Gibson LP Push Tone..

[TWANG]

am I the only one who hasn't seen that?

kind of neat idea.. pretty guitar!

[Ricochet]

am I the only one who hasn't seen that?

kind of neat idea.. pretty guitar!

 

That idea has been around. It was used to demo different pickups.

Alltho I like the clean look(no PU rings) I shudder to think what those through-body-PU-holes do for tone. I always understood that you could drill holes in any part of the guitar's anatomy' date=' [i']except[/i] the part between the bridge and nut.

[carverman]

Alltho I like the clean look(no PU rings) I shudder to think what those through-body-PU-holes do for tone. I always understood that you could drill holes in any part of the guitar's anatomy' date=' [i']except[/i] the part between the bridge and nut.

 

Best not to any drill holes from the nut to the bridge, except for

p_up slots. The area around the bridge posts needs to be very solid as well

for better sustain. Anything after that, drill as many swiss cheese holes as

you like for weight relief

 

My thinking now is to go with a acoustic style (3 inch hollow LP style) except for tone block

with an acoustic t-o-m bridge (LR Baggs T-Bridge) and the battery preamp with

a blend control for piezo, neck humbucker and bridge humbucker.

 

Anybody have some experience with the LR Baggs piezo t-o-mÉ

[Prospero]

My thinking now is to go with a acoustic style (3 inch hollow LP style) except for tone block

with an acoustic t-o-m bridge (LR Baggs T-Bridge) and the battery preamp with

a blend control for piezo' date=' neck humbucker and bridge humbucker.

 

Anybody have some experience with the LR Baggs piezo t-o-mÉ[/quote']

 

Last week I bought a Godin Solidac that has an LR Baggs piezo X-Bridge. Haven't used it all that much, but it does sound very authentically like a steel-string acoustic. Very, very sensitive. You need to have a light touch while playing when using it. My understanding is that quite a number of Godins have LR Baggs piezo bridges (X for the ones with tremolos and T for the ones with string-through-body) so you might be able to get a good idea about them by playing a Godin.

[TWANG]

I wondered why they had no pictures of the back.

I assumed it was more like.. loosen the strings and push through some small hole.. which wouldn't affect anything seriously.

But how big is the hole? You push them out through the back?

 

I'd have to hear that before I bought it for sure.

 

I know the idea's been around I'm old and stuff. *G*

[oldpriest]

Actually they drop in from the top, I think, because they are held in place by powerful magnets. I'm surprised by this because most people want less magnetic pull on their strings...and here they go adding more magnets.

[Prospero]

This is what the thing looks like from the back (go to the 360 view in the product page):

 

[oldpriest]

That's just wierd. I just can't get my head into something like that.

[TWANG]

I don't mind it at all.

It would be pretty handy, but I had the idea the way to replace the pups would be slicker and faster..

that looks like you have to unscrew at least four screws each pup..

 

I had thought maybe they slid in at an angle.. into, say a pair of 1/4" jacks but short..

so the back holes would be smaller, the pup would stay in place better and it wouldn't take anything to change them at all.

 

you know. a hole that's just barely wider than the pup is thick.. nice firm hardwood path to slide on.. a little ring off the base of the pup to hook your finger in when removing. a pair of jacks to keep it steady.. which would lower and raise with the bridge, but always be at the right angle for

ingoing and outgoing pickups.

and maybe something on one edge of the bass that clips it in securely on the non jacked side of the base plate.

 

You wouldn't even feel the holes in the back playing it.. no ugly plates no time consuming screws..

 

 

They should have asked me, first!

[carverman]

I don't mind it at all.

 

I had thought maybe they slid in at an angle.. into' date=' say a pair of 1/4" jacks but short..

so the back holes would be smaller, the pup would stay in place better and it wouldn't take anything to change them at all. You wouldn't even feel the holes in the back playing it.. no ugly plates no time consuming screws..

[/quote']

 

The main problem with changing them through the top is that you pretty much have to slack off all 6 strings and

set the strings out of the way on either side of the t-o-m. Unscrewing the ring and replacing the p_up doesn't

take any time at all on a connectorized p_up. Its the hassle of retuning, because once the tension is removed

off the neck, you have to retune it a few times and it still can drift off.

 

If you pushed the p_up out the bottom by removing the bottom plate, the string tuning isn't disturbed

and I presume here, a much faster way to plug and play right away.

[oldpriest]

Twang was with you Carverman...about the back being the way to go..I was the idiot who thought they dropped in through the top8-[

[bluesstringer]

I don't mind it at all.

It would be pretty handy' date=' but I had the idea the way to replace the pups would be slicker and faster..

that looks like you have to unscrew at least four screws each pup..

 

I had thought maybe they slid in at an angle.. into, say a pair of 1/4" jacks but short..

so the back holes would be smaller, the pup would stay in place better and it wouldn't take anything to change them at all.

 

you know. a hole that's just barely wider than the pup is thick.. nice firm hardwood path to slide on.. a little ring off the base of the pup to hook your finger in when removing. a pair of jacks to keep it steady.. which would lower and raise with the bridge, but always be at the right angle for

ingoing and outgoing pickups.

and maybe something on one edge of the bass that clips it in securely on the non jacked side of the base plate.

 

You wouldn't even feel the holes in the back playing it.. no ugly plates no time consuming screws..

 

 

They should have asked me, first!

 

[/quote']

 

Twang, It sounds almost like you're thinking of something more like the old Dan Armstrong type system or something similar. Sure would be alot easier.

[carverman]

Twang was with you Carverman...about the back being the way to go..I was the idiot who thought they dropped in through the top8-[

 

Twang and I should get together..we could revolutionize the guitar world with our

novel ideas.

 

Of course, I hate to inform you all "purists", that in the future, acrylic with tone wood

grain photos will replace tone woods, and p_up changing will be a thing of the past. Electronic string sensors

will detect the string vibration optically,sustain will be built in..you won't have to

modify your guitars anymore. You simply "dial in" on the guitar keypad that

plugs into your guitar interface jack..what ever style of guitar and tone you want

to hear and play..bluesy, rock, "woman tone", LPs, Strats, Rickenbackers, Tele,

jazz archtop, etc. Line 6 may already be working on the "modeling guitar".

You buy one and download whatever tone you want.....

Do I hear chuckles? Think back a few years (70s)..did you have a home computer

with all the power and internet access? :)

[Ricochet]

It's all here allready...

 

Now excuse me while I change the roll in my guitarola. Hmm...Jazz

[TWANG]

I want my first guitar back.

The one with the little crank on the bottom.

Much easier than picking!

 

although those freaking mouse ears still get to me.