Admin Post For some time, I have had some problems with the sound of my G6122-1959 when the volume was rolled back 90 degrees. Cranked all the way it sounded fine to me, but my stage strategy is to roll the master volume back 90 degrees as my default setting, so I have some room to increase volume on the fly. A couple of months ago, I visited Lavonnes in Savage, MN and Pancho gave it a listen, coming up with the perfect explanation; when the volume was rolled back, it lost all presence. He suggested a treble bleed and when the word “presence” was used it all made sense. The basic idea of a treble bleed is to use a small value capacitor to allow highs to bypass the volume control, which means that the highs will remain strong, even when the volume control is rolled back. For the non technical people reading this, simply think of a treble bleed circuit as a shortcut that allows the higher frequencies (especially overtones) to get out to the amp without going through the volume control. In theory, if the volume is turned all the way up, the treble bleed has little, if any, effect. As the volume is turned down, the volume of treble frequencies does not drop,as quickly. If you have a Fender amp with a bright switch, this is a treble bleed at the amplifier. Treble bleed circuits come in a variety of designs and, like everything in our modern world, there are all sorts of approaches. My challenge was to find one that worked for my needs. I did some research and found a virtual smorgasbord of information here: https://drkevguitar.com/2016/11/24/treble-bleed-mod-roundup/ After reading that, I came up with my own idea. Keep in mind that our perception of sound is not analog, it is logarithmic. Specifically, a doubling or halving of a value is a relatively minor change. So if you put a resistor in parallel with the capacitor in a bleed circuit it would require a doubling of halving of the value of that resistor in order to produce a perceptible change. When a resistor is placed in a treble blade circuit, the taper of the pot will be affected. Is this problematic? Faced with that dilemma I decided to try something a bit different. As I understand it, a .001 uf cap’ with a 150 k-ohm resistor in parallel will make the pot taper more gradually. So, being an obstinate old cuss, I decided on a .001 uf cap’ with a 75k-ohm resistor in parallel and a 75 k-ohm resistor in series with the cap/pot in parallel. My theory was that the taper of the pot would be somewhat less affected. So, how did it do? My G6122-1959 is somewhat unique, in that I have Supertrons in both the neck and bridge positions. This gives it a bit stronger highs on the bridge pickup than the Classic + and suits my tastes quite well. I like some degree of brilliance in my playing, even when I’m playing Jazz and I like to use my various Gretsch for straight ahead Country (think Telecaster) sounds. Once I soldered then treble bleed in place, I did a quick setup to balance the pickup volume between pickups and to balance the low strings with the higher strings. Then I rolled back the master volume by 90 degrees and gave it a listen. The results were pleasing. First off, the taper of the master volume was quite well preserved. I got a decent volume cut at -90 degrees from full-up and a nice smooth taper up to full volume on the master volume control. I had wanted to avoid creating an unusable taper, but this was not the case. I can live with this taper and do so happily. The timbre remains bright and brilliant as the volume is rolled down. The sound on the neck pickup is somewhat reminiscent of a Gibson Johnny Smith model. The Smith is designed for stronger highs than the typical archtop, while maintaining a strong bottom end the effect is a mix of typical Jazz guitar warmth with great strength in the upper register. Switching between pickups, I found that the highs were strong without being overwhelming. On the bridge pickup, I got as close to a Telecaster as any archtop could get. In fact, the overall effect is somewhat reminiscent of a solid body, with regard to the strength and focus of the higher frequencies, while preserving the warmth and sonic girth of an archtop. Is it perfect? Good question. I will opine that it could be improved upon, but considering the ordeal of performing surgery on an archtop without F holes, I doubt that I’ll be tinkering with the success I’ve achieved so far. I plan to add this same treble bleed to my G6120-DC, which is somewhat challenged when it comes to highs, by virtue of the fact that the mute moves the bridge pickup about an inch further away from the bridge itself. It’s a guitar with powerful mids and quite useful for filling a lot of sonic space, but it’s somewhat lacking in the upper frequencies sparkle that I desire. Strangely, my two G6119s don’t seem to need a treble bleed, so I’ll reserve judgement on the matter until I’ve had some time to compare them back to back. It’s interesting that my G6119-1962 and my G6120-1962 (the DC) have the same basic wiring harness, but sound quite different from one another. Overall, I’d say that I’m definitely in favor of treble bleed circuits and can say for a certainty that my G6122-1959 is a much more versatile instrument for having performed the mod. Every modification, especially electrical mods, nvolces a degree of trade off, but I see this treble bleed as being an excellent compromise. You could tweak the cap values, cutting the cap value in half would make the highs that pass through a bit higher and result in a bit less “in your face” effect. I feel that the compromise of using two 75 k-ohm resistors in series with the cap in parallel with only one of the resistors is a good one. The taper is quite nice and the bleed circuit does not have quite as much authority as it would with a more conventional design. Overall, I would say that the circuit is exceeding my expectations.