What Makes A Great Pick Great? Is It Science or Smoke & Mirrors?

[Charmed Life Picks]

This is long, but perhaps worth the read.....

For those of you considering looking at upscale picks, how do you determine which brands might be better than others? Why are they "better?" Are there some basic principle(s) to guide your choice of which ones to try? In fact there is one HUGE one factor that dwarfs all the others. I had shared this a while back in another thread, and people said they'd like to hear more. I'll try to be concise.

The key is how the pick is manufactured. Picks machined (cut) from solid, factory sheets vs injection molding will ALWAYS outperform injection molded picks, typically dramatically so, sometimes stunningly so. Translation: the scuttlebutt is real, and based on real science. In fact it is physically impossible to even remotely to achieve the mechanical properties of a thermoplastic with injection molding. Can't happen. Why?

Let's take Blue Chip as an example. They use a material manufactured by DuPont that is used in aircraft and heavy industry. It is actually used to replace metal bearings in environments experiencing incredible heat and pressure. Why the application? It is self-lubricating but more importantly far lighter than any metals with the same mechanical properties. This is important in jetliners or high-performance fighter jets, where every ounce increases fuel efficiency. It has no official melting point and begins to "soften" at about 1000 degrees F. It was used in the Space Shuttle, and is used extensively in fighter jets and most airliners.

How does it achieve these properties? It is extruded under INCREDIBLE pressure and heat. I mean, incredible. Frankly, Injection molding doesn't even belong in the conversation. DuPont has the whole thing locked up and, to my knowledge, has only two licensed extruders in all of North America. They have it dialed in and the stuff rocks.

What companies use this kind of manufacturing in making their picks? Blue Chip, Red Bear, Wegen (at great prices!), Gravity, Clayton Ultems, V-Picks and several others who escape me at the moment. This is why you keep hearing these names when the discussion veers this way.

I hope this Pick Primer is helpful and useful to you. Feel free to ask any questions you may have, and I will do my best to be unbiased and non-partisan in my responses. Members who own these kind of products: Please feel free to share your experience(s).

Sorry to rattle on. I love this stuff.

Memmer

[00-28]

Well, I guess that is one man's opinion. You never explained the "Why are they better?" question.

........Mike

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by 00-28

Well, I guess that is one man's opinion. You never explained the "Why are they better?" question.

........Mike

A fair question; thanks for asking.

The experience is in the playing. I never try to predict someone's experience in playing these products. Your experience is your experience. It trumps any sales pitch someone might throw at you. It either performs, or it doesn't. Specifically, what most players report are:

1) Deeper, richer, tighter base
2) A marked improvement in warmth and tone
3) Dramatically less pick noise
4) Softer highs that are balanced and rounded, but not muted
5) Much improved "release" off the strings (that's the self-lubricating thing)
6) Better grip

These plastics are known in the trade as "engineering plastics"; that is, they were designed specifically to equal the mechanical properties of metal, but in a plastic compound. DuPont was the first, but there are now literally hundreds of engineering thermoplastics on the market, made by probably a dozen different companies. That's at least 100 high-performance plastics that have never been made into guitar picks, by anyone.

I'm not a scientist, but many players have reported that they can actually feel and hear those mechanical properties in a guitar pick. It's a weird, unintended consequence that these plastics, made for industry, replicate the properties of genuine tortoise shell -- density, lubrication, release, warmth and tone. In short, it was an accident.

So the science is there, and has been there for about thirty (30) years.

One suggestion: If you decide to "take the plunge" find a company with a generous return policy. BC offers 30 days, in writing on their site, which is extremely generous.

thanks!
scott

[Goat Mick]

Hey Scott here's one for you and I honestly don't know the answer. I've got a buddy that is a machinist and does quite a bit of work with industrial plastics. As you know these materials can be purchased in sheet form or in rod form. He said that comparing two identical plastics one in a sheet and the other a rod, the material in the rod form will be structurally more dense than the same material in sheet form. Have you ever heard this?

[AndrewG]

What determines 'better' is purely subjective. There is no 'science' behind this; mostly it's marketing hype and unscientific junk promising unbelievable tone and never before obtainable longevity from your $50 square inch of unobtainashell plastic, made from, *gasp*, space-age materials, probably used by NASA in the space shuttle! Seriously, I've tried a couple of these wonder picks, and all the crispness, clarity and brightness I expect from my guitars disappears into mud.
If you're unable to get great tone from your 50c square inch of plastic, you're not trying hard enough. Like the lady says, 'it ain't what you got, it's what you do with it'.

[Brick is Red]

Originally Posted by Charmed Life Picks

A fair question; thanks for asking.

The experience is in the playing. I never try to predict someone's experience in playing these products. Your experience is your experience. It trumps any sales pitch someone might through at you. Specifically, what most players report are:

1) Deeper, richer, tighter base
2) A marked improvement in warmth and tone
3) Dramatically less pick noise
4) Softer highs that are balanced and rounded, but not muted
5) Much improved "release" off the strings (that's the self-lubricating thing)
6) Better grip

This list captures what I haven't often taken the time to articulate.

[00-28]

Originally Posted by Charmed Life Picks

A fair question; thanks for asking.

Your welcome, but it wasn't my question. It was your question in your first post.
"Science" doesn't explain why your material is best. Is it really the best, or is it a preference for some?


...........Mike

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by Mick's Goat Whiskey Picks

Hey Scott here's one for you and I honestly don't know the answer. I've got a buddy that is a machinist and does quite a bit of work with industrial plastics. As you know these materials can be purchased in sheet form or in rod form. He said that comparing two identical plastics one in a sheet and the other a rod, the material in the rod form will be structurally more dense than the same material in sheet form. Have you ever heard this?

Absolutely a mechanical fact, yes, Mick, and this is not from me but from several of the chemists and plastics mucky-mucks I've talked to over the years. Rod is apparently better than sheet (whether you can feel it in your playing, I don't know), but MUCH more difficult to work with, with much higher material lost, which translates into higher pick costs.

sm

[jmjohnson]

Thanks!

Who knew the same materials used for jet fighter bearings because of the immense heat and pressure would make great guitar pick!

Science is fun stuff.

[JeffreyAK]

"Picks machined (cut) from solid, factory sheets vs injection molding will ALWAYS outperform injection molded picks"

This is simply wrong, because pick performance is subjective and individual. Bringing in science, thermoplastic, aircraft, injection molding, self-lubricating, high-performance jets (!), space shuttle (!!), blah blah, is really just smoke IMHO. If people like them, great, but there isn't and doesn't need to be a "scientific" reason for it.

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by AndrewG

What determines 'better' is purely subjective. There is no 'science' behind this; mostly it's marketing hype and unscientific junk promising unbelievable tone and never before obtainable longevity from your $50 square inch of unobtainashell plastic, made from, *gasp*, space-age materials, probably used by NASA in the space shuttle! Seriously, I've tried a couple of these wonder picks, and all the crispness, clarity and brightness I expect from my guitars disappears into mud.
If you're unable to get great tone from your 50c square inch of plastic, you're not trying hard enough. Like the lady says, 'it ain't what you got, it's what you do with it'.

A valid experience in your playing, Andrew. That's why I never try to predict someone's experience. It is what it is. I'm always in favor of folks spending as little as possible to get the performance that works for them. it works for you. Bravo.

sm

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by JeffreyAK

"Picks machined (cut) from solid, factory sheets vs injection molding will ALWAYS outperform injection molded picks"

This is simply wrong, because pick performance is subjective and individual. Bringing in science, thermoplastic, aircraft, injection molding, self-lubricating, high-performance jets (!), space shuttle (!!), blah blah, is really just smoke IMHO. If people like them, great, but there isn't and doesn't need to be a "scientific" reason for it.

Well, I understand. If you test these materials on a Rockwell hardness scale, density and flexibility, etc., these numbers are markedly higher than celluloid, for instance. You cannot use celluloid to replace a mechanical bearing.

Interestingly, on the density thing: We do a simple sonic test where we drop a pick onto a circular pizza stone. You can actually "hear" the difference in density from this simple experiment.

sm

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by JeffreyAK

"Picks machined (cut) from solid, factory sheets vs injection molding will ALWAYS outperform injection molded picks"

This is simply wrong, because pick performance is subjective and individual. Bringing in science, thermoplastic, aircraft, injection molding, self-lubricating, high-performance jets (!), space shuttle (!!), blah blah, is really just smoke IMHO. If people like them, great, but there isn't and doesn't need to be a "scientific" reason for it.

The science is valid in terms of specifications, Jeff. Whether one can hear or feel the difference in one's playing is, as you so rightly state, Jeff, entirely subjective.

sm

[jmjohnson]

So in your experience the hardest densest materials make the best guitar pick? With self-lubing a cool bonus.

I wonder how turtle shell would compare?! That was the gold standard for so long.

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by 00-28

Well, I guess that is one man's opinion. You never explained the "Why are they better?" question.

........Mike

Again, a valid statement, Mike.

I'm not dodging the question, but I think it's much more valid to hear from players of these products, pro or con, not from me. I have a vested interest. I was merely trying to explain why the numbers MIGHT might explain why some players -- clearly a minority -- claim these products improve their playing.

sm