| Want to install B-Band [7] |
|---|
From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@xxxomega...>
Subject: Re: Want to install B-Band
Date: 27 Jan 1999 13:21:54 +0200
Organization: Tampere Univ. of Technology
"Ray Polakovic" <<rayp@accessone...>> writes:
> I want one of these things, too, and I'm having the same problem.
> Every dealer I goes to says: "wow, what a great idea! But I've
> never heard of it." I'm hoping next week's NAMM takes care of the
> ignorance. I'm still concerned about installation. From prior
> posts, I gather that there's a little trick to installing these
> things. Any ideas where I could get this thing installed in the NW?
> I have a Larrivee C-10 Koa.
B-Band installs just like an ordinary piezo transducer. About 90 %
of the rewievs in this NG say that the process was quick and easy -
easier than most piezos.
Some individual bridges do seem to be giving B-Band a hard time
though. This type of electret condenser film transducer is capable of
much greater accuracy than the piezo crystal equivalent. Hence the
nice sound. Unfortunately, the great sensitivity also makes this
element somewhat more prone to trouble. Every now and then you really
have got to work to get it right, as it can be extremely difficult to
pinpoint the source.
Fortunately this does not happen terribly often. Any experienced
luthier / repairsperson with good ears can do it, and if trouble
comes, you just keep tweaking it until you get it right. Wooden and
metal shims can be useful, as well as tiny pieces of Post-It notes -
whatever that works.
Tom Loredo, Larry Pattis and I have posted pretty thorough articles on
this over the last year or so. A dejanews power search should find
them all.
GFTT (uwp)
Ville# Ville.Nummela"at"iki.fi ("at"=@) http://www.iki.fi/vnummela/
# Note: To reduce spam, my return address has been modified.
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
# MAKE MONEY FAST (Hall of Humiliation): http://ga.to/mmf/
From: John Z <ccm_touchesNOSPAM@hotmail...>
Subject: Re: Want to install B-Band
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 14:19:13 GMT
Organization: Ohio University C.S. Dept, Athens
I think the key to successful B-Band installation is ensuring that the
bottom of the saddle is perfectly flat. It also follows that the
bottom of the saddle slot should be perfectly flat. Also that the
saddle sits on the electret element firmly i.e. a perfect sandwich
(this can be a problem with a wiggly saddle fit - easily remedied by
proper settling) If you achieve this, you will not even need to use
shims to get good balance. I think the fact that the B-Band is so thin
and stiff is why this is important, not it's sensitivity (though
B-Bands are wonderfully sensitive).
Taking care in preparing the saddle ensures an easy, quick and great
sounding B-Band installation.
Regards ,
John
PS. Hey Ville - you used an acronym I'm not familiar with. What is
GFTT (uwp) ...
just curious I got the "go for the tone" partt ........ what's (uwp)?
On 27 Jan 1999 13:21:54 +0200, Ville Nummela
<<vnummela@xxxomega...>> wrote:
>"Ray Polakovic" <<rayp@accessone...>> writes:
>
>> I want one of these things, too, and I'm having the same problem.
>> Every dealer I goes to says: "wow, what a great idea! But I've
>> never heard of it." I'm hoping next week's NAMM takes care of the
>> ignorance. I'm still concerned about installation. From prior
>> posts, I gather that there's a little trick to installing these
>> things. Any ideas where I could get this thing installed in the NW?
>> I have a Larrivee C-10 Koa.
>
>B-Band installs just like an ordinary piezo transducer. About 90 %
>of the rewievs in this NG say that the process was quick and easy -
>easier than most piezos.
>
>Some individual bridges do seem to be giving B-Band a hard time
>though. This type of electret condenser film transducer is capable of
>much greater accuracy than the piezo crystal equivalent. Hence the
>nice sound. Unfortunately, the great sensitivity also makes this
>element somewhat more prone to trouble. Every now and then you really
>have got to work to get it right, as it can be extremely difficult to
>pinpoint the source.
>
>Fortunately this does not happen terribly often. Any experienced
>luthier / repairsperson with good ears can do it, and if trouble
>comes, you just keep tweaking it until you get it right. Wooden and
>metal shims can be useful, as well as tiny pieces of Post-It notes -
>whatever that works.
>
>Tom Loredo, Larry Pattis and I have posted pretty thorough articles on
>this over the last year or so. A dejanews power search should find
>them all.
>
>GFTT (uwp)
>
> Ville
>
># Ville.Nummela"at"iki.fi ("at"=@) http://www.iki.fi/vnummela/
># Note: To reduce spam, my return address has been modified.
># Tampere University of Technology, Finland. All opinions are mine.
># MAKE MONEY FAST (Hall of Humiliation): http://ga.to/mmf/
From: Jay Adair <oja@flash...>
Subject: Re: Want to install B-Band
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 19:24:59 GMT
Organization: FlashNet Communications, http://www.flash.net
>Taking care in preparing the saddle ensures an easy, quick and great
>sounding B-Band installation.
>
Well, almost easy & quick. First B-Band installed in a Breedlove Ed Gerhard
and went very smoothly, with no "tweaking" needed. Good sound & good
balance across all strings. String volume uniform and pleasant.
Second B-Band installed in a Goodall standard, and I am still working to get
the strings balanced. Yes, the saddle is flatter than Dick's hatband, and
the slot is flat as well, but for some reason the high E-string is barely
audible and the D-string can be heard in remote parts of Brazil when the
wind is right.
But when it gets adjusted just "right" it is very nice......noticeably
better than my Fishman undersaddle pickups.
Jay
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: Want to install B-Band
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 18:15:49 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <fKJr2.8966$t%.<780@news...>>, "Jay Adair" <<oja@flash...>>
wrote:
> >Taking care in preparing the saddle ensures an easy, quick and great
> >sounding B-Band installation.
> >
> Well, almost easy & quick. First B-Band installed in a Breedlove Ed Gerhard
> and went very smoothly, with no "tweaking" needed. Good sound & good
> balance across all strings. String volume uniform and pleasant.
>
> Second B-Band installed in a Goodall standard, and I am still working to get
> the strings balanced. Yes, the saddle is flatter than Dick's hatband, and
> the slot is flat as well, but for some reason the high E-string is barely
> audible and the D-string can be heard in remote parts of Brazil when the
> wind is right.
>
> But when it gets adjusted just "right" it is very nice......noticeably
> better than my Fishman undersaddle pickups.
>
> Jay
Jay,
I'll bet, believe it or not, that both the D and E string need shims. When
the high E string is quiet, it generally needs extra pressure to increase
the pick-up's sensitivity. When another string (especially Low E, A, or D)
is loud, added pressure somehow reduces the flow of "signal". Ville could
explain the technical side of this, I am hoping the practical answer is
helpful.
Also, if you add shims I recommend the sticky part of post-it notes, added
right to the TOP of the B-band element. And DON'T be shy, add a couple of
thicknesses at once to see if any change occurs.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: <ccm_touchesNOSPAM@hotmail...> (John Z)
Subject: Put a B-Band in my 12 string - results
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 14:43:57 GMT
Organization: Ohio University C.S. Dept, Athens
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic
Hi folks,
I just installed a B-Band in my Sigma rosewood 12 string (the one I
picked up a while back for a song), and it sounds great.
This time, I did not have to do any adjustment or fiddling to get a
good balance of volume between the strings. I did make sure that the
bottom of the saddle (I had fashoined a bone saddle for it) was nice
and flat, and I suppose the bottom of the saddle slot was pretty flat,
because I didn't do any touch-up routing.
Well, I got the thing finished at about 10:30 last night, and plugged
in to my son's Crate amp to test it (my kids have the amps, Dad can't
afford his own <grin>) and that guitar just sang so nicely. I have to
say that the B-Band is quite an amazing little creature.. I don't know
how it gives such a natural sound without a mike in tandem.
Thought I'd share this nice experience.
Can't wait to try it with the P.A. at church!
John Zyla
From: Al Carruth <alcarruth@aol...>
Subject: Re: Want to install B-Band
Date: 1 Feb 1999 21:21:43 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
I once had some problems with another piezo instalation where the high and low
Es dropped out. Everything checked out flat when the strings were off, but they
simply wouldn't sound. We finally noticed that the piezo worked fine when the
strings were slack, but not when they were tight. There was enough disotrtion
inthe top from the stringtension to bow up themiddleof the bridge, and
eliminate the pressure on the outside strings. The saddle had to be slotted to
make it work.
I just pu ta B-band in a guitar I'm making for Chuck Brodsky, and it seems to
work fine. There's enough meat in the bridge on this one, I guess....
Alan Carruth / Luthier
From: Slcss98808 <slcss98808@aol...>
Subject: Re: Want to install B-Band
Date: 2 Feb 1999 12:52:43 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Youch! Hearing you talking about gluing the pickup in makes me a little
scared. I had much trouble with the b band on my Taylor. Opposite problem to
you - my low strings were quiet and the treble guys were loud. We fixed it by
sanding the bottom of the saddle at an angle. Turns out it was leaning over
(away from the bridge) and by matching the lean on the bottom, we had it
sitting nice and straight. This solved the problem perfectly.
I don't know if this helps...
Steve
Work like you don't need money, Love like you've never been
hurt, And dance like no one's watching
From: John Z <ccm_touchesNOSPAM@hotmail...>
Subject: Re: Want to install B-Band
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 13:45:54 GMT
Organization: Ohio University C.S. Dept, Athens
On Tue, 02 Feb 1999 01:14:02 GMT, "Jay Adair" <<oja@flash...>> wrote:
<snip>
>John,
>
>Everything about the guitar's set-up was as perfect as my eyes and ears were
>able to discern prior to the B-Band installation. No loud or muted strings,
>saddle snug in the slot, no string buzz, sustain as long as a Baptist
>preacher's sermon, etc. I have wondered if glueing the B-Band to the bottom
>of the slot would eliminate some of the possible variances in string volume
>adjustments. Hopefully, that would create a "solid" base from which to
>work, shimming between the pickup and saddle as needed, assuming no dead-air
>space under the pickup. but if things went awry with the glueing....OUCH.
>
>I have just changed strings (Elixr's light tops / medium bottoms) from a
>freebie set of John Pearse Lights and things are a bit better - string
>volume a little closer to uniform, but the high-E is still too quiet and the
>D-string still a bit too boisterous. But since I don't plug in real often,
>I'm kinda putting off re-working the shims until a rainy day. This Goodall
>sounds so sweet by itself, unless I really need to annoy my wife in the
>other room, I tend to skip the amp most days. Especially with Valentine's
>Day coming up......
>
>Jay
>
Jay,
Alan Carruth recounted an experience earlier in this thread that shed
some light on why under-saddle pickups may have balancing problems,
even with the saddle and slot are flat as can be. I also have a
suggestion, a method I used in the b-band installation on my six
string. I Modified my saddle so it was similar (although not exactly)
to a Fishman cleartone saddle. I use only bone for my saddles, and I
was having problems with balancing the thing. Since I have an aversion
to using shims (don't ask me why, I'm just weird about that) I decided
to try modifying the saddle with a triangular file, cutting a medium
to deep inverted "v" shape in the bottom of the saddle, in the space
between where the strings lie on top. Depth about 2-3 mm for my
saddle. This did promptly solve the balance problems I had. Now, in
an attempt to explain "why" this works, absent an analysis with
sophisticated instrumentation that I don't have, I hypothesize that by
cutting the inverted "V" slots on the bottom, I am allowing the string
tension on the top of the saddle to "flex" the saddle ever so slightly
along it's long axis, in essence performing the same function that
shims do. This made more sense to me after I read the post by Alan
Carruth. I think I'll experiment with another saddle blank, and
instead of cutting inverted "v"'s, just cut 2'3 mm slots with a nice
sharp flush cutting saw I got for christmas. I think the results might
be better. I enjoy experimenting, and am inclined to try stuff like
this when I change strings - bone saddle blanks are cheap,
compensating doesn't take too long ......
Anyone else have thoughts on this?
Regards,
John Zyla
| Bob's B-band, Baggs, Trance Dilemna |
|---|
From: Slcss98808 <slcss98808@aol...>
Subject: Bob's B-band, Baggs, Trance Dilemna
Date: 3 Feb 1999 23:47:53 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Hi Bob,
I replied to your email, then my win98 crashed and rather than retrieve old
messages, I figured it would be easier to just start again.
I was in your boat a couple of months ago and managed to come up with the best
of both worlds.
Larry is partially correct in that the Baggs standardly mixes both signals and
comes out mono, but he may not realize that since summer of 98, Baggs has made
their dual source with a stereo option that will send out two separate signals
through a stereo cord. So it is a little more flexible than people realize.
B-band has made a few (and is apparently going to produce) PR systems which are
"Pick up replacement systems." It is basically a b band with a little preamp
that boosts the signal so it can be run through other companies' (such as
Baggs) preamp and blending systems. I tracked one down with the help of Tom
Loredo and bought it privately off Rocky Jones. I'm not sure if he has
another. If he doesn't, email B-Band (EMF) and they'll build you one! Very
helpful guys.
So anyway, I ended up with the Baggs blending dual source unit with the B band
saddle pu. Beware though, as Larry said, B band cannot plug straight into any
other preamp so you'll need the PR system from them.
I agree that the Baggs mic is limited - it does the job for me for now and when
I'm rich and famous, I'll upgrade to a Mills, switch the ole Baggs over to
stereo and run it all through a Rane AP13!!!!
Anyway, I love the convenience of the baggs on board remote and it is pretty
much non invasive (would probably leave glue stains....) but the B band is
defintely a finer sounding saddle system than the Baggs. I checked it against
my friend's Baggs system and also two local guitar techs both commented on the
sound. Very warm and natural.
As for installation, the PR system simply needs to be soldered into a little
plug and into the battery terminal. It comes with specific instructions.
best wishes
Steve
| B-Band vs Baggs vs Trace |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-Band vs Baggs vs Trace
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 17:00:46 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <bq%t2.197$<mw1.1356@news...>>, "Mark Gottlieb"
<<sales@clairebell...>> wrote:
> If you purchase the B-Band mike combo all you the need is a pocket blender
> (Fishman) which you can mount on a mike stand. You can easily reach this
> during a song and you have not cut any holes in you guitar. Plus you have
> all the tone controls and gain controls and notch filter, etc...
>
> Mark Gottlieb
>
> Bob Lusk wrote in message <<19990203113442.26745.00000161@ng-fq1...>>...
> >>The Baggs mic is mounted in a block of foam and once mounted cannot be
> easily
> >repositioned or removed.
> >How is the B-Band mounted?
> >>If you want controls on or in your guitar you will have to give up
> something
> >for this "convenience".
> >Actually for some of the playing I do it is a necessity!
> >
> >Larry - Thanks for the feedback - Bob
> >
Yes, the very convenient Pocket Blender is what I currently use, although
EMF Acoustics did announce at the NAMM show their version of a dual-channel
pre-amp. It will have lots of interesting features that I won't go into
here, because they announced it for a May release. More later.....
The Pocket Blender (or EMF's new unit) is something that does not come as
cheaply as, say, the Baggs internal unit, and therefore will not be
everyone's cup of tea. I understand this. What I will say, is that I
believe the B-band (and it's pre-amp, the Core) is so good that I think it
is easily the equal to the Baggs dual source. Yes, even without the mic,
the B-band is that good.....
Additionally, one CAN use a B-band/mic set-up directly into two channels of
a mixing board.
If, as Bob has stated, one absolutely needs "on-board" controls for a dual
system you will lose the ability to eq separately outside of the guitar.
Life ain't perfect, ya'know.......
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
really excited about the possibility of having this type of set-up. So
like other areas of technology in our society, things are changing...maybe
not so rapidly as in the computer hardware industry, but it seems like we
all lived with piezo quack for far too long.
I want to thank Alan Carruth for such a wonderful post describing some of
this technology....one question Alan, you mentioned "electret ( B-band and
others)" and I wasn't aware that anyone else in the world is using this
technology, although I am always happy to be educated. Could you elaborate
on this? Thanks.
Larry Pattis
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
| Electronic or no electronics... |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <lpattis@xmission...>
Subject: Re: Electronic or no electronics...
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 08:21:13 -0700
> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 10:56:35 -0500
> From: "Chuck Murphy" <<crmurphy@ids...>>
>Subject: Re: Electronic or no electronics...
>
>Larry,
>
>Any idea when the new mic will be available? I may just get the B-Band under
>saddle and add the new mic at a later date. Thanks for the info.
>
>Chuck Murphy
>Richmond, RI
Chuck,
It is likely that as we "speak," the new mics are in transit to the
distributors. It shouldn't be more than a week or two for retailers to get
them. The 1999 retail pricing on the B-band (I just got an email from
Finland) with new Core (the internal pre-amp) is $149.99, and with mic
$219.99, so I guess the mic will sell separately for about 70 bucks.
Unbelievably great deal.
All the best,
Larry Pattis
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
| On B-Band technology (long) [3] |
|---|
From: Ville Nummela <vnummela@butler...>
Subject: On B-Band technology (long)
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 20:53:40 +0200 (EET)
Once again, Alan Carruth gave us a lengthy posting filled with
information. I'll hop in to clarify a few points in it, mainly
regarding the B-Band pickup.
> Internal mics tend to pick up the lowest bass notes really well,
> since these are mostly produced by the lowest air modes of the body
> and the mic is pretty sensitive there. The further from the sound
> hole the mic is the less it will pick up noise from outside the
> guitar and feed back, but the more it will tend to sound like the
> bottom of the trash can.
The small internal mics, even the cheap ones, are not necessarily
inherently more sensitive in the low end. As I explained in RMMGA a
few month back, it is possible to make even the cheap capsules flat
enough in frequency response.
The real reason lies in the acoustics of the instrument itself. The
lowest modes have greater (free-air) wavelengths than the body itself,
and thus fill the inside of the body almost uniformly. Think of them
as variations in tide, rather than waves that splash against the
shore.
Highs, on the other hand, have wavelenghts comparable or smaller to
the body dimensions. This enables them to have a direction of
propagation, reflect on surfaces, interfere with each other, form
standing waves etc. The mic will only hear whatever interference
pattern happens to be going on at that particular location. It'll miss
some of it entirely, and in comparison to an external mic, will
distort things quite a lot. Even if the mic is ideal. It's the
combination of the body air vibration modes that get to decide what
you are going to hear.
> Under-the-saddle p/u's only 'see' those lows to the extent that the
> air in the body can push/resist the top motion. Piezos, whether
> polymer or 'crystal' (really ceramic), seem to be most sensitive to
> highs anyway, and even with a pre-amp have electrical
> characteristics that emphasize highs. Translation; you tend to get
> a fair amount of attack and pick/finger noise out of them.
Don't know about them being more sensitive to highs. Could be. What I
do know is that they are usually more or less non-linear.
Linearity means that the output is directly proportional to the
input. This is desirable, if one wants an accurate reproduction of
sound. Non-linearity, on the other hand, means that in addition to the
linear stuff, the output signal has a component that is proportional
to the square, qube, or even higher order exponents of the input
signal. Distortion, in other words.
Skipping the maths, whenever you run a signal through a non-linear
device, you will get additional frequency components summed to it.
You can try to hide them with EQ (as is common practise with piezo
pickups), but you can never get rid of them. These unwanted noises
usually overlap with the original signal, and if that happens it's
impossible to isolate and eliminate them later. Certainly not with
just an EQ circuit.
It is these noises people refer to when they speak of the piezo
quack. (Knowingly or not :-) They are most prominent when the signal
is the loudest - that is, during the attack. Quack!
> The electret ( B-band and others) ones may be less prone to that;
> I've only heard the B-band and I liked it. Undersaddles seem to have
> the least tendency to feed back on the whole. A good one can sound
> reasonably like your guitar: if you can only watch the game through
> one hole, this is the one behind home plate.
The secret of the B-Band is the new EMF electret condenser material,
which is inherently much more linear in behavior. More sensitive
too. Thus the ultra-simple design of the Core preamp. It's a textbook
JFET source follower and nothing else. When you start with a good
signal, there's no need to try to fix things in the preamp like others
do.
OF COURSE, even the B-Band is still "watching the game through one
small hole in the fence". Thus the option to add the mic.
(Incidentally, the mic is also an electret condenser. Just not
made of EMF.)
> (Optional Techie digression: an electret element has two parallel
> plates or screens of metal separated by an insulator in such a way
> that one of the plates can move toward or away from the other.
Not quite electret: What you describe here is a condenser element.
> In some cases the insulator or one of the plates has a built-in
> electric charge or bias, while in other cases you have to supply it
> with an external battery.
Now we're getting there. Electret simply means a condenser
(microphone/pickup) element that has permanently charged plates.
> The closer the plates get to each other the more charge they can
> store at a given voltage, so as they are pushed together electrons
> move in, and when they move apart the electrons move out. Thus
> relative motion of the plates gives rise to a small alternating
> electric current that your amp can deal with.
Couldn't have said it better!
> The B-band has the plates (really thin foil or even just a
> metallized surface on plastic) separated by a compressible foam that
> seems to have been squashed to make the bubbles lens- shaped.
Actually, the B-Band element does not have any metal in it at
all. It's conducting plastic with permanently embedded (immobilized)
charged ions in it.
This is the big innovation behind the whole technology. B-Band is a
genuine condenser pickup. Similar to the megabuck studio tools, and
enjoying all the advantages of the condenser technology. Plus one:
Being made of flexible plastic, it does not need to bother with the
rigid and clumsy metal housing of it's predecessors. Which is what
makes it possible to stick it to weird places like under the guitar
saddle.
(Incidentally, the EMF material the B-Band is based on has plenty of
applications elsewhere too. In fact, guitar pickups are but a newcomer
in the family.)
> At least in theory it's easier to tailor the electrical
> characteristics of an elecret element than a piezo, so it could have
> better frequency response characteristics. )
Yup. It's flat as flat can be, throughout the audio range. (Verifiably
so!) If you've got problems, it's your guitar that is making them, not
B-Band.
> Contact sensors are generally piezo based accelerometers. They
> 'hear' the motion of the place they are attached to, which is
> essentially 'filtered' by whatever resonances are active at that
> point. When placed directly under the bridge they act a lot like an
> under-the-saddle p/u, but without so much pick noise. I have seen a
> magnetic top sensor. It can be a real hassle to get the 'perfect'
> spot for a top sensor, but if you find it they can sound great.
> OTOH, that spot may not exist on your guitar......
>
> Magnetic pickups 'see' the velocity of the strings, and 'see' fat
> strings much more clearly than thin ones. Thus they tend to have a
> full bass sound that is not a much 'colored' by the character of the
> guitar. They do block of some soundhole area, which changes the
> acoustic timbre of the instrument, although you will get arguments
> as to how important the change is. They match well electrically with
> the amps, and can be built to have a variety of tone colors.
>
> I think I've seen every possible combination of these over the years
> (in fact, I've got one customer who seems to have a different setup
> on his guitars every time I see him!). They all can sound good,
> depending on the guitar and how they are set up. By the same token
> any of them can sound really bad if you try hard enough. Think about
> the sound you want and the costs (in money and tone) you are willing
> to bear to get it. And keep in mind that all categorical statements
> are false (except the one about my guitars being the best....). ;-)
Oh, feel free to send me one - I'd be happy to offer an unbiased
opinion! :-)
> Alan Carruth / Luthier
Go for the tone,
Ville# E-mail <Ville.Nummela@iki...> Office +358 (0)3 365 2977
# WWW http://www.iki.fi/vnummela/ Cellular (0)40 552 1819
# Plasma Technology Lab, Physics Dept, Fax (0)3 365 2090
# Tampere University of Technology, Finland.
From: <AlCarruth@aol...>
Subject: Re: On B-Band technology (long)
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 09:33:02 EST
The great thing about the internet is that there are lots of good folks out
there to learn from.
Ville Nummela wrote:
<<Don't know about them being more sensitive to highs. Could be. What I
do know is that they are usually more or less non-linear.<snip>It is these
noises people refer to when they speak of the piezo quack. (Knowingly or not
:-) They are most prominent when the signal is the loudest - that is, during
the attack. Quack!>>
I had always suspected that the inherent mechanical stiffness of the PZT
ceramic was what gave it the big output 'bump' I've seen around 4 kHz, but
then the Kynar pickups came out, with the same 'quack', and that stuff is
supposed to be linear from almost DC to 1 MHz, so I couldn't figure it out.
Thanks for the explanation.
<<Actually, the B-Band element does not have any metal in it at
all. It's conducting plastic with permanently embedded (immobilized)
charged ions in it.>>
Shazam! No wonder it works so well; they can probably tailor all of the
electrical and dynamic properties within broad ranges nearly independently of
each other.
<<Not quite electret: What you describe here is a condenser element.<snip>
Now we're getting there. Electret simply means a condenser (microphone/pickup)
element that has permanently charged plates.>>
That should teach me not to over simplify. Thanks.
<<Oh, feel free to send me one[guitar] - I'd be happy to offer an unbiased
opinion! :-) >>
Well, I just finished a nice BRW/WRC 12-fret 000 cutaway that I will be happy
to send along *absolutely free of charge* if you will only send me $4500 for
shipping and handling! Or you could stop by the shop when you are in the
Boston area, or check it out at Healdsburg this summer.
Alan Carruth / Luthier
From: Chuck Boyer <caboyer@mnsinc...>
Subject: Re: On B-Band technology (long)
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 15:21:54 -0500
Organization: Verio East
Tom Loredo wrote in message <<36CC5D80.8174EAE8@spacenet...>>...
>Howdy folks-
> <...>
>Personally, I am not sure what exactly folks mean by "quack." I agree
>it probably has something to do with distortion on the initial transients.
>I think there's more to it, though. I've wondered if part of the problem
>is the risetime of the attack. Any undersaddle pickup picks up the
Nice posts, Ville & Tom!
Re your risetime guess, I've often wondered if piezoelectric
crystals have a "dx/dt" response component in addition to the
"dx"" response, but haven't seen anything about it anywhere.
I definitely hear a distinctive change in tone character when
I strum hard, tho.
>string's motion basically instantly. But our ears here it only as
>it excites a large area of the top, which takes time. I don't know
>what the speed of sound in wood is, but I've wondered if the sharper
>attack is part of the origin of "quack." Also, if you just put your
I wonder if it could be a "near field" effect at the bridge; 'twould be
interesting to place a very directional mic up close to see what
shows up; perhaps a localized nonlinear displacement of the top
at that point IRT a quick hit?
Chuck Boyer
| On B-Band technology [3] |
|---|
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: On B-Band technology
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 14:40:31 -0500 (EST)
Howdy folks-
Ville provided probably more tech info than anyone but me likes to see,
but he provided it so clearly that hopefully more of you enjoyed it!
Just to further clarify....
Speaking of piezos:
> Don't know about them being more sensitive to highs. Could be. What I
> do know is that they are usually more or less non-linear.
Piezoelectric technology is prized for its "linearity;" they are
actually quite linear by most standards. I recall one tech report
I read recently boasting of 1% linearity over much of the useful
range of that particular piezo. By most folks' standards,
this would be deemed a quite linear transducer. But our auditory
sense can detect rather small amounts of distortion. 1% is not
considered to be high quality in audio circles, where one typically
seeks less than .1% total harmonic distortion (THD, a measure of
those "additional frequency components" Ville mentioned) in a
good audio component, and less than .01% in a hi fidelity component.
So piezos are actually pretty linear---just not linear enough.
[I have to emphasize that a lot of my opinions on the linearity of
these transducers is little more than educated guessing. It is
incredibly difficult to measure this kind of thing---you can't just
look at the signal out from the pickup and easily see the distortion,
because the input signal from the guitar is complicated, not just
a pure sine wave. Fishman (and presumably others) have special
equipment for doing the appropriate measurements, but I have not
seen any public technical info providing piezo (or B-band!) linearity
measurements in the piezo literature for the parameters relevant
to acoustic guitar amplification.]
As for sensitivity to highs, this can be true of piezos, depending
on the size of the element and the electronics. They have resonances
(frequencies they are especially sensitive to); the smaller the crystal,
the higher the resonance (higher frequencies have smaller wavelengths).
So in soundboard transducers, for example, a tradeoff one has to
worry about is making the element small enough to move the resonance
high enough so that it doesn't affect audible frequencies, yet keeping
it large enough so that it produces a strong signal that won't have
noticable noise. This is less of an issue with undersaddle transducers,
where the crystals are usually quite small (the signal is larger
there, so they can get away with it!).
In addition, electronically piezos resemble a capacitor, which is
a device that has less resistance at high frequencies. Thus if
they are not correctly buffered with a high impedance (resistance) preamp,
the high frequencies will be emphasized (the high impedance has to be high
to swamp the frequency dependence of the piezo's own impedance).
That's why if you plug an unbuffered piezo (like a Baggs LB6 or old
Thinline) into a mixer, you get that harsh sound with no low end.
(This stuff is partly true of the B-band as well, by the way.)
> It is these noises people refer to when they speak of the piezo
> quack. (Knowingly or not :-) They are most prominent when the signal
> is the loudest - that is, during the attack. Quack!
Personally, I am not sure what exactly folks mean by "quack." I agree
it probably has something to do with distortion on the initial transients.
I think there's more to it, though. I've wondered if part of the problem
is the risetime of the attack. Any undersaddle pickup picks up the
string's motion basically instantly. But our ears here it only as
it excites a large area of the top, which takes time. I don't know
what the speed of sound in wood is, but I've wondered if the sharper
attack is part of the origin of "quack." Also, if you just put your
ear next to the bridge, you'll hear a tone that is quite a bit harsher
in quality than the sound you hear a couple feet away. This is
the "watching the game through one small hole in the fence" effect
Ville mentioned, and this, too, gives a midrange emphasis/hype that
I personally associate with "quack." To my ears, the B-band still
quacks, though less so than piezos, and more consistently (i.e., it
doesn't quack more if you play harder).
> The secret of the B-Band is the new EMF electret condenser material,
> which is inherently much more linear in behavior. More sensitive
> too. Thus the ultra-simple design of the Core preamp. It's a textbook
> JFET source follower and nothing else.
The B-band is actually considerably less sensitive than most piezos,
in the sense of putting out a weaker signal right from the pickup.
As a consequence, there's a fair amount of gain in the Core preamp,
more than in most onboard piezo preamps. The level of the output
of the Core is not a reflection of the intrinsic sensitivity of the
pickup technology. And since the Core needs to provide gain, its
first stage is actually a JFET *common source* stage, not a
source follower (which would have a gain slightly less than unity).
> Now we're getting there. Electret simply means a condenser
> (microphone/pickup) element that has permanently charged plates.
Actually, "electret" is the electric analog to "magnet." Just as
a magnet is a material with a permanent magnetic dipole moment
(north and south pole), an electret is a material with a permanent
electric dipole moment (permanent positively and negatively charged
sides). "Electret" refers to this kind of material, which need not
be in a capacitor/condenser. In the audio world, however, it is
not too uncommon to use the word as a shorthand for a condenser
mic that is polarized using electret material (some condenser
mics instead require an external polarizing power source). The
fully correct term is "electret condenser element."
> Similar to the megabuck studio tools, and
> enjoying all the advantages of the condenser technology. Plus one:
> Being made of flexible plastic, it does not need to bother with the
> rigid and clumsy metal housing of it's predecessors.
To be fair to its "predecessors," they have air between the plates
so that they can easily detect air vibrations (microphones!),
which the B-band cannot. They are thus more fragile and put out
weaker signals, requiring that "clumsy metal housing." As I see it,
the cleverness of the EMF folks was in realizing that the idea
behind a condenser mic could be taken over to detecting non-sound
vibrations. As Ville said, a great innovation!
Double-quoting Alan here,
>> Contact sensors are generally piezo based accelerometers.
Some are (the True Tones bridge plate pickup comes to mind), while
others actually detect stress and strain across the pickup element.
My understanding (from talking to the True Tones folks) is that
the majority of contact sensors (soundboard pickups) are actually
of the latter type, and are not accelerometers.
>> Magnetic pickups 'see' the velocity of the strings, and 'see' fat
>> strings much more clearly than thin ones.
On all the acoustic guitars I've played, they see the thin ones better.
That's why all of us players who use soundhole pickups with pole pieces
have them way down for the 1st and 2nd strings. The pickup sees the
changing induced field in the strings. This depends on how magnetic
the strings are. The fat strings get part of their "fattness" from
the winding which, being bronze of some sort, is not magnetic. That's
got to be at least part of the reason why the signal is abnormally
strong from the unwound strings (which are basically entirely magnetic).
Well, more than anyone probably wanted to hear, I'm sure! And if I've
picked on places where I have a somewhat different opinion, hopefully
that doesn't overshadow the wide area of agreement I have with
everything else these gentlemen said!
Peace,
Tom Loredo
From: <AlCarruth@aol...>
Subject: Re: On B-Band technology
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 09:01:21 EST
Thanks to Tom Loredo for contiuing my education!
He wrote:
<<On all the acoustic guitars I've played, they [magnetic p/us] see the thin
[strings] better. That's why all of us players who use soundhole pickups with
pole pieces
have them way down for the 1st and 2nd strings. >>
I wonder if that isn't because the mag p/u is a velocity sensor; putting out
current proportionally to the rate of change of the magnetic field? The thin
strings are tuned to higher frequencies, so for a given amplitude thay have to
move faster on the average to complete more cycles/sec. Higer velocity
compensates for less metal, and gives them a stronger signal. The overspun
strings generally have thicker cores than the E or B strings, and according to
Mr. Wizard the bronze wrap doesn't effect the ability of the magnetic field to
detect the steel core: it's not ferro-magnetic and so should be 'transparent'
(ignoring eddy currents and so forth, which should be second-order effects at
best). I'm not an EE, as is probably obvious by now, but somebody out there
must know. Otherwise I'll have to make time to do the experiment.
Alan Carruth / Luthier
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: On B-Band technology
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 14:54:29 -0500 (EST)
Howdy again folks-
Alan asks:
> I wonder if that isn't because the mag p/u is a velocity sensor; putting out
> current proportionally to the rate of change of the magnetic field? The thin
> strings are tuned to higher frequencies, so for a given amplitude thay have to
> move faster on the average to complete more cycles/sec. Higer velocity
> compensates for less metal, and gives them a stronger signal. The overspun
> strings generally have thicker cores than the E or B strings, and according to
> Mr. Wizard the bronze wrap doesn't effect the ability of the magnetic field to
> detect the steel core: it's not ferro-magnetic and so should be 'transparent'
> (ignoring eddy currents and so forth, which should be second-order effects at
> best).
Many good and correct points here. Mr Wizard is right about the bronze
wrap. Alan is right about velocity playing a role, but it's the
product of frequency and displacement amplitude and magentization that
matters (freq. times displacement amplitude ~ peak velocity). So there
are lots of variables. Bob Culbertson (another physicist!) and I have
been puzzling a bit about this in email off-list, but neither of us
have a completely consistent picture. In particular, the rate of
change of flux (and thus the induced EMF in the pickup) is proportional
to the frequency, which implies that all other things equal, as you
play up the string, the sound should get louder; twice the amplitude
when you get to the 12th fret. But the typical amplitude of the motion
probably also changes, and the pickup also ends up sampling the string
at a different place in its plucked shape (ie, different
displacement). This is why in my post I said that the amount of
magnetization is part of the story. It can't be just velocity,
because on most guitars I see (mine included) the pole pieces take a
sudden dive at the B and E strings.
I hope this discussion is as fun for some of you as it is for me! 8-)
Peace,
Tom
| What Pick up? |
|---|
From: AlchemyMN <alchemymn@aol...>
Subject: Re: What Pick up?
Date: 28 Feb 1999 04:20:09 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
"JCilove" <<JCilove@ix...>>Date: 2/26/99 6:50 PM wrote:
>I want to put a pickup in my J-200 but dont know what to buy. I play mostly
>Praise and worship music and would plug direct to the mixer through a EQ,
>something like the Fishman. Any sugestians for a Gibson jumbo?
I put in a B-band into a Guild (rosewood) Jumbo and I have been extremly happy
with it. People keep coming up to me saying "what kind of pickup is in that
thing - it sounds great."
I do the P&W thing with the guitar being plugged into a direct box, then to the
board. I don't even bother with the mic when playing live.
More info. at http://www.b-band.com/
michael.
<AlchemyMN@aol...>
| B-Band service |
|---|
From: Fahrnholz <fahrnholz@get2net...>
Subject: B-Band service
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 02:21:59 +0100
Organization: get2net Internet Kunde
Hi all
I recieved a B-band pickup from a shop in Sweden last week (I couldn't =
get one in Denmark), I brought my guitar to the luthier and he installed =
it for me so I had it friday, only to hear that there was some sort of =
resonant buzz. I brought it back monday this week and he tried to =
correct the error, took it out and reinstalled it after checking =
EVerything!, after that there was no sound at all !!?!, any way I =
contacted the shop tuesday morning and told them about the situation and =
at the same time e-mailed EMF (manufacturer of B-band in Finland) and =
asked if they could help me. at 3 pm i got a call from EMF and I tried =
to explain the problem, (and told them that I was a bit under pressure =
since I've got a gig this friday, and I couldn't get through the =
week-end without the naked audience in mind !!!!) a couple of minutes =
later there was a new pickup on the way with express-courier from =
Finland to Denmark and hopefully I should have it installed by friday, =
what a service !!
Morten,
and I'm NOT affiliated with B-band :-)
| EMF Customer Service [2] |
|---|
From: <mikecloud@my-dejanews...>
Subject: EMF Customer Service
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 18:38:23 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
I, like many others, have ranted and raved numerous times about the terrific
tone one can get from an EMF B-Band and Core. EMF should certainly be
commended for developing and producing a truly superior product. As if this
wouldn't have been enough, I think they also offer by far the best customer
service in the industry, and I wanted to recognize them for this as well. A
few days ago I posted a message to the group about balance and volume
problems I am experiencing with the B-Band in my twelve string. Yesterday I
was contacted by E-mail by Heikki at EMF who had apparently read my post. He
informed me they were sending me a new B-Band 29L and Core99 which he thinks
may fix my problems--the 29L contains more EMFi material than standard. This
is the third time that EMF has contacted me after reading one of my posts,
and the second time that they've offered to send me something free of charge!
I've never dealt with a company that cares as much about pleasing theircustomers.
Mike
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
From: Mark Gottlieb <sales@clairebell...>
Subject: Re: EMF Customer Service
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1999 10:20:40 -0500
Organization: TotalNet Inc.
Wow ! That is service. I had mine installed and found that it does indeed do
justice to my guitar. Plugged into a 4 track it is a bit sterile but through
and amp it shines. It's good to see that as a company they are doing their
best to have good customer service. It is just to easy to offer a good
product and ignore any complaints/problems that arise. Hopefully the B-Band
will catch on like Fishman and LRBaggs have and will become a major player
here in North America.
Mark G.
<mikecloud@my-dejanews...> wrote in message
<7d0puv$o3m$<1@nnrp1...>>...
>I, like many others, have ranted and raved numerous times about the
terrific
>tone one can get from an EMF B-Band and Core. EMF should certainly be
>commended for developing and producing a truly superior product. As if
this
>wouldn't have been enough, I think they also offer by far the best customer
>service in the industry, and I wanted to recognize them for this as well.
A
>few days ago I posted a message to the group about balance and volume
>problems I am experiencing with the B-Band in my twelve string. Yesterday
I
>was contacted by E-mail by Heikki at EMF who had apparently read my post.
He
>informed me they were sending me a new B-Band 29L and Core99 which he
thinks
>may fix my problems--the 29L contains more EMFi material than standard.
This
>is the third time that EMF has contacted me after reading one of my posts,
>and the second time that they've offered to send me something free of
charge!
> I've never dealt with a company that cares as much about pleasing their
>customers.
>
>Mike
>
>-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
| B-band Core dipswitches [2] |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-band Core dipswitches
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 14:42:24 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <3nTI2.300$<Ez6.15@news...>>, "Fahrnholz"
<<fahrnholz@get2net...>> wrote:
> Hey all
> Is there anyboddy out there who's tried the different dipswitch
combinations on the core preamp ?
> I've just installed it yesterday and went for a gig and what a sound!!!,
The guitar is a HD-28 and the dipswitches is setup like they were when I
got the core, (on, on, off, off), which supposedly should be for
dreadnought-style bodies, any experiences ?
>
> Morten
Morten,
You may be one of the first to receive/install the new "Core'99". I
experimented with the dip switches (which provide for bass boost/cut and
treble boost/cut) a couple of months ago, and felt that on a well made
guitar the switches were unecessary...that doesn't mean that having these
options is not useful, even on a well made guitar. I think the folks that
will benefit the most from these new features will be folks with good,
middle of the road guitars, and also folks with less than good guitars.
The dip switches will enable them to bring out whatever may be lacking in
these instruments.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-band Core dipswitches
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 07:41:04 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <Yq1J2.41$<y65.50@news...>>, "Fahrnholz"
<<fahrnholz@get2net...>> wrote:
> >You may be one of the first to receive/install the new "Core'99". I
> >experimented with the dip switches (which provide for bass boost/cut and
> >treble boost/cut) a couple of months ago, and felt that on a well made
> >guitar the switches were unecessary...
>
> do you mean no audible difference ?
I simply found that the most satisfactory sound to my ears through my
guitar (Jumbo Goodall) was in leaving the dip switches untouched. I have
since experimented on a few other guitars, all in the same general quality
range as the Goodall, and the results were similar. No need to boost or
cut from the original settings.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
| B-band and Lowden? [2] |
|---|
From: Teja Gerken <teja@stringletter...>
Subject: Re: B-band and Lowden?
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 21:21:10 GMT
I spoke with the B-Band folks at the Frankfurt Musikmesse earlier this
month. Apparently they're just about finished with their split-saddle
model, but they didn't have one quite yet. I'd guess that maybe they'll
show it by the Nashville NAMM show.
Teja Gerken
Dave Carter <<davidc@teleport...>> wrote in article
<<36F801A6.142E@teleport...>>...
> I heard a rumor that EMF was going to make a split-bridge b-band for
> Lowden guitars. Any truth to this? If so, does anyone happen to know
> what kind of progress is being made on this project?
From: Tony Rairden <TRairden@XXfqms...>
Subject: Re: B-band and Lowden?
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 18:31:26 -0500
Organization: First Quality Musical Supplies
I have one of the prototypes remaining in stock-- the one I sent out a
couple of months ago hasn't come back, so I have to presume it worked OK. No
upcharge for the split version on the prototypes, but the production models
will be a bit more than unsplit.
A revised version of the split saddle is a current, active project at EMF
according to Heikki, and we should have something in hand within 6 weeks or
so...
Tony Rairden
First Quality Musical Supplies
www.fqms.com
(Anti-SPAM on-- delete Xs from return address to eMail directly.)
Larry Pattis wrote in message ...
>In article <<36F801A6.142E@teleport...>>, <davidc@teleport...> wrote:
>
>> I heard a rumor that EMF was going to make a split-bridge b-band for
>> Lowden guitars. Any truth to this? If so, does anyone happen to know
>> what kind of progress is being made on this project?
>>
>> Thanks for any light you can shed.
>> --
>> DAVE CARTER
>
>
>Dave,
>
>The folks at EMF have had too many irons in the fire for too long! They
>did come up with some "prototype" split elements a while back, but I don't
>know the results of this.
>
>Why not email Heikki directly at <<emf@dlc...>> and ask him what stage this
>(one of many!) project is in. Then you can tell us...8-)
>
>Larry Pattis
>
>Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
>
>Liberal Palette Records
>http://liberalpalette.com
>"Music Without Borders"
| clarity about the pre-amp [2] |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: clarity about the pre-amp
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 09:46:38 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <<lo1zi8qnhr.fsf@catapult...>>,
<djm@catapult...> (David J. MacKenzie) wrote:
> EMF announced their own blender-sort of unit especially for the b-band...
> don't know when it'll be available, though.
I was hesitant to "promote" this, due to a variety of reasons....I will
mention this now, since it was not I that brought it up. It may be another
two-three months (hopefully not more) before EMF brings their two signal
pre-amp to market. It will be good, however, and will have some
interesting new features previously not available on this type of
equipment. One feature should be the ability to externally power both the
internal mic AND a version of their Core pre-amp from the external
unit...NO battery needed inside your guitar (finally!). Also, the external
pre-amp should have the ability to get its own power via 48v phantom power
from whatever mixing board it is plugged into (it will have the usual a/c
adapter type set-up as well, in case your board doesn't have phantom
power....but the ability to work off of phantom, plus the ability to NOT
have any battery in your guitar is very appealing, to me, anyway).
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: Tony Rairden <TRairden@XXfqms...>
Subject: Re: clarity about the pre-amp
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 18:59:34 -0500
Organization: First Quality Musical Supplies
The B-Band mic normally draws power from the internal 9v. battery, along
with the B-Band under-saddle pickup. Powering the mic along with the p/u
reduces nominal battery life from 3000 hours to 1500. The Core preamp can be
modified to utilize external phantom power for the mic, but the battery will
still be required for the under-saddle B-Band p/u and the preamp itself.
The EMF Entity System, to which David MacKenzie and Larry Pattis refer, is
going to be especially felicitous for multi-guitar owners, since you'll be
able to install the mics, pickups and phantom-powered endpin preamps in
multiple instruments and use them with just one external Entity control
unit, which would come with your initial system. They say you'll also be
able to configure the external unit to work with extant Core/B-Band/mic
installations via internal dip switches, but they haven't announced any
pricing for the external control unit by itself... and you won't be able to
use it with both Core and Entity preamps without opening it up and resetting
those dip switches whenever you switch between types. I wouldn't look for
the Entity for at least three months, as Larry indicated...
Tony Rairden
First Quality Musical Supplies
www.fqms.com
(Anti-SPAM on-- delete Xs from return address to eMail directly.)
Jae wrote in message <7do6sm$22a$<1@news...>>...
>the only thing that i know of so far that is cheap enough and capable is
the
>Acoustic blender. It'll power that little mic and is the only fishman
>product that does stereo. I don't think the pocket blender can do that but
>i could be mistaken.
>
| B-Band 12- String Balance [2] |
|---|
From: <mikecloud@my-dejanews...>
Subject: B-Band 12- String Balance
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 14:33:30 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
I'm still trying to get an acceptable volume balance (pair to pair) from the
B- Band in my Taylor 12-String. Yesterday I finally broke down and abandoned
my bone saddle (which sounded great unplugged) and installed a Fishman
Cleartone. This helped the plugged-in balance somewhat, but the bass and
treble E strings are still relatively too quiet. It seems pretty obvious
that this is a problem of poor mechanical contact at the ends of the saddle,
and not excessive downward pressure, based upon my prior experience with
shimming under my bone saddle. At this point I'm fairly confidant that I can
solve the plugged-in balance problem by sanding the bottom of the Cleartone
in a slight arch. It's flexible enough that the pressure of the strings will
push it down into uniform mechanical contact with my apparently less than
flat Taylor saddle slot. Has anyone else had this experience with Taylor
12-Strings and B-Bands?
To complicate the matter, although I think the Cleartone can be shaped for
good plugged-in balance (and with the B-Band, good plugged-in tone as well),
to my ear it doesn't sound nearly as good unplugged as bone. I had thought
of having my luthier make me a bone saddle with Cleartone like cut-outs and
an arched bottom, but bone is so much more rigid than the Cleartone that I
don't think bone will have the "give" to spread out and provide uniform
mechanical contact across the full length of the pick-up. I suppose that if
the arch perfectly matches the the contour of the saddle slot, it might work,
but experience tells me that the level of perfection needed is very hard to
achieve! One other possible solution might be to cut the bone saddle into
six totally independent pieces--although I don't know how this might affect
the stability of the saddle (s) in the slot, and I don't know how this might
affect acoustic tone? I think I remember a post some months ago telling of
trying this? Might have been George Reiswig? George, or anyone else out
there, do you have any advice about the six independent saddles idea?
Mike
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
From: Mark Gottlieb <sales@clairebell...>
Subject: Re: B-Band 12- String Balance
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 10:03:26 -0400
Organization: TotalNet Inc.
Take your Cleartone and cut it in half. In essence you will have two
saddles, 1 for the ead strings and 1 for gbe strings. I've never tried this
but I spoke to a couple of people recently who do this with remarkable
results. Or you can cut it in three 1 for the be strings,1 for dg strings
and one for the ea strings. You can try any combination you want but
remember the placement of the pins on your Taylor may always lead to balance
problems. I guess it has to do with mechanical leverage and all.
Mark G.
<mikecloud@my-dejanews...> wrote in message
<7e7t7r$l67$<1@nnrp1...>>...
>I'm still trying to get an acceptable volume balance (pair to pair) from
the
>B- Band in my Taylor 12-String. Yesterday I finally broke down and
abandoned
>my bone saddle (which sounded great unplugged) and installed a Fishman
>Cleartone. This helped the plugged-in balance somewhat, but the bass and
>treble E strings are still relatively too quiet. It seems pretty obvious
>that this is a problem of poor mechanical contact at the ends of the
saddle,
>and not excessive downward pressure, based upon my prior experience with
>shimming under my bone saddle. At this point I'm fairly confidant that I
can
>solve the plugged-in balance problem by sanding the bottom of the Cleartone
>in a slight arch. It's flexible enough that the pressure of the strings
will
>push it down into uniform mechanical contact with my apparently less than
>flat Taylor saddle slot. Has anyone else had this experience with Taylor
>12-Strings and B-Bands?
>
>To complicate the matter, although I think the Cleartone can be shaped for
>good plugged-in balance (and with the B-Band, good plugged-in tone as
well),
>to my ear it doesn't sound nearly as good unplugged as bone. I had thought
>of having my luthier make me a bone saddle with Cleartone like cut-outs and
>an arched bottom, but bone is so much more rigid than the Cleartone that I
>don't think bone will have the "give" to spread out and provide uniform
>mechanical contact across the full length of the pick-up. I suppose that
if
>the arch perfectly matches the the contour of the saddle slot, it might
work,
>but experience tells me that the level of perfection needed is very hard to
>achieve! One other possible solution might be to cut the bone saddle into
>six totally independent pieces--although I don't know how this might affect
>the stability of the saddle (s) in the slot, and I don't know how this
might
>affect acoustic tone? I think I remember a post some months ago telling of
>trying this? Might have been George Reiswig? George, or anyone else out
>there, do you have any advice about the six independent saddles idea?
>
>Mike
>
>-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
| Taylor Electronics |
|---|
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: Taylor Electronics
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 15:00:21 -0400
Organization: Cornell University
<knucklehead25@my-dejanews...> wrote:
>
> I agree with Tom to the degree that this is a highly subjective issue.
> However, it does amaze me that the same 7 people boast the wonders of b-band
> pickup throughout this news group. After reading the many references, I went
> and had one installed in my taylor 514C and was surprisingly dissapointed
> with it. I put the Fishman back in and explored what other options their
> product line offered. I run it through a Baggs para DI and I don't think you
> could get a better tone if you tried.
>
Fascinating. The guitar I refered to that had the Fishman gear in it
first and then changed to a Highlander + Panasonic internal
mic element was in fact a Taylor 514C. The improvement in tone
switching from the Fishman was, to put it mildly, not small.
And yes, the Fishman was installed by an experienced and reputable
guitar tech. I hope the person who installed your B-band knew
what he or she was doing. As noted in the threads you appear to have
read, there are aspects of the installation that are different
from what one would do with a piezo pickup.
As for "the same 7 people," I humbly suggest you check your counting.
I happen to keep a lot of the amplification-related posts on RMMGA,
and have an archive of pickup posts for the last couple years or
so. Many more than 7 people have spoken highly of the B-band.
To be fair, some also speak highly of Fishman, though in all that time
this is the 1st time I've seen someone prefer Fishman to B-band.
As I've written here before, the Fishman Matrix products seem to suit
a few guitars really well (I've heard 3 or 4 Martin setups, D1s or
D16s, I forget now, that sounded great with it), but to my ears it
sounds bad more often than it sounds good. This could well be
a selection effect, at least in part---they are far and away the
most popular pickups, so if some sizable fraction of them are not
installed well, I'm more likely to hear large numbers of them.
That said, my perception is still that Baggs, Highlander, and EMF
offer superior technology at the present time (for undersaddle
transducers) for most users.
Peace,
Tom Loredo
| newsgroup advice [8] |
|---|
From: Bgmsc <bgmsc@aol...>
Subject: newsgroup advice
Date: 6 Apr 1999 15:41:13 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Someone recently posted an article about trying the B-band pickup based on a
large amount of testimonials on this newsgroup. He tried it and didn't like it.
I did the same thing and went back to my Fishman and am much happier. Well, I
then did a little research based on a comment by this poster that the same 7
people acclaimed the B-band over and over. This is true. One of the largest
endorsers here of B-band is an official endorser of B-band and gets his picture
in an ad for another product he touts. He at least has something to gain. I
then looked at another who loves b-band and if you go back far enough, you find
that he has a ax to grind with Fishman that has nothing to do with the product,
but the fact that he can't buy them at a good enough price. This seems to be a
about that guy in Alaska who hates price gouging at his local music stores and
then talks about how he bought a guitar for $50.00, did about $20.00 worth of
work on it and then sold it to a student for $350.00? Who are these people
whose advice we seek? What is their agenda? I hate being manipulated. The
B-band was hard to install, had lousy string balance and cut out or distorted
when played hard.
Rodger Peterson
"Show me the way to the next whiskey bar, or beer, or vodka, or gin, or . . ."
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: newsgroup advice
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 10:02:36 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <<19990406114113.20394.00002952@ng-fr1...>>, <bgmsc@aol...>
(Bgmsc) wrote:
> Someone recently posted an article about trying the B-band pickup based on a
> large amount of testimonials on this newsgroup. He tried it and didn't
like it.
> I did the same thing and went back to my Fishman and am much happier. Well, I
> then did a little research based on a comment by this poster that the same 7
> people acclaimed the B-band over and over. This is true. One of the largest
> endorsers here of B-band is an official endorser of B-band and gets his
picture
> in an ad for another product he touts. He at least has something to gain. I
> then looked at another who loves b-band and if you go back far enough,
> that he has a ax to grind with Fishman that has nothing to do with the
product,
> but the fact that he can't buy them at a good enough price. This seems to be a
> powerful forum for misinformation and manipulation for a chosen few. And how
> about that guy in Alaska who hates price gouging at his local music stores and
> then talks about how he bought a guitar for $50.00, did about $20.00 worth of
> work on it and then sold it to a student for $350.00? Who are these people
> whose advice we seek? What is their agenda? I hate being manipulated. The
> B-band was hard to install, had lousy string balance and cut out or distorted
> when played hard.
> Rodger Peterson
> "Show me the way to the next whiskey bar, or beer, or vodka, or gin, or . . ."
Rodger,
If you choose to believe that I use products because I have "something to
gain," so be it. I have always stated that my recommendations of products
The "benefits" that I receive from using or endorsing these products is so
small as to be negligible, really. I, like you, do not like to be misled
by folks with an agenda. I feel that good information is hard to come by,
especially on the internet. Again, I am sorry if you believe my support of
B-band and Elixir is motivated by anything other than me finding these
products to work the absolute best for me.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: Norman Draper <ndraper@prodigy...>
Subject: Re: newsgroup advice
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 14:09:43 -0400
Organization: Prodigy Services, Inc
Charles,
With none of our usual comic banter, I can't agree with you more,including the respect for the original post. There are people here and out
there in the real world with agendas that are antithetical to our own. Our
job is to keep an eye on them.
I have had a business dealing with Larry that I have mentioned here. Hewas nothing less than honest and straightforward in a situation that should
have had him screaming! He strikes me as honest and decent, one of those to
be trusted. I don't even know what a B-band is... I assumed it was a band
that hadn't made the "A" list yet... but if Larry has one and likes it, I'm
willing to bet he really likes it. I know something of his taste in
Wade strikes me as funny, knowledgeable, sometimes pedantic, andhelpful. I don't know about the guitar sale post. Bring me the facts and
I'll make a judgment for you. :-)
I'll close now. I feel a rant about Mississippi John Hurt and Beethovencoming on..... I mean, there the same, right?
Norman (Make Me A Pallet On Beethoven's Floor) Draper ... may do a post
with that title....
From: Hojo2X <hojo2x@aol...>
Subject: Re: newsgroup advice
Date: 6 Apr 1999 19:57:37 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Rodger Peterson wrote:
>I hate being manipulated.
Me, too. Good for you.
He then complained about the B-Band pickup, and how he felt it had been way
oversold on this group.
Fair enough.
I think whenever you get a group of like-minded people together, a sort of
"groupthink" is easy to fall into. My own experiences with the B-Band suggest
that it is a perfectly adequate under-the-saddle pickup, but I happen to prefer
the sound the of the LR Baggs RT system, as I find it more natural-sounding.
But none of these pickups sound altogether natural by themselves - you need to
combine them with a microphone, either internal or external - to get the most
accurate, natural sound. If you put ANY pickup on your guitar expecting the
going to be disappointed.
Folks who are happy with a specific product can easily overpraise it, as,
perhaps, has happened here. But those folks who like it, really, really like
it. It doesn't automatically follow that when they say so that they are trying
to manipulate you.
Then Rodger got a little personal when he wrote:
>And how>about that guy in Alaska who hates price gouging at his local music
stores>and
>then talks about how he bought a guitar for $50.00, did about $20.00 worth
of>work on it and then sold it to a student for $350.00?
This is interesting, as I'm >that guy in Alaska, but the truth of the situation
is a little different.
First, I'd be interested to see where I've made an issue out of "price gouging
at my local music store" - show me the thread where I've carried on about that.
My recurring theme is that you have to do your research and be prepared tomarket will bear. If you walk in unprepared and pay list when you could have
had a discount just by asking, that's your problem, not the store's.
Glori Berkel in KC noticed that her local Taylor dealer was trying to pass off
a year old shopworn guitar as brand new stock, and trying to charge
accordingly, and I merely suggested a strategy for dealing with the somewhat
unethical store owner. But it should go without saying that you have to use
your wits, and know the values, before proceeding into any situation like that.
Then there's the bit where I supposedly
>bought a guitar for $50.00, did about $20.00 worth of>work on it and then sold
it to a student for $350.00.
Get your facts straight before waxing indignant on the Usenet, Rodger. This
shows that you didn't read my post regarding this particular instrument very
carefully at all.
Which somehow doesn't surprise me....
I bought the Hondo Double O you're referring to for $150, not $50. It was and
is a superb-sounding guitar, but from the start was plagued with repair
problems large and small. The braces had to be reglued three times, at about
$40-75 a time, depending on the severity; the bridge and bridgeplate had to be
replaced once, that ran me about $145, and I also spent an immense amount to
get holes drilled into some Schaller mini tuners so they could be used in the
slotted peghead. I dropped off the guitar and the tuners with my repairman so
he could install them, expecting to pay about $40-50.
My repairman at the time was under pressure from his boss at dB Music to turn a
profit on repairs, and to keep track of every minute that he spent on a job.
This particular job was new and totally unfamiliar terrain to him, so when I
Yes, I was overcharged, but I was stuck. So I paid it.
Add to that the general setup and other routine maintenance, and I spent over
$500 in repairs stabilizing and maintaining that instrument.
This was spread out over eleven years of professional use, so I didn't mind it
so much. But when my current repairman told me it would take another $450 to
completely rebuild the top and to make it perfectly intonated up the neck, I
opted to get the instrument's current brace problem stabilized (for about $50)
and sell it, with its $150 hardshell case, for a fair market price.
In that original post, Rodger, if you'd been reading a little closer, you would
have noticed where I mentioned that I had spent more in repairs on that Hondo
copy of a Martin Double than a used Martin Double O would have run me.
Anyway, the high school kid who bought got a nice-sounding instrument for his
for it in a store. He's actually a classical and jazz bassist and a French
Horn player, so guitar is way down his list. He's aware of the instrument's
shortcomings, but it suits him just fine.
Anyway, Rodger, I think your application of critical thinking is just fine,
even if your indignation is misplaced. I personally don't hold with the idea
that it's somehow unethical to make a profit on a musical instrument, but in
this particular instance, I think it's fair to say that I lost money on the
guitar.
Sorry to go on at such great detail, here - just for once, I wish I could match
Larry Pattis' economy of phrase and quiet dignity. But since you were
basically inpugning my integrity, pal, I decided you should be spattered with a
mudshower of verbiage as equally indignant as your own.....
Having said that, Rodger, I agree with your basic point: one should apply
critical thinking to whatever you read, whether on this newsgroup or in the
magazines.
Wade Hampton "That Guy In Alaska" Miller
From: Bob Dorgan <d77737@epix...>
Subject: Re: newsgroup advice
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 19:26:01 -0400
Organization: epix Internet Services
Bgmsc wrote:
>
> Someone recently posted an article about trying the B-band pickup based on a
> large amount of testimonials on this newsgroup. He tried it and didn't like it.
> I did the same thing and went back to my Fishman and am much happier. Well, I
> then did a little research based on a comment by this poster that the same 7
> people acclaimed the B-band over and over. This is true. One of the largest
> endorsers here of B-band is an official endorser of B-band and gets his picture
> in an ad for another product he touts. He at least has something to gain. I
> then looked at another who loves b-band and if you go back far enough, you find
> that he has a ax to grind with Fishman that has nothing to do with the product,
> but the fact that he can't buy them at a good enough price. This seems to be a
> powerful forum for misinformation and manipulation for a chosen few. And how
> about that guy in Alaska who hates price gouging at his local music stores and
> then talks about how he bought a guitar for $50.00, did about $20.00 worth of
> work on it and then sold it to a student for $350.00? Who are these people
> whose advice we seek? What is their agenda? I hate being manipulated. The
> B-band was hard to install, had lousy string balance and cut out or distorted
> when played hard.
> Rodger Peterson
> "Show me the way to the next whiskey bar, or beer, or vodka, or gin, or . . ."
Ok Rodger,
you've asked some fair questions, and raised some issues that need
addressing.
From what I've already read on this thread some of those questions have
been answered, so I won't address them. I will offer three, very short
and succinct statements of my own and you can make your own choices.
1. I have had financial dealings with Larry Pattis and found him to be
honest, and a man of integrity.
2. It is my opinion that the B-band is the finest undersaddle transducer
on the market. I have no affiliation with any music oriented company,
nor could I give one shit who reads/believes this.
3. You would have to be a complete idiot to purchase ANYTHING because it
was endorsed by a faceless entity on a PC monitor.
Now that I've made my statements, answer one question for me, if you
please:
Who are you, and why should I believe that you are not a 14 year oldpimply faced high school freshman, who has decided to stir some shit on
an otherwise friendly, and helpful newsgroup?
I guess I should feel sorry for someone who has gleaned some free
advice, and was studpid enough to follow it without doing their own
research. Yeah, sure.
I'm sure my friend from Alaska will pen his own answer to the misguided
charges you have made. so I will ignore those.
If my response pisses you off, keep in mind that I used a great deal of
restraint in replying. It would have been much easier to say
............ and gone about my business.
Bob Dorgan
From: ChrisRockcliffe <chrisrockcliffe@scripto99...>
Subject: Re: newsgroup advice
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 23:40:44 +0000
Organization: Chris Rockcliffe
Bgmsc wrote (cut from detailed post):
> Who are these people whose advice we seek? What is their agenda? I
> hate being manipulated. Rodger Peterson
Rodger, you make a valid point about integrity here but the inference is
very wrong. To look at it in a wider context - I too have wondered at
times about possible 'hidden agendas', unsolicited testimonials and the
willingness of certain individuals to dive in when certain types of
questions are asked.
You ask "who are these people" as if there were a controlling force at
work? I'm sorry but you are wrong and I hope no-one else thinks that.
If an individual of some standing endorses a product; is it because they
mostly use it and believe in it themselves?. Larry Pattis has already
replied clearly and honestly here I believe.
But you HAVE dived in head-first here and your post appears to contain
some inaccuracies. There is a serious side to this apparent blanket
accusation of yours which needs to be addressed. No doubt our Alaskan
friends, (Wade in particular) will no doubt respond to this. I vaguely
remember the post referred to and if I remember correctly, you've got
some of the facts wrong.
People like John Pearse for example, lurk here and enter into dialogue
which is genuinely helpful - whether about his own products or not. When
people are asking detail or technical questions about John Pearse's
strings, armrests, picks, videos or anything else - and which many
believe to be the best available - what better than to have the
governor, inventor and engineer on-hand to answer those queries.
There are many others besides - luthiers, retailers, musicians, and some
offering very helpful free advice and wonderful websites which are
themselves a labour of love. By God, I wish RMMGA had been available to
me when I was starting out all those years ago.
IMO, we are all lucky on this newsgroup, to have the largest pool of
objective and subjective knowledge on acoustic guitars and related
products, music and theory ever assembled in one place and available to
you at low-cost round the clock. Added to that, are the queries,
thoughts, feelings, prejudices, hates, loves and dreams of many who play
or are learning hard to play acoustic guitars.
In print we often believe we're reading objectively written stuff when
in fact it amounts to carefully constructed 'advertorial'. In for
instance an in-depth product comparison (the editorial review fodder of
specialist mags'), it's OK if the 'winners' of such 'contests' are
better on merit and measurable criteria, but when it's obviously that
they're not, we can smell a big fat rat.
In magazines, there's always the letters page, but try critcising the
editorial and just see if your letter gets published. With RMMGA on the
other hand, you post direct, make your point with as equal a force as
anyone else, and if you disagree strongly - you say so. You can even say
outrageous things and get called all the names under the sun for saying
it too.
>From what I've read, I'd be more inclined to believe a cross-section of
postings from people who mostly have no direct sales interest. Will Wade
Hampton Miller for instance, ever get a free guitar from Martin for
recommending their products. No, it's unlikely, but he will no doubt get
a warm welcome when he visits the factory - for a variety of reasons. We
can't divorce the builders - whether it's the C.F. Martin Co or Mr Olsen
- from their supporters and why should we?
If you're lucky enough to get 50 replies to your query, and 10 of them
are saying much the same thing, then you should take note. If still in
doubt post again and find out why!
When it comes to guitars themselves: The same model names of budget to
midrange guitars are mentioned time and time again on this newsgroup.
Arriving from the planet Zog you could indeed sense a sales conspiracy
until you've been here a while.
Then however you will begin to understand the reasoning of buying a
solid wood guitar (for good acoustic un-amplified playing), or a well
made solid-topped guitar with laminated structure. The real choice is
further limited by adding to that a price range which narrows the field
even further.
It stems from the advice of those who understand the way tone is
produced and how such a guitar will, in most cases, provide longer
lasting satisfaction - particularly for a beginner. Given that you can
pay just as much, or even more for an inferior build - it's just good
advice which needs to be fully born out by the purchaser trying them
out.
A beginner can't always do that. (In such a case, ask a friend who can
play acoustic to accompany you and play each one for you).
If there is a hidden agenda re guitars - and I think there is in a way -
although it's hardly hidden: It is this: By pointing people to the
better instruments available in any price range, it is forcing
manufacturers and luthiers to make more of those better instruments.
Also to improve their build methods and provide better quality
instruments at all levels for a more 'educated' and discerning public.
By extension this applies to pick-ups or anything else discussed here.
As I read in a recent interview with C.F. Martin: He recognises Martins
need to build on their unique heritage, but also the need to compete in
the new world of acoustic guitars which exists today. People at Martin
amongst many many others, no doubt keep tabs on what's being said here -
more than we realise. RMMGA is a growing and powerful force in the world
guitar market place, particularly in the US. This is the worldwide web,
but with around 85-90% of all posts emanating from the US, it's hardly
surprising that American retailers, sales patterns, prices etc dominate
this newsgroup.
Some of the products mentioned and those of individual luthiers are
unlikely to be seen in other parts of the world and prices have little
relevance for those of us who aren't in the US. There are many around
the world who can read and understand English a lot better than they can
write or express themselves in it. Sometimes I wonder what they make of
some of our ramblings. They are the lurkers we rarely hear from and
occasionally get ignored because their English is limited. There are
others who make a real point of trying to help in such cases and we know
who they are.
However most of the world's fammous names and best mass produced
steel-stringed acoustics are built in the US. Indeed most of the better
smaller but growing luthiers are based there too. No doubt some of these
will become major forces tomorrow. In addition the US seems to have more
small luthiers per square mile than anywhere else.
Given that building, selling guitars and other equipment is first and
foremost a commercial business, I'm constantly surprised at how
uncommercial this newsgroup actually is and how little commercial
spamming there is on a group generating - what is it - 1500 posts a
week!. It must be one of the lowest - thankfully - on the Internet.
I know very little about acoustic pick-ups - the exact subject of this
thread. If there is a conspiracy to sell individual brands of acoustic
pick-ups through postings, it seems like a lot of bloody effort for
little reward, on the part of some - other than to offer the well-meant
good advice, which some believe is reward in itself.
This is a very public forum. Although I'm sure you are not a bitter
person, your post nevertheless has a bitterness to it which is totally
unjustified when addressing the group as a whole. With your post
entitled 'Re: newsgroup advice', questioning RMMGA's whole integrity,
you may find that you'll get a few stern replies - questioning your own
approach and motives.
Sorry this is so long, but this one does need to be fully addressed.
Gan canny,
Chris Rockcliffe
From: Larry Kotz <lkotz@uswest...>
Subject: Re: newsgroup advice
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 17:07:35 -0700
Organization: U S WEST Interprise
I am one of the folks who raved about the B-band and I still do. I sell
aircraft parts and don't get endorsed for anything musically related. As a
matter of fact, my biggest account is Kaman Aerospace owner of Kaman Music
(Ovation, Dean Markley, Takamime ect) and all the guys I deal with know I
play Martins and soon a Gibson 67 B-25. I would like to emphasize that I had
my B-Band professionally installed by Brian, the luthier at Rainbow Guitars
here in Tucson. He's the only Luthier at the shop who does B-bands, the
other luthier Rick doesn't do them. I have said in the past for a reasonable
$35.00, have someone who knows what they're doing do the job. By the way,
the pre-amp blew in mine and was promptly replaced and fully covered by
warranty. I bought mine on the recomendation of folks on this newsgroup and
I appreciate their input. I bought my Martins on the advise of folks on this
newsgroup and also am very happy with my choice and appreciate the advise.
But advise is best taken with a grain of salt. So far all the advise I have
gotten has been seasoned perfectly!
--
Larry Kotz------Tucson, AZ Tel: 520-747-4417
K-Tech Aviation, Inc. Fax: 520-745-6139
<lkotz@k-techav...>
www.k-techav.com
From: John Zyla <ccm_touchesNOSPAM@hotmail...>
Subject: Re: newsgroup advice
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 13:50:43 GMT
Organization: remove "NOSPAM" from my address to reply
Well ...... quite a venting from Rodger here.
I suppose I'm one of those who "acclaim the B-Band over and over" too.
You know what, I've never seen the B-Band recommended unless a post
was asking for opinions - aside from the odd "I just got my B-Band and
love it" type post. This type of post is no different from the "Just
put on a set of John Pearse and WOW" posts or "I Love my Elixers" or
"My New Fishman blender sounds GREAT" post. You see, people like a
product and like to share their opinions - this is a newsgroup, for
heaven's sake, Rodger!
As for myself, I have two B-Bands, I purchased them both, I have no
financial interest in EMF, yadda yadda yadda. Sure - EMF uses one of
my comments on their "letters" page, - I wrote that unsolicited, and
if you think EMF pays for that you're paranoid. I simply like the
sound of the B-Band pickup! And, if you do a little reading, I believe
just about every person who posts in rmmga about the B-Band is pretty
careful to mention that other pickups are good too. It's simply inane
to expect folks to never recommend a product they use and like. Inane.
So, judging from your post, you would like everyone who likes a
product to *shut up* and all posts on rmmga be discussions of music
theory or how to make an f barre chord without buzzing strings.
As for your experience with the B-Band, - I'm sure not a-gonna dispute
you, except to say that I have two perfectly funtioning B-Bands, and I
love them. Well - oops ! Did I just say that? Shame on me.
Maybe proper installation is a factor, y'think, maybe ...????
John Zyla
On 6 Apr 1999 15:41:13 GMT, <bgmsc@aol...> (Bgmsc) wrote:
>Someone recently posted an article about trying the B-band pickup based on a
>large amount of testimonials on this newsgroup. He tried it and didn't like it.
>I did the same thing and went back to my Fishman and am much happier. Well, I
>then did a little research based on a comment by this poster that the same 7
>people acclaimed the B-band over and over. This is true. One of the largest
>endorsers here of B-band is an official endorser of B-band and gets his picture
>in an ad for another product he touts. He at least has something to gain. I
>then looked at another who loves b-band and if you go back far enough, you find
>that he has a ax to grind with Fishman that has nothing to do with the product,
>but the fact that he can't buy them at a good enough price. This seems to be a
>powerful forum for misinformation and manipulation for a chosen few. And how
>about that guy in Alaska who hates price gouging at his local music stores and
>then talks about how he bought a guitar for $50.00, did about $20.00 worth of
>work on it and then sold it to a student for $350.00? Who are these people
>whose advice we seek? What is their agenda? I hate being manipulated. The
>B-band was hard to install, had lousy string balance and cut out or distorted
>when played hard.
>Rodger Peterson
>"Show me the way to the next whiskey bar, or beer, or vodka, or gin, or . . ."
| L.R. Baggs Double Barrel [3] |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: L.R. Baggs Double Barrel
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 1999 14:06:48 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
> Tom Loredo wrote:
>
> > Hi folks-
> >
> > I have both a Baggs LB6 and a B-band in my Olson, so these comments are
> > based on in-use comparisons.
> >
> > Lance McCollum wrote:
> > > Now, my biggest complaint is that I've installed about four B-Bands,
two of
> > > which have gone bad, and while they are excellent at sending replacements,
> > > they're in Finland.
> >
> > Now this is a very valid complaint. I have a couple that have had no
> > problems, and none of the ones I know of that have been installed
> > locally have had problems; I wonder how many folks have had this kind of
> > problem...?
Woops, I missed this on my first reply....
Let's remember a few things,
A) EMF is a small start-up company, and yes, they are overseas. Remember,
ALL gear is prone to failure, no matter how well constructed. Hey, stuff
breaks from time to time...that's why I have lots of "back-ups" with gear
that is crucial to my livelihood. Now, see "B" below...
B) The EMF Core (pre-amp) product has had two major changes in the one year
it has been on the market (better battery clip so folks CAN'T fry the
pre-amp, and now the "Core 99" improvements). I own two guitars with the
original gear (although I replaced the battery clips myself), and now a
third with the latest Core 99, and I can't tell any difference in final
sound(within the context of how I use the gear), so folks with the early
stuff shouldn't feel cheated! They had the sound they wanted, a few things
needed some minor improvements, which they were not afraid to implement.
C) Now that the product has gone through these two changes, any of the
early problems are not likely to be repeated, which should make Lance (and
a lot of other folks) happy. The B-band itself (the saddle element) has
also had one recent minor change, and the report is that the few volume
balance problems that folks had will now also be a thing of the past. As I
said in my last post, I just now installed a new Core 99 B-band in a
guitar, and as been MY experience, no shimming or adjusting was needed
whatsoever. I plugged into my PA, and there it was, big, beautiful, and
perfectly BALANCED.
D) Don't forget ALL of the glowing reports of how EMF has dealt with the
problems (refer to "A" above if necessary) that have occured in the past.
Exemplary, in anyone's evaluation.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: George Reiswig <george.reiswig@intel...>
Subject: Re: L.R. Baggs Double Barrel
Date: 9 Apr 1999 00:26:36 GMT
Organization: Intel
Okay, I admit it...I'm one of the guilty parties who is recommending the
B-Band.
I also admit that I have had some trouble with my unit, largely because I
got one of the EARLIEST prototypes of a split-saddle design. It has been a
bit hard to balance.
I further admit never listening to the Trance system, and I don't know how
much it costs. But...
...I am not getting anything from EMF for telling people that I think this
is the best pickup system I've heard thusfar, and I resent the implication.
Simply put, for something in this price range (the same range as the Baggsdual source, etc.) the B-Band is best at duplicating the natural sound of a
guitar. That is my opinion.
Calm down, Pierre.
GR
Pierre Debs <<debs@aecom...>> wrote in article
<<370D0C1C.DC007C30@aecom...>>...
> Here we go again, but this time I will go home and come back tomorrow
after
> calming down to respond. Pierre
>
>
> Larry Pattis wrote:
>
> > In article <<370CFA54.3C8838BD@aecom...>>, <debs@aecom...> wrote:
> >
> > > I swear that b-band is lining the pockets with the forces that drive
the
> > RMMGA.
> > > Many of you will be sorely disappointed with your b-band if you ever
try the
> > > Trance Audio Acoustic Amulet system. This is a not solicited view, I
pay
> > them to
> > > use their products. I read so many posts concerning the quality of
the
> > b-band. 1.
> > > They are built rather flimsy. 2. In my ears they sound no different
that
> > a regular
> > > under the saddle with an internal mic.
> > > For my money, the Trance gives the most natural amplification of an
acoustic
> > > guitar, outside of a good external mic. It is fast.
> > > Love Pierre
> >
> > Interesting (sort of) discussion, of which I snipped 90%. Thanks Tom
L.
> > for your cogent and calm response....
> >
> > A few comments.
> >
> > First, the NEW EMF B-band with what they are calling the "Core 99"
pre-amp
> > has four dip switches on the inside which allow you to boost or cut
several
> > frequencies. On a high-end guitar these are not necessary (for ME,
> > anyway), but for guitars that are either all plywood, or "solid top
only,"
> > these switches will be a real help. No one else in the industry offers
> > anything like it on an internal pre-amp, period.
> >
> > Secondly, I have tried the Trance Audio equipment (admittedly several
> > years ago, but the basic gear remains the same, especially what goes in
the
> > guitar) and I couldn't disagree more with Pierre's commentary. I was
> > considering the gear not only for my own use, but as something that I
could
> > represent via my old shop, Local Music. The Trance gear just does not
give
> > a good enough quality sound for me at concert volume levels. It might
be
> > alright for at home with a practice amp, but not on-stage. I won't
bore
> > you with details of my experience (since it was my experience) but I
now
> > use the B-band gear because it works the best for me. This is also NOT
a
> > solicited view, the EMF folks don't pay me a durned thing, and I just
> > bought (that's right "bought," and with my hard earned cash) yet
another of
> > their systems (from the good folks at First Quality Musical Supply) to
> > install in my new Goodall CJ (that's another post...). So anyone out
there
> > claiming that I am being paid in any form whatsoever by B-band can bite
me.
> > Hah, that's tellin' 'em. (...love those parantheses...)
> >
> > Thirdly, no one, ESPECIALLY the good folks at EMF, is lining their
pockets
> > with anything said here, and if want to mention "forces" on rmmga,
well,
> > the main voice (some guy from Alaska) here uses ("endorses" if you
will)
> > and recommends L.R. Baggs gear. So let's get real here.....
> >
> > Lastly, is it my imagination, or is Pierre the only person I have ever
> > heard recommend the Trance gear (and not just on rmmga, I have never
heard
> > of anyone using this gear)? That is not to say (or even imply) that
simply
> > because something is not widely known of, that it can't be the "best"
> > stuff. Quite the contrary, the B-band gear is hardly known outside
of
> > rmmga, so I am hoping a few rmmga'ers "pop" for the Trance gear based
on
> > Pierre's repeated recommendation, and report back to us. Hopefully
they
> > won't consider it wasted money....I would recommend, when dealing with
> > Trance (or their retailers) that one gets a "100% money back guarantee"
in
> > writing if not fully satisfied after 30 days. Caveat emptor.....
> >
> > Larry Pattis
> >
> > Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
> >
> > Liberal Palette Records
> > http://liberalpalette.com
> > "Music Without Borders"
>
>
From: Hojo2X <hojo2x@aol...>
Subject: Re: L.R. Baggs Double Barrel
Date: 9 Apr 1999 01:24:30 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
It would be nice if we could have a thread on this newsgroup about other brands
of pickups without it turning into either:
A) an attack on B-Band pickups.
B) an endorsement of B-Band pickups.
If we can have discussions of Martin guitars without the Larrivee fans
rallying, joining the thread and insisting that Larrivees are really GREAT,
then it seems to me that, as civilized folk, we ought to be able to extend that
to other products, as well. By the same token, if Martin fans can discuss
their favorite guitars without saying "Yeah, and those Larrivees really SUCK!"
then fans of other pickups ought to extend that same courtesty to B-Band.
I like the Baggs gear, always have, always will. I'm such a gearhead I try
anything else that's new on the market, but always come back to Baggs.
That's my choice, although in the case of the mountain dulcimer, nobody else
makes a professional quality pickup for it, so I haven't got a lot of choice
there.
I haven't installed a B-Band in any of my guitars because I wasn't terribly
impressed with those I have heard. But it works JUST FINE, and a lot of people
with fine ears think that they sound terrific.
This stuff, ultimately, is very subjective. I can't hear the difference
between Indian and Brazilian rosewood, either, but people whose opinions I
trust tell me that they can. So I take their word for it.
So speaking strictly for myself, if I happen to mention that I like Baggs
pickups, I would really appreciate it if no-one else takes that as an attack or
a dismissal of any other brand. Baggs gear is just what happens to work best
for me.
Judging from the general responses one sees here, it doesn't appear that a
whole lot of folks are following me lemming-like into the sea on that, either.
My guess is that folks have the sense to think for themselves on the matter.
Wade Hampton Miller
| Using B-Band with Fishman RE |
|---|
From: <mikecloud@my-dejanews...>
Subject: Re: Using B-Band with Fishman RE
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 16:06:56 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
In article <<370fce9a.100387023@news...>>,
benhan@nospam.monmouth.com (Ben Han) wrote:> Is it possible to wire a Fishman RE Humbucker with a B-Band for stereo
> output?
Ben:
Didn't I just talk to you!?! ;-) It is certainly possible to run the RE and
B- Band through the Core's stereo strap-jack. The Core will have to be
modified slightly so that it's power won't be sent to the RE. I'm sure that
Heikki at EMF can tell you how to make the alteration and wire the two
together. He's very helpful!
Mike
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
| Gold B-Band Strap-Jack Nuts |
|---|
From: <mikecloud@my-dejanews...>
Subject: Gold B-Band Strap-Jack Nuts
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 20:27:14 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
I received an E-mail from Heikki at EMF Friday informing me that they now
have gold strap-jack nuts available for the original Core preamp and the Core
'99 (apparently the threads are different). I thought this might be of
interest to B-Band users wanting to match their strap-jack nut to their gold
tuners.
Mike
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
| B-Band in Classical - My Experience [3] |
|---|
From: JJBateson <jjbateson@aol...>
Subject: B-Band in Classical - My Experience
Date: 14 Apr 1999 11:51:20 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Well gang, I finally got the classical guitar back from the shop with the
B-Band core & mic system installed. I must say that the sound is quite good. I
am very happy with that.
However ...
The finger noise squeeks are so pronounced as to render the guitar unplayable
in a live setting. The sonic quality of the squeeks is excellent, of course!!!
I realize that part of this problem is technique, and Segovia's memory is in no
danger whatsoever of being replaced by mine. Just move your finger a little bit
on one of the strings, any string, and a loud squeek will be heard by all.
I should point out that I was not using a Fishman Pocket Blender or any other
such device. I just plugged straight into an amplifier and played.
Does anyone have any ideas or suggestions to help remedy this situation?
Use only a microphone in front of the guitar when playing live, and forget the
B-Band system entirely? That would be a shame.
Spray something on the strings before performing? Finger-eze (or whatever).
Ideas?
Jay Bateson
From: Tony Rairden <TRairden@XXfqms...>
Subject: Re: B-Band in Classical - My Experience
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 10:41:32 -0400
Organization: First Quality Musical Supplies
Finger-Eze could help some, Jay, and you also might try changing strings to
different brands and models, looking for a string characterized as for
"recording"- these typically have the smoothest outer surfaces, to minimize
finger noise. If the noise is predominantly from the wound strings, you
might also try substituting Gore Elixirs for the wounds-- their "PolyWeb"
coating is Gore-Tex, which is expanded PTFE, and PTFE is generally referred
to as Teflon.
I'm glad you like the sound quality, if not always its content... <G>
Tony Rairden
First Quality Musical Supplies
www.fqms.com
(Anti-SPAM on-- delete Xs from return address to eMail directly.)
I
JJBateson <<jjbateson@aol...>> wrote in message
news:<19990414075120.06172.00000376@ng-fw1...>...
> Well gang, I finally got the classical guitar back from the shop with the
> B-Band core & mic system installed. I must say that the sound is quite
good. I
> am very happy with that.
>
> However ...
>
> The finger noise squeeks are so pronounced as to render the guitar
unplayable
> in a live setting. The sonic quality of the squeeks is excellent, of
course!!!
> I realize that part of this problem is technique, and Segovia's memory is
in no
> danger whatsoever of being replaced by mine. Just move your finger a
little bit
> on one of the strings, any string, and a loud squeek will be heard by all.
>
> I should point out that I was not using a Fishman Pocket Blender or any
other
> such device. I just plugged straight into an amplifier and played.
>
> Does anyone have any ideas or suggestions to help remedy this situation?
> Use only a microphone in front of the guitar when playing live, and forget
the
> B-Band system entirely? That would be a shame.
> Spray something on the strings before performing? Finger-eze (or
whatever).
>
> Ideas?
>
> Jay Bateson
>
From: Tony Rairden <TRairden@XXfqms...>
Subject: Re: B-Band in Classical - My Experience
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 13:36:49 -0400
Organization: First Quality Musical Supplies
I just got input from the factory on this. They say:
>>Does he have the new Core99?? If so, he should make sure the treble boost
is turned OFF from factory default setting ON. This is the recommended set
up by us. For classicals we recommend both LF-enhancer (bass boost) and
HF-enhancer (treble boost) are on turned OFF (ref. installation
instructions, dated 22-Feb-99).
>>Also, one can filter high frequencies somewhat by installing a soft wood
shim over the pickup. It doesn´t make a really noticeable change to the
original sound.<<
Let us know what works for you, Jay.
Tony Rairden
First Quality Musical Supplies
www.fqms.com
(SPAM control on-- delete Xs from return address to correspond.)
JJBateson <<jjbateson@aol...>> wrote in message
news:<19990414075120.06172.00000376@ng-fw1...>...
> Well gang, I finally got the classical guitar back from the shop with the
> B-Band core & mic system installed. I must say that the sound is quite
good. I
> am very happy with that.
>
> However ...
>
> The finger noise squeeks are so pronounced as to render the guitar
unplayable
> in a live setting. The sonic quality of the squeeks is excellent, of
course!!!
> I realize that part of this problem is technique, and Segovia's memory is
in no
> danger whatsoever of being replaced by mine. Just move your finger a
little bit
> on one of the strings, any string, and a loud squeek will be heard by all.
>
> I should point out that I was not using a Fishman Pocket Blender or any
other
> such device. I just plugged straight into an amplifier and played.
>
> Does anyone have any ideas or suggestions to help remedy this situation?
> Use only a microphone in front of the guitar when playing live, and forget
the
> B-Band system entirely? That would be a shame.
> Spray something on the strings before performing? Finger-eze (or
whatever).
>
> Ideas?
>
> Jay Bateson
>
| Nailing B-Band Balance |
|---|
From: <mikecloud@my-dejanews...>
Subject: Nailing B-Band Balance
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 15:40:40 GMT
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
Over the past several months I have struggled with the balance and output
level of the B-Band in my Taylor 12-string. Throughout this process I've
posted my results (or lack thereof) to the group. I tried everything:
Post-it shims, Tusq saddles, bone saddles, Cleartone saddles, and saddles in
separate pieces. I had pretty much come to the conclusion that a B-Band just
was not going work well with a Taylor 12: too many down-force problems, too
sensitive to differences in mechanical contact, too short of a saddle (not
enough pick-up going past the ends of the E strings, the dreaded Taylor
semi-circular bridge pin arrangement, etc. I was just about to give up,
having ruined countless new string sets; but, everytime I heard the B-Band in
my Collings 6-string, I'd decide to try just one more thing. Heikki at EMF
was always very helpful, and made numerous suggestions--the most recent of
which was to try the new Core '99 and the new 29L pick-up with more sensing
material in it. I installed it last night. EUREKA!!!!!!!!!! Perfect
balance, no shims, great output level, and I'm using a bone saddle which
sounds MUCH BETTER unplugged than did the synthetics. My saddle is cut into
five pieces: E, A, D-G, B, and E; but, I don't think this arrangement has
anything to do with the great results I'm getting. It's a remnant of a
failed attempt with the old pre-amp and pick-up (it produced the worst
balance and worst output with the old equipment, but it doesn't seem to
adversely affect unplugged tone so I'm sticking with it). Rather, the new
equipment is THE CURE!!!!! I am NOT EXAGERATING!!!!! If you've experienced
balance and output problems with a B-Band, try the new stuff (oh, and for
what it's worth, I left the low and high frequency enhancers "on"). YOU
WON'T BELIEVE YOUR EARS!!!!!!!!!! B-BAND BALANCE AND OUTPUT PROBLEMS SHOULD
VIRTUALLY BE A THING OF THE PAST!!!!!!!!!!
Mike
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
| B-Band split-saddle pickup review [2] |
|---|
From: George Reiswig <george.reiswig@intel...>
Subject: B-Band split-saddle pickup review
Date: 29 Apr 1999 20:25:00 GMT
Organization: Intel
Okay, I know that RMMGA has seen a lot of posts about the B-Band pickup,
many of them mine. I know that certain individuals don't see (hear) what
the fuss is about.
Well, I fuss. I've not used the Trance system or the Highlander, but I've
tried guitars equipped with the Baggs dual source, the Baggs LB6, and the
Fishman Prefix dual source. I thought all of these were very respectable
pickup systems, but they added a coloration that I didn't care for.
I started Beta testing EMF's split-saddle design pretty early on in their
development, installing it in my Lowden O-32C. To accommodate the saddle
split, they had put two separate narrow saddles together. This created
several problems: the two ribbons of transducer material could rub together
as the guitar moved, which made noise. Easy enough to fix by fitting a
small piece of foam around the ribbons to keep the loose parts from
rubbing. Also, it was very difficult to get the balance right, both
between the saddles and between the strings. This has been the major
complaint against the B-Band that I have heard. This problem is
exacerbated by the fact that restoring balance can be counterintuitive:
louder strings can be made quieter by shimming them, quieter strings can be
made louder by shimming in such a way as to reduce the pressure under that
string. Sometimes. It can be very much an exercise in patience. Next,
apparently putting two elements in parallel reduces the overall output of
the pickup, resulting in less gain and a higher signal-to-noise (S/N)
ratio.
Nevertheless, I was more than willing to spend the time necessary to get
the setup right, and I used that setup for a year without complaint. The
sound was rich and natural, crisp but not "plastic," and even sounded more
like a miced guitar in an amplifier shootout than did a LB6-equipped Olson.
I was very pleased with it.Recently, I got EMF's latest solution for split-saddle pickups. Instead of
using two saperate transducers, each of which fed into a hole in their
respective saddle slots, EMF designed a narrow pickup with a "jog" at the
appropriate place...it's shaped a little like a lazy "Z" such that it
perfectly fits my Lowden. It comes up through the hole under the 6th
string, and just slips right in.
How does it sound? I don't know what the people at EMF do with their spare
time, but I get the impression that most of the time is spent tinkering.
Their tinkering has paid off yet again. Mind you, I was pretty much
content with the pickup system I had, once the concerns that I already
mentioned were dealt with. I did not relish the idea of spending a lot of
time getting the new pickup to balance again.
Well, it took less than ten minutes. Right off the bat, the balance was
much, much better than the old pickup had been when I first installed it.
It is wise to wait a few hours, though, for the saddle to sit on the pickup
while the pickup conforms better to the slot and saddle contours. So I did
that. Next day, I went back, and the 1st string was still decidedly
overbalanced compared to the others. I took that saddle out, and used a
small piece of cellophane tape to shim up the saddle directly under the 1st
string, increasing the pressure under it. As soon as I plugged it in, the
balance was there. All six strings were in excellent balance, and I still
haven't heard the need to do anything else. So one single small shim was
all it took.
Next, I installed the second new pickup they had sent, just in case the
first one was a fluke. Nope...same exact thing: too strong on the 1st
string, one piece of cellophane tape to cure it. That makes me pretty darn
confident in the consistency of their pickups, and that there is some
characteristic about string angle or the slot in my guitar that makes the
1st string a bit weaker.
Somehow, the tinkering also resulted in a good deal more output from the
pickup. I was able to turn down the gain on my Rane AP-13 preamp quite a
bit, and still get the same volume output. This resulted in a dead-silent
setup. Much quieter than before, although I had never had cause to
complain about the S/N ratio in my first pickup.
The new pickup also seems to sound better to me. Fuller, more defined...
It is difficult to tell whether the increase in loudness is the reason for
this perception, which is my guess. I didn't really know of a place where
the old pickup needed improvement. But this one sounds better.
Suffice it to say, the new B-Band split-saddle pickup definitely works, and
works well. Any trouble in getting string balance is apparently easily
dealt with, and the end result is well worth the effort. One of the other
things about this pickup system is that it is very comparable in price to
other pickup systems, but just plain sounds more pleasant IMHO, and in the
opinions of a lot of other people around me.
One last thing: I am not a paid endorser for EMF or B-Band. EMF is a
small company which has a great technology, good customer service, and
should succeed. I have been very impressed with what they've accomplished.
If you prefer the James Taylor tone, by all means go with a Baggs LB6setup. If you want something that sounds closer to a Neumann-miced
acoustic guitar without the feedback problems, you owe it to yourself to
listen to one of these.
Nice job, EMF.
George Reiswig
From: hank alrich <walkinay@thegrid...>
Subject: Re: B-Band split-saddle pickup review
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 07:55:04 -0700
Organization: secret mountain
George Reiswig <<george.reiswig@intel...>> wrote:<a bunch of interesting
stuff snipped before and after the section quoted below>
> Next,
> apparently putting two elements in parallel reduces the overall output of
> the pickup, resulting in less gain and a higher signal-to-noise (S/N)
> ratio.
George, I think you mean a _lower_ signal-to-noise ratio - less signal,
more noise.
--
hank - secret mountain
Note: the rec.audio.pro FAQ is at http://recordist.com/rap-faq/current
Read it and reap!
| B-band blender? [2] |
|---|
From: Tony Rairden <NoSpam@fqms...>
Subject: Re: B-band blender?
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 07:22:00 -0400
Organization: First Quality Musical Supplies
The Entity blending preamp won't be shipping until July at the earliest, so
any one that's in use at this point is a prototype or pre-production model.
Tony Rairden
First Quality Musical Supplies
www.fqms.com
lionson <<lionson@ms17...>> wrote in message
news:<374A57BB.7205@ms17...>...
> I notice that the b-band introduced their new "Entity" blender on their
website.
> Did anyone use that? how does it be compared to the Fishman blender?
>
> Lai
>
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-band blender?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 12:04:11 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <7ihb4r$32n$<1@nnrp1...>>, <mikecloud@my-deja...> wrote:
> Does anyone know the specs on EMF's much anticipated "Entity" blending
> preamp?
Some.
>Do the mic and pick-up input through a single TRS?
Yes. Standard stereo 1/4" output jack.
>Does it
> have a high impedance 1/4" output in addition to the low impedance
> XLR?
Don't know. Probably.
>Does it have a mute button?
Yes!
>Does it have a ground lift switch?
Don't know.
> How much EQ does it have?
Enough. At least as much as the Pocket Blender, possibly more.
>Can you EQ the mic channel and pick-up
> channel separately?
Of course!
>Will it work with a single source (pick-up only)?
Sure, but why use it? O.K., I take that one back, there may be many
reasons to use it this way....but since the new EMF mic retails at about
$70, why not go whole hog?
> Without modification, will it work with old style (battery on board the
> guitar) systems, as well as the new (batteryless) systems?
No, not without "modification"...there will be an internal switch of some
sort that will accomodate this.
>Is there
> one effects loop for each channel?
Don't know. Likely, however.
>Do the effects loops interrupt
> signal flow?
Probably not.
>Are the loops pre-, or post-EQ?
Hmmm, good question....I don't even know the answer to that on my Pocket
Blender.
>How big is the unit?
Small, about the same size as a PB.
> Will it mount on a mic stand? Is EMF putting out a special adapter so
> that it will mount on a mic stand?
Yes. Yes.
>What's the suggested retail price
> of the Entity?
Don't think anyone knows. Probably in the $400-500 range (as per the
"competition's" pricing) for just the "Entity" (or whatever better name I
hope they come up with!) as a "best guess." I could be way off.
> Thanks for any info.
You're welcome.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
| Core preamp (B-Band) problem [2] |
|---|
From: <GregN.>
Subject: Core preamp (B-Band) problem
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 16:06:26 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
I'm having a small problem with my Core pre-amp:
When I plug in the amp connector cable, I may or may not get a signal.
It behaves very much like a slack joint.
When I slightly retract the plug from the Core's socket (about 1/16"),
the contact is made firmly, and the signal is reliably there. I have
now resorted to using a shim between the plug and the socket.
Questions:
1) is this a common problem?
2) did I do some mistake in the core/b-Band installation?
3) is there anything I can do to fix it?
--
Greg N.
http://www.neatone.com
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: Core preamp (B-Band) problem
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 10:53:35 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <7iehq1$1mt$<1@nnrp1...>>, Greg N. <"Greg N."
<<yodel_dodel@yahoo...>>> wrote:
> I'm having a small problem with my Core pre-amp:
>
> When I plug in the amp connector cable, I may or may not get a signal.
> It behaves very much like a slack joint.
>
> When I slightly retract the plug from the Core's socket (about 1/16"),
> the contact is made firmly, and the signal is reliably there. I have
> now resorted to using a shim between the plug and the socket.
>
> Questions:
>
> 1) is this a common problem?
> 2) did I do some mistake in the core/b-Band installation?
> 3) is there anything I can do to fix it?
>
> --
> Greg N.
> http://www.neatone.com
>
EMF recommends using connecting plugs from Switchcraft only. This could be
your problem. Also, input jacks can go bad through misuse, AND they can go
bad with NO misuse!
You may also want to check that the interior 1/4 female jack is at least
flush with the outer cosmetic cover. If the interior receiver is "sunken"
in relationship to the outer cover, well, this is a problem with any of
these devices. A lot of installations are done incorrectly in this way,
I've seen it happen from the best of shops. The correction is removing the
pre-amp, and re-setting the interior nut so that more of the receiver
protrudes through the endpin area on the guitar. Clear?
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
| B-band "Entity"? |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-band "Entity"?
Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 12:19:50 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
Let's see, what did I want to mention, but forgot?
It will have the unique ability to itself be powered by 48v phantom power
from a mixing board. If you don't have the luxury of phantom (like if you
are using a powered mixer that does not have this feature, or going
directly into an amp) it will have the usual a/c adapter set-up.
It will have at least one "phase shift" button.
Hmmm, seems like there is more that I am forgetting (wouldn't be the first
time)......
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
| other mics with b-band |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: other mics with b-band
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 12:35:34 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <<37600D43.927E74C1@meca...>>, <zzbucky@meca...> wrote:
> will the core 99 preamp accept other mics?
Yes.
>what kind of connection does it have.
They have a modular plug-in system, so without their mic plugged in there
are two "poles" that any mic can be soldered on to. Prior to their new
mic coming out, I was using my favorite Mills mic in just this fashion.
>I have a highlander mic which has a built in preamp and phantom
> power supply with an 1/8" jack. Can I plug this directly into the core
> preamp?
I have no idea, you might have to contact both companies on this. FYI, the
Core comes from the factory pre-set to draw phantom from the internal
battery. The Core can be easily modified to accept external phantom, like
the 6-15v available from the dual-channel external pre-amps that are
available.
I have definitely heard good things about the new Highlander mic, but you
don't need much mic signal in conjunction with the B-band pick-up, and the
new EMF mic goes for only about $70 at full retail. I guess if you've
already got the gear you might as well use it, however, so you're on your
own from here!
Best of luck,
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
| B-band in a Lowden? [2] |
|---|
From: Tony Rairden <TRairden@NoSpamfqms...>
Subject: Re: B-band in a Lowden?
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 09:09:26 -0400
Organization: First Quality Musical Supplies
B-Band split-saddle pickups are in production, and we have 'em in stock.
Tony Rairden
First Quality Musical Supplies
www.fqms.com
Larry Pattis <<abuse@127...>> wrote in message
news:<abuse-ya02408000R1306990928410001@news...>...
> In article <<37634ae5.1888504@news...>>, <pjmacd1@concentric...>
> (Peter MacDonald) wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know if B-band (or anyone besides Fishman) makes a UTS
> > pickup for a split-saddle guitar like a Lowden?
> >
> > Peter
>
>
>
> Hey Peter,
>
> I suggest you email EMF directly. I know that several prototype versions
> have been "out there" being tested for a while, but if they don't have
> something on the market currently, they might sell you one directly. I
> simply don't know, which is why the frontal approach might be best. Then
> you can educate us on the latest...
>
> Heikki at EMF: emf "at" dlc "dot" fi
>
> Their website is www.b-band.com
>
> Larry Pattis
>
> Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
>
> Liberal Palette Records
> http://liberalpalette.com
> "Music Without Borders"
From: Ben Han <benhan@nospam...>
Subject: Re: B-band in a Lowden?
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 13:28:08 GMT
Organization: Monmouth Internet
Hi Marc,
It took me a while to narrow my search down to the B-Band (with the
help of Tom Loredo and Larry Pattis). I am more than happy with it.
I took my Goodall to a local builder to help with the installation.
Drilling the hole under the saddle was a little tricky because you
could get too close to one of the braces if the angle is too sharp.
If you don't do the installation yourself, make sure you go to someone
who really knows what they're doing. The nicest thing was not having
to do any modification to the saddle because the pickup is so thin.
Also, I put the battery on the bass side of the neck block, so I
wouldn't cover the sticker. The battery holder comes with
double-stick tape and works well.
Good luck.
Ben Han
<benhan@nospam...>
please remove nospam. when replying
On Mon, 14 Jun 1999 00:55:26 -0400, "Marc C Durso"
<<dir1ssdc@earthlink...>> wrote:
>Since I have a Goodall Koa Standard and you speak so highly of this pickup,
>I may now consider "electrifying" my dream guitar.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Marc Durso
>Goodall Koa Standard
| Batteries in the guitar, danger Will Robinson (was: B-band in a Lowden?) |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Batteries in the guitar, danger Will Robinson (was: B-band in a Lowden?)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 07:44:27 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <<3767a568.54853422@news...>>,
<benhan@nospam...> (Ben Han) wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
> It took me a while to narrow my search down to the B-Band (with the
> help of Tom Loredo and Larry Pattis). I am more than happy with it.
>
> I took my Goodall to a local builder to help with the installation.
> Drilling the hole under the saddle was a little tricky because you
> could get too close to one of the braces if the angle is too sharp.
> If you don't do the installation yourself, make sure you go to someone
> who really knows what they're doing. The nicest thing was not having
> to do any modification to the saddle because the pickup is so thin.
>
> Also, I put the battery on the bass side of the neck block, so I
> wouldn't cover the sticker. The battery holder comes with
> double-stick tape and works well.
>
> Good luck.
> Ben Han
> <benhan@nospam...>
> please remove nospam. when replying
Ben & others...I recommend against relying soley on the 3M material EMF provides (or
double stick tape, or Velcro, or anything!) to hold any battery holder on.
The best method is to screw directly into the neck block of the guitar.
If, like on the Goodall, there is a cosmetic issue, screw the battery clip
to a small, thin block of wood, and then superglue that to the side of the
neck block.
ALWAYS remove the battery when traveling with, or shipping a guitar.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
| B-Band in D-35 Report (longish) |
|---|
From: john bj <desert2000@my-deja...>
Subject: B-Band in D-35 Report (longish)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 20:46:59 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Here's my promised report on the B-Band installed in my 1978 Martin D-35
a few months ago. I chose the B-Band largely based on RMMGA reports and
recommendations. I gave it some time to try out variations on the mic
placement and amp settings, etc.
First some background:
The existing (unsatisfying) pick-up was an old ('95) Martin Thinline
with preamp. It was OK for basic amplification - little or no feedback
problems at loud on-stage levels - but it didn't sound like my guitar
(almost like a jazz archtop, which ain't bad, but wasn't exactly what I
was looking for). It also had significant trebly quacking, especially
when flatpicking accented up-stroke chords. It was running through a
Fishman Acoustic Performer Pro amplifier. The bass had to be boosted a
lot. The treble was cut quite a bit to soften up the quacking. The end
result was kind of empty.
I was hesitant to try the B-Band because of the high temperatures here
in Tucson, Arizona. I wrote to EMF after reading their on-line owners
manual (I wish more companies did that!) and saw that they warned
against exposing it to temps above 120. I was checking to see if they
meant F or C and explained that a closed car can easily get up to
140-150 in the sun. Here in Tucson they've been measured as high as
180. Heikki wrote back and said they did indeed mean 120F. Extended
exposure to temps above 120 would degrade the B-Band material, cutting
its response. I finally gave in to the urge to try the B-Band because I
was getting sick of my Martin sounding worse than an acoustic simulator,
plus I take pretty good care of my instrument and don't leave it out to
bake, etc.
Anyway, I got the whole Core Pre-amp, B-Band and mic, installed at
Rainbow Instruments, the local authorized Martin repair shop. I was
truly amazed at the improvement. After some months now, I remain pretty
happy with it. My overall evaluation is that the B-Band is an excellent
relatively low-cost product. I mention problems just to be thorough.
Good points:
Virtually no EQ adjustments are needed. I cut the treble just a tad
(11:00 vs 12:00 for flat) to almost totally eliminate a slight quack
that is still audible on those hard up-stroke chords, but bass and mids
are totally flat. The frequency notch filter is set at about the open
B, which seems to be a resonant frequency for my guitar, but only have
to cut it slightly (about 3:00 on the 5:00 to 7:00 counter-clockwise
control knob).
After fiddling with the mic position quite a bit, it ended up pointed at
the treble side of the upper bout. Cutting some of the bass out of the
mic signal to get rid of some boominess, and blending it about 1 part
mic to 3 parts B-Band, produces an amplified sound I like. There's zero
feedback on stage as long as a Kyser soundhole humidifier is in place
(and I remember to mute the guitar when I lean over to adjust anything -
duh). At home, with low volumes and the humidifier out, there's zero
feedback as long as it's more than two feet the speaker. To answer a
possible question: I do about 1/3 of my home practicing amplified
because it helps me hear (and hopefully eliminate) mistakes, plus I like
tweaking the settings for stage use.
The mic is pretty good, too. As part of the amp set-up, the gain is
adjusted by listening to the mic and pick-up separately before blending
them, so I got a good listen to each separately. In vague, generalized
terminology, I hear it like this: the B-Band picks up that nice, woody,
acoustic sound; the mic adds that distinctive splash of warm, resonant
"Martin" sound. It's like (my guess) the B-Band is picking up the top,
and the mic adds the back/whole soundbox.
Bad (but not too bad) Points:
The B-Band is very sensitive to where you pluck the strings. Plucking
or strumming closer to the bridge produces a MUCH brighter sound than
the guitar on its own. This is useful for no-picks-or-nails fingerstyle
playing, making the sound much clearer, but I have to watch strumming
and flatpicking. Up-stroke quacking can get really noticeable when
strumming hard near the bridge. I'm playing more over the soundhole to
compensate, and I'm starting to get used to the greater variance in
response. By 'greater variance' I mean greater than the guitar on its
own - the old Thinline sounded pretty much the same no matter how/where
I played.
After about a week of 'settling' (which EMF recommends, should you have
balance problems), the middle strings started to fade. Boosting the EQ
didn't help because it really was the middle two strings, not just the
middle frequencies. So I pulled out the EMF instruction book and looked
under troubleshooting balance problems. I didn't have the recommended
very thin piece of softwood, so I tried two post-it note layers under
the G&D, with no change. The RMMGA trick of putting the layers under
the hot strings is in the instructions as a 'last resort'. I tried this
next. It only made the hot strings hotter. So I inspected the saddle
to be sure it was 'perfectly flat'. There was some uneven, grainy
pattern on the bottom and a slight upward curve on the ends. When
lightly sanded smooth and flat, it got worse. Back to Post-Its. There
were about five layers under the G&D when the B&E disappeared. After a
few days (!) of fiddling around, the final configuration has the saddle
sanded with a slight curve in the bottom (a bit more than it was) and
flat but not quite square on the bottom (short on the soundhole side).
This, with a single layer of Post-It under the G&D, which extends
outward almost to the B&A, gave a pretty well-balanced response once
again. It cost a couple of sets of strings (from all the winding and
unwinding), but has remained pretty consistent over two months now,
including a couple of normal string changes.
All in all, I'm really pleased with the sound. I've written to EMF
suggesting they look into an embedded saddle concept (a la Baggs LB6) to
simplify or eliminate the balance adjustments.
peace and joy,
jbj
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
| Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source [17] |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 18:48:45 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <7lgvjn$ee5$<1@cletus...>>, "DReke" <<dreke@bright...>> wrote:
> I am thinking about installing either the L.R. Baggs Dual Source System or
> the B-band pickup/mic combination in my Taylor 714. Unfortunately I have not
> found any luthiers in my area who have installed either. (In fact, they
> weren't even familiar with the B-band.) So I'm thinking about just doing the
> installation myself.
>
> Is that a good or a bad idea? Have any of you installed either of those
> yourself? How difficult would that be?
>
> BTW - this is a great newsgroup. It seems like just about everyone wants to
> help folks, and I greatly appreciate the good advice I've gotten.
>
> Dan R.
Dan,
You haven't told us if you have some tools, or if you are "handy" with
things in general. The B-band doesn't require much, tool-wise, and since
you've got a Taylor, that means that the endpin is pre-drilled to the
correct diameter. Might be a piece of cake for you, then again, it might
not. No one here can give you a definitive answer about what you can
handle! There is only one small hole to drill through your bridge's saddle
slot, at an angle for both the Baggs and B-Band (so you need to be careful
to not drill through a brace), and that might well be the scariest part.
I have installed over a couple of hundred pick-ups, including dozens of
B-bands and Baggs equipment. Any reasonably intelligent person can do the
installation, but you may have problems with saddle height and/or string to
string volume balance.
The fact that your local shp(s) have not heard of the B-band is not
surprising, nor will it deter me from making this comment; that is, anyone
that has installed ANY of the current pick-ups can install a B-band (as
long as they can read!), in fact the B-band is easier to work with because
no soldering is required. This may also be true of the Baggs equipment, it
is not true for Fishman.
BTW, I had a good laugh while on the phone with Jeff Traugott today, since
I (finally) am having difficulties balancing a B-band in one of my own
guitars. Jeff mentioned that even with his perfect saddle slots (well he
didn't use the word perfect, but I am) and carefully produced saddles, he
has trouble more often than not with ALL of the pick-ups out there. (if
you don't know who Jeff Traugott is, well, let's just say that his guitars,
along with Linda Manzer and James Olson, are the most sought after guitars
in the business. While we were on the phone Colin Hay called...)
So it's really your call about what to do. The B-band comes with very
explicit instructions, I don't remember how the Baggs instructions compare,
but they are probably as good.
Best of luck,
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 07:25:35 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <<19990702023259.10037.00001768@ng-bg1...>>, <hojo2x@aol...>
(Hojo2X) wrote:
> Well, Lance may have said it a bit harshly, but his opinion concurs with what
> I've heard from other builders and guitar repair techs:
> regardless of whether one likes the tone of the B-Bands, they do, in
fact, have
> a greater problem with getting a proper string balance than most of the other
> brands out there. Trying to diminish the significance of the problem by
> claiming it is spread out evenly with other brands is just not accurate.
>
>
> Wade Hampton Miller
I am not going to respond at all to Lance's angry post, but I will point
out a few things via Wade's calm, but not fully accurate post.
This has ALL been said (by me) before.
All saddle elements have a tendancy to string balance problems.
The original B-band was indeed more prone to these problems, but the
problems were fairly easy to correct, if you know how (NOT rocket science,
simple applications of pressure via paper shims, a common luthier trick).
The NEW B-band element (distributed with the Core99) has about the same
tendancy as any other pick-up to have balance problems. No more, no less.
If any one cares to dispute me on this, well, they had better have
installed (themselves) about two dozen of them, because I already have.
As I said, ALL of these things have been presented by me before on rmmga.
If anyone NOW does not make some distinction between the original gear
(which again, was not too hard to deal with) and the new gear (which is
extremely easy to deal with) from EMF, well, they are possibly (I said
possibly) guilty of having an agenda (just like folks think I have).
When Wade says "they do, in fact, have a greater problem with getting a
proper string balance than most of the other brands out there" I have a
problem with this, since he is NOT making a distinction between the the
original, and the new, current B-band.
I am NOT trying diminish any problems, as it is a well known fact (by any
reputable and honest repair person) that ALL saddle elements ARE prone
to this problem. I dispute your comment Wade, in that the builders and
guitar techs that I know do not think the B-band is much of a problem
(certainly not as big as is being made out here), and that includes the
original gear.
Are we in the middle of another B-band debate?
Why?
Any original condition B-bands that Lance has, I'd be more than happy to
buy for $5 a piece. Send 'em on over.
Larry "my agenda is the truth about things" Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: George Reiswig <george.reiswig@intel...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 10:55:15 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Short followup to the Larry's well-written response (copied below):
I've got two guitars, and have beta-tested for B-Band from very early on.
As Larry says, the early versions were prone to balance problems: too much
or too little pressure underneath particular strings resulted in reduced
output. (Ville Numela (sp.?) gave some excellent reasons from the physics
perspective for this behavior) I had those problems, too, and told B-Band
about them. They were VERY aware of the problem, since all of their beta
testers were giving them the same feedback.
One of the things about the EMF folks...they never stop trying to respond to
the user feedback they get, which to me is the mark of a good company.
Heikki and friends went back to work, and I got (within the past few months)
newer pickups from them. I can honestly say that with each successive
design, they have gotten better: better balance right off the bat, better
signal/noise ratio, and actually somewhat better tone, IMHO. While I have
only installed a couple of Baggs Ribbons, I really think that the most
recent incarnation of the B-Band is at least as easy to balance. If you
get one and have trouble balancing it, e-mail me and I'll be happy to help
you tinker with it until it's right.
No, I am not a compensated endorser of EMF.
As for Traugott guitars...well, I think I'll stick with my Lowden and humble
Yamaha.
George "Satisfied Customer and not a Pattis Relative" Reiswig
Larry Pattis wrote in message ...
>In article <<19990702023259.10037.00001768@ng-bg1...>>, <hojo2x@aol...>
>(Hojo2X) wrote:
>
>> Well, Lance may have said it a bit harshly, but his opinion concurs with
what
>> I've heard from other builders and guitar repair techs:
>> regardless of whether one likes the tone of the B-Bands, they do, in
>fact, have
>> a greater problem with getting a proper string balance than most of the
other
>> brands out there. Trying to diminish the significance of the problem by
>> claiming it is spread out evenly with other brands is just not accurate.
>>
>>
>> Wade Hampton Miller
>
>
>I am not going to respond at all to Lance's angry post, but I will point
>out a few things via Wade's calm, but not fully accurate post.
>
>This has ALL been said (by me) before.
>
>All saddle elements have a tendancy to string balance problems.
>
>The original B-band was indeed more prone to these problems, but the
>problems were fairly easy to correct, if you know how (NOT rocket science,
>simple applications of pressure via paper shims, a common luthier trick).
>
>The NEW B-band element (distributed with the Core99) has about the same
>tendancy as any other pick-up to have balance problems. No more, no less.
>If any one cares to dispute me on this, well, they had better have
>installed (themselves) about two dozen of them, because I already have.
>
>As I said, ALL of these things have been presented by me before on rmmga.
>If anyone NOW does not make some distinction between the original gear
>(which again, was not too hard to deal with) and the new gear (which is
>extremely easy to deal with) from EMF, well, they are possibly (I said
>possibly) guilty of having an agenda (just like folks think I have).
>
>When Wade says "they do, in fact, have a greater problem with getting a
>proper string balance than most of the other brands out there" I have a
>problem with this, since he is NOT making a distinction between the the
>original, and the new, current B-band.
>
>I am NOT trying diminish any problems, as it is a well known fact (by any
>reputable and honest repair person) that ALL saddle elements ARE prone
>to this problem. I dispute your comment Wade, in that the builders and
>guitar techs that I know do not think the B-band is much of a problem
>(certainly not as big as is being made out here), and that includes the
>original gear.
>
>Are we in the middle of another B-band debate?
>
>Why?
>
>Any original condition B-bands that Lance has, I'd be more than happy to
>buy for $5 a piece. Send 'em on over.
>
>Larry "my agenda is the truth about things" Pattis
>
>Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
>
>Liberal Palette Records
>http://liberalpalette.com
>"Music Without Borders"
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 15:11:24 GMT
Organization: remove "NOSPAM" from my address to reply
The B-Band just requires a different seating technique, that's all. I
am able to install b-band pickups without any balancing problems, the
first time every time - and without using those d**ned
post-it-shims, either. The shims are a real bummer, and hit or miss at
best. It's all in your process.
John Zyla
On 02 Jul 1999 06:32:59 GMT, <hojo2x@aol...> (Hojo2X) wrote:
>Well, Lance may have said it a bit harshly, but his opinion concurs with what
>I've heard from other builders and guitar repair techs:
>regardless of whether one likes the tone of the B-Bands, they do, in fact, have
>a greater problem with getting a proper string balance than most of the other
>brands out there. Trying to diminish the significance of the problem by
>claiming it is spread out evenly with other brands is just not accurate.
>
>
>Wade Hampton Miller
From: Chuck Murphy <crmurphy@ids...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 16:07:22 -0400
I installed a B-Band undersaddle in about an hour. I drilled a 1/2" hole
where the endpin was and 1/8" hole at a 45 degree angle at the bass side of
the saddle slot. I checked to make sure I was not hitting any braces. To add
the mic would not have been any extra effort in that everything on the
B-Band plugs in to the Core Pre-Amp. The only thing that slowed me down was
trying to get the end pin jack through the hole I had drilled (my arm
wouldn't fit that far in). Eventually, I just put a Phillips screwdriver
through the hole I had drilled, from the outside. Inside the guitar, I slid
the jack/pre-amp over the end of the screwdriver and guided it into place. I
used a very small screwdriver (the kind used to tighten eyeglass screws)
through the hole on the outside of the pre-amp jack to hold it in place
while tightening the outside nut. This keeps the Core Pre-Amp from turning
and twisting wires inside the guitar.
--
Chuck Murphy
Richmond, RI
DReke <<dreke@bright...>> wrote in message
news:7lgvjn$ee5$<1@cletus...>...
| I am thinking about installing either the L.R. Baggs Dual Source System or
| the B-band pickup/mic combination in my Taylor 714. Unfortunately I have
not
| found any luthiers in my area who have installed either. (In fact, they
| weren't even familiar with the B-band.) So I'm thinking about just doing
the
| installation myself.
|
| Is that a good or a bad idea? Have any of you installed either of those
| yourself? How difficult would that be?
|
| BTW - this is a great newsgroup. It seems like just about everyone wants
to
| help folks, and I greatly appreciate the good advice I've gotten.
|
| Dan R.
|
|
|
From: Chuck Murphy <crmurphy@ids...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 16:17:50 -0400
I've only installed one (the new '99 Core Pre-Amp) B-Band...no balance
problems at all.
--
Chuck Murphy
Richmond, RI
Larry Pattis <<abuse@127...>> wrote in message
news:<abuse-ya02408000R0207990725350001@news...>...
| In article <<19990702023259.10037.00001768@ng-bg1...>>, <hojo2x@aol...>
| (Hojo2X) wrote:
|
| > Well, Lance may have said it a bit harshly, but his opinion concurs with
what
| > I've heard from other builders and guitar repair techs:
| > regardless of whether one likes the tone of the B-Bands, they do, in
| fact, have
| > a greater problem with getting a proper string balance than most of the
other
| > brands out there. Trying to diminish the significance of the problem by
| > claiming it is spread out evenly with other brands is just not accurate.
| >
| >
| > Wade Hampton Miller
|
|
| I am not going to respond at all to Lance's angry post, but I will point
| out a few things via Wade's calm, but not fully accurate post.
|
| This has ALL been said (by me) before.
|
| All saddle elements have a tendancy to string balance problems.
|
| The original B-band was indeed more prone to these problems, but the
| problems were fairly easy to correct, if you know how (NOT rocket science,
| simple applications of pressure via paper shims, a common luthier trick).
|
| The NEW B-band element (distributed with the Core99) has about the same
| tendancy as any other pick-up to have balance problems. No more, no
less.
| If any one cares to dispute me on this, well, they had better have
| installed (themselves) about two dozen of them, because I already have.
|
| As I said, ALL of these things have been presented by me before on rmmga.
| If anyone NOW does not make some distinction between the original gear
| (which again, was not too hard to deal with) and the new gear (which is
| extremely easy to deal with) from EMF, well, they are possibly (I said
| possibly) guilty of having an agenda (just like folks think I have).
|
| When Wade says "they do, in fact, have a greater problem with getting a
| proper string balance than most of the other brands out there" I have a
| problem with this, since he is NOT making a distinction between the the
| original, and the new, current B-band.
|
| I am NOT trying diminish any problems, as it is a well known fact (by any
| reputable and honest repair person) that ALL saddle elements ARE prone
| to this problem. I dispute your comment Wade, in that the builders and
| guitar techs that I know do not think the B-band is much of a problem
| (certainly not as big as is being made out here), and that includes the
| original gear.
|
| Are we in the middle of another B-band debate?
|
| Why?
|
| Any original condition B-bands that Lance has, I'd be more than happy to
| buy for $5 a piece. Send 'em on over.
|
| Larry "my agenda is the truth about things" Pattis
|
| Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
|
| Liberal Palette Records
| http://liberalpalette.com
| "Music Without Borders"
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 00:00:00 GMT
There's been some talk about methods of balancing B-Bands. Here's a
slightly edited version of a descriptive email I sent to L. Pattis on
my method. This is not sanctioned by EMF in any way, and I have no
connection with EMF outside of the fact that I use B-Bands and love
them. In fact, the folks at EMF think the public might think putting
clay into a guitar is weird, so - remember this is John Zyla speaking
- not EMF ..... Anyway, it works extremely well in my limited
experience using this method - perfect balance the first time on
guitars that were giving me fits otherwise.
<< start text >>
You've installed a great number of B-Bands, I understand, so you might
appreciate this. I love the B-Band, but I don't like balancing any
pickup using shims. It's too much of a hit or miss process.
Well, I got to thinking about the possible causes of balancing
problems, and it all boils down to, in one way or another, a failure
to completely and evenly transfer pressure from the top of the
saddle down through the "sandwich" structure of the pickup, to the
wood of the bottom of the saddle slot. From reading of other luthier's
experiences, it seems that just making sure your saddle is flat on the
bottom, and the slot is flat, doesn't always guarantee a trouble-free
balancing especially with the B-Band, because it's stiffness tends to
exaggerate the effect any (even miniscule) sloping of the saddle or
slot routing.
So, the task at hand was to devise a method by which one could ensure
a pretty much consistent transferance of pressure, without having to
go through the trial and error exercise of shimming. Shimming is fine,
it's just not an efficient use of the luthiers time, because results
aren't predictable.
I got to thinking about how fine target rifle barrels are "bedded" to
the stocks using fiberglass and other compounds, and this lead me to
consider using bedding in this application. Actually, I considered
this very early on, just had not decided on a bedding material.
I do a bit of ceramics work as a hobby, and am quite familiar with the
properties of various clays, and it hit me that this may be the
answer. The properties I wanted for a bedding material were:
1. The material must not be adhesive, except to itself - i.e. we do
not want to "glue" the sandwich together!
2. The material must conform to surfaces, but be hard - so that it
would transparently transfer pressure. A soft material would color
the sound. This would not be acceptable.
3. The material must have a fine grain structure so that it can be
used in a very thin layer so saddle height is not affected
appreciably. It's important to note here that the only function the
material must perform is to ensure even pressure transfer, so a thin
layer is all that is needed. Indeed, a *more than thin" layer would be
detrimental.
The material I decided to try is a self-hardening modeling clay. This
clay hardens without firing, is adhesive only to itself, and has a
very fine grain structure. Amoco "Mexican" or "Marblex" self hardening
clay is what I have used. This is available at art supply stores or
university book stores that have an art supplies section. It's
important to find a source that sells it once in a while, so you get a
reasonably fresh box. A 32 oz brick costs about $5.50 around here.
Enough to do about 30,000 saddles, or a few saddles and some neat
sculptures.
Here's the applcation method simplified. If you're interested and want
to try, I can go into more detail, let me know.
1. Lay down a very thin layer of bedding in the saddle slot, tamping
reasonably flat.
2. Install the pickup over the first layer.
3. Lay down another very thin layer on top of the pickup.
4. Install the saddle, and string the guitar, tuning to pitch.
5. The whole "sandwich" will cure in a day or so.
So there you have it.
<< end text >>
John Zyla
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 17:38:51 GMT
Organization: remove "NOSPAM" from my address to reply
On 15 Jul 1999 15:36:42 GMT, <dunwell.guitar@dorje...> wrote:
Alan, I'll imbed some answers to your further questions below ….
>John,
>Good idea, I didn't realize that there were self-hardening clays, perfect!
>Some more questions:
>- Can you please be a bit more specific as to what a "ver thin layer" means in
>aprox. inches or mm?
As far as layer thickness, I haven't measured exactly, but it's just
really really thin -think as thin as you can make it and get a solid
layer (without holes). I'm estimating .25 mm or less. I actually leave
a bit of open space around the perimeter (think the "walls" of the
saddle slot) so that the stuff will squish out toward the walls as
saddle pressure is applied. This ensures that I end up with a thinner
layer than I could apply by hand.
>- Do you just make a small roll and then tamp it in place, or do you try to
>flatten it ahead of time?
I actually apply the clay with a Popsicle stick that I have trimmed a
bit on one angle to make it pointier. Dab up a bit of the clay on the
stick, then tamp into the slot. I tried the roll method and it seemed
that I could not make a small enough roll - important to realize the
layer is just as thin as you can possibly make it. I also use a
technique where I get some of the clay on the end of the stick, then
wipe it on the side of the slot - think of cleaning a peanut-butter
knife on the edge of the jar - same idea. Then I tamp down into the
slot.
>- Have you ever had the clay squish by the pickup and bond the upper and lower
>layers together and if so, does it matter?
Yes, in fact I consider it a good thing, but that's not a scientific
estimation - just a feeling.
>How good is the non-adhesive nature
>of this clay, is the pickup separable from the clay afterwards?
The clay when dried (hardened) can be broken easily in thin layers -
so it's extremely non-adhesive. I've removed B-Bands from slots
installed this way - just take the same Popsicle stick tool and
lightly scrape an edge of the layer off on the free end of the pickup,
then pull the pickup up and out. I use a dental probe to snag the end
of the B-Band (these are great tools - ask your dentist for a couple
of them - when they dull, the dentists throw them into a box in the
back room (cleaned) - mine gave me a handful of them). Any remaining
clay can be wiped off of the pickup between two dry fingers. A
slightly damp paper towel is just effective too. One can clean the
stuff out of the saddle slot with a dry toothbrush - the wood is
porous so wiping only may leave a few tiny bits in there - hence the
need for the soft toothbrush. . . Very non-adhesive as I say. There
is zero permanent adhesion to anything of a smooth nature such as the
B-Band element. In fact, the layers will tend to settle over time, -
improving the contact layer - but if you remove the saddle you may
have to re-do the clay installation if any of it falls out. I tape the
saddle on to the bridge with a single strip of scotch tape if I've
taken off all of the strings for any reason.
>- What sort of total thickness do you end up with for the two layers and the
>pickup, ie: how much do you need to route?
Again - I've not measured, it's less than one half millimeter. I
don't like to route if I don't have to, and these installations added
so little that I just took a bit off of the top of the saddle and
re-profiled a bit. I probably wouldn't even have had to do that except
I'm way too picky (anal?) and am fanatical about achieving low
actions.
I apologize for the long post.
Grace and Peace,
John
>
>Thanks for the info,
>Alan
From: Nelson Foster <nelsonfoster@worldnet...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 21:49:17 -0400
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
John - I also thought about the problem with the shims and how it is time
consuming, I hadn't thought of the modeling clay tho' - that seems like a
great idea. I tried using some flour (it isn't self adhesive - in fact it
doesn't adhere to anything ) and it almost worked - it was better than
shimming. So I had stuck this idea of using a packing material aside for
now - thanks to you I might make another attempt.
I got an email from B-Band a week or so ago and they mentioned that any
material used to shim should not compress (such as a strip of thin rubber)-
because they were concerned about preserving the tone of the guitar. I
assume that modeling clay is not going to compress. . . so before I try this
. . . how does it affect tone? especially on the higher strings?
Thanks in advance,
Nelson
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: 16 Jul 1999 00:49:07 -0500
Organization: Zyla Guitars
On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 21:43:58 -0600, <abuse@127...> (Larry Pattis)
wrote:
>In article <7mm33c$fs5$<1@bgtnsc03...>>, "Nelson Foster"
><<nelsonfoster@worldnet...>> wrote:
>
>> John - I also thought about the problem with the shims and how it is time
>> consuming, I hadn't thought of the modeling clay tho' - that seems like a
>> great idea. I tried using some flour (it isn't self adhesive - in fact it
>> doesn't adhere to anything ) and it almost worked - it was better than
>> shimming. So I had stuck this idea of using a packing material aside for
>> now - thanks to you I might make another attempt.
>>
>> I got an email from B-Band a week or so ago and they mentioned that any
>> material used to shim should not compress (such as a strip of thin rubber)-
>> because they were concerned about preserving the tone of the guitar. I
>> assume that modeling clay is not going to compress. . . so before I try this
>> . . . how does it affect tone? especially on the higher strings?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Nelson
>
>
>Nelson,
>
>Remember, John is using "self-hardening clay," not modeling clay (if there
>is a difference?). Since I have not yet embarked on my own experience with
>John's technique, I cannot yet comment about the compression/acoustic sound
>issue.
>
Larry is right. Even though the Amoco self hardening stuff is
"modeling clay per se", there is also non-hardening modeling clay. You
will see a brand called "Sculpey (tm) " on the shelf next to the self
hardening stuff. I have not tried this, but it did not meet my specs
according to my hypothesis of what properties I wanted in a bedding
compound. I believe a soft pliable modeling clay such as Sculpey (tm)
might tend to color the sound, and my prime goal is to not affect the
tone in any discernable way. As I have mentioned to some folks, I use
the clay when I seat all of my saddles whether I am installing a
B-Band pickup or not. The reason I do this is to ensure a perfect
transfer of pressure from the saddle to the bridge (saddle slot
bottom). I do notice that I get a better (actually - I should use
the words "more consistent") sound when I do this. I am a firm
believer that the saddle is an extremely important link in the
transfer of modulated pressure (sound!) in the guitar. This is why we
all have opinions on what saddle material is best, and all that - it's
an important link. I use bone! - Tried 'em all (except carbon fiber)
and settled on bone. I need to try the carbon fiber composite stuff
cause high tech materials interest me. I think I'll end up staying
w/bone though - it's a gut feeling.
Here I've gone and written a too-long post - again I apologize for the
bandwidth usage. Please forgive me I get carried away.
Grace and Peace,
John
>Larry Pattis
>
>Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
>
>Liberal Palette Records
>http://liberalpalette.com
>"Music Without Borders"
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 14:47:07 -0400
Organization: Cornell University
Hi folks-
John's method is fascinating and certainly worthy of exploration.
I just wanted to note one slight complication.
> 2. The material must conform to surfaces, but be hard - so that it
> would transparently transfer pressure. A soft material would color
> the sound. This would not be acceptable.
It is absolutely true that a soft material will color the sound. I
just want to point out that a hard material can color it, too. The
most relevant parameter is probably not hardness per se, but acoustic
impedance. Whenever a vibration has to pass from a material of
one impedance to a material of a different impedance, part of the
wave gets reflected at the interface. One of the cool things about
the B-band material is that it has very similar acoustic properties
to wood, so the B-band/slot interface should be essentially transparent,
and the saddle/B-band interface should behave just like a saddle/slot
interface. Adding stuff to either side could influence the tone
even if that stuff is very hard. The fact that the added material
here is very thin might complicate or simplify matters, depending
on the speed of sound in the material (I would guess that what matters
is the size of the material relative to the wavelengths of interest).
That said, if the added material makes the mechanical contact more
consistent across the whole slot, the improvement from that (with or
without a pickup!) could very well completely mask some slight
complication due to additional mismatched impedances.
Peace,
Tom Loredo
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 16:06:43 -0400
Organization: Cornell University
John Zyla wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comments. This is what is needed - peer review. There
> may even be a better substance (probably is!) for the bedding
> material. I encourage folks to experiment with this.
Well, as I mentioned, the fact that you are improving the contact
may well completely overwhelm impedance matching issues. I just don't
know enough acoustics/material science to know what will matter most
here. It is very probably complicated enough that having the
cleverness (and audacity?!) to experiment as John has is the only
way forward.
One possibility for experiment, besides trying different materials,
would be to try using the material only on one side. For example,
if the hardened clay is acoustically more like bone than like
wood, then any impedance-mismatch effects should be minimized if
you use it only between the saddle and the B-band. It could be
that using just one layer provides enough "stuff" to squeeze
around and deal with the slot/saddle/B-band imperfections, and
putting it where it essentially just extends the acoustically
similar saddle is enough. Though for all I know hardened clay is
acoustically more like wood than bone, in which case.... Well,
you get the idea! Trying just one layer might also reduce the
action increase. The B-band itself is pretty flexible, so I would
guess that the problems can be dealt with by "bedding" just one side.
Larry wrote:
> From now on, Tom (with your permission of course), I will be running all
> of my "tech" posts by you for evaluation and approval first!
No permission granted; you certainly don't need any such evaluation!
Nor does John, or many others here, and in any case I'm not the one
to be giving it. I just get a kick when a bit of my physics training
ends up having some relevance to music, and I make comments like
the acoustic impedance stuff more just out of my excitement about
the connection than out of any direct relevance to the practical
issues, which are usually too complicated for me to really grasp at
a theoretical level! With this stuff, it's fun to theorize, but
you really just have to play around. And play, of course!
> Thanks, for about the ba-zillionth time, for adding your wisdom to all of
> our existences.
Back at you! And also to John, who is clearly the real clever man in
this thread....
Peace,
Tom
From: <hedberg@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 21:09:31 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
In article <<378F7E2B.AB801415@spacenet...>>,
Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet.tn.cornell.edu> wrote:> It is absolutely true that a soft material will color the sound. I
> just want to point out that a hard material can color it, too. The
> most relevant parameter is probably not hardness per se, but acoustic
> impedance. Whenever a vibration has to pass from a material of
> one impedance to a material of a different impedance, part of the
> wave gets reflected at the interface. One of the cool things about
> the B-band material is that it has very similar acoustic properties
> to wood, so the B-band/slot interface should be essentially
transparent,
> and the saddle/B-band interface should behave just like a saddle/slot
> interface. Adding stuff to either side could influence the tone
> even if that stuff is very hard. The fact that the added material
> here is very thin might complicate or simplify matters, depending
> on the speed of sound in the material (I would guess that what matters
> is the size of the material relative to the wavelengths of interest).
Awe jeez, Tom!
You are right about the reflection at the interface (of course, you
don't need me to tell you that). The greater the contrast in the
acoustic impedances the greater the reflection. Acoustic impedance is a
function of density and acoustic velocity. Layers that are thin with
respect to the wavelength tend towards invisibility, though, so even
though the layer (hardened clay, for example) may have an acoustic
contrast with respect to the bridge material and the bone of the saddle,
it might still be acoustically invisible if it is sufficiently thin.
You allude to this as well. My suspicion is that a thin layer of
hardened clay shouldn't affect the Tone (as Pierre would write it) a
whole lot. As it gets thicker, though, it becomes non-invisible to
frequencies with shorter wave lengths (higher frequencies) first. I
think this is called "dispersion" -- frequency selectivity with respect
to reflection, attenuation, and velocity.
One thing that should be pointed out, I guess, is that impedance does
not imply attenuation (i.e. energy dispersal). Attenuation is
inversely related to hardness though not only to hardness. In any event,
I doubt if a thin layer of clay (hardened or slightly viscous) would
have much of an effect either because of reflection or attenuation.
Best I can gather from John's description of his technique, it seems
that the clay serves as a very thin bedding layer to insure good contact
between the saddle, the transducer, and the bridge -- implying that
balancing problems are due to uneven acoustic coupling along the length
of the saddle. I would suspect that the clay would tend to "smush" out
when compressive force is applied and that it would become very very
thin in areas where there already was very good contact and coupling
from the saddle through the transducer to the bridge.
I read an article in Taylor's propaganda letter (Wood and Steel) a
couple years ago about the importance of fit between the saddle and the
bridge slot. What they claimed is that a very good flat fit along the
entire length of the saddle is not really very important. They also
claimed that good contact at the ends of the saddle (slightly concave
shape to the bottom of the saddle) was superior in sound transmission to
a saddle which had good contact in the middle but poor at the ends
(slightly convex shape). This seems to make intuitive sense to me. If
Taylor is correct in what they wrote, I think this is strong supportfor what John is suggesting.
Those areas along the saddle that have good acoustic coupling will keep
it as the clay layer will probably be very thin (if not absent) there.
Where the clay is less thin would be areas where there is less than
perfect contact between the layers and the clay will ameliorate that
poor coupling. This will help the B Band but probably not have
significant effect on the acoustic properties of the guitar itself.
All this technical mumbo-jumbo is, of course, just that. The proof lies
in the results and apparently John is getting good results without a lot
of dicking around. If I had a B-band with balance problems, I sure
would give it a shot--using the material that John suggests. Seems like
a low risk option.
Harold
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 15:31:05 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
Anyone notice how a bunch of good and useful information has finally been
generated from this thread?
I have.
No sarcasm directed at folks supporting B-band. No "making fun" of
products that "a certain individual" doesn't happen to use. No irrational
challenges or commentary.
Kind of nice, if you ask me.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: 17 Jul 1999 09:50:18 -0500
Organization: Zyla Guitars
On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 21:09:31 GMT, <hedberg@my-deja...> wrote:
<snip>
>Best I can gather from John's description of his technique, it seems
>that the clay serves as a very thin bedding layer to insure good contact
>between the saddle, the transducer, and the bridge -- implying that
>balancing problems are due to uneven acoustic coupling along the length
>of the saddle. I would suspect that the clay would tend to "smush" out
>when compressive force is applied and that it would become very very
>thin in areas where there already was very good contact and coupling
>from the saddle through the transducer to the bridge.
Harold has written a very good interpretation of what one hopes
should happen here. The clay must be able to "smush" out - in effect,
it performs the same function as shimming with paper, except it's
automatic, and much more "accurate" than paper shims. At least that's
my analysis of the process going on under there.
As I mentioned before, even though we can try our darndest and with
the best tools to make a saddle and a saddle slot bottom perfectly
flat and square, it's extremely difficult to achieve the desired
result. The bedding material simply "fixes" any miniscule error's
we've left.
Once again, an extremely thin layer is essential.
<snip>
>Harold
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
From: Nelson Foster <nelsonfoster@worldnet...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 12:10:30 -0400
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
I tried something a little different this morning with my second attempt at
applying clay to the B-Band setup. If you remember yesterday I posted that
the action at the 12th fret was a little higher than I liked.
So this morning I took it all apart - the clay was hardened from last
night - (it was relatively easy to get out with a toothpick and a can of
compressed air). I saw that the thickest (although thin) portions of clay
were underneath the B-Band.
I feel the problem with this guitar is the saddle and not the slot, so this
time I didn't put a bed underneath the pickup at all, and seated the b-band
in the slot. Then instead of using the toothpick to apply the clay, I used
my fingers and made 6 small balls of clay just a bit smaller than the width
of the slot. Then I put one ball of clay on top of the b-band where each
string would be when the saddle was in place. At the high E where I had a
drop out yesterday I put a little extra clay with the toothpick. Then I put
in the saddle and used the saddle to squash the balls across the slot. I
pulled out the saddle and looked and the clay had moved into the areas
between the string locations. I could see that it was very thin as some
spots of the b-band (where the clay hadn't migrated when squashed) could
still be seen.
Basically as Harold and John have pointed out - accurate and automatic
shimming.
I put a fresh set of strings on the guitar and tuned up. Action is now
right where I like it and the B-Band is balanced - volume is great and the
tone is all B-Band.
I'm going to leave this guitar as is and give it a couple of days to settle.
If the clay shrinks as it dries I might see some volume drop out on
individual strings but I don't think it can be improved upon right now.
Nelson (watching clay dry in Virginia Beach) Foster
John Zyla <<zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>> wrote in message
news:<379095eb.88238861@news...>...
: On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 21:09:31 GMT, <hedberg@my-deja...> wrote:
: <snip>
: >Best I can gather from John's description of his technique, it seems
: >that the clay serves as a very thin bedding layer to insure good contact
: >between the saddle, the transducer, and the bridge -- implying that
: >balancing problems are due to uneven acoustic coupling along the length
: >of the saddle. I would suspect that the clay would tend to "smush" out
: >when compressive force is applied and that it would become very very
: >thin in areas where there already was very good contact and coupling
: >from the saddle through the transducer to the bridge.
:
: Harold has written a very good interpretation of what one hopes
: should happen here. The clay must be able to "smush" out - in effect,
: it performs the same function as shimming with paper, except it's
: automatic, and much more "accurate" than paper shims. At least that's
: my analysis of the process going on under there.
:
: As I mentioned before, even though we can try our darndest and with
: the best tools to make a saddle and a saddle slot bottom perfectly
: flat and square, it's extremely difficult to achieve the desired
: result. The bedding material simply "fixes" any miniscule error's
: we've left.
:
: Once again, an extremely thin layer is essential.
:
:
: <snip>
:
: >Harold
: >
: >
: >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
: >Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
:
From: Nelson Foster <nelsonfoster@worldnet...>
Subject: Re: Amateur Installation of B-band or Dual Source
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 22:53:07 -0400
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
An hour ago I just made my first attempt at using John's technique in
installing a B-Band (which I included below from two earlier posts)
I used the same type of clay he used - a "fresh" brick of Amaco's Marblex
self hardening modeling clay (cost me 5.95) I found it in a craft store at a
local mall. This is a grey colored clay which I thought would be easier to
see while applying.
I applied it thin using a toothpick I had cut in half, using the thicker
part of the cut toothpick to apply a little clay at a time. A popsicle stick
was to thick for me to maneuver in the slot. But I still ended up applying
it a little thick I suspect. The action is just a tad to high at the 12th
fret for me to consider acceptable.
I tuned to standard and hooked the guitar up to the amp and watched the
LED's on the mixer - balanced all the way across except for the high E which
was about 30% lower. So I played a while and after about 15 minutes it had
balanced out! After 30 minutes more it hadn't changed any...It stayed
balanced! I am impressed with "the Zyla" technique and I'm very, very
happy with the result. The tone isn't affected much at all - and the clay is
still wet. I am going to wait till tomorrow and see what happens to the
tone in the morning after it dries a bit.
Then I'm going to take it apart and try again for lower action - John
mentioned apply thin and leave room around the sides of the slot. He's right
on there and I think I can do that better.
For 5.95 and less than an hours time! John your technique is fabulous!
grinning the big grin,
Nelson
For those just joining this thread - John's technique is described by him
below
<< start text >>
You've installed a great number of B-Bands, I understand, so you might
appreciate this. I love the B-Band, but I don't like balancing any
pickup using shims. It's too much of a hit or miss process.
Well, I got to thinking about the possible causes of balancing
problems, and it all boils down to, in one way or another, a failure
to completely and evenly transfer pressure from the top of the
saddle down through the "sandwich" structure of the pickup, to the
wood of the bottom of the saddle slot. From reading of other luthier's
experiences, it seems that just making sure your saddle is flat on the
bottom, and the slot is flat, doesn't always guarantee a trouble-free
balancing especially with the B-Band, because it's stiffness tends to
exaggerate the effect any (even miniscule) sloping of the saddle or
slot routing.
So, the task at hand was to devise a method by which one could ensure
a pretty much consistent transferance of pressure, without having to
go through the trial and error exercise of shimming. Shimming is fine,
it's just not an efficient use of the luthiers time, because results
aren't predictable.
I got to thinking about how fine target rifle barrels are "bedded" to
the stocks using fiberglass and other compounds, and this lead me to
consider using bedding in this application. Actually, I considered
this very early on, just had not decided on a bedding material.
I do a bit of ceramics work as a hobby, and am quite familiar with the
properties of various clays, and it hit me that this may be the
answer. The properties I wanted for a bedding material were:
1. The material must not be adhesive, except to itself - i.e. we do
not want to "glue" the sandwich together!
2. The material must conform to surfaces, but be hard - so that it
would transparently transfer pressure. A soft material would color
the sound. This would not be acceptable.
3. The material must have a fine grain structure so that it can be
used in a very thin layer so saddle height is not affected
appreciably. It's important to note here that the only function the
material must perform is to ensure even pressure transfer, so a thin
layer is all that is needed. Indeed, a *more than thin" layer would be
detrimental.
The material I decided to try is a self-hardening modeling clay. This
clay hardens without firing, is adhesive only to itself, and has a
very fine grain structure. Amoco "Mexican" or "Marblex" self hardening
clay is what I have used. This is available at art supply stores or
university book stores that have an art supplies section. It's
important to find a source that sells it once in a while, so you get a
reasonably fresh box. A 32 oz brick costs about $5.50 around here.
Enough to do about 30,000 saddles, or a few saddles and some neat
sculptures.
Here's the applcation method simplified. If you're interested and want
to try, I can go into more detail, let me know.
1. Lay down a very thin layer of bedding in the saddle slot, tamping
reasonably flat.
2. Install the pickup over the first layer.
3. Lay down another very thin layer on top of the pickup.
4. Install the saddle, and string the guitar, tuning to pitch.
5. The whole "sandwich" will cure in a day or so.
So there you have it.
<< end text >>
John Zyla
Alan asked some good questions here which John answered below - this really
adds detail to Johns process.
John Zyla <<zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>> wrote in message
news:<378e1bd2.26127173@news...>...
: On 15 Jul 1999 15:36:42 GMT, <dunwell.guitar@dorje...> wrote:
: Alan, I'll imbed some answers to your further questions below ..
:
:
: >John,
: >Good idea, I didn't realize that there were self-hardening clays,
perfect!
: >Some more questions:
: >- Can you please be a bit more specific as to what a "ver thin layer"
means in
: >aprox. inches or mm?
:
: As far as layer thickness, I haven't measured exactly, but it's just
: really really thin -think as thin as you can make it and get a solid
: layer (without holes). I'm estimating .25 mm or less. I actually leave
: a bit of open space around the perimeter (think the "walls" of the
: saddle slot) so that the stuff will squish out toward the walls as
: saddle pressure is applied. This ensures that I end up with a thinner
: layer than I could apply by hand.
:
:
: >- Do you just make a small roll and then tamp it in place, or do you try
to
: >flatten it ahead of time?
:
: I actually apply the clay with a Popsicle stick that I have trimmed a
: bit on one angle to make it pointier. Dab up a bit of the clay on the
: stick, then tamp into the slot. I tried the roll method and it seemed
: that I could not make a small enough roll - important to realize the
: layer is just as thin as you can possibly make it. I also use a
: technique where I get some of the clay on the end of the stick, then
: wipe it on the side of the slot - think of cleaning a peanut-butter
: knife on the edge of the jar - same idea. Then I tamp down into the
: slot.
:
: >- Have you ever had the clay squish by the pickup and bond the upper and
lower
: >layers together and if so, does it matter?
:
: Yes, in fact I consider it a good thing, but that's not a scientific
: estimation - just a feeling.
:
:
: >How good is the non-adhesive nature
: >of this clay, is the pickup separable from the clay afterwards?
:
: The clay when dried (hardened) can be broken easily in thin layers -
: so it's extremely non-adhesive. I've removed B-Bands from slots
: installed this way - just take the same Popsicle stick tool and
: lightly scrape an edge of the layer off on the free end of the pickup,
: then pull the pickup up and out. I use a dental probe to snag the end
: of the B-Band (these are great tools - ask your dentist for a couple
: of them - when they dull, the dentists throw them into a box in the
: back room (cleaned) - mine gave me a handful of them). Any remaining
: clay can be wiped off of the pickup between two dry fingers. A
: slightly damp paper towel is just effective too. One can clean the
: stuff out of the saddle slot with a dry toothbrush - the wood is
: porous so wiping only may leave a few tiny bits in there - hence the
: need for the soft toothbrush. . . Very non-adhesive as I say. There
: is zero permanent adhesion to anything of a smooth nature such as the
: B-Band element. In fact, the layers will tend to settle over time, -
: improving the contact layer - but if you remove the saddle you may
: have to re-do the clay installation if any of it falls out. I tape the
: saddle on to the bridge with a single strip of scotch tape if I've
: taken off all of the strings for any reason.
:
: >- What sort of total thickness do you end up with for the two layers and
the
: >pickup, ie: how much do you need to route?
:
: Again - I've not measured, it's less than one half millimeter. I
: don't like to route if I don't have to, and these installations added
: so little that I just took a bit off of the top of the saddle and
: re-profiled a bit. I probably wouldn't even have had to do that except
: I'm way too picky (anal?) and am fanatical about achieving low
: actions.
:
:
: I apologize for the long post.
:
: Grace and Peace,
:
: John
:
: >
: >Thanks for the info,
: >Alan
:
| B band [2] |
|---|
From: George Reiswig <george.reiswig@intel...>
Subject: Re: B band
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 09:02:43 -0700
Organization: Intel Corporation
Actually, Tony, this may be wrong. At least on my own Lowden, the saddle
slots already have the connecting slot between them, and the B-Band saddle
fit perfectly without modification to the bridge.
GR
Tony Rairden wrote in message <7ocsbt$br2$<1@nntp1...>>...
(SNIP)The
>pickup is continuous, and you or your luthier would need to cut/rout a
>connecting slot between the two discrete saddle slots in the standard
>split-saddle bridge to accommodate the connecting "zig" in the saddle.
>
(SNIP)
From: Tony Rairden <TRairden@NoSpamfqms...>
Subject: Re: B band
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 16:51:20 -0400
Organization: First Quality Musical Supplies
Thanks, George! That should make installation a piece of cake.
When I saw the "ziggy" pickup, I didn't have a Lowden handy, so I called
Heikki to inquire about the installation. He didn't have one handy either,
but he said that the connecting slot would need to be machined... (There may
have been some slight communications slippage, despite Heikki's excellent
English.)
News on other fronts (taking advantage of a reason to be posting, I
suppose...): Our first Tacoma AJF22CE5 Archtop with EMG floating pickup just
came in-- sounds pretty good acoustically, looks great, sounds great (fat,
but more acoustic sounding than a lot of archtops...) plugged in. We also
got in and shipped out a 000-15, and have a 00-15 (nice big voice, bright
clear tone) in stock for the moment...
Tony Rairden
First Quality Musical Supplies
www.fqms.com
(SPAM control on-- delete "NoSpam" from return address to correspond.)
George Reiswig <<george.reiswig@intel...>> wrote in message
news:7of0q2$<cr8@news...>...
> Actually, Tony, this may be wrong. At least on my own Lowden, the saddle
> slots already have the connecting slot between them, and the B-Band saddle
> fit perfectly without modification to the bridge.
>
> GR
>
> Tony Rairden wrote in message <7ocsbt$br2$<1@nntp1...>>...
> (SNIP)The
> >pickup is continuous, and you or your luthier would need to cut/rout a
> >connecting slot between the two discrete saddle slots in the standard
> >split-saddle bridge to accommodate the connecting "zig" in the saddle.
> >
> (SNIP)
>
>
| B-band modeling clay install [15] |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 07:25:56 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <7ooc8m$<1uc4@enews3...>>, <thissong@pclink...> (Tim
Helmen) wrote:
> I was thrilled a while back to stumble across John Zyla's "Self-hardening
> modeling clay" fix for balancing the b-band.
>
> I love the sound of the b-band ("sounds like my guitar, only louder"--what
> else can I say?) but have had balancing problems in my 1990 Taylor 712.
>
> So tonight I got some of the clay and went to work. I'll report back on the
> results.
>
> I did want to pass on my own little twist that I tried. (Apologies if
> someone else posted this as well.)
>
> I was unsure about being able to get a uniformly thin layer of clay tamped
> down into the saddle slot. And I remember John saying that THIN was key.
>
> So instead, to put a small amount of clay between layers of wax paper. I
> rolled it out (using the barrel of my handy x-acto knife) to a very and, I
> think, quite uniform layer.
>
> Then with a straight edge I sliced a line through the whole shebang more
> than the lenght of the saddle. I peeled back the top layer and made a
> parallel cut to leave me a strip just narrower than the saddle slot.
>
> I trimmed the strip to the length needed for the bed of the slot. I gently
> peeled back the wax paper on one end to leave the beginnings of a thin
> "shim" of the clay. I started this in one end of the slot, held it down
> carefully and gently peeled back the rest of the paper.
>
> I got about halfway through the slot before the clay finally broke off. But
> I was able to complete the job by adding shorter sections and matching them
> up to the previous "bed" by gently nudging them down the slot (x-acto
> again).
>
> So it wasn't a single complete strip of clay, but the final effect was
> pretty darn close, the difference probably made negligible by the
> "squishing" that the pressure of the strings will bring. And I'm sure it was
> more uniform and thin than I would have been able to get by packing it in
> there. I would say the thickness was equivalent to or less than the
> thickness of the b-band itself.
>
> My pickup was pretty springy,so trying to put a layer of top was difficult.
> I opted for leaving just the bottom layer so my result is
> wood/clay/pickup/saddle. I figure that may be enough, and I can always go
> back in if I have to.
>
> As I said, I'll let you know my results as far as balance and tone.
>
> Blessings,
>
> Tim Helmen
> http://www.pclink.com/thissong
Tim,
My brief experience using John's methods, on both sides, and then only
underneath the B-band required more clay on the "underneath only"
installation. Not a total of more clay, but simply more clay underneath
than if a "two-sided" method was used. This was on a very bad problem
guitar. Also, this instrument balanced perfectly immediately once I got
the thickness right. No waiting for the self-hardeneing clay to harden,
the guitar sounded the same acoustically, and when plugged in balanced
perfectly as soon as I strung it up. Your results should be just as
immediately testable.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 15:09:31 GMT
Organization: remove "NOSPAM" from my address to reply
I think for the normal installation, that clay on both top and bottom
is appropriate initially. In this way, you are eliminating flatness
and/or contact area errors on both the saddle slot bottom and the
saddle bottom itself. You can eliminate the top layer, as Larry says,
but I have tried bottom only and had to re-do it with both, but have
never had to re-do an installation with both sides. So, in effect what
I'm saying is if you use bottom only, you're going to get there
through experimenting. My best success has been with both sides, a
very thin layer.
Once again, the function the clay performs is only to "even out" any
un-evenness in the contact area of the "sandwich" formed by the
saddle-slot-bottom, the pickup element, and the saddle bottom itself.
The whole reason this is necessary is it seems that we cannot
detarmine a perfect mating by simply making sure everything is flat.
There are imperceptible errors that show up as pickup-imbalance. The
clay eliminates those imperceptible errors.
grace and Peace,
John Zyla
On Tue, 10 Aug 1999 07:25:56 -0600, <abuse@127...> (Larry Pattis)
wrote:
>Tim,
>
>My brief experience using John's methods, on both sides, and then only
>underneath the B-band required more clay on the "underneath only"
>installation. Not a total of more clay, but simply more clay underneath
>than if a "two-sided" method was used. This was on a very bad problem
>guitar. Also, this instrument balanced perfectly immediately once I got
>the thickness right. No waiting for the self-hardeneing clay to harden,
>the guitar sounded the same acoustically, and when plugged in balanced
>perfectly as soon as I strung it up. Your results should be just as
>immediately testable.
>
>Larry Pattis
>
>Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
>
>Liberal Palette Records
>http://liberalpalette.com
>"Music Without Borders"
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 09:18:39 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <<37b33adf.24873028@reading...>>,
<ray@krisalisNOSPAM...> wrote:
> you might find that if the stuff hardens, it will hold the pickup down
> flat, and you could ( if you so desired ) add another thin layer later
> between the p/up and the saddle. Who knows - not me for one, but its
> an interesting idea and I'd be curious to know how it effects the
> tone.
>
> cheers
>
> ray.
Yes, just using clay on the bottom does indeed (after it hardens) hold the
B-band element in place. However, if you create a proper thickness of clay
underneath (and thereby achieve proper volume balance), there will be no
need to go back to add clay on top.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 20:12:29 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <7oqajh$<1i5@enews4...>>, <thissong@pclink...> (Tim
Helmen) wrote:
> Well, I plugged it in when I got home from work and.....
>
> ...both e-strings are quite weak (pretty much the problem I had before). So
> I think I'll try to put a top layer on too, especially if I find the bottom
> layer holds the pickup down.
>
> I also wonder if I got it too thin and filled the slot too well. Perhaps
> there was not really anywhere for the clay to move?
>
> Stay tuned...(good advice for us under any circumstances, I guess)
>
> Grace and Peace to you as well.
>
> Tim
Tim,
I recommend scraping out the existing clay and starting all over, this way
it wil self-seat more accurately.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: Nelson Foster <nelsonfoster@worldnet...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 22:19:01 -0400
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Tim - this was exactly my problem without the clay - both E strings were
weak. I ended up adding only clay to the top of the b-band. (instead of
underneath the pickup. I was installing into a 96 Taylor 514-C - maybe your
bridge and saddle are shaped similarly.
Just a thought.
Nelson
Tim Helmen <<thissong@pclink...>> wrote in message
news:7oqajh$<1i5@enews4...>...
: Well, I plugged it in when I got home from work and.....
:
: ...both e-strings are quite weak (pretty much the problem I had before).
So
: I think I'll try to put a top layer on too, especially if I find the
bottom
: layer holds the pickup down.
:
: I also wonder if I got it too thin and filled the slot too well. Perhaps
: there was not really anywhere for the clay to move?
:
: Stay tuned...(good advice for us under any circumstances, I guess)
:
: Grace and Peace to you as well.
:
: Tim
:
: Http://www.pclink.com/thissong
:
:
: In article <<37b03eff.903413@news...>>, <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
: says...
: >
: >
: >I think for the normal installation, that clay on both top and bottom
: >is appropriate initially. In this way, you are eliminating flatness
: >and/or contact area errors on both the saddle slot bottom and the
: >saddle bottom itself. You can eliminate the top layer, as Larry says,
: >but I have tried bottom only and had to re-do it with both, but have
: >never had to re-do an installation with both sides. So, in effect what
: >I'm saying is if you use bottom only, you're going to get there
: >through experimenting. My best success has been with both sides, a
: >very thin layer.
: >
: >Once again, the function the clay performs is only to "even out" any
: >un-evenness in the contact area of the "sandwich" formed by the
: >saddle-slot-bottom, the pickup element, and the saddle bottom itself.
: >The whole reason this is necessary is it seems that we cannot
: >detarmine a perfect mating by simply making sure everything is flat.
: >There are imperceptible errors that show up as pickup-imbalance. The
: >clay eliminates those imperceptible errors.
: >
: >grace and Peace,
: >
: >John Zyla
: >
: >On Tue, 10 Aug 1999 07:25:56 -0600, <abuse@127...> (Larry Pattis)
: >wrote:
: >
: >>Tim,
: >>
: >>My brief experience using John's methods, on both sides, and then only
: >>underneath the B-band required more clay on the "underneath only"
: >>installation. Not a total of more clay, but simply more clay underneath
: >>than if a "two-sided" method was used. This was on a very bad problem
: >>guitar. Also, this instrument balanced perfectly immediately once I
got
: >>the thickness right. No waiting for the self-hardeneing clay to harden,
: >>the guitar sounded the same acoustically, and when plugged in balanced
: >>perfectly as soon as I strung it up. Your results should be just as
: >>immediately testable.
: >>
: >>Larry Pattis
: >>
: >>Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
: >>
: >>Liberal Palette Records
: >>http://liberalpalette.com
: >>"Music Without Borders"
: >
:
From: Tim Helmen <thissong@pclink...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: 11 Aug 1999 04:56:34 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com
In article <7oqmjq$neq$<1@bgtnsc02...>>,
<nelsonfoster@worldnet...> says...
>
>Tim - this was exactly my problem without the clay - both E strings were
>weak. I ended up adding only clay to the top of the b-band. (instead of
>underneath the pickup. I was installing into a 96 Taylor 514-C - maybe your
>bridge and saddle are shaped similarly.
>
>Just a thought.
>
>Nelson
>
I wonder if it's a Taylor thing. Larry, it seems to me that you've
indicated that it was a Taylor you've had the most B-band balancing trouble
with, finally solved with the clay. True?
In my case, it's not the original Taylor saddle. I had a Baggs L6 or some
dreadful thing put in early in the guitar's life, and when I went to the
B-band I had a saddle made that kept breaking strings. So I made the saddle
myself, with similar experience balance-wise to the ones I spent the money
at the shop for.
From: Tim Helmen <thissong@pclink...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: 11 Aug 1999 05:01:20 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com
In article <7oqajh$<1i5@enews4...>>, <thissong@pclink...> says...
>
>Well, I plugged it in when I got home from work and.....
>
>...both e-strings are quite weak (pretty much the problem I had before).
So
>I think I'll try to put a top layer on too, especially if I find the bottom
>layer holds the pickup down.
>
>I also wonder if I got it too thin and filled the slot too well. Perhaps
>there was not really anywhere for the clay to move?
>
>Stay tuned...(good advice for us under any circumstances, I guess)
>
OK, tonight I tried again, following John's original method: tamping the
clay into the slot, and putting it below and above the saddle. (After the
bottom layer, I pressed the saddle down, and the pickup held very nicely in
the clay so I could do the top layer.)
After about 15 minutes the high e was weak, but another half hour later,
everything seemed to balance out fine across the board.
The action is now definitely too high, though. But that should be fairly
easy to deal with and worth the time now that I know I'll not have to
struggle with the balance issue.
Thanks again, John
Tim Helmen
http://www.pclink.com/thissong
From: SCuss98871 <scuss98871@aol...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: 11 Aug 1999 15:00:18 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
I do think this is primarily a Taylor problem. I have a 714 and it was a right
royal pain to get it to balance. (Totally reversing the saddle so the
compensation sat under the A string worked like a charm, much to the chargrin
of the guitar tech!) Anyway, he said it is because of the string angle on
taylor's bridge pins....
Steve (did that make any sense?) Cuss
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 15:16:35 GMT
Organization: remove "NOSPAM" from my address to reply
Pickup balancing (unfortunately) is not brand-specific. I wish it
were!
John Zyla
On 11 Aug 1999 15:00:18 GMT, <scuss98871@aol...> (SCuss98871) wrote:
>I do think this is primarily a Taylor problem. I have a 714 and it was a right
>royal pain to get it to balance. (Totally reversing the saddle so the
>compensation sat under the A string worked like a charm, much to the chargrin
>of the guitar tech!) Anyway, he said it is because of the string angle on
>taylor's bridge pins....
>
>Steve (did that make any sense?) Cuss
From: john bj <desert2000@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 18:39:09 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
scuss98871@aol.com (SCuss98871) wrote:> I do think this is primarily a Taylor problem. I have a 714 and it
was a right royal pain to get it to balance. (Totally reversing the
saddle so the compensation sat under the A string worked like a charm,
much to the chargrin of the guitar tech!) Anyway, he said it is because
of the string angle on taylor's bridge pins....
>
> Steve (did that make any sense?) Cuss
>
Steve,
I had a great deal of trouble installing a B-Band into my Martin earlier
this year (I wrote a fairly lengthy post on the ordeal) and it's still
not perfect. The high E is still a little hot, but tolerable. I may
try this clay method, although it may be tricky getting it out of the
bridge slot.
As far as your question - yes, string angle across the saddle does make
a difference. EMF's instruction book recommends the angle be the same
for all strings to ensure proper balance. This isn't too hard to
achieve with the pins in a line, but it must be a bear with Taylor's
"smile" pattern. Since it's common to all Taylors, you're probably
right in observing the general difficulties with a B-Band in that brand.
Make sure you let the EMF guys know what's going on, too
(www.b-band.com). They're honestly looking to make the B-Band the best
pick-up available and really do appreciate user feedback. They need to
figure out a way to maintain the pick-up's fidelity while making it less
sensitive to minute installation variances, especially if they're making
it difficult to use in all models of a very popular brand.
peace and joy,
jbj
--
(e-mails should be sent to desert2000 @ NOSPAM yahoo.com)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
From: Bob Dorgan <d77737@epix...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 01:20:49 GMT
jtougas wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Aug 1999 18:39:09 GMT, john bj <<desert2000@my-deja...>>
> wrote:
>
> > <scuss98871@aol...> (SCuss98871) wrote:
> >>snip
> > They need to
> >figure out a way to maintain the pick-up's fidelity while making it less
> >sensitive to minute installation variances, especially if they're making
> >it difficult to use in all models of a very popular brand.
> >
> >peace and joy,
> >jbj
>
> I see a day where every box of B-band pickups comes with a small
> package of modelling clay... and every buyer scratches his head in
> confusion until they read the instructions!
>
> jtougas
Let's clear something up here.
ALL undersaddle transducers can have balancing problems. This is not
unique to b-band. Ask any tech who has installed a fair number of pick
ups, and you'll find that they have had their problems balancing several
brands.
Bob Dorgan
From: <mikecloud@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 01:40:29 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
I have a couple of questions for those with experience using self-
hardening modeling clay to balance a B-Band:
1. Are you talking about balance problems you're having with a 1999
version of the element, or an older version? The pre-'99 version gave
me fits in my Taylor 12 string; but, the '99 version fixed the problem
without shims or clay. Also, for what it's worth, both the pre-'99,
and the '99 work great in my Collings SJ--with the '99 version having a
hotter overall output.
2. Does the clay make quiet strings louder, or does it make overly
loud strings quieter, or does it do both? When I had the pre-'99
element in my 12 string, I could get an acceptable balance using shims
(as many as four layers of "Post-It" under quiet strings--usually the
outside strings [E, B, and E]), but I found the shims mainly decreased
the volume of adjacent loud strings, and therefore lowered overall
output and in my opinion signal to noise. This is the main reason I
switched to the '99 version. The output was closer to the level of my
Collings, and the signal to noise ratio improved. Is the clay
detrimental to signal to noise?
Thanks.
Mike
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
From: john bj <desert2000@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 03:14:08 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
> Let's clear something up here. ALL undersaddle transducers can have
balancing problems. This is not unique to b-band. Ask any tech who has
installed a fair number of pick ups, and you'll find that they have had
their problems balancing several brands.
> Bob Dorgan
Without a doubt, this is true, Bob. My experience so far (FWIW) is
limited to a Martin Thinline (Fishman piezo) and a B-Band. The Thinline
was a piece of cake to install, balanced perfectly right off, stayed
balanced without any problems for the four years I had it in, but
quacked incessantly with hard strumming. The B-Band started OK,
'settled' into non-balance after a few days, took many hours to
rebalance, and now (months later) is beginning to get unbalanced again.
The sound is much better, but the balancing problems are driving me
nuts. Next stop for me on the acoustic pick-up train is the Baggs LB6/12
I'll have installed in my Chelsvigs this fall. 8-)
peace and joy,
jbj
--
(e-mails should be sent to desert2000 @ NOSPAM yahoo.com)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
From: Tony Rairden <TRairden@NoSpamfqms...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 14:19:06 -0400
Organization: First Quality Musical Supplies
John, your luthier must have added that adhesive layer-- B-Bands don't come
with it, and there's no mention of such in the directions. If your luthier
used a foam-based double-stick tape, that itself could be the source of your
problems. I'd carefully remove it, see what the B-Band sounds like without
it, and if balance is still a problem (possibly indicating a
less-than-perfectly-flat slot and/or saddle), try John's clay method.
Tony Rairden
First Quality Musical Supplies
www.fqms.com
(SPAM control on-- delete "NoSpam" from return address to correspond.)
john bj <<desert2000@my-deja...>> wrote in message
news:7p9hc3$dek$<1@nnrp1...>...
> >
> I'll probably give The Zyla Method a shot in the coming weeks. One
> question: the B-Band seems to have some sort of self-adhesive holding it
> to the bottom of the bridge slot (I had a luthier install it, so I don't
> know exactly what was involved). Is it removeable, or do you think I'd
> be better off just doing a half-sandwich?
>
> Thanks,
> jbj
> (e-mails should be sent to desert2000 @ NOSPAM yahoo.com)
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: B-band modeling clay install
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 16:23:06 -0400
Organization: Cornell University
john bj wrote:
>
> Next stop for me on the acoustic pick-up train is the Baggs LB6/12
> I'll have installed in my Chelsvigs this fall. 8-)
John-
I had and LB6 in my Olson before putting in the B-Band (in fact,
it's still there, with the B-band under it). The balance problems
with the LB6 were at least as bad as with the B-band. So don't
get too hopeful about that route! It is a good sounding pickup
though; I prefer the B-band slightly for tone (and more than
slightly on the whole), but others with good ears have come to
the opposite conclusion.
Your mention of adhesive sounds peculiar to me, and perhaps your
guitar tech's use of some kind of adhesive during the install is
the cause of the problem.
Peace,
Tom Loredo
| B-Band Pickup |
|---|
From: Tony Foster <tef@futuresouth...>
Subject: B-Band Pickup
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 13:58:17 -0500
Greetings: I am a music store owner and guitar repairman for the past 20 years. Istock Fishman and L.R. Baggs pickups and systems and I have to tell you
I'm VERY impressed with the B-Band pickup. I ordered one by request for
a customers Taylor 712. I installed it and was knocked out. Very
natural! I have put one more in since then and was very pleased once
again. I think I'm gonna put one in my own guitar! Their site is
b-band.com My site is http://backstagemusic.com
TonyFoster
| B-Band Balance: Zyla Method [2] |
|---|
From: john bj <desert2000@my-deja...>
Subject: B-Band Balance: Zyla Method
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 18:31:37 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
After lamenting about balance problems on the B-Band installed into my
1978 Martin D-35 earlier this year, I tried the self-hardening modelling
clay method John Zyla posted recently. Simply put - on the second try
it worked perfectly. If it 'goes bad' in the future, like the paper
shim method I had used previously, I'll be sure to post a report.
Here's some thoughts and details on what I did:
On my first trip to the hobby store I mistakenly bought non-hardening
clay rather than self-hardening clay. Fortunately I reviewed John's
post before opening things up. I bought the Amaco Marblex clay John
recommended. It cost $7.30 for five pounds, which, according to John's
calculations for two pounds, should be good for over 75,000 B-Band
installations, or a few installations and some sculptures. I think it
could do more. So if you pay for round trip shipping, I'll be happy to
try and fix the B-Band balance in your guitars - of course cure times
may vary by as much as 6 months in the case of very high end guitars...
;-)
My balance problem had been a hot high E string, after my first try at
the Zyla Method it was the B that was hot and both Es had virtually
disappeared. I had put in too much clay, so my action was high, but I
didn't see how that should affect the balance. So I loosened the
strings enough to get the bridge pins and ball ends out. What I found
as I removed saddle and the clay were little voids and cracks. BTW -
the clay's box says it shrinks as it dries, which I thought would make
removing it simpler, but (a) it doesn't shrink all that much, and (b) it
gets into the wood grain pretty easily.
On my second attempt I worked on the "VERY thin" layer concept John
tried to communicate but I was too clutzy and hurried to accomplish. I
got a good, thin piece by rolling the clay on a piece of wax paper which
was taped to an old marble chess board (hard and flat was what I was
going for). I concentrated on keeping it at a constant diameter along
its whole length. When it got much thinner than toothpick size it would
start to break off, so I figured that would have to do.
Upon examining the clay, though, I noticed there were still fold lines
and slight voids. So I added a TINY bit of water - like <1/4 of a DROP.
To get <1/4 drop, lightly dampen a paper towel, touch it with your forefinger and gently slide it up and down the sliver of clay. More water
turns the clay into a liquid. And use a smooth part of your finger
rather than the tip - calluses catch and break the clay. Here's another
hint: make the piece longer than your saddle slot so you can cut it to
size along a constant diameter section, leaving off the inevitable taper
you get at its ends when you roll it.
This first layer goes under the B-Band. I laid it in the slot, tamped
it somewhat flat using the saddle. Then I smoothed it out by dipping
the rounded corner/side of the saddle in water, dabbing it almost dry
and lightly running it across the clay as it lay in the slot.
I noticed some separation in the B-Band itself between its layers for
about a 1cm section on the bass side of center. But since I was sure I
was way outside warranty territory, I proceeded to carefully clean off
the old clay using water and a paper towel and then gently lay it down
in the slot over the first layer of clay. It seemed to hold together
fine when squeezed lightly.
I repeated the process for a roll of clay and laid it on top of the
B-Band, tamping it down and smoothing it with the saddle as before. I
cleaned off the bridge and saddle, reinstalled the saddle, stuck the
string ends and bridge pins back in and tuned up the guitar. The action
was back to acceptable. After the one day cure time on the guitar
stand, I plugged it in and got a nice even balance right off. No EQ
needed at all. In fact, I had to turn down the gain from where I
had it previously because every string was now equally hot.
One serious note on cure time: local humidity here in Tucson is under
20%. The clay probably cured quicker than one day for me - I had tried
to make both rolls of clay simultaneously, but in the 15 minutes before
I got to the second layer, it had started to harden and broke off in
brittle pieces when I picked it up. I had to make a fresh one before
proceeding. (don't worry - I keep my guitar interior 40%-60% with a
soundhole humidifier)
So there you have it. The Zyla Method for the clay-challenged.
peace and joy,
jbj
--
(e-mails should be sent to desert2000 @ NOSPAM yahoo.com)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Balance: Zyla Method
Date: 25 Aug 1999 22:11:01 -0500
Organization: Zyla Guitars
One comment I would make, is to definitely watch if you add any water.
Clay is not just a suspension, it's a compound, and water can change
the properties of it. Not to mention, I have NO idea what a "wet" clay
would do to a pickup, but I suspect it might not be pretty!
John Zyla
| B-band update |
|---|
From: Tom <asciiwar@hotmail...>
Subject: Re: B-band update
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 15:10:18 -0700
Organization: UC Berkeley
Mark,
Glad to hear your success at your church with the B-band pickup. It's beena while since I've written to RMMGA at all, but I must admit that the b-band
performs phenomenally well within our praise band. I happen to be the soundman
as well as an avid guitarist--and no piezo or dual system pickup seems as
natural and sweet as the b-band in my guitar.
I'll bet that the range was from both: having a guitar with a good rangeand then using the b-band to pick it up. B-band picks up really well--in fact
a little too well-- since my guitar is incredibly bright, the sound that comes
out is somewhat bright. You'll find that the b-band just picks up what it
hears. (though i have not heard the core99 preamps which change the signal)
--Thom
Mark Schulz wrote:
> I played my EMF B-band (in my Martin d-16) for church for the first time
> this weekend. I was using a cordless hookup.
>
> Two different people said that they were amazed how loud my new guitar was
> "unplugged." In other words, the acoustic sound was so natural they didn't
> think that I was amplified! One of the two plays guitar himself in our
> praise band at times.
>
> I was also pleased by the dynamic range I was able to get, although I'm not
> sure whether this was the pickup or the all solid guitar (my previous was a
> Yamaha solid top).
>
> Mark Schulz
> <schulzmc@mc...>
| B-band |
|---|
From: Chuck Murphy <crmurphy@ids...>
Subject: Re: B-band
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 22:52:43 -0400
I used my cordless drill with 1/8" bit for the bridge hole and 1/2" for the
end pin. I wrap a duct tape strip around the bit to make sure when it goes
through that the chuck doesn't bottom out.
--
Chuck Murphy
Richmond, RI
John Zyla <<zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>> wrote in message
news:<37c73089.78832656@news...>...
| Use a hand drill! Use a hand reamer to enlarge the endpin hole.
|
| John
|
|
| On Fri, 27 Aug 1999 09:41:19 -0400, "Robbie" <<robwith@uoguelf...>>
|
| wrote:
|
| >Does anybody know of any Canadian sources? My local music shop hasn't
even
| >heard of them. I'm not sure I have enough nerve to bring a power tool
| >anywhere near my guitar to do a self install.
| >
| >Rob
| >
| b-band install [4] |
|---|
From: Tim Helmen <thissong@pclink...>
Subject: b-band install
Date: 29 Aug 1999 04:05:31 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com
You might remember I was working on installing my b-band with the Zyla clay
method. This is in my Taylor 712.
I never was able to get a good balance using the strict Zyla method of
laying down a bed below and above the pickup.
So I tried a modification someone else had posted, making small balls of
clay and putting one directly under each string. I used this on top of the
pickup, with the pickup itself right on the wood of the saddle slot--no clay
underneath.
This gets me perfect balance every time. I only have to adjust the size of
the clay balls to get the action where I want it.
I theorize that this works better for me because with the method of laying a
bed in the whole slot, there's not enough room for the clay to balance out,
even leaving space along the side of the slot. The result is six
unconnected clay "pedestals" one under each string, formed by the specific
pressure of that string.
So far so good. But now I am having another problem, maybe related to this
method, maybe not.
The pickup picks up the body resonance. That's part of getting the sound of
the wood, I realize, but this is extreme. I get body feedback at what
should be reasonable volumes, with the strings damped. It's really
completely unacceptable.
I have previously gotten a good sound, with lots of gain before feedback,
with this same guitar, using tape for shims (no clay). But that was with a
saddle a shop made for me that had too sharp angles and I constantly broke
strings. So I made my own more gently-curved saddle, which I have only been
able to balance with the clay.
Any ideas? Any one else experienced serious body resonance issues with the
b-band? (The pickup is not looping down to touch the body inside or
anything like that--I've checked that out.)
Tim Helmen
From: john bj <desert2000@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: b-band install
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 19:06:07 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Hi Tim,
Two thoughts:
First, even though you say the pick-up isn't touching the body, it's
worth another check, especially if everything else is perfect. The
B-Band instructions mention possible body resonance difficulties (and
solutions) with smaller body guitars such as your 712. If you don't
have the instructions, you can get it off their web site
(http://www.b-band.com/).
Another possibility is that your clay pedestals are TOO small and are
therefore concentrating the saddle pressure onto a relatively small
area of the pick-up. The instructions illustrate a saddle modification,
similar to the Fishman Cleartone, that essentially ends up with six
'pedestals' touching on the pick-up. The thing to notice is that there
is very little separation between the pedestals, so the total pressure
from the saddle is still spread out over almost the same surface area.
So, you might check the spacing of your clay and, if it's not there
already, try getting to 1 mm or less.
Hope this helps.
peace and joy,
jbj
(e-mails should be sent to desert2000 @ NOSPAM yahoo.com)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
From: Tim Helmen <thissong@pclink...>
Subject: Re: b-band install
Date: 31 Aug 1999 01:12:29 GMT
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com
I did try to follow the original specs closely, but the truth is, I didn't
get balance even close.
I do wonder about the consistency of the clay I've got. My sense from
reading of others' experiences is that some have got fresher batches that
have more "flow" to them.
At any rate, I did try again with putting a bottom layer down first, and
that seems to have helped. I'm guessing that when I had just the pedestals
and nothing underneath the pickup, the pickup may have had just enough play
to vibrate itself when the body moved, since between the pedestals it wasn't
really held down.
Now with a bottom layer, the pickup is set into the bed, and can't vibrate
on its own.--Just a theory. The bottom bed does seem to help.
As far as the clay consistency, that's pretty hard to quanify over the
net...
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: b-band install
Date: 30 Aug 1999 22:22:04 -0500
Organization: Zyla Guitars
You are right about clay consistency. It should be very pliable, like
chewing gum (not bubble gum). Of course, it's not sticky. One person
with whom I have corresponded said the first box of clay he bought
was obviously very old, it was so hard he had to scrape it off.
The idea is to get the whole thing together (the sandwich) before the
clay starts to harden, and string up to pitch, so that the downward
pressure of the strings on the saddle does the final "squishing" of
the clay, and - if all of the right magic occurs in there, the thing
will be perfectly balanced. I actually recommend that folks do a
practice run or two, just loading the slot, then putting in the saddle
- without the pickup element, then pressing down to compress the clay,
let it harden (a couple hours) the pull up the saddle and look at the
results. It takes only a few times to get good at it. The hardened
clay comes right out (a tiny bit will stay in the grain of the wood,
and this is actually a plus). I realize that a person doing this on
their own guitar may consider doing practice runs a bit of overkill,
but it's the same thing a tech would do to get his technique down, and
the technique is quite repeatable, and very forgiving, unlike paper
shims. In fact, as I've said, that's the whole point of clay over
paper shims - the repeatability. Good luck!
John Zyla
On 31 Aug 1999 01:12:29 GMT, <thissong@pclink...> (Tim Helmen) wrote:
>I did try to follow the original specs closely, but the truth is, I didn't
>get balance even close.
>
>I do wonder about the consistency of the clay I've got. My sense from
>reading of others' experiences is that some have got fresher batches that
>have more "flow" to them.
>
>At any rate, I did try again with putting a bottom layer down first, and
>that seems to have helped. I'm guessing that when I had just the pedestals
>and nothing underneath the pickup, the pickup may have had just enough play
>to vibrate itself when the body moved, since between the pedestals it wasn't
>really held down.
>
>Now with a bottom layer, the pickup is set into the bed, and can't vibrate
>on its own.--Just a theory. The bottom bed does seem to help.
>
>As far as the clay consistency, that's pretty hard to quanify over the
>net...
>
| B-band acoustic pickups [2] |
|---|
From: Chuck Murphy <crmurphy@ids...>
Subject: Re: B-band acoustic pickups
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 12:51:51 -0400
I installed a B-Band undersaddle in my Seagull and love it. The acoustic
sound is great. The balance wasn't great when I first installed it...not the
B-Band fault. The string angle over the bridge wasn't sharp enough on some
of the strings, so the pressure wasn't even. Kim Walker (who is building my
new guitar) http://www.walkerguitars.com/ used his dremel tool to make slots
from the bridge pin holes toward the saddle. Each slot is a different length
(saddle is set at an angle to the bridge pin holes) which makes all of the
strings break at the same angle. The balance is perfect now.
--
Chuck Murphy
Richmond, RI
Adam Robertson <<info@ara-consult...>> wrote in message
news:WxsA3.1383$<H5.172538@newsr2...>...
| Hi there
|
| I would be grateful for any opinions on EMF B-band undersaddle pickups as
I
| am thinking of installing one in my Santa Cruz OM. How does the sound
| compare to others, what's string balance like etc. etc.
|
| Any thoughts, opinions advice etc. would be fantastic.
|
| Thanks,
|
|
| Adam
|
|
From: Charlie Escher <charliejane@gorge...>
Subject: Re: B-band acoustic pickups
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 11:01:57 -0700
Organization: Passing Wind
Chuck Murphy wrote:
> I installed a B-Band undersaddle in my Seagull and love it. The acoustic
> sound is great. The balance wasn't great when I first installed it...not the
> B-Band fault. The string angle over the bridge wasn't sharp enough on some
> of the strings, so the pressure wasn't even. Kim Walker (who is building my
> new guitar) http://www.walkerguitars.com/ used his dremel tool to make slots
> from the bridge pin holes toward the saddle. Each slot is a different length
> (saddle is set at an angle to the bridge pin holes) which makes all of the
> strings break at the same angle. The balance is perfect now.
>
> --
>
> Chuck Murphy
> Richmond, RI
>
> Adam Robertson <<info@ara-consult...>> wrote in message
> news:WxsA3.1383$<H5.172538@newsr2...>...
> | Hi there
> |
> | I would be grateful for any opinions on EMF B-band undersaddle pickups as
> I
> | am thinking of installing one in my Santa Cruz OM. How does the sound
> | compare to others, what's string balance like etc. etc.
> |
> | Any thoughts, opinions advice etc. would be fantastic.
Funny, I just mixed a guy last night who has one, the first I've encountered.I was very favorably impressed. Very resistant to feedback, perhaps a touch dark
without a preamp (which is good, IMO as a sound dude), worked fine straight to
my board with no DI. The headliner's Ovation sounded pretty pathetic in
comparison, IMHO. Sorry I can't tell you much about the guitar it was installed
in; the guy showed up 1 minute before show time, after I had already
painstakingly EQ'd the Ovation ;^(
The owner installed it himself, and reported no problems doing so. Thumbs wayup from my experience.
--C.E.
| Just installed a b band on my new Thomspon T1 |
|---|
From: SCuss98871 <scuss98871@aol...>
Subject: Just installed a b band on my new Thomspon T1
Date: 15 Sep 1999 03:26:34 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Hi all,
thought I'd post a positive message. I recently sold my Taylor 714 (really
nice instrument and one of the better Taylors I have played) for a Thompson T1.
Bit of a risk as I'd never gotten my hands on a Thompson, but bought it from
reputation. The Thompson arrived today and it is indeed a beautiful piece
visually and tonally. Incidentally - can anyone tell me the binding that Ted
uses? Looks like maple and two other woods I cannot identify..
I have only played the instrument for about 30 minutes but it definitely sings.
Louder than my Taylor and a fuller, warmer tone. More complex, I guess.While Taylor make some great stuff, I can defintiely see why the whole
"handmade" thing is so appealing. The guitar is understated, but very
beautiful and neat.
Anyway, I typically get a guitar tech to do any work on my guitar, but I bit
the bullet and installed the B band myself and acheived (through luck not
skill) perfect balance the first time. It sounds terrific! Even through my
flextone (NOT a great amp for acoustics...) I can hear the woody sound coming
through. Anyway, I know several people have balance problems with B bands and
I in fact had great difficulty with the last b band on my Taylor( which was
actually EMF's "pickup replacement system" but that is another story...) but
l'll simply say it is worth the effort as this is a great pick up
Now if I can save my pennies for a Mills mic and some outboard blending
units....
Steve
| B-Band Controversy [2] |
|---|
From: <mischultz@my-deja...>
Subject: B-Band Controversy
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 00:13:01 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
There isn't one, at least not at the moment.
I installed mine today in a Tacoma DR12, and I wanted to let folks know
that things are going swimmingly. 'Twas my first installation, and it
could not have been more straightforward. I returned a short while ago
from the area Mars where I ran the guitar through the SWR Strawberry and
California Blonde amps. The sound was dead on. I have been, and still
am, a vocal proponent of Baggs gear, and the Ribbon Transducer system in
particular. I love them for the richness they impart to the sound; it's
absolutely unique. The B-Band, on the other hand, is transparent.
What I heard through the SWR was the strong, resonant tone of my
instrument. Period.
By the way, I didn't employ John Zyla's installation method. I wanted
to try it just as it came, and am quite pleased. I think Tacoma's use
of CNC machinery is responsible, at least in part, for my unaided
success: a perfectly cut slot and a manufactured, synthetic saddle
allow for wonderfully tight tolerances, and all but preclude the sort of
unevenness that is apparently the primary cause of balance problems with
the B-Band (and that predominantly with the older system, if I've done
my homework correctly).
I'm on board.
Michael
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
From: Norman Draper <ndraper@prodigy...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Controversy
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:15:45 -0400
Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com
I heard Larry and El at Acoustic Rootshttp://members.aol.com/gtrac/acroots.html lats spring. The were playing
Goodalls... both of them... I think.... am I remembering correctly, or was
one a Framus? No, both Goodalls with B-Bands installed through a Cal Blonde
amp. I thought the sound was absolutely great. I rarely plug in, so the
sound I compared it to was unamplified guitar as I most often here it.
Really great sound from both the amp and the B-Band... No weak link inthat chain.
Norman (Gotta Weak Link Or Two In My Chain!) Draper
>I returned a short while ago
>from the area Mars where I ran the guitar through the SWR Strawberry and
>California Blonde amps. The sound was dead on. I have been, and still
>am, a vocal proponent of Baggs gear, and the Ribbon Transducer system in
>particular. I love them for the richness they impart to the sound; it's
>absolutely unique. The B-Band, on the other hand, is transparent.
>What I heard through the SWR was the strong, resonant tone of my
>instrument. Period.
>
| Blender for Highlander and Joe Mills....and more! |
|---|
From: Tony Rairden <TRairden@NoSpamfqms...>
Subject: Re: Blender for Highlander and Joe Mills....and more!
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 21:26:12 -0400
Organization: First Quality Musical Supplies
It now appears that we won't see the Entity (or the VIP violin pickup or the
Statement upright bass pickup) until after January NAMM.
Other news: List price on the B-Band with mic has gone up to $239.99 (still
a good deal IMO at normal discounted prices), and the New New (New2)
Frontier onboard preamp/blender with mic IS available. Rather than a large
hole in the side of the guitar, it requires holes for four pot shafts. You
can see the system at www.b-band.com/acoustic.htm (with lots of detailed
text on the system).
Tony Rairden
First Quality Musical Supplies
www.fqms.com
(SPAM control on-- delete "NoSpam" from return address to correspond.)
Larry Pattis <<abuse@127...>> wrote in message
news:<abuse-ya02408000R0510991855070001@news...>...
> In article <miwK3.103$<j73.2892@cletus...>>, "DReke"
> <<dreke@bright...>> wrote:
>
> > Larry,
> >
> > If I use a pocket blender, which provides phantom power (I think?), with
a
> > B-Band pickup/mic combo, do I still have to have to use the Core Pre Amp
and
> > internal battery?
>
>
> Yes, you still need the B-band's Core pre-amp and battery in your guitar
to
> run with a Pocket Blender.
>
>
> >
> > Have you heard if that's going to be the case with the Entity?
>
> The Entity will work as above (in systems with existing internal
> batteries), AND will also allow a "no-battery" situation for your guitar,
> providing phantom for both an internal mic AND the Core....one small
caveat
> is that to run without any internal batteries (when the Entity is
> available) there will be a special Core needed...the existing Cores will
> always need a battery in the guitar, regardless of how they are being
> amplified outside of the guitar. So for those with existing B-band gear
> that they have purchased (like ME!), they (we!) will need to upgrade to
new
> Core units to have a no-battery system. I don't have a problem with
this.
> I will be happy to be getting rid of always having to have 9v batteries
> around, especially worrying if (even though I replaced it, say, 10 minutes
> ago) it is going to cut-out in the middle of my next set!
>
>
>
> > Also K & K Sounds makes a much less expensive blender with phantom
power.
> > Their URL is http://www.kksound.com/welcome.html. I don't know if it's
good
> > enough for pros like Larry, but it might work for us rank amateurs.
>
>
> I can't comment on this system since I have not yet heard it.
>
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dan Reke
>
> Larry Pattis
>
> Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
>
> Liberal Palette Records
> http://liberalpalette.com
> "Music Without Borders"
| Awesome B-Band! [3] |
|---|
From: Michael A. Wong <mwong1@attglobal...>
Subject: Re: Awesome B-Band!
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 20:48:04 -0400
Organization: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & News Services
As Larry stated this topic has really
been covered quite a bit here.
I dutifully read through all these posts before trying
my first installation and was rather surprised that
the whole job took about 15 minutes and I have not
had any balance problems at all.
Granted this was on a Taylor and the endpin
hole was pre-reamed as on all Taylors.
-Michael-
<<swmaxwell@my-deja...>> wrote in message news:7v2f53$mnr$<1@nnrp1...>...
> I've been told that the B-band, though nice sounding, is difficult
> to install. String balance is a problem, from what I've heard.
>
> Has anyone had a similar experience with this?
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
From: <cuss@juno...>
Subject: Re: Awesome B-Band!
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 10:32:07 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
In article <<3814fb51_3@news1...>>,
"Michael A. Wong" <m.wong@bigfoot.com> wrote:> the whole job took about 15 minutes and I have not
> had any balance problems at all.
> Granted this was on a Taylor and the endpin
> hole was pre-reamed as on all Taylors.
>
> -Michael-
Hi Michael,
In contrast to you, I had tremendous troubles on my Taylor
(but eventually got it squared away) essentially because of
the "triangle" bridge pin arrangement. My new Thompson, though, took
it in 15 mins like your Taylor did. SOunds wonderful!
Steve
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Michael A. Wong <mwong1@attglobal...>
Subject: Re: Awesome B-Band!
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 07:13:18 -0400
Organization: Global Network Services - Remote Access Mail & News Services
Hi Steve,
This is interesting. I had noted in
a seperate post this particular Taylor
was a semi-custom order 412 grand concert in
Koa. When I got the guitar I noticed that the bridge
pin alignment was in the "straight" line
as opposed to the "smiley face" that is typical
of Taylor and Goodall. (This was not something I specified)
While I am no luthier it would seem to me that
because of the "smiley" face arrangement there would
be an un-equal string angle and probably pressure to the
bridge which may have contributed to your balance problems.
My other Taylor, a 714CE has the typical Taylor "smirk"
bridge pin setup.
-Michael-
<<cuss@juno...>> wrote in message news:7v3vv8$ort$<1@nnrp1...>...
> In article <<3814fb51_3@news1...>>,
> "Michael A. Wong" <<m.wong@bigfoot...>> wrote:
> > the whole job took about 15 minutes and I have not
> > had any balance problems at all.
> > Granted this was on a Taylor and the endpin
> > hole was pre-reamed as on all Taylors.
> >
> > -Michael-
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> In contrast to you, I had tremendous troubles on my Taylor
> (but eventually got it squared away) essentially because of
> the "triangle" bridge pin arrangement. My new Thompson, though, took
> it in 15 mins like your Taylor did. SOunds wonderful!
>
> Steve
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
| B-band With or Without Mic? [2] |
|---|
From: Bob Dorgan <d77737@epix...>
Subject: Re: B-band With or Without Mic?
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:47:44 GMT
Organization: Bobs R us
Robbie wrote:
>
> I wonder what the opinion of those using b-bands regarding the benefits of
> shelling out an extra $100 for the optional mic (and probably another $300
> or so for a blender)? If the mic icing on the cake or highly recommended?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Robbie
>
> --
> change 'f' to 'ph' to reply by e-mail
depends on your needs.
A instrumentalist that is looking for absolutely the best tone a guitar
can achieve will insist on the mic.
An acoustic guitarist that plays in a loud band will find the mic damn
near worthless. A guitarist that uses the instrument to accompany
vocals, but in a solo or acoustic only group will probably fall
somewhere in between.
The value of the mic is relevant to how you use the guitar, and how
fussy you are.
Bob Dorgan
From: john bj <desert2000@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: B-band With or Without Mic?
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 17:39:30 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Robbie wrote:
> >
> > I wonder what the opinion of those using b-bands regarding the
benefits of shelling out an extra $100 for the optional mic (and
probably another $300 or so for a blender)? If the mic icing on the cake
or highly recommended?
Bob responded:
> A instrumentalist that is looking for absolutely the best tone a
guitar can achieve will insist on the mic. An acoustic guitarist that
plays in a loud band will find the mic damn near worthless. A guitarist
that uses the instrument to accompany vocals, but in a solo or acoustic
only group will probably fall somewhere in between. The value of the mic
is relevant to how you use the guitar, and how fussy you are.
John (that's me) rambled on:
Bob is right on. BTW - I'm in the near worthless category - plus I
don't really need the mic much. ;-)
Before you plunk down the money for a blender, check your acoustic amp.
Many with two channels have a stereo-in jack or at least two inputjacks. If this is the case, you can get by spending less than $20 on
the right cable (which you'll need for the blender anyway). If there's
a stereo jack, all you need is a stereo (balanced) cable and you then
use your amp's channel controls to blend the sound. If you don't have a
stereo jack, but do have two channels, you can get a stereo Y-cable
which splits the signal from your guitar and you just plug each branch
of the Y into its own channel, and again use the amp to blend the
signals.
One other note - you may find (as I did) that the B-Band needs very
little, if any, EQ adjustment; has very little worry of feedback; and no
need for a notch filter; which reduces the blender to a fancy volume
switch. For me, the mic is the side that usually needs the fancy stuff.
All that said, the blender can be handy in a number of ways, here's just
two:
First, it lets you work with a single channel for your guitar(s). You
can then manage with a single channel amp, or save the second channel
for vocals. With judicious use of a mute or volume pedal/switch to
avoid unplugging pops, you only need to keep track of the settings for
the multiple instruments you have lined up next to you for ready use.
Hint - to ensure you don't mix up the list of settings, use some
gaffer's (non-residue-leaving) tape to note the settings for each
instrument on its upper bout, bass side.
Second, most blenders can be attached to a vocal mic (or music) stand,
which makes tweaking the settings more convenient (and often safer) than
reaching down and around to the amp controls. This also enables you to
keep talking to your audience without the distraction of climbing around
your equipment to make the adjustments.
One more note - if you're getting charged an extra $100 for a B-Band and
preamp with mic versus just a B-Band and preamp, you need to keep
shopping!
peace and joy,
jbj
--
(e-mails should be sent to desert2000 @ NOSPAM yahoo.com)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
| Gave up on the B-Band.... [4] |
|---|
From: Jay Adair (no-spam-please) <oja@flash...>
Subject: Gave up on the B-Band....
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:23:40 GMT
Organization: FlashNet Communications, http://www.flash.net
Well, after months of monkeying around with a B-Band I had installed in a
Goodall Standard Koa, I just finished yanking it out and replacing it with
the standard Fishman Matrix. I had used so many shims I lost count.
Replaced batteries and even had EMF send me a replacement pick-up, which
they graciously did at no charge.
But no matter what I did, I was chasing the elusive goal of balance back and
forth. There was always at least one HOT string, almost double the volume
of the rest. And the overall volume output was so low I could turn my amp
up to nearly full volume without getting a full sound. The replacement
B-Band pick-up - a little better but still not where it should be. Still
imbalanced strings and poor output. And more and varied shim placements.
Now, I should point out that I love my other B-Band, in a Breedlove Ed
Gerhard. It sounds just great and has a nice smooth even output. It has
never caused a lick of problems and was perfect from the get-go. But this
second one could never get with the program. As much as I wanted to get it
right, my patience (never a plentiful commodity) wore out. It took a grand
total of 25 minutes to pull the B-Band and slip in the Fishman, even
counting the time it took to solder the two pick-up wires to the pre-amp.
Plugged it in and it sounded wonderful. Even balance, full volume.....well,
just like all the other Fishmans. A tad brittle, but a little tweaking of
the amp's tone knobs got that under control.
I realize that this admission of failure flies in the face of current B-Band
raves, but enough is enough. Maybe I'll try putting it in an old nylon
string I have laying around. Just my own results, yours may certainly
vary.....
Jay (semi-B-Band supporter, but still like Fishmans) Adair
--
Founder & Charter Member of The Society for Mediocre Guitar Playing on
Expensive Instruments, Ltd.
From: Jay Adair (no-spam-please) <oja@flash...>
Subject: Re: Gave up on the B-Band....
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 01:03:59 GMT
Organization: FlashNet Communications, http://www.flash.net
>
>
> I'm very curious, Jay, did you ever simply try the "John Zyla not-patented
> method" using a smidgen of self-hardening clay in the saddle slot?
>
> My ONE very difficult experience with a B-band (out of 40 installations)
> was cured in 5 minutes with John's trick....and I had spent maybe 5-6
hours
> screwing around with shims on this guitar.
>
> Larry Pattis
>
Larry,
I started to do that very thing, but the more posts on the subject I read,
the more intimidating the whole process seemed. And I had to ask myself,
"Jay, after your completely screw this thing up with hardening clay, THEN
what will you do?" I chickened out and went with the Fishman. You have to
realize, my eyesight is going, I have trouble buttering bread without
getting it on me, what was my chances of getting the right amount of clay
into that tiny slot.....
I still love the B-Band tone....when I can get what it was meant to produce.
But in my experience, the Fishman is easier for clabbers like myself to
manage.
Besides, after 16 years riding a fire engine and those bloody sirens and air
horns, my hearing is nothing to brag about....
Jay (approaching tone deaf in steadily increasing increments) Adair
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: Gave up on the B-Band....
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 20:25:38 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <3iNR3.1911$<49.165232@news...>>, "Jay Adair"
<oja(no-spam-please)@flash.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I'm very curious, Jay, did you ever simply try the "John Zyla not-patented
> > method" using a smidgen of self-hardening clay in the saddle slot?
> >
> > My ONE very difficult experience with a B-band (out of 40 installations)
> > was cured in 5 minutes with John's trick....and I had spent maybe 5-6
> hours
> > screwing around with shims on this guitar.
> >
> > Larry Pattis
> >
> Larry,
>
> I started to do that very thing, but the more posts on the subject I read,
> the more intimidating the whole process seemed. And I had to ask myself,
> "Jay, after your completely screw this thing up with hardening clay, THEN
> what will you do?" I chickened out and went with the Fishman. You have to
> realize, my eyesight is going, I have trouble buttering bread without
> getting it on me, what was my chances of getting the right amount of clay
> into that tiny slot.....
>
> I still love the B-Band tone....when I can get what it was meant to produce.
> But in my experience, the Fishman is easier for clabbers like myself to
> manage.
> Besides, after 16 years riding a fire engine and those bloody sirens and air
> horns, my hearing is nothing to brag about....
>
> Jay (approaching tone deaf in steadily increasing increments) Adair
It is really too bad that you didn't go the final step, or perhaps find
some repair person to give it a shot. The clay is not only quite easy to
work with, it is easy to remove, even after it has hardened. It also has
had NO effect on the acoustic tone on my Traugott, which was the guitar I
was having such difficulty with simply using shims.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: Gave up on the B-Band....
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:51:17 -0600
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <%mPR3.1978$<49.174632@news...>>, "Jay Adair"
<oja(no-spam-please)@flash.net> wrote:
> Larry,
>
> Just a thought...it seems that most of the installation difficulties with
> the B-Band are related to the incredible thinness of the pick-up material,
> in that it quickly reveals any imperfections in the saddle slot, saddle
> bottom, etc. Since the Fishman is a rigid pick-up, it is more forgiving of
> these slight anomalies.
They may have tested some different methods of manufacturing their B-band
material, but unfortunately I cannot shed any light on your theory, or what
EMF has done. A year ago they did go to a very slightly thicker material,
but it did not help with my particular problem.
I have heard false rumors that EMF has added some other material (like
rubber) to the B-band, but these rumors would, indeed, be false. Again, I
had one problem that was unresolvable with shims in approx. 40
installations....and that problem was immediately resolved in 5 minutes
with John Zyla's self-hardening clay method.
> Could the B-Band be "bonded" to a rigid material, perhaps even to the top of
> a Fishman Matrix.....two pick-ups, two output jacks.....talk about the
> ultimate A / B comparison...
>
> Has EMF ever tried their pick-up bonded to a blank strip of metal before
> installation?
I don't know about the latter, but I doubt it. In regards to the former,
it would be pretty easy to lay a B-band on top of a Matrix, but I don't
think that at this point there is a necessity to change what is now a 100%
success story (for me, anyway), in terms of being able to get a perfect
balance each time. I have not yet heard of anyone using John's method that
has failed...and there have been so many nay-sayers here on rmmga, I am
sure that this would have been widely shouted. The facts now seem to be
that anyone willing to go spend a few bucks on a couple of pounds of clay
(approx. a 73 year supply), and has the clay-working skills of a
kindergartner (that's me I'm describing), will be able to clear up any
potential balance problem with B-band. Frankly, Jay, I wish you had gone
for it, since you obviously love the sound of the B-band in your other
guitar. Why settle for, ahem, second best? (ducking for cover)... John
Zyla has mentioned that he will use the clay on every installation, my
opinion is to use it only when there is a determination of an actual
problem.
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
| What IS a B-Band? [2] |
|---|
From: Ian Warshak <iwarshak@NOSPAM...>
Subject: What IS a B-Band?
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 1999 22:55:11 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
dumb question, but i still dont know what the difference is between a b-band
and a fishman matrix that i have installed on my acoustic. can someone
please tell me?
ian
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: What IS a B-Band?
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 18:27:02 GMT
Organization: remove "NOSPAM" from my address to reply
Ian, the difference is in the pickup element itself.
The Fishman pickup uses piezo technology. This technology is based
upon the physical properties of certain crystals that, when
compressed, emit a minute electrical signal. This is a mature and
well-developed technology. This technology is also used in some
microphones, high frequency transducers, pressure sensors, and a slew
of other exotic and not so exotic applications.
The B-Band pickup element is based upon an electret film technology,
similar to that used in modern condenser microphones. This technology
use changes in capacitance created by compression of the film to
generate an electrical signal. The film is made up of permanently
charged metal plates separated by a compressible dielectric layer,
which is made of a polymer substance filled with microscopic gas
bubbles. Electret technology is also a very mature technology, but
has only in recent years been developed for use in under-saddle guitar
pickup elements.
For more information, visit the EMF site, http://www.b-band.com
Regards,
John Zyla
On Thu, 28 Oct 1999 22:55:11 -0500, "Ian Warshak"
<<iwarshak@NOSPAM...>> wrote:
>dumb question, but i still dont know what the difference is between a b-band
>and a fishman matrix that i have installed on my acoustic. can someone
>please tell me?
>
>ian
>
>
| b-band installation report |
|---|
From: Southern <southern@datasync...>
Subject: b-band installation report
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 20:32:38 -0600
Organization: AMC Internet
I’ve been lurking around this group sometime now and have picked up a
unfathomable amount of useful (& useless) information from you guys & gals.
This is undoubtedly the greatest newsgroup on the net. Anyway, I really
haven’t had much to contribute until today when I received & installed my
new b-band pickup in my Taylor 614C (pre-electronics version).
A little background on me. I’m a 48 year old professional amateur, married
to my beautiful wife Debra and been playing the guitar way too many years to
be no better than I am, but Koko the cat and I still enjoy it. Debra puts
up with it. Oh, I live on the Mississippi Gulf Coast where the humidity
never drops below 80% and solid wood guitars thrive.
Late last Friday afternoon I called First Quality Music Supplies and ordered
a b-band core 99 pickup. Imagine how surprised I was when it arrived in
Mondays mail. Hats off to FQMS for their gracious sales people and super
fast service. This afternoon, armed with a wealth of info I’d gathered from
rmmga and various implements of destruction I attacked the project and my
Taylor.
First things first, I removed the strings (yes all of them) and gave the
fretboard a good cleaning. I had read over the excellent instructions that
EMF provides and had every imaginable tool that might be needed laid out on
the kitchen counter (Debra was at work). Removing the saddle I found that
Taylor had thoughtfully started a pilot hole in the exact place I needed to
drill through the bridge. Taking my 2 hp. masonry hammer drill I carefully
drilled through the bridge and guitar, stopping short of going through the
back and into the kitchen counter. Piece of cake. Next thing was to
install the new endjack/preamp. Again Taylor had prudently predrilled the
strap button hole for the new endjack. The hole was a bit tight (that’s
another thread) but I was able to enlarge it ever so slightly using a .47
in. drill bit turned gently by hand. . Hardest part was getting the new
jack into the strap button hole by feel, the washers kept falling off the
jack when I’d put my hand into the soundhole. It appeared to me that the
bottom of the saddle was a bit concave and EMF was adamant that it had to be
absolutely flat, besides I needed to remove a bit to allow for the thickness
of the pickup, thin as it is. Luckily I had recently sharpened the
lawnmower blade and the bench grinder was already set up on my work bench.
The rest was simple, slid the b-band element up through the hole in the
bridge, lay it in the saddle slot and replaced the saddle. Re-strung the
guitar and plugged it into my old Crate amp.
At first it was hard to appraise the sound quality, probably due to the amps
raspy rattling speakers. Refusing to be discouraged I switched to the
overdrive channel, turned the gain up to 10, level to about 5 and kicked
into “Whole Lotta Love”. Man this thing rocks! I may never pick up my
Strat again. Hopefully my new acoustic amp will arrive soon and if all goes
well I’ll be able to return the five pounds of self hardening clay. Till
then I’m going to practice playing some Metallica in DADGAD.
Ron
| B-Band + Larrivee J-19 = Extreme Happiness |
|---|
From: Carey Driscoll <carey@funtv...>
Subject: B-Band + Larrivee J-19 = Extreme Happiness
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 16:40:53 -0800
I just posted this to a Bulletin Board site called The 13th Fret:
There's a recurring question -- presumably it recurrs due to new people
joining after the last time the subject was discussed -- about pickups,
and I've just installed one that I just learned about on the RMMGA
newsgroup: the EMF B-Band.
Based on my first gig with it, done 2 hours after I completed
installation (and therefore not having had time for it to
settle/stabilize), I can give it a conditional "WOW" :-)
I installed it in my "new" Larrivee J-19, and only used the under-saddle
+ Preamp version, choosing to skip the optional microphone. Installation
was extremely easy, and due to the extremely thin element, there was NO
NEED to sand the saddle. The element, and the battery, connect to the
preamp by means of plug-ins which are already attached to them. NO
SOLDERING!
There were numerous posts at RMMGA regarding string-to-string balancing
problems, although a number of people (Larry Pattis and Tom Loredo in
particular -- sorry if I forgot anyone) have posted lengthy and very
helpful "cures" for this potential problem.
Uncharacteristically, I seem to have NO problem of this nature:-) But if
I had, the "fixes", and the extreme helpfulness of some of the RMMGA
members, would have allowed me to remedy the problem quickly.
Performance? Tone and volume seem outstanding. I'm a pretty damn
mediocre player (even that's probably an overstatement), and I'm sure my
ear is not good enough to detect other then extreme imballance, so I'll
take the guitar in to a local luthier to make sure it's OK. But from all
indications, this pickup is a real winner.
Pricing is under $100 -- not installed -- but finding a source/supplier
seems like it could be a challenge. The two acoustic shops (as well as
one repair shop and Guitar Center) that I tried here in San Diego had
never even HEARD of B-Band!
If anyone is interested in B-Band, their web site is:
http://www.B-Band.com/
If you want to buy one, I'll be happy to pass along the way to reach
Larry Pattis, who can probably supply you.
--
~Carey Driscoll~
(619) 267-7501
DRISCOLL ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES
http://de.services.tripod.com
| B-Band balance & shims |
|---|
From: Elizabeth Papapetrou <NOSPAMmother@fdt...>
Subject: B-Band balance & shims
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 01:08:54 GMT
Organization: Motherheart
I fitted a B-Band to my new Goodall today and had no balance problems.
However, the guitar came with a Baggs ribbon pick-up and two thin shims made
of bone. They were about 2/3 the width of the saddle slot. The Baggs and the
B-Band are about the same thickness and, as I thought I would like the
"action" of the instrument a little lower, I only used one shim, below the
B-Band.
As I said, the amplified balance was fine, but the action was a tiny bit too
low, so I refitted the second shim. This time, the low and high E were much
louder than the other strings. However, I knew the problem was the combination
of two shims that were both a little narrow.
So ...at the same time I fitted the B-Band, I found an older B-Band ribbon
that had gotten bent over at one end and "bubbled" when bent back and it
wouldn't work anymore. I called Larry Pattis to brainstrom about shims and he
suggested we try using the old B-Band as shim material (duh!). The old B-Band
is about the same thickness as the shims so I put one piece below the pickup
and another above. I strung it up and was amazed to find that, not only was
the amplified volume balance from string to string perfect, but the guitar
sounded significantly better acoustically than any time in my experience..
I emailed Heikki at EMF and suggested that, if he has old B-Band ribbons lying
around doing nothing, why not cut the connector off them and send them to
B-Band installers and also make them available to do-it-yourselfers, too, as
acceptable shim material. Two old-style B-Band thicknesses plus one new B-Band
makes almost exactly the same thichness as a Fishman pick-up.
Thought y'all would like to know.
Oh ...and the Goodall Grand Concert already sound better - more open and with
a little more complex mids.
Elizabeth
Remove NOSPAM from email address before replying
| EMF Entity? (any other alternatives to Fishman Blender?) |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: EMF Entity? (any other alternatives to Fishman Blender?)
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 16:01:57 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <807aii$g95$<1@nnrp1...>>, <steveandlisa123@my-deja...> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I posted something similar to this re: acoustic amps verses blender
> units. Does anyone have solid info on EMF's entity? Price and what it
> will do? Any recommendations on a good unit for B band plus mic
> source? Seems like someone would do well to design a compact DI box
> that can eq two separate sources and add some reverb and compression.
> Does anything like this exist that is relatively low cost?
>
> thanks
>
> Steve
Solid info? Uhhmmm, maybe. Price, not sure, probably around the same as a
Pocket Blender. It will do more, providing external power for a special
EMF "Core", so no battery is needed in the guitar at all. It will also run
off 48v phantom from a mixing board, rather than having to use a/c
adapters. It will have the ability to use an a/c adapter or 9v battery if
no phantom is available from a mixing board. Send & return loops for both
channels, yes. It will run any dual-signal set-up, Fishman, Highlander,
EMG, etc., not just the EMF gear.....BUT, the special EMF Core will be the
only way to run "battery-free," no battery in the guitar. Separate EQ for
both channels, of course.
"Does anything like this exist that is relatively low cost?" Depends on
what you perceive as "low." Most folks seem to think that these external
units are a bit pricey, but they really do quite a lot.
More, but I'm sort of busy with a new guitar right now.
See ya'.....
Larry Pattis
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
| B-Band update [2] |
|---|
From: Lyle Caldwell <caldwell@bellsouth...>
Subject: B-Band update
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:18:02 -0600
Well, I turned off the treble "enhancer," and it's better, but still a bit
bass shy. Man, this thing is a pain to disassemble, change, and reassemble.
<g>
Next I'll try the bass enhancer and then turning off the high pass filter,
or at least changing it to 30Hz instead of 70Hz.
If that doesn't do it, I'll spring for the internal mic.
Still better than a piezo. Turning off the treble "enhancer" eliminated the
quack.
--
Lyle Caldwell
Psionic Music
Composer, Producer, Arranger
<caldwell@bellsouth...>
"Gimme some money" - David St. Hubbins
From: Lyle Caldwell <caldwell@bellsouth...>
Subject: Re: B-Band update
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 22:29:34 -0600
Hey Carey. I ended up going with the B Band instead of the Fishman Rare
Earth, obviously.
I installed it in my Gibson Sourthern Jumbo (round shoulders, rosewood
sides, spruce top), and initially followed the manual's recommendation for a
"jumbo" guitar (though the Gibson's more a dreadnaught than a true jumbo
like a J200 etc), turning the bass enhancer off but leaving the treble
enhancer on. I found that with these settings, there was a weird quality to
the transients of the guitar when amplified, not quite a quack (like a
piezo) but a very brittle sound. I turned off the treble "enhancer" and the
top end now sounds normal, but the guitar when amplified still seems bass
shy.
So now I have 3 options to try: turning the bass enhancer on (which I'm not
optimistic about), disabling the high pass filter (removes everything under
70 Hz, which shouldn't affect the percieved low end output at all), and
adding the internal microphone (which makes sense, but then I either have to
use a mixer or a special cable.
The guitar does sound better than piezo-equipped guitars, but not as good as
I had hoped after hearing the raves on the news group.
--
Lyle Caldwell
Psionic Music
Composer, Producer, Arranger
<caldwell@bellsouth...>
"Gimme some money" - David St. Hubbins
Carey Driscoll <<carey@funtv...>> wrote in message
news:<38320A3B.468E@funtv...>...
> Lyle Caldwell wrote:
> >
> > Well, I turned off the treble "enhancer," and it's better, but still a
bit bass shy. Man, this thing is a pain to disassemble, change, and
reassemble.
>
>
> Lyle:
>
> I missed the early stages of your problem. What kind of guitar, and
> what's your complaint? My B-Band, the pre99 Core, seems great, in my
> rosewood jumbo (Larrivee J-19).
> --
> ~Carey Driscoll~
> (619) 267-7501
> DRISCOLL ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES
> http://de.services.tripod.com
| b-band HELP!!! |
|---|
From: <randycrosby@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: b-band HELP!!!
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:37:33 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Hello,
The b-band has several qualities better than the
fishman, one is that it is thinner so that there
is less mass underneath the saddle; two, it has a
more even bandwidth so that you can run the EQ
flat and it has a quality of a microphone rather
than an electric pickup which the fishman tends to
have. I've been installing b-bands for about one
year and have had good to excellent results and
prefer it to fishman.
Randy Crosby
Luthier
Calliope Music, Burlington, Vermont
In article
<9MBZ3.8316$<JD1.608556@typhoon...>>,
"rftobias" <rfurnis1@twcny.rr.com> wrote:> Can someone please, explain this b-band thing to
me. I have a fishman in my
> D-45 and J-200 and they both sound great through
our PA. But all I see, all
> over this group is b-band. If there is something
better, I want it. So tell
> me what the hell (excuse my language) is b-band?
> Thanks,
> RF
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
| I Tried a Rare Earth |
|---|
From: <mikecloud@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: I Tried a Rare Earth
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 03:16:14 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
In article <<19991121200830.27315.00001291@ng-fi1...>>,
gsprigg@aol.com (DADGAD Tune) wrote:> I brought a Rare Earth Humbucking home today and tried it. I am
striving for a
> pure acoustic sound. The pick up was nice with plenty of output, but
it still
> sounded very much like a typical magnetic pick-up (surprise) - as in
not very
> acoustic. It was especially jagged when fingerpicked, which is the
primary use
> of the guitar I intended it for. Playing around with the parametric
EQ on a
> Baggs Param DI still could not do much.
>
> I can see where many styles of music would really like this pickup,
but it does
> not suit my tastes. Anyone have the same results? Guess I am
ordering a
> B-Band.
>
> Larry
>
Larry:
I used a RE for a brief time in conjunction with a Mills mic. I
thought the bass from the RE was great--warm, fat, and transparent;
but, the treble left a lot to be desired, even with the mic added in.
As you move up the fretboard I think the RE sounds more like an
electric piano than an acoustic guitar. I replaced it with a B-Band
(and ditched the mic too) some time ago, and I've never been sorry. I
think you'll love the B-Band in comparison.
Mike
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
| Got my B-Band Installed |
|---|
From: Sam Chon <samchon777@my-deja...>
Subject: Got my B-Band Installed
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 15:42:54 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Hi,
I got a B-Band installed in my Taylor 410 - 1998
I got the B-band without the extra mic.
I really like it. It sound 10 times better than my Fishman AG 125
Passive.
I got it installed by Flip Scipio. He does really good work
(Thanks to Adrian Legg for the Referral on that)
If you are in the NYC Area, he is the man
It was about 230 for parts and labor. Which seems ok to me.
Sam
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
| B-Band - Counterpoint [17] |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 18:45:18 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <81v6n1$45j$<1@bgtnsc02...>>, "JD BLACKWELL"
<<oneeyedjack@worldnet...>> wrote:
<<snipp>>
. I'd rather hear an opinion from a working shmuck
> musician like myself who bought it, uses it regularly and gets good results
> with it. This may well describe some our more visible B-Band endorsers but
> where the suspicion probably springs from is their failure to address an
> inordinately high number of poorly performing units. I couldn't in good
> conscience continue to endorse something that I may have one of the few
> working examples of. The practice of putting the "good stuff" in the hands
> of endorsers and selling the junk is an old one. Most big names are careful
> to avoid having that associated with their reputations as it clouds their
> credibility for future endorsements.
> JD
All of the B-band sytems that are in my guitars have all come from
wholesalers with EMF inventory in stock. No pre-testing, just ordered and
delivered just like what goes out to any store or retailer. Same for other
pros I have helped outfit, or given advice to after the fact. And from
what I understand, most (if not all) of the touring musicians that have
been mentioned in this thread came to EMF & B-band through word of mouth,
had the gear installed in their guitars (just like me) long before any sort
of relationship was developed. Again, this could not have been "special"
gear, since it was off-the-shelf stock.
In fact, EMF is flourishing right now, from what I have seen. Their sales
are certainly increasing, and the occassional amazing service that we hear
about here from time to time would not even be possible if Heikki and
others in Finland were buried under dealing with "an inordinately high
number of poorly performing units" as JD claims. As has been pointed out
by others, now the U.S. manufacturers are beginning to copy EMF's
advertising, although the technology is clearly different, and cannot
perfom in the same way that the EMF technology does. Pretty funny if you
ask me, and again, a good sign that EMF is being noticed by those U.S.
manufacturers.
This misinformation (since JD has absolutely no data at all on how many
B-band units have been sold, and what their reliability rate is), or more
accurately, purely fictional commentary, is something that I feel a need to
point out, and call a spade a spade.
It reminds me of the anger and ridicule voiced on rmmga directed at Elixir
strings before the real marketplace accepted them. Some folks apparently
don't deal well with change, or with accepting the fact that certain gear
can work well...even without their approval.
I am sure that JD will continue to direct his personal attacks my way here
on rmmga. Some folks just can't get over being wrong, and having it
pointed out, no matter how politely.....
Larry Pattis
"Surround yourself with friends that are seeking the truth, and run like
hell from anyone claiming to have found it."
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
"Music Without Borders"
From: JD BLACKWELL <oneeyedjack@worldnet...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 21:07:35 -0800
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Larry Pattis wrote in message ...
>In article <81v6n1$45j$<1@bgtnsc02...>>, "JD BLACKWELL"
><<oneeyedjack@worldnet...>> wrote:
>
>
>
><<snipp>>
>
>. I'd rather hear an opinion from a working shmuck
>> musician like myself who bought it, uses it regularly and gets good
results
>> with it. This may well describe some our more visible B-Band endorsers
but
>> where the suspicion probably springs from is their failure to address an
>> inordinately high number of poorly performing units. I couldn't in good
>> conscience continue to endorse something that I may have one of the few
>> working examples of. The practice of putting the "good stuff" in the
hands
>> of endorsers and selling the junk is an old one. Most big names are
careful
>> to avoid having that associated with their reputations as it clouds their
>> credibility for future endorsements.
>> JD
>
>
>
>
>
>All of the B-band sytems that are in my guitars have all come from
>wholesalers with EMF inventory in stock. No pre-testing, just ordered and
>delivered just like what goes out to any store or retailer. Same for other
>pros I have helped outfit, or given advice to after the fact. And from
>what I understand, most (if not all) of the touring musicians that have
>been mentioned in this thread came to EMF & B-band through word of mouth,
>had the gear installed in their guitars (just like me) long before any sort
>of relationship was developed. Again, this could not have been "special"
>gear, since it was off-the-shelf stock.
>
>In fact, EMF is flourishing right now, from what I have seen. Their sales
>are certainly increasing, and the occassional amazing service that we hear
>about here from time to time would not even be possible if Heikki and
>others in Finland were buried under dealing with "an inordinately high
>number of poorly performing units" as JD claims.
OK so you won the crapshoot and got some good ones. I challenge you to go
back over the history of this ng and find a pickup thats gotten more bad
press than the B-Band. Maybe its a regional thing but I cant find a tech or
a luthier in the greater Puget Sound area (and I know all of them) that
would touch a B-Band on a bet. That to me is an indication of an
"inordinately high number of poorly performing units" regardless of the
numbers sold or the service history. If they're so great, why do so many
people dislike them enough to make it an issue. And if they're that much of
a problem dont you have some moral obligation as an endorser to prevail upon
EMF to ameliorate the situation. About all I seem to recall hearing from you
is "Mine works great". Do feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but you do
seem to have a big blind spot regarding the significant numbers of
dissatified B-Band users inthis NG alone.
As has been pointed out>by others, now the U.S. manufacturers are beginning to copy EMF's
>advertising, although the technology is clearly different, and cannot
>perfom in the same way that the EMF technology does. Pretty funny if you
>ask me, and again, a good sign that EMF is being noticed by those U.S.
>manufacturers.
>
>This misinformation (since JD has absolutely no data at all on how many
>B-band units have been sold, and what their reliability rate is), or more
>accurately, purely fictional commentary, is something that I feel a need to
>point out, and call a spade a spade.
There's nothing fictional about the number of dissatisfied users in this ng
or do they all have a personal grunge against you?
JD
>
>It reminds me of the anger and ridicule voiced on rmmga directed at Elixir
>strings before the real marketplace accepted them. Some folks apparently
>don't deal well with change, or with accepting the fact that certain gear
>can work well...even without their approval.
>
>I am sure that JD will continue to direct his personal attacks my way here
>on rmmga. Some folks just can't get over being wrong, and having it
>pointed out, no matter how politely.....
>
>Larry Pattis
>
>"Surround yourself with friends that are seeking the truth, and run like
>hell from anyone claiming to have found it."
>
>Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
>
>Liberal Palette Records
>http://liberalpalette.com
>"Music Without Borders"
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 22:39:50 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <81vm41$q32$<1@bgtnsc01...>>, "JD BLACKWELL"
<<oneeyedjack@worldnet...>> wrote:
> OK so you won the crapshoot and got some good ones. I challenge you to go
> back over the history of this ng and find a pickup thats gotten more bad
> press than the B-Band.
Sure, JD, from folks like you.
>Maybe its a regional thing but I cant find a tech or
> a luthier in the greater Puget Sound area (and I know all of them) that
> would touch a B-Band on a bet.
Right, we know you know all of them. But if they won't touch them, how do
they come to a conclusion about them? Or did they all try just one, and
then decide all together that they didn't like them. When you make these
blanket statements about every luthier/repair person in the Puget Sound,
well JD, you're setting yourself for some critical evaluation as to the
basis for (and the reality of) such commentary. Apparently there is NO
statistically significant conclusion for anyone to make, especially in the
Puget Sound area where the B-band is apparently non-existent. You can't
have it both ways, either there are a lot of folks that have worked with
the B-band there, or not. You claim not, so they can't have much
experience with it. I have installed well over 40 B-bands now, can you
claim that any of your techs that "won't touch them" have installed that
many?
>That to me is an indication of an
> "inordinately high number of poorly performing units" regardless of the
> numbers sold or the service history. If they're so great, why do so many
> people dislike them enough to make it an issue.
Well, I'm still not sure who, especially in the Puget Sound area doesn't
like the B-band? The techs won't touch them (according to you) so no one
must have any installed in their guitars for them to be dissatisfied with.
I can't figure that one out.
>And if they're that much of
> a problem dont you have some moral obligation as an endorser to prevail upon
> EMF to ameliorate the situation. About all I seem to recall hearing from you
> is "Mine works great". Do feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but you do
> seem to have a big blind spot regarding the significant numbers of
> dissatified B-Band users inthis NG alone.
You ARE wrong JD, especially in claiming that all I ever say is that "mine"
works. In the very post you were responding to I said:
<<<<No pre-testing, just ordered and
>delivered just like what goes out to any store or retailer. Same for other
>pros I have helped outfit, or given advice to after the fact. And from
>what I understand, most (if not all) of the touring musicians that have
>been mentioned in this thread came to EMF & B-band through word of mouth,
>had the gear installed in their guitars (just like me) long before any sort
>of relationship was developed. Again, this could not have been "special"
>gear, since it was off-the-shelf stock.>>>>
So again, which way would you have us thinking...you ignore my obvious
comment to attempt to make a point...so there actually is no point to what
you are saying. Either the "working schmucks" that use B-band like them,
and actually prefer the sound of the B-band, or they are being paid huge
sums of money by a small start-up company to say so, and travel with their
instruments and attempt to make music with faulty equipment in their
guitars. As another rmmga'er pointed out, the California Guitar Trio
played on Ovations (at high volume levels) and tried Taylors (with a U.S.
manufacturer's pick-ups) and then settled on the B-band in their Somogyi
guitars. Good taste if you ask me, all the way around. I have pretty much
given this group a running commentary about the numbers of B-bands that I
have worked with, and I have been honest about my installations....but you
continue to ignore this clear information I offer up, and simply repeat
things that attempt to put EMF in a bad light. And as to any "numbers of
dissatisfied B-band users" in this newsgroup, well, see below where I ask
you to come up with some numbers that would validate your position on this.
You don't have them. I could claim the exact same thing about you, that
is, you have a blind spot when it comes to recognizing very satisfied users
on this NG when it comes to B-band.
I said:
<<<<> >This misinformation (since JD has absolutely no data at all on how many
> >B-band units have been sold, and what their reliability rate is), or more
> >accurately, purely fictional commentary, is something that I feel a need to
> >point out, and call a spade a spade.>>>>
> There's nothing fictional about the number of dissatisfied users in this ng
> or do they all have a personal grunge against you?
> JD
I don't know, JD, seems like we see the same thing but come to different
conclusions. On this newsgroup I can really remember only a handful of
folks that have really had experience with the B-band in a less than
positive light.....and many more that are thoroughly thrilled with the
B-band. So let's see a compilation of your numbers...or was I right, that
your commentary is purely fictional. I don't have any numbers, mind you,
but if you want to bandy about commentary that appears to be based in fact,
than I will ask you to prove it. Prove it. In fact, I am sure that I have
seen more "third hand" negative commentary (those without actual
experience!) about B-band, but it does seem to me that the majority of
folks that have actually done a head to head comparison, or simply had the
B-band installed on their own guitars prefer the B-band. I guess that's
just my imagination....
...another idiotic B-band thread, with pretty much the same characters on
both sides. Shit, I give up. What a huge g_d-damned waste of time....
Larry Pattis
"Surround yourself with friends that are seeking the truth, and run like
hell from anyone claiming to have found it."
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
Endorser and lover of the following gear...
Elixir Strings
EMF Acoustics/B-band pick-ups
Tippin Guitars
...it's what I use to make music.
From: JD BLACKWELL <oneeyedjack@worldnet...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 22:43:41 -0800
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Larry Pattis wrote in message ...
>In article <81vm41$q32$<1@bgtnsc01...>>, "JD BLACKWELL"
><<oneeyedjack@worldnet...>> wrote:
>
>
>> OK so you won the crapshoot and got some good ones. I challenge you to go
>> back over the history of this ng and find a pickup thats gotten more bad
>> press than the B-Band.
>
>
>Sure, JD, from folks like you.
>
>
>>Maybe its a regional thing but I cant find a tech or
>> a luthier in the greater Puget Sound area (and I know all of them) that
>> would touch a B-Band on a bet.
>
>
>Right, we know you know all of them. But if they won't touch them, how do
>they come to a conclusion about them? Or did they all try just one, and
>then decide all together that they didn't like them. When you make these
>blanket statements about every luthier/repair person in the Puget Sound,
>well JD, you're setting yourself for some critical evaluation as to the
>basis for (and the reality of) such commentary. Apparently there is NO
>statistically significant conclusion for anyone to make, especially in the
>Puget Sound area where the B-band is apparently non-existent. You can't
>have it both ways, either there are a lot of folks that have worked with
>the B-band there, or not. You claim not, so they can't have much
>experience with it. I have installed well over 40 B-bands now, can you
>claim that any of your techs that "won't touch them" have installed that
>many?
The point you dont seem to get is that if you dont sell it first you cant
install them. For the record, 75% of the techs I know have installed at
least three. Half of those were replaced within 2 months and no one got a
second one. The other 25% took one look at the installation and decided that
the methodolgy was too shaky to be losing money on it coming back. I dont
know where you're installing these things but Seattle is probably one the
most sophisticated acoustic guitar cities I've ever seen. There just may be
a higher level of expectation here.
>
>
>>That to me is an indication of an
>> "inordinately high number of poorly performing units" regardless of the
>> numbers sold or the service history. If they're so great, why do so many
>> people dislike them enough to make it an issue.
>
>
>Well, I'm still not sure who, especially in the Puget Sound area doesn't
>like the B-band? The techs won't touch them (according to you) so no one
>must have any installed in their guitars for them to be dissatisfied with.
>I can't figure that one out.
It doesn't take many of them for the word to get out. Dusty Strings and
Guitar Emporium and Mike Lull carry a lot of weight around here and if they
say its junk you can bet it probably is.
>
>
>>And if they're that much of
>> a problem dont you have some moral obligation as an endorser to prevail
upon
>> EMF to ameliorate the situation. About all I seem to recall hearing from
you
>> is "Mine works great". Do feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but you
do
>> seem to have a big blind spot regarding the significant numbers of
>> dissatified B-Band users inthis NG alone.
>
>
>You ARE wrong JD, especially in claiming that all I ever say is that "mine"
>works. In the very post you were responding to I said:
>
><<<<No pre-testing, just ordered and
>>delivered just like what goes out to any store or retailer. Same for
other
>>pros I have helped outfit, or given advice to after the fact. And from
>>what I understand, most (if not all) of the touring musicians that have
>>been mentioned in this thread came to EMF & B-band through word of mouth,
>>had the gear installed in their guitars (just like me) long before any
sort
>>of relationship was developed. Again, this could not have been "special"
>>gear, since it was off-the-shelf stock.>>>>
>
>
>So again, which way would you have us thinking...you ignore my obvious
>comment to attempt to make a point...so there actually is no point to what
>you are saying. Either the "working schmucks" that use B-band like them,
>and actually prefer the sound of the B-band, or they are being paid huge
>sums of money by a small start-up company to say so, and travel with their
>instruments and attempt to make music with faulty equipment in their
>guitars. As another rmmga'er pointed out, the California Guitar Trio
>played on Ovations (at high volume levels) and tried Taylors (with a U.S.
>manufacturer's pick-ups) and then settled on the B-band in their Somogyi
>guitars. Good taste if you ask me, all the way around. I have pretty much
>given this group a running commentary about the numbers of B-bands that I
>have worked with, and I have been honest about my installations....but you
>continue to ignore this clear information I offer up, and simply repeat
>things that attempt to put EMF in a bad light. And as to any "numbers of
>dissatisfied B-band users" in this newsgroup, well, see below where I ask
>you to come up with some numbers that would validate your position on this.
>You don't have them. I could claim the exact same thing about you, that
>is, you have a blind spot when it comes to recognizing very satisfied users
>on this NG when it comes to B-band.
Just as there are satisfied users of anything else here. I dont have a
blind spot there. You cant deny that there have been more dissatisfied
B-Band users here proprtionately than any other.
>
>
>I said:
>
><<<<> >This misinformation (since JD has absolutely no data at all on how
many
>> >B-band units have been sold, and what their reliability rate is), or
more
>> >accurately, purely fictional commentary, is something that I feel a need
to
>> >point out, and call a spade a spade.>>>>
>
>
>
>> There's nothing fictional about the number of dissatisfied users in this
ng
>> or do they all have a personal grunge against you?
>> JD
>
>
>I don't know, JD, seems like we see the same thing but come to different
>conclusions. On this newsgroup I can really remember only a handful of
>folks that have really had experience with the B-band in a less than
>positive light.....and many more that are thoroughly thrilled with the
>B-band. So let's see a compilation of your numbers...or was I right, that
>your commentary is purely fictional. I don't have any numbers, mind you,
>but if you want to bandy about commentary that appears to be based in fact,
>than I will ask you to prove it. Prove it.
Make it worth it! Hell I'd be glad to drudge through Deja News for a week
and tabulate all that data if I thought you'd donate your guitars (sans
B-Band) to Tom Risner and exile yourself to rmmg. How far back does DejaNews
go anyway?
In fact, I am sure that I have>seen more "third hand" negative commentary (those without actual
>experience!) about B-band, but it does seem to me that the majority of
>folks that have actually done a head to head comparison, or simply had the
>B-band installed on their own guitars prefer the B-band. I guess that's
>just my imagination....
Damn right its third hand! You dont think for a second that I'm going to
guinea pig one of my guitars in the face of controversial reviews. I did
play one through my AP-13 (in a Guild jumbo 12) next to my McIntyre equipped
Taylor 12 and was nothing short of underwhelmed by the B-Band. I'm willing
to allow for the different sounds of nearly identical guitars by different
builders but this was ridiculous.
>
>
>
>...another idiotic B-band thread, with pretty much the same characters on
>both sides. Shit, I give up. What a huge g_d-damned waste of time....
Yeah. All those idiots that just have it out for you for no apparent reason.
>
>Larry Pattis
>
>"Surround yourself with friends that are seeking the truth, and run like
>hell from anyone claiming to have found it."
When I met Carl McIntyre in Charlotte he was hawking his pickups, a rather
low tech looking thing that sticks to the soundboard. He told me his pickups
sounded better than anything I'd ever heard. To which I characteristically
replied, "Bullshit".
He proceeded to install one in my C-10 and we plugged up to his A/B box.
Mind you, I was running my Fishman and AKG mike through an AP-13 and we
tried various combinations of Piezo only, Mike only and other permutations.
The Mcintyre so far outperformed my rig that to this day I use a single
McIntyre and leave an empty channel in my AP-13. The point is that Carl was
more than willing to show me his truth in a way I couldn't contradict and
made a friend in the process. Maybe you and EMF need to borrow a page or two
from Carl's marketing manual.
JD
>
>Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
>
>Liberal Palette Records
>http://liberalpalette.com
>
>Endorser and lover of the following gear...
>Elixir Strings
>EMF Acoustics/B-band pick-ups
>Tippin Guitars
>...it's what I use to make music.
From: Dick Schneiders <dickschnei@aol...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: 30 Nov 1999 18:33:19 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
JD continues his vendetta with:
>You cant deny that there have been more dissatisfied
>B-Band users here proprtionately than any other.
>>
There have certainly also been many more satisfied B-Band users here than any
other system.
This particular topic has been argued here many different times and there is no
doubt that by far most of those that have commented here fall in the satisfied
camp. Some have had problems initially, but the company has been exceptional
in handling and solving those.
I am not a B-Band user, but I do feel that they have the most natural sound of
any of the many systems I have tried and heard.
Dick Schneiders
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 10:54:50 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <XTT04.66$<hV.22862@news-west...>>, <stephen.m.hawkins@tek...>
(Steve Hawkins) wrote:
> Maybe I can bring a little order to chaos. I haven't played a B-Band and to
> my knowledge I haven't heard one. What I have gleaned from this group and
> talking with others locally is the following.
>
> a) B-band's sound great.
>
> b) B-band's sound terrible.
>
> From what I've heard and read, the major difference between a and b seems to
> be that the B-band's performance is extremely sensitive to the installation.
> It seems to take a lot of effort compared to other under saddle models to get
> it right. This might explain the feedback JD is getting from the local
techs.
> They haven't figured out the "magic touch" that will bring forth the
B-band's
> full potential and they are tired of the customer returns. The fact that it
> requires a "magic touch" is a short coming of this pickup IMHO. EMF would be
> wise to come up with some sort of training package for the techs. Other than
> that it's like anything else in this world, you either like it or you don't
> and no one should be dinged for their opinion. Presentation maybe, but not
> their opinion.
>
> In regards to the endorsement issue that is rearing it's ugly head again. My
> take is this. I don't think the people on this newsgroup who endorse certain
> products have a Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan kind of deal. I also don't
> believe they would compromise their sound for the deal they have. They use
> these products because they like them. So IMHO this corporate stooge,
> conspiracy theory is a load. I am the ultimate determiner of what I use.
> Someone's opinion may point me at a product to look into but it's my decsion
> to try it or pass.
>
> So enough already. Tis the season and all that. :-) Let's make merry.
>
> Steve "commence playing" Hawkins
Just to address one point. As far as I can tell, the single most talked
about "performance" complaint about the B-band has been some difficulty in
getting the strings to balance from time to time. I myself have done over
40 installations with only one guitar (one of mine!) causing a headache.
And I am not a "wizard" at installations, but I have done enough to do a
thorough job. And since John Zyla came up with the self-hardening clay
method, the B-band installations are now quicker and easier than any other
pick-up (for me).
So it is the mistaken belief (and commentary thereof) that some sort of
magic touch is needed that fuels this controversey.
It's really simple: The EMF gear is a new product, not everyone has heard
of it. As more and more customers-stores-techs become familiar with it,
this veil of mystery that (IMO) is unfounded will disappear. Poof.
Larry Pattis
"Surround yourself with friends that are seeking the truth, and run like
hell from anyone claiming to have found it."
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
Endorser and lover of the following gear...
Elixir Strings
EMF Acoustics/B-band pick-ups
Tippin Guitars
...it's what I use to make music.
From: JD BLACKWELL <oneeyedjack@worldnet...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 01:38:04 -0800
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
hank alrich wrote in message
<<1e25i2p.1jaqtcr1t2y40lN@alm-ts1-h1-27-197...>>...
><<hedberg@my-deja...>> wrote:
>
>> your reaction towards product
>> endorsers on this forum borders on the paranoid.
Actually its a little worse than just paranoid. The tendency to project the
percieved flaws of an endorser onto the product is unfair to the product and
lacks the detached scientific equanimity I would expect from anyone else.
Unfortunately, my own opinion of B-Band is colored by my personal
experiences with the endorser that only a few of you have experienced. Most
of you know this person to be quite the gentleman and whatever experiences
I've had with him aren't relevant to this forum. My experiences with B-band
are over 2 years old and from some world class techs. I'll be checking in
with Dusty Strings and Mike Lull to see if perhaps I've missed something
since then and will endeavor to try one. Quite frankly, the Olympia store
and Hugo Helmers dont score big credibility points in my book and I'll be
looking at the opinions of DS, Lull, A# music, Guitar Emporium, John Bently
and Cat Fox. In addition, I'll be touching base with players Charles David
Alexander, Marvin McDonald, and neighbor Steve King(all Winfield winners and
none of them know Pattis so they wont be likewise biased). I'll also be
doing my own informal poll at Wintergrass in Tacoma this February. In the
meantime I will concede that B-Band can be a decent pickup and that my
opinion of it is based on four things; 1) 3 guitars I personally played that
the PU sounded awful, 2) No one whose luthiery skills I personally know and
respect likes them. 3) No one whose playing I personally know and respect
has anything good to say about them. and 4) Though totally a subjective
reaction having nothing to do with the pickups, my personal dislike and
distrust of the endorser triggers my "guilt by association" reflex. Thats my
issue and shouldn't have been visited on this group. Mea culpa. It was an
exercise in bad judgement.
JD
>
>I understand that many of y'all constitute the RMMGA in-crowd. That's
>fine. Understand that folks not of that persusasion will be dropping in.
>They may even carry traditions from other forums that were developed to
>eliminate confusion and deception. Extreme defensiveness in the face of
>questions about affiliation with products one is recommending is not a
>particularly enlightened response, IMNSHO.
>
>--
>hank - secret mountain
>Note: the rec.audio.pro FAQ is at http://recordist.com/rap-faq/current
>Read it and reap!
From: Elizabeth Papapetrou <NOSPAMmother@fdt...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 12:53:29 GMT
Organization: Motherheart
>4) Though totally a subjective
>reaction having nothing to do with the pickups, my personal dislike and
>distrust of the endorser triggers my "guilt by association" reflex. Thats my
>issue and shouldn't have been visited on this group. Mea culpa. It was an
>exercise in bad judgement.
>
>JD
>>
Well, JD. Can we ask you - and anyone else who has such prejudices - to put
them aside in this forum, whether discussing personal issues or product
preferences?
Also, I've had enough of all this pussyfooting around. Lets be clear that the
person you regularly eviscerate here is Larry Pattis. I have come to know
Larry quite well over the last couple of years and my experience of him is
that he is a very sweet, helpful guy who wants the best for everyone he
encounters. However, he tends to tell it like he sees it - assertively,
and without reservation. He also has exacting (some might say
unreasonable) demands on luthiers and others he works with in the acoustic
guitar world ...and an unfortunate habit of telling all-and-sundry when he
doesn't feel those needs are met. All this is compounded by a tendency to hit
back twice as hard - and often with painful and detailed accuracy - if he's
attacked. I think Larry would agree with me that, as a consequence, he tends
to be someone you either love or hate. :>
I've had personal communication with the "haters" in this group quite a few
times. Without exception, they have benn unwavering in absolute condemnation
of Larry and many have lurid stories that they are keen to share to "prove"
what an awful person Larry is. (Putting on my Dr. Joy hat) It's clear that
these folks are lashing out from a sense of being wounded - which Larry
happily returns, amplified.
Boys - both Larry and his dedicated detractors (there's a band in there
somewhere :> ) - please make an effort to unruffle your feathers and see that
you've all been caught in a war of words that have little or no substance.
Lighten up, guys! The problem is people being JUDGEMENTAL - ie: deciding
what's right or wrong instead of stating personal preference - which all of us
who get into warring fall prey to. Please try to communicate instead of being
offensively defensive.
These are just my perspectives. I don't have any answers to offer you. I just
know that it only takes a glimmer of willingness to make a move towards
clearing up of misunderstanding to facilitate some degree of reconciliation.
Come on - you can do it. :>
Elizabeth
Remove NOSPAM from email address before replying
From: JD BLACKWELL <oneeyedjack@worldnet...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 23:34:02 -0800
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
Elizabeth Papapetrou wrote in message ...
>>4) Though totally a subjective
>>reaction having nothing to do with the pickups, my personal dislike and
>>distrust of the endorser triggers my "guilt by association" reflex. Thats
my
>>issue and shouldn't have been visited on this group. Mea culpa. It was an
>>exercise in bad judgement.
>>
>>JD
>>>
>
>Well, JD. Can we ask you - and anyone else who has such prejudices - to put
>them aside in this forum, whether discussing personal issues or product
>preferences?
"Prejudice" suggests that there is no valid reason for these opinions which
is not the case on either aspect of the issue. I will own them both but
will keep them separate.
>
>Also, I've had enough of all this pussyfooting around. Lets be clear that
the
>person you regularly eviscerate here is Larry Pattis.
I think its pretty clear to all who I'm talking about.
I have come to know>Larry quite well over the last couple of years and my experience of him is
>that he is a very sweet, helpful guy who wants the best for everyone he
>encounters.
I'm glad you can see him in his best light. Some of his "friends" must have
encountered his evil twin Skippy
however, he tends to tell it like he sees it - assertively,
>and without reservation.
I have no problem with assertion and forthrightness....until it descends to
obscenity cloaked in the privacy of email. The consummate phoniness of
hiding ones true persona from the public is especially unattractive in a
group of people that I've found to be exceptionally standup otherwise. The
cowardly behavior stands out against such a background.
He also has exacting (some might say>unreasonable) demands on luthiers and others he works with in the acoustic
>guitar world ...and an unfortunate habit of telling all-and-sundry when he
>doesn't feel those needs are met.
So I've heard.
All this is compounded by a tendency to hit>back twice as hard - and often with painful and detailed accuracy - if he's
>attacked. I think Larry would agree with me that, as a consequence, he
tends
>to be someone you either love or hate. :>
While I might take issue with obscenity having anything to do with detailed
accuracy, you're pretty much on the mark.
>
>I've had personal communication with the "haters" in this group quite a few
>times. Without exception, they have benn unwavering in absolute
condemnation
>of Larry and many have lurid stories that they are keen to share to "prove"
>what an awful person Larry is. (Putting on my Dr. Joy hat) It's clear that
>these folks are lashing out from a sense of being wounded - which Larry
>happily returns, amplified.
Nice spin Liz. The "haters" as you so skillfully applied a sobriquet
guaranteed to conjure up negative connotation are a variety of people that I
know to be decent folks. Those "lurid stories" are fact in that they exist
with Larry's account incontrovertibly attached to them. That you've heard
these stories and fail to demonstrate any disapproval for that kind of
behavior doesn't surprise me too much. While nowhere nearly as steeped in
the vitriol of your mentor, you were the author of the "snotty email" I
referenced earlier. As for being "wounded", I suspect it'll take a lot more
than some potty mouth email to "wound" any of us. I prefer to call it
righteous indignation over the duplicitous behavior of coward.
>
>Boys - both Larry and his dedicated detractors (there's a band in there
>somewhere :> ) - please make an effort to unruffle your feathers and see
that
>you've all been caught in a war of words that have little or no substance.
>Lighten up, guys! The problem is people being JUDGEMENTAL - ie: deciding
>what's right or wrong instead of stating personal preference - which all of
us
>who get into warring fall prey to. Please try to communicate instead of
being
>offensively defensive.
>
>These are just my perspectives. I don't have any answers to offer you. I
just
>know that it only takes a glimmer of willingness to make a move towards
>clearing up of misunderstanding to facilitate some degree of
reconciliation.
>
>Come on - you can do it. :>
While the message you give here is intrinsically uplifting, it sure loses
its shine in the face of my experience with you. There is no
"misunderstanding", he clearly has a habit of dealing with dissent in an
inappropriate manner that can verified by any number of ng members. I'll be
glad to reconcile when he cops to it and cuts it out.
JD
>
>Elizabeth
>
>Remove NOSPAM from email address before replying
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 07:26:55 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <825elj$q2b$<1@bgtnsc02...>>, "JD BLACKWELL"
<<oneeyedjack@worldnet...>> wrote:
> hank alrich wrote in message
> <<1e25i2p.1jaqtcr1t2y40lN@alm-ts1-h1-27-197...>>...
> ><<hedberg@my-deja...>> wrote:
> >
> >> your reaction towards product
> >> endorsers on this forum borders on the paranoid.
>
> Actually its a little worse than just paranoid. The tendency to project the
> percieved flaws of an endorser onto the product is unfair to the product and
> lacks the detached scientific equanimity I would expect from anyone else.
> Unfortunately, my own opinion of B-Band is colored by my personal
> experiences with the endorser that only a few of you have experienced. Most
> of you know this person to be quite the gentleman and whatever experiences
> I've had with him aren't relevant to this forum. My experiences with B-band
> are over 2 years old and from some world class techs. I'll be checking in
> with Dusty Strings and Mike Lull to see if perhaps I've missed something
> since then and will endeavor to try one. Quite frankly, the Olympia store
> and Hugo Helmers dont score big credibility points in my book and I'll be
> looking at the opinions of DS, Lull, A# music, Guitar Emporium, John Bently
> and Cat Fox. In addition, I'll be touching base with players Charles David
> Alexander, Marvin McDonald, and neighbor Steve King(all Winfield winners and
> none of them know Pattis so they wont be likewise biased). I'll also be
> doing my own informal poll at Wintergrass in Tacoma this February. In the
> meantime I will concede that B-Band can be a decent pickup and that my
> opinion of it is based on four things; 1) 3 guitars I personally played that
> the PU sounded awful, 2) No one whose luthiery skills I personally know and
> respect likes them. 3) No one whose playing I personally know and respect
> has anything good to say about them. and 4) Though totally a subjective
> reaction having nothing to do with the pickups, my personal dislike and
> distrust of the endorser triggers my "guilt by association" reflex. Thats my
> issue and shouldn't have been visited on this group. Mea culpa. It was an
> exercise in bad judgement.
>
> JD
JD,
Again you prove publicly that your knowledge of me is quite limited.
Charles David Alexander is a friend, he has stayed at my house, and I have
even hosted a House Concert for him. Steven King and I are not friends,
but I was forced to work with him during my tenure at Breedlove. And as
for Winfield Champions, Tim Sparks uses B-band, he and I have never met (or
even spoken), so I have had no influence on him.
The stores that don't score "credibility points" are located in the Puget
Sound area...exactly where you claimed NO ONE has ever recommended the
B-band. I guess that if they are not credible in your book, then they get
to be excluded from you having to deal with reality?
I am tired of your nonsense. I am tired of your non-logic,
misinformation, and blatant lies about me. Your non-apology is pitiful.
Your experience, based on a grand total of three guitars is laughable.
Your "concession" that the B-band can be a decent pick-up is irrelevant.
YOU are irrelevant.
Larry Pattis
"Surround yourself with friends that are seeking the truth, and run like
hell from anyone claiming to have found it."
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 13:52:38 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <zxW04.4$<8C1.356@news-west...>>, <stephen.m.hawkins@tek...>
(Steve Hawkins) wrote:
> In article <<abuse-ya02408000R3011991054500001@news...>>,
<abuse@127...> (Larry Pattis) wrote:
>
> < I snip myself >
When you did that, did it hurt?
>
> >Just to address one point. As far as I can tell, the single most talked
> >about "performance" complaint about the B-band has been some difficulty in
> >getting the strings to balance from time to time. I myself have done over
> >40 installations with only one guitar (one of mine!) causing a headache.
> >And I am not a "wizard" at installations, but I have done enough to do a
> >thorough job. And since John Zyla came up with the self-hardening clay
> >method, the B-band installations are now quicker and easier than any other
> >pick-up (for me).
> >
> >So it is the mistaken belief (and commentary thereof) that some sort of
> >magic touch is needed that fuels this controversey.
> >
> >It's really simple: The EMF gear is a new product, not everyone has heard
> >of it. As more and more customers-stores-techs become familiar with it,
> >this veil of mystery that (IMO) is unfounded will disappear. Poof.
> >
> >Larry Pattis
>
> Good point Larry. New products that use new technology sometimes have what I
> call implementation problems. The balance problem seems to be solved by
> John's clay process. In the manufacturing engineering biz we would call
> John's fix a kluge (sounds like huge). Kluges are not necessarily bad
things.
> They're just not planned for. Do you happen to know what EMF's opinion of
> John's fix is and are they considering adding it to their installation
> process?
>
> Steve Hawkins
Steve, I honestly don't know. I suspect that they do not want to
complicate the lives of retailers/techs by making this a requirement for
installation, however. I have only needed the clay on two installations
out of 40+ (one was really necessary, my Traugott, the other really didn't
need it, but I just wanted to do the job once because I had other things to
attend to), but others may have had a higher percentage.
I have three new B-band elements sitting on my desk that I will find time
to test next week, if possible. They continue to improve their product via
experimentation and field testing. A U.S. manufacturer's product (that I
won't name) also requires regular shimming to get a perfect balance, and
there are a lot of "in the trenches" fixes (including wrapping aluminum
foil around the pick-up where the signal is not strong enough) that are not
mentioned anywhere in their installation literature. I'm not too worried
about the B-band, at this point.
Larry Pattis
"Surround yourself with friends that are seeking the truth, and run like
hell from anyone claiming to have found it."
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
Endorser and lover of the following gear...
Elixir Strings
EMF Acoustics/B-band pick-ups
Tippin Guitars
...it's what I use to make music.
From: Rocky Jones <spam@hotmail...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 22:08:24 GMT
Organization: C.C. - Lou., KY
>Good point Larry. New products that use new technology sometimes have what I
>call implementation problems. The balance problem seems to be solved by
>John's clay process. In the manufacturing engineering biz we would call
>John's fix a kluge (sounds like huge). Kluges are not necessarily bad things.
> They're just not planned for. Do you happen to know what EMF's opinion of
>John's fix is and are they considering adding it to their installation
>process?
>
>Steve Hawkins
If EMF implements the clay as part of the installation procedure,
it'll kill 'em in the marketplace... whether it works or not. However,
my most recent dealing with the B-Band involves now having a "top" and
"bottom" side distinction, the bottom of which has a non-element
material affixed to the B-Band element. I'd guess that it works very
similarly to the solution I've used which includes a Post-It Note shim
(1-2) between the element and the saddle bottom - haven't confirmed it
with Heikki, but it works and sounds the same as my older setups (with
& without the shims).
Blessings,
Rocky Jones
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
REPLY: cclouky(at)hotmail(dot)com"He who has Jesus... has life!" - I Jn 5:12
From: Rocky Jones <spam@hotmail...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 17:21:31 GMT
Organization: C.C. - Lou., KY
<stephen.m.hawkins@tek...> (Steve Hawkins) wrote:
>In article <<3846ec63.64951117@news...>>, <spam@hotmail...> (Rocky Jones) wrote:
>>
>>>Good point Larry. New products that use new technology sometimes have what I
>>>call implementation problems. The balance problem seems to be solved by
>>>John's clay process. In the manufacturing engineering biz we would call
>>>John's fix a kluge (sounds like huge). Kluges are not necessarily bad things.
>>
>>> They're just not planned for. Do you happen to know what EMF's opinion of
>>>John's fix is and are they considering adding it to their installation
>>>process?
>>>
>>>Steve Hawkins
>>
>>If EMF implements the clay as part of the installation procedure,
>>it'll kill 'em in the marketplace... whether it works or not. However,
>>my most recent dealing with the B-Band involves now having a "top" and
>>"bottom" side distinction, the bottom of which has a non-element
>>material affixed to the B-Band element. I'd guess that it works very
>>similarly to the solution I've used which includes a Post-It Note shim
>>(1-2) between the element and the saddle bottom - haven't confirmed it
>>with Heikki, but it works and sounds the same as my older setups (with
>>& without the shims).
>>
>>Blessings,
>>Rocky Jones
>
>Thanks for the very informative posts Rocky. How do you tell an early B-band
>from a late model one without opening the box?
>
>Steve Hawkins
Steve,
The old-style looks the same (black, somewhat metallic) on each side,
whereas the newer ones are black on the top and yellow (my
recollection, because it's now installed) on the bottom.
To note, although the older version potentially suffers from balancing
problems, it sounds vastly better now that it's considered 'vintage' -
ought to be worth at least 3x its original list price now. ;)
Blessings,
Rocky Jones
+++
REPLY: cclouky(at)hotmail(dot)com
"He who has Jesus... has life!" - I Jn 5:12
From: AcoustiKal <acoustikal@aol...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: 01 Dec 1999 09:00:08 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Larry sez "So it is the mistaken belief (and commentary thereof) that some sort
of
magic touch is needed that fuels this controversey."
Well, I don't know to tell you, then , boss........As I said before, I had two
different units in two different guitars ( installed by a well known tech), and
both times the balance was unworkable, even after futzing with it many times.
Also, the output from the supplied preamp was so low as to be nearly
unworkable, for me, at least.
On both guitars, we got frustrated and went back to the typical Fishman setup (
not stunning sounding, I know......notice I don't defend them too
boisterously!), and viola`!! Balance problems solved....output problems solved.
I wanted to like it...I really did. Like all of us, the quest for a better
pickup is neverending for me. To me, the B-band isn't it yet.
-Kaleb Aichim21st century acoustic adventurer
From: JD BLACKWELL <oneeyedjack@worldnet...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 11:33:32 -0800
Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
I think you hit it on the head, Steve. Which is why the techs I know aren't
nuts about them. The learning curve is much too shallow. The Highlander is
another one thats installation critical but at least thats a dimensionally
definable requirement. The B-Band seems to rely more on less controllable
things to affect a good installation. It doesn't matter how good it is if it
takes finding a tech thats been through the learning curve to get it right
and even then there seems to be varying degrees of "right".
JD
Steve Hawkins wrote in message ...
>Maybe I can bring a little order to chaos. I haven't played a B-Band and
to
>my knowledge I haven't heard one. What I have gleaned from this group and
>talking with others locally is the following.
>
>a) B-band's sound great.
>
>b) B-band's sound terrible.
>
>From what I've heard and read, the major difference between a and b seems
to
>be that the B-band's performance is extremely sensitive to the
installation.
>It seems to take a lot of effort compared to other under saddle models to
get
>it right. This might explain the feedback JD is getting from the local
techs.
> They haven't figured out the "magic touch" that will bring forth the
B-band's
>full potential and they are tired of the customer returns. The fact that
it
>requires a "magic touch" is a short coming of this pickup IMHO. EMF would
be
>wise to come up with some sort of training package for the techs. Other
than
>that it's like anything else in this world, you either like it or you don't
>and no one should be dinged for their opinion. Presentation maybe, but not
>their opinion.
>
>In regards to the endorsement issue that is rearing it's ugly head again.
My
>take is this. I don't think the people on this newsgroup who endorse
certain
>products have a Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan kind of deal. I also don't
>believe they would compromise their sound for the deal they have. They use
>these products because they like them. So IMHO this corporate stooge,
>conspiracy theory is a load. I am the ultimate determiner of what I use.
>Someone's opinion may point me at a product to look into but it's my
decsion
>to try it or pass.
>
>So enough already. Tis the season and all that. :-) Let's make merry.
>
>Steve "commence playing" Hawkins
From: Rocky Jones <spam@hotmail...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 22:00:40 GMT
Organization: C.C. - Lou., KY
>It seems to take a lot of effort compared to other under saddle models to get
>it right. This might explain the feedback JD is getting from the local techs.
> They haven't figured out the "magic touch" that will bring forth the B-band's
>full potential and they are tired of the customer returns.
My experience & observations from installing eight B-Bands in guitars
ranging from a cheap Takamine (<$150), to a Baby Taylor, to Martins,
Bourgeois & Goodalls:
Being an undersaddle PU, the expectation in installation is assumed to
be the same as that of a piezo-type. However, care in different areas
need to be recognized in order for the installation to be sound. For
instance...
1) The saddle bottom & slot must be flat. 2) 12-24 hours under string tension may be necessary to allow the PU to "form" (don't know why, but sometimes needs to happen). 3) If still unbalanced, I've found that 1-2 Post-It Note shims installed between the B-Band PU & the saddle-slot remedies theproblem (at least, it's the solution that's worked each time I've come across the balancing problem). It seems to offer thesort of continuity between the two materials that allows the PU to be more evenly responsive. Incidently there's no acoustic or electric sound degradation due to the Post-It shims. These days, when I install a B-Band, I'll cut the Post-It shim and just install it right at the beginning. Incidently, I've recently received a B-Band with a material on 'the bottom side' (previously there was no distinction) which appears to be the same solution.Regarding the Tech situation, I'd guess it's really a matter of
ramping up to the learning curve for B-Band installations. It's not
that it's difficult, but there are things to be aware of which differ
from the usual undersaddle piezo installation. As I've observed from
postings on RMMGA over the past couple years, we're ALL learning about
a good, typical installation of the B-Band, EMF included. In fact,
though not nearly as cumbersome, I'd liken it historically to the
Highlander PU, which required a tech who was pretty experienced in
installing not just undersaddle PU's, but Highlander undersaddle PUs.
While this may still be true for Highlanders, I believe the procedures
for a B-Band are/have become much more defined (much to the credit of
our fellow RMMGA B-Band "pioneers").
Blessings,
Rocky Jones
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
REPLY: cclouky(at)hotmail(dot)com"He who has Jesus... has life!" - I Jn 5:12
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: B-Band - Counterpoint
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:25:18 -0500
Organization: Cornell University
Hi folks-
JD BLACKWELL wrote:
>
> OK so you won the crapshoot and got some good ones. I challenge you to go
> back over the history of this ng and find a pickup thats gotten more bad
> press than the B-Band.
I've been trying to stay out of this thread, but this comment was just
so patently absurd and JD's posts so irresponsibly filled with innuendo
that I couldn't resist comment. I've only installed a few B-bands
myself (including a couple betas), and heard only a few others (bought
commercially and installed in others' guitars). Although I was given
a beta, I've since purchased the B-band from First Quality. This is
admittedly a small sample, but in every case the pickup has performed
exceptionally well.
More importantly, I've been collecting substantive pickup and preamp
posts from this group for years now, including nearly everything substantive
item I've seen posted on the B-band (which excludes most of this thread!). I've
saved this stuff intending to format it all up for my AG
web site eventually. Anyone wanting to read this collective opinion
and wisdom on the B-band (rather than taking JD's word for it, which
I suggest would be extremely unwise) can email me and I'll be happy
to copy you the raw news dumps so you can compile your own statistics!
I have appreciated JD's posts on some topics, but these comments are
so out of line that my personal reaction is to question his objectivity
in the same way others are questioning those of B-band "endorsers."
There are certainly a few negative comments in the posts I've collected, but
other pickups have gotten much more negative comment in this group
than B-bands. To my knowledge, the B-band is the only pickup that
was developed with the expertise of this newsgroup specifically sought
by the manufacturer. It is also newer than any of the other widely
used undersaddle pickups. There has thus been more interest in the B-band
here than there might otherwise have been. In numbers there may
be more complaints about B-band balance, for example, than about the
balance of other pickups. But proportionally, there has been less
negative press, and much more numerous and stronger positive response
about the B-band than about any other pickup, with the possible exception
of the Fishman Rare Earth.
Peace,
Tom Loredo
| Breedlove and B-bands [2] |
|---|
From: Larry Pattis <abuse@127...>
Subject: Re: Breedlove and B-bands
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 09:38:09 -0700
Organization: XMission http://www.xmission.com/
In article <<3843FB7C.D684316B@visi...>>, <eadric@visi...> wrote:
> First of all I don't even want to get in the middle of good b-band/bad
> b-band. I recently heard one and have decided I'd like to place one in
> my Breedlove. My question is directed to anyone who had a Breedlove with
> a b-band. What other gear do you use? I've asked Mrs. Santa for an SWR
> Strawberry Blond amp for Christmas and I'm just curious what anyone else
> was using (presuming there are any at all).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
Mike,
I recently installed a B-band in one of my very close friend's Breedlove.
It replaced another pick-up of U.S. manufacture. He uses a Fishman
Blender, and then into a Centaur amp (casual gigs and for practice), or a
full PA system for gigs.
Larry Pattis
"Surround yourself with friends that are seeking the truth, and run like
hell from anyone claiming to have found it."
Lpattis "at" xmission "dot" com
Liberal Palette Records
http://liberalpalette.com
Endorser and lover of the following gear...
Elixir Strings
EMF Acoustics/B-band pick-ups
Tippin Guitars
...it's what I use to make music.
From: Jay Adair (no-spam-please) <oja@flash...>
Subject: Re: Breedlove and B-bands
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 22:01:47 GMT
Organization: FlashNet Communications, http://www.flash.net
I have an Ed Gerhard Breedlove with the original B-Band / Core Pre-amp /
Mini-mic running thru a Fishman Blender into a Fender Acostisonic SFX.
Sounds good to these old ears...
Jay
--
Founder & Charter Member of The Society for Mediocre Guitar Playing on
Expensive Instruments, Ltd.
Michael S. McCollum <<eadric@visi...>> wrote in message
news:<3843FB7C.D684316B@visi...>...
> First of all I don't even want to get in the middle of good b-band/bad
> b-band. I recently heard one and have decided I'd like to place one in
> my Breedlove. My question is directed to anyone who had a Breedlove with
> a b-band. What other gear do you use? I've asked Mrs. Santa for an SWR
> Strawberry Blond amp for Christmas and I'm just curious what anyone else
> was using (presuming there are any at all).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
| My Continuing B-Band Saga [3] |
|---|
From: john bj <desert2000@my-deja...>
Subject: My Continuing B-Band Saga
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 19:56:17 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
I had been waiting to post a more complete story, but given the current
wave of interest here in RMMGA-land, I thought I'd post an interim
report.
Last February I replaced the Martin Thinline (Fishman piezo) and preamp
in my 1978 Martin D-35 with a B-Band/Core with mic. The sound was
remarkably improved, with virtually no quacking (common and annoying
with the piezo), no need for any EQ adjustment (again, radical
adjustments were needed to achieve anything remotely "acoustic" with
the piezo), and achieving the nice, rich, woody, acoustic sound that
reproduced my Martin with amazing fidelity.
After about a month, however, the balance went awry, with the high and
low Es becoming much louder. Paper shims would fix it for a couple of
weeks, but the imbalance returned, sometimes one or the other E,
sometimes both, sometimes the B also. I tried the Zyla clay method and
it worked immediately, but lasted only about 6 weeks.
Finally I wrote EMF asking for help. They sent a free replacement unit
which was the new, thicker version. It initially worked perfectly with
no shims, but after a few days, the A string became much softer. EMF
had also sent me an experimental version (I call it "B-Band Gold") to
try out should balance problems arise, so I installed it. (side note -
replacing the B-Band is easy with the clip design they use)
The B-Band Gold is much louder overall, and I have not had any balance
problems since installing it two weeks ago.
EMF also recommended two other balance fixes which I have not tried.
Both of these attempt to address the day to day variations in a guitar's
wood due to environmental and aging factors. Given a flat, well-fit
saddle and slot, and the B-Band's high sensitivity, even slight
variations in the wood can potentially affect balance. So,
theoretically, if a more flexible saddle is used, it can respond to
these changes to a certain degree and avoid a shift in balance. The two
fixes are: (a) drill and slot the saddle, making it look similar to the
Fishman Cleartone, and (b) creating a six piece saddle which would allow
a portion of the saddle to move with each string and maintain even
pressure across the B-Band element. As I said, I haven't tried either
of these, but I do recall reading a positive post from someone trying
the six piece saddle method (b).
Despite all my difficulties with the B-Band in my old Martin, I
preferred the sound of the B-Band enough to have it factory-installed in
my new Tacoma Chief. It is the new, thicker version and has performed
flawlessly for the few weeks I've had it. I also plan to get a B-Band
installed in my new 12-string.
One last comment - I've found the EMF rep, Heikki Raisanen, to be
remarkably responsive, informative, helpful and generous; a real credit
to the company. I'd expect this high level of attention if I were a
well known professional or paid endorser, but I'm just an unknown guy
who plays mostly at church.
peace and joy,
jbj
--
(e-mails should be sent to desert2000 @ NOSPAM yahoo.com)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: DADGAD Tune <gsprigg@aol...>
Subject: Re: My Continuing B-Band Saga
Date: 02 Dec 1999 04:05:57 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Compare the excellent support John has gotten from EMF/ B-Band to the terrible
support Robert Inkenbrandt is getting from Takamine with pick-up/preamp
problems in a recent post entitled "What Kind of Business is Takamine Running".
I don't for one second doubt that Fishman and Baggs would provide the same
excellent support as EMF in a similar situation. Carl McIntyre is also
extremely supportive of people using his transducer products, and takes time to
patience answer questions and provide recommendations.
No folks, I don't receive support from EMF.
I don't even have a B-Band, and I could not make a McIntyre work well in theone guitar I tried it in. Nevertheless, I would not hesitate for one second
buying or recommending these products because I know the companies stand behind
them and care about us, the end users as much as they care about the bottom
line. Evidently Takamine does not have the same philosophy.
Larry
From: john bj <desert2000@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: My Continuing B-Band Saga
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 17:16:56 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
<gsprigg@aol...> (DADGAD Tune) wrote:
> Compare the excellent support John has gotten from EMF/ B-Band to the
terrible support Robert Inkenbrandt is getting from Takamine with
pick-up/preamp problems in a recent post entitled "What Kind of Business
is Takamine Running".
>
> I don't for one second doubt that Fishman and Baggs would provide the
same excellent support as EMF in a similar situation. <snip>
>
>
I can attest that this is absolutely true - I recently had some problems
with my Fishman Acoustic Performer Pro amp (weird signal at the tuner
jack and a high freq noise). When they had it in house, they couldn't
duplicate the exact problems, but did replace the reverb card. When I
got it back and reported the problems still existed, they sent me a new
amp and even picked up the tab for shipping back the old one. Kudos to
Joe Barbieri and Fishman! (try getting that kind of care at a car
dealer!)
peace and joy,
jbj
--
(e-mails should be sent to desert2000 @ NOSPAM yahoo.com)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
| Norman: B-band Explanation and more [3] |
|---|
From: John <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Norman: B-band Explanation and more
Date: 3 Dec 1999 01:04:52 -0600
Organization: Newscene Public Access Usenet News Service (http://www.newscene.com/)
Normans question gives me an opportunity to discuss some new
developments from experiments I have been doing concerning B-Band
balancing.
First, let me preface with what my original theory is on why under
saddle pickups in general have balance problems. It seems, after
careful observation, that the problem arises not from the composition
(or construction) of any particular pickup, but from the un-even
distribution of pressure through the saddle-pickup-saddle-slot
sandwich. The source of such un-even distribution of pressure ends up
being an un-even-ness of pressure across the whole length of the
saddle. This maybe caused either by a slightly non-planar saddle slot
bottom or a non-planar saddle bottom. This effect is especially
evident with solid saddles, because the rigidity of the saddle will
tend to ensure that any hill or valley in the "sandwich" stays put,
therefore the problem is persistent. Since the B-Band is a rather
stiff and sensitive element, the effect is more pronounced, when it is
present. Compounding the problem is that the B-Band is quite
sensitive, and while this contributes to what many consider to be a
more natural sounding signal, it also magnifies any imbalance
(imbalance that may be overlooked with a less sensitive saddle
element.) Slotted saddles in the style of the Fishman Cleartone
address this problem by adding some flex in the saddle itself, thus
helping even out pressure, only where needed. Think of an array of
automobile leaf springs, all in a row. Similar effect.
A discussion of the clay bedding method.
I began to think about solutions to this problems, since it is near
impossible to get flatness within tolerances needed to achieve perfect
balance. What I needed was a way to get perfectly even pressure along
the saddle element, in relation to the pressure exerted by each
string, regardless of whether the saddle slot or saddle bottom was
perfectly planar. I thought of how high quality target rifles use
fiberglass bedding to solve similar problems. What I needed was a
bedding material to fill microscopic, or near microscopic hills and
valleys in the saddle bottom or saddle slot bottom. some of the
requirements foe bedding material should be :
1. should be fine grained, to be able to fill minute imperfections in
flatness
2. It should not be adhesive to anything but itself - i.e. a saddle
using the bedding material should be easily removable, as should the
pickup element.
3. the material should be inexpensive, easily applied, and not color
the sound.
It ends up, after much thought, that clay would be perfect, because it
meets all three criteria, is I tested it in several guitars, and
balance problems disappeared.
I saw some potential problems. First, it is hard to get a thin layer,
- thin enough so that you do not have to modify the saddle to preserve
your original saddle height.
Second, the clay will tend to powder over time. This is a good thing
if the saddle fits in the slot relatively
Tightly, because it will fill imperfections even better. The problem
is, if there are even small gaps on either end of the saddle, some of
the clay will escape, and the element will go out of balance.
My theory has proven true. My on guitar has a saddle that has about
1/32 inch leeway on each side of the saddle, in the slot. This was
enough for some of the clay, as it powdered over time, to escape.
Therefore, my low E string wend loud. Ack! An opportunity for more
research!
So I got my thinking cap, various materials, and some good old
brainstorming going. I have tried adding a bot of polymer to the clay,
so it will not powder. This was successful, but I still had the thick
bedding material, making it hard to get a predictable clearance
(saddle height).
The methodology I have come to find gives my best most lasting
results, is to take the same modeling clay, and wet it to the
consistency of thick cream. Stir to get it smooth with absolutely no
lumps.
I then add Durham's Water Putty (you can pick this up the hardware
stores), to the mixture. I keep adding until I have a solution that is
a bit runnier than toothpaste, Ultra Brita in particular.
Now, we have a bedding solution that is thin enough that it ill still
fill gaps, but is much easier to "squish" out around the pickup
element - it is also easier to apply. I apply it to the bottom of the
saddle slot - it's much easier than the old method, and lay peizo (or
B-Band if that is 3hat you are installing) element back down on top of
the layer, then slosh a later on top of the element. Stick in the
saddle and lush down, the excess should squeeze out. Wipr the excess
off, and string up the instrument to pitch. Let sit a day (probably
not necessary, but let's be safe.
Well, you ask, what are my results. The Durhams water putty mixed with
clay makes it set up a little bit harder, enough that the clay does
not tend to powder over time, hence the thing does not go out of
balance after a while if you've a loose saddle (note, this is not a
problem on a tight fitting saddle . You setill get the benefit - easy
to remove, etc.
You may ask, what are the results. Again, perfect, balance, and so far
(a few weeks now) no balance problems, the sandwich seems quit
intact. Sounds beautiful.
Best Regards.
John Zyla
I
On Thu, 2 Dec 1999 22:29:38 -0500, "Norman Draper"
<<ndraper@prodigy...>> wrote:
>
>Dear Folks,
> I have just finished reading all of the threads concerning the B-band.
>Interesting. Now could someone, in relatively non-technical language,
>explain what one is (I know it's a pickup!), where it goes, how it works,
>and where and why the clay comes into the picture?
> This is NOT an invitation to stir up old controversies, nor is it a
>troll. It is not an invitation to review the B-band, either positively or
>negatively. It is a request for objective information. I have heard the
>B-band in action. I already have my own opinion as to its sound. I just
>want to know how it works.
> There will be no arguing in this thread. If anyone starts anything,
>Bobs Dorgan, my friend, will come out and "talk" to you.
>
>Norman (You DON'T Want That To Happen!) Draper
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: Norman: B-band Explanation and more
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 15:24:38 GMT
Organization: remove "NOSPAM" from my address to reply
I need to add an addendum to my preceding post. The B-Bands I am
working with are original flavor. Heikki meant to send me a few of the
new ones to test, but inadvertently sent the old ones. I understand
that the new B-Band does not have balancing problems, or if it does,
they are minimal and easier to soft. I cannot comment on this.
My methods are to be considered "balancing methodology", rather than a
"kludge" fix that is specifically applicable to the B-Band. The
methodology should be considered analogous to using post-it note
pieces, or shims, and is valid for any under-saddle pickup that is
proving top be a problem vis a vis string to string balance, not just
B-Band elements.
I must also mention that my methodology is not endorsed by EMF in any
way, nor has EMF contributed to the methodology. I do not receive
monetary compensation from EMF, nor am I an EMF endorser, though I do
personally recommend these pickups.
It is my hope that the methodology - or at least an understanding of
the methodology, which could be applied to other ideas, is of help
the anyone who is having problems balancing any under-saddle pickup.
John Zyla
12/3/99
From: John Zyla <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: Norman: B-band Explanation and more
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 18:42:47 GMT
Organization: remove "NOSPAM" from my address to reply
This version takes care of misspellings (I hope all of them) in the
original post. I should have spell checked with the machine instead of
my brain (especially at midnight!)
++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++
First, let me preface with what my original theory is on why under
saddle pickups in general have balance problems. It seems, after
careful observation, that the problem arises not from the composition
(or construction) of any particular pickup, but from the uneven
distribution of pressure through the saddle-pickup-saddle-slot
sandwich. The source of such uneven distribution of pressure ends up
being an uneven-ness of pressure across the whole length of the
saddle. This maybe caused either by a slightly non-planar saddle slot
bottom or a non-planar saddle bottom. This effect is especially
most prominent with solid saddles, because the rigidity of the saddle
will
tend to ensure that any hill or valley in the "sandwich" stays put,
therefore the problem is persistent. Since the B-Band is a rather
stiff and sensitive element, the effect is more pronounced, when it is
present. Compounding the problem is that the B-Band is quite
sensitive, and while this contributes to what many consider to be a
more natural sounding signal, it also magnifies any imbalance
(imbalance that may be overlooked with a less sensitive saddle
element.) Slotted saddles in the style of the Fishman Cleartone ™
address this problem by adding some flex in the saddle itself, thus
helping even out pressure, only where needed. Think of an array of
automobile leaf springs, all in a row. Similar effect.
A discussion of the clay bedding method.
I began to think about solutions to this problem, since it is near
impossible to get flatness within tolerances needed to achieve perfect
balance. What I needed was a way to get perfectly even pressure along
the saddle element, in relation to the pressure exerted by each
string, regardless of whether the saddle slot or saddle bottom was
planar. I thought of how high quality target rifles use fiberglass
bedding
to solve similar problems. What I needed was a bedding material to
fill
microscopic, or near microscopic hills and
valleys in the saddle bottom or saddle slot bottom. Some of the
requirements for bedding material should be :
1. The material should be fine grained, to be able to fill minute
imperfections in
flatness of the saddle slot bottom, and between the layers of the
saddle-pickup-element-saddle-slot sandwich.
2. The material should not be adhesive to anything but itself - i.e.
a saddle
using the bedding material should be easily removable, as should the
pickup element.
3. The material should be inexpensive, easily applied, and not color
the sound of the guitar in any perceptible way.
It ends up, after much thought, I determined that some type of clay
would be perfect, because it
Has properties that meet all three criteria. This material was tested
in several guitars, and
balance problems disappeared.
Potential problems:
I saw some potential problems. First, it is difficult to form a thin
layer of the clay - and takes practice.
Ideally the layer should be thin enough so that you do not have to
modify the saddle to preserve
your original saddle height, yet still fulfill its function of
eliminating pressure variances in the matrix..
Second, the clay will tend to powder over time. This is a good thing
if the saddle fits in the slot relatively tightly, because it will
fill imperfections even better.
The problem is, if there are even small gaps on either end of the
saddle, some of
the clay will escape, and the element will go out of balance.
This has indeed proven to be a valid concern. My own guitar has a
saddle that has about
1/32 inch leeway on each side of the saddle, in the slot. This was
enough for some of the clay, as it powdered over time, to escape.
Therefore, my low E string went loud. Ack! An opportunity for more
research!
So I got my thinking cap, various materials, and some good old
brainstorming going. I have tried adding a bit of polymer to the clay,
so it will not powder. This was successful, but I still had the thick
bedding material, making it difficult to form a consistently and
thin layer
so as to not affect clearance (saddle height) appreciably.
I looked to other materials.
The methodology I have come to find gives my best most lasting
results, is to take the same modeling clay, and wet it to the
consistency of very thick cream. Stir to get it smooth with absolutely
no
lumps.
I then add Durham's Water Putty (you can pick this up the hardware
stores), to the mixture. This product, when used alone, dries to very
hard
form, yet is still largely non-adhesive except to itself. Leaving the
clay in the
formula here gives a little bit less hard product when cured. The clay
also has
a finer particle size so it's still contributing to the function of
the layer
I keep adding the Durham's until I have a solution that is
a bit runnier than toothpaste, Ultra Brite in particular (grin).
Now, we have a bedding solution that is thin enough that it will still
fill gaps, but is much easier to "squish" out around the pickup
element - achieving a very thin bet adequate layer. It is also easier
to apply. I apply it to the bottom of the
saddle slot - it's much easier than the old method, and lay the piezo
or electret
element back down on top of the layer, then slosh a layer on top of
the element. Stick in the
saddle and push down, the excess should squeeze out. Wipe the excess
off, and string up the instrument to pitch. Let sit a day (probably
not necessary, but let's be safe.)
Well, you ask, what are my results. The Durham's water putty mixed
with
clay makes it set up a little bit harder, enough that the clay does
not tend to powder over time, hence the thing does not go out of
balance after a while if you've a loose saddle (note, this is not a
problem on a tight fitting saddle . You still get the benefit - easy
to remove, etc.
You may ask, what are the results. Again, perfect, balance, and so far
(a few weeks now) no balance problems, the sandwich seems quit
intact. Sounds beautiful.
Best Regards.
John Zyla
| Got my UltraSound today |
|---|
From: Michael S. McCollum <eadric@visi...>
Subject: Got my UltraSound today
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 03:56:16 GMT
Organization: House Suo Marte
My UltraSound AG50R arrived today. I went out to pick up my Martin D16H
(lemme hear an amen, Tom) after having had a b-band installed in it.
When I arrived home, the amp was on my doorstep like the proverbial
abandoned baby in a basket. I took in inside, set down the amp, went
back and got my guitar and assorted detritus..I now own cords..wheeee,
more stuf'.
Now this amp is technically a Christmas gift from Mrs. Santa so to
speak, and rightfully should have been immediately wrapped and placed
beneath the tree. So I debated whether or not to check to see "if it
made it thru shipping OK" or to go ahead and wrap it. So, I wrapped
it....NOT.
OK, so I'm the kind of kid who would go on gift safari every Christmas
and could determine the outline of that fav prezzie from 50 yds out on a
misty night. I mean, I just had to know if it was OK or not.
Oh baby, oh baby...this amp is everything I anticipated and more. They
really weren't kidding when they said they added a power on light or you
wouldn't know it was on. I instinctively flinch whenever I plug or
unplug an amp..no need any more...this puppy is downright stealthy.
Controls are simple..bass and treble,a mid roll off, reverb, and volume.
FX loop, Direct input and output, line out, normal instrument input.
I haven't had a chance to play any FX thru it because I just had so much
fun playing clean. It's crystal clear and I guess the word is
transparent. With a little futzing around (I'll get better as I get more
familiar with the amp) I couldn't tell if the output was from the guitar
alone or with the amp. Turning it up resolved this issue. My heartfelt
thanks the Dave Eidelberg for jogging my memory regarding the UltraSound
and for Dan Gore of UltraSound for service above and beyond. I'm
ordering the not yet ready powered extension cab from UltraSound which
will have a 15 and a horn.
The overall quality of the amp is wonderful. Brown cab cover looks nice.
It's a fairly small amp (specs available at www.UltraSoundamps.com) but
puts out a suprisingly large sound. The size is such that it tucks away
neatly under one of the end tables in my living room (makes the wife
happy). This amp will be great when (if ever) I play out..easy to haul
around..would hold it's own in a small to medium venue.
In addition, I'd like to thank the members of RMMGA who recommended the
B-band. Had it not been for the ng, I probably never would have heard of
either of these products and my life would be more pitiable and
miserable than one could imagine. 8^}
The B-band has proven (initially at least) to provide a warm even
response from my Martin boomer. I had it installed in the Martin to
determine whether or not I wanted to do so with the Breedlove. I do.
Thanks againMikejust as mediocre..but with fortissimo! and authority
| B-Band Installation |
|---|
From: Nick <chambers100@hotmail...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Installation
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 16:51:21 GMT
Organization: Invsn.com NewsReader Service
Yeah Yeah, so I'm replying to myself. Gimme a break. Anyhow, I thought I
would go for a little more detail on my clay (not glue) installation. Before
the clay, the balance was horrible with the B string very loud. First thing
I did was put a thin layer underneath and above the pickup. When I got
everything back together, it was better, but the B was still loud. I waited
a day or so to let the clay dry and settle, but it was still not good so I
removed the strings and saddle. I took out all of the clay and gave it
another shot. I just put a thin layer down in the saddle slot with a little
bit more thickness at the lower end. Put everything back together and it is
working beautifully. So one layer worked great for me.
-Nick
| B-Band Definitive for John [20] |
|---|
From: <firestick@my-deja...>
Subject: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 02:34:14 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Hi John,
This is pretty long but I think it is important.
It is a fairly comprehensive narrative of my B-
Band experiments that encapsulates somewhat that
which others have written along with much that I
have not seen in print. Print it out and read it,
at your leisure, in the bathroom or wherever your
private reading haven might be. .It confirms much
of what you have written and goes further. (I
will post the complete journey on one of my
websites (googalies.com -a guitar cloth) in the
near future).
I first read your threads about a month ago when
I started on the B-Band odyssey. After much
research on various pickups available for my
1996 Taylor 714. I decided on the B-Band. I
spoke with Tony Reirdon at First Quality Music
and Pekka in LA (the B-band artist rep). Both
made the installation sound simple and effective.
I had read so many threads concerning B-Band
string balancing issues, and the love/hate
relationship evident there, that I aggressively
broached this subject with them as well as Mike
Doolin of Doolin Guitars and my guitar tech
(Steve Spalding (who was destined to at least
drill the hole for me and mount the electronics).
I have been experimenting with acoustic pickups
for nearly 30 years and was more than a little
skeptical and having tried EVERYTHING from Barcus
to Frapp to Lawrence to Fishman. Never satisfied,
I began using Takamine Guitars as their sound, to
an audience, was far superior to anything (pickup
wise) installed on higher quality guitars. I sold
off many Martins, Guilds and the like as
professionally unusable and the Takamine was
easily replaceable for a relative low cost, were
I to break one.
I tell you this to accentuate my 40 yearbackground of making a living with acoustic
instruments and to assure you that I have done
the scientific rigor. Obviously the B-Band seemed
like the panacea I had sought for so many years
but yes, I was skeptical.
I bought the pickup w/mike from FQMS, gave it and
my 714 to my guitar tech/luthier for installation
and the next day picked it up. Steve had
installed about half a dozen and was thrilled
with the sound. It did sound pretty good in his
shop but when I got home I went into my studio,
plugged it into one of my main boards and
auditioned it using head phones. Not only was the
sound plastic (quacky I guess) but the string
balance was horrible. (I fingerpick with thin
National plastic thumbs and brass Dunlop
fingers). The E-6th was almost invisible. I
removed the strings, lifted the saddle and looked
at the pickup. It looked OK so I restrung and
this time the E6 was better but the G3 was light,
again almost invisible in the sonic spectrum. In
both cases the B string and to some degree the
E1st were too loud, much like an old Bill
Lawrence mag pickup of days gone by. (I had
successfully balanced those old mag pickups by
placing thin strips of metal over the B and E
string areas of the pickups to deaden those
particular string sounds- You see I have tried
nearly everything including electric guitar
stings ). After playing with the saddle pressure
(literally pushing down or pulling up on the
areas of string volume deficiency I was able to
get different balancing scenarios but never
perfect. (Contrary to what most people seem to
think in the thousands of threads I have read
about under saddle pickups in general, the louder
strings usually result from less pressure on the
pickup at the particular string location than
what would seem obvious - that is, more pressure
- hence the trough or channel hollowing method
espoused by some for improving the B-band and
other undersaddles.) I would be glad to discuss
at length all of the tricks I have learned and
tried over the years but back to the B-Band
installation.
I called Steve and told him honestly the balance
and sound were poor and mentioned that I had
tested using headphones to truly isolate the
pickup sound from ambient guitar and room
acoustics. He had not tested that way. I called
Pekka and Toni and found they had not tested that
way either. Now almost any pickup can sound good
in a room where at least part of what you are
hearing is coming from the acoustic sound of the
instrument mixed with the pickup sound. All B-
Bands should be auditioned and balanced with
headphones.
I had bought a Takamine LTD 98 the week before
expressly for the dual purpose of having a
similar size backup stage ax and to compare the B-
Band/Taylor combo. The Tak killed the Taylor/B-
Band sound. Going through a Digitech Artist 2120
tube preamp the Tak soared while the Taylor B-
Band sound like a cheap guitar( I must admit, as
humbly as possible, that I know how to get rid of
99% of transducer quack and plasticity using good
preamps and processing. I am always amazed at how
bad top performers manage to achieve such a poor
sound from acoustic/electric pickups. (Rod
Stewart's guitarist for instance on the Unplugged
album or most acoustic electrics you hear on
Austin City Limits (Monte Montgomery being a
dramatic exception) and nearly all live
performances by acoustic electric players who
should know better) So I know how to maximize the
sound of an acoustic electric and again, that is
why I have been using Takamine for over 20 years
for stage work.
Now if you think this is becoming a Takamine ad
you are dead wrong and should read on.
I was NOT finished with the Taylor/ B-Band. I
rarelyr give up and am a pain-in-the-ass
perfectionist. I went back to the threaded
discussions, remembering your comments about
using clay for a pickup bed. I had used similar
materials on Yamaha APX's (they had an under
saddle and two transducer pickups attached to the
soundboard underside and at times could be
tinkered with to produce a pretty good sound. I
owned three and every one was weirdly different,
so yes, I experimented to the point that I
understood how to best adjust the transducer
positioning and found that modeling clay worked
far better than the adhesive they factory
installed in transmitting acoustic energy. This
was 8 years ago and I payed little attention to
the kind of clay. I got it out of my girlfriends
sculpting studio but made no note of the brand.
However, when rolled thin and allowed to dry this
clay, when held up in front of your mouth, (4
inches say) really vibrated when I would hum at
it. (I guess I have too much time on my hands but
I truly have pursued these issues in a
scientific, albeit anal, method. I also enjoy
humming at clay).
So when I read your suggestions about clay
embedding I knew you might be on to something,
because not only was string balancing the issue,
I found the overall sound of the B-Band to be
plastic and artificial.(at this point I must say
that, nonetheless, there was SOMETHING delicate,
sweet, and potentially beautiful about the b-band
sound, a hint perhaps of what the possibilities
were) But the combo of bone (plastic, tusk,
micarta, whatever), wood (saddle slot), and
pickup even optimally fitted, was not good enough
to rival the Takamine sound!
I braved holiday sales at a local art supply
store (there were 500 women in a 2000 square foot
shop and I was nearly overcome by fumes of
estrogen) and found MarbleX and Amoco Mexican. I
choose the MarbleX because it looked more like
the clay I had used many years before on the
Yamaha's and the Mexican was quite a bit firmer
(drier perhaps). I rolled the clay with a good
rolling pin to flatten it and then cut strips
which I rolled again to get even flatter. Took
all of ten minutes. I removed the saddle, placed
thin strips of clay in the slot, tamped down to
insure evenness, placed the b-band on top of the
clay, and added the recommended thin layer on top
of the pickup strip, tamped a little more to
evenly distribute (the clay must be moist and
since it dries quickly (a few minutes) after
being rolled thin you must proceed at a fairly
rapid pace), replaced the saddle, strings and
plugged it in. Using the same preamp settings as
Takamine I put on the headphones a came as close
to having a sonic orgasm as I can remember. Not
only was the sound as good or better than the
Tak, I was getting this sound while playing my
beloved Taylor. AND the most stunning revelation
was that the pickup was now 40% hotter than it
had been without the clay. The clay not only
improves the balance but adds power and
efficiency to the pickup so that it matches (in
volume) the Takamine with the AccuraAcoustic
preamp at full volume. That hint of sweetness
aforementioned with the B-Band was now fully
evident. No noise, no hum, no adjusting saddle
pressure. Simply a beautiful powerful sound. As
mentioned before, all acoustic electric pickups
benefit from proper processing, even the Tak and
through the headphones, unprocessed the AE
character of the B-band is still slightly present
but once processed properly, (a little chorus,
reverb, delay, very slight compression) the sound
is breathtaking.
Needless to say I was thrilled. So I took the
whole damn thing apart and started over. I wanted
to see if I had been lucky. I repeated the
procedure from square one and obtained EXACTLY
the same result. I am hardly a craftsman and
though very artistically demanding and a sonic
perfectionist, I still always managed to get glue
on the windows of my model airplanes and do in no
way consider myself a meticulous hand worker.
That same day The Fishman Clear tone saddle thatTony at FQMS had recommended as a possible cure
for the Taylor balancing problem arrived so I
took it all apart again (each time I carefully
scraped the clay out of the slot and off of the
pickup - it come off pretty easily but care must
be taken when removing the pickup as I was to
find out later that day). I lightly sanded the
Cleartone Saddle so it would just fit, tighter
than the Taylor saddle (the Taylor saddle was
always loose enough to wiggle just slightly and
though it may be a problem without the clay, with
the clay it made no difference). Restrung, the
Taylor with Cleartone was better than the
original (although the actual acoustic sound
suffered somewhat) setup without clay but not
much. Perhaps a bit more powerful than the
original but string balance was still a problem
and very slight pressure on the saddle would
change the balance of each string but never
anything usable. Needless to say I once again
performed the clay method using the old original
saddle and once again the sound was perfect.
Nailed every time.
At this point a WARNING for those performing this
very simple installation enhancement (I say
enhancement as I would hesitate to drill a hole
in my Taylor and the electronic and placement of
internal components/jackpin is best done by
someone who is used to working in the confined
space of a guitar interior and with the delicate
materials used in fine guitars).
OOPS! The last time I removed the b-band pickup
from the bridge slot (after the Cleartone saddle
experiment) I inadvertently lifted (using a sharp
small toothpick) the top layer of the pickup and
separated it from the bottom layer exposing the
silver colored interior. The pickup strip is
actually 2 layers pressed together (I doubt it is
glued as it came apart too easily). Horrified, I
retreated to the studio to test the damage and
found both strips (top and bottom) were sonically
active so I carefully repeated the clay method
installation, making as sure as possible that the
separated b-band strips lay evenly on top of each
other. The result was every bit as good as any of
the other attempts. Thankfully b-bands are
forgiving to at least the degree I screwed up but
I recommend care in handling the pickup, no
bending or stressing and when removing/prying
from the slot, be very careful not to separate
the composite layers.
Also during one of my original experiments I
wanted to see the result of removing strings and
saddle completely and then reinstalling same on a
now dry pickup/clay sandwich. The sound suffered
somewhat. Although the balance was still fine,
the power and efficiency of the pickup and some
of its beauty was reduced. I think that as long
as the saddle is not removed, even if the stings
must be removed to change batteries or to
reposition the internal condenser mike, you will
not lose sound sufficiently to abort stage
performance ability but it is better to minimize
(as with any acoustic electric) removal of all
strings simultaneously.
One last note: I have still not found an ideal
location for the condenser mike. Although it is
obviously a high quality mike, it adds only
minimally if at all to the pickup. I will do more
experimenting in the future but at this time I
would not recommend its necessity (given the
beauty of the pickup alone, the simplicity of
plugging a standard, as opposed to a balanced
(stereo) guitar chord into the guitar and the
lack of added expense for either a stereo Y cable
or some kind of preamp splitter like the Fishman
Pocket Blender - all of which I bought and will
probably not use).
I would like to thank you for setting me on the
right track (or at least paving the way as I
should have, no doubt, eventually tried some kind
of clay). The B-Band is as potentially
revolutionary as claimed and can solve (with
proper processing) the problem of sharing a great
guitar's sound with an audience. However be wary
of those who would tell you the pickup sounds
great with the standard factory recommended
installation unless they have demo'd it through
headphones. I have listened to a number of
Martins and other instruments with the B-band
that the owners assured me sounded incredible.
Few even minimally passed the headphone test
without the clay. I do not see how the
saddle/pickup/wood slot combination alone can
possible sound as full and warm without the added
insulating acoustic properties of the clay. I
will cc this to Pekka and Tony and especially B-
band in Finland as I know they are truly
dedicated to solving the ago old problem of
acoustic guitar amplification.
Thank you for all and most notably for the time
you have spent that helped so many. You may share
any or all of this as you wish.
Doug
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Charley Bonner <cwbne@aol...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: 19 Dec 1999 20:00:59 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Hi,
I know it's pretty stupid to get involved in a B-band thread, but here goes. I
think the most important implication in your thread is that B-band, the
company, released a potentially great product before it was really ready for
market. In my business, which is pretty high tech (very specialized alarm and
security systems), the vultures are always waiting so ironically our own
security borders on paranoia. Back to the point. If a product is released too
early and doesn't work perfectly, 100% of the time, it is pretty useless. I
work as a troubleshooter and know first hand what improper or too delicate
equipment can do for a customer's confidence. It also gives a competitor a
chance to see the idea and improve upon it. I have heard many here say the
B-band is great but never so well as the previous post. It would be a shame to
lose something with such great potential because of timing error. I would
suggest through Larry P (I know you're there even though you "left") that he
contact B-band and have them pull all of the available units, work a way to
properly sandwich the element, and then re-market the product before it is too
late.
Charley
From: John <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: 19 Dec 1999 21:37:01 -0600
Organization: Newscene Public Access Usenet News Service (http://www.newscene.com/)
B-Bands are fine. The company is small and growing, and the technology
needs to be properly installed to work.
I wonder about your statement that if a product does not work
perfectly, 100 percent of the time, it is useless.
I know of no product that works 100 percent of the time, all of the
time. Perhaps a Rolex does, but I would not know. Your statement is
specious. I wish my car worked 100 percent of the time, all of the
time! Even when it was new!
If course, everyone knows that the B-Band preamp had battery polarity
problems in the first run, that was corrected. I can tell you, from
experience, that errors in design are pretty much to be expected when
products are released. One who does not realize this should
concentrate on opening his or her eyes a bit wider. Even our Space
Shuttles have problems. I work with computers, and I tell you, if I
expected the computers we use to work 100 % or the time, all of the
time, and if the computer companies recalled all units because people
did not have installation expertise, or if some of the units failed,
I'd get no programming work done! All of the computers would be back
at the manufacturer's factories! Imagine if software companies
recalled all software if a bug was found (they are found all of the
time, by the way - yea - you know that, I know. I'm being facetious).
Wow, I'd have to give it up if my C, PL/SQL, COBOL, ACCESS, and VB
compilers all ended up being pulled cause they don't work 100% of the
time, all of the time. While that might make me fat and lazy, it
would definitely cramp the programming style.
Now, the problem about B-Band threads is that folks seem to get all
worked up over a new product that is in the process of refinement, and
needs market testing to be improved even more (although no product is
ever truly perfected - not a one!) I suppose back in the old days,
the same whining went on in reference to the newfangled early
electric guitars, amps, cars, rockets, communications satellites,
computers, radios, TVs (remember the old mechanical tuners on TVs?
..) ; sofas fabrics, bicycles, CD players, Tape Players, CD ROM,
plastic grocery bags, batteries, cameras, clocks, electric pencil
sharpeners, typewriters, tires, racing cars, shampoos, dishwashers,
dishwasher soap, light bulbs, ceiling fans, elevators, paving
machines, calculators, X-RAY machines, intercoms, telephones,
cellphones, (dang - my cellphone STILL fails sometimes, I demand a
recall!), glues, speakers, guitar cables, 1/4 inch phone plugs, 1/4
inch phone jacks - for heaven's sake, water coolers, soft water
conditioners, air conditioners, furnaces, house paint, roofing
material, saber saws, power hand drills, MY STINKING 25 DOLLAR
MECHANICAL PENCIL, motor oils, gasoline formulas, vaccines, cancer
treatment methods, lawnmowers, Framus guitars ....... OOPS! One
exception - my humble apologies to Norman; Frami are perfect.
'scuse me whilst I take a breath - - -
spell checkers, GRAMMAR CHECKERS!!!!, cola drinks, diet sweeteners,
wristwatches, socket wrenches.
You get the picture.
B-Band threads do not have to be heated. Discussions of products,
their merits and problems, whether B-Band or Fishman, or Martin,
Taylor -Takamine-Guild-Fender-Alvarez-SAMICK ! - Seagull, Olson,
Lowden, Acoustasonic-Crate-AR;SWR- - John Pearse_Armrest/Elixer-Martin
SP; (D'Addario, GHS, Maxima, DR 'Rare' Phosphor, .... ) can be held in
a civil manner, with the intention of enlightening each other with the
richness of each of our experiences, valuable opinions - and yes,
negative opinions are valuable too .... and WHAT NOT!!
Grace and Peace,
John Zyla
On 19 Dec 1999 20:00:59 GMT, <cwbne@aol...> (Charley Bonner) wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I know it's pretty stupid to get involved in a B-band thread, but here goes. I
>think the most important implication in your thread is that B-band, the
>company, released a potentially great product before it was really ready for
>market. In my business, which is pretty high tech (very specialized alarm and
>security systems), the vultures are always waiting so ironically our own
>security borders on paranoia. Back to the point. If a product is released too
>early and doesn't work perfectly, 100% of the time, it is pretty useless. I
>work as a troubleshooter and know first hand what improper or too delicate
>equipment can do for a customer's confidence. It also gives a competitor a
>chance to see the idea and improve upon it. I have heard many here say the
>B-band is great but never so well as the previous post. It would be a shame to
>lose something with such great potential because of timing error. I would
>suggest through Larry P (I know you're there even though you "left") that he
>contact B-band and have them pull all of the available units, work a way to
>properly sandwich the element, and then re-market the product before it is too
>late.
>Charley
From: <firestick@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:06:12 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Hi Charley
I can certainly agree with your concerns about products not being ready
for market and I am as disturbed as you about the tendency to produce
vaporware to gain R&D funds. In a perfect world this would not be an
issue. But in this one, the cost of bringing a new product to market is
such that few companies, even Microsoft can afford to work out all of
the bugs before introduction and many of the bugs are not evident until
the user base is sufficient in size to explore all of the subtleties of
usage. Even in the electronic surveillance world you must admit as is
obvious to anybody that watches the news that not everthing works as
advertised. It is more logical and thus important to expect a new
company provide updated refinements at low or
no cost to initial users of their fledgling products. How else will we
ever see these new products. Nothing works perfectly all of the time.
Our best hope is that innovators continue to explore and that the
market will support their attempts. Within reason of course. I hope B-
Band is one of those pioneers that recognize the importance of
followup. I doubt they have gotten rich on this pickup yet and if they
want real substantial success they will evolve this product so that any
novice can install it successfully. Until then USE CLAY and you will
appreciate the sound.
Doug>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Charley Bonner <cwbne@aol...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: 20 Dec 1999 19:26:03 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Perhaps I overstated a bit at 100%, but it should be pretty darn close. I've
been using the same pickup for 5 years and it went in easy and has never caused
a problem. It really seemed to me from all the posts that B-band is working on
a serious credibility problem. These problems are 10 times harder to straighten
out than if they did not exist in the first place. If someone told me to put
modelling clay in my saddle slot, I'd say no. You can tell me all you want that
it causes no harm, but I'm not going to do it on my Martin or my Guild. The
pickup I have sounds great. I would change for something better but not if I
perceive a problem which I do with the B-band going from all I've read here. It
seems to me that the company could embed the material in something the same
consistency as the clay when hard that would be part of the unit. If they would
then go in without balance or output problems, wouldn't that be a more viable
product. I stand by my statement that they entered the marketplace prematurly.
I don't want my guitar to be the beta tester.
>I wonder about your statement that if a product does not work
>perfectly, 100 percent of the time, it is useless.
Charley
From: John <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: 21 Dec 1999 00:03:02 -0600
Organization: Newscene Public Access Usenet News Service (http://www.newscene.com/)
On 20 Dec 1999 19:26:03 GMT, <cwbne@aol...> (Charley Bonner) wrote:
>Perhaps I overstated a bit at 100%, but it should be pretty darn close. I've
>been using the same pickup for 5 years and it went in easy and has never caused
>a problem.
Then, why on earth are you interested in debating the merits or lack
thereof of B-Bands? There are a lot of folks who love their B-Bands.
I'm one. Just because I love my B-Band, I do not knock the sound of
other pickups! I Know some people do, and this is not valid, because
it's a subjective thing. But you don't have a B-Band, and wouldn't
want to try one, so - whay would you choose to participate inspecious
debating?
>It really seemed to me from all the posts that B-band is working on
>a serious credibility problem. These problems are 10 times harder to straighten
>out than if they did not exist in the first place. If someone told me to put
>modelling clay in my saddle slot, I'd say no. You can tell me all you want that
>it causes no harm, but I'm not going to do it on my Martin or my Guild.
I don't think you should put clay in your Martin or Guild! You like
the pickup you have! Why would you install a B-Band anyway?
I do suggest, however, that you are a candidate for a soundhole type
pickup. If you have put a piezo pickup in your Martin or your Guild,
then you have put a polymer, with quartz crystals imbedded in it under
the saddle!
Perish the thought!
In a Martin and a Guild, no less! Who knows what else is in those
piezo pickups. Maybe bug secretions! At least there's no clay in
there.
Then again, if you put a soundhole pickup in your guitar, you've put a
magnet and a gob of copper coil, and funky mounting contraptions on
your guitars too! Inthe soundhole no less! AHHHrrgh! You wouldn't do
that to a Martin or a Guild, now, would you?
Pardon my sarcasm, but again, your argument is specious. Reminds me
of Luddite philosophy.
>The
>pickup I have sounds great.
If your pickup sounds great, then what is the problem here? Keep it.
Still, I would worry, it's plastic and quartz, and you've got that
stuff under your saddle, you know . Not in MY guitar!
>I would change for something better but not if I
>perceive a problem which I do with the B-band going from all I've read here. It
>seems to me that the company could embed the material in something the same
>consistency as the clay when hard that would be part of the unit. If they would
>then go in without balance or output problems, wouldn't that be a more viable
>product. I stand by my statement that they entered the marketplace prematurly.
>I don't want my guitar to be the beta tester.
Your guitar is probably a beta test for a bunch of things done at the
factory. These R&D people don't sit around and twiddle their thumbs.
Beta testing is a relative term. I've worked in manufacturing in the
past, and products get changed every day. Every single day is the
norm. These are not changes the customer is aware of, and they are not
tested exhaustively. You are a beta tester. Maybe a gamma tester. Your
guitar is a beta test. Maybe it's a Gamma test. maybe it's a PI test!
I re-state - you are a consumer tester more often than you realize.
B-Band is a new product and will doubtless go through enhancement, as
you suggest. I'm not privy to what goes on at EMF, but I can assure
you that they are doing active R&D just as Fishman, Baggs, Martin,
Guild, Gibson, Samick, Ford, Dodge, GE, Dell, IBM, Maytag, BF
Goodrich, Toyota, GM and (sigh) et.al. are doing - every day of every
year. My - do I have to go through this exercise again to make a
point? I think it was missed last time.
My arguments are not so much that you would not feel comfortable with
a B-Band - I understand where you are coming from. What I don't
understand is your proclamation of what is good or bad business
practices, and your judgement that clay bedding is somehow going to
put the voodoo hex on any guitar that uses it. Nonsense! Balderdash!
Pardon my vehemence.
Maybe EMF should publicize more of what is going on in R&D. I don't
know. I still think B-Band threads are *unnecessarily* contentious.
Peace,
John Zyla
>
>>I wonder about your statement that if a product does not work
>>perfectly, 100 percent of the time, it is useless.
>
>
>Charley
From: Charley Bonner <cwbne@aol...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: 21 Dec 1999 17:28:02 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Steady on, Brother. Please don't take my post personally. I did not knock the
sound of the B-band. I only spoke about its obvious (read the posts)
difficulties. I wasn't debating the merits or lack thereof of anything. I think
I said it would be a shame if this technology was lost to us, the consumer due
to poor marketing strategies. I do think I have a right to have my say. As far
as the clay, I'll bet there are others who feel the same. I know of three
reputable repair people who won't install them (please don't ask for names,
you'll just have to trust me). The fact is when B-band hit the market, there
were already established market leaders. When Fishman and Baggs were starting
with the under the saddle technology, it was new. Today it seems the most
pickups installed are the Fishman. This is the power of being the first and the
market leader. To compete, a product had darn well better be problem free. It's
kind of like in boxing where the challenger has to take the fight from the
champ, he can't merely do as well.
>Then, why on earth are you interested in debating the merits or lack
>thereof of B-Bands? There are a lot of folks who love their B-Bands.
>I'm one. Just because I love my B-Band, I do not knock the sound of
Actually, no, I don't want to pardon you sarcasm. There was absolutely no
reason for you to be rude to me. Your apology is even sarcastic.
>
>Pardon my sarcasm, but again, your argument is specious. Reminds me
>of Luddite philosophy.
>
There is no problem. I thought that what I considered to be constructive
thoughts were welcome here, as would be rational discussion, perhaps with
different, not necessarily opposing point of view.>
>
>If your pickup sounds great, then what is the problem here? Keep it.
>Still, I would worry, it's plastic and quartz, and you've got that
>
I have no doubt that my guitars are the products of constant evolution. Bottom
line for me is they work as have most of their predecessors, at least judging
from their value in the marketplace.
>
>Your guitar is probably a beta test for a bunch of things done at the
>factory. These R&D people don't sit around and twiddle their thumbs
>
If they are doing creative R&D as you suggest, and also as you suggest they are
going to do something along the lines I suggested, than you have supported my
original statement. Companies do recalls all the time when something doesn't
work quite right. I think my suggestion was non contentious and quite
constructive. Please don't ask me to write a paper supporting my theory, I
haven't got the time.
>
>Your guitar is probably a beta test for a bunch of things done at the
>factory. These R&D people don't sit around and twiddle their thumbs
>
Again, no. This is pretty nasty stuff here.>
>Pardon my vehemence.
I don't know who you think you are, but to treat a total stranger, who has done
nothing to you the way you have, would belie your signature. Sarcasm is one of
the most powerful forms of agression.
Pax et Veritas,
CW
From: Michael S. McCollum <eadric@visi...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:39:00 GMT
Organization: House Suo Marte
Well I guess I'm a vanilla poster. I recently had a B-band placed in my
Martin D16H with no problems whatsoever. Balance is excellent, tone is
as acoustic as I've heard in a amp'd guitar. The Martin was a test bed
prior to deciding whether or not to have one placed in my Breedlove. I
still haven't made up my mind yet, but any decision not to do so would
have more to do with changing anything about the Breedlove more than
doubts about the B-band. Anyone have any comments regarding the B-band
Core 99 + mic installation/results?
Mike
From: Bob Dorgan <d77737@epix...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 10:27:34 GMT
Organization: Dorgan Welding
<firestick@my-deja...> wrote:
>
> Charley,
> What kind of pickup do you have in your guitars. Have you tested their
> sound with headphones, so that you only can hear the pickup sound
> Doug>
Doug this is something I learned a few years ago, and the first time I
did it I was appalled! A guitar tech in a Rochester shop demonstrated
his installation methods for me for USTs, and he used headphones.
I learned a great deal about balancing issues that day.
And about shim materials. And about patience.
Bob Dorgan
From: Jon Larsson <sti4667@MT...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:56:18 -0700
Charley Bonner wrote in message
<<19991220142603.27880.00000170@ng-bd1...>>...
It really seemed to me from all the posts that B-band is working on
>a serious credibility problem. These problems are 10 times harder to
straighten
>out than if they did not exist in the first place. If someone told me to
put
>modelling clay in my saddle slot, I'd say no. You can tell me all you want
that
>it causes no harm, but I'm not going to do it on my Martin or my Guild. The
>pickup I have sounds great. I would change for something better but not if
I
>perceive a problem which I do with the B-band going from all I've read
here. It
>seems to me that the company could embed the material in something the same
>consistency as the clay when hard that would be part of the unit. If they
would
>then go in without balance or output problems, wouldn't that be a more
viable
>product. I stand by my statement that they entered the marketplace
prematurly.
>I don't want my guitar to be the beta tester.
>
>Charley
First, I do not own a B-band, have never performed any sort of sound test
with a B-band, and I am not an excellent guitarist.
Purely from a business point of view, maybe the B-band people didn't have
the foresight or real-world experience to package a small amount of
self-hardening clay with their products. If they had, and made the clay a
part of the "official installation procedure", would that settle the matter?
Seems to me that John Zyla's method (if Doug's experience could lead us to
being convinced that said method can potentially result in a good
installation in practically ANY guitar) is actually better than anything the
company could do to the pickup BEFORE it is installed. It's not just the
"hardness" of the clay or the composition of the material surrounding the
pickup - rather it is the complete conformation of clay-pickup combination
to each individual saddle/slot combination that makes this technique so
amazing.
I have a high-end guitar that has no pickup and will remain that way for the
time being. However, if and when, I will definitely be trying the B-band
w/mic and using, if necessary, the Zyla technique in installation.
If you are celebrating anything this time of year,
Happy-Merry-Blessed-Exciting-Pleasant whatevers to everyone!
Jon Larsson
<sti4667@mt...>
mt=montana
From: George Reiswig <george.reiswig@intel...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:40:06 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Charley,
I really think you're having what we cognitive psychologists would calla "perceptual salience issue." You've seen a number of people on this
newsgroup post that they had balance problems. I think you're assuming
that MOST of them do. I think that's wrong.
If you looked at the past couple of years, you might think that theaviation industry has a bad record in terms of accidents, because the media
has given us a lot of exposure to some particularly grisly ones. That makes
these accidents very salient to us, and makes us overestimate the number of
such accidents. In reality, the aviation industry is very safe.
I've had some balance problems with my B-Band, but there is anotherperceptual buggaboo at work for me here. I've used Fishman UTS and
soundhole units, Baggs UTS, and other pickups, and none of them sounded as
much like my guitar as the B-Band does. Part of what that "naturalness" did
for me was to make it so I was much more critical of balance now. Where I
didn't listen to balance critically before, I now go back to listen to (for
example) the Fishman Rare Earth pickup, which reputedly has good balance,
and I'm much LESS pleased with it's string-to-string balance than I am with
my B-Band.
Also, EMF is eager to work with people to solve their balance issues,and has done so with me. I solved it after some work, and I'm happier than
ever.
EMF also continues R&D in an effort to solve the problem right out ofthe box, so I think you do them a disservice to suggest that they launched
prematurely. They probably had balance problems on a similar proportion of
their test guitars (5%?), and deemed that 95% good was good enough to
market. I would agree with that.
GR
>Charley Bonner wrote in message
><<19991220142603.27880.00000170@ng-bd1...>>...
>It really seemed to me from all the posts that B-band is working on
>>a serious credibility problem.
From: John <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: 21 Dec 1999 23:39:07 -0600
Organization: Newscene Public Access Usenet News Service (http://www.newscene.com/)
Bob,
I have not, but I believe other folks have.
About shims shifting - this reminds me to direct attention to a post I
made a few weeks back in which I indicated that I had had one clay
installation fail - after a month or so. Seems that if the saddle is
loose in the slot, and the clay powders, some of it can escape, and
leave voids, thus the bedding will fail. The way I solved this was to
add a component to the clay that made it a bit harder, so it will not
powder over time - to any appreciable extent. Note - my original
thoughts were that powdering would be a benefit, and indeed it would -
if the powdering could be contained. The problem is when it escapes.
I also want to mention that, in reference to this clay thing, I
arrived at the application through thought experiments, and empirical
experiment, but I regard the clay bedding technique as "one"
solution, and surely not the optimum. It is my hope that the pickup
manufacturers will play around with the concept, and come up with
something better. I would like to see something that comes in a tube,
about the size of a bicycle-tube-patching kit adhesive tube, that the
installer squeezes out into the spot, lays the pickup down, and
squeezes a bit more on top of the element. Nice and easy. I think
whatever substance is used, should perhaps have the properties I
thought might be of important - - my choice of clay was that it had
properties I wanted - those being:
1) It is adhesive only to itself, thus easily removable.
2) The clay has a small enough (actually extremely very small)
particle size that it efficiently fills hills and valleys of an uneven
saddle bottom or saddle slot bottom, or combination of both.
3) clay would not color the sound of the guitar at all, in such a thin
later, there is effectively no impedance change that is a result of
the clay. I had originally thought that some type of polymer would be
better, but I worried about impedance effects coloring the sound.
One more interesting comment on this - an aside - I actually use clay
bedding in all of the saddles I install now, whether there is a pickup
in the picture or not! Seems that I get a better (just perceptible -
with the naked ear) balancing of sound - mainly because I am
transferring energy from the saddle bottom to the bridge (and from
there to the top) more efficiently. Sort of like gluing the saddle in,
except with clay (or actually the new mixture of clay and Durhams
Water Putty) the saddle is removable (unlike a glued saddle ! Ugh!)
because the clay is not adhesive.
Bob, Have a very happy Christmas.
John
On Tue, 21 Dec 1999 20:27:26 GMT, Bobs Dorgan <<d77737@epix...>> wrote:
<snip quoted jz post>
>Hey John,
>have you used this method yet for other USTs?
>Last weekend I played a Xmas party and I had a Fisman Natural go
>squirrely on me. I've played that guitar several places without
>incidence, but Saturday night when I did my sound check, the 2nd strings
>(12 string) were noticably louder than the others. I quickly changed
>batteries, but no soap. Luckily my wife was there, and she buzzed home
>and picked up another guitar.
>I pulled the strings off last night, pulled the saddle and found that
>some paper shims were used in the installation. I'll eventually change
>this out to a b-band but I'd like to get through the holidays before I
>do.
>Bob Dorgan
From: Michael S. McCollum <eadric@visi...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 05:28:04 GMT
Organization: House Suo Marte
<firestick@my-deja...> wrote:
>
> Hi Mike
> In my first posts (firestick) I mentioned the problem with the mic
> (finding the right position) After a lot of experimenting I did finally
> find an ideal location and the sound is further enhanced. As to your
> Martin installation
> 1. I have heard many Martin people claim to have trouble free balancing
> with Martins. I am curious. though, You said you had it installed. Did
> the technician use shims to achieve balance. Please don't take it apart
> to find out - just ask whoever did it.
>
> 2. Bob Dorgan's post today mentions that he had a Fishman pickup
> problem and when he investigated found shims in the slot he was not
> aware of. Many good guitar techs use shims and many other techniques to
> achieve optimum sound. That is what we pay them for.
>
> 3. Have you listened to it in isolation (Headphones or isolation rooms)
>
> Doug
Doug, my installation was done by Marguerite at Fret Not here in Va. I
talked to her and she listened to my style of playing (and earned
brownie points by keeping a straight face)to get a better idea of the
sound we were looking for. I have a Tusq nut and saddle and the
installation was absolutely clean with no shims needed. All freq boosts
were cut out. I haven't listened to it on headphones yet, but did listen
using my UltraSound set as neutral as possible...ie middle settings, no
boosts. I'm quite pleased so far. Frankly, I cannot discern the
difference between amped and unamped until I raise the volume levels to
a degree that makes it apparent. The amp is wrapped now until Christmas
(drat) but I just got a Fishman Para EQ DI and I'll be very interested
to see what the guitar sounds like with that in the loop. I don't play
out, but foresee a time when I will...otherwise the only need for the
amp/FX is a big boy toy.
At this point I'm curious to see what a B-band will sound like in my
Breedlove. It's walnut/cedar combination gives it a virtual subsonic
bass. I can really feel it when I play. It will be interesting to see
how well it translates to amplification.
Mike
From: John <zylaNOSPAM@joymail...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: 22 Dec 1999 11:47:04 -0600
Organization: Newscene Public Access Usenet News Service (http://www.newscene.com/)
On Wed, 22 Dec 1999 14:41:10 GMT, <hedberg@my-deja...> wrote:
Hi Harold,
The moisture content of the clay is low, and disappears quickly, (the
clay has to be kept sealed or it dries) In fact, it's hard to get the
thing done before the clay dries. So, that the moisture content of
the bridge is not affected, i.e. it returns to ambient almost
immediately.
Lets definitely not argue! It's becoming to no one.
You make some good points. I think that since the B-Band is so
sensitive that perhaps at this point it needs to be installed by a
skilled tech. I figure EMF will try to come up with a solution that is
more user-installable. I do not know what their goal is - I'm not
affiliated with EMF in any way - I just like their product. The way I
look at the B-Band at this point is the same way I would look at
putting a modified camshaft in an automobile engine. I'm not gonna do
it myself, but I know a qualified person can do it and get great
results. Another analogy would be building an airplane. Airplanes are
not built assembly line fashion - they are largely handbuilt with much
care taken at each rivet. (even 767's!) . The B-Band element is an
extremely high tech component that has very special properties, and
has to be installed in a very particular way to get those special
properties to work. I'm trying to make the right analogy, but It's
difficult. In other words, I think your statement :
>"there is the >perception that these pickups are more technique sensitive
>to install than other under the saddle pickups. This perception does
>not seem to be completely without basis."
- - is right on the money.We see eye to eye on that one!
In any case, I do not know if EMF would agree with my feelings here -
I think they would prefer that this be a drop in and go type of deal -
I do not think it is - yet. Maybe someday. Still, the sound I get with
a proper B-Band installation is quite astounding - and very well worth
the work involved in getting things right. I let people try mine, and
they simply cannot believe it. This is just my own personal
experience.
I'm not familiar with the Baggs product - maybe someone else will
chime in and give us some insight on it's makeup. By the way, I use a
Baggs Para-acoustic DI with my B-Band, and it's a wonderful
instrument.
Merry Christmas all!
John Zyla
>John
>
>Putting something wet in the saddle slot will change the moisture
>content of the bridge material and maybe of the top in the vicinity and
>maybe of the bridge plate. I have no idea whether there is enough
>water in the clay to have a significant effect on these woods or not,
>but I don't think that one needs to be paranoid to be concerned about
>it. I don't think that Charley was being silly but I certainly don't
>want to get in an argument about it (hopefully, I haven't).
>
>I will tell you something that I think about the whole controversy,
>though. It is based on the messages in this group and personal
>conversations with one person who had some difficulty with a B-Band
>installation.
>
>Although the B-Band seems to be a good product with high potential,
>there is the perception that these pickups are more technique sensitive
>to install than other under the saddle pickups. This perception does
>not seem to be completely without basis. If it is true that they are
>more technique sensitive to install, then the company needs to do the
>work to develop a fix -- either change the product to minimize the
>problem or develop an approved method for reliable installations. If
>the perception is false, then the company needs to do better marketing
>to eliminate the perception and part of that would be promulgation of
>good installation procedures that have a high likelihood of success.
>
>I am certainly willing to accept the possibility that the perception is
>false; lots and lots of people who participate in this group have had
>very good success with these things and there is a plethora of
>information indicating that other makers' pickups (Fishman, for example)
>can have installation problems as well.
>
>Just curious, are you familiar with the Baggs RT and how they sandwich
>the sensitive material in between layers of what looks like elastic
>material? Do you know if the Baggs RT works on the same physics as the
>B-band? I don't think that the Baggs is strictly a piezo either, but
>I'm not sure.
>
>Harold
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
From: George Reiswig <george.reiswig@intel...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 11:11:14 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Harold, all,
I've been helping to Beta test for B-Band for a couple of years now. Idon't get any sort of payment for this, I just do it because I appreciate
EMF's innovation and because I'm a natural tinkerer, too. Besides, I like
their product. I have B-Bands in both my acoustics.
Anyway, believe me, EMF *IS* doing constant, continuous research to tryto improve the system, to cope with reported balance problems, and to
improve things that aren't currently getting much in the way of complaints
at all. EMF is a small company, without many employees. Nevertheless, IMHO
they do a great job at technical innovation, at helping out customers, and
at continued R&D. I am constantly trying out new things for them. (many of
which don't work, but as Hans Bethe once said, 'If we don't fail on at least
50% of our experiments, we're not pushing the envelope enough.' Or words to
that effect.) I think their use of the clever employees they have and of
people like me (tinkerers) more than makes up for their lack of size. Their
innovations continue, things keep getting better, and nobody has ever
complained about their customer service!
As far as dealing with the current "bad" marketing spin, well...again,they're a small company, and they've chosen to put their ergs into bettering
the product, which in my opinion already speaks for itself. They're in
Finland, which also makes keeping in touch with the US market more
difficult. And besides, the only place where I hear them getting much
negative publicity is on this newsgroup, and only about string balance
problems. Some people prefer the sound of a Fishman, but that's as much an
opinion-based choice as is the make of guitar we choose.
As I said yesterday, I think this is becoming an issue of perceptualsalience: we've all heard it so often that B-Bands can have balance problems
that we think that such a problem is unusually bad for that pickup, and that
it is not a problem in other pickups. I'm not sure either of those are
true. I think all UTS pickups are prone to not have very good balance.
None of them approaches a 100% reliability rating, I'd wager. I also think
that the closer you get to a "true" acoustic tone, the more sensitive your
ear becomes to the balance problems, too. (for example, if your UTS pickup
tone sounded like doo-doo, you'd be much more concerned about the tone than
about the string-to-string balance...that concern affects your perception.)
I guess I'd just say that we (being the good capitalists and guitarplayers that we are) actually benefit from innovation in amplification,
whether it works right out of the box or not! Things are getting better all
the time in this realm. EMF is a company that is *extremely dedicated* to
making their transducers better. They work very, very hard. I think they
deserve our support, if for no other reason than they're making some of the
big boys (Baggs, Fishman, etc.) work harder to improve their own technology.
Those of us who prefer the tone of the B-Band will also continue to benefit
from their work. Some people prefer Taylors and Fishmans. Some of us
prefer Lowdens and B-Bands. There's enough room for all of us.
The folks at EMF *are* working, hard, on perfecting their product. Itmay never be the case that anyone will be able to install a B-Band in any
guitar, and the balance will be perfect. Think about the variables: is the
saddle slot flat? Is the saddle consistent? Is it flat? Is the string
tension equal? And on and on...
Like I said, EMF is working on it. Give them a break. If you can't doit just to be nice, do it because they are doing a lot of good for acoustic
guitar amplification, and certainly no harm.
Please...if we can't give EMF a break, then we at least owe it tocertain other UTS companies to give them equal time! "Baggs, Fishman, you
went to market TOO EARLY, before you had taken care of that quacky, plastic
sound that your pickups get! Shame on you!"
On second thought, let's just give EMF a break. Merry Christmas!George "Happy with my B-Bands" Reiswig
<hedberg@my-deja...> wrote in message <83qnu5$lkj$<1@nnrp1...>>...
(SNIP)
>Although the B-Band seems to be a good product with high potential,
>there is the perception that these pickups are more technique sensitive
>to install than other under the saddle pickups. This perception does
>not seem to be completely without basis. If it is true that they are
>more technique sensitive to install, then the company needs to do the
>work to develop a fix -- either change the product to minimize the
>problem or develop an approved method for reliable installations. If
>the perception is false, then the company needs to do better marketing
>to eliminate the perception and part of that would be promulgation of
>good installation procedures that have a high likelihood of success.
>
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:12:26 -0500
Organization: Cornell University
Hi folks-
I'm reading along in this thread, drafting a response to Charley's
remarks, when I get to George's comments, which say it all, better
than I could. So consider this a hearty "second" of what George said.
I'd like to add a few comments. First, I was among a handful of
beta testers I know of; to my knowledge, all of us found the pickup to be a
standout. I know there were others I don't know of. EMF did do
substantial testing of the B-band before shipping.
Second, the B-band is a new technology that resembles an old technology.
An unfortunate consequence is that folks familiar with the old technology
figure that whatever they did to get that to work, should apply to
the new technology. But it doesn't always work that way, in general,
or with the B-band. All pickups have balance problems, and all
competent luthiers and repairmen have a bag of tricks they use to fix
them. These tricks don't always work with the B-band, and a new
trick or two has to be added. Some of us beta testers found these
tricks for ourselves; since there has been wider distribution, others
have found potentially better ones.
Finally, to my knowledge the B-band is the only pickup technology
that was developed with the input of RMMGA specifically sought during
the test and development period, and subsequently. Thus it is not
surprising, and indeed to be expected, that you will hear more about
it than about other technologies here on RMMGA. This effect may
distort one's impression of its good qualities as well as its
problems; but it's something you have to keep in mind and sort out
for yourself.
I'd also like to add a comment regarding the "test with headphones"
remark of Doug's. I agree that an "open ear" test is misleading. But
I'd also like to point out that a headphone test is somewhat misleading
(though less so) in my experience as well. I found this to be
particularly true when testing internal mics a couple years ago.
I had 4 or 5 simultaneously mounted in my guitar, and I recorded
4 of them simultaneously to my cassette 4-track. I formed one set
of opinions about them when I listened (thru headphones!) while
tracking, but came to a different conclusion on the playback! No
headphones seal completely, so you will always hear a bit of the
guitar acoustically, even with 'phones. But more importantly, you
can feel the low end as you play, and this can significantly distort
your impression of the sound. The best way to judge the sound that
an audience will hear (assuming the room you will play in is large
enough that they won't hear your guitar much acoustically) is to
record it and listen to the playback. In fact, a principle use of
my JamMan now when I play out is during soundcheck: I'll record
a riff or rhythm part, put the guitar down, and go out and listen
to what the signal really sounds like. Several years ago, when
*Guitar Player* was first reviewing acoustic pickups and preamps,
they used to talk about the "DAT test"---one had to record the guitar
to DAT, and listen to the playback to assess the signal quality. It's
still the most accurate way to go (though now we have other options
besides DAT for faithful recording!).
Peace,
Tom Loredo
From: Mark Schulz <schulzmc@mc...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 22:01:37 -0600
Organization: King of Glory Lutheran Church
George Reiswig <<george.reiswig@intel...>> wrote:
> we've all heard it so often that B-Bands can have balance problems
> that we think that such a problem is unusually bad for that pickup, and that
> it is not a problem in other pickups. I'm not sure either of those are
> true. I think all UTS pickups are prone to not have very good balance.
> None of them approaches a 100% reliability rating, I'd wager.
FWIW - In our church band there are three guitars: An Ovation with
balance problems on the low E string, A Tak with balance problems all
over the place (he's on his third reset of his saddle/pickup and each
time a different string as gone so dead as to be un-usable as he picks
out melodies), and my Martin with a B-band. The B-band is the only one
without balance problems of any kind.
--
Mark Schulz
<schulzmc@mc...>
From: <mike@cellbio...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 12:43:27 -0600
Organization: Washington University in St. Louis
In article <<3860095A.20CC0EB7@spacenet...>>, Tom Loredo
<<loredo@spacenet...>> wrote:
> I'd also like to add a comment regarding the "test with headphones"
> remark of Doug's. I agree that an "open ear" test is misleading. But
> I'd also like to point out that a headphone test is somewhat misleading
> (though less so) in my experience as well.
Absolutely. Anyone who has done a significant amount of recording,
mixing, and mastering will attest to that. Recording engineers rarely if
ever mix down using headphones. Most music is listened to through
speakers, and guitars are amplified through speakers, not headphones.
Headphones might be better for judging string balance because of the
improved isolation, but that is not the only consideration when installing
or evaluating a new pickup. You have to use both speakers and headphones.
From: Paul Guy <paul@guyguitars...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 04:43:33 +0100
Organization: Paul Guy Guitars
Charley Bonner <<cwbne@aol...>> wrote:
> Perhaps I overstated a bit at 100%, but it should be pretty darn close.
> I've been using the same pickup for 5 years and it went in easy and has
> never caused a problem. It really seemed to me from all the posts that
> B-band is working on a serious credibility problem.
I don't agree. I'm a professional guitar tech, and selling and
installing undersaddle pickups is a good percentage of my work. When
asked to recommend a pickup I have no hesitation in bluntly asserting -
"B-Band. Nothing else comes close." Remember that I'm the poor SOB who's
going to have to do the job, and get it right, because if I don't the
customer will be back complaining, and I'll have to fix the problem
under guarantee, which completely wipes out my profit on the deal. No
way am I going to recommend a pickup which I think is going to give me
trouble.
BTW, I have no special deal with EMF Acoustics. Financially it makes
not one whit of difference to me whether I sell the customer a B-Band or
a Fishman/Baggs/Barcus/Duncan/EMG or whatever. I buy pickups from the
Swedish importer in each case and my discount is the same on them all.
I was one of the beta testers. EMF supplied me with two complimentary
systems - an original New Frontier (about 2 -1/2 years ago) and a
New2Frontier (about six months ago) - for evaluation and test in "FUZZ",
the Swedish guitar mag I freelance for. I raved about these pickups in
the mag both times, and meant every word I said. (They have the first
test up on their website in English, no doubt the new one will appear
too.)
BTW, FWIW - My take on the condenser mike is that it is a definite bonus
if you play nylon-strung. I have one in my steel-string, but rarely feel
the need to use it. Soft fingerpickers may find it useful though.
> These problems are 10 times harder to straighten out than if they did not
> exist in the first place. If someone told me to put modelling clay in my
> saddle slot, I'd say no. You can tell me all you want that it causes no
> harm, but I'm not going to do it on my Martin or my Guild. The pickup I
> have sounds great. I would change for something better but not if I
> perceive a problem which I do with the B-band going from all I've read
> here.
I can't really see why the B-Band seems to annoy you. It's not like you
bought one and felt burned or something. If you are happy with your
pickup you have no reason to change, and no-one here is trying to
persuade you to.
> It seems to me that the company could embed the material in something the
> same consistency as the clay when hard that would be part of the unit.
That rather negates the whole idea of using clay, doesn't it? The soft
clay forms itself to fill any slight imperfections, and then hardens in
that form. Anything "the same consistency as the clay when hard" is not
going to be flexible enough to fill the gaps.
I don't really understand the concern about using clay, there's no way
it will harm the guitar. As has been observed here before, the clay will
not adhere either to the wood or the bone (or the pickup for that
matter) and can be removed at any time. I'm not personally keen on the
idea of using clay either, but it's not out of any concern for damage to
the guitar. It's just being a stick-in-the-mud. But from all reports it
definitely does the trick and I'm just going to have to try it soon.
Thus far I haven't had the need to resort to clay in any of the B-Band
installations I have done - judicious sanding of the saddle and/or
shimming with paper under loud strings (the reverse of normal procedure
with piezos) has successfully cured any balance problems, except in one
case - my own guitar - which caused me a few curses until I "keyholed"
the saddle (like a Fishman Cleartone). From then on it worked perfectly.
I have had a variety of pickups in that guitar in the 27 years I have
had it - Barcus-Berry, Fishman, EMG, Ashworth, Sony condenser mike, what
have you - and the B-Band is just in another league. The guitar never
sounded this good before. The customers I have installed B-Bands for
have been uniformly delighted, particularly when the installation was to
replace another pickup.
The biggest single advantage of the B-Band in my book is its ability to
handle dynamics - up to and including real thrashing - without breaking
up or distorting on the attack. None of the other pickups I've had in my
guitar has managed that.
> If they would then go in without balance or output problems, wouldn't that
> be a more viable product. I stand by my statement that they entered the
> marketplace prematurly. I don't want my guitar to be the beta tester.
I have been installing pickup systems in acoustic guitars for a good 25
years. I put my first B-Band in a guitar about 2-1/2 years ago, and have
been installing a steady stream since then. I wouldn't say they entered
the market prematurely. My experience of B-band installations - getting
to be quite a few now - is that they have never given me any worse
balance problems than I have encountered with other undersaddle pickups.
I certainly haven't had any output problems whatsoever.
Paul Guy
--
Paul Guy Guitars (Handbuilt / Custom built / Repairs)
Katarina Bangata 65, 116 42 Stockholm
Homepage: http://home.swipnet.se/guyguitars
From: <mike@cellbio...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:22:23 -0600
Organization: Washington University in St. Louis
> Charley Bonner <<cwbne@aol...>> wrote:
>
> > If they would then go in without balance or output problems, wouldn't that
> > be a more viable product. I stand by my statement that they entered the
> > marketplace prematurly. I don't want my guitar to be the beta tester.
I have B-bands installed in 5 guitars: Martin N-10 classical, Taylor Leo
Kottke 12-string, Collings OM2H, McCollum Meghan, and a Taylor 914-C.
That's quite a diverse set of guitars and the string balance is near
perfect in each one. No special fiddling was required and I paid my Tech
$40 labor for each installation (except for the McCollum for which Lance
did the installation). I have had one of the B-bands for two years and
haven't had a single problem with it or any of the others. B-bands
replaced a Fishman matrix in the Collings and a Highlander in the Leo
Kottke, and the improvement in amplified tonal quality (and balance in
comparison to the Highlander) was dramatic in each case.
There can be balance problems with ANY under saddle pickup. My guitar
tech tells me that the B-band installation is easier than most since the
thin element rarely requires sanding down the saddle to re-adjust the
action.
It seems to me there have been a fairly small number of highly vocal
complaints about B-band balance/installation problems on RMMGA, not a
large number as some have inferred. These problems are undoubtedly due to
an inconsistent density of the saddle in a particular guitar (especially
common with bone saddles), or uneveness of the saddle bottom or slot
bottom. The B-band may be particularly sensitive to these irregularities
(which are problems with the guitar, not the pickup), but that isn't even
clear because no comparative scientific evaluations have been conducted.
I certainly don't hesitate to recommend a B-band pickup to anyone who asks
my opinion about acoustic guitar amplification.
I don't have any affiliation with EMF.
| Followup B-Band Definitive for John [2] |
|---|
From: <firestick@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: Followup B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 12:30:08 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
In article <83hg77$dod$<1@nnrp1...>>,
firestick@my-deja.com wrote:Hi John,
Another long but hopefully concise pickup related cathartic response.
At the very end of my previous letter I mentioned the need for a Y-
chord or a Fishman Pocket Blender, which splits the stereo signal from
the b-band preamp/endpin/stereo guitar cord, so you can have
independent control of mic and pickup. My problem is that I have not
found an ideal or even desirable internal location for the internal
(sic) mic that enhances the sound significantly.
As to other undersaddles, yes, they can and do all have balancing
problems (Martin thinline, Fishman, Dunlop, Yamaha, and even Takamine,
as they all depend, like the B-Band (un-clayed) on the string angle
going over the saddle (thus the string pressure on the pickup at each
string location) and the true and precise flatness of the saddle
underside. All benefit from some kind of insulator like the clay to
even the vibrations that generate impulse at each string location.
(Except the Takamine which has pressure adjustment screws at both ends
of the saddle - hidden under the little round dots). Since the B-Band
is so thin, insulating, whether with shim or clay, has the least impact
on the action height, thus reducing the need for further saddle
shaving. (This very thinness and the pickup's hardness no doubt
increases the B-Band susceptibility to balance problems).
More importantly, I have never been very good at sanding the bottom of
a saddle without using a surface grinder or having a tool and dye maker
(my father for instance) use a precision surface grinder to precisely
keep a 90 degree angled, perfectly flat relationship. I suspect that
many of the problems with unclayed, undersaddle installations that
occur once a saddle is shaved to achieve a lower action (or at least
the pre-pickup action height) is the result of imperfect sanding
tolerances, but not all. Even the slightess hollow on a non-insulated
installation can prove devastating to balance **More on this at the end
of this page.
Now Martin is very prescient in slotting their saddle/string peg holes
so that string angle/pressure on the saddle is even, resulting in a
factory ready ideal pickup situation, but the problem I have found on
nearly all Martins, especially the ones that pre-dated their use of
adjustable truss rods was that the factory action was much too high for
me. Most new quality guitars, in fact, have a fairly equal string angle
over the saddle, and unfortunately, most need action adjustments. On
the other hand, a Taylor out of the box, in most cases provides a much
lower and usable standard action. But I have noticed that few if any
Taylors have the identical string over saddle angle for each string.
The minute you start messing with the saddle to reduce action height
you encounter pickup related balance problems since the all important
(at least without the clay) string angle may change unequally or be
reduced to an insufficient degree. The slots Martin uses help a lot but
you can still have balance problems from uneven sanding or reduced
string angle. Certainly this is one reason why so many players tend to
adjust their truss rods rather than sand their saddles to lower action
and many of us cannot run to our guitar tech every time the weather
changes and the action follows suit.
**To finish up on the note earlier as to clay method advantage let me
say that insulating with clay, in every case I have participated in,
not only evens the balance, but reduces the string angle dependency to
nearly zero. It also can sweeten the sound and improve projected tonal
power. Important to note however, if the insulation is too thick, you
can run into issues involving individual string articulation. Simply
put, the pickup will tend to blend the string sounds together thus
reducing each strings individual character and resulting in a "muddy"
sound. Folks who mostly strum may not notice or even have a problems
with this (in less than extreme cases) but it can be annoying even
devastating.
Thanks for taking the time to read this and I promise again not to
produce future communications that are quite this wordy. However,
acoustic guitar pickups have been the cause of many years of sleepless
nights for me and I suspect for MANY others, and there are solutions in
which the B-Band can play an intrinsic part. Its thinness, superb
acoustic properties, ease of installation, reasonable cost, and first
class preamp make it my choice and the company's stated dedication to
future design improvements (perhaps even providing the pickup in a
factory created insulator based sandwich) give me confidence in its
future. I would buy company stock. They should make the pickup
available without the preamp for the clam-handed like me who like to
experiment.
Peace
Doug (Can I go to bed now?) Kennedy
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: Followup B-Band Definitive for John
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:14:31 -0500
Organization: Cornell University
Doug wishes aloud:
> They should make the pickup
> available without the preamp for the clam-handed like me who like to
> experiment.
Amen! Please, EMF, do this for us!
Peace,
Tom Loredo
| B-Band Question [4] |
|---|
From: Larry Sprigg <gsprigg@aol...>
Subject: B-Band Question
Date: 21 Dec 1999 03:50:55 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
I put a B-Band in a OM with a cedar top about two weeks ago. Straight
installation - no clay, etc. Used the original saddle also, unmodified.
The amplified sound is excellent, balance is fine, etc. Not a single complaint
here. However there appears to be a change in the acoustic sound. It seems to
have lost a small bit of the ring and resonance it used to have, and it also
seems to have lost some volume slightly. Strings are new since the B-Band
installation, but the same brand and type as I have used on this guitar for 6
years - John Pearse phosphor lights. Again the amplified sound is excellent.
Anyone else experience this with their B-Band installations???
Thanks for your comments.
Larry
To reply via E-Mail, please remove the "nojunk" from my address
From: Bobs Dorgan <d77737@epix...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Question
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 14:13:18 GMT
Organization: Bobs R us
Larry Sprigg wrote:
>
> I put a B-Band in a OM with a cedar top about two weeks ago. Straight
> installation - no clay, etc. Used the original saddle also, unmodified.
>
> The amplified sound is excellent, balance is fine, etc. Not a single complaint
> here. However there appears to be a change in the acoustic sound. It seems to
> have lost a small bit of the ring and resonance it used to have, and it also
> seems to have lost some volume slightly. Strings are new since the B-Band
> installation, but the same brand and type as I have used on this guitar for 6
> years - John Pearse phosphor lights. Again the amplified sound is excellent.
>
> Anyone else experience this with their B-Band installations???
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> Larry
>
> To reply via E-Mail, please remove the "nojunk" from my address
Hi Larry,
folklore wisdom puts for the theory that an undersaddle transducer will
insulate the saddle from the top of the guitar and have a negative
impact on the unamplified tone. I personally, have never noticed it with
any of my guitars, but that's not to say that the phenomena doesn't
exist. It's a theory that makes some sense, but my experiences don't
back this one up.
Hope it's not too noticeable. If I ever have it happen, Id remove the
pickup, and start looking for a solution before I'd live with it.
Bob Dorgan
From: George Reiswig <george.reiswig@intel...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Question
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 09:42:55 -0800
Organization: Intel Corporation
Larry,
I didn't notice this with any of the guitars I've installed one in. Notto say it didn't happen, but maybe my ears aren't as critical.
One way you could test this, since the element is relatively easy totake out and put back: do a recording with the guitar through a good mic
without the element, and then with the element, and do a blind test to see
if you can tell which recording is which. If you can keep the same distance
and location of the mic, this would be an interesting test to report back.
GR
Larry Sprigg wrote in message
<<19991220225055.16720.00000505@ng-cg1...>>...
>I put a B-Band in a OM with a cedar top about two weeks ago. Straight
>installation - no clay, etc. Used the original saddle also, unmodified.
>
>The amplified sound is excellent, balance is fine, etc. Not a single
complaint
>here. However there appears to be a change in the acoustic sound. It seems
to
>have lost a small bit of the ring and resonance it used to have, and it
also
>seems to have lost some volume slightly. Strings are new since the B-Band
>installation, but the same brand and type as I have used on this guitar for
6
>years - John Pearse phosphor lights. Again the amplified sound is
excellent.
>
>Anyone else experience this with their B-Band installations???
>
>Thanks for your comments.
>
>Larry
>
>To reply via E-Mail, please remove the "nojunk" from my address
From: Tom Loredo <loredo@spacenet...>
Subject: Re: B-Band Question
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:36:17 -0500
Organization: Cornell University
Hi Larry-
I agree with Bob and George on this, not denying that you are experiencing
this, but simply reporting that it wasn't the case with my guitar. However,
I installed it under an LB6 saddle (not undersaddle!) pickup, not under a
normal saddle. Actually, I thought the tone very slightly improved
acoustically, but I took that to be the result of the slightly increased
action after the pickup install.
If you learn more, do report back.
Peace,
Tom Loredo
| Charlie and John - Ouch! [2] |
|---|
From: <firestick@my-deja...>
Subject: Charlie and John - Ouch!
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 03:12:05 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Charlie and John
Now boys, I did not mean to start a fight. Very often we can learn more
from those with whom we disagree with than from those of similar
opinion BUT only if we share information and not emotion. The
pursuit of a decent sounding pickup should not end up like that pseudo
religious battle between PC and Mac users ( I have both and use both).
They are tools and so are guitars - even very nice ones. The emphasis
of the B-Band clay modification should be its sheer simplicity. Were it
a case of rewiring the thing or re-engineering it, I would agree,
Charlie, that it is not ready. But the clay method is as simple as
overiding the presets on your sound processor to create custom patches.
Far simpler than the actual pickup installation itself although most
agree that the b-Band installation is far easier than the competition.
Now while I know a few of you out there may be ecstatic with the
factory presets, most players customize.
The clay “tweaking” (and that is all it really is) is a no brainer and
it works “every” time. All instruments may not need it and, believe me,
NO undersaddle works perfectly and is balanced in all guitars - not
even close, although most factory installed pickups do balance,
regardless of how bad they sound.
The point of all of this is that if you are content with the sound of
your instrument and do not need to project its sound over a large area
why put a pickup in it at all. If, on the other hand you want to share
that glorious sound you can hear with a large group of others you would
be wise to try the B-Band. I have found no other acoustic pickup system
that can pull it off to my satisfaction. although they all have certain
strengths and weaknesses. (Except for high end Takamine Guitars - which
sound VERY GOOD to a large audience right out of the box - yes I know
they are a little thin unamplified but I rarely buy a guitar just to
play in my living room) I love the sound of an acoustic guitar and hate
the sound of most pickups for them. Yes I HATE them! Hate Them and use
high quality mics in studio situations.
I use Taylor, Takamine, Gibson, Martin, Fender, Yamaha, Harmony (yes,
an old Sovereign), and Ibanez guitars as well as a number of other
handmade contraptions to get the particular sound I want at any given
time. And as much as I love all of them, I would paint any one of them
blue and hang dangleballs on the stings if it was necessary to get
their sound out to an AUDIENCE.
If it takes a very simple addition of a little clay to make the best
(by far - but No! not perfect) sounding (in headphones and amplified to
an audience) undersaddle pickup I have yet auditioned, one that I
can fingerpick gently or roughly and beat if necessary with a flatpick
without artifacting, I can see no reason not to try it. Hell, I’d
pee on the poor thing if need be to get that sound out to an audience.
Charlie, I would still like to know the nature (name) of the pickups in
your Martin and Guild - that would be an instructive contribution for
me.
Thanks
Doug
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
From: Charley Bonner <cwbne@aol...>
Subject: Re: Charlie and John - Ouch!
Date: 22 Dec 1999 18:16:21 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
>Charlie, I would still like to know the nature (name) of the pickups in
>your Martin and Guild - that would be an instructive contribution for
>me.
I left it out on purpose as I did not want to start one of those silly "vs."
posts. However, since you ask, I'll tell you. In both my guitars I use the
Fishman Matrix Natural and run them through the Baggs Para D.I. When my tech
installed the Fishmans we did a blind sound test with a B-band(I don't know
which version, but it was about a year ago), A Baggs RT and the Fishman. I was
given a very clear explanation when I blindly picked the Fishman. He explained
that the EQ is essential. The Fishman purposely does not contour the sound via
their preamp thus allowing for more headroom and EQ capabilities. It was
therefore not the best sounding at flat settings, but when the mid range was
dropped back a bit the difference was astounding. He then hooked it up with the
Baggs D.I. and I was sold. I easily recognize that this is not everyones
experience, just mine. One thing he said that really put it into perspective
for me was this. Once you amplify an acoustic, it no longer is. The sound is
coming out of speakers, not my wooden box. He further narrowed the perspective
by saying that yes, I could get a much more natural sound. He started on the
shoppping list. A good Neumann Mike - $2000.00. Good preamps and compression -
$4000.00. An adaquate sound system - $5000.00 to $20,000.00. A good sound
engineer at gigs - $200.00 per gig. He specified the need for a large diaphragm
rather than a small condenser mike as the former will "hear" in much the way
the human ear does.
A note to John Z. My original post was not spoken in a "haughty" tone as you
suggest. And I personally don't see myself or my ideas as "silly". The internet
doesn't seem to adaquately provide for inflection. If you play with the
inflections in my post, I think you'll see where you could have been mistaken.
I think due to its nature we see ourselves reflected back at ourselves here in
the Cyberworld. Therefore, if you saw haughtyness and silliness, well you can
draw your own conclusions :-)
Charley
| Tom Laredo Welcome Back |
|---|
From: <firestick@my-deja...>
Subject: RE: Tom Laredo Welcome Back
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 09:22:35 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Hi Tom,
Could not agree with you more. I would never trust my onstage or
recording sound simply to a pair of headphones, no matter how good the
quality. They are nearly useless for live and the about only way to be
sure of the audience perceived sound is to go out there and listen.
Recording, or having someone else play your instrument (my preference)
reasonably like yourself is almost necessary unless you trust your
sound person and he/she REALLY knows what you want - rare indeed.
Phones can be nearly as unreliable for recording.
I raised the use of headphones only for STRING BALANCINGissues because
I can hear the relative string volumes under gentle to normal picking
pressures, far better that way. And I can do it alot quicker. I have
never heard an undersaddle pick up (or a Les Paul/Strat whatever) sound
better in phones. The B-Band just sounds better to me than all the rest
auditioned.
Balance is either there or not and screwing with saddles and
installations detracts from the creative process. I like to keep it
simple if at all possible.
I also rely to a degree on phones to tell me at what point the pickup
might become stressed and spit at me. One reason I like the B-Band is
that it is hard to stress.
> Lastly, I can't imagine recording (in a studio at least) with either
a saddle pickup or an internal mic with so many incredible studio mics
available. After all is said and done, sound is a series of compromises
and there is really no one way to accomplish a great sound. You have to
trust your ears and back that up with metering and good people around
you who will at least wince if your sound sucks.
Doc Watson showed up at a concert a few years ago (15 years I guess) in
Alaska with a Bill Lawrence black Mag pickup in his dreadnought sound
hole and the audience loved it though all I could hear well was the B
and E1st string. I have had a number of guitar techs tell me that most
of their customers aren't that critical. I admit freely that I am.
Doug
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
| Mike - headphones |
|---|
From: <firestick@my-deja...>
Subject: Re: Mike - headphones
Date: Sat, 25 Dec 1999 06:40:16 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
In article <<mike-2312991243270001@mueckler...>>,
mike@cellbio.wustl.edu wrote:> In article <<3860095A.20CC0EB7@spacenet...>>, Tom Loredo
> <<loredo@spacenet...>> wrote:
>
> > I'd also like to add a comment regarding the "test with headphones"
> > remark of Doug's. I agree that an "open ear" test is misleading.
But
> > I'd also like to point out that a headphone test is somewhat
misleading
> > (though less so) in my experience as well.
>
> Absolutely. Anyone who has done a significant amount of recording,
> mixing, and mastering will attest to that. Recording engineers
rarely if
> ever mix down using headphones. Most music is listened to through
> speakers, and guitars are amplified through speakers, not headphones.
> Headphones might be better for judging string balance because of the
> improved isolation, but that is not the only consideration when
installing
> or evaluating a new pickup. You have to use both speakers and
headphones.
Mike, In my reply of 12/22 to Tom's reply I wrote this as to Headphones:
>>>Hi Tom,
Could not agree with you more. I would never trust my onstage or
recording sound simply to a pair of headphones, no matter how good the
quality. They are nearly useless for live and the about only way to be
sure of the audience perceived sound is to go out there and listen.
Recording, or having someone else play your instrument (my preference)
reasonably like yourself is almost necessary unless you trust your
sound person and he/she REALLY knows what you want - rare indeed.
Phones can be nearly as unreliable for recording.
I raised the use of headphones only for STRING BALANCING issues because
I can hear the relative string volumes under gentle to normal picking
pressures, far better that way. And I can do it a lot quicker. I have
never heard an undersaddle pick up (or a Les Paul/Strat whatever) sound
better in phones than through speakers. The B-Band just sounds better
to me than all the rest auditioned. But balance is the issue.
Balance is either there or not and screwing with saddles and
installations detracts from the creative process. I like to keep it
simple if at all possible and get on with the more challenging issues
of dynamics and sound quality.
I also rely, to a degree, on phones to tell me at what point the pickup
might become stressed and spit at me. One reason I like the B-Band is
that it is hard to stress.
> Lastly, I can't imagine recording (in a studio at least) with either
a saddle pickup or an internal mic with so many incredible studio mics
available. After all is said and done, sound is a series of compromises
and there is really no one way to accomplish a great sound. You have to
trust your ears and back that up with metering and good people around
you who will at least wince if your sound sucks.<<<
Back to live:
Mike, I know of no engineer who would trust the final mix on significant
projects to headphones. However, to quickly and efficiently check
balance on a new pickup installation there is no better way. After
balance is acceptable, remove the headphone and see if the sound is
projected well through speakers and the metered dynamics are in the
range one is used to or should expect. I wrote this simply because far
too many folks have proudly showed me their undersaddle wonders (of
various brands) and were amazed when I showed them the lack of string
balance and further demonstratd for them (with speakers in a room
acoustically isolated from their instrument) that the sound they
thought they were getting was not what the audience was hearing.
Doug
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.