Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

[ranalli]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

this is a good idea! mids alone is too general, you have upper and lower ones so they should be listed.
like this,

I like this idea too. Mids are too general...I think it would help alot of people decide easier. And what about mV as output like Dimarzio does?? They're usually pretty dead on with that I find.

 

[Artie]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

And what about mV as output like Dimarzio does??

I gotta say, I don't like this idea at all. Here's my reasoning: in order for the mv value to have any meaning, all pickup manufacturers would have to stimulate their pups with the exact same source, or device, in order to have consistency across lines. Which means someone would have to build, and sell, a "pickup calibrator" that everyone would have to buy.

That just doesn't make sense, when we already have the measurement of DC resistance. We can all check this easily with our $3 meters. DC resistance, and knowing the magnet type, gives us a ballpark idea of what the output will be. If all manufacturers published this, it would be easy to match pickups across brand lines.

 

[shred-dog]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

numbers !!!!!!!!! output with numbers would be great as well!!!!!!

 

[Leather Rebel]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

i like the idea of high mids vs low mids and i think bars and a numeric value would be the best. i think those few changes would really help paint a better picture for people

I totally agree with Jeremy. I voted for numbers because the bars that currently exist doesn't do it for me. I'd also like to see output in millivolts rather than just a number from 1 to 10.

 

[ranalli]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

I gotta say, I don't like this idea at all. Here's my reasoning: in order for the mv value to have any meaning, all pickup manufacturers would have to stimulate their pups with the exact same source, or device, in order to have consistency across lines. Which means someone would have to build, and sell, a "pickup calibrator" that everyone would have to buy.

That just doesn't make sense, when we already have the measurement of DC resistance. We can all check this easily with our $3 meters. DC resistance, and knowing the magnet type, gives us a ballpark idea of what the output will be. If all manufacturers published this, it would be easy to match pickups across brand lines.

Why fumble around with that stuff though?? Why do I want to buy a meter and all that garbage....all I want is the right pickup for the job. With a mV statistic, I know EXACTLY where that pickup lies in the output spectrum.

I guess my problem lies with the fact that when I first started using Duncans I had to go through like 3 of them to finally get the "right" one. The tone charts are poor IMO and DC Resistance is a worthless indicator of output because of all the guessing with the magnet. If Duncan could just get the mVs on their own pickups relative to each other, I'd be happy enough with that. I mean I guess they do with the output bars....but those bars had to be derived some some calculation of numbers so maybe just post that even.

With Dimarzio's charts and stats, I don't know......it just seems like I nail the exact sound I'm looking for every time even though they have more pickups to choose from.

 

[Davey]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

One vote for bars with the number value on them. Or else just bars.

+1

 

[Metalman_666]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

I would prefer numbers because it's easier to see (sort of) rather than bars.

 

[theboatcandream]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

One vote for bars with the number value on them. Or else just bars.

Me too.

 

[JammerMatt]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

One vote for bars with the number value on them.

+ another 1

 

[Blueline]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

2 additions
1) i find some reference to modern v. vintage tone helpful (like prs does no their site)
2) i'd add a little more in the way of description/summation to the tone chart

otherwise, i like the bars + numbers idea

 

[TattooedCarrot]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

Why not both, keep a bars graphic with a number incorperated into it somewhere. The bars give some idea at a glance, and the numbers can indicate a little more specific.

 

[Zerberus]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

One vote for bars with the number value on them. Or else just bars.

+1

 

[RiffGuy]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

I'd really like the four-bar (lows. lower mids, higher mids, highs) representation on a numbered graph.

 

[Gamera]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

Why not both, keep a bars graphic with a number incorperated into it somewhere. The bars give some idea at a glance, and the numbers can indicate a little more specific.

That's why I like the segmented bars idea. You see a graphical representation but if you want the number you just need to count the segments in the bar.

 

[jmp2kt]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

I'll go with artie!

 

[fenderiarhs]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

If it has to be one or the other, I prefer bars. But, I don't see why you can't have both.
To be perfectly honest, when I want to look at Duncan specs, I go to Guitar Electronics.

They present the info way better than you guys do. (Sorry.) :sigh:

THAT'S PERFECT

 

[Metalblaze]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

If it has to be one or the other, I prefer bars. But, I don't see why you can't have both.
To be perfectly honest, when I want to look at Duncan specs, I go to Guitar Electronics.

They present the info way better than you guys do. (Sorry.) :sigh:

I agree with this one too. If it had 4 or 5 bars for the bridge and neck models separately like Marcel said, it'd be the best. :fing2:

 

[FuelGTRX]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

I would like to see bars with number values on them. If not that, just numbers. Numbers are easier to compare than the bars, but would be better together.

 

[Lee_M.]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

Numbers...much easier to analyze and compare.

 

[Vincent]

Re: Next Tone Chart: EQ in Numbers? Or Bars?

Is there any way to numerically incorporate / measure harmonics? Very often the harmonic content of a pickup is done through a written description, which is somewhat subjective. I feel this is important cos some players prefer 'flat' sounding pickups compared to the higher harmonic ones.

I must agree that Dimarzio have set the standard in the whole millivolt (mV) output calculation. What SD could do is to adopt the same measurement techniques (pickup height, decay, no. of repititions) when quoting output in millivolts. This would also help users in making inter-company comparisons of pickups.

Just my 2 cents, guys.