Why no 'dimarzio' love?

[orpheo]

Hi guys,

for some years now, I only use seymour duncan pickups in my guitars. Sometimes a little detour, though; wizard, bareknuckle, tonefordays... but 90% of the pickups I use are duncans. I don't use dimarzio's, cause they have a negative association, to me anyway. I associate dimarzio's with a bit nasal in the mids, smooth in the highs and mushy in the lows, and more importantly: flat, dull, unresponsive, and not as dynamically rich as duncans.

It seems that many people find that about dimarzio's (and ofcourse just as many find duncan's thin and screechy). but where does that idea come from?!

I'm asking, because I'm thinking of mixing the x2n and superdistortion together in 1 hybrid pickup (maybe even the super2 for more highs, though I'm not completely sure). I don't want to buy pickups that sound flat and dull. If I wanna do that, I'd rather buy a set of GFS (for instance, not that there's a bad thing about GFS pickups, but I place GFS in the same league as dimarzio).

 

[uOpt]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I boycott them because they abuse the US intellectual property system.

Apart from that I also had one too many incidents like creme color that is way green, unshielded wires (on noiseless pickups, sure). Their pickup rings come with no screws where Gibson's are cheaper and come with them. It's not a big deal but getting ahold of the right color long and short screws can be a pain. And you can't use Gibson's screws in the bridge position. Not a big deal, big annoyance. Most of the time I walk away unsatisfied when I mess with one of their products.

The sound I associate with their humbucker is generally a low-mids push that can be useful to drive an amp but makes it harder to make a good guitar sound really alive.

 

[Funkfingers]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I'm a tone hoe so I'll use anything that sounds right for the track.

DiMarzio started out building a pickup designed to drive a non-Master Volume EL34-powered amplifier. He has stayed true to this basic approach ever since. (Hence, the low mid thing mentioned by uOpt.)

Seymour Duncan always struck me as coming from the "Fender" end of the spectrum. The tonal emphasis is in a difference place. As a 6L6-driven amplifier user, my natural bias is more towards Duncan than DiMarzio. I have pickups of both brands but Duncans outnumber DiMarzios six to one.

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I use the VPAF N pickup and the Fred...Love em both..I also use Fralin and Fender CS stuff...

 

[JeffB]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

Just like any pup manufacturer, some of them are awesome, some of them I don't like at all. I like the more raw aggressive nature of DiMarzios at times- the SuperD being my one and only Distortion pup that I love. Some of his discontinued PAF types were very nice as well- the PAF Classic, the original DP103, etc.But alot of them are definitely too nasal, hi-fi/modern, overly aggressive and compressed in the high end. His singles especially.

At the same time I find many of the Duncans production models too polite, lack complexity, and have a sickly sweet top end which I don't care for. Hence my love for the PG by far as it''s the most complex and richest bucker in the line that has some bite and grit in the highs. The Seths are the runner up. In a alder strat for heavier music I love the JB, but's that's the only guitar type in general I like it in. I also like the quarter pounders for strat/tele. In general I don't like the true single coil Duncan strat pups.

Because I became pretty unhappy with the Gibson, DiMarzio and Duncan production pups I started to branch out to some other pup makers, famous and not so famous, and these "non production" hand/custom wound pups are much more complex, full, and alive under the fingers..just more toneful overall. They remind me more of the 3 dimensional vintage pups I've played in old strats , les pauls, and SGs moreso than Gibson, DiMarzio or Duncan stuff.

That said, I still love the PGs, and Seths. In the right guitar I'd have no problem rocking those.

 

[idsnowdog]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

Hi guys,

for some years now, I only use seymour duncan pickups in my guitars. Sometimes a little detour, though; wizard, bareknuckle, tonefordays... but 90% of the pickups I use are duncans. I don't use dimarzio's, cause they have a negative association, to me anyway. I associate dimarzio's with a bit nasal in the mids, smooth in the highs and mushy in the lows, and more importantly: flat, dull, unresponsive, and not as dynamically rich as duncans.

It seems that many people find that about dimarzio's (and ofcourse just as many find duncan's thin and screechy). but where does that idea come from?!

I'm asking, because I'm thinking of mixing the x2n and superdistortion together in 1 hybrid pickup (maybe even the super2 for more highs, though I'm not completely sure). I don't want to buy pickups that sound flat and dull. If I wanna do that, I'd rather buy a set of GFS (for instance, not that there's a bad thing about GFS pickups, but I place GFS in the same league as dimarzio).

When you consider there are 2 or 3 people at each company that design pickups their combined preferences become a design philosophy, whether formally articulated or not. However not all Dimarzio/Duncans sound the same.

This forum doesn't exist solely to promote duncans and badmouth Dimarzio pickups. There are plenty of users here who are enthusiastic about and use both.

I think you're making some gross generalities about both Duncan/Dimarzio pickups and assuming that everyone else shares those opinions. If you do run across someone who says all pickups by either manufacturer are good/bad you can bet that they have little practical experience with either.

 

[aleclee]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

Maybe there are some biases present on this board. Check the logo in the upper left corner of this page. I love the Dimarzios in my EBMM guitars and I love the SD Custom Shop pickups in my Driskill. Good pickups are good, regardless of the logo on the box.

Some people object to DMZ's business practices and I totally get that. There are some manufacturers whose stuff I refuse to own (e.g., Fulltone) based on my opinion of their operation. Even so, I don't necessarily expect others to share those opinions let alone shun the products.

 

[TheLivingDead]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

Unresponsive, eh? That gave me a good laugh.

I dig DiMarzios quite a bit. They work perfectly for what I do. Haven't found a Duncan that I truly bonded with... Looking to change that eventually.

 

[Jessie's ghost]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I think you're making some gross generalities about both Duncan/Dimarzio pickups and assuming that everyone else shares those opinions. If you do run across someone who says all pickups by either manufacturer are good/bad you can bet that they have little practical experience with either.

 

[Jessie's ghost]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I've become quite the Seymour Duncan fanboi in the last few years, but I still appreciate a good DiMarzio when I play one. I love the Breed set, and the Evolutions are awesome in the right guitar. I know Yngwie is with Seymour now, but that doesn't mean I don't still love my HS-3's and YJM's. Then there's the True Velvet, Fred, the OEM Peavey Wolfgang set… Basically, I've never spend much time with a DiMarzio pickup that I didn't think was a quality product and useful for some intersection of guitar and playing style.

 

[Gplayerzzz]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I like Dimarzios. I've used a lot of their models. Used the EVO and X2N for years.

 

[Ed Hunter]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

NO dimario love? think you need to use the search funtion here!:14:

 

[Aceman]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

Two of the things I admire most about this board are
a) The participants willingness to give props to whatever gets the tone - including DiMarzio. Most here have used them and many currently have them.

b) Even more impressive - the proprietor's not giving a flip dang about what you give props to.

I think many have issues with DiMarzio's business practices (search "patent"). I also think we are all or most here because regardless of what we have in the stable, we do prefer Duncan's.

as I have said - both Seymour and Larry have awesome skills and great ears for tone. But they have a general difference. Seymour runs to the mid/treble side of things, Larry to the Bass/Mid end of the spectrum. And that is a GROSS generalization. Both have full lines of anything you could want.

My ears, they hear what Seymour hears. His pickups speak to me.

 

[marvelous_seven]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I love so many SD artists' tones,but I also like recent Paul Gilbert and John 5 tones so much that I wanna try their pickups if I had many guitars.
So I guess it depends on the individuals,not by a random fanatical generalization spread on the internet badmouthing every side of fences.

 

[Ed Hunter]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

One of the great things about dimarzio is that they have their own signature tone. So if you have tried many duncans and cant settle on any the dimarzio line may have something you do like.
I really hate the duncan's rule and dimarzio's suck talk, even though it's true! LOL! just kiddin!
I like dimarzio's just fine.

 

[FuseG4]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I liked the D-Activator when I had one. Bright, but clear, and the pickup did "feel" hotter than the specs would suggest.
I also don't like the whole "TM the double-cream" thing. That's BS. That'd be like Ford trademarking the color black for automobiles.

 

[loudriver23]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I've never used a Dimarzio pickup. I have replaced the pickups in all my guitars, and I have yet to find an application where Duncan hasn't deliver. I would never bad mouth a company I have no experience in.
To state the obvious, tone is very subjective, and what works for me might not work for someone else.
Use what works for you. Use your ears, and take very little away from the flaming that happens on internet forums.

 

[Seraphial]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I'll raise my hand and say I've never tried a Dimarzio, even in stock guitars. A few years ago I wanted to give them a try but settled on SDs, then branched out into other brands like Rumpelstiltskins and Kinmans.

Why? I realised years ago that my favourite artists used SDs - Slash, Mike Einziger, Adam Jones, David Gilmour, etc. And as my love for tone developed, I realised very few Dimarzio endorsers actually had tone I wanted. The only guy I can actually think of that really blows me away right now is Andy Timmons. I've found that the Satch/Gilbert/Petrucci/Vai tones weren't something I was after. They always sounded way too processed, not organic, just not raw enough.

I'm sure if I went through them all I'd find fantastic pickups in their range - but hey, happy with SDs as the benchmark.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

It was my intention to make some generalisations, in order to get the opinions flowing and to see where some idea's come from, regarding either brand. I think I'l refrain from posting my idea's and read other people's experiences

 

[Ed Hunter]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

It was my intention to make some generalisations, in order to get the opinions flowing and to see where some idea's come from, regarding either brand. I think I'l refrain from posting my idea's and read other people's experiences

If it helps you any i have read about many that claim they have to use dimarzio's because their particular guitar is thin sounding and they said the duncans did not fill the tone enough? Now this is NOT my opinion or experience but i guess with the basswood body/locking trem/the way ibanez mounts the neck at the joint and the ultra thin necks that some of those ibanez's have it is possible. Ibanez guitars are not very strong acoustically compared to other similar guitars like a Charvel strat which rings like a MF'er unplugged:naughty: anyway these guys swear by dimarzio as i do duncans for my guitars. Dimarzio do have a lot of models that are big in the the bass and low mids and are aimed at trem equipped guitars.