Opinions on an Epiphone Dot

It's just thrown me, because I have several guitars with vintage-type pups and have never had an issue with brightness.

It happens. There are a lot of pieces of wood that goes into those. The idea is that the "average" piece of mahogany and maple etc sounds thus and such.

But sometimes you get the BRIGHTEST maple, and the BRIGHTEST mahogany and the BRIGHTEST rosewood...and sonic disaster. Or the darkest like in a Les Paul sometimes. Rare - but sometimes the stars align in all the wrong ways.
 
One thing I'm wondering if someone can explain...does the 59 bridge sound so bright in this particular guitar because of the scooped mids? I noticed that the 59s are significantly mid-scooped compared to the others. Would that be part of the issue? If that is the case, would the magnet swap help much, or would I be better off putting in something that has more mids? Or would the other mentioned fixes do it? Just wondering if the scoop plays a role here.

I don't know if I can explain and I hope I don't reply too much in this topic but here is my take:

-IME, Dots tend to be mid scooped acoustically. The frequency chart shared above should illustrate this idea.

-A5 mags typically tend to favor bass and treble because they are strongly gaussed. The "mid scoop" is a byproduct of their strong magnetic field.

-Some coils like those of the 59 tend to accentuate this effect because of tech specs that I won't dig here.

So, you have a "mid scooping" pickup in an acoustically mid scooped guitar, yes.


Now here are schematically the effects of various solutions evoked above:

1-Any magnet with a weaker magnetic field would put less focus on the high range & bass because it magnetizes the strings with less strenght. Other AlNi(Co) alloys than A5 also increase the inductance, shifting down the resonant peak of the pickups. All of this gives apparently less bass, less high & therefore more perceived mids. The weakest mag field and highest inductance would be obtained with a typical A3, then an A2, then an A4...A typical UOA5 has a different effect IME: basically, it slowers the attack and mellows the sound accordingly.

2-Lowering the tone pot, changing pots resistance or adding a resistor in parallel between hot and ground would flatten the resonant peak of your pickups and tame the brigtness, obviously.

3-Adding stray capacitance with a long cable or parallel cap would shift down the resonant peaks of your pickups towards the high mids instead of flattening it. Mounting a pickup with more inductance would have the same effect (hence the recommendation of a Duncan Custom by Clint55 somewhere above: "hot" pickups have a high inductance shifting down their resonance, exactly like added capacitance. The difference is that more inductance = more output if the mag field remains the same. Different mags don't reflect this rule because their mag field weakens while their inductive influence rises).



IOW, all these solutions are valid because they converge towards the same goal: obtaining a less insistant and/or less high pitched resonant peak from pickups... and compensating the acoustic mid scoop of a Dot.

They just require different strategies (regarding pickups height settings for instance: with solutions 2 & 3, it might be necessary to lower the pickups under the bass strings in order to tame the bass in the same way than high frequencies are softened).


FWIW : rambling from an old fart as an attempt to help. LOL.

Again, good luck in your quest...
 
The first thing I'd try is just swapping the bridge volume pot for a lower value one. The neck pot in my dot is 600k and the bridge is 400k (mesured values . . . they're both 500k on the label). That helps make the bridge less barky.

It's a bastard to rewire a dot, but depending on how much cable slack you have you might get lucky and be able to pull out one just the single pot enough to change it. Something to 300 or 400 from 500k will reduce a lot of the unwanted shrillness and stabby-bright treble and round things out a bit.
 
Last edited:
As already noted, if you are changing/modifying components the Dot is not fun to work on. Magnet swaps are likely the easiest. If you do change pots or add components to the output jack, this was my experience changing the jack on my Dot. Just use the fishing line/dental floss approach on all components you pull, and note the order so you can reverse it when reinstalling.

https://forum.seymourduncan.com/for...ver-replaced-a-jack-in-a-dot-es-335#post82767
 
Sorry, haven't had any updates yet. I was supposed to go see a tech yesterday, but ended up changing it to this week coming up. I'll go over my options and see what makes the most sense.

The two most likely scenarios would be either a magnet swap in the bridge to possibly tone down the shrillness, or take the pup out altogether and replace with an A2P. I'll also see about taking the bridge Slash model out of my PRS SE Custom 24, which I hardly ever play. But it might be better in my specific circumstance to use a regular A2P.

I decided to hold off a few days because I want to play the guitar a little more before making any decisions,. particularly where it comes to the neck. So far I've liked the 59n. It's been brighter than I normally think of a neck pup, and that's a good thing. The neck tone is for sure there, but it has seemed to have more clarity to it, which I love. Primarily I play rhythm guitar, so to hear chords ring out and the arpeggiated notes has been awesome.

The bridge situation has to be remedied though. I have to roll way off the tone on it, and if I get past maybe a medium overdrive, I hate it. All I hear is shrill, bright and loud...no more musicality.

One last thing that I'm trying to do is make sure I get a unique tone from this guitar. I like to have all of my guitars bring a different voice to the table, so I'm being careful to keep a sound distinct from my Epi ES-175, which I love. That has Gibson 57 Classics and is just fantastic. The Dot needs to keep its own sonic space.

I'll post when I have this squared away (finally!). Thanks to you all for your thoughts, your knowledge has been very helpful and appreciated!
 
I'll do my best to compare the sounds...to me the 175 has a smooth, warm tone to it, very much in the traditional jazz range. When I push it, there is a dirty tone to it that I find inspiring. It seems to me to still be articulate and warm, no piercing highs at all. Probably a pretty good balance across the spectrum. To my ears, the tone is reminiscent of Stones Sticky Fingers/Exile On Main St, Black Crowes and solo Izzy Stradlin. Dirty, bluesy straightforward rock.

The Dot is more open sounding, brighter and edgier. Cleans are still very clean, but don't sound as warm. I assume that's a result of the maple body, and the highs and scooped mids of the pickups. I can still get good tones with the neck, the bridge is just teetering on shrill. For me, it loses its musicality. If pressed, I'd say the Dot is perhaps an edgier, rockier guitar, while the 175 has a smooth and warm sound that can get surprisingly dirty, but never harsh. Maybe the 175 pushed is early 70s Stones while the Dot can cover more rock like Aerosmith, AC/DC, etc. Neither one is really suited for metal.

My apologies if I'm not explaining this well. I've never been able to put into words technically what I'm hearing or seeing.
 
Ironically, the Dot was quite a bit warmer with its stock pickups. Not quite like the 175, but very different from what it is with the 59s. I think at the time, I was looking for something different because all of my guitars had A2 pups, and I thought the A5 in PAF family would be a different voice. I don't think I realized that the body was maple...most likely, I just assumed it was mahogany. It took a long time for me to realize the sound that I now have because I didn't consistently play the guitar, and because I didn't start playing guitar until I was 40 or 41 (52 now)...I was starting completely from the beginning and I imagine as my playing has improved over the years, my ears have too. So because I play and hear better now, sounds and tones I couldn't get before are now much more recognizable to me.
 
Those descriptions are pretty much what I thought they would be. I lean more towards jazzy rock, so I think the 175 would be better for me.
 
I was afraid you might say something like that! Any good medium pup that wouldn't be so bright, or it's just inevitable that I visit the rabbit hole?!
Did I already mention the UOA5? It would probably be Goldilocks in the bridge pickup. A little more mids, a little less top. Go roughcast if you want it even less bright.
I think that A2 would eliminate too much top end.
A4 could also be a contender because it would flatten the frequency response of the pickup. Which might be all it needs.

Sent from my SM-A115A using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Crap, more thinking! Actually, that's one of the things I'm going to talk to the tech about...magnet swap being on the table, swap the two bridges of my guitars, swap the sets of the two guitars, or just get an altogether new bridge pickup. Admittedly, I'd forgotten about the UOA5 and A4 being swap options though.

One element that's making this a little more difficult for me is the layered maple construction of this guitar. I've literally never played any other maple-bodied guitar, so I really have no frame of reference when it comes to how various bridge pickups might sound. I have two Strats with maple necks, but rosewood fretboard and alder body. I have a Warmoth Tele that is maple neck/fretboard and swamp ash body. And my Epi LP and PRS SE obviously have the maple cap over the mahogany body. But that's as close as I've gotten.

I found a tech who has decades of experience, so hopefully we'll get this thing figured out in short time...
 
One element that's making this a little more difficult for me is the layered maple construction of this guitar. I've literally never played any other maple-bodied guitar, so I really have no frame of reference when it comes to how various bridge pickups might sound. I have two Strats with maple necks, but rosewood fretboard and alder body. I have a Warmoth Tele that is maple neck/fretboard and swamp ash body. And my Epi LP and PRS SE obviously have the maple cap over the mahogany body. But that's as close as I've gotten.

That's why I've shared acoustic tone charts in the post 17. :-)

Regarding the materials of your guitar: me think the maple neck might be the worst offender in this case. Food for thought: https://www.frudua.com/neck_influenc...uitar_tone.htm

About materials in Epiphone guitars: there's theory and reality. My friend luthier and I have once analyzed the woods of an Epi LP Classic, built in the Samick plant and meant to be made of mahogany with a maple top. The body was actually made from 19 (!) chunks of sycamore (!), with a thin fotoflame veener (!). This LP had the same problem of brightness than your guitar and it has been solved with the cap trick (which is not very well known nor understood, BTW. I humbly think that's why Seymour has erased this advice from his FAQ and the reason why people rarely remember that Bill Lawrence was also correcting pickups with added capacitors).

The last semi hollow that I've "tuned" has been cured with new pickups hosting themselves new mags (A2 neck and short degaussedA5 bridge, kept after half a dozen of mag tests) + a new bridge whose saddles were made of a different alloy than the stock ones. IOW, the guitar has been improved by a correction of its electronics AND acoustic resonance. Lighter tuners were also tried but they dulled the harmonics so the stock tuners came back....

While I'm at it, I'd like to correct an error due to my old brain: in my previous posts above, I had absurdly in my mind the memory of an Epi Dot Studio, whose jack plug is more accessible than in a regular Dot... It defeats my statements about a low value cap on the output jack... but such a cap can actually be mounted anywhere between hot and ground: on the pickup switch, for instance, if not on the pickups themselves (been there, done that at least two times).

Sorry for this long rambling; it's meant to precise and contextualize my previous attempts to help. Let us know what your tech did. Good luck again! :-)
 
Last edited:
When I still had a Dot, I was finally content with A2Pro bridge and Jazz neck. Before that, I had '59 set (overly bright bridge and overly bassy neck) and also tried A2Pro neck (overly smooth).
 
A couple of things...

Freefrog, great info again, but I have no idea what you're talking about! ...hence, my impending visit to the guitar tech. I'll be showing him your posts, because if I try to explain what you wrote, he'll only be able to help a half hour later when he finishes rolling on the floor laughing!

The second thing, and this really illustrates how I will be very happy when I get this whole thing resolved...in one of my recent posts, I mentioned that I'd never played an all-maple body other than this Dot...well, I was quite wrong!

Turns out my ES-175 that I've referenced is also layered maple body construction! And I absolutely love that guitar! It has Gibson 57 Classics and makes for an amazing combo. They also came in my Epi LP 1960 Tribute. As great as they are, I won't put the Classics in the Dot, as I still want to make sure it has its own voice.

But it just goes to show, so many times when we think we're getting to the source of an issue, be ready for a new surprise. Could be as Aceman said earlier, that I just happened to get a guitar with ultra-bright maple.

Anyway, it'll probably be tomorrow that I visit the tech and we hopefully come up with a plan that works.
 
Turns out my ES-175 that I've referenced is also layered maple body construction!

That's why I've evoked the maple neck as being potentially the main responsible of brightness in your Dot... :-)

An ES175 potentially hosts a mahogany neck. Its body is made of laminated maple but there's another wood in between (spruce or poplar... and sometimes, a few bits of mahogany used to make the back or sides of the body)... As a fully hollow guitar, it doesn't have the center block of 335 style axes so it has a narrower acoustic response, with more mids... As a Gibson, it features a thin nitro finish, not a thick poly varnish... And most other parts are made of different materials and construction as well.

Anyway and even if we compare an all maple Epi to an all maple Gibson (like the L6)... there's maple and maple. Soft or hard. Dried naturally or in an oven...

The tonal consequences of these variations were meant to be illustrated in my post 17: Gibson's are typically mid centric and harmonically rich. Epi's have less harmonic richness but are typically brighter.

I hope this answer doesn't sound pedantic. I'm just trying to say that a same name of wood doesn't necessarily covers the same physical reality.

I'll read with interest what you tech will have done and/or said.
 
You don't sound at all pedantic, Freefrog. It just turns out that there are even more layers affecting tone than I ever realized. I was always aware that there was simply no way the wood used for Epis could possibly be of equal quality to that used for Gibson. There's a reason for the price difference. Someone who is willing to pay $2-3,000 surely gets a better grade of wood than the one that costs $5-700.

I just don't think I've ever experienced such a drastic effect, and who knows, maybe it's just a particular mix in this instance. I'm looking forward to seeing the tech and having him play the guitar a bit himself, to see what kind of plan makes sense. Honestly, so many different opinions in this thread have actually sounded like the answer, so I'll be very curious to learn what it is.

I'm going to try to find out what the neck is on my two guitars, as that of course could be in play here. Or the maple used on this guitar just happens to be bright, even by maple standards. Or who knows what else?!
 
So I saw the tech today, and the first thing he said was that the Dot, being semi-hollow and maple body, would be bright! We talked about various options, and everything that has been suggested on the forum would definitely work, providing that I like the tone of the pups. I'm glad that I took a few extra days to play the guitar some more and experience the pickups, because it helped me realize that the 59s are just not for me, in this guitar.

As has been noted by others, I started to realize the neck had more bass than I wanted, especially on the A and low E strings. I noticed this even playing on the 12th fret and higher. And there is no way I'd ever be satisfied with the bridge, I think I need mids to have more of a presence than they do in this case. So we reached a conclusion for a starting point...

The Slash signature pups are coming out of my PRS SE Custom 24, and into the Dot, and the 59s vice versa. I suspect the 59s, for me anyway, will be more suited to the PRS. And I know the Slash set is very similar to the A2P, some more mids and a little more output. So we'll start there.

As mentioned earlier, I have an Epi ES-175 with Gibson 57 Classics that I love, and the same pups came in my Epi Les Paul 1960 Tribute. So if the Slash set doesn't quite make it in the Dot, I may do the swap with the LP. I'm sure the Slash pups would be great in the LP, and there's a good chance I'll like the Gibson's in the Dot. I just don't want it to end up with too similar a voice to the ES-175.

So that's where we stand now... should have the guitars back in a week or so. If all goes well, the PRS may go up for sale...I just never play it. If anyone has any thoughts on all of this, please say so!
 
So here's the final update, just got my guitars back today...

I went and took a shot at swapping before buying new pickups. Here's my Before list
Epiphone Les Paul 1960 Tribute - Gibson 57 Classics
Epiphone Dot - SD 59 Blues set
PRS SE Custom 24 - SD Slash signature

It was the Dot that was the big issue with an overly bright bridge pickup. To recap, I also have an Epi ES-175 that came with Gibson 57s, and I love that. That led me to the following rotation...

Les Paul now has Slash pups
PRS now has 59 Blues
Dot now has 57 Classics

I have to say, to my tin ears, I'm thrilled! The Dot is giving me a warmer tone, but still with brightness and grit, which is exactly what I wanted. I had been considering selling the PRS (still might), as I've never really bonded with it and hardly play it. Strange, because it's incredibly comfortable. Anyway, the 59s sound damn good in it, and I actually like them in that guitar much more than I did the Slash set.

Looks like things are set moving forward, and I'm quite pleased so far with the changes!
 
Back
Top