All The Little Things Add Up

[penguinchit]

Anyone who can hear the difference in batteries is a crackpot.

 

[Jason Taylor]

Anyone who can hear the difference in batteries is a crackpot.

Dude try it for yourself and hear it first hand in a distortion or overdrive pedal like a Catalinbread Dirty Little Secret or a Fulltone OCD with tone turned up.

If you can't hear the difference then that means something is wrong because its plain as day side by side!

Mesa Boogie even says to use CARBON ZINC batteries with their pedals.

And pedals like old MXR Phase 45s and 90s sound superbalicious with carbon zinc.

T-R-Y it yourself and hear the difference.

Here's a video where you can switch the balance on your speakers or headphones preferably to hear the differences between carbon zinc and alkaline batteries:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_7re1_EYYw

Can you hear it sir?

And here is another page to read and listen to...

http://www.andrewmartinmusic.net/the-lab/blog/a-battery-of-tests-part-i-fuzz-face

Its LONG been known that battery type affects tone!!!!

http://www.andrewmartinmusic.net/the-lab/blog/a-battery-of-tests-part-i-fuzz-face

And a quote from Analog Man's website about Fuzz Face pedals:

"Using a power supply may add AC hum noise, and can affect the tone, as the best sound is obtained by using an old style non-alkaline battery. I get these two for a dollar at the DOLLAR STORES. I like the Eveready 1222 "black cat", Maxell, or Panasonics.
An Alkaline battery will sound a bit dull in a germanium fuzzface, it can lose some character (you can hear the difference in a sound sample above).
It's not just the voltage that makes batteries and power supplies sound different.
It's the resistance, inductance, and capacitance in the battery, which is part of the circuit in a fuzzface."

http://www.analogman.com/fuzzface.htm

And here's another quote:

"The reason is that the old Carbon Zinc Batteries "sag" when you hit um hard in voltage but alkaline and Litheums don't. It does make a tonal difference and some guys like that "sag" feel in there compressors and distortion pedals.
The current capacity of the battery is the reason for this voltage "sag". The higher current capacity Alkalines and Litheums don't voltage sag as much under load as the old Carbon Zincs do so that affects the tones."

Nothing "crackpot" abut facts my man

 

[penguinchit]

I'll check out the links when I have a bit more time...and have something better than laptop speakers.

Make me a believer!

 

[DavidRamey]

Hey David thanks! What made you decide on the brass instead of the titanium sir? And second question what difference have you noticed from Gibson stock Zamek saddles vs the brass ones?

Wait... the Gibson stock saddles *are* made of Zamak, right? Are they plated brass too, or the zinc/aluminum alloy from the factory?

Titanium will brighten up the guitar and my guitar is bright enough already. I have no idea what Zamak is but I chose the nickel plated brass because that is what Gibson used in the 50's and 60's. I do not know what Gibson uses today for their saddle material.

 

[Jason Taylor]

Titanium will brighten up the guitar and my guitar is bright enough already. I have no idea what Zamak is but I chose the nickel plated brass because that is what Gibson used in the 50's and 60's. I do not know what Gibson uses today for their saddle material.

Ahhh cool makes sense. Zamak is the name of the zinc alloy stuff that for example modern Gibson bridges and saddles and tailpieces are made of apparently. Zamak an alloy of zinc and aluminum. Brass is an alloy of zinc and copper.

Regardless thanks for your replies man!

I wanted to ask... I had read that brass saddles kinda mellow out the highs a little... add some warmth to the notes and not quite so "clear" or as much treble... did you find that to be the case over the stock Gibbo bridge saddles?

I have an SG Classic w/P90s that I don't want to get too bright, but want to get as "clear" sounding as possible.

I have that aluminum tailpiece with steel studs I believe comes with them by Gotoh. I found it really livened up my geetar a lot and despite the bass getting a little less solid sounding but clearer and tighter. The highs are what really make it ring now with the aluminum tailpiece... just rings more in general and doesnt feel or sound so plunky as it did with the stock Zamak zinc alloy tailpiece. They really sound bad to my ears and when I had one on my Les Paul it really opened that sucker right up.

My Nashville bridge is stock and right now sounds purty good as is.

Tone wise--- what do you think are the advantages and disadvantages would be for me on my SG comparing what you noticed from the stock Gibby saddles to the nickel plated brass ones you have now?

I like a lot of single note stuff in my playing too if that helps... I just wonder if brass would mellow it out a little or make it brighter sounding from what you found in your experience?

Heck anyone else reading this that can help describe the differences or changes please let me know!

JT

 

[ARandall]

The whole is a sum of parts as has been said many times here. Not every change will result in the same difference. An example is swapping a speaker into a cab that gives you reproduction to 15Khz from 10Khz originally. If the supplied signal only goes to 8Khz then there is no change overall, even though the speaker itself has that extra potential.

Any material on earth has its own inherent structure. 'Man-made' metal are quite consistent in composition (although metals were quite variable back in the 50's), so are usually considered to have a specific tonal signature. The same shape and size should produce an identical 'tap tone'......a tuning fork for example.

Inconsistent things.....wood is like snowflakes, no 2 bits are the same....produces subtle differences, although there are 'species similarities' that allow you to give a tonal clustering for any 1 species. As such when you join separate bits of wood there is a multiplicative effect on the results that can be produced.

 

[Jason Taylor]

The whole is a sum of parts as has been said many times here. Not every change will result in the same difference. An example swapping a speaker into a cab that gives you reproduction to 15Khz from 10Khz originally. If the supplied signal only goes to 8Khz then there is no change overall, even though the speaker itself has that extra potential.

Any material on earth has its own inherent structure. 'Man-made' metal are quite consistent in composition (although metals were quite variable back in the 50's), so are usually considered to have a specific tonal signature. The same shape and size should produce an identical 'tap tone'......a tuning fork for example.

Inconsistent things.....wood is like snowflakes, no 2 bits are the same....produces subtle differences, although there are 'species similarities' that allow you to give a tonal clustering for any 1 species. As such when you join separate bits of wood there is a multiplicative effect on the results that can be produced.

Well said totally agreed! And hey I just noticed you're a lefty!

In your avatar thats a great looking Les Paul... what pickups, parts, and caps did you put in to finish it off?

 

[yeti]

Question: How come that most of the guys (except for EJ of course) who created the tones y'all emulate would have laughed their asses off if presented with this list?
Like someone noted earlier , there are some valid points here but it reads like a "to-do" list for OCD types or a "canon for believers" and all that "effort" doesn't even come close to influencing tone as much as a little practice every day.
Also, the notion of "sounding better" is a joke when it comes to electric guitars, "bad sounding" guitars can sound better than "good sounding" guitars depending on the context.

 

[Bill Hicklin]

Next up: how carbon-zinc 1.5 volt potential is more musical than alkaline 1.5 volt potential.

I found it interesting that Mesa also says the same thing with their stomp box pedals... they say clearly to use carbon zinc!

Anyone who can hear the difference in batteries is a crackpot.

And a quote from Analog Man's website about Fuzz Face pedals:

"Using a power supply may add AC hum noise, and can affect the tone, as the best sound is obtained by using an old style non-alkaline battery. I get these two for a dollar at the DOLLAR STORES. I like the Eveready 1222 "black cat", Maxell, or Panasonics.
An Alkaline battery will sound a bit dull in a germanium fuzzface, it can lose some character (you can hear the difference in a sound sample above).
It's not just the voltage that makes batteries and power supplies sound different.
It's the resistance, inductance, and capacitance in the battery, which is part of the circuit in a fuzzface."

Ok, that just sounds like handwaving, throwing out technobabble. However

"The reason is that the old Carbon Zinc Batteries "sag" when you hit um hard in voltage but alkaline and Litheums don't. It does make a tonal difference and some guys like that "sag" feel in there compressors and distortion pedals.
The current capacity of the battery is the reason for this voltage "sag". The higher current capacity Alkalines and Litheums don't voltage sag as much under load as the old Carbon Zincs do so that affects the tones."

...actually leaves some plausible headroom for a non-absurd hypothesis. After all, power supply sag in tube-rectified amps is totally a thing.

But, before we go any farther, we have to determine whether carbon batteries actually are more current-limited than alkalines, and if so if the difference is enough to produce theoretically audible sag (= 'spongier' onset).

 

[Jason Taylor]

Question: How come that most of the guys (except for EJ of course) who created the tones y'all emulate would have laughed their asses off if presented with this list?

Dude all the guys I think have massive tone would not laugh their asses off... in fact, they are even more selective and meticulous about gear and tone than I could ever hope to be.

Besides who are you to say the greats don't care about the details? How about dropping $250,000 + on a 50s Les Paul for example? That alone doesn't clue you in to how far these greats will go to chase tone?

Ever heard of Eddie Van Halen? You should read all the tinkering he does to get his tone, one of the best ever. He doesn't even use tone pots... and his volume knob on his guitar says "TONE". Read about his exploits and get back to me.

Eric Johnson certainly would not laugh. Nor Jimmy Page. Nor Brian May. Nor Ty Tabor. Nor Les Paul himself!

In fact, I don't even think your comment shows you know what you're talking about to be honest. There are so many greats that are totally obsessed with tone.

Like someone noted earlier , there are some valid points here but it reads like a "to-do" list for OCD types or a "canon for believers" and all that "effort" doesn't even come close to influencing tone as much as a little practice every day.
Also, the notion of "sounding better" is a joke when it comes to electric guitars, "bad sounding" guitars can sound better than "good sounding" guitars depending on the context.

That old myth is always amusing to me. Practicing never improves tone!!! It only improves playing.

If it true and all players needed to have massive TONE was to just "practice", all players would ever need to use is the cheapest off the rack guitar with a Fender Frontman practice amp. For every player in the history of music.

And they would all SOUND different you think?

Don't confuse TONE with PLAYING.

If we all used the same gear do you honesty think we would all SOUND different?

Do you think David Gilmore can get the SAME tone as David Gilmore on the solo of "Another Brick In The Wall" with for example an Epiphone Les Paul Special with humbuckers and a Fender Frontman practice amp that will 100% match sonically the tone he gets originally on the album?

Bad sounding guitars can never sound better than good sounding guitars!

A bad sounding guitar may be what someone puts on a track for color or effect, but that doesn't mean it SOUNDS better than a GOOD sounding guitar!

That's like saying "...a slow runner is actually faster than a fast runner in a 50 yard dash depending on the context".

LOL!

 

[Jason Taylor]

Ok, that just sounds like handwaving, throwing out technobabble. However



...actually leaves some plausible headroom for a non-absurd hypothesis. After all, power supply sag in tube-rectified amps is totally a thing.

But, before we go any farther, we have to determine whether carbon batteries actually are more current-limited than alkalines, and if so if the difference is enough to produce theoretically audible sag (= 'spongier' onset).

I would think you would find it interesting that SOOO many people have written about the differences instead if trying so hard to dismiss what I'm trying to say as "technobabble" etc.

Sorry if I can't explain what I hear and others hear as well as you want my man.

Maybe you can go get one if each type of battery and throw them in a fave old pedal and see if you can hear a difference yourself?

There are tons of people who have discovered this fact, and I'm positive you will be able to discover it too if you give it a try

 

[ARandall]

Question: How come that most of the guys (except for EJ of course) who created the tones y'all emulate would have laughed their asses off if presented with this list?
Like someone noted earlier , there are some valid points here but it reads like a "to-do" list for OCD types or a "canon for believers" and all that "effort" doesn't even come close to influencing tone as much as a little practice every day.
Also, the notion of "sounding better" is a joke when it comes to electric guitars, "bad sounding" guitars can sound better than "good sounding" guitars depending on the context.

We have to eliminate musical artistry from some of the other tonal aspects of the guitar......and lets face it, much of those 'iconic tones' were produced with guitars sporting the very same 'upgrades' we do to our guitars as 'standard features'.

'Tone' is not absolute, and some people's natural ability of course makes them able to wring quality out of instruments that some of us would struggle to make sound in tune. Needless to say, any change will be just as felt by a good player as a bad one.

And none of these changes are labelled good or bad......that is your invention here. We simply note the changes, as for most of us here it is implied that tone is in the ear of the beholder.

 

[David Collins]

I believe my inquiry was tacitly answered, so I'll stay out of it for the most part. This however -

That old myth is always amusing to me. Practicing never improves tone!!! It only improves playing.

If you believe or assume this to be true, that the player does not have any significant control over, responsibility for, or ability to affect tone by their touch and attack, then you have much yet to learn.

 

[Jason Taylor]

We have to eliminate musical artistry from some of the other tonal aspects of the guitar......and lets face it, much of those 'iconic tones' were produced with guitars sporting the very same 'upgrades' we do to our guitars as 'standard features'.

'Tone' is not absolute, and some people's natural ability of course makes them able to wring quality out of instruments that some of us would struggle to make sound in tune. Needless to say, any change will be just as felt by a good player as a bad one.

And none of these changes are labelled good or bad......that is your invention here. We simply note the changes, as for most of us here it is implied that tone is in the ear of the beholder.

Most excellently put my man. Superb job.

 

[yeti]

We have to eliminate musical artistry from some of the other tonal aspects of the guitar......and lets face it, much of those 'iconic tones' were produced with guitars sporting the very same 'upgrades' we do to our guitars as 'standard features'.

'Tone' is not absolute.

Agreed, but all these measures suggested by the OP don't make for better tone, just different tone, more sustain vs less sustain, more HF loss due to higher C cables vs less HF loss due to lower C cables, more clarity vs less clarity, fresh strings vs crusty strings,voltage-sag vs headroom, Coke vs Pepsi, blahblahblah.
Different? Yes, but better tone?
Document the changes all you want but a zero-sustain guitar with ancient strings through a Solid state practice amp can sound better than a '59 Burst through a plexi, a buffered pedal can sound better than a true bypass, High C coily cables of old can sound better than George L's (ask SRV or Jimmi) and so forth, it all comes down to subjective preferences as opposed to what the overwhelming majority of the electric guitar-playing population considers "good tone". This is not the case in most other classes of instruments, pretty much every violin player (not fiddleplayer) agrees on what attributes make for a great violin sound, same for pianists, mandolin players, classical guitar players, heck, even Jazz guitarists, but ask 10 (other than Jazz) electric guitar players about tone and you get 10 different answers, that's the beauty of "easy-to-get-something-going" type instruments, you get to develop your tonal preferences, become set-in-your-ways and closeminded before you can even play half a dozen songs.
But whatever route you choose tonally, there's no doubt that practice will make "your tone" better in ways that no equipment mod can.
I'll leave you with an example of fantastic tone that defies any "tone-quest-top-ten-list" every posted.

https://youtu.be/RW8N5hNANpk

 

[ARandall]

^ Well, he has documented the changes as noted by him for his own tastes. It is a personal opinion, and the premise that it was his opinion in the first post is clear.....so he is perfectly justified saying that the tone is better (to his ears).

 

[yeti]

^ Well, he has documented the changes as noted by him for his own tastes. It is a personal opinion, and the premise that it was his opinion in the first post is clear.....so he is perfectly justified saying that the tone is better (to his ears).

Absolutely, but this being a forum one should expect to have ones' opinions debated.

 

[Bill Hicklin]

I would think you would find it interesting that SOOO many people have written about the differences instead if trying so hard to dismiss what I'm trying to say as "technobabble" etc.

Sorry if I can't explain what I hear and others hear as well as you want my man.

Maybe you can go get one if each type of battery and throw them in a fave old pedal and see if you can hear a difference yourself?

There are tons of people who have discovered this fact, and I'm positive you will be able to discover it too if you give it a try

I think you need to re-read my post. While the *first* guy quoted sounds like he's doesn't know what he's talking about and is just throwing out a vague jumble of jargon, the *second* guy quoted I think might well be on to something: if carbons really do current-load faster than alkalines, then there may be something to this. (Notice however the big IF. I wanna see numbers.)

----------------------

David Gilmour is a poor example, considering how very heavily processed his sound is. Consider Hendrix instead, who used dog-stock factory guits through fewer pedals than most bar-band guitarists do these days*- and yet was recognizably Jimi even when playing a Flying V instead of a Strat.

*A Vox Wah, an Arbiter Fuzz Face and an Octavia, that's it.

 

[ARandall]

Absolutely, but this being a forum one should expect to have ones' opinions debated.

Hmmm, but thats pointless though, and also straightaway a giveaway to an inexperienced or incompetent debater. Nobody can question or doubt what sounds better to you, what neck profile plays better for you, nor determine what constitutes value to you, etc etc.
Personal experience and personal perception is only relevant to the individual, and hence is their own absolute truth.
You can of course counter with your own experience and see how that differs - and similarly others cannot contradict your own.

 

[Wraptail]

.