Duncan JB - let me throw this out there

[spauldingrules]

I've always hated the JB - spikey, middy, annoying.  Clean it's too middy, dirty it sounds to nasally.  But I had to borrow a guitar one gig when I was playing with the band - a Gibson LP with a JB in the bridge.  It sounded perfect with gain, and when cleaned up by rolling back on the volume.  I cut through and sit perfectly in the mix without being too loud. 

So I tried one in my LP - same thing.  I've always been a PAF guy, but the JB is great with a band - with my Fender Twin, Mesa Mark I, or AC15. Just thought I'd start a discussion on why the oldest/obvious choices are sometimes the best, even if not at first glance.  The best thing about it to me is that I can sit in the mix without cranking the amp.

 

[Kostas]

I have tried the JB only in a Squier '51 I had. I put new pickups, pots, cap and bone nut. I had read the comments so I went straight for a 300k volume & 250k tone pots and I was surprised. It was great, even the clean tone was good, especially split. It still had all the highs I needed, it wasn't muted at all. As good as it was, it's not the best for me. It can't touch the WCR Godwoods in my LP or the TVJ Classic Plus in my Thinline. These are my favorite HB's of those I have tried.

 

[aarontunes]

I learned long ago never to finalize my opinion on how something sounds until I've heard it with the band. There are millions of examples of things that sound mediocre or downright crappy on their own, but perfect within the context of a band.


If you haven't yet, spend some time EQ'ing and mixing tracks. Doesn't take to long to discover that you should avoid EQ'ing tracks when they are soloed. Instead, do it with everything playing. That's how you get 'em to sound good and sit right in the mix. Once you've done that, if you solo them you will often find they sound thin or otherwise wanting on their own.


Same principle applies to sounds in a real live band.

 

[Cagey]

Just as cameras see things the eyes don't, microphones hear things the ears don't. Human perceptions are non-linear. When it comes to blending in or standing out in a mix, it helps to know about the "Fletcher-Munson" effect.

Basically, what it describes and maps out is not only how the ear's sensitivity changes with reference to frequency, but also amplitude. It's why your guitar/amp can sound great at home, but terrible at practice, or vice-versa. There are a dozens of articles about it on the web.

 

[TBurst Std]

What sounds good alone doesn't always sound good in a mix, and vice versa. 
Have learned this many times over and still am sometimes surprised. 

Rather than offer you my insights on my tone, think this:

Randy Rhodes' tone was great on recordings.  Solo it would sound like lifeless crap.

It's all about filling in the sonic floor.

The best thing about my playing right now is understanding this, and playing with other musicians that feel/hear the same. 

A guitarist I play with at times has a new to him guitar. Was asking him about it tonight.  His response, sounds good here but let's wait for rehearsal tomorrow.

 

[Kostas]

I learned long ago never to finalize my opinion on how something sounds until I've heard it with the band. There are millions of examples of things that sound mediocre or downright crappy on their own, but perfect within the context of a band.

Many Marshalls and Vintage 30 speakers, especially the Celestions I can't stand but they cut well in a mix. On the other hand there are people who never played in a band or others who stopped and play alone or jam with friends. Everyone's needs are different.

Randy Rhodes' tone was great on recordings.  Solo it would sound like lifeless crap.

Not really... :icon_scratch: He's one of my all time favorite guitarists, the two albums (and the live LP even more) are my favorite Ozzy albums but I don't like his tone either in the mix or alone. Not so bad I can't listen to the songs but nothing special.

 

[spauldingrules]

I think the JB sounds like shrill trash, but what do I know, I rock the Invaders. #ymmv

That's my point!  That's exactly what I thought.

 

[Wolfie351]

I've been struggling with the JB since the 80s.  Never cared for it, could never understand why people liked it.  I've probably put more JBs on eBay (stripped from guitar purchases) than all my other pickup listings combined.  I think players that are more focused on their rhythm sound tend to dislike the JB, those that are more lead oriented do like the JB.   

 

[Cagey]

I've always liked them. For me, they're a "can't go wrong" pickup. When I can't decide on something else or don't have a particular target sound in mind, JB or JB/59 set gets installed.

 

[Zhaezzy]

I would say I am not a fan. Put them in my first build never liked it. Too me it seemed to bite in the wrong frequency range. I would use a FRED for similar reasons for that midrange bite but it seems to be at a better register to me. Use what works for you.

 

[BroccoliRob]

I hate the JB for years until I tried it with a 250k pot (due to tolerances, it actually measured 232k ohms). The low-value pot actually rolled off the strident highs and smoothed it out. Very usable, BUT I still prefer other thigns if I want a lot of output

 

[swarfrat]

I've never tried but given my love for the GFS Memphis... it might be up my ally. My love for that pickup is more about tightness than brightness though.

 

[Strat Avenger]

The JB is a good-sounding pickup. It was the sound of Jake E Lee and Warren DeMartini in the '80s. I think EVH even had one in the "5150" Kramer.  My only complaint is that it's slightly too hot for my taste. It's more compressed than a lower output humbucker.  I want to try a Arcane "Mr. Scary" pickup. It's less windings but a A8 magnet instead of A5. My experience is that it really depends on the guitar whether or not a JB (or any other pickup) will sound good.