Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum

Forum Ringside => Pickups => Topic started by: PeterMoore on June 04, 2010, 08:40:57 AM

Title: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: PeterMoore on June 04, 2010, 08:40:57 AM
Hi, my brother bought a Raw Power Gibson Les Paul... And he want a very "bad and angressive" sound to play harsh metal music...

What is the most agressive PU in BK pickups ? Thanks.
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: Madsakre on June 04, 2010, 08:59:19 AM
The painkiller has the ideal thrash tone. And i mean IDEAL!
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: PeterMoore on June 04, 2010, 09:10:02 AM
The painkiller has the ideal thrash tone. And i mean IDEAL!
Thanks Madsakre !
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: Roobubba on June 04, 2010, 10:14:53 AM
PK, but also: Miracle Man
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: ericsabbath on June 04, 2010, 11:08:29 AM
ceramic warpig
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: ShotgunInnocence on June 04, 2010, 11:44:14 AM
Perhaps the Aftermath (like MDV requested Tim to wind for him)........
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: Alex on June 04, 2010, 11:45:11 AM
LesPaul probably goes very well with a Miracle Man. On other axes probably Painkiller.
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: Madsakre on June 04, 2010, 03:32:24 PM
The miracle man has more grind to it.

Rock hard, punishing tone ala; Nuclear assault, exodus, testament = Painkiller
über bright, liquid, grinding tone ala; Death metal = Miracle man
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: MDV on June 04, 2010, 06:15:35 PM
Perhaps the Aftermath (like MDV requested Tim to wind for him)........

This confuses me - I suspect people recommend pickups they havent played all the time, but its rare that I see it and KNOW that you havent played one ;)

besides, its not available. I was offered the chance for it, and since then 2 poeple have got one, that I know of, one got lucky and another was offered it as well because it fit a sound he wanted very well.

Its not generally available: people have been refused it already.

Anyway: painkiller is the obvious choice :8
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: Alex on June 04, 2010, 08:44:26 PM
Wait these Raw Power are these bright maple LesPauls??? How does it sound acoustically?
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: MDV on June 04, 2010, 08:47:36 PM
Wait these Raw Power are these bright maple LesPauls??? How does it sound acoustically?

I missed that 'raw power' bit!

yes, all maple (a little reseach reveals).

Then I dont think the PK is wise. I'd be inclined to go for a ceramic nailbomb.
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: Roobubba on June 05, 2010, 02:31:40 PM
I still say Miracle Man. :P
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: Transcend on June 05, 2010, 02:36:34 PM
In a standard LP i would say MM all the way

i think the painkiller would be overly bright in a maple one

the MM could also end up a bit spikey

i found my nailbomb to be darker so i would say that

unsure how the ceramic would work though as i have no experience whatsoever with it
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: ericsabbath on June 05, 2010, 03:30:55 PM
the old standard raw power had regular woods
just unfinished

the new maple ones look awful
but the miracle man is said to work pretty well on maple
Title: Re: Best choice to make a VERY TRASH METAL Gibson les Paul
Post by: nfe on June 05, 2010, 05:51:01 PM
the old standard raw power had regular woods
just unfinished

the new maple ones look awful
but the miracle man is said to work pretty well on maple

I thought the raw power has always been maple. When was there a raw power series previously?