Metal tones and arch enemy.

[kotornut]

Well, since this is a place to talk about guitars and music I just wanted to say I am excited about going to see Arch Enemy on March 10th. It will be pretty cool. It's been a while since I went to see a heavy band.

I heard the new album for the first time in it's entirety this weekend, sad I know, it's not very new but, none of my friends are into metal and I can't buy everything immediately.

Those boys can play, I'm glad Christopher is back, his playing helps the melody of the music. But, I still can't get into Angela's vocals too much, they just don't do it for me. All of that makes me more excited to see them than I would have been. I wasn't a huge AE before (due to the vocals) but they're growing on me. I know people around hear like to rag a little on ESP and Seymour Duncan but, I'm sorry, Michael Amott has the best metal tones I have ever heard. Don't know what people think of Randall though.

This all makes me think though, why do bands seem to prefer Duncans and Solo artists prefer DiMarzios? Just look at the number of real continually functioning bands on the DiMarzio site, and then compare that to the Duncan site. Then do the same for solo acts. The findings are interesting. I know it could be that SD simply has more endorsers than DiMarzio but, it's interesting to me what do you think?


-Fett

[Sam D.]

Originally Posted by kotornut

This all makes me think though, why do bands seem to prefer Duncans and Solo artists prefer DiMarzios? Just look at the number of real continually functioning bands on the DiMarzio site, and then compare that to the Duncan site. Then do the same for solo acts. The findings are interesting. I know it could be that SD simply has more endorsers than DiMarzio but, it's interesting to me what do you think?


-Fett

Hey Fett. To me it's very simple. Ducnans, regardless of output have a crunch to them. DiMarzio's are more open, and aren't so crunchy. Although that can't really be said for my FRED, with other DiMarzio's I've played it seems to be the case.

[kotornut]

Yeah I have been doing research since i wrote this, and I can see that. To me DiMarzios are too muffled. But, one mans muffled is another mans "Ahh, wah pedal like tone characteristics" to quote Paul Gilbert.

I guess I really like crunch, because a lot of Duncans sound perfect to me. Some DiMarzios, even played by guitarist I love, sound like someone turned the tone knob down, overly smooth. I think the Fred doesn't really do that though.

[Wild_Child]

You could probably make the same comparison between solo guitarists that use Ibanez and guitarists in a band that use ESP. Just look at their lists of endorsees.

Additionally, Ibanez tend to use Dimarzios while ESP tend to use Duncans.

I don't think there's any real reason for it, neither brand is any less capable for metal than the other. It's just the way it's happened.

[toshiro]

Bah: Dimarzio = Micheal Romeo > *.

Lots of guitarists never swap pickups from the stock that come in their guitars, or to something similar. ESP and Jackson pretty much use nothing but Duncans stock(except for a couple models, like the PC1), and are on a whole more associated with Metal now than Ibanez is.

[kotornut]

Well, whatever it is about Duncans, I think I like it better than DiMarzios. Every time I hear a sound clip at DiMarzios website they all sound the same to me. I mean it's a good smooth tone but, the tone zone, the breed, the air norton, the evo, the PAF pro and so on all sound like the same tone to me.

And maybe Duncans all sound alike too, but I dig that sizzle and the crisp bite of the treble, which is what I think lacks in many DiMarzios.

Not to mention I'm from California and would rather go with a Cali company than a NY company. I work with too many New Yorkers and I am so sick of "The Greatest City In The World." Extremely petty and more than a slightly retarded reason but, that's just me.