Some musings about on-board electronics

[HapiCmpur]

I've been shopping for a new acoustic guitar, and as if it isn't hard enough choosing from among all the different makes, models, and configurations, one also has to make decisions about whether or not to get built-in electronics. I think I want some kind of on-board gizmo on my next guitar, if for no other reason than that it's a little easier to perform with than a mic on a stand. However, I am growing increasingly uncomfortable with the idea of buying a guitar with one or more holes cut into it to accommodate an electronic system that -- let's face it -- will be considered obsolete in less than a year.

Today the owner of a small guitar shop in DC showed me a guitar made of Brazilian rosewood (yes, really) that had been outfitted with Fishman electronics that required a hole that must have been about 4 square inches. We agree that there should probably be a law against such a thing. It almost made me cry.

Anyway, that experience convinced me that if I get an on-board system, it must be easily removable and require no permanent changes to the guitar. The owner of the shop I mentioned showed me a Fishman gizmo called "The Natural," which replaces the strap pin on the bottom of the guitar. In addition, a long, thin contact gets placed between the saddle and the bridge, so the only alteration is that the saddle must be filed down to accommodate the thickness of the contact. Seemed like a good solution to me. Does anyone have any experience with this device? It doesn't appear to have any tone controls, but I'd be okay with that as long as it pretty faithfully reproduced the sound of the guitar.

Please share your thoughts about non-invasive electronics. What has worked for you? What hasn't? And what should be the penalty for cutting holes into Brazilian rosewood?

 

[mshilarious]

The owner of the shop I mentioned showed me a Fishman gizmo called "The Natural," which replaces the strap pin on the bottom of the guitar. In addition, a long, thin contact gets placed between the saddle and the bridge, so the only alteration is that the saddle must be filed down to accommodate the thickness of the contact. Seemed like a good solution to me. Does anyone have any experience with this device? It doesn't appear to have any tone controls, but I'd be okay with that as long as it pretty faithfully reproduced the sound of the guitar.

I'm pretty sure that's the one I installed in my guitar. No controls, no fuss. Nice tone I think, if you heard the "Acoustic Piezo Rumble" a while back on the Clinic, that was done with that pickup system.

Really, I think onboard electronics should be a simple buffer and nothing else. A volume pot if you're really needy, but that should be a single hole with a discreet knob, that's it.

 

[Outlaws]

I belive Fishman has a combo with a blender control. It gives the transducer (under the bridge) and a mic that goes inside the guitar, then the only real modification is the end pin becomes a stereo jack that goes to the preamp.

 

[Light]

I've been shopping for a new acoustic guitar, and as if it isn't hard enough choosing from among all the different makes, models, and configurations, one also has to make decisions about whether or not to get built-in electronics. I think I want some kind of on-board gizmo on my next guitar, if for no other reason than that it's a little easier to perform with than a mic on a stand. However, I am growing increasingly uncomfortable with the idea of buying a guitar with one or more holes cut into it to accommodate an electronic system that -- let's face it -- will be considered obsolete in less than a year.

If you are going to use it, then get it. If your not going to use it, then don't get it. But it will not be obsolete anytime real soon. There hasn't been any real change in acoustic guitar pickups in probably ten years, and there is nothing on the horizon which looks to change things drastically. There have been some refinements, and some new alternatives, but the most common and basic system for years has been the Fishman Matrix.

Today the owner of a small guitar shop in DC showed me a guitar made of Brazilian rosewood (yes, really) that had been outfitted with Fishman electronics that required a hole that must have been about 4 square inches. We agree that there should probably be a law against such a thing. It almost made me cry.

While I don't like doing such things, if that is what it takes for someone to find the guitar useful, than that is what has to happen. The main thing I have against controls in the side of the guitar is that guitar players have this aggravating habit of USING them, and thus fucking up the mix.

Anyway, that experience convinced me that if I get an on-board system, it must be easily removable and require no permanent changes to the guitar. The owner of the shop I mentioned showed me a Fishman gizmo called "The Natural," which replaces the strap pin on the bottom of the guitar. In addition, a long, thin contact gets placed between the saddle and the bridge, so the only alteration is that the saddle must be filed down to accommodate the thickness of the contact. Seemed like a good solution to me. Does anyone have any experience with this device? It doesn't appear to have any tone controls, but I'd be okay with that as long as it pretty faithfully reproduced the sound of the guitar.

My shop has sold and installed probably thousands over the years. The basic design, a piezo film or cable which is buffered by an internal preamp, is probably the best compromise available for 90% of guitar buyers.

Oh, and the system is the Fishman Matrix, and it comes in two versions, the Natural I and the Natural II. The one has a flater EQ curve, and the two has a dip in the midrange to help the guitar resist feedback and to help it sit in a busy mix a bit better. Get the I and if you need the curve, use a good EQ to get it.

Fishman makes a few different control mechanisms for it, from the VTB a Volume/Treble/Bass module that gets mounted in two holes up by the neck, to the Ellipse VT. Again, personally, I don't like them because I want that control at FOH, but if you need them they are available.

Other brands to check out would be the Highlander (the first system of the type), The B-Band version (essentially, just a rip off of the Fishman), the L.R. Baggs, or the D-TAR (the newer version of the design by the guy who made the Highlander, and probably my favorite pickup of the type).

The Fishman is, though, the most popular by FAR, is the easiest and least invasive installation, and is the system chosen by Martin, Gibson, and just about every other major acoustic manufacturer out there (including Taylor up until a few years ago, when the whole ES disaster....er...change happened).

Please share your thoughts about non-invasive electronics. What has worked for you? What hasn't? And what should be the penalty for cutting holes into Brazilian rosewood?

I've made quite a few very extensive posts on the subject. Do a search on Acoustic Pickups with my name. I'm just not in the mood tonight. It's been a bit of a rough day.

Oh, and no penalty for cutting Brazilian. You do what you gotta do. Now, cutting a hole into a 1934 D-28, THAT is a different question, but on a new guitar I just don't care. The first priority is that they be functional.

Remember, guitars aren't art, they are tools. Function first, THEN aesthetics.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi

 

[Light]

I belive Fishman has a combo with a blender control. It gives the transducer (under the bridge) and a mic that goes inside the guitar, then the only real modification is the end pin becomes a stereo jack that goes to the preamp.

Several, in fact. The cheapest option is the Ellipse Blender, but to be frank, I hate the sound of internal mics. They don't sound anything like a guitar, and they are too prone to feedback.


Light

"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi