很多人都喜歡把音響的Graphic EQ 調成"V"型.......... 就是突出LF & HF..... According to general human hearing ability..... 人耳的確對極高跟極低的音頻較不敏感,,,,. 所以把Graphic EQ調成"v"好像很有acoustic理論根據.......... IMHO......That is totally bullshit !! 把polepieces 跟著fingerboard 的 radius 調.... 不就跟"V"形EQ 是很類似的概念??... 不過個人喜好不同啦....自己高興就好... 有人愛看起來好聽...也不是不行啦!!! 計程車司機有很多都愛V形EQ setting......... 大家對"事"討論....,別討論"人"啦....
Hi Cuckoowho, I didn't mean to pick on anybody's language ability. I was trying to avoid any linquistical misunderstanding. I encouraged Recto to improve on his English for his benefit, not mine. I even offered to help Recto if he wished to make his advertisement more comprehensible to the "Westerners". It's a pity my well-meaning words were depicted as an "attack". Please accept my apology to you and Recto if I was being excessively direct and came off sounding mean (or "asshole wannabe", as you put it), which was absolutely not my intention. Thank you for bringing it up, wherever you are. As for what's wrong with adjusting the polepieces with the fingerboard radius gauge, hereby I repeat what I wrote in my last post: "...The radius gauge is certainly a good starting point for setting the height of each polepiece, however, aligning the top of polepieces to the radius curve certainly doesn't guarantee that you'll gain perfect volume balance across the strings, if one has the ears to tell, which I believe you do. In my very humble opinion (again, I didn't "think this up myself"), you still have to fine-adjust the polepieces according to the individual string gauges and sonic characters and the player's technique...the resultant curve formed by the polepieces wouldn't, most of the time, match the radius gauge 100%..." Using your ears to do it is the key point here. Also, let's not forget about guitar and bass necks whose fingerboards are of the "compound radius" design---for example, 10" at the nut and 15" at the last fret. Please tell me which radius gauge you would use as the "standard" for adjusting the polepieces? Ok, here's my way of adjusting the polepieces which has been working quite well for me: With all the polepieces flush to the pickup bobbin's top surface, I first position the pickup so that the distance between both the low and high E strings and their corresponding polepieces are approximately 1/6" (high E) and 1/4" (low E) when the strings are pressed at the last fret. Then I play and listen to each string's volume (through an amp in clean tone setting, whose EQ is flat, no cut and no boost on any frequency range) and raise the polepieces under the B, G, D, A strings to achieve perfect volume balance across the strings. Again, the ears play an important role in the process. The result is that the polepieces will form an "arc" which does not necessarily follow the fingerboard radius 100%. Lots of times after adjustment, the low E, A and D polepieces are slightly lower than the arc line of the fingerboard radius because thicker strings do yield more volume and they would sound too loud if you adjust their corresponding polepieces exactly following the radius gauge card. Also keep in mind that, when the adjustment is done, the top of the pickups may not be absolutely parallel to the body top of the guitar. I hope I'm making myself clear here. Rock on, brothers and sisters!
沒有人的語言是完美的, 但是至少可以試著把話說/聽清楚些, 這也是我的意思, 因為我覺得那是誤會的來源之一; 至於我聽起來是不是混蛋或wannabe則不是我能控制的. It's up to you to interpret.
回到拾音器吧 我前幾個星期才問jeff類似的問題.我看到 fender noiseless的pickup.他的磁石高低並沒有依弦的順序規則起伏.我也忘了jeff跟我說明的內容..呵呵壞學生!!..我想應該是跟距每一條弦的響應特性.來找到適合的高度吧.?
Dear Friends, Excuse me for the overlook to this thread, seems there's some disagreement here. Please kindly allow me to mediate. I trust that you all have a certain level of understanding/experiences toward the tech issue discussed here but like my teacher always said, "do it the way you believe, there's not just ONE way doing it". I believe everybody came here with great respect to each other because we're here to make friends, not enemies. With that in mind I hope we can just let off the misunderstanding and learn from a rational discussion. This forum is known for an open minded "play ground" because we're always welcome everybody with great respect. I hope the above helps and to see you enjoy making friends here.
I wholeheartedly agree with Jeff. Let's make this forum a friendly space for intelligent discussions on what we love---music and gear. Back to the subject of adjusting pickup polepieces: The materials (stainless steel or nickel), inner core structures (round, hex or octagonal), wound types (roundwound, compress-round or flatwound) and gauges (a .010 E string is louder and fuller than a .009 E string even if they come from the same manufacturer) of the strings are also influential factors in how they perform in tone and volume. Aligning the polepieces strictly to the fingerboard radius, neglecting all the aforementioned factors, is plain suicidal. Most of us know the fact that there are many kinds of materials that pickup polepieces could be made of, including Alnico, Ceramic and other alloys. Each of these material has a different pattern of sensitivity and response in volume, frequency and harmonic contents. It's virtually impossible and fatally risky to set up the polepieces of the pickups (neglecting their individual design philosophies), in a fixed radius, "by the book" (the radius gauge in this case), without careful listening and fine-adjustments, and expect them to produce good level balance across the strings. A pickup with alnico polepieces and another with ceramic ones produce immensely different sonic results even if you set them (pickup and polepiece positions) up the same way, not to mention aligning them polepieces to the curve of the radius gauge. I was recording a band last week. The guitarist complained that, when the neck pickup of his Gibson Les Paul was used alone, the high E string always was not as loud as the others . I listened and found the strings to have good volume balance except the E string. I helped him with the problem by raising the E polepiece to almost as high as the D polepiece and the strings sounded all balanced since then. I'm not self-bloating, but just stating a simple fact and solution that all our guitar and bass playing friends here can benefit from. Let me illustrate the issue from a music and sound engineering point of view: You have a choir of 6 singers standing in positions that form an "arc", respectively singing the notes (high) E, B, G, D, A, and (low) E at the same time. Do you think you'll get perfect balance of the singers' voices if you set up 6 microphones of the same make (let's say, 6 Neumann U-87's with exactly equal gain on their mic-preamps) in an arc "according" to the singers positions? Definitely not!!! Chances are that you have to get the microphones closer to certain singers and further from the others in order to get a good balance of their voices. With a 100% friendly welcome , I invite Recto and his knowledgeable friends to join us on this friendly and rational discussion. No need to plant a hostile land mine and then hide away, my friend.
Guys: Oh my god! I didn't realize I was the rude one......( I wasn't pointing my finger. I was reminding...) Apologize to all that I offended......hehehe......But what has been said can't be reversed....the only thing I can do is to apologize a thousand times....sorry X 1000...hehehe... Sincere thanks to all the peacekeepers!! You guys rocks !! Anyway, I was thinking....why was the neck designed in an arc shape....was it because in the beginning of the invention of guitar, the inventor already thought about different gauge of the strings exerts different volume? or was it evolved into such shape? What I meant was....before there was electric guitar....there was classic acoustic.....and there was no pick-up......the "body" (soundboard and sound-hole...etc) acts as pick-up.....and that was flat.....is it because it was flat so the "neck" (fingerboard) was designed in arc shape? so that different gauge (thickness) of string's volume can be obtained equally.....not to mention the saddle was also in an arc shape (fixed shape).... One more thing.....if the string is made of the same material all across on ONE GUITAR....(assuming that you all like to use same brand of strings on ONE GUITAR)..and so as the pick-ups (since all of them are embodied into one "case") shouldn't they have same property all across on "ONE GUITAR"? (therefore "different material" doesn't have an effect here).....so the only cause of the volume difference left is the distance to the pick-up....isn't it? (hence the pick-up heights should match the arc shape of the neck). The easier picture here would be: Ask the same singer singing in different notes...but stand on different height of stools.....shouldn't the Microphone be adjust according to the "height of the stools"? Seriously......I am not debating here....I am asking questions....What Paul says does make sense to me also.......I just need to clear this thought..... Rock On!!
cuckoowho, I think using accoustic guitars to aid to the understanding of this issue is rather smart and I just might be able to dig further into this whole 'balance' thingy... I was a big fan of accoustic guitars (though I'm still not quite sure how the radius of fretboards came about in the history of guitars; BTW, there ARE accoustic guitars that come with wierdly-shaped soundboards that are by no means flat), and I was especially into Martin, Collings and unavoidably, Taylor guitars. Let's say we forget about pickups and radius for a while but focus on the sound properties and the anatomy of guitars: High-end guitars made by the above-mentioned big brands, whether or not they're hand-built or machine-built, are known to be produced with stringent quality control. And one of the most important things to a smart accoustic guitar buyer is that he/she should play the guitar by him/herself before making a decision, because it is very rare that two guitars would play and sound exactly the same even if they carry the same material and share exactly the same structure, and it is so because guitars are not just made of fingerboards and sound holes (or pickups)--the resonace and characters of wood, even cut from the same tree, can play a big part in the final sound. And of course, to make matters more complicated, we have strings made of different materials in different ways and with different gauges. In other words, you can almost be certain that no two guitars can sound exactly the same. And the point of this is: the sound we hear is determined by a hell lot of factors, and our preference of sound can be even harder to analyse. Some like it gentle and mellow and some like it bold and in-your-face. So even if we're talking about ajusting ONE guitar to ONE player's taste, all the factors (from the wood, the pickups, the strings, the radius and polepieces of a guitar, to the lead, the amp, the tubes in the amp, the speaker, and of course to the kind of venue that one plays in and so on) must be taken into consideration. As long as one of the above factors changed, there is no reason to ask the rest to remain the same if you're trying to maintain the same integraty of your sound. And of course, the length one will go to fine-tune every bit within one's reach soley depends on how sensative (or anal) one is. I guess it's kinda like using an amp. Almost every amp I bought came with a manufacturer's recommendations about how one may safely assess an amp with factory standard setting on the knobs. But we know so naturally that knobs are there to be tweaked as long as we know what we're doing and we like what we do. So my short answer to your previous question might be 'no', because I can be very anal. If I could, I would probably use different guitars for each different song I play (assuming that my playing is worthy of it) because sounds are not just about volume or balance. I might think my G string is wonderful today but I might wanna hide it a bit tomorrow. Or, another example is that I tend to play hard on lower strings because I like the attack and body heavy playing produces on these strings, but somehow that makes it sound harsh and moody and I might lose the clarity of my overall sound: so one of the many things I can do to rectify that before I change my playing style is adjudting the polepieces (instead of, say, buying another guitar that might not look as cool as this one) and see if it helps. And I think your other question is also spot-on: I am actually more (oh so much more) of a vocalist than a guitar player (though I have played SO MANY guitars) and I think my mates in the band couldn't agree more. Anyways, my point is, if you observe singers who sings with great difference in dynamics and volumes as they seek to express themselves in different ways on different notes, chances are you'll see them adjusting the distance between themselves and the mic as they sing all the time (try Mariah Carey, for example). Having a fixed distance between the singer and the mic is of course one way of doing it. But, because people tend to produce smaller volume as they go into falsedo or pretend to talk like a little girl, but have to shout to hit higher notes (and there are a lot of exceptions, of course), in my opinion, a fixed distance between me and the mic is almost impossible/undesirable. What I've said here is almost already said in this discussion, but I hope my way of putting it might help a bit.
上次去找Jeff調他也都是用聽的,他有告訴我fender原廠的調法可是真的沒有太大意義,因為每個人彈琴的方式,力道也都不一樣....還有最好不要 用太差的按普也比較容易聽得出來,Jeff哥吉他彈得很棒我比較放心,而且只有他會認真跟我討論怎麼調整.所以最重要的還是先搞清楚自己想要什麼樣的聲 音,光是照別人說的調不見得最好
Shawn:...WOW......That's a detail reply man!....gosh..... I read it and read Paul's message again (carefully, this time).... Kinda understand what you guys are talking about..... Anyhow,....thanks for all the enlightenment.... (hope no harm done here.......) Rock On!!!