The JB "I call BS on everyone" thread

[Aceman]

If Ace doesn't feel like doing the demo, I can do it. I would compare a new JB, JBJ, Ant, Trash Factor, and an A5 Distortion.

No - but you will be on the list for pickups....

[Lewguitar]

I'm also sorry if you don't get to decide who can and can't really play. Why are you assuming already that someone who can't play will be doing this? who are you talking about?

Here's what I said: "Since this test has been already done, and done so well by someone who can really play, why is there a need for another test?"

What you implied that I said has nothing in common with what I really said.

[misterwhizzy]

Since this test has been already done, and done so well by someone who can really play, why is there a need for another test?

Shots fired. Pretty sure Bob's a quite capable player, regardless of whether or not he's condescending on the forum.

very subtle

...as opposed to the above.

[Clint 55]

Lew said the demo was done by someone who can really play. Meaning the demo was well done.
Instead of saying someone who can 'actually' play. Which would imply that someone else sux.
I wouldn't take that personally.

[Gtrjunior]

This is suddenly the most entertaining thread on the forum.

[formula73]

I’m enjoying this.

[Clint 55]

I like how the this is the best forum thread developed a beef lol.

[Mincer]

Knock it off. Put each other on ignore. Do not respond to each other any longer.

[frankfalbo]

Bottom line is there are two basic categories of tests.

One is designed to exacerbate the deltas. It’s to teach the subtle differences between things, and sometimes reveal what it takes for those differences to manifest. Yngwie, for example, tested his pickups through a cranked overdrive, cranked Marshall, isolated speakers and mics, back up through a control room with studio monitors, listening at normal levels. Not being fooled by the air pressure, the loudness, etc. and from this he can hear AND sense a gnat’s eyelash difference. 50-100 turns of wire up or down, something any engineer would say “there’s no way he can hear the difference, it’s psychosomatic” but they’d be wrong. But many of you guys, however, probably couldn’t hear the difference between the last 5 prototype revisions we sent him. But he could, and the due diligence paid off. I even mimicked that setup at headquarters to be able to hear smaller differences.

So is there a test I can design to reveal all the key differences between 10 different JB’s? Absolutely.

The second kind of test, is more of a “gotcha” test. The test to prove that the differences between things don’t matter, or that you’re overreacting if you think they do. That Visual Sound op-amp test was exactly that, and the worst kind. The guy commits the cardinal sin of leading the witness. He repeats “sounds about the same, RIGHT?” a ton of times. And they’re not playing the guitar in a way to show the difference, they’re not using the overdrive to boost a super hot amp where subtleties in gain staging are more apparent.

So is there a test I can design to reveal how all the JB’s sound basically the same and you either can’t tell the difference, or the ones you thought you liked are actually juxtaposed? Absolutely.

The second type of test, in my opinion, as it relates to product development for the manifestation of an art form where the artist is participating in the process, is an irrelevant waste of time. This is what you do for something utilitarian like a toaster or other appliances. The former is what you do to discover ways you can make the artists creation experience more fruitful.

If I were to change an artist’s paint brushes, and the painting still came out looking just as good, would you say it doesn’t matter? The painter will tell you that they achieved the same result but they didn’t like the brushes and had to work harder to get the paint to flow. Then does it matter?

[Jack_TriPpEr]

Bottom line is there are two basic categories of tests.

One is designed to exacerbate the deltas. It’s to teach the subtle differences between things, and sometimes reveal what it takes for those differences to manifest. Yngwie, for example, tested his pickups through a cranked overdrive, cranked Marshall, isolated speakers and mics, back up through a control room with studio monitors, listening at normal levels. Not being fooled by the air pressure, the loudness, etc. and from this he can hear AND sense a gnat’s eyelash difference. 50-100 turns of wire up or down, something any engineer would say “there’s no way he can hear the difference, it’s psychosomatic” but they’d be wrong. But many of you guys, however, probably couldn’t hear the difference between the last 5 prototype revisions we sent him. But he could, and the due diligence paid off. I even mimicked that setup at headquarters to be able to hear smaller differences.

So is there a test I can design to reveal all the key differences between 10 different JB’s? Absolutely.

The second kind of test, is more of a “gotcha” test. The test to prove that the differences between things don’t matter, or that you’re overreacting if you think they do. That Visual Sound op-amp test was exactly that, and the worst kind. The guy commits the cardinal sin of leading the witness. He repeats “sounds about the same, RIGHT?” a ton of times. And they’re not playing the guitar in a way to show the difference, they’re not using the overdrive to boost a super hot amp where subtleties in gain staging are more apparent.

So is there a test I can design to reveal how all the JB’s sound basically the same and you either can’t tell the difference, or the ones you thought you liked are actually juxtaposed? Absolutely.

The second type of test, in my opinion, as it relates to product development for the manifestation of an art form where the artist is participating in the process, is an irrelevant waste of time. This is what you do for something utilitarian like a toaster or other appliances. The former is what you do to discover ways you can make the artists creation experience more fruitful.

If I were to change an artist’s paint brushes, and the painting still came out looking just as good, would you say it doesn’t matter? The painter will tell you that they achieved the same result but they didn’t like the brushes and had to work harder to get the paint to flow. Then does it matter?

Frank,

Isn't the type 2 test still applicable in product develooment in certain scenarios, like when the model of pickup is not an artist signature pup, and the manufacturer wants to determine if they can make some changes to the design of the pup without significantly impacting the tone of the pickup? Whether those drivers for change be cost cutting measures or a material formerly used is no longer available on the market?

[Aceman]

There are more than two types. There is a difference between a "gotcha" including leading information, and the objective "can you tell"

The thing here that inspired this is the myriad requesters hunting JBJ's, old JB's and any other kind of JB sight-un-heard.
Again - Stevie Ray Vaughn - great example. The settings on his amp made him "feel" inspired. But the reality was that his tech set the knobs and put them in his magical spot.

And I didn't say ever that there were not people who couldn't tell. I said that most can't. And in a test of take away the actual knowledge of what it is....you find that what you think you know isn't true.

And if you watch the results from the VS tests - you get half like one and half like the other. Hardly anything "better" about either of them, over multiple similar videos.

Which WOULD you prefer if you didn't know.....

[formula73]

Knock it off. Put each other on ignore. Do not respond to each other any longer.

Can I respond to you?

[frankfalbo]

Frank,

Isn't the type 2 test still applicable in product development in certain scenarios, like when the model of pickup is not an artist signature pup, and the manufacturer wants to determine if they can make some changes to the design of the pup without significantly impacting the tone of the pickup? Whether those drivers for change be cost cutting measures or a material formerly used is no longer available on the market?

Sort of...But only if your company's philosophy is to see what you can "get away with" without it being noticed. One example I'll give from my time at Duncan, I disclosed this while I worked there. So this is not disclosing any trade secrets (and it's favorable toward Duncan) We were experimenting with keeper bars, the metal spacer that the screw pole pieces pass through, which holds them in place and influences the magnetic circuit. Over time, and depending on which supplier you use, there can be different (and evolving) techniques to make them. There are drilled spacers, which usually yield a clean hole for the pole piece screws to pass through. The bar's shape and size is very crisp with sharper corners. They can have burrs, but often will be cleaned up or tumbled to knock off the roughness. There are also stamped holes which smash the holes like a hole-puncher. Those sometimes look more like "melted butter" where the holes have some compression. And maybe they don't hold the same tight tolerance as a drilled spacer. Sometimes the entire spacer is stamped. You can tell those because they edges are rolled, you can see the metal tearing along the edge, the top is like melted butter but the bottom is more flat, stuff like that.

Duncan's position could have been "let's find the cheapest we can get away with" but instead, we were pursuing what was best, regardless of cost. Derek and I conducted the experiment, some people posited there'd be no difference at all, but what we found (that I can disclose) was that if the keeper bar holes are loose, and there's too much air gap around the pole, you could hear the difference, in the attack of the note, more so when picking hard than softly. Extremely subtle, but it was there. So the global edict was smaller diameter holes, and tighter tolerances. Meaning, if we ever made a change in suppliers, that's one thing that was important. As technology advances, maybe there's a punch process that's as good as drilling, maybe there's a plasma/laser cutter that can do it as cheaply as punching, maybe a shop located in another state where cost of living is lower can do drilled spacers for the same price as punched spacers, whatever, it doesn't matter, the point was even in that case, it was still a test like #1, not like #2.

But I DO know of some pickup companies that will do test #2 to validate saving money for sure.

[frankfalbo]

There are more than two types. There is a difference between a "gotcha" including leading information, and the objective "can you tell"

Semantics/irrelevant. There are two motivations, you're either trying to highlight ways in which things are the same/similar, or ways in which they are different. If your ideal premise is that while we know they are different, that we shouldn't assume mainstream groupthink is accurate, or that what is thought of as better than, is actually not, while it may be noble, is basically the definition of a gotcha test.

[superpete]

If I were to change an artist’s paint brushes, and the painting still came out looking just as good, would you say it doesn’t matter? The painter will tell you that they achieved the same result but they didn’t like the brushes and had to work harder to get the paint to flow. Then does it matter?

THANK YOU