software

Tell me about it...everything you think when you think Norton.

It says that it has the quot;nasty harmonic overtonesquot; that the FRED has and the power and mid-range of the Tone Zone. Sounds pretty badass.

Now I haven't played the Tone Zone, but I have played the FRED...does it really capture the vocal quality that he FRED has, that sort of open-vowel sound when you start to really dig in?

Your help is appreciated...I'm trying to figure out what bridge pup to put in my Soloist to replace the JB I got in there and I want dub-creams, babe.

Also, would someone be so kind to point me in the direction of a good DiMarzio Dealer? Gracias.

I put a Norton in the bridge position of my LP a while back. I'm not trying to be funny or sarcastic when I say this:

The Norton sounded like the best overdriven LP you ever heard in your life if the amp your were playing it through was in a closed closet. The lows and the mids were right there with grit and rip but the high end sounded muffled or masked somehow - no sparkle whatsoever, just a compressed, 'eh'. I had a Pearly Gates bridge model in the neck position of the LP at the same time. The PG blew away the Norton in highs and also served to A/B how much more air the PG had by comparison.

In other words, if one is into a great, powerful, vintage tone with everything but high end, the Norton is a great choice.


Originally Posted by GuitaristTell me about it...everything you think when you think Norton.

I can give you my opinion on the Air Norton. It's lower powered, but supposedly has the same tonal voicing. So take my opinion with a grain of salt - I don't know how close the Air norotn and Norton truly sound, but I bet it's pretty darn close. The big difference is probably in how your amp will respond to the higher or lower voltage coming from the guitar.

Here's my 2¢:

First thing that comes to mind is that It has got to go in the right guitar. Check out my clips here, towards the bottom of page 7: from : localhost//forum/s...6amp;page=7amp;pp=20 I don't think it works at all in a mahogany guitar. The low end just blooms and gets too big. Instead of fat, it's kind of morbidly obese, you know what I mean?

But in the right guitar? It could be awesome. Depnds on your style and tastes. I think it's a very very modern-sounding pickup. Fat, with complex, rich mid-range. Cutting high end, but not shrill. Not a PAF, not a hot PAF, not a distortion-type pup. A modern, rich sounding pup, with a very broad and complex tonal spectrum.

Do I sound like I'm talking BS? I dunno... haven't had my second cup of coffee yet, so I may be whacked out at the moment. Hope this is helpful at all!

Cheers


Originally Posted by MartianI put a Norton in the bridge position of my LP a while back. I'm not trying to be funny or sarcastic when I say this:

The Norton sounded like the best overdriven LP you ever heard in your life if the amp your were playing it through was in a closed closet. The lows and the mids were right there with grit and rip but the high end sounded muffled or masked somehow - no sparkle whatsoever, just a compressed, 'eh'. I had a Pearly Gates bridge model in the neck position of the LP at the same time. The PG blew away the Norton in highs and also served to A/B how much more air the PG had by comparison.

In other words, if one is into a great, powerful, vintage tone with everything but high end, the Norton is a great choice.

Many Dimarzios have the top end rolled off.....they work best in bright guitars with bright amps IMO. If you find Duncans are too bright for your application(generally speaking), try some of the Dimarzios....they will beef up any guitar without the ear bleeding top end.


Originally Posted by wildstarInstead of fat, it's kind of morbidly obese, you know what I mean?


This is hysterically funny... and true. I used the Norton in a Epi LP Custom, the Black Beauty one that is not necessarily made of Mahagony (some are alder) and it was way too dark.

Since everyone seems to be searching for the ultimate hot Paf, the Norton is sort of an oddity. Very modern, very middy and dark... Which can also sound muddy and dull, like Martian said. If you search for a pickup that breaths, with openness, man don't touch this one with a ten-foot pole.

I suspect it may sound better in a bright guitar.

This pickup is far from being DiMarzio's best seller, and there's a reason for that. I don't know too many people who actually like this one.

And I have to confess that this is the only DiMarzio pickup that I actually hate. And I tried several of them.

Eeeww...anyone else?


Originally Posted by Sly_D
This pickup is far from being DiMarzio's best seller, and there's a reason for that. I don't know too many people who actually like this one.

And I have to confess that this is the only DiMarzio pickup that I actually hate. And I tried several of them.
Probably one of the few DiMarzio pickup's I actually like. I have it in a basswood Charvel, and the highs are not ear piercing or shrill. But that's what I was trying to avoid.But at the same time, it's not at all dark. Not even close to the Tone Zone.
Wild Star, great description!

Well apparently Dimarzio site says that the Norton is a Tone Zone with the bass rolled of for , so it should be brighter than a TZ and more balanced , but i would also avoid those pickups in a dark and fat guitar like lespauls .

Yeah, I'm using this in an alder superstrat...

the norton is right in between the tone zone and fred
it is a real good pup and underated
reb beach uses these along with rob balducchi

it has the harmonics of the fred but the fat mids of the TZ and the output is real good not too hot and not too tame