Username: Password:

Author Topic: Review: Holydiver Revisited  (Read 17753 times)

GuitarIv

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1052
  • Tempus fugit ergo carpe diem
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #15 on: December 13, 2012, 11:17:47 AM »
Isn't it possible at all to adjust pickup height if they are directly mounted to the wood? O.o

nkay

  • Flyweight
  • *
  • Posts: 65
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #16 on: December 13, 2012, 12:46:34 PM »
No, the pickups are just screwed right in, they don't go up or down. The Charvel San Dimas Pro Mods come with the JB in the bridge, and 59 in the neck, and they are already set to the optimal height. It's a fantastic guitar, killer shredder with an awesome neck, but doesn't allow much in the way of customizing (like Charvels of old). I love the guitar, extremely well built with one of the best necks I've ever played on, but the "cookie cutter" factor kind of kills the mojo for me. It's a backup guitar for me right now, but a very capable one. Just killer tone when you need it, and it never goes out of tune. I think the So Cal models are not direct mounted, but I could be wrong.

darkbluemurder

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 2246
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #17 on: December 13, 2012, 01:45:49 PM »
Isn't it possible at all to adjust pickup height if they are directly mounted to the wood? O.o

It is possible but more difficult. You have to set the maximum possible height with the length of the mounting screws. You insert then a small spring between the wood and the mounting leg of the pickup and set the height by tightening the screws. Contrary to mounting in rings the pickup will go down when direct mounted instead of up when you tighten the screws. If the pickup does not sit tightly enough or too tightly at the desired height, change the spring to a larger or smaller one respectively.

Cheers Stephan

GuitarIv

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1052
  • Tempus fugit ergo carpe diem
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #18 on: December 13, 2012, 01:48:25 PM »
Is this the case with every guitar that has the pickups directly mount? I'd wonder if no one has come up with a solution for this yet. In any case i'd try to fix it if I were you. Is the pickup too high or too low? If too high I'd see a luthier to cut the cavity a bit deeper and if the latter is the case, I'd try to put something under the screws. Do you know the little rubber spacers that come with single coils? You could use those together with longer screws to highten the pickup. I must confess those are just some thoughts of mine, I actually never had a guitar with directly mounted PUs before, so maybe post a pic?

Cheers

darkbluemurder

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 2246
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #19 on: December 13, 2012, 01:53:09 PM »
Exactly these considerations.

Most P90 guitars have their pickups direct mounted. The routes are usually big enough to put a full size humbucker in there - if you direct mount it. Don't like the humbucker - easy to go back to P90s - which would not be an option if you decide to convert to ring mounting.

I can well imagine why direct mounting is not done on a wider commercial basis - the trial and error process in selecting the proper screws, body rout and springs can be time consuming.

Cheers Stephan

GuitarIv

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1052
  • Tempus fugit ergo carpe diem
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #20 on: December 13, 2012, 02:14:49 PM »
Thanks for clearing it up Stephan :)

Philly Q

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 18109
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #21 on: December 13, 2012, 02:32:06 PM »
One of the arguments in favour of direct mounting is that - some claim - it improves the tone because the pickup is directly in contact with the wood and therefore "picks up" the resonance of the body as well as the movement of the strings.

Arguably you lose most of that "benefit" if there's a spring, compressed foam or some other kind of spacer between the pickup and the wood.
BKPs I've Got:  RR, BKP-91, ITs, VHII, CS set, Emeralds
BKPs I Had:  RY+Abraxas, Crawlers, BD+SM

darkbluemurder

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 2246
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #22 on: December 13, 2012, 02:57:31 PM »
One of the arguments in favour of direct mounting is that - some claim - it improves the tone because the pickup is directly in contact with the wood and therefore "picks up" the resonance of the body as well as the movement of the strings.

Arguably you lose most of that "benefit" if there's a spring, compressed foam or some other kind of spacer between the pickup and the wood.

I guess we have read that on the same website.

I actually did a direct mount once since I needed to get the pickup as far down as possible. The bottoms of the mounting legs were screwed directly to the body, however, the baseplate did not touch the body wood. I did not notice a real improvement in the acoustic tone this way, and the electric tone changed anyway due to the pickup change. So whether the improvement claimed is true or only individually felt I cannot say but then it was not direct mounted in a way that both the bottoms of the mounting legs AND the baseplate touched the wood. I guess doing the latter requires major detail work on part of the luthier to get right, and yes, in that case the pickup height is fixed, or it will no longer be direct mounted in that sense (maybe I should call this kind of direct mounting "total direct mount" as opposed to the "partial direct mount" what I did).

Cheers Stephan

GuitarIv

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1052
  • Tempus fugit ergo carpe diem
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #23 on: December 13, 2012, 03:02:57 PM »
I read the stuff about the tone improvement as well, however those are such little things and tone gurus tend to get lost sometimes in details that don't even matter that much at the end of the day. However I saw a video with Petrucci talking about his signature Music Man and saying that the direct mount pickups keep the mounting rings outta the way for a more comfrtable hand positioning...

darkbluemurder

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 2246
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #24 on: December 13, 2012, 04:33:09 PM »
However I saw a video with Petrucci talking about his signature Music Man and saying that the direct mount pickups keep the mounting rings outta the way for a more comfrtable hand positioning...

... which brings it down to personal preference again ...

Cheers Stephan

Philly Q

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 18109
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #25 on: December 14, 2012, 01:41:52 AM »
However I saw a video with Petrucci talking about his signature Music Man and saying that the direct mount pickups keep the mounting rings outta the way for a more comfrtable hand positioning...

... which brings it down to personal preference again ...

Definitely!  I don't like to feel my hand resting on the pickup, especially an uncovered humbucker.  In fact sometimes I'll fit a taller mounting ring to stop my hand touching the pickup.
BKPs I've Got:  RR, BKP-91, ITs, VHII, CS set, Emeralds
BKPs I Had:  RY+Abraxas, Crawlers, BD+SM

GuitarIv

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1052
  • Tempus fugit ergo carpe diem
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #26 on: December 14, 2012, 07:04:00 AM »
I'm less disturbed by the matter of pickups than by misplaced volume pots. I hate it when those buggers are too near to the bridge, always leaves me worrying when I play fast riffs or leads with my hand open. I even once played a live gig where I turned myself completely off and the sound tech tried to counter it and turned my guitar all the way up. Then somewhere halfway of the song I notice it, turn my volume pot all the way up and assault myself, the sound guy and the audience with huge feedback resulting in me being turned down almost to a non recognizable level for the rest of the set. Bummer.
That's why I most times end up resoldering the guitar to a one pot setup, changing the tone to volume :P

Philly Q

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 18109
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #27 on: December 14, 2012, 11:32:30 AM »
I've got a Washburn guitar with a Strat style layout - volume, two tones and a five-way switch. 

Trouble is, the scratchplate isn't the same shape as a Strat scratchplate and whoever designed the control layout was a complete idiot - wherever you move the switch one or other of the knobs gets in the way of your fingers.  It's really, really stupid and annoying.

I'm going to make a new plate and relocate the controls more like a Strat.  And I might just go for one volume, one tone to keep it even simpler.


BKPs I've Got:  RR, BKP-91, ITs, VHII, CS set, Emeralds
BKPs I Had:  RY+Abraxas, Crawlers, BD+SM

GuitarIv

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1052
  • Tempus fugit ergo carpe diem
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #28 on: December 14, 2012, 05:31:29 PM »
I don't get why manufacturers don't think about such stuff...

case report

  • Flyweight
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Aquila non capit muscas
Re: Review: Holydiver Revisited
« Reply #29 on: December 15, 2012, 10:03:45 AM »
I actually have direct mount pick up on single coils of Jackson Fusion Pro (Trilogy Suite custom made by Tim) and I adjust pickup height using little gums on screws that let pu stay not on body wood...

Just curious:
what's distance between strings and Holydiver poles (bridge) for you? (in mm if you can  8) )
Gibson Les Paul Historic 1958 - Stormy Monday
Charvel San Dimas - Holydiver (b) -Crawler (n)
Jackson Fusion Pro - Holydiver & Trilogy Suites