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

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by jmg257

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.

JMG, here's something fascinating. The other material that is revered out there is called casein. It has been reputed by players to make great picks for about twenty years. This is the material used by Red Bear and a number of vendors from Europe (Pearse, Hense, etc.) In this case, it's a completely different molecular bond.

Casein is made by, get this, milk and acid -- almost any acid. You can make it on your kitchen table:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-milk-plastic/

You take a cup of nonfat milk, heat it to maybe 150 F, then add several tablespoons of an acid -- lemon juice, vinegar, hydrocloric acid, etc. -- then stir it gently. It goes SCHLOOOP! then separate and turns into a round white globe right there before your eyes. Leave it overnight on your table on a piece of wax paper and you have a hard rock. They do this all the time in middle school high school classes.

There is a chemical reaction between the milk and the acid that creates a new molecule. The French word for it means "milk stone." It was discovered in 1895 in Germany and never really caught on in the States. It is the first modern bioplastic in the history of mankind. It it still made, but almost all the companies have gone out of business. Why? You cannot injection mold it or shape it in any way. They make it into a sheet and then it has to be cut (machined) from the stock shape.

Here's an interesting tidbit: Casein has been used as a binding agent in paint for roughly five thousand years. Get this: There are cave paintings in the ancient pyramids in Egypt that have casein in them. Wow!

Fun to talk about.

[AndrewG]

Originally Posted by Charmed Life Picks

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

I have to say, 'so what'? It isn't a pick's density, nor the materials used which produce great tone. It's the player; always the player. In my 50 years' playing experience I've had just about every variety of marketing schpiel thrown at me, and that experience, coupled with a healthy dose of well-earned scepticism, invariably tells me that 'less is more'.

[AndrewG]

Originally Posted by Charmed Life Picks

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

A sceptic might suggest that if one has just forked out $50 for a pick an element of confirmation bias might just creep into the equation!

[Br1ck]

The only two brands of picks I use anymore are Wegen and Blue Chip. I have one BC and eight or ten Wegens. Why? Price alone. I find Wegen picks to be made from a very different material than the BC. They hit the right price/performance ratio for me.

I like to keep a pick with each instrument I own, with a backup if possible, and different pick thicknesses suit different instruments. I use 1.2 mm for guitars, 1.8 for mandolins. I can afford Wegens for everything. My BC, a fantastic pick by the way, goes with my best mandolin.

I know only one other using BC picks and no one using Wegens. Most I know are picking 50 cent picks and are happy.

[00-28]

Originally Posted by Charmed Life Picks

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

Thanks, I know your not dodging the question. This is the second time you responded to it.

........Mike

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by AndrewG

A sceptic might suggest that if one has just forked out $50 for a pick an element of confirmation bias might just creep into the equation!

Andrew, no doubt. I thought it was smoke and mirrors myself. What happened was, I'm cheap. True story. So I bought a small quantity of this stuff to make my own and then, at least to my ears and feel, noticed something. I've kept experimenting. I've been playing over forty years and also play genuine TS. I totally backed into this. I'm an English prof, for God's sake. I had no intention of starting any kind of business. But it's fun.

sm

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by 00-28

Thanks, I know your not dodging the question. This is the second time you responded to it.

........Mike

Mike, I've always felt others experiences were more important than mine. Including yours.

Hope this is clear.

scott

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by AndrewG

I have to say, 'so what'? It isn't a pick's density, nor the materials used which produce great tone. It's the player; always the player. In my 50 years' playing experience I've had just about every variety of marketing schpiel thrown at me, and that experience, coupled with a healthy dose of well-earned scepticism, invariably tells me that 'less is more'.

Again, totally valid. The player is always the most important link in the chain, and I daresay Django could make a toothpick sound like tortoise shell. I learned recently than Doc Watson played .88 mm Herco nylons his whole career. Didn't seem to hurt his playing none. So yeah, almost goes without saying, but you said it.

The player ALWAYS is the key component.

Curious: What capos do you use these days? I've been all around the world on this and this last weekend was at a jam where I used a regular old Kyser and dang if it wasn't good.

sm

[CaineIsCarter]

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'.

Likewise. Very well put.

[AndrewG]

Originally Posted by Charmed Life Picks

Again, totally valid. The player is always the most important link in the chain, and I daresay Django could make a toothpick sound like tortoise shell. I learned recently than Doc Watson played .88 mm Herco nylons his whole career. Didn't seem to hurt his playing none. So yeah, almost goes without saying, but you said it.

The player ALWAYS is the key component.

Curious: What capos do you use these days? I've been all around the world on this and this last weekend was at a jam where I used a regular old Kyser and dang if it wasn't good.

sm

I use Shubb, G7th or Planet Waves NS Pro; whichever happens to be within reach.

[Goat Mick]

Originally Posted by AndrewG

A sceptic might suggest that if one has just forked out $50 for a pick an element of confirmation bias might just creep into the equation!

Lets just throw the expensive picks out of the conversation because they're not for everyone and we're all ok with that. Really we are. But just do this little experiment for laughs. As guitar players we all have a bunch of picks laying around (most of mine came from forgetful picking buddies). Grab three different picks. For example a Fender Celluloid, Dunlop Nylon and a Clayton Tortex. Can we agree that all three of those would have a slightly different tone when played on the same guitar by the same person? I think we would all say "of course they do". Ok now if you had a group of players listen to your experiment some would prefer the tone of the celluloid, some would prefer the nylon and some would prefer the tortex, but all of those are about the same price so nobody gives it a second thought. Well just like all three of those had a different tone from each other, all of the fancy expensive picks have a different tone not only from the budget picks available, but also from each other. My picks don't sound a thing like a Wegen, and Wegen picks don't sound a thing like a Blue Chip, etc, etc, etc. But just like someone might prefer a tortex pick over a nylon, some folks are going to prefer a Blue Chip over any of those. I understand it isn't for you and that's fine, judging from your signature you have found some fine Yamaha guitars that make you very happy so there's no reason for you to shop for an Olsen. But saying I'm throwing money away because I bought a Taylor instead of a Yamaha isn't really a fair statement, and it's exactly the same with picks.

[CaineIsCarter]

To the OP: you state in your post title that you are not trying to pitch your own product, but I am afraid that is transparently what you are doing, and that is all you are doing. There is precisely nothing to be found anywhere in this thread to scientifically verify or disprove anything.

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by AndrewG

I use Shubb, G7th or Planet Waves NS Pro; whichever happens to be within reach.

Andrew, I find the Shubbs change tonality and I always have to retune. I'm a huge G7 fan but feel they blew it when they got rid of the P1 and went to the P2. Really bad marketing move, IMHO. When that happened I bought eight (8) P1s on eBay and now I'm set for life.

Which G7 do you play?

sm

[Pine]

Hi Scott. I’m just responding to the aspect of your post that implies “scientific proof” of your assertion.

“It is not fairy dust, or myth-making, or a magic wand, or unusual mushrooms. It's hard science, folks.”

All of the evidence you cite is anecdotal, not scientific at all. You did not tie injection vs. sheet to any measures of pick quality. Nor did you prove to me that sheet built picks are superior to injection molded picks.

On the other hand, while I have a whole box of a wide variety of picks, I only use a Blue Chip TPR-35. Why? Because I think it sounds best, and produces less string click. Or maybe because I spent $35 bucks, and I darn well better use it. 

There is a long thread going on over in “open mike” titled: Fact or Opinion. I would put your assertion under the “Opinion” heading, although presented as "Fact".

I do agree though that the Blue Chip picks sound great. But that’s just my opinion. YMMV.

[AndrewG]

Originally Posted by Charmed Life Picks

Andrew, I find the Shubbs change tonality and I always have to retune. I'm a huge G7 fan but feel they blew it when they got rid of the P1 and went to the P2. Really bad marketing move, IMHO. When that happened I bought eight (8) P1s on eBay and now I'm set for life.

Which G7 do you play?

sm

I use the P2; my original P1 fell apart after nearly 10 years' use. The nice guy at G7th sent me a free replacement after reading my post here about it self-destructing. I preferred the 'heft' of the P1, although it functioned no better that the P2-for me anyway.