Why no 'dimarzio' love?

[StrangeSound]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

Your thread made me checking the DiMarzio page out

Well, in my opinion and experience: DiMarzio pups lack quality. The wires seem to get loose if you don't pay super attention. SD are more sturdy and sound more open to me. Even my Ibanez RG doesn't sound generic anymore..I love it. I used to be a shred fan and had an Air Norton and a Breed in my RG. It was ok but too dark sounding and compressed.

But, I'd really like to try Kinman, Suhr, Häussel pup out but I'm totally fine with what I've got now.

 

[JohnnyGuitarCA]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

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

Not this whiny crap again... :flush:

 

[zanshelby03]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I can see where this is coming from I have used both DMZ's and SD's and have loved both of them but have never truely been compleatly satisfied. I am always looking forword to the best tone and that always depends on all the variables involved. Wood tone , effects , amp , speakers , heck even the type of cord used to conect your gear. Love the tone of my DMZ steve speacial in my Ibanez rg321 mh but wish it had a bigger voice. I love the tone of my SD sh6 in my Jackson Rhoads but wish it was a little boomier (bottom heavy). It really seems to be the sum of the parts that make up the best whole tone. When looking for a replacement for the stock pickups in my new Ibanez art 100 I was at a lose, DMZ's seemed to be lacking a combination of bottom end along with the power and SD seemed to be lacking that mid scoupe I needed combined with the bigger voice/power. That's why there are some many choices, aint life grand?

 

[Jessie's ghost]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

There is nothing in life that cannot be said simply by showing this picture. It encompasses the full scope of interpersonal communication. It is infinite and universal. Simply put, this picture says everything that could ever need to be said about anything.

Thank you.

 

[appar111]

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.

They don't abuse it, they use it how it's set up to be used. Everyone gripes about that and acts like its Dimarzio that's at fault-- the beef should be with the darned loophole in the intellectual property system.

carry on.

 

[appar111]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I love Dimarzio, and I love doughnuts. If offered a Dimarzio or a doughnut I would probably take the doughnut...but the choice would be quite difficult.

The big question--- what kind of doughnut? :scratchch

 

[Archer_of_Fish]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

The big question--- what kind of doughnut? :scratchch

Double chocolate

 

[muttznmongrelz]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I like their pickups and have them in a few guitar...Virtual/Pro '54, SDS-1, PAF Pro, Super Distortion, Tone Zone...also have a couple w/Duncans and a couple w/Gibsons, one w/Rio Grandes...spread the love man...

 

[uOpt]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

They don't abuse it, they use it how it's set up to be used. Everyone gripes about that and acts like its Dimarzio that's at fault-- the beef should be with the darned loophole in the intellectual property system.

It isn't that easy. Laws aren't perfect and they are hard to change and not all changes come out as intended and you start the cycle again.

People like DiMarzio make it harder for everybody else, because them gaming the system is what is driving up the cost of fighting ridiculous patents and trademarks.

You see at least the patent office threw out a couple of those ridiculous patents Oracle brought forward about Java in their lawsuit against a well know internet company, just a few days ago. So there is some sanity. But the volume of abuse and the fact that few people there are sane means that low-profile cases like guitar pickup related items never get a good re-evaluation.

And Dimarzio is the one who took the active step here, everybody else was just peacefully building pickups.

 

[Despair]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

They don't abuse it, they use it how it's set up to be used. Everyone gripes about that and acts like its Dimarzio that's at fault-- the beef should be with the darned loophole in the intellectual property system.

carry on.

Lying to lock competitors out of the market is NOT how it's intended to be used. But it's MUCH too expensive for the competitors to fight.

 

[appar111]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

It isn't that easy. Laws aren't perfect and they are hard to change and not all changes come out as intended and you start the cycle again.

People like DiMarzio make it harder for everybody else, because them gaming the system is what is driving up the cost of fighting ridiculous patents and trademarks.

You see at least the patent office threw out a couple of those ridiculous patents Oracle brought forward about Java in their lawsuit against a well know internet company, just a few days ago. So there is some sanity. But the volume of abuse and the fact that few people there are sane means that low-profile cases like guitar pickup related items never get a good re-evaluation.

And Dimarzio is the one who took the active step here, everybody else was just peacefully building pickups.

Yeah, Dimarzio's not the only one who's noticed the whole loophole, but they're certainly not helping things either.

I wonder how many sales they actually avoided losing to other pickup companies by enforcing the double cream patent? I mean, I think double cream looks pretty cool on some guitars, but is it really worth starting a friggin' patent over?

Still, I loves me some Dimarzio PAFs and Super Distortions...

 

[appar111]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

Lying to lock competitors out of the market is NOT how it's intended to be used. But it's MUCH too expensive for the competitors to fight.

Lying?

 

[uOpt]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I wonder how many sales they actually avoided losing to other pickup companies by enforcing the double cream patent? I mean, I think double cream looks pretty cool on some guitars, but is it really worth starting a friggin' patent over?

If the sales would be really low they wouldn't have bothered. Larry Dimarzio doesn't show up in court with a donut and a ballpen. They partner with the same law firm for many years, and that costs a lot of money. They are defending this stupid trademark by spending real cash.

Cash that you people who buy his products provide. It's used to attack those who e.g. provide this forum.

That's why I might have some Dimarzios that came in guitars I bought and I even pass through a bunch of used Dimarzios to see what they are like, but I won't become part of that circus.

 

[Archer_of_Fish]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

If Gibson or Fender wanted to contest this and TRULY press the matter they could easily. Dimarzio's cash flow vs FMIC or Gibson is teeny.

 

[zanshelby03]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

I know just learn to build your own then stack and wind them however the hell you want! I think I would love to be a luthier!

 

[Edgecrusher]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

If Gibson or Fender wanted to contest this and TRULY press the matter they could easily. Dimarzio's cash flow vs FMIC or Gibson is teeny.

Actually not so much. Being they have gone this long and not contested it this sets a legal precedent which would tip the scales in Dimarzios favor. One of the ugly truths about trademarks and such is that if you dont defend them in court the courts basically assume that you have abandoned them. Not defending Dimarzios actions but things are nearly as simple as people would like them to be.

Theres been more than 1 inventor who has gone broke defending their patents.

 

[IanBallard]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

Lying to lock competitors out of the market is NOT how it's intended to be used. But it's MUCH too expensive for the competitors to fight.

And yet, Seymour Duncan is doing just fine. I don't know who is technically more profitable, what the stock prices are or whatever, but Duncan's simple, mostly vintage spec, symmetric winds seem to do just fine against DiMarzio's "super high-tech aired, dual-resonance la-de-da modern" stuff.

Honestly, I like lots of DiMarzio pickups but I tend to think artists who use them don't sound even half as good tone-wise as Duncan artists. DiMarzio has some Heavyweights for sure in the technique dept., but there's something creamy delicious about Duncan tones, as opposed to the modern sterility of the DiMarzio dudes.

 

[IanBallard]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

If Gibson or Fender wanted to contest this and TRULY press the matter they could easily. Dimarzio's cash flow vs FMIC or Gibson is teeny.

It's not fair to compare the whole companies as they are. Gibson and Fender are GUITAR COMPANIES. If you whittle down the profits of Gibson and Fender's retail pickup sales combined, they wouldn't hold a candle to DiMarzio or Duncan I will presume quite confidently (with no numbers to back this up). EVH went to Duncan (and maybe DiMarzio I don't know) for his new Wolfgang pickups BEFORE settling on in-house stuff at Fender. Why? Because his Frankie and Kramer were both powered by Duncan and the reputation is there. Jeff Beck's #1 does NOT have Fender pups in them... they have Fralins (and it's a basswood body, not alder like the "signature model" has).

Let's be realistic about comparisons.

 

[IanBallard]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

Super Distortion. just wish it cleaned up better.

I didn't really have a problem with the clean tones so much as the tone was one-dimensional. It lacked that "3D" complexity I've experienced with a '59, Custom Custom and now my hybrid. Although, I'm going to experiment with A2's and A5's in my Super D and see if it gives the tone more character.

 

[Despair]

Re: Why no 'dimarzio' love?

And yet, Seymour Duncan is doing just fine. I don't know who is technically more profitable, what the stock prices are or whatever, but Duncan's simple, mostly vintage spec, symmetric winds seem to do just fine against DiMarzio's "super high-tech aired, dual-resonance la-de-da modern" stuff.

Unless the customer wants a creme humbucker, then they have one choice in the US. Some have recently reported Seymour Duncan (and other manufacturers) now refusing to even ship creme under a cover.

It's about taking choices away, and abuse. Chilling effects. Not just money, though there is impact there.

Also, DiMarzio is making more vintage and symmetrical wind models now that the Dual Resonance patent has expired. But trademarks/design patents don't expire...