Originally posted by J the TyranT
whoa, weird pic of the lefty floyd rose. Anyways... the guitar in the pic above looks like a Paul Reed Smith. High-end guitar. flame maple top [the translucent wood grain] in cherry sunburst finish. I prefer an ebony fretboard, some prefer rosewood, some prefer maple. Ebony is a harder wood.. so gives a harder sound... and is quicker for leads and shite. The tone and resonation are harsher... whereas rosewood is "warmer"
I play an ESP Horizon Custom. Made of ash. It's a neckthrough ebony board with a bound neck. The binding you see on guitars sometimes is the "white shit" on the outer edge. IT's made of ivory and costs $$$. I use thomastik-infeld powerbright strings. BADASS brass plated strings.
I've got a custom pickup humbucker in a single-coil space [a la Seymour Duncan hotrails] and a Seymour Duncan JB in the bridge, soon to be replaced with an active EMG 81. The guitar is a carved top, six-on-a-side headstock...
And I use Jim Dunlop cell picks in X-H series =P
Now you too can rock like me... with fat $$$.
Any q's, ask me.
J
Originally posted by YaYoGakk
Strings:
Brand name is always mentioned, the other important thing is string guage, which is how thick the strings are! You probably know that one already though.
Originally posted by Opth_001
My question is when you tell someone what gauge your stings are, are you suppost to tell them the size of the high E or the low E. I alway tell people the high E but sometime I hear people say "I got .52" and at first I think damn you've got some huge stings and than I realize they're talking about the low E.
Just to stop Kushantaiidans confusion at this point, locking nut and floating bridge generally go together i believe, and ill descrive a floating bridge in future, but theres one on my guitar...Originally posted by veil the sky
Dude most guitars DON'T have locking nuts!!
In fact, the best and most expensive ones don't. PRS rarely have them. The reason is that with a floating bridge, PARTICULARLY with a Ffloyd rose style tremolo, there is less contact between the bridge and the body-wood of the guitar. This results in inferior tonality because the sound doesn't resonate within the wood as well.
Also Floyd Rose style tremolos result in reduced body integrity of the guitar. They break easier, particularly if they are open-fronted and have a scratchplate.
The truly best guitars have fixed bridges. IMHO of course.
Originally posted by veil the sky
Dude most guitars DON'T have locking nuts!!
In fact, the best and most expensive ones don't. PRS rarely have them. The reason is that with a floating bridge, PARTICULARLY with a Ffloyd rose style tremolo, there is less contact between the bridge and the body-wood of the guitar. This results in inferior tonality because the sound doesn't resonate within the wood as well.
Also Floyd Rose style tremolos result in reduced body integrity of the guitar. They break easier, particularly if they are open-fronted and have a scratchplate.
The truly best guitars have fixed bridges. IMHO of course.
Originally posted by veil the sky
Yeh, metal guitars man. I love 'em too Just a pain in the ass sometimes when they need repairs.
Standard trems as a rule don't have locking nuts because they don't have fine tuning at the bridge. Standard trems are also distinguishable in that they make full contact with the body of the guitar (when you're not using the whammy bar of course!) and the fender style ones are screwed in rather than balanced on pegs driven by alan keys.
People used to call those floyd rose-type tremolos super tremolos, but I don't hear that term used anymore?!
The key factor is the fine tuning though.
Originally posted by Opth_001
From what I know I thought that the locking nuts helped keep your guitar in tune when you used your whammy bar. Is this true?? If so why would they make guitars without locking nuts w/whammys'?
Originally posted by YaYoGakk
i use both when i tell people... as do most people really, because it tells you most of what you need to know, some people mix and match and prefer ligther high strings to solo with, but heavy strings to riff with.. so the two extremes are the way to go
currently i have 11-52 strings...
Originally posted by veil the sky
It's because when guitars first had tremolos, it was so people could do what Hank Marvin does and give it a light vibrato. Not what us uncouth metalheads do and divebomb to the point where our strings touch the floor (guilty as charged ) This 'light tremolo' effect (hence the name) doesn't put your tuning out any more than bending a string does, so the locking nuts just weren't necessary.
'Super' tremolo systems tend to go out of tune far easier anyway due to the fact that the bridge is totally suspended and the slightest change in tension will put you out of tune. That's just another reason why the locking nuts are there, for that little bit extra tuning integrity.
Originally posted by Misanthrope
This is a very important issue. Nowdays i hate exesive tremolo just as much as wah. Why are all metal players obsessed with doing dive bombs and other wild crap? I think we need another Schuldiner nowdays ( For those of you who dont know he was a legend to solo ( imho and in others opinion ) and composing, and he was using fixed bridge most of the time ). Im currently trying to eliminate most note altering techniques on my solos, i have just 1 solo with 1 bending, and there are still like a million things i wanna try, i always had bad guitars with ruined intonation ( i never care for fixing it i just adapt ) and i was always making an efford not to use vibratos bendings or tremolo bar. Nowdays it just kinda seems like not as good and those things are almost none-existant in my playing...its a bit weird now that i think of it...