Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve DeRosa
Definitely old stuff (the clear plexi mini-knobs are the giveaway) and there's no question that it sounds great (old DeArmonds generally do), but the cardinal rule is that you never, EVER cut/drill/screw-mount anything into an acoustic carved-top instrument - the serious postwar jazzbox players all understood this and adopted the "monkey-on-a-stick" Rhythm Chief or FHC, which left the top unmolested and maintained the guitar's full acoustic properties. I'm thinking this one was owned by someone who made a half-hearted attempt at learning to play right about the time Elvis got out of the Army (probably got talked into the pickup at the same time as you suggest, by a store owner who wanted it out of his shop ASAP - for obvious reasons) and packed it away, never again to see the light of day until it found its way into your hands; needless to say it's your guitar/choice, but if it were me I'd remove that pickup, have my tech fill and spot-refinish any holes left behind, and sell the otherwise excellent-condition pickup to a collector for historic value alone - might net you a couple hundred to offset the cost of repairs, and I think you'll see a major improvement in tone and volume...  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluemonk
I'm going to be a dissenting voice. Since the guitar can never be restored to its original condition anyway, and because the OP likes the sound of the guitar amplified, my 2 cents are to leave it as is.
Now, if the OP's priority is to optimize its acoustic tone and volume, then yes. removing the Dearmond would achieve that.
|
Both of you are making good points.
I'm mainly going to use this as an electric guitar anyway (I even have strung it with flatwounds), so I'm okay with keeping the ancient modification intact.
I don't know who owned it before me (I bought it from a shop that had it on consignment), but the most recent owner was probably a jazz guitarist. It was set up very well, with very low action.