California 50s ssl 1 review
- Thread starter smitty302
- Start date
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
yep, they sound like nice strat should. bright, clean, and just enough meat to not sound thin. some dont like the bridge pup since it is wound the same as the neck and middle which is the way all strats were for decades. putting a tone control on the bridge can tame the high end
yep, they sound like nice strat should. bright, clean, and just enough meat to not sound thin. some dont like the bridge pup since it is wound the same as the neck and middle which is the way all strats were for decades. putting a tone control on the bridge can tame the high end
Ayrton
New member
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
The rumor was John used SSLs and/or Antiquties. However John’s long time tech confirmed the pups John actually settled on were Fender.
Not that you can’t nail the sound with SSLs (or any quality strat pickup)
The rumor was John used SSLs and/or Antiquties. However John’s long time tech confirmed the pups John actually settled on were Fender.
Not that you can’t nail the sound with SSLs (or any quality strat pickup)
Last edited:
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
Spot on, especially about the meat part. I have another Strat with Rumpel's Experiences on it for the crystal clear Stratty stuff, but anything with OD, the SSLs are my go - to.
Spot on, especially about the meat part. I have another Strat with Rumpel's Experiences on it for the crystal clear Stratty stuff, but anything with OD, the SSLs are my go - to.
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
https://forum.seymourduncan.com/showthread.php?159888-Nice-SSL-1-Comment-from-John-Frusciante
https://forum.seymourduncan.com/showthread.php?159888-Nice-SSL-1-Comment-from-John-Frusciante
Chickenwings
Alnico 6/8
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
Real nice
Real nice
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
how different are the bridge ssl1 and bridge experience?
how different are the bridge ssl1 and bridge experience?
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
Just to provide some background context:
SSL-1s are in a rosewood fretboard Strat;
Rumpels (for the bridge, it's actually a Formvar wound instead of PE used in the neck and mid) are in a maple fretboard Strat.
Both played through VOX AC15 Custom.
Both are wound to the same DC, around 6.5k.
SSL-1 bridge sounds fuller and warmer, compresses well under OD.
Rumpel bridge, clearer, more piercing, less compression.
FWIW, the SSL-1 always makes me sound good; I have to concentrate and not play sloppily when playing the Rumpels.
Just to provide some background context:
SSL-1s are in a rosewood fretboard Strat;
Rumpels (for the bridge, it's actually a Formvar wound instead of PE used in the neck and mid) are in a maple fretboard Strat.
Both played through VOX AC15 Custom.
Both are wound to the same DC, around 6.5k.
SSL-1 bridge sounds fuller and warmer, compresses well under OD.
Rumpel bridge, clearer, more piercing, less compression.
FWIW, the SSL-1 always makes me sound good; I have to concentrate and not play sloppily when playing the Rumpels.
Ayrton
New member
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
Everyone has read that. The problem is John didn’t know if they were SSLs or Antiquities, only that they were supposedly Duncans. John’s tech later said it was Fender 57/62s that John settled on.
I don’t think anyone knows for certain what is in each of John’s strats. However, it really doesn’t matter as you can get that sound with any 6k ish single coil.
Everyone has read that. The problem is John didn’t know if they were SSLs or Antiquities, only that they were supposedly Duncans. John’s tech later said it was Fender 57/62s that John settled on.
I don’t think anyone knows for certain what is in each of John’s strats. However, it really doesn’t matter as you can get that sound with any 6k ish single coil.
PFDarkside
of the Forum
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
No, they are real vintage style Strat single coils. If you need noiseless the Duncan equivalent is the STK-S4 series.
No, they are real vintage style Strat single coils. If you need noiseless the Duncan equivalent is the STK-S4 series.
GuitarStv
Sock Market Trader
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
I really like the sound of SSL-2s (SSL-1s with flat poles rather than staggered) in the neck and middle position. They sound great clean, they take overdrive well, they sound lovely with effects. They sound the way that a nice strat sounds in my head . . . clear, sparkly, and not too thin.
They're definitely not noiseless, but if you shield the back of your pickguard and the pickup cavities they're far from noisy.
I really like the sound of SSL-2s (SSL-1s with flat poles rather than staggered) in the neck and middle position. They sound great clean, they take overdrive well, they sound lovely with effects. They sound the way that a nice strat sounds in my head . . . clear, sparkly, and not too thin.
They're definitely not noiseless, but if you shield the back of your pickguard and the pickup cavities they're far from noisy.
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
Noiseles is NOT a good thing.
If you later find you need some noiseless after all, swap the bridge pup with a stack or a rail or something.
Noiseles is NOT a good thing.
If you later find you need some noiseless after all, swap the bridge pup with a stack or a rail or something.
Clint 55
OH THE DOUBLE THICK GLAZE!
Synapsys
Well-known member
Re: California 50s ssl 1 review
Ditto. I understand the compromise when compared to true singles, but I really, really, hate the 60-cycle hum.
Between stacks and rail single sized humbuckers, I manage just fine.
Ditto. I understand the compromise when compared to true singles, but I really, really, hate the 60-cycle hum.
Between stacks and rail single sized humbuckers, I manage just fine.
Similar threads
