Fred vs AT-1 vs SD CC Comparison Comments > GO!
- Thread starter Drak
- Start date
Teleplayer
Active member
Re: Fred vs AT-1 vs SD CC Comparison Comments > GO!
I had all three. These are my amateur impressions:
1) Fred has a broad sound with good mid-mids, and lots of harmonic overtones. IMO the Fred tends to "fill the sound" more than cut. Some people people like it in warm guitars, but can also work in guitars that have naturally bright Upper-Mids. Its very articulate pickup and surprisingly versatile for a pickup associated with JS. You may get tired of the harmonic overtones after a while, but the Fred is very good at what it does.
2) AT-1 has a significant mid-range grind to the sound. When played clean it has warm tone, but with gain the upper-mids will cut though. It also has a lot of harmonic overtones, but not as much in the top-end like the Fred has.
However its very different from the Fred because it has a lot more compression and pick response feels different. AT-1 feels more like a high gain pickup than the Fred.
3) SD CC: I had pickup this immediately after the AT-1. I was hoping for a less compressed pickup with better cleans, but it didn't deliver that. The biggest problem (for me) was its too warm and thick with full and heavy mids. It also has similar compression effect to the AT-1.
I had all three. These are my amateur impressions:
1) Fred has a broad sound with good mid-mids, and lots of harmonic overtones. IMO the Fred tends to "fill the sound" more than cut. Some people people like it in warm guitars, but can also work in guitars that have naturally bright Upper-Mids. Its very articulate pickup and surprisingly versatile for a pickup associated with JS. You may get tired of the harmonic overtones after a while, but the Fred is very good at what it does.
2) AT-1 has a significant mid-range grind to the sound. When played clean it has warm tone, but with gain the upper-mids will cut though. It also has a lot of harmonic overtones, but not as much in the top-end like the Fred has.
However its very different from the Fred because it has a lot more compression and pick response feels different. AT-1 feels more like a high gain pickup than the Fred.
3) SD CC: I had pickup this immediately after the AT-1. I was hoping for a less compressed pickup with better cleans, but it didn't deliver that. The biggest problem (for me) was its too warm and thick with full and heavy mids. It also has similar compression effect to the AT-1.
Teleplayer
Active member
Re: Fred vs AT-1 vs SD CC Comparison Comments > GO!
You could also consider the Suhr SSH+ as an alternative to AT-1 and SD CC. SSH+ also has a lot of mids, but it has better clean tone and not as compressed as the other two.
You could also consider the Suhr SSH+ as an alternative to AT-1 and SD CC. SSH+ also has a lot of mids, but it has better clean tone and not as compressed as the other two.
Gtrjunior
Well-known member
Re: Fred vs AT-1 vs SD CC Comparison Comments > GO!
See, I like the compressed thing from a pickup.
I hear (read) lots of reviews from people and they make that sound like it’s a bad thing.
I suppose it’s all personal taste but I like a pickup to provide some compression.
See, I like the compressed thing from a pickup.
I hear (read) lots of reviews from people and they make that sound like it’s a bad thing.
I suppose it’s all personal taste but I like a pickup to provide some compression.
Mononoaware
Active member
Re: Fred vs AT-1 vs SD CC Comparison Comments > GO!
I agree in general with Teleplayer's sketch, though I'd add a couple things about the Fred and CC.
Fred: One of my favorite pickups in the bridge, and I've tried it in a variety of instruments and woods. Rarely does it not work. I've found it to be detailed, with a sparkly top, strong "aw" type voicing, an Goldilocks output. Splits well, and has a good humbucking split sound, too. I'd liken it to a PAF-meets-Tele bridge sound -- spanky clean, gutsy mids, and tightens up really well under gain.
CC: I have less experience with this one, but wanted to note that I found it to be fairly picky about which guitar it was in. When it doesn't work, it can be a gutless-sounding mess. When it does work, it's a joy to play, particularly if you dig brown-sound tones. I preferred it in brighter guitars for soloing. If you want to get a good sense of what it can do in a Floyded superstrat, listen to some Neil Zaza.
I agree in general with Teleplayer's sketch, though I'd add a couple things about the Fred and CC.
Fred: One of my favorite pickups in the bridge, and I've tried it in a variety of instruments and woods. Rarely does it not work. I've found it to be detailed, with a sparkly top, strong "aw" type voicing, an Goldilocks output. Splits well, and has a good humbucking split sound, too. I'd liken it to a PAF-meets-Tele bridge sound -- spanky clean, gutsy mids, and tightens up really well under gain.
CC: I have less experience with this one, but wanted to note that I found it to be fairly picky about which guitar it was in. When it doesn't work, it can be a gutless-sounding mess. When it does work, it's a joy to play, particularly if you dig brown-sound tones. I preferred it in brighter guitars for soloing. If you want to get a good sense of what it can do in a Floyded superstrat, listen to some Neil Zaza.
Drak
New member
Re: Fred vs AT-1 vs SD CC Comparison Comments > GO!
I should probably add that I have all three in-hand, collected over the years and sat in the pickup drawer.'
So I'm not looking at any alternatives.
Just trying to sort/hash them all out to see respectively what should go where and why there kind of thing.
And what experiences others' have had with them.
And what SC's to match them with.
I know the readings so there's that, but the opinions of people who have walked the mile before me are always counted.
Thanks, keep 'em coming.
And Cherry is near as bright as Maple except (to me) it has more life and resonance in it.
Maple is bright with usually very little to no natural resonance (to me).
I think that will help with the CC from what I've read.
And I did have the CC in a build awhile back, but it was a stoptail and a completely different wood type than Cherry.
I noticed the squshy bottom, but besides that it did have a great inherant VH sound to it.
Interesting note about getting tired of the overtones.
I'm also a huge Roy Buchanan fan from way back and have spent many years coaxing bell tones and harmonics from Tele's.
So I don't think I'll probably tire of it's harmonic leanings, I'm totally into that aspect.
Also, I'm not planning on putting a splitting option into any of them.
I have many other guitars that can do 'that' better, so no swiss army knife stuff needed with these.
These will all be dedicated to full onslaught bridge position mayhem.
I should probably add that I have all three in-hand, collected over the years and sat in the pickup drawer.'
So I'm not looking at any alternatives.
Just trying to sort/hash them all out to see respectively what should go where and why there kind of thing.
And what experiences others' have had with them.
And what SC's to match them with.
I know the readings so there's that, but the opinions of people who have walked the mile before me are always counted.
Thanks, keep 'em coming.
And Cherry is near as bright as Maple except (to me) it has more life and resonance in it.
Maple is bright with usually very little to no natural resonance (to me).
I think that will help with the CC from what I've read.
And I did have the CC in a build awhile back, but it was a stoptail and a completely different wood type than Cherry.
I noticed the squshy bottom, but besides that it did have a great inherant VH sound to it.
Interesting note about getting tired of the overtones.
I'm also a huge Roy Buchanan fan from way back and have spent many years coaxing bell tones and harmonics from Tele's.
So I don't think I'll probably tire of it's harmonic leanings, I'm totally into that aspect.
Also, I'm not planning on putting a splitting option into any of them.
I have many other guitars that can do 'that' better, so no swiss army knife stuff needed with these.
These will all be dedicated to full onslaught bridge position mayhem.
Last edited:
Mononoaware
Active member
Re: Fred vs AT-1 vs SD CC Comparison Comments > GO!
Interesting; never had a cherry guitar. From what you're describing, I'll bet that CC will work great and give the guitar back some squish.
Should also note that I didn't have much to say about the AT-1 because my only experience with it was in an alder strat with a maple neck, and I found it entirely too icepicky in that particular instrument. That seems at odds with other things I've heard people say about the AT, so maybe it was just a bad match.
Interesting; never had a cherry guitar. From what you're describing, I'll bet that CC will work great and give the guitar back some squish.
Should also note that I didn't have much to say about the AT-1 because my only experience with it was in an alder strat with a maple neck, and I found it entirely too icepicky in that particular instrument. That seems at odds with other things I've heard people say about the AT, so maybe it was just a bad match.
Re: Fred vs AT-1 vs SD CC Comparison Comments > GO!
I have a cherry-bodied Godin, but I have a 59 and Jazz in that. I have the CC in an alder-bodied Music Man, along with an APH-1 and 5 way switch. This is a great combo- I dig both the clean and overdriven sounds of the CC, and even the split sound, too. It is perfect if you are the only guitarist, and don't have a keyboardist. It takes up a lot of sonic space, and seems to seriously love overdrive pedals.
I have a cherry-bodied Godin, but I have a 59 and Jazz in that. I have the CC in an alder-bodied Music Man, along with an APH-1 and 5 way switch. This is a great combo- I dig both the clean and overdriven sounds of the CC, and even the split sound, too. It is perfect if you are the only guitarist, and don't have a keyboardist. It takes up a lot of sonic space, and seems to seriously love overdrive pedals.
Teleplayer
Active member
Re: Fred vs AT-1 vs SD CC Comparison Comments > GO!
The Fred is likely to work fine in a guitar with some brightness in the upper mids. However if your neck is ebony or some monstrously thick or stiff construction it could be too bright overall and emphasize the high frequcnies too much. Otherwise the Fred seems like a good candidate.
The Fred is likely to work fine in a guitar with some brightness in the upper mids. However if your neck is ebony or some monstrously thick or stiff construction it could be too bright overall and emphasize the high frequcnies too much. Otherwise the Fred seems like a good candidate.
shredi
New member
Re: Fred vs AT-1 vs SD CC Comparison Comments > GO!
I like the FRED in a strat with 250k pots. Balanced sounding with tons of harmonics. Like most dimarzio it sounds refined/polished but very clear.
I used to have the AT-1 in a rather bright sounding LP copy. It sounds exactly like what I expect: medium-hot gain, lots of mids, tight bass. Great for anything.
I experimented with different capacitor values for the tone pot, with 0.047uf it has big fat low-mids, with smaller value (0.015 IIRC) it's much brighter and kinda remind me of the JB/Custom.
I like the FRED in a strat with 250k pots. Balanced sounding with tons of harmonics. Like most dimarzio it sounds refined/polished but very clear.
I used to have the AT-1 in a rather bright sounding LP copy. It sounds exactly like what I expect: medium-hot gain, lots of mids, tight bass. Great for anything.
I experimented with different capacitor values for the tone pot, with 0.047uf it has big fat low-mids, with smaller value (0.015 IIRC) it's much brighter and kinda remind me of the JB/Custom.
STLMTLHD79
Active member
Re: Fred vs AT-1 vs SD CC Comparison Comments > GO!
I have some familiarity with the FRED and the CC. Here is my 2 cents
The FRED is probably, to this day, the only Dimarzio humbucker i have ever liked. Its a very nice medium output very balanced pickup that is extremely versatile. It has mis-matched coils, so harmonics jump out of the thing like nothing. I have had it in a Kramer F3000 and a MIM strat-sounded great in both. I am going to be putting it in a MIJ Strat here shortly and looking forward to the results.
The CC (i put a rough-cast A2 mag in mine) is somewhat balanced in terms of EQ however, has that 1984 VH tone that everybody wants. Somewhat warm with rolled off treble but still has enough highs in most applications (especially in strats). I would not use this in a guitar that is somewhat dark/bass heavy (like a les paul), but works well in alder or basswood guitars.
I have some familiarity with the FRED and the CC. Here is my 2 cents
The FRED is probably, to this day, the only Dimarzio humbucker i have ever liked. Its a very nice medium output very balanced pickup that is extremely versatile. It has mis-matched coils, so harmonics jump out of the thing like nothing. I have had it in a Kramer F3000 and a MIM strat-sounded great in both. I am going to be putting it in a MIJ Strat here shortly and looking forward to the results.
The CC (i put a rough-cast A2 mag in mine) is somewhat balanced in terms of EQ however, has that 1984 VH tone that everybody wants. Somewhat warm with rolled off treble but still has enough highs in most applications (especially in strats). I would not use this in a guitar that is somewhat dark/bass heavy (like a les paul), but works well in alder or basswood guitars.
Similar threads
