Author Topic: Mule or Crawler (Read 19173 times)

Philly Q · « **Reply #30 on:** March 03, 2007, 02:05:07 PM »

I really don't think the Riff Raff is all that trebly, it's not like icepick-in-the-ear-time at all. If anything I notice the treble more with my Rebel Yell, but that might be because it's a more powerful pickup all round.

I've never tried a Mule, but as far as I know the main difference between it and the RR is that the Mule has a "hump" in the midrange. Output-wise, they're about the same. I would guess the Alnico V Mule sounds very close to the RR.

We're going round in circles, aren't we? I think your best bet is probably to call BKP and talk it through with Tim or one of the other guys.

sgmypod · « **Reply #31 on:** March 04, 2007, 05:25:47 PM »

tried twinfans sg with riff raffs and was very sweet, slightly more treble than the neck crawler..but hard to tell, have changed bridge crawler now in sg but am sticking with the neck...it is to die for

Dane · « **Reply #32 on:** March 04, 2007, 06:43:12 PM »

What did u change ur SG Bridge to??

Dane · « **Reply #33 on:** March 04, 2007, 06:45:18 PM »

Well this is waht i email Tim maybe while waiting for him to come back some of u can help me out abit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Tim

Well i juz got a 1996 SG Special with Ebony finger board. PLan to arm myself with ur BKP. The amp i am using is just a decent Peavey Bandit 112. I am looking to be more of a Guiitar Chord and Amp player so no effects.

I am very new to Guitar, just started about a year back. The music that i have always listen to are stuff from Jimi Hendrix, G n R, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, AC/DC, Eric Clapton, Free, Grandfunk, Early-era Aerosmith, Metallica ( up to the black album only), Iron Maiden, Santana.

I am not that good or fast on the guitar and also i don't really fancy shredder, so i am also looking for a pick-up that is user friendly. I would like to get a vintage sound from the pick-up and it must sound very sweet on both the bridge and neck position. I love the neck pick-up tone more as it is very sweet.

The tone i am after is more of something like Santana Supernatural album like Smooth and Maria2.
(i noe i wont get exact tone, but something with the same vibe will do) I also want to be able to roll of the tone and get that amazing woman tone. I am not someone who embrace treble that well and do not want my SG to sound bright. And it must just sing and make the guitar cry. But also it shud be able to go mean if i want it to but not very often.

I initially thought of getting a mule or Cralwer but after asking fellow BKP forumites, they say it will mud out. So i am left blank as i did not expect it to be this difficult to choose a BKP for my SG as the choice i had seems not the right one for an SG. I was made even more confuse when i was recomended Riff Raff, SM, WarPig,RY. The reason i chose mule and Crawler in the 1st place was from the Cralwers Clips at the BKP webby adn the MUle clip done by u and HJM. and i fell in love wit the Crawler neck od clips.

CAn i get your help by listing for me what pick-ups u think suits me and tell me more about them so its easier for me to choose. Also i need a very good pick-up as i do not intend to use pedals to improve the tone or how it distort. Also i want to find out how would a Warpig handle blues, hot blues, Classic Rock?? And is teh RY alnico based pick-ups, and how will it sound ina n SG as i worry for ending up with more treble and being bright.

Also lastly give me an ans to this question, "If u were me what pick-up would you choose??"

Thx hope to hear from you very soon as i cant wait to get a BKP.

carlaz · « **Reply #34 on:** March 04, 2007, 07:21:01 PM »

Santana tone for an SG .... Well, would the Abraxas be wrong with the all-mahogany thing?

Way back in the 70s, Santana used a Yamaha SG, though I don't know what kind of pickups that had, nor whether that'd be right for the somewhat updated Supernatural tone. (I do love the tone on Supernatural, and think the Abraxas/Crawler neck definitely is taking one into that ballpark in a maple-capped LP ....). I think the Abraxas is voiced to triangulate between "classic" and "modern" Santana tones.

Are we overthinking this? Gibson put out that "Voodoo" SG with the 498T in the bridge and 490R in the neck, which is exactly what my LP Std came with (and what I replaced with Crawlers). Did that model SG have a mahogany body or something else? Maybe it was swamp ash, actually .... Anyway, perhaps Crawlers or Abraxas will indeed be just fine in an SG. The 498T/490N combo isn't a million miles away from an Abraxas or Crawler set (though not as good :)).

Philly Q · « **Reply #35 on:** March 04, 2007, 07:56:24 PM »

Quote from: carlaz

Way back in the 70s, Santana used a Yamaha SG, though I don't know what kind of pickups that had, nor whether that'd be right for the somewhat updated Supernatural tone.

Yes, but a Yamaha SG is an entirely different guitar from a Gibson SG - through-neck, fat mahogany body, maple top. It has much more in common with a Les Paul than an SG, if anything. Even further back in the 60s, Santana did use a Gibson SG, with P-90s. He still sounded like Carlos Santana, but perhaps that shows that tone is more in the fingers than the equipment.

Quote

Gibson put out that "Voodoo" SG with the 498T in the bridge and 490R in the neck, which is exactly what my LP Std came with (and what I replaced with Crawlers). Did that model SG have a mahogany body or something else? Maybe it was swamp ash, actually ....

It was swamp ash, with a mahogany neck, but the current SG Standard also uses the 498T/490R combo. Then again, most people on this forum seem to think Gibson pickups are sh!t, so there's not much point trying to recommend pickups that sound like them.

All I'm doing is - dare I say - trying to be helpful by repeating what I've read and learned. One thing I've learned is that a pickup which sounds great in one type of guitar won't necessarily sound great in another. And I've tried to point out what Tim has recommended to other SG users, which is to go low-output or high-output, and avoid medium-output. I'm not saying that's right or wrong. I'm not trying to persuade anyone to buy one pickup, or put them off buying another.

Quote

Are we overthinking this?

Maybe.

What we are definitely doing is going round in circles.

Dane, if you want Crawlers then you should buy Crawlers. It's your choice, not anyone else's.

sgmypod · « **Reply #36 on:** March 04, 2007, 09:11:10 PM »

To a warpig(a great sg pickup) that I had in my ibanez

Dane · « **Reply #37 on:** March 05, 2007, 05:23:56 AM »

Well im appreciatitng all the advice i get. Just waiting for Tim the best man for the job to call it for me. As i hope he will come out with some idea that will work for me. He is suppose to be back on the 5th and i hope he reply soon.

Dane · « **Reply #38 on:** March 05, 2007, 05:31:45 AM »

Btw how do a warpicg do clasic rock? i had a friend who use warpigs and it's sound awesome. He put da warpig in a custom-made guitar like Santana's PRS.

Listen to axe tester and also funk jam

http://www.myspace.com/pauldanial

1 more thing, since the warpig blanket the sound of the wood, does this means we don;t hear the wood at all.?? So will it sound almost similar in many guitars??

carlaz · « **Reply #39 on:** March 05, 2007, 09:29:23 AM »

Quote from: Philly Q

Yes, but a Yamaha SG is an entirely different guitar from a Gibson SG - through-neck, fat mahogany body, maple top. It has much more in common with a Les Paul than an SG, if anything.

OK, that's worth knowing.

Quote from: Philly Q

Even further back in the 60s, Santana did use a Gibson SG, with P-90s. He still sounded like Carlos Santana, but perhaps that shows that tone is more in the fingers than the equipment.

Definitely true. Give me Santana's set-up, and I'll still sound like pants! ;)

Quote from: Philly Q

the current SG Standard also uses the 498T/490R combo. Then again, most people on this forum seem to think Gibson pickups are sh!t, so there's not much point trying to recommend pickups that sound like them.

I'll defend Gibson pickups! :) They're not shitee, they're just not nearly as good as BKPs. :) Even I can hear the difference.

At the very least, I've heard worse pickups than Gibson's.

Quote from: Philly Q

What we are definitely doing is going round in circles.

Yep. OK, any useful knowledge I can contribute is long since exhausted here!

Philly Q · « **Reply #40 on:** March 05, 2007, 11:24:07 AM »

Quote from: carlaz

I'll defend Gibson pickups! :) They're not shitee, they're just not nearly as good as BKPs. :) Even I can hear the difference.

At the very least, I've heard worse pickups than Gibson's.

Well yeah, I agree really. I don't think the 498T/490R combo sounds any worse than the "industry standard" Duncan JB/59n combo. I was just playing Devil's Advocate.

carlaz · « **Reply #41 on:** March 05, 2007, 11:47:14 AM »

Quote from: Philly Q

I don't think the 498T/490R combo sounds any worse than the "industry standard" Duncan JB/59n combo. I was just playing Devil's Advocate.

;) Well, just to play Devil-dragging-this-thread-off-topic (but not very much, really), I'd have to agree. I stuck with the stock 498T/490R combo for over 10 years, knowing I wanted to replace it, but not find something clearly better. I considered the JB/59n combo early on, in the mid 90s, but wasn't sufficiently impressed to make the jump. I briefly flirted with the idea of the Gibson Iommi signature pickups when they came out, but mostly for the name :P and I don't think they would have worked they way I wanted, especially in an LP.

I went with the Crawlers (in my LP) partially on the strength of Tim's recommendation, but also because they didn't seem like they'd be radically different in intent from the 498T/490R combo, just better. I had decided I pretty much liked the way my stock pups were trying to sound, but they were a bit dull and mushy and didn't keep the definition there at higher gain and lower tunings. The Crawlers solved those problems very happily. :)

Alas, this post still has little to do with SGs. I will say that I've entertained the idea of getting an SG and loading it with Warpigs or Pig-90s ... but I haven't got the budget to do more than entertain that idea! :lol:

Dane · « **Reply #42 on:** March 05, 2007, 11:36:36 PM »

Finally a reply from the man himself:

Hi,

I would recommend The Mule set-they definately won't mud out in your SG and they are very balanced across all frequencies so no harsh highs either.The neck is a touch lower output than the Crawler neck which will be good in an SG as it will balance better to the bridge.
I usually advise Stormy Monday humbuckers for SGs but because you want a warmer tone the Mules will be better in this case.

kind regards

Tim

Dane · « **Reply #43 on:** March 06, 2007, 06:47:21 PM »

Well this mite be my final decision.. Mule bridge and MQ neck. Wat do u tink pple??? Btw wud a P-90 sound as fat as Humbucking or Thin like a strat?? As i lookin for a fate tone?? If it's thin den i'll go wif mule neck instead

Philly Q · « **Reply #44 on:** March 06, 2007, 07:07:19 PM »

The MQ will sound much fatter than a Strat-type pickup, but it's still a single-coil. If you're going for a Santana tone I think you need a neck humbucker.