As you remember from the previous article (Part IV – Lighting), I succeeded in taking a number of pictures of my instruments that, after some tweaking with Photoshop, would resemble the professional image I wanted to “emulate” in terms of professional quality. So let’s see how I did it.

The first thing is to isolate the instrument from the background. There are several ways to do that (and a lot of tutorials on YouTube):

- You can use Photoshop’s “pen tool”

- You can use the “quick selection tool”

- You can eliminate the background with the “magic wand”

- You can use the “magnetic lasso tool”.

Which one is the best? There are many theories about it, but I am going to tell you rught away: none of the above.

To extract a sharply defined copy of your instrument from the background, you have to use the polygonal lasso tool, patiently marking the borders of the instrument with it. It takes some time, but it is the most precise way to do it. The polygonal lasso tool defines a path composed of straight lines, but you can perfectly cut out a curvy guitar image with it. You approximate the curves by magnifying the image enough, and defining short segments with the tool.

You probably suppose that the result might end up being too “polygonal”, but I promise you: that is simply not true. Take your time and you will perfectly isolate the guitar from the background.

Once you have your guitar selected, copy the image (edit -> copy) and paste it “in place” (Edit -> Paste special – > Paste in place):

The idea is to have two superposed images of the instrument:

- the one on top will be the picture of the instrument extracted:

- and the picture underneath, overexposed, used to eliminate unwanted details of the background, leaving only the shadows. Do you remember that overexposing a picture made the background dissapear? Well, that is exactly what we are doing here, but the instrument is not affected by the overexposure, because it was previously extracted to a different layer, which is on top.

To overexpose the “shadow/background” layer, go to the “Adjustments” section, and select the “overexposure” icon.

Important: all “adjustments” you make to a layer in Photoshop (altering exposure, brightness, contrast, etc) affect the layer selected and all other layers below it.

One word about shadows: you want to keep them. They give realism and depth to the photo. You don’t want a picture of a guitar that seems to be spookily floating amidst the nothingness.

You can also use Lightroom, another software from Adobe (you can download a 30-days free trial version) which is a very practical software to make adjustments either to the layer with the instrument, or to the final complete picture (check out this article about the possibilities of Lightroom).

So, at the end, you this is the result of both layers together, plus some additional tweaking with Lightroom:

Which is acceptably close to what we wanted to accomplish.

This is a picture of another instrument, obtained following the same procedure (with my logo added to it):

So, there you go. Good luck with your photos!

*************************

Did you like the article? Share it! Tweet it, or something

Find me on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/lospennato.lutherie

Visit my website, Leo Lospennato Electric Guitars: http://www.lospennato.com

Check out my book on Amazon: Electric Guitar and Electric Bass DESIGN

today I tell you about my second try regarding lighting, and about the third (and definitive) try.

Looking at my picture of reference (a bass of mine photographed by a professional), I realized that I needed only one big, diffuse light source, placed directly above the instrument.

That light source can be seen reflected on the instrument’s body, knobs, and pickups, and its position can be deducted from the shadow it drops.

I decided, however, to keep the two 500w frontal lamps as they were, and to add some light from above in order create reflection on the bass’ top. For that, I used the legs of the table (my “supporting structure”, remember?) and improvised a home-made diffusor. In the picture below, I am placing some baking paper (the one you use to bake things) to act as diffusor of the light provided by two 11watts light tubes tied together:

Note how I keep the paper in place by using clamps. This is how the whole thing ended up looking:

The results? Still not good. The 1,000watts of the frontal lamps overwhelmed the meager 22watts of the tubes. It was as if the tubes on the top weren’t even there. There was too much light from the front as to create a defined reflection on the top of the instrument. Second try: epic fail.

Third try

So, I decided to directly place the two big lamps (diffused with baking paper instead of the umbrellas) lighting the instrument from above, and nothing else. No other lights around.

The following picture might be a little confusing, but you can see 1) a 500w lamp, unelegantly placed between the table and the book shelf, 2) a concoction made of baking paper and black cloth acting as a diffusor (the baking paper difusses the light, the black cloth helps me “shape” the reflection that will show on the instrument’s face), and 3) down there you can see a different bass being photographed:

Professional photographers must be clenching their teeth in disgust right now.

But it worked. Look at the result (picture not retouched):

I got a nice, very defined, 4,000 x 2,800 pixels picture of my bass, with a nice reflection on top and a good background. Yes: I replaced the white cloth background with a panel of something similar to Styropor (also called polystyrol, hard foam, etc), but more tightly grained than normal styropor, and covered with some rigid sheet, so the instrument leaning on it wouldn’t damage it so easily.

Ok, so that’s how I got a decent picture to work on. Now read the final part of this series: “How to photograph electric guitars – Part V: Retouching”.

(Previous: “How to photograph electric guitars – Part III: Studio setting”)

******************

Find me on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/lospennato.lutherie

Visit my website, Leo Lospennato Electric Guitars: http://www.lospennato.com

Check out my book on Amazon: Electric Guitar and Electric Bass DESIGN

I continue with this series of articles about how to take nice pictures of your guitars and basses. Today I tell you about how did I mount my “studio”. Remember, I am a photography noob, I am learning as I go, and I mounted the whole thing in my living room!

Studio setting

This is the “before” picture:

As you can see, I took a table from my workshop, and placed on its side.

I could have used the table to place the instruments on, but I decided to go for the floor so I could use the table’s legs as “supporting structure” for the lighting from above (explained soon, in “second try”).

Background

I used a piece of white fabric I bought on eBay, advertised as “photographic background”. It is a cotton cloth (in my case, 160cm x 250cm big – or about 5 x 8 feet), with a texture that helps diffuminate shadows. However, any real clean white sheet would have done the job.

Being a piece of cloth, it was important to extend it correctly, minimizing wrinkles. A better, more practical solution would probably have been using an Ikea roll curtain: no wrinkles, easy to roll and store.

You can also use white paper, but I found it difficult to find a sheet of paper big enough as to serve as background for a 120cm (4ft.) long bass. These were my first attempts to take a decent picture. At the end, I used something different as background (keep going).

So, back to the background cloth: I took advantage of my furniture to hold the background in place (I used clamps):

Another thing you could use as background is a transparent, reflecting sheet above the cloth (like plexiglas, or acryllic). That would eliminate shadows and will create a reflection instead. That is what I tried to achieve in this next picture (of another instrument – the “Mrs. Jazz” – this picture has of course been retouched with Photoshop, which will be discussed in the last part of this series of articles).

In the case of that guitar, instead of going for the shadows, I went for a reflection, as if the instrument were leaning on a shiny surface (which it was: a big piece of 2mm thick acrylic sheet).

Lighting – first try

Here we arrive at a phase of the process directly related to photography, which is also the most important. Despite my fundamental ignorance on the subject, I have come to understand that good photography is not about expensive cameras: is about good lighting.

You have basically three options regarding lighting:

- To use natural light (which is of not much use when you have to photograph products indoors)

- To use off-camera flashes. This is complicated, because you need to synchronize the flashes, which requires the use of remote controlled signals, special settings on the camera, supports for the flashes, etc. If you have them and know how to use them, go ahead, by any means. Certainly not my field of expertise.

- To use “continuous lighting” (lamps). This is the way I went. As the lights are on continuously, you can see a preview of the result on your cameras visor (or screen) and adjust things before shooting.

Lamps. I used two incandescent 500 watts lamps. You can get a similar lighting power from two 105W fluorescent bulbs. I didn’t have those at hand, but they are better than the incandescent bulbs for two reasons: lower consumption, and lower temperature.  They are more expensive, though. I got my two 500W lamps a couple of years back for 15eur each, in a “Home Depot” kind of store. Don’t forget to buy a couple spare filaments for them (they burn or break fast, but are really cheap).

As indicated in part I of this series, those 500w lamps will get HOT very quickly. Let them on only when you are taking pictures. If you have to go to the bathroom or answer the phone, turn them off.

I also got on eBay two white umbrellas with their supports, and mounted them on the lamp standers:

By using these, the strong light coming from the lamps gets diffused. That way the lamps, instead of acting as kind of “spotlights” (creating hard shadows) create an ambience filled with a more distributed light (which means softer shadows). All parts of the instrument get a more uniform lighting, too.

Note in the picture above how the light points directly to the umbrella. I did that by aligning the lamp angle (while the lamp is off and cold, of course) and the umbrella’s stick, hold in position by the support that came with it (which is itself screwed to the lamp support). There are different types of lamps and supports; you will have to use some ingenuity to get everything in place.

So, this is how my “studio” looks at this point:

My dog "Tango" is making sure that everything has been set up correctly.

And this is how it all looks with the lights on:

Note that the multiple socket is out of the way (down on the right part of the picture): I could move the lights around and have easy access to the instrument without getting my feet wrapped up in cables. Both lamps are plugged to the same multiple socket, which has an interruptor (easy to turn all lights on/off simultaneously).

I used gloves made of cloth to move the instrument around (latex ones would leave marks on the guitar). To keep the bass in position, I placed one of my dog’s plush toys under the body of the instrument (he was not happy about that). A bag with rice would have also worked, probably better. I have still have to try this support I made up with some PVC parts I bought in the hime-improvement store (about 7euro in total).

I intend to place the body of the guitar against this… object, and it will hopfully not slip away like the dog’s toy.

The dynamic of the session. I decided not to make the session “instrument after instrument” (like, taking all pictures of one guitar after another) but “take after take”, instead. That means: I would place the lamps and the camera, and shoot the main picture for all seven instruments; then I would set up the lamps and camera for the headstock takes, and shoot all seven headstocks, and so on. That way I am not constantly repositioning the lights and the camera (trying to remember how they where, etc), but just the guitars, and getting consistent results for all the instruments -which means also a more consistent presentation of the pictures in my website, later on.

So, in try #1 (lighting from the front) I obtained this result:

First try: lights from the front - No reflexes, no shadows... not good.

Look again at the professional picture we are using as reference (the kind of professional quality I intended to emulate):

Copyright: Dieter Stork - Instrument: Leo Lospennato - "Sauron" bass.

This means:

- My setting up the lights in front of the instrument (see pictures above) wasn’t right.

- Either the studio (in which the picture of the black bass was taken) was dark, or the instrument was placed inside a “tent” made with black fabric.

In the next picture, look what happens otherwise (if you don’t keep attention to what is reflected on your guitar): In the back of this black guitar you can see the reflections of the windows on the opposed wall o fmy living room, and you can see me reflected also, with a bored expression after hours of taking pictures.

(By the way, the guitar is hanging on a thin, nylon rope, which gives away another setup I used with my instruments – later, I would Photoshop the rope away, of course).

Looking at the reflection on the knobs in my picture of reference, and knowing the geometry of the body of that bass, I realized that the instrument had a light directly placed above it. Look:

There is a “rectangular-ish” source of light above (not an umbrella, but a so called “diffuser”), and no other sources of light reflected in those knobs.

So, it was time for a second try.

Next:  “How to photograph electric guitars – Part IV: Lighting”

(Previous: How to photograph electric guitars – Part II: Camera settings)

*************************

Find me on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/lospennato.lutherie

Visit my website, Leo Lospennato Electric Guitars: http://www.lospennato.com

Check out my book on Amazon: Electric Guitar and Electric Bass DESIGN

I hope you enjoyed the Part I of this series of articles. Now let me tell you about camera settings, so you can make the most of your guitar’s pictures.

1) Set the priority mode to “Aperture”.

The first thing we are going to do is to set the camera to “aperture priority mode”. In most cameras this is indicated in a wheel (it should be on the left side of the camera) with an “A” or with “Av”.

Make the "A" coincide with the marker.

That means that the camera will give priority to something called “Depth of Field”, and not to the shutter’s speed. Keep reading.

2) Set a “high” depth of field

Set the “Depth of Field” (“DOF” from now on) to f16, or even higher. The higher the f-number, the deeper DOF the pictures will have. That means: more things will come into focus, and not only the central part of the picture (or the main object).

However, it is not true that “the higher the DOF, the better”: Sometimes, it is desirable to have the main object in the picture sharp, while ensuring that the background is sufficiently “unsharp”. An example of this are portraits: you set a low number of DOF (like f2.8), so you can “isolate” the subject by putting it into focus (or even just their eyes, for example) against the surrounding objects, which will appear slightly blurred.  A high DOF number (f22 or more) will put virtually everything into focus no matter how far away they are, which is useful for example when you want to take pictures of landscapes, keeping in focus both your dog in the foreground, and some mountains in the background, which may be kilometers away. Or a complete guitar, come to that.

Granted, a guitar is a relatively small object, but nonetheless, you want to set a high f-number, otherwise one part of it would be in focus, but not the rest. That is what happened to me in the first try, using a DOF = f8:

This is a picture taken with DOF = f8, which caused...

..that the pickups are in fairly in focus, but...

...the headstock is out of focus.

If you want to learn more about DOF, check out this article on Wikipedia. But for practical terms, suffices to say that:

- More DOF = Higher “f” number = More things into focus / Whole objects look sharp (maybe including a background in focus as well)

- Less DOF = Lower “f” number = Less things into focus = Only some detail looks sharp / surroundings increasingly blurred the farther they are from the main detail.

Next: Set the ISO to 100.

The “ISO” (formerly known as “ASA”) tells you about the camera’s degree of sensitivity to light. In the old days of photography on film, a 100 ISOs film would take the most clear and detailed pictures, but it needed better lighting conditions. If you wanted to take photos in a darker environment (an indoor party at night, for example) you would choose a 400 ISOs film. To photograph stars, for example (incredibly low amounts of light) you would use a film with an ISO in the thousands. High ISO films would work much better in the dark, but the “grain” of the picture would be much coarser: the higher sensitivity of the film was achieved by means of larger photo-reactive particles on it, implying a lower resolution. In modern digital cameras something analogous happens, but all you have to do, is to set the ISOs to 100 (in fact, I found something even lower than 100 in my camera: something called “L 0.3″ – I believe is some simulation of an extra low ISO by means of software in the camera – not sure though).

I would be surprised if in your own camera the adjustment is done in exactly the same way (you might have “menues” to navigate, instead of “control wheels”). But you get the idea: find the way to set the ISO as low as possible for higher detail.

Overexposure: overrated

Overexposing the picture (allowing more light to impact the light-sensitive surface) is a trick that might help in diffusing the details of a white background. Look at these examples:

No overexposure

Overexposed (+1.0)

Even more overexposed (+2.0)

The overexposure diffuminates the background, allright. But it also sheds too much light on the guitar, making some details dissapear and making “the eyes hurt”. My experience is: better shoot the pictures without overexposing them, and use the overexposure function of the software in the retouching phase (to be explained in Part V of the present series of articles).

If you want, you can try a slight overexposure (+0.5, for example). That way, each object in the picture would appear to be slightly “flooded” with more light, even the background. Do not go much higher, though, otherwise the picture would result too bright.

White balance

The camera will try to balance the colors in the picture to avoid extreme contrasts, causing the white background look greyish.  This can be corrected from the camera itself (which I didn’t try to do) or more simply, by using software later on (Lightroom or Photoshop). In some forum I read someone suggested to use something called a “18% gray card” to set the white balance: this sounds like quantum physics to me; I imagine it depends on your camera having this feature, on having some set of grey cards at hand, and on you having the knowledge to do so. I don’t, so I go for Photoshop – the white balance is reset with just a couple of mouse clicks.

- Metering

“Metering” refers to the mode in which the camera measures the light in the scene in order to set its own sensors; the objective is to balance the parameters of the resulting picture in the best possible way.

There are three modes of metering: sensing the lighting conditions in a spot (in the very center of the scene), or in a slightly wider zone, or (this last one is what we are looking for) to sense the lighting conditions in the whole field of the picture. So, you want to set your camera like this:

That way, the metering is set to “Overall Metering”. Instead of measuring the light in a particular point (a shiny, chromed pickup, for example) the camera will take as reference the lighting in the whole instrument, instead. Of course, this is valid for the kind of “whole instrument” picture I am trying to make. If you want to isolate a particular detail, go ahead and try the other metering modes.

Resolution

You want, of course, the camera set to the highest resolution available. No matter how many megapixels it has: you want them all.

Shutter speed

The settings described above will give you the most clear, detailed picture. But there is a catch: the camera will require a relatively longer “exposure time” (the shutter will have to stay open longer to allow enough light to get into the camera).

This is specially true if you are using a long lens like I am (a huge 18-200mm zoom). That long, dark cylinder needs more time to let the light go through, into the camera.

Why is this a catch? Because a longer exposure time means a higher risk of camera-shake. With this settings you get the higher detail, but you cannot shoot holding your camera in your hands. If you are really determined to make good pictures, you must use a tripod. You can get them very cheap on… yes: Amazon or eBay (believe it or not, I got mine -a cheap but decent tripod that gets the job done- for 12.90 euros plus shipping).

So, is the camera ready? Time to read the next part: “How to photograph electric guitars – Part III: Studio setting + Lighting (first try)”

****************

Find me on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/lospennato.lutherie

Visit my website, Leo Lospennato Electric Guitars: http://www.lospennato.com

Check out my book on Amazon: Electric Guitar and Electric Bass DESIGN

Having just finished a few new models of electric guitars and basses, I found myself in front of two options:

Option 1 – Take all seven instruments to a professional photographer, which would imply transporting the guitars, and leaving them with someone unknown. I asked myself “how good are the pictures going to be? What insurance does he have? What happens if someone breaks in his studio and steal my guitars?” –not to mention a few hundred euros in fees.

Option 2 – Take the pictures myself. I don’t have formal training on photography, nor a professional studio. But I made my homework and the pictures came out fairly good, and in this article (and the next four ones) I intend to share that experience, in case you are tempted to do the same.

Despite being a photography-noob, I did have this in my favor:

A nice camera. My wife is an amateur photographer (she runs the Berlin Fotomarathon) and I borrowed her Nikon D90. Not the absolute top of the line (the camera, not my wife -she’s lovely), but also not just your typical tourist camera.

A clear idea of the quality I wanted to achieve.  Compare this two pictures:

This was my first attempt. Wrong camera settings, wrong studio setting, wrong lighting, wrong background, no retouch.

Now look at this one:

This is a picture of one of my basses taken by Dieter Stork (a professional photographer specialized in electric guitars) for a test of my instruments on Gitarre&Bass, Germany’s most important magazine on the subject.

I knew that I would never reach that level of quality, but that picture did set the benchmark for me: I wanted to make something at least approximating that astonishing clarity and level of detail. If you look at the picture in full resolution you can, for example, magnify the frets, and actually see things reflected on them!

In my yucky first picture, instead, the frets themselves were barely defined by some blurry pixels:

The camera’s resolution was only one variable contributing to the disaster: there were a lot of things I was leaving out.

Eventually, though, I managed to approximate the quality of the professional photo. This is one of the final (raw) photos of one of my instruments, one that took several sessions, corrections, trials and errors:

Which after retouching, ended up looking like this:

Not bad for a total noob, isn’t?

I also had a clear idea of the individual takes I wanted to make for each guitar. I needed:

- A main picture of the full instrument (just as in the pictures above)

- A frontal picture of the guitar’s body, in playing position (that is, the guitar inclined about 20°, as it would look hanging around a player’s shoulders)

- A picture of the back of the body

- Three or four pictures of details (headstock, pickups, nut, etc.)

Preparation

First, quick setup the instrument

Setting up an instrument is a process that requires precision, patience -and consequently- time. In my case I had several just-finished instruments to take pictures of, and I wanted to start as soon as I put the strings on them.

But I didn’t want to take pictures of my guitars with the wrong action (the distance between fretboard and strings) -I wanted the viewer to be tempted to reach into their computer’s screen, grab the instrument and play something. So I had to perform a quick setup – a “cosmetic” one if you want.

It just had to look good; I took care of the real setup later on.

Cleaning the instrument

The second step is to clean the instrument as perfectly as possible. Granted, you can use Photoshop in order to eliminate fingerprints, dust specks and dirty spots. But I have found that a good microfiber cloth works much better than software, and saves you a lot of time.

To improve results you can use wax, swirl removers or other product of your choice – I prefer those produced by 3M. You find them in stores specialized in car’s accessories, or just order them on eBay, or Amazon (note: I have no commercial interests in any of these companies).

Time and place

This is my advice regarding the circumstances you are going to work in:

- Time of the day. This concerns the use –or not- of natural light. I prefer to work with natural light, but just because it improves the lighting of the room –not the lighting of the product (I use artificial light for that). However, being in northern Europe in winter, sunlight was a rare commodity.

- Room: make sure you work in a room as big enough as to contain the elements you are going to use, and to allow you to move around without stepping on things. Depending on the kind of lights you are using, the temperature can go up very quickly, so be sure that the place can be properly ventilated.  In my case, my living room (4m x 6m, or 12 x 18 ft.) would do:

In the picture you can see one of the lamps, and the background I started using, but which later on I changed for another one, though – trial and error! (More details coming soon in Part II of this series of articles).

- Having a helping hand is important, for example to hold the instrument in position for particular pictures, or to help you move things around. A person with experience in product photography will add a valuable collaboration. But this is valid as long as you can work together effectively. Having someone looking over your shoulder making suggestions or correcting you all the time can be pretty annoying. If that is the case, you are better off working alone (like I do). Your mistakes are part of a learning curve.

Safety

(This is important. Please pay attention to this advice).

- Do not allow children in the room. It is going to be full of cables lying around, delicate equipment (tripods are not as stable as they look), and things (hot things) running on electricity.

- Talking about hot things, I use 500w halogen lights (see picture above). They are very, very hot. They can ignite or melt all kind of plastics, papers, fabrics and other materials placed close enough (guitar finishes, too). They must absolutely be used mounted on their corresponding  stand, never directly leaning on top of other things (like tables, books, etc).

- Have a fire extinguisher at hand (one adapted for electrical fires).

- I assume that you will work in a place with a proper electrical installation (thermal switches, circuit breaker, etc).

Next: “How to photograph electric guitar: Part II – Camera settings”

*************

Find me on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/lospennato.lutherie

Visit my website, Leo Lospennato Electric Guitars: http://www.lospennato.com

Check out my book on Amazon: Electric Guitar and Electric Bass DESIGN

What was the purpose of the designer of these instruments? I recognize a few of them, so I added a comment in those cases. Enjoy!

Twelve-neck Stratocaster

What’s the point? Developing something extreme! This is probably the most extreme guitar I ever saw. Multiple necks are suppose to expand the instrument’s resources, for example combining a 6-string with a 12-string, or a bass neck, etc. But twelve (!) necks exactly alike?

This “guitar” is actually intended as an art piece, made by Yoshihiko Satoh (title: “Present Arms”, 2002). Awesome. Unsellable as guitar, but awesome.

Glam-rock guitars

These instruments (1 bass, 1 guitar) have been custom made for Dusty Hill and Billy Gibbons, frontmen of the Texan rock band ZZ-Top. The intention of the design is clearly to cause an impression on a show. And maybe take the dust off the amps afterwards

“Mary-jane”

The goal of this cannabis-shaped body design was clearly not “ergonomics”. Maybe a political position demanding the legalization of pot?

Surfboard guitar

Behold Masayoshi Takanaka’s guitar, made from a real cut-out surfboard. I don’t want to know the size of the case in which that thing is transported!

“Escopetarra”

Colombian luthier Alberto Paredes designed the “Escopetarra” (an invented word in Spanish, mixture of “Escopeta” -shotgun-, and “guitarra” -guitar-), made from decomissioned rifles. One of these babies hangs on the UN Headquarters, and the objective of the design was not musical, but political.

Vintage-style 5-neck guitar

I like this one. One 12-string neck, three 6-string necks, and 1 6-string fretless neck. It has a “Gretschy” look, but sadly only 3 knobs (so, no independent controls of the different necks).

Michael Angelo Batio’s guitar

The author of “Velocity Kills” has developed a unique playing style using to mirrored necks. Look for a video of him on YouTube, and join the debate on “talent vs. acrobatics”

A Lego guitar

Cute idea; I don’t think this guitar can be played, though, but is only decorative. The main clue is the lack of strings (the structure probably cannot support the tension) but there are also no frets, and I cannot imagine how do you regulate the neck relief.

Steve Vai’s “heart guitar”

Featured in my book Electric Guitar and Bass Design, this awesome guitar was played live by Steve Vai some years ago. I imagine it can be disassembled through the central line, to facilitate portability. Now it hangs on a wall at the Orlando Hard Rock Cafe.

End-to-end guitar

I imagine the objective of this design is simply “to have fun”. Some things confuse me, however: 1) Which kind of strings are being used? It seems to me that those should be like four feet long!  2) Does can this guitar possibly play in tune? The position of the frets is off in relation with the length of the strings. The only solution I see is avoiding to play open strings at all.

Angel Guitar

Since those wings and the knives are surely not intended to make the player comfortable while holding this instrument, the rational conclusion is that these is a decorative object only

The “Picasso”

Made by American (and female!) luthier Linda Manzer, this awesome, 42-string instrument was built for Pat Metheny (watch this video on YouTube). Just take a look at the control console on the top of the body.

Big Foot

Fun

 Cheap Trick’s 5-neck

Another version of the “vintage 5-neck” depicted above. Used by Rick Nielsen, from the Illinois’ rock band Cheap Trick.

Mermaid guitar

It seems to me that this is an acoustical instrument, not an electrical one. I wonder how does it sound!

Impressive metal gear

Now, this one is as original as is scary. The beauty of the form is undeniable to me; it is clearly an instrument intended to play standing, being careful not to stab yourself to death by accidentaly falling on the headstock. I couldn’t find the luthier that made this one. Anyone?

Thanks for reading!

Fig.11. A transmitting coil radiates its magnetic AC field into the pickup coils. So you can measure the frequency response easily

The Secrets of Electric Guitar Pickups

An electric bass or guitar’s sound depends greatly on its pickups. There are lengthy discussions between musicians about the advantages and disadvantages of different models, and for someone who has no knowledge of electronics the subject may seem to be very complicated. Electrically, though, pickups are fairly easy to understand – so this article will examine the connection between electrical characteristics and sound.

I am sorry to say that most pickup manufacturers spread misleading information on their products, in order to make more money and to agitate their competitors. So some corrections of facts will be necessary. I am not affiliated with any manufacturer.

There are two basic pickup types, magnetic pickups and piezoelectric pickups. The latter type work with all kinds of strings (steel, nylon, or gut). Magnetic pickups work only with steel strings, and consist of magnets and coils. Singlecoil pickups are sensitive to magnetic fields generated by transformers, fluorescent lamps, and other sources of interference, and are prone to pick up hum and noise from these sources. Dual coil or “humbucking” pickups use two specially configured coils to minimize this interference. Because these coils are electrically out of phase, common-mode signals (i.e. signals such as hum that radiate into both coils with equal amplitude) cancel each other.

The arrangement of the magnets is different for different pickups. Some types have rod or bar magnets inserted directly in the coils, while others have magnets below the coils, and cores of soft iron in the coils. In many cases these cores are screws, so level differences between strings can be evened out by screwing the core further in or out. Some pickups have a metal cover for shielding and protection of the coils, others have a plastic cover that does not shield against electromagnetic interference, and still others have only isolating tape for protecting the wire.

The magnetic field lines flow through the coil(s) and a short section of the strings. With the strings at rest, the magnetic flux through the coil(s) is constant. Pluck a string and the flux changes, which will induce an electric voltage in the coil. A vibrating string induces an alternating voltage at the frequency of vibration, where the voltage is proportional to the velocity of the strings motion (not its amplitude). Furthermore, the voltage depends on the string’s thickness and magnetic permeability, the magnetic field, and the distance between the magnetic pole and the string.

There are so many pickups on the market that it is difficult to get a comprehensive overview. In addition to the pickups that come with an instrument, replacement pickups – many of them built by companies that do not build guitars – are also available. Every pickup produces its own sound; one may have a piercing metallic quality, and another a warm and mellow sound. To be precise: A pickup does not have a sound, it only has a “transfer characteristic”. It transfers the sound material that it gets from the strings and alters it, every model in its own fashion. For instance: Mount the same Gibson 490 humbucker on a Les Paul, on a Super 400 CES, or on any inferior pawnshop guitar. You will hear three completely different sounds. So what is the sound of that humbucker? The best pickup is useless when you have a poor guitar body with poor strings. The basic rule is always: garbage in – garbage out!

Replacement pickups allow the guitarist to change sounds without buying another instrument (within the limitations of body and strings, of course). Different pickups also have different output voltages. High output models can make it easier to overdrive amplifiers to produce a dirty sound, while low output models tend to produce a more clean sound. The output voltage of most pickups varies between 100 mV and 1 V RMS.

Unlike other transducers that have moving parts (microphones, speakers, record player pickups etc.), magnetic guitar pickups have no moving parts – the magnetic field lines change, but they have no mass. So evaluating pickups is much easier than with other transducers. Although the frequency responses of nearly all available magnetic pickups are nonlinear (which creates the differences in sound), they don’t have quite as many adjacent peaks and notches in their frequency response as for example a speaker. In fact, the frequency response can be smooth and simple enough to be easily described with a mathematical formula.

The Pickup as Circuit

From an electrical standpoint, a magnetic guitar pickup is equivalent to the circuit in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Electrical equivalent circuit of a magnetic pickup

A real coil can be described electrically as an ideal inductance L in series with an DC resistance R, and parallel to both a winding capacitance C. This replacement circuit can be used as a first approximation. It is a bit simplified compared to the reality but quite useful for the beginning. The finer details are explained later. For a humbucker, two of these circuits have to be connected in series. Since both coils (with precise manufacturing) have practically identical properties, you may use the same simple replacement circuit for the electrical examination. You then have to use twice the values for the inductance and the DC resistance and half of the value for the capacitance as compared to one coil.

Many people measure only the DC resistance and think they know something about a pickup. But this is a fundamental error. There never flows any DC in a pickup. By far the most important quantity is the inductance, measured in Henries. It depends on the number of turns, the magnetic material in the coil, the winding density and the overall geometry of the coil. The DC resistance and the capacitance don’t have much influence and can be neglected in a first approximation.

When the strings are moving, an AC voltage is induced in the coil. So the pickup acts like an AC source with some attached electric components (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2. A pickup as an audio voltage source plus second-order lowpass

The external load consists of resistance (the volume and tone potentiometer in the guitar, and any resistance to ground at the amplifier input) and capacitance (due to the capacitance between the hot lead and shield in the guitar cable). The cable capacitance is significant and must not be neglected. This arrangement of passive components forms a so-called second-order low-pass filter (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. A pickup plus real external load (pots, cable, and amp input resistance)

Thus, like any other similar filter, it has a cut-off frequency fg; this is where the response is down 3 dB (which means half power). Above fg, the response rolls off at a 12 dB per octave rate, and far below fg, the attenuation is zero. There is no low frequency rolloff; however, a little bit below fg there is an electrical resonance between the inductance of the pickup coil and the capacitance of the guitar cable. This frequency, called fmax, exhibits an amplitude peak. The passive low-pass filter works as a voltage amplifier here (but doesn’t amplify power because the output current becomes correspondingly low, as with a transformer). Fig. 4 shows the typical contour of a pickup’s frequency response.

Fig. 4. Fundamental frequency response of a magnetic pickup. Position and height of the peak vary from type to type

If you know the resonant frequency and height of the resonant peak, you know about 90 percent of a pickup’s transfer characteristics; these two parameters are the key to the “secret” of a pickup’s sound (some other effects cannot be described using this model, but their influence is less important).

What all this means is that overtones in the range around the resonant frequency are amplified, overtones above the resonant frequency are progressively reduced, and the fundamental vibration and the overtones far below the resonant frequency are reproduced without alteration.

How Resonance Affects Sound

The resonant frequency of most available pickups in combination with normal guitar cables lies between 2,000 and 5,000 Hz. This is the range where the human ear has its highest sensitivity. A quick subjective correlation of frequency to sound is that at 2,000 Hz the sound is warm and mellow, at 3,000 Hz brilliant or present, at 4,000 Hz piercing, and at 5,000 Hz or more brittle and thin. The sound also depends on the height of the peak, of course. A high peak produces a powerful, characteristic sound; a low peak produces a weaker sound, especially with solid body guitars that have no acoustic body resonance. The height of the peak of most available pickups ranges between 1 and 4 (0 to 12 dB), it is dependent on the magnetic material in the coil, on the external resistive load , and on the metal case (without casing it is higher; many guitarists prefer this).

The resonant frequency depends on both the inductance L (with most available pickups, between 1 and 10 Henries) and the capacitance C. C is the sum of the winding capacitance of the coil (usually about 80 – 200 pF) and the cable capacitance (about 300 – 1,000 pF). Since different guitar cables have different amounts of capacitance, it is clear that using different guitar cables with an unbuffered pickup will change the resonant frequency and hence the overall sound.

There are some books that deal especially with electric guitar pickups. They pay much attention to the DC resistance and the magnet materials. But the DC resistance is the least interesting magnitude of all. And statements like “Alnico 5 sounds like this, Alnico 2 sounds like that” are completely misleading. Many “pickup experts” have never heard the term “inductance”. What you find in those books is an obsolete “geocentric” view on pickups that will never work.

The integral “heliocentric” view on pickups: Pickup, pots in the guitar, cable capacitance, and amp input impedance are an interactive system that must not be split up into its parts. If you analyze the properties of the parts separately you will never understand how the system works as a whole. The sound material a pickup receives from the strings is not flavoured by the pickup alone but by the complete system. This includes the guitar cable.

Another cable, another sound! This is a shame but it is true. You can easily check it up. A few pickup manufacturers know that fact but they conceal it. The majority seems to be totally ignorant.

The influence of eddy currents

As mentioned earlier, this overview has been simplified to make it easier to understand. Up to this point, it has not taken into account the influence of eddy currents in metal parts. Such currents appear wherever an alternating magnetic field flows through electrically conductive parts. These parts are mostly the cores of magnetic coils. That is, either permanent magnets (in which the currents are relatively weak) oder soft iron parts such as screws or fixed slugs (where the currents are stronger). Strong eddy currents can also occur in metal covers; these currents vanish when the covers are removed. To some degree, the currents’ strength depends on the dimensions of the metal parts as well as their constituent materials. The decisive factor, however, is the parts’ specific resistivity, which is highly variable. There are thousands of iron and steel core types, whose properties can differ widely, resulting in variable frequency transmission characteristics. Metal covers are made of either brass (copper/zinc) or German Silver (copper/zinc/nickel); the latter has a higher specific resistivity and is therefore less conductive to eddy currents. Plastic covers are not conductive. To a lesser extent, eddy currents can also occur in base plates as well as in metal magnets located underneath the coils.

Eddy currents have a threefold effect: First, they reduce resonance superelevation, sometimes to the point of eliminating it completely; secondly, they steepen the slope of frequency transmissions at a height far exceeding the resonant frequency, where 18 dB/octave slopes can be measured. This slope is inversely proportional to the threefold power of the frequency. Thirdly, they cause the frequency transmission curve to drop slightly below the resonant frequency, as shown in Fig. 5:

Fig. 5. Transmission characteristics resulting from strong eddy currents

There have been attempts to measure eddy currents by attaching resistors to the replacement circuit, in parallel to the coil or to the terminals. This method has not been successful, however, for although it does reduce resonance superelevation, it fails to achieve the other two above-mentioned results. A much more effective approach is to divide the coil in two, and to connect only one of the two parts via resistor (R2). The point of division is “virtual”. That is, it does not actually exist, or rather, it cannot be measured directly. This point does not correspond directly to the point at which the two coils in a humbucker are connected; this also holds true for single-coil pickups that have been strongly damped against eddy currents (such as Gibson P90 or DiMarzio “Fat Strat”). The two parts of the coil do not have to be the same size. For practical purposes, identical sizes can be used as a point of departure, but there is no need to keep them identical. The extended replacement circuit is shown in Fig. 6:

Fig. 6. Replacement circuit for a pickup with eddy currents

When you rearrange this setup into an AC signal source by attaching a passive filter, you obtain the configuration shown in Fig. 7:

Fig. 7. Pickup with eddy currents as signal source with attached lowpass filter 3

 Altering Pickup Characteristics

Basically, there are three different ways to change a guitar’s sound as it relates to pickups:

1. Install new pickups. This method is most common, but also the most expensive.

2. Change the coil configuration of the built in pickups. This is possible with nearly all humbucking pickups. Normally, both coils are switched in series. Switching them in parallel cuts the inductance to a quarter of the initial value, so the resonant frequency (all other factors including the guitar cable being equal) will be twice as high. Using only one of the coils halves the inductance, so the resonant frequency will increase by the factor of the square root of 2 (approximately 1.4). In both cases, the sound will have more treble than before. Many humbucking pickups have four output wires – two for each coil – so different coil combinations can be tried without having to open the pickup. Some single coil pickups have a coil tap to provide a similar flexibility.

3. Change the external load. This method is inexpensive but can be very effective. With only a little expense for electronic components, the sound can be shaped within wide limits. Standard tone controls lower the resonant frequency by connecting a capacitor in parallel with the pickup (usually through a variable resistor to give some control over how much the capacitor affects the pickup). Therefore, one way to change the sound is to replace the standard tone control potentiometer with a rotary switch that connects different capacitors across the pickup (a recommended range is 470 pF to 10 nF). This will give you much more sound variation than a standard tone control (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8. Changing the frequency response with different external capacitors parallel to a pickup coil

These rotary switches are commercially available now, handmade by the author, embedded in epoxy resin (Fig. 9).

Fig. 9. Rotary switch with a selection of different capacitors, embedded in epoxy resin

Also, adding an internal buffer amplifier can isolate the pickup from some of the loading effects of cable capacitance, thus giving a brighter sound with higher resonance frequency and higher peak.

The table correlates some well-known pickups and their electrical characteristics. However, note that pickups are not precision devices and that old pickups in particular (eg. Fender and Gibson pickups of the fifties) vary so much that almost each one sounds different from the next. Thus, the values of the resonant frequency in the table are rounded to the nearest 100 Hz. Also note that peaks become very flat and large below 1,000 Hz. As the height of the resonance peak depends on the external load resistance (volume pot, tone pot and amplifier input resistance), lowering this load (e.g. by switching resistors in parallel to the pickup) lowers the height. For raising the height of the peak, the load resistance must be increased. In many cases this is only possible by installing a FET or other high-impedance preamp in the guitar.

See table: Resonant frequencies of some well-know pickups for various parallel capacitors. (Consider that figures can vary by +/– 10 to 20 % due to sample variations.)

4. Install an active electronic circuit that acts as a second-order low-pass filter. This will give you the possibility to adjust the resonant frequency and the resonance height continuously with potentiometers, instead of only in discrete steps. So you can imitate the sound characteristics of many different guitar and bass pickups. These circuits are called „State Variable Filter”. The first instrument manufacturer to apply this was Alembic since the seventies, later it was copied by others. Completely mounted circuit boards of this kind, fitting into most common instruments, are available from the author (Fig. 10). They need a 9 V battery for supply, and on some instruments some space inside the body that must be routed.

Fig.10. Active electronic circuit that acts as a second-order low-pass- filter and imitates the sound characteristics of many different guitar and bass pickups

Measuring Frequency Response

To precisely measure a pickup’s frequency response, it would be necessary to measure the vibration of the string and compare it with the output voltage at every frequency. In practice, this is very difficult to do. An alternative to moving the string is to subject the pickup to an outside magnetic field, generated by a transmitting coil. This induces a voltage by changing the magnetic flux through the coils. As the induced voltage in the pickup is proportional to the variation of the magnetic field with time, the driving current through the coil must be inversely proportional to the frequency.

A sine wave voltage feeds an integrator circuit to produce an output voltage that is inversely proportional to frequency. This signal then goes into a power amplifier and then to the transmitting coil that actually couples the signal into the pickup. The coil can consist of a pickup bobbin wound with about 50 turns of enamelled copper wire (approximately 0.5 mm, or 0.02 inches in diameter, no. 24). The exact value is not critical. The coil must be driven with a constant current independent of its impedance. It is mounted above the pickup so that it radiates its magnetic field into the pickup coil(s) as fully as possible. With single coil pickups, the axes must be in line with each other; with humbucking pickups, the axis of the transmitting coil must be perpendicular to the axes of the pickup’s coils (Fig. 11).

Fig.11. A transmitting coil radiates its magnetic AC field into the pickup coils. So you can measure the frequency response easily

To plot the response, vary the sine wave frequency from about 100 Hz to 10 kHz and measure the pickup’s output voltage with a broad-band multimeter or oscilloscope. The absolute value is not important; what matters is the position of the resonance peak and its height above the overall amplitude at lower frequencies. The effect of different load capacitors (cables) and resistors (pots) is easy to examine with this setup. One of the main advantages of this measuring method is that no modifications on the guitar are necessary, and the pickups need not be removed from the guitar.

This complete measuring arrangement is now available as a commercial instrument. With this, you can easily see what a pickup does with the sound material it gets from strings and body. This is the end of wandering around in the fog. The Pickup Analyzer© (Fig. 12) determines the frequency response, it shows which frequencies are emphasized and which are attenuated – objectively, independent of strings and body, with mounted or loose pickups. How it works: A transmitting coil radiates an alternating magnetic field into the coil(s) of the pickup. While the frequency is varied over the entire audio range, the instrument measures the output voltage of the pickup. The external load conditions can be varied over a wide range: 11 capacitors from 47 pF to 10 nF and five resistors from 111 kOhm (representing 250 kOhm volume and tone pot in the guitar and 1 MOhm amp input resistance) up to 10 MOhm. Also, the combination of a pickup with a guitar cable can be measured, the influence of different cables on the response is plain to see. Furthermore, it is possible to analyze any modifications on a pickup, such as removing the metal cover or exchanging the magnets for others, or technical defects like short-circuit windings inside the coil. Sample variations of the pickup series can be recognized quickly, deviants can be identified and sorted out. So reclaiming from the manufacturer will have a better chance. The Pickup Analyzer© saves time in development and repairs. Main users are pickup manufacturers, high quality guitarmakers and renowned music shops.

Fig.12. The "Pickup Analyzer"© - the first commercially available measuring instrument for the frequency resonponse of magnetic pickups.

In its first version the Pickup Analyzer worked as a stand-alone device. The figures of frequency and response were read on two seven-segment LED displays. The new second version (Fig. 13) is used in combination with a PC. It is connected via two audio cables to the sound card which works als digital to analog and analog to digital converter.

Fig. 13. The new PC-coupled Pickup Analyzer©

If you run the measuring software you will get the response curves of the pickup on the PC screen. You can easily store it and print it, or send it to another person by e-mail. Fig. 14 and 15 show some results.

Fig. 14 shows the frequency response of a 1972 Fender Stratocaster Pickup with capacitive load of 470 pF and eight different Ohmic loads from 10 kOhms to 10 MOhms. It can be seen how different values of pots in the guitar influence the height of the resonance peak. With 47 kOhms or less the peak vanishes.

Fig. 14. Response of a Fender Stratocaster pickup with 470 pF load capacitance and different Ohmic loads

Fig. 15 shows the frequency response of the same pickup, now with constant resistive load of 10 MOhm and eight different load capacitors from 47 pF to 2200 pF. The resonance frequency and so the tonal characteristics can be easily changed by varying the load capacitance.

Fig. 15. Response of a Fender Stratocaster pickup (1972) with 10 MOhms ohmic load and eight different capacitive loads

For comparison Fig. 16 shows the response of an inferior pickup. This is a Hoyer built around 1970, looking like a humbucker but with only one coil inside, capacitive load 470 pF, five different resistive loads. With the 250 k pots used in this guitar there is no more resonance because of very strong eddy currents in the metal parts. The sound is dull.

Some final comments

The measured result is really precise only for single coil pickups. Humbucking pickups have certain notches at high frequencies, because the vibrations of the strings are picked up at two points simultaneously. High overtones, where the peak of the waveform occurs over one pole and the trough (valley) of the wave occurs over the other, can produce cancellations. These notches are at different frequencies for each string and cannot be described with a single curve. For instance, with standard size humbucking pickups, for the deep E string the notch is at about 3,000 Hz, for the A string at 4,000 Hz. For the high strings the notch is far above the cutoff frequency fg and can hardly be heard.

The effect of the sound difference between one coil and two coils with a humbucker is overestimated by far. The main reason for getting more treble with one coil is that the resonant frequency has been raised because of the halving of the inductance. Sensing the strings at only one point instead of two also has an effect, but this is much smaller. It can only be compared when the resonant frequency is held constant while switching.

Furthermore, this measuring method does not take into consideration the effect of different output voltages of different pickups. For instance, the Gibson 498T and 500T humbuckers have a very similar transfer characteristic, but the 500T is remarkably louder. In the „crunch” range of a tube amp a louder pickup produces a different tone than a low volume pickup, even when their transfer characteristics are equal. Nevertheless, testing a pickup in this manner gives useful information on its characteristics. With this knowledge, you can find which type of sounds appeal to you the most, and possibly bend and shape the frequency response with external capacitors and resistors to “tune” pickups to your liking (and for the best match to the body and strings).

Finally, the nonlinear distortion of a pickup cannot be measured in this way. It exists, because the relationship between the magnetic flux through the coil(s) and the distance from the magnetic pole to the string follows a hyperbolic curve. So, if the string vibrates in a sine wave (which every harmonic does by itself), additional even harmonics are produced which do not exist in the natural spectrum of the vibration, and as a consequence alter the sound. The resulting distortion depends on the width of the string vibration and can hardly be quantified. The shorter the distance between magnetic pole and string, the stronger it is. This can be heard: With a shorter distance, the sound is more aggressive than with a larger distance. But with too short a distance, the magnets pull the strings, and harmonics are shifted so that they are no longer exact multiples of the fundamental frequency, but a little higher or lower. If this variation is very small, it can sound good and the tone becomes more alive, like with a slight chorus effect. But if it is too large, the sound will be terrible. You will find this problem on many Stratocasters, it is called “Stratitis”. The only way to reduce it is to adjust the pickup to be further away from the strings.

© Helmuth E. W. Lemme, Munich, Germany

http://www.gitarrenelektronik.de

The first version of this article was published in the American magazine “Electronic Musician” (edited by Craig Anderton), December 1986, p. 66 – 72.

Also reproduced with authorization of the author on “Electric Guitar and Bass Design“.

Look at the uninterrupted, elegant fluidity of Les Pauls and Stratocasters. The perimeter of the body is defined by a sigle, continuous line that defines the concavities and convexities without sudden jumps or insecure changes of direction. Even the sharp corners (found in the vecinity of the heel) make sense, so the horns naturally flow into the neck lines (not shown here):

Straight lines are pure too, of course. Boring pure, glass-of-tepid-water pure. They have no accidents, no inflection points, no changes. The only attribute it have is length. Circles are pure, too. Regular polygons, spheres… predictably pure.

I believe that “purity of lines” has to do with:

1) the definition of the inflection points.

* Position and number. On the red curve you can say how many inflection points there are, and where are they located. The blue curve is confusing in this sense.
* Separation. The inflection points are clearly set apart. On the blue curve they seem to be competing against each other.
* Well defined peaks. No matter if the peaks are sharp, rounded, acute or wide: they have a clear (not necessarily regular) geometric nature: angular, parabolic, semielliptical, etc. On the blue curve the peaks look undefined.

2) The definition of the curves

* Direction. In the red figure you can say in which direction each line is actually curved.
* Change. A curve with a constant curvature (an arc) is pure. A curve with a uniform change (a spiral, for example) is pure. A curve with strongly irregular changes in curvature will probably not be pure.
* Concavities and convexities. The spaces defined by the concavities and convexities of a smooth curve are clearly defined.

Compare:

That’s the concept at the core of pure lines: smoothness. Compare the spirals below. Both are irregular and very similar. But one has purity of lines, and the other does not:

By the way: “Smoothness” makes me think of NURBS (Non-uniform rational basis spline – See Wikipedia entry), which are mathematical models commonly used in computer graphics for generating and representing curves and surfaces which offers great flexibility and precision for handling both analytic and freeform shapes. They have positional, tangential, and curvature continuity. Smooth!

As a counterexample found on electric instruments, let’s analize a bass whose sounds and looks are amongst my favorite, but from which we can point out a slight, subtle “impurity” in the lines: the Rickenbacker 4004 bass. Can you spot it? (Try to find it yourself, and then scroll down to see what I mean):

Follow the top line of the instrument from right to left. Inside the circle there is a point in which the curve loses the smoothness, it becomes more straight, and then starts curving the other way to define the lower bout:

This also affects the vertical symmetry somehow: the lower line (smooth, sexy) is not reflected in the top line of the body.

This is how I would have resolved this body:

What do you think of it? What would you have done? Let me know!

Be inspired and make music!

Visit my guitar website: http://www.lospennato.com

1. Weyland Yutani (“Alien”, directed by Ridley Scott, 1979)

The company: Apart from building very cool androids, this respectable American-Japanese conglomerate used to make its daily bread by excelling at “terraforming” – injecting an atmosphere on inhabitable planets and stuff.

Shortly after, sadly, some of their customers got annihilated by horrible insect-like monsters which used the colonists’ torsos as nursery.

W.Y. went ahead, nonetheless, and tried to bring those bastards to Earth to use them as weapons. Or maybe as pets. Yeah, that would be cool: having your kids playing with predators with molecular acid instead of blood running through their veins.

The logo looks very industrial, very structural, in sintony with their business. The font’s choice is a classic: the Eurostyle. In foreground, the “W”, with the “Y” behind. Clever, serious and good looking. This is one of my all-time favorite logos. Good slogan, too, although not always supported by historical facts.

"Mommy! Fido is eating Granma!"

2. Cyberdyne Systems (“The Terminator”, directed by James Cameron, 1984)

The company: It seems that Cyberdyne went from programming some free Joomla extensions and ringtones, to creating a self-conscious artificial intelligence who spawned an entire race of killing machines, the most charming among them being some liquid poly-alloy terminators. 

The logo: The “C” and the “D” of CyberDyne are represented by the triangle, which includes the letter “y” in it, too. I interpret the internal elements of the logo as the integration of humanity and cybernetics, poetically converging together. I am sure that such analysis looked great on their business plan, but they failed in the implementation phase, bringing Judgement Day instead. Way to go, a-holes!

"You want me to clean the toilet for you? Hahaha... Oh, boy, you ARE killing me..."

3. OCP (“Robocop” – Directed by Paul Verhoeven, 1987)

The company: OCP is into a lot of things: construction, transportation, and some really good breakfast cereal. Later on they went onto manufacturing robotic police forces, but only the first prototype worked fine: the rest of the product line was nothing but a bunch of soulless, stupid walking machine guns.

The logo represents the “O” of “Omni” including everything in it (honoring the spirit of the Latin word); it engulfs even the “Consumer”, represented by a C that seems to be “eating” the P of “Products”.

Also, the “P” is on top of the other letters, which means they put their products above their customers, who are also “trapped” inside the “O”.

Metaphorical, isn’t?

"No, Ma'am; for technical service please call our Hotline, 0-800-OCP-HELP".

4. Tyrrell Corporation (“Blade Runner”, directed by Ridley Scott, 1982)

The company: Tyrrell Corp. is not an evil corporation per se. In fact, their intentions were good. They failed in considering two small details: the synthetic-humans’ feelings, and the real-humans’ safety. I regret they are not in business, as long as Google shows. I would have loved to catch some good deal on a Sean Young’s look-alike replicant…

The logo represents an owl (symbol of wisdom) over “T” of Tyrrell looking almost as a trident. The logo has the shape of a shield, which gives a certain strong, trustworthy aura to it.

"I may be synthetic, but I am not stupid, mister. You say 'coffee', but you mean something else."

5. Umbrella Corporation (“Resident Evil” – Directed by Paul W.S. Anderson, 2002)

The company: Despite its name, this company is not the business of producing rainwear; no Bed-Bath-&-Beyond-like branding going on here.

They produce pharmaceutical products. But I am not talking about aspirin: I am talking about the vicious T-Virus, a genetically modified microscopic terror that ends up causing a Zombie Holocaust.

The logo and the name of the company seem to have been chosen in a hurry, since they are more adapted to ladies’ apparel than to mass destruction biological products. Well, at least the logo is simple, which is always nice.

"That's it, brain-eater... come to papa... I have your medicine right here..."

Be inspired, make music! ?

(This is a fan article. All the logos are fictional, and so are the companies. I drew this logos myself, and to that extent are free to use and reproduce. Third parties rights may apply, though. All pictures are reproduced under Creative Commons licence, reproduced originally on Flickr.com: Vermin Inc, Kadath, sjmck, Thomas Duchnicki, shaun wong).

Take a look at the following guitar logos, trying to identify some common characteristics:

Have you noticed?

1) Almost all of them are based on surnames.

2) They use script fonts, that is, typographies that resemble handwriting.

3) Most of them are slightly angled, imitating a signature.

4) Almost half of them include the word “guitars”.

If you want to design your logo in the same traditional style than the ones above, then your job is half done: find a script font you like, write your own name with it, add some graphic elements (an artsy underline, a variation in the initial letter, etc.), and there you go.

You can design your own logo, of course. Be aware, though, that logo design is a complex discipline, a subject of study in itself, full of aesthetic, artistic, psychological and symbolic connotations; it needs a lot of dedication and experience to create logos that can be considered “great”, or even “good”.

In the article 10 tips on how to avoid common mistakes in logo design the first advice warns against “having your logo designed by an amateur”, be that you, a friend, or an inexperienced graphic designer. But if you really want to design your own logo, check the following article, which lists 45 Rules for Creating a Great Logo Design.

From my part, I wish to offer these “dos and don’ts” of logo design, with focus in guitar branding:

A quick way to “create” a sober logo is just using your signature. It doesn’t have to be your real signature, especially if your penmanship is like your doctor’s. Use a simplified, stylized version instead. It looks elegant, and it is very simple to make: just use a permanent marker.

Logos in guitars can also be inlayed (as in many Gibson instruments), or applied in the form of a decal (Fender style), or carved into the wood. I have my logo laser cut from a thin metal sheet, and glued to the instrument before the transparent finishing coats are applied.

This article is an extract of my book Electric Guitar & Bass Design. And if you like guitars, visit my other website to see my crazy instruments.