent quality string I have used and I have used them all over the centuries. The cost on EXL is ridiculously low for the quality.
  4. Mathematical progression of thickness to length if you had a bunch of progressively thicker strings the same pattern repeats on three. It is sort of odd and seemingly unlinear but may be just our way of looking at it. Something to do with the thickness and string length progression, the Greeks probably had it mapped out. I never encountered such outright hatred as merely dropping the info about intonation proceeding in a step like pattern across the strings. It is just the way it is, there is no way for some strings on any guitar to be more forward or back than the usual thinner to sharp progression. It repeats in steps of three (with each new set of three starting a little more back or flat to the string nut). The size of the steps vary to each guitar. Many forget the hard slant on Gibson bridge types towards the treble side so even if you have a Les Paul similar to one of mine where the saddles are very close one forgets the bridge tilt already to the treble side. Many some how got a notion I was saying to set intonation by sight, just not true, they are starting points, the amount of step in your saddles will vary to the guitar but will always be there. One of my LPs is almost straight across while another more abrupt stepping. If you have a guitar hard to intonate like a Strat these basic saddle positions get you in the ball park. Sometimes I find some Strats almost impossible to pull back flat enough on the 6th string as Gibson had the advantage of design to just hard tilt their bridge similar to an acoustic bridge slant.
  5. The step increments vary from guitar to guitar. They are slight on my one Les Paul but more so on another one. If one is adjusting thin strings further than thicker it is just not right. One may find that the strings are very close to the same but there is a slight step that just has to be there, it is mathematics. A good strobe tuner tells the tale. That is one reason a Strat is often hard to intonate because they do not have the bridge tilt present on most tune-a-matic Gibson types. Ever had a Strat god awful to pull the 6th back flat enough while the 1st is up close??? One major reason the Gibson bridge has a hard tilt on the treble side, the step pattern is already present, perhaps another thing not noticed. The bridge is already heavily slanted. If you notice the pattern is in sets of three saddles with each set of thicker strings starting a little more back or flat to the string nut. If you had a bunch of strings in size progression you would see this repeat in threes right across. Some LPs like one I have has very little step difference while another one is more drastic like the pick above. The step increments vary from guitar to guitar but I kid you chaps not, this is a axiom of tuning intonation on a guitar. There is no way some strings can be physically closer than other one outside the pattern. It is what it is. Just thought that might help some get things in the ball park before they fine tune their intonation. That's all really. Never encountered so much resistance and hatred simply stating something I have known for ages as a plain truth in guitar tech realm. Please stop hating me because I am pretty. I do know a few things about guitars, what I do not know I do not speak.
  6. Pardon me with the corrected fret thing, but doesn't that all go right out the window when you bend a string? I find that variance of how hard you press a string can help get things more in tune at times if you're flat of course, pressing harder sharpens the note. It is all a fundamental flaw in the mathematics of string length and thickness to note division. A guitar is an imperfect instrument at best, but they do tend to sound rather amazing in the right hands. As for "terrorists", they can take their religious nutdom with them to their imagined paradise. As long as people believe fantasy as reality there will never be an end to the madness. Every religion has done the same monstrous things in history, every one of them. Delusion is crazy, plain and simple.
  7. Be nice to discuss this "tone is in the hands thing". As if your amp/rig has a crappy tone that is not happening, your hands will make it right. One gets a style and technique of playing, hopefully, that is individual to you but "tone" for the sake of "sound" is gear related. A crap/amp rig is what it is. I can play the crap out of my kids cheap beginner guitar but at no time does it sound like my Les Paul's. That "tone" is the guitar itself. As for guitars and tone woods, its a puzzle really. Acoustic instruments, sure, the density, weight and resonance of woods makes a difference but electrics, typical pickups only register the mag field being created by the string vibrating in the coil field. Does the pickup care if it is mahogany or walnut, only from the aspect of wood density which relates to sustain and vibration qualities. For the life of me I cannot see how my Les Paul is so much the less of one costing thousands more when its tone and playability is as good as anything ever heard. Vintage is a hoot to me as somehow thinking a pickup over 50 years old is the same as it was a half century ago or the woods have not changed, much less the electrical components. When those guitars were creating legendary tones they were "new", now they are +50 yrs old, just not the same. Worth tens of thousands?? Maybe if you have money to burn. Time ravages everything.
  8. NO, sorry chuckles that is just your sense of NOT comprehending anything. I stated that all guitars due to the size and mathematics of string length and division will display play a similar stair step pattern across the bridge saddles. The size of the steps will vary but at no example will some of the saddles be closer to the string nut than the usual formula the Greeks discovered centuries upon centuries ago. A particular reason if you examine the Les Paul bridge that is is off set more towards the treble side of the strings closer to the neck, Duh. Thinner strings have to be more sharp to the neck than thicker. The size of the steps will varying from guitar to guitar but all guitars when properly on pitch intonation will have the same approximate stepping. 1st string closest, then the 2nd after it, and the third further back, the 4th will be somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd with the 5th more back and the 6th the furthest away. The three step pattern repeats with the general size increase of strings. At no time will proper intonation be outside these simple rules. For example nothing will be closer to the neck sharp than your thinnest string and nothing further back away flat than your 6th or thickest string. Be glad to place your guitar on a strobe to show you that what I have said is dead right. Try and accept some of us playing for many years have knowledge just because you have not come to it does not mean it is not so.
  9. I do think having the G Force auto tuner is novel, pretty cool technology all things considered, and I will use mine until it craps out and refit it but for now it is OK. You have to learn to adjust the sensitivity and accuracy of the setup and also SLOW it down. I also recommend holding the button in longer to activate single string tuning mode which seems to do much better. There is a fundamental flaw in the software of the unit which I am surprised hardly anyone seems to know, including the Gibson chaps who designed it. In the matter of tuning, one needs to "come up into pitch", "not down", as turning down into pitch just makes for an out of tune situation really soon. If the unit had been software programmed to start below pitch and then tune up into correct pitch it would be so much a better unit. Sort of a shame they gave up on it so quickly probably from the usual dirge of nits who seldom comprehend or like anything. Mine works and as much as it is zero effort to use my usual PitchBlack board tuner I use the G force because, well it is there and having adjusted and tweaked it as much as it can be it does OK. It's just the tuning down into pitch that bugs me, goes out of tune almost right away because of that. Rather astounding for me that experienced players do not know that tuning up into pitch is a trick orchestral string players have used for centuries to hold tuning. I honestly do not remember how long ago I was taught this but it has been a part of my normal means of tuning longer than I can recall. Maybe some reading this will pick up on it as it just works so much better. I thought it was a standard knowledge premise.
  10. I find I can adjust back and forth from the fat neck to my Epi slim neck in a few minutes but have to say the smaller neck befuddles me a little worse than the LPM. Fat one seems odd at first but a few runs and it seems normal and relatively easy to play. I have more trouble going back to the thin neck as the strings just seem so close. But my hands adjust to either pretty quickly which is something I did not expect to be so easy. I thought as well the fat neck would mess me up but now that I have played it have to say I love the LPM. The most complaints I have run into is not so much the neck chunk but rather the 5 degree tilt on the neck which makes the pickups have to sit higher and you cannot nut down the stop piece to the boody without top wrapping which I do not care to do. I find however the tone and playability is just fine with the stop piece being up some and a vibration test indicates it is quite solid and dead to string vibration no different than the stop piece screwed down. It's all really what some get used to, naturally what you first use is going to be what you look for. I think many LPs are different in tilt and setup but remains a very special guitar. Mine have spoiled me, I just do not care to play anything else these days.
  11. Yep. Hard to find those 7s. I think 9 is as low as I care to go. I worry the string tension on the Les Paul is just not enough going that low. I have trouble now getting my truss rod to give relief with 9s. I do think Billy G is right about the strings you do not have to use thick strings, the exception is probably using lower tunings which tend to work better on heavier strings. Thought about maybe going back to 10s, John McLaughlin uses 10-46. I am thinking D'Addario 9-46 will be the keeper for me. The 42s have been OK but I think I little bit heavier would be better for me. I like the 9s and changing back to std tuning was an adjustment for me but I like it. Despite they are very cost effective they last and feel smooth to touch. Spent a lot more and gotten a lot less. Have not tried the NYXL and not sure I need to mess with them. The XLs are cool for me. I have never broken a string in my entire several decades of playing (light touch of a heavy hand) so the NYXL without a trem are probably overkill for me. D'Addario has been a fav of mine and they seem to never let me down or fail to hold a quality standard. For the cost. hard to beat. I have used about everything over the centuries but D'Addario seems to be the one for me.
  12. You're right man. Same pickup is not going to sound much different. A lot of myth and lore in woods and guitars. I have an assortment of various woods and guitars. They sound different from the radically different pickups each has. If you took various Les Paul's with the same pickup, hardware, setup, and so on using different woods the same pickups would be damn near identical. I think you already discovered that. If the chap is playing hollow body guitars and such he is missing the entire point. A pickup gets signal from the strings vibrating in the magnetic field, it does not hear wood. Wood differs in density and weight with variant grain structure. Pickups do not really give a damn. Since it is basically scientifically impossible to accurately design an experiment to measure the frequency response of the same exact guitar using various woods without the infinite problem of variants it cannot be measured with any accuracy. The various qualities labeled to different woods having tonal qualities is true in an acoustic sense but only due to the density, weight and structure of the wood. Sustain of vibration is a variant of different guitars and woods but the pickup only gets the string breaking the mag field. Same pickup is not much different allowing for the slight variance in the windings and magnet quality in each one, as no two things are ever identical, one of the laws of physics.
  13. So what does what you say matter? Dude, that is all you chaps have done to me is insult everything said as if I am wrong when most of the time I doubt things were actually read or comprehended. After 4 decades of playing and a tech background I have never seen so many clueless guitar players, ever. You seem to think time here matters, why? This is just another idiot blog spot. You try and talk about something or get a discussion going and all you get is insulted and told you're wrong but those who obviously do not know. I was commenting on the chaps observations of what he heard using the same pickup on various guitars through the same amp using the same player, of course they all sound similar. One has to admire how one says nothing but sites things as wrong. What is wrong, be specific rather than insulting. What do you disagree with? Acoustic qualities of various woods really have no bearing on electric guitars, it is physics. Wood density, weight, hardware set up and pickup components make up the tone. Pickups do not hear wood, it is simple electronic magnetic field theory. All this yada about woods being brighter and so on is just lore. Acoustically yes, solid body electrics no. Just look at a Les Paul neck, half the board is made up of pearl or abalone inserts not wood. I have guitars will all sorts of wood types, its the pickups man. And yes what I said and the points made are true. Ask someone who has a clue. What gets me is some here think I cannot know or I must be wrong because I am new here. I cannot count the boards I have posted and gotten bored with the inability for some many to discern reality. I have a technical engineering background and been a guitarist for 41 yrs how is it you feel I cannot know anything and someone here does? Ponder the issues.
  • Create New...