billlorentzen Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 My main gigging guitar is a custom made "super strat" type guitar (ebony fingerboard, chambered body, flame maple top, EMG SA pups, original '80s Floyd Rose). It has tons of sustain and a very solid feel to it. To me Fender Strats feel more flimsy and sort of dead, with less sustain and kind of a softness to them. (I don't mean to put Fenders down -- obviously a lot of players love them, but that's not what I'm looking for.) If you own a Korean or American JTV 69, would you say it is more of the Fender feel or more like an Anderson or other high end super strat? I realize it doesn't have a Floyd, and that could be a sustain factor -- low mass bridges give less sustain. Obviously it doesn't have EMGs either, but that's not really relevant to the question; I just mentioned that to fully describe it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_m Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 I don't think I've ever played anything that I'd call a "super strat", so I don't really have anything to make that direct comparison to. But I have played a lot of Strats, and I think my 69 US feels pretty similar to a Strat. There are some differences, though. Mainly the neck is a little different than any Strat I've played. It's a bit narrower at the nut, and it's thicker than any of my Strat necks. The trem system on the 69 is different than a Strat trem in many ways, but it's still a floating trem system. So I think it's going to feel much different than the Floyd Rose. I have played some more "metalized" Strat style guitars - the Ibanez RG series, for example - and I think the 69 is quite different from those. Those usually have much flatter and wider fingerboards. From your description, I wonder if you wouldn't be more comfortable with the 89F? Is there a reason you don't want to go that route? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billlorentzen Posted July 14, 2014 Author Share Posted July 14, 2014 I don't think I've ever played anything that I'd call a "super strat", so I don't really have anything to make that direct comparison to. But I have played a lot of Strats, and I think my 69 US feels pretty similar to a Strat. There are some differences, though. Mainly the neck is a little different than any Strat I've played. It's a bit narrower at the nut, and it's thicker than any of my Strat necks. The trem system on the 69 is different than a Strat trem in many ways, but it's still a floating trem system. So I think it's going to feel much different than the Floyd Rose. I have played some more "metalized" Strat style guitars - the Ibanez RG series, for example - and I think the 69 is quite different from those. Those usually have much flatter and wider fingerboards. From your description, I wonder if you wouldn't be more comfortable with the 89F? Is there a reason you don't want to go that route? Thanks for the reply. I'm not so much concerned about the feel of the neck, although I do like a thinner feel. I'm most concerned about getting a nice solid feel and good sustain. I don't like a guitar that feels flimsy or of too soft a wood. I prefer single coils, or SSH configuration so the 89 wouldn't be right for me. I love the sound I get with EMG SAs. It sings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jandrio Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 if u have a hd500, u can easily achive any sustain level u wish.... also, via workbench hd, u can simulate EMGs simply by icreasing model's output level. in fact with the jtv+hd500, u can simulate any guitar sound... if u hear it, u can ...patch it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billlorentzen Posted July 14, 2014 Author Share Posted July 14, 2014 if u have a hd500, u can easily achive any sustain level u wish.... also, via workbench hd, u can simulate EMGs simply by icreasing model's output level. in fact with the jtv+hd500, u can simulate any guitar sound... if u hear it, u can ...patch it. I've been gigging with an HD 500 for a few years and absolutely love it. While it's very capable of increasing sustain, there is still an instrument factor that is important to me. I guess I need to spend some real time with a JTV to find out what it can do - somehow I have a hard time with the idea that it really can do what people say. I've got a Buscarino Starlight for sale, and once that goes, I'm finally getting a 69. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jandrio Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 excellent choice. go 4 it! ps btw, the black maple 69s is "sustain friendly". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toasterdude Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 if u have a hd500, u can easily achive any sustain level u wish.... also, via workbench hd, u can simulate EMGs simply by icreasing model's output level. in fact with the jtv+hd500, u can simulate any guitar sound... if u hear it, u can ...patch it. OK, I want to simulate the nylon string guitar I hear in my head ;-_ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clay-man Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 if u have a hd500, u can easily achive any sustain level u wish.... also, via workbench hd, u can simulate EMGs simply by icreasing model's output level. in fact with the jtv+hd500, u can simulate any guitar sound... if u hear it, u can ...patch it. Though I put the output high on my patch that is based on an EMG guitar, upping the output will not "emulate" an EMG. It will make it louder like one, but an EMG has a different frequency response than a passive humbucker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewolf48 Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 It is possible to change the frequency response of the modelled pickups using Workbench by changing the Pot and Cap values, and therefore simulate virtually anything. But it is a real black art. For a start you need to know what the frequency response of the target pickup is, and what the response of the current modelled pickup is, and how the Pot and Cap values impact on the response. The tutorial here: http://www.vettavill...al 6 290107.pdf goes into a lot of details about how changing the values affects the sound... but the link is currently not responding, and while I have a downloaded copy at home I don't at work so I can't show you. Or you can just look at standard response charts like this one and trust that something similar happens when you change settings in workbench: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clay-man Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 It is possible to change the frequency response of the modelled pickups using Workbench by changing the Pot and Cap values, and therefore simulate virtually anything. But it is a real black art. For a start you need to know what the frequency response of the target pickup is, and what the response of the current modelled pickup is, and how the Pot and Cap values impact on the response. The tutorial here: http://www.vettavill...al 6 290107.pdf goes into a lot of details about how changing the values affects the sound... but the link is currently not responding, and while I have a downloaded copy at home I don't at work so I can't show you. Or you can just look at standard response charts like this one and trust that something similar happens when you change settings in workbench: Good point. Pickup position also changes the tone. I'm not sure if it's specific enough to emulate an EMG but it is intensive editing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.