Is low action on a guitar always the best way to set one up?
A common belief that every guitar should have the action (which in general terms means the string height) set as low as you can get it without fret buzz.
Well, that belief is wrong. The action of a guitar should be set up according to player preference first and always.
I personally set the action of my guitars to be what I call "medium-high", meaning not low but not high either. And I do this for the reason that if I don't, my fingers will run over other strings when I do bends.
This is a little difficult to explain, but I'll try my best. I apologize in advance if you get confused. Like I said, this is tough to explain.
Let's say I have my index finger on the 1 string, 12th fret, and I want to bend the string UP from an E to an F# (or Gb). In other words, a two-fret bend.
With the 1 string 12th fret being held, the way I prefer my action is that the unheld 2 string should be resting half-way between the top and bottom of my finger.
Why do I do this? Because on the 1 string I never bend down but always UP. And if the 2 string is set too low, my finger literally runs over that string when I try to bend up the 1.
I do UP bends on the 1, 2 and 3 strings often, so that means when I'm holding the 1 down, the 2 has to be resting in middle-of-finger position. When holding the 2, the 3 has to be middle-of-finger position, and for the 3 the 4 has to be middle-of-finger position. Being I do NOT do up bends on the 5 and 6, those strings can be set lower for my playing style.
This type of string action isn't what you would call "high" but rather "medium-high", as I call it. However it's definitely not low.
If you were wondering how I'm able to get sinfully sweet bends and vibratos on my strings, a lot of that has to do with the fact I do not have my strings set low.
On a final note, this is not to say you shouldn't set your strings low. Set up your action in a way that feels most comfortable for your style. I don't set my action low because then I can't do the bends I like.
Rich's favorite guitar brand logos
The logo on a guitar's headstock (or pegboard in Fender vernacular) matters to me; these are a few of my favorites and I'll explain why I like them.
1969 Fender Stratocaster "transition" logo that includes "with synchronized tremolo"
This CBS-era Fender logo is without a doubt my absolute favorite out of all Fender logos. In fact, it's my favorite logo period. And yes, it is the same one you see on the Yngwie Malmsteen Strat. I really like the large swooping italicized "STRATOCASTER" and the "WITH SYNCHRONIZED TREMOLO" underneath it. For whatever reason it totally works. It's a "busy" design, to be sure, but it's freakin' awesome.
You can still get the "swoopy" logo today, but the tough part is getting the "WITH SYNCHRONIZED TREMOLO" underneath it. Only the Malmsteen Strat has the complete '69 logo treatment.
1990s-era ESP logo
ESP has bounced around with a bunch of logos, but this is the best one. Very squared-off, very in-your-face, very bold; it totally works. And I love the fact the middle part of the "E" looks like a speaker cone.
And wow, do you have to pay a lot to get this logo on a guitar these days. The ESP "M" series guitars have that old-school logo, and you're going to pay well over a grand to start just to get it.
Jackson Guitars logo
As far as I'm aware, Jackson has always used the same logo and rarely uses anything else. And fortunately there's a wide selection of Jackson axes from cheap to expensive and everywhere in between, so you can get a guitar with a cool Jackson logo to fit any budget.
I'm very happy Jackson did not do that "premium only" crapola with their branding, because it allows anyone to look cool with one of their guitars.
Epiphone "e" logo
The Epiphone logo itself isn't that interesting, but the "e" logo is. You can see it in the above image on the truss rod cover.
There are only two guitar brands in the world that can be recognized by a single stylized letter. The first is the Fender "F", and the other the Epiphone "e".
I'm actually surprised Gibson doesn't use more of Epiphone's "e" because it can be recognized instantly the moment you see it, and it is distinctive.
The "e" is used mostly on higher-end Epiphone models like the Sheraton where the logo can be seen on the pick guard and the tailpiece.
Were it up to me, every single Epiphone electric should have the "e" on the truss rod cover. The logo isn't tacky, and a small "e" on the cover would be a nice touch.
1990s-era Washburn logo
There was a time when Washburn was considered a major player in the electric guitar market. The Nuno Bettencourt model above is, of course, what put Washburn electrics on the map in the rock world.
The way Washburn did the logo for the Nuno model (which is still sold today) works very well. It's a nice combo of vintage+modern and does look best when applied as black-on-natural.
The magic sound of the P90 pickup
The song Hideaway by Freddie King is part of what inspired me to get the Epiphone Les Paul Special I P90 guitar...
...because the P90 has great tone.
The P90 works for basically every type of music except metal. Ordinarily I'd say you can make any electric "sound metal", but not when it comes to the P90; that pickup is best suited for blues, jazz, country, classic hard rock and pretty much everything else short of metal crunching.
Again, this is why I say I think it's mandatory for guitar players to own multiple guitars with different pickups and pickup configurations. I don't ever plan on performing metal songs with the Paul I bought, but instead concentrate on classic rock and blues tones, which I know the P90 is good for.
Do you need a Les Paul for that classic P90 sound? No. What you need is the P90 itself no matter what guitar it is. The pickups could be in a Stratocaster body and they would basically sound the same. So if you happen to be in situation where you really like the P90 but can't get the Epi Les Paul like I did, find yourself another guitar that can have that pickup installed, or if it's a Strat body just get a pick guard that has the proper cutouts for it.
Are cheap guitars more fun?
There is the Epiphone Les Paul Special I P90. The price? Cheap. As in under $150 cheap. And I got one because I've been wanting a P90-equipped guitar for a while now.
I am a guy who prefers cheap electrics over expensive ones for various reasons, but the best reason is that cheap electrics are just plain fun to play.
What makes cheap guitars fun?
Cheap
When you get a cool guitar that doesn't cost a lot, you immediately feel a lot more comfortable with it. And comfort has a lot to do with fun factor. Guitars that don't cost a lot takes off a lot of pressure. With expensive axes you have the feelings of "I have to polish this thing and keep it pristine clean all the time" or "I always must put this in its case when I'm finished playing it" and so on. Not so with cheap electrics.
Carefree
Want to use a cheap gig bag instead of a hard case? Go right head. Want to leave your guitar on its stand instead of constantly having to put it in its case when finished playing? Go right ahead. Want to let the guitar get dirty? Go right ahead.
It's like I said, a lot of pressure is taken off your mind when you have a cheap guitar. And that feels great.
No, I'm not saying you should totally neglect your cheap axe and let it go into ruin. But I am saying that it's okay to let it get banged up and dirty since you hardly paid anything for it to begin with.
Hackable
Expensive guitars aren't meant to be upgraded, but cheap guitars are. If you want to switch out the bridge, pickups, nut, electronics or whatever else you can think of, then do it.
Again, this has a lot to do with comfort. You will feel much more comfortable hacking up a cheap guitar than you would an expensive one.
Much easier to build your "guitar army"
Three new cheap guitars can be had easily for under $500. Think about that for a moment. Three guitars. And you can mod/hack them up any way you wish. Buy a couple of Squier Stratocasters and an Epiphone Les Paul, and you've got enough guitar goodness to last you a good long time.
As I've said before, it's not a sin to own multiple guitars. Not only is it more fun, but it can be cheap. And it's also cool to be able to pick up one of your other guitars should you have a string snap on you.
Humbuckers vs. Single-Coil - which is better?
I'm going to answer the question in the title of this article right up front: The answer is neither. A humbucker is not better than a single-coil, nor is a single-coil better than a humbucker.
Instead, I'm going to talk about why "all-in-one" guitars are a bad idea.
There have been many attempts over the years by various guitar manufacturers to produce a guitar that gets every type of pickup sound there is, and all of them have failed. Why? Because there is no way to produce one guitar that sounds like every guitar.
Even though I just purchased a Fender Modern Player Stratocaster HSS which allows for 7 pickup selections including splitting the bridge humbucker to single-coil, I still go back to my "plain" Squier Bullet Strat which has a traditional Stratocaster SSS layout and switching system. Why? Because the the traditional SSS layout has a bridge pickup with staggered pole pieces and is mounted on an angle which makes it sound different than a split humbucker mounted vertically straight with flat pole pieces.
My Fender MP Strat may be the most versatile out of all the guitars I own, but that's doesn't mean it does everything.
I personally believe you need three electric guitars to cover almost everything tone-wise. One in SSS layout, one in HSS and the third in HH. The SSS is best as a Squier or Fender Strat. For HSS there are many guitar makes to choose from, and the same goes for HH.
My advice to you is this: Don't seek out a guitar that does it all, because it doesn't exist. It's not a sin to own multiple guitars. In addition to that, owning just one guitar is pretty boring.