The Gretsch Pages: Discussions: Pickups: Dynasonic Observations

Dynasonic Observations

« » Page 1 2 3

- Rated: 8 ↑
Aug 17, 2008 7:53 a.m. MBL:

Howdy all. Tim here..I have recently made some comparisons using my three Gretsch guitars that have Dnyas...I wanted to share what I found and see what you thought about some things.

I have a 1953 Gretsch Bacon Belmont with stock Dynas. The guitar is really boomy in bass section and nice and bright all around. The frequency response is what I would expect from a vintage gretsch.

I later got a 1999 Duane Eddy model. The pickups in this guitar actually sound identical to the ones in my Bacon Belmont. This really surprised me when I got the guitar. I expected some difference.

I then got a 2006 or so Eddie Cochrn model. The Dyna in this guitar sounds a bit different from my other two guitars. It doesn't sound bad. Just not as forceful across most ranges. There are some other tonal differences that exist, but as most things tonally go, they are difficult to articulate in text.

Now I just got my DE model back from the shop. I had some new frets put in on the 1-7. I also got one of the alumimum Tru-Arc bridges. What the luthier found is that the magnets on the DE model Dynas actually pull REALLY hard on the strings.

I know that this is generally accepted, but is find that if you are to set the guitar at a comfortably action, the guitar has considerable string buzz if the magnets are not dropped a whole bunch. Like below the surface of the bobbin up to 1/8".

Now I thought this was strange but I seem to remember several vintage guitars with Dynas that had this same adjustment. I also remember reading where Chet Atkins had some major issues with the magnet strength, so much so that he actually broke parts of the magnet off.

Anyway, with the magnets this low, I'm not sure if I'm still getting the smooth response that I used to get. When playing through the Standel, the bass has to go way down, otherwise it is REALLY boomy in the bass department. The highs still seem to be there but the treb on the amp must be adjuted 3/4 the way up.

Now I know there can be several reasons for the string pull. One could be is that the magnets on the DE model and on the 50's models are stronger. Also the slightly shorter scale length may loosen the strings enough to have an adverse effect. Perhaps if I go with 12's instead of 11's? Perhaps this will tighten the tension so the magnets won't pull as hard?

Any thoughts? Tim MBL
- Rated: 48 ↑
Aug 17, 2008 8:25 a.m. dmanlow:

Interesting observations. Could you not lower the pickups on the DE instead of burying the poles? You might have to get some new spacers but it would be interesting to see if the tonal differences (bassiness and reduced treble) go away.

As far as string pull goes, does it still buzz when you have the poles lowered?
- Rated: 27 ↑
Aug 17, 2008 8:48 a.m. audiodrome:

Have you compared the output of your "DE" Dynas to your 2006 model? It's possible that they were winding them hotter back then. I know that the 1990s Gretsch Filtertrons were a lot hotter (8k) than the current stock FTs, which are around 4.5k. Maybe it's the same thing with the Dynas.
- Rated: 16 ↑
Aug 17, 2008 9:50 a.m. lionel:

The ceramic FilterTrons measured out at 8k, but I believe that their output was about the same as AlNiCo FilterTrons. Some other factor(s) is(are) involved here.
- Rated: 8 ↑
Aug 17, 2008 11:56 a.m. MBL:

There is a significan string pull difference. The guitar has vitually no buzz issues with the pole pieces down. I have to mess with it some more to see what the tonal differences are. Tim MBL
- Rated: 9 ↑
Aug 17, 2008 2:24 p.m. JohnnyFriendly:

"Perhaps if I go with 12's instead of 11's?"

Yes. I am absolutely of the opinion that modern Dyna Gretsches do not sound very good unless you stick on heavy strings. However, I'm not really sure whether this will solve your particular problem.

Like yourself, I have a vintage Dynasonic Gretsch ('57 Clipper) and modern ('07 6120 DSV). The stocks on the DSV didn't sound anything like the '57. I bought the Seymour Duncan repro Dynas and installed them into the 6120 and, bang on, identical tone to the old one. Is there a strong string pull? I don't know. I do notice that neither sustain very well though whether that's due to the construction or the electronics, it's hard for me to gauge.

But back to your issue, perhaps you should cease to challenge the nature of the Big Orange and just raise the action. This sounds like a simpler fix than playing around with polepieces. The axe will sound a lot better that way too but it will be impossible to play at the 12th. However, I consider everything above the 12th to be just showbiz anyway so this never bothers me.
- Rated: 16 ↑
Aug 18, 2008 8:57 a.m. lionel:

"...and just raise the action... but it will be impossible to play at the 12th..."

What?

Just how high are you suggesting he raise the action?

12's and an impossibly high action? Even cheap guitars have good action these days. For most players, playability is an important consideration.

(You're right, of course, most playing is done further down the neck, but a lot of guitarists play some notes up there to good effect).
- Rated: 10 ↑
Aug 18, 2008 12:13 p.m. hellbilly:

TV Jones once told me that by using a hand held magnet (with the correct polarity), there's a procedure you can do to weaken the polepiece's magnetic pull on the strings. Give him a call.
- Rated: 84 ↑
Aug 18, 2008 12:39 p.m. Deed Eddy:

Is that the De-Twangerator?
- Rated: 212 ↑
Aug 18, 2008 1:12 p.m. Proteus:

Ewww...thoundth painful! You thtay away from Duane'th guitar with that!
- Rated: 66 ↑
Aug 18, 2008 1:15 p.m. Walter Broes:

Wouldn't that be the "re-twangulator"? If the string vibrates better with no string pull, I'd assume it would twang more..?
- Rated: 212 ↑
Aug 18, 2008 1:19 p.m. Proteus:

Walter, we may run up against different functional definitions of "twang." Twanging LONGer is not necessarily the same as twanging MORE.

The sudden attack and then a quick decay, that percussive pop, may be an element of the particular sort of twang we associate with Gretsch.

MBL, does the string "buzz" come through amplified, or just acoustically?

If so, had it ALways bothered you, and has just now become annoying? If it bothered you, was it annoying enough to overcome your affection for the native sound of the DE, with all that boomknockentwang?

I've still not raised the bodies of any my Dynas up where everyone says they should be, and have my polepieces pretty high. I'm aware it's probably impeding sustain – though I can't say I can attribute any FRET buzz to it – but I guess I don't care.

The guitars just sound great to me as they are, and I take the whole suite of characteristics as a package.

I may be "settling," but I'm plenty happy with both the stock Dynas and the SDs. I think BZ suggested there's less tonal difference among all these pickups than our obsessing would suggest...and that the variations can be overcome at the amp and/or are trumped by player technique.
- Rated: 66 ↑
Aug 18, 2008 1:25 p.m. Walter Broes:

Proteus said: Walter, we may run up against different functional definitions of "twang." Twanging LONGer is not necessarily the same as twanging MORE.

The sudden attack and then a quick decay, that percussive pop, may be an element of the particular sort of twang we associate with Gretsch.
But pickup string pull is never good - and certainly not a part of "the great Gretsch sound", it doesn't just kill sustain, it messes with the attack of the note too, and pulls strings out of tune. The percussive pop I love too (and it's certainly not Gretsch exclusive), but that's guitar type and construction, certainly not string pull.
- Rated: 16 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 10:01 a.m. lionel:

"The sudden attack and then a quick decay, that percussive pop, may be an element of the particular sort of twang we associate with Gretsch."

Yeah, do you remember that article in Guitar Player that I mentioned a while back, about the fellow out in Phoenix who built such a dynamic-control device for Duane, acted sort of the opposite of a compressor?

There is one piece of equipment on the market today that does that, but I've been holding off buying one until I move.

My thinking is that it would be useful not only for getting Duane's sound, but for all sorts of guitar sounds.
- Rated: 16 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 10:01 a.m. lionel:

This post has been deleted
- Rated: 9 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 12:40 p.m. JohnnyFriendly:

"What?

Just how high are you suggesting he raise the action?

12's and an impossibly high action?"

High enough to get a good tone out of it.

The truth is, these guitars don't sound very good when the action is too low. And they don't play well with wimpy strings either which is why you often read posts here of people complaining about how their bridge moves when they use 10s (well, OF COURSE it will...).

Plus if you take a good look at your 6120 DSV (I can't say about the other 6120 variations) since it's so difficult to reach above the 12th anyway, this guitar was clearly NOT designed for the kind of playability that you suggest.

Which leads me to another point, namely, how do you define playability? I'm assuming that the kind of person who buys a Dyna equipped 6120 would have an inclination to vintage styles ('50s Blues, original Rockabilly, surf etc) which do not require 100 mph riffing.

Light strings/low action are not always appropriate, son. In fact, sometimes they are downright detrimental.
- Rated: 16 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 1:31 p.m. lionel:

About fifty years ago, my first guitar was a cheapo with very high action. It was almost impossible for me to play (not simply calluses, but BLISTERS!). There is simply no need to be in that territory with any quality guitar, even with today's cheapo guitars for that matter.

If you have a gorilla grip, fine for you, but ANYONE will play better with an easier action.

(Recall the purported use of extremely high action by Chet claimed here. When we went back and took a look at (several) photos of Chet's guitars, it turned out that they showed the BASS side of his bridge hiked way up, not all the way across).

Spending $1,500 on a Gretsch and then running the action ridiculously high is stupid, in my opinion.

Many guitars, including some Gretsches (at least until recently) were shipped with light strings (how's 9-42?). And if you read up on many of today's finest players, that's what they prefer, light strings.

That's the reason that electric guitars were invented in the first place; they allow you to be heard without pounding the stuffings out of the thing.

For the hundredth time, I have never heard one iota of difference of tone between lighter and heavier strings (and I have changed gauges on many of my guitars).
- Rated: 31 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 2:08 p.m. do not be afraid:

i don't know if heavy strings and higher action really “sound better”, but i do know that on every electric guitar i've ever bought i've had to go up at least two gauges, and at least double the height of action, just to make it playable! but, i started out on acoustics, and i guess i'm still really an acoustic player at heart (just one who happens to prefer the sound of a Fender Telecaster to a Martin Dreadnaught, and a Gretsch 6120 to a Gibson J-200!) i mean, i love “pounding the stuffings out of the thing!” and, actually, i think if there is a tonal improvement, it's not so much that the bigger strings themselves sound better, but they allow (require?) you to play harder, and the harder playing itself sounds better! or, at least, that's my theory!
- Rated: 16 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 3:31 p.m. lionel:

Look, whatever works for you guys.

I just don't think that it's good to be handing out advice for people to go to bridge cables and hike the hell out of the action. That's not what these guitars were designed for, and it's not good for everyone.

(I have jumped up a gauge or two on strings myself, but twelves? C'mon, that's too much for most people. They would play better (and more comfortably) with elevens or even tens).

I have elevens on the majority of my guitars, but as I get older and have more problems with my hands, I'm backing off to tens.

I'm not about to strip all the 11/15/22w/32/40/50 sets off of my guitars, but I am looking at going to 10 1/2 high E on those guitars that seem too stiff. Another area for change would be to change those middle strings, say 22 to a 20 and 32 to a 30; that makes it easier to hold a bar chord.
- Rated: 31 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 3:54 p.m. do not be afraid:

i don't even really think of 12s as being heavy! but, i only use sets with wound 3rds, so i tend to label 'em like so:

11s = light, 12s = medium light, 13s = medium, 14s = medium heavy, 15s = heavy.

anything less than 11s i just can't deal with at all! which isn't to say that everyone should only use 11s and up, either — whatever works for you is fine by me!

however, for whatever it's worth, it is what these guitars were designed for! at the time when the vast majority of "classic" guitar designs came about those were the only strings available and those are the strings they were designed to work with! i once read an interview with Ernie Ball where he said that he started producing “Slinkies” because Leo Fender refused to sell lighter-gauge strings, and i also read an interview with Seth Lover where he complained about people using too-light strings with his PAFs (he also felt that was why people had been “hod-rodding” them for more output!) just sayin'…
- Rated: 66 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 4:07 p.m. Walter Broes:

Heavy strings are fine if you can manipulate them, but they shouldn't be a fix for a badly set up guitar.
A Dynasonic Gretsch can be set up to play and intonate perfectly without any problems with a set of 10's. Fret buzz or pickup string pull are not caused by light strings, they're caused by a bad setup.
- Rated: 61 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 4:35 p.m. Bear:

I use .011s and the lightest action I can get away with without string rattle and/or fret buzz and it works for me. However, what works for me doesn't work for everyone. I have a friend who uses .009s but his action is so high, you need an oxygen tank to breathe the air. He sounds incredible on his guitar and like doo-doo on mine and vice versa. I just cannot play his guitars.

To my ear, a heavier string has more tone, but that may just be an audio illusion due to the fact there is just more mass in the magnetic field so it's just louder.

Giving advice is just human nature as we want to help those that are like us or share the same passions. I assume everyone is smart enough to try what they think will work for them from the amount of information we all supply.
- Rated: 66 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 4:40 p.m. Walter Broes:

Of course different string gauges will sound different on the same guitar, but that whole "bigger is better" mantra was getting old ten years ago already. Define "better".

I have 11-49 on my own guitars, any lighter and I'll play out of tune half the time, bigger and I'll hurt my hands.
- Rated: 19 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 8:53 p.m. CnW:

I'm curious about the magnets on dynasonics from different eras. The way we obsess about resistance (ohm-readings), one would think that it was the only factor governing the tone generated by a pickup. How consistant is the strength of the magnet slugs used in DeArmond pickups---or in Gretsch's dynas? Are we comparing apples to apples here?
- Rated: 31 ↑
Aug 19, 2008 10:27 p.m. do not be afraid:

actually, i'm with you on that CnW! i'd love to know the evolution of the Dyna'Sonic's magnets over the years! name any type of pickup, and it's probably been through at least a few different magnetic alloys! i'm thinking that the current Gretsch Dyna'Sonics are AlNiCo 5, but it wouldn't suprise me in the least to find that the old Dyna'Sonics were AlNiCo 2 or 3, or something else altogether different!