Modern Gretsch Guitars

TV Jones classic and Dearmond 2000 combination.

1

Hi guys I've set my New Yorker up with a TV Classic in the neck and a Dearmond 2000 in the bridge. Because I put the TV classic in first and lived with it a while, and because the position of the TV is quite far north compared to standard pickup layout of say a 6120 or the like (it's in the same relative position as the Rhythm Chief type pup I took off) theres a gulf of tonal difference between the 2. The 2000 is really trebbly and the classic really bassy. In the middle position, the classic tone overrides the dearmond, I was hoping for more of a balance. I've used 500k pots and both the pickups are wired to a single vol and tone. I'm guessing there's not much I can do to balance them a bit more as the pole pieces are as low as I can get them in the classic. Anybody had any experience using a blend pot? Just feels like I want to adjust the amp tone for the bridge pickup. I guess this is why you would use 2 volume pots but i really don't want to go down that route as i find it difficult enough whilst playing to change the volume! The actual tone of both pickups is great. I've heard that tapping the classic isn't an option because of the output being so low. Any thoughts? Thanks!

2

Do you have pics of the distance string-pole screws? I‘d try to lower the classic pickup itself and do only fine adjustment to the pole screws. Or buy a shim for the Dearmond to get him higher and leave the Classic alone.

3

Do you have pics of the distance string-pole screws? I‘d try to lower the classic pickup itself and do only fine adjustment to the pole screws. Or buy a shim for the Dearmond to get him higher and leave the Classic alone.

– ChimingBell

Both pups are on the body with no shims as theres only just enough space for them. I've tried lifting the poles on the Dearmond a bit bit it just makes it more trebbly. Let me see if I can upload a pic or 2

6

You have pickups with identical heights, from what I can see in your pic, so the answer to what you're experiencing could be as simple as : swamp them. But the 2000 in the neck slot and the filtertron at the bridge.

7

If you turn the Dearmond around so the slugs are north, you should get a little more volume out of it as it will be farther from the bridge, where the least amount of string vibration occurs. I doubt that it would make enough of a difference to totally solve the issue, but if there is any room for a riser under it, bringing the whole pickup closer to the strings might do it. Have you tried the Dearmond in the neck position and the Classic in the bridge? I had that configuration in my Annie conversion for a while, also wired like a Tele, and the balance was pretty good.

8

What version of DeArmond are you using? There have been a couple of different types of 2000s made; one IIRC that had almost no pole pieces and sounded like a P90. From the front they all look the same. Musicpickups.com has a whole history of the various types of DeArmond/Dynasonics and that may be what's going on. If anything, a Dyna would tend to overpower a Filtertron.

9

You have pickups with identical heights, from what I can see in your pic, so the answer to what you're experiencing could be as simple as : swamp them. But the 2000 in the neck slot and the filtertron at the bridge.

– WB

They are different heights by about 7mm which makes it impossible to swap them. I had thought of that!

10

If you turn the Dearmond around so the slugs are north, you should get a little more volume out of it as it will be farther from the bridge, where the least amount of string vibration occurs. I doubt that it would make enough of a difference to totally solve the issue, but if there is any room for a riser under it, bringing the whole pickup closer to the strings might do it. Have you tried the Dearmond in the neck position and the Classic in the bridge? I had that configuration in my Annie conversion for a while, also wired like a Tele, and the balance was pretty good.

– Journeyman

I'll try turning the bridge pickup round, that might give a tiny bit more,thanks for the idea. The housings are different heights though so can't swap them.

11

What version of DeArmond are you using? There have been a couple of different types of 2000s made; one IIRC that had almost no pole pieces and sounded like a P90. From the front they all look the same. Musicpickups.com has a whole history of the various types of DeArmond/Dynasonics and that may be what's going on. If anything, a Dyna would tend to overpower a Filtertron.

– lx

These are the new Guild Dearmond 2000s. They are the same as I had in my 5129 which I regret getting rid of! I read up on the dyna/2k/2000s before I bought this one. At £60 new it was pretty reasonable so I thought I'd better get one before they put up the price!

12

I would try bringing one pickup higher with a self made riser cut out of foam. Use additional layers until you get the height you desire. Using foam layers give you a bit more control cause they are compressing

13

Or you could turn the classic into a single coil by unscrewing one row of pole pieces. The sound gets thinner though. But its total reversible so might worth a try

14

Or you could turn the classic into a single coil by unscrewing one row of pole pieces. The sound gets thinner though. But its total reversible so might worth a try

– ChimingBell

Would this be the same as coil tapping the pickup? I would give that a go, just heard the output is pretty low so it's not recommended. If both of the pickups are thinner sounding I guess I could then EQ them both a bit more bottom end. I've also heard that you can wire the classic pickup series/parallel. Anyone had any experience of this? There's very little space to raise the bridge pickup sadly as theres only a gap of about 4mm over the pickup. It's hard to see in the pictures. Thanks for the suggestions!

15

Another idea has come to my mind

Is it possible to use a stacked pot and have 2 individual volume controls on one pot or a master volume and a blend control?

maybe its worth a look if you dont want to drill additional holes?

16

Pulling the screws is not the same as tapping it, no - as it doesn't electrically defeat one of the coils. It will definitely thin it out and brighten it, though. And I definitely wouldn't tap the Classic; they're already as thin and bright as I want from a double-coil pickup. And if you like the sound you're getting now...that's not what you'll get either when you remove a row of screws or tap.

The question about which "2000" you have remains relevant. An actual DynaSonic 2000 has more output than the 2000 Fender/DeArmond put on guitars 15 years ago or so.

But if you LIKE each pickup separately, and just want to balance them in middle position, I'm in favor of your original suggestion: a blend pot. You may have to carefully consider and/or fiddle with values (and I'm not the guy to ask about that) - but I have several guitars so equipped, and it does let me get the balance I want. (Just be advised that response from the pot may not be linear in both directions, and the sweet spot might be fiddly to find. But once you do find it, you'll be able to find it again. (Maybe you could find one of those old pot washers with a pointed tab sticking out from its perimeter as a marker, then mark your knob to match up.)

Re ChimingBell's last idea: yes, you could use a concentric pot with two vol controls, but you'd still have to set two knobs instead of one. (Although my old Danelectro Silvertone has a stacked concentric set in which the two knobs WANT to turn together, so once I get a relative level set, turning the outer knob takes the inner knob with it, so maybe. I don't know the P-Bass stacked concentric works like that.)

I like CB's idea of a master volume and blend pot better. That's the approach I'd take.

17

Thanks guys for your thoughts. https://shop.guildguitars.c...

This is a link to the pickup. Outwardly, it looks exactly the same as the Dearmond 2000s I had in my electrostatic 5129. They arent giving away the measured output on the site. I think the issue is that the 2 pickups are physically so far apart that the tone difference is huge. I think the volume of each pickup isn't too far apart but the classic has so much more low end and I find myself wanting to add more bass at the amp on the bridge pickup but then it's too much when on the neck. I like the idea of a blend pot. That's the way I'm gonna go and I'll just drop the poles on the treble side of the bridge pickup. Too late to change the pickup position now but if nothing else, I've learned a lesson from it! I guess I could get another classic for the bridge position at some point or try some stuff out with different pickups. One last thought though, has anyone ever tried to put a volume control on one side of a classics coils?
Humbuckers are a new thing to me. I've never warmed to them really and usually find them muddy. Not so with the classic.

Thanks!

18

“One last thought though, has anyone ever tried to put a volume control on one side of a classics coils?“

I believe coil splitting isnt that easy as the pickup only has 2 wires instead of 4

19

Blend pot in place of the pickup selector switch as you've already decided (there's a blend pot that came stock in that spot on my Reverend Rick Vito Signature, and it's a feature I love), your volume knob remains as is, but replace the single tone knob pot with a stacked, concentric pot that's wired not only as a traditional treble cut for the 2000 but also -- and here's where it gets interesting -- a bass cut for the Classic (this last notion will sound familiar to anyone that's ever encountered the Bass Contour Control on Reverend guitars). There are quality stacked knobs available out there that will spin individually without binding, and many different styles -- here's a pic of just one...

20

Wow, that sounds interesting. How does the bass cut work? I never thought about just replacing the pickup selector switch with the blend pot too. Saves another hole! Nice work!


Register Sign in to join the conversation