The Stormy's can obviously sound fat and juicy when distorted but some demos sound a bit thin when clean, can you get a nice rich sound when playing clean?
Try this one:
https://bareknucklepickups.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=32407.0All the guitars on that one are the Les Paul with the Stormies, and they're going through the same amp setting - the clean, crunch, and lead tones all come from different choices and attack on the guitar itself. The amp in that case was a Laney CUB12 mic'd with an SM57. No pedals, no chorus, a bit of reverb during the mixing.
There are a lot of clean parts on it, but you'll have to listen closely to get a good idea of what one on its own would sound like. You
can hear them sticking out here and there (for example, look for this jangly part on the choruses, that was bridge and neck together, sounded particularly pleasant on its own
- but I couldn't resist putting the crunch riffs around it).
Out of the humbuckers I have (Mules, Riff Raffs, and Stormies), I'd say the Stormies are best for clean tones the way I want clean tones. I find the Riff Raffs a bit harsh and thin (though the song was written with them), and the Mules quite "nondescript" (in comparison) when used for cleans. The Stormies give me this lovely jangle with plenty of character and warmth - first time I've been happy using a humbucker for more "acoustic" playing. Usually I'd have used a telecaster for stuff like that, but the parts wouldn't have had quite the "rounded" vibe to it then. And it's also the first time I've ever played an LP-type clean as much as I do dirty when I'm sat on the sofa doodling!
HOWEVER! One word of warning - I'm singing the praises of the Stormies for clean versus Mule/RiffRaff here, but I'm very aware that the guitars themselves might have a bit of a say in it. This Les Paul already sounded bluddy good with the original 57/57+ Classics in it!
EDIT: And I forgot to say - thanks for the compliments guys :)
