Blue Chip Pick Thickness

[renoyd]

I like the Blue Chips a lot. As many have attested, yes they are worth it. The TPR and TP-1R models seem to be just the right size and shape. I have both the 50 and 60 thicknesses, and both are quite stuff and loud. I'm thinking of trying a 40 thickness, particularly when wanting a bit softer, less loud sound. For those that have used the 40, as well as 50 and 60 thicknesses, could you comment a bit on the comparison? Just wondering if the 40 is perhaps "too thin". Thanks.

[WW52]

I've been skeptical of those expensive picks and don't own one (yet), but recently got a chance to give a TPR 45 a pretty good workout and it made a believer out of me. I haven't tried any thicker ones, but I thought the 45 handled absolutely perfectly. Too perfectly. I like thicker picks, but the TPR45 (1.12mm thickness) was better than any the thick picks of other brands I have. So now I'm going to have to order one. Maybe two, a TPR45 and a TPR50 or 60.

[Hendrik Ahrend]

I've been on a TD 45 (custom order) for a few years now. A 50 makes the e-string sound a bit rounder, but the other strings lack some brightness, which seems important in order to cut through in a band. A 40 sounds too thin mainly on the e-string. So the 45 is the best compromise - at least to my ears and on my mandos. I realize, though, that most players these days seem to favor a thicker pick for a fat, round sound (and, of course, a mandolin that would support that), an approach hardly to be found on recordings prior to the '90s. Maybe not quite, there was Dempsey Young already in the mid '70s.

[jmagill]

I've been using them for years, and after a lot of experimentation using a half-dozen or more Blue Chips, I've concluded that, all else being equal, the variation in their tone comes from three critical factors: the thickness, tip shape and bevel. Those last two are key.

As to thickness, a 55 hits the sweet spot in tone for me: more robust than a 50, but a bit brighter than a 60.

We all know that a pointed tip will sound crisper than a rounded one, so finding the shape that has your personal optimum sound is fairly straightforward. Most of us probably have a favorite shape already.

The bevel has a surprisingly noticeable effect also, but it make sense: if you have a BC 60 with a bevel, then the thickness at the tip, the business end, is going to be closer to 55 or 50, and its going to sound more like a 55 or 50 without a bevel. I've used nail files and micromesh polishing cloths to take the bevel off one of the points of a TAD, and there is a noticeable difference in the sound of points the same shape on the same pick.

Why use a thicker pick if you're going to negate that extra thickness with a bevel?

It took a while, but I've finally settled on my personal optimum Blue Chip: a TAD 55 with no bevel. Just right for me.

[Mike Snyder]

Big fat and dark. I have an 80 and a 100, big triangles. Tried the 40s to 60s, nice but a little bright. So, the 80 lives with the Black A4 and the 100 with the F5G. You can't beat BC!

[Mark Wilson]

I have both the 50 and 60 thicknesses, and both are quite stuff and loud. I'm thinking of trying a 40 thickness, particularly when wanting a bit softer, less loud sound.

At one time I had 40,45,50,& 60 thicknesses in TP sized picks. Instead of 'softer', for me, there is a brighter sound when using a thinner BC pick. Also a thicker pick might allow you to play harder but not sure I would say a thinner pick is "less loud" either. I notice that I tend to hear it as brighter for just a while then it sounds normal.

The thing for me was there seems to be a thickness that allows you to hook up better with your stoke. It just feels the best over the others. For me that is the 50 with the 45 a close second. I kept both of these.

IMO the only way to know is to try as many as you can until to find the once that fits you.

On songs like "moonlight waltz" where there is lots of tremolo I use the rounded edge of my TP1R. For standard picking I use the pointed tips.

I had a 40 with no bevel that sounded like a 50. I enjoyed picking with it til I lost it in the yard.

[JeffD]

favor a thicker pick for a fat, round sound (and, of course, a mandolin that would support that), 0s.

In another thread I describe my own "experiment" (very limited) with thin versus thick picks, and I came to the conclusion, which surprised me, that the mandolin that supports the lows seems also to support the highs. I was thinking that a mandolin optimized around one would not be optimal for the other, but what I found is that those mandolins that sound great with a thick pick, give you wonderful high end sparkle and shine with a thin pointy pick. And those mandolins that are kind of thunky at the low end, sound kind of tinny and thin with a thin pointy pick. The best, most substantive high end sparkle and scintillation came from the more bluegrassy woofy deep round sound capable mandolins, played with a thin (0.7 or less) pointy pick.

A much more comprehensive study would be needed. But my limited testing results are counter-intuitive. I

[foldedpath]

My $.02... I think it's impossible to talk about thick vs. thin pick preference in the abstract, because so much depends on the genre of music you play, and also on the exact way you hold the pick and strike the strings (including how heavy the attack).

For what it's worth, I settled on the Blue Chip TAD40-1R a couple of years ago, as the best fit for what I play. That would be mostly Irish/Scottish traditional music, a little OldTime, some Eastern European things... fiddle tunes, basically.

I need good volume because I sometimes attend sessions full of fiddlers and the occasional piper. The conventional wisdom seems to be that you get more volume from thicker picks, but I play with a slight angle of attack on the strings, and when I dig in, I can get enough volume with a size 40.

I also need to hit the "treble" ornaments in Irish music, which is a rapid staccato flick of the wrist. Maybe a better player could do that with a thick pick, but I've never managed to do it consistently with a pick thicker than around 1.0mm, which is basically the 40 size in Blue Chip land.

I also use the TAD40-1R for my steel-string acoustic guitar. I wouldn't normally use anything thicker on guitar, so that turned out to be a nice side effect of the choice. It's just one expensive pick to keep track of, along with a backup or two. It's cost-effective that way.

[WW52]

I also need to hit the "treble" ornaments in Irish music, which is a rapid staccato flick of the wrist. Maybe a better player could do that with a thick pick, but I've never managed to do it consistently with a pick thicker than around 1.0mm, which is basically the 40 size in Blue Chip land.

Just the opposite was true for me. I could generally play quicker triplets more easily with certain heavier picks, but that doesn't make me a better player. A thinner pick seemed to snag on the string for me, but even with that I'm convinced it's more the material the pick is made of than just the thickness, or I wouldn't have been constantly searching for a better pick --except it appears it's been found.

The TPR45 (w/plain round bevel) does a better job than all my old favorite picks of any thickness or material and it doesn't sound brighter --just fuller, stronger, and easier to manipulate.

[gtani7]

(Probably been suggested here before but)

We could have pick meetups/demo's. Anybody wants to meet in Seattle to try Blue chip, red bear/Pearse/caseine, V pick, wegen, bone, camel horn, etc, send a PM. I have BC's in beveled and unbeveled 1R triangles and the Dunlop jazz3 equivalent.

Course that assumes i can find these in finite amt of time

[DataNick]

Big fat and dark. I have an 80 and a 100, big triangles. Tried the 40s to 60s, nice but a little bright. So, the 80 lives with the Black A4 and the 100 with the F5G. You can't beat BC!

A man after mine own heart...LOL! Like MIke I prefer a thicker pick, I use a custom ordered TAD-3R 80 (2.0 mm) with the (R) bevel

[Mike Stewart]

(Probably been suggested here before but)
Anybody wants to meet in Seattle to try Blue chip, red bear/Pearse/caseine, V pick, wegen, bone, camel horn, etc, send a PM.

I'd be up for that. It would take some convincing to get me off BCs, but I can offer TADs in 40, 55, and 60.

[foldedpath]

(Probably been suggested here before but)

We could have pick meetups/demo's. Anybody wants to meet in Seattle to try Blue chip, red bear/Pearse/caseine, V pick, wegen, bone, camel horn, etc, send a PM. I have BC's in beveled and unbeveled 1R triangles and the Dunlop jazz3 equivalent.

Course that assumes i can find these in finite amt of time

I'd be up for that. It would take some convincing to get me off BCs, but I can offer TADs in 40, 55, and 60.

I think a pick comparison would just turn into a mandolin tasting party. Not that there's anything wrong with that.


A month ago, I was at a workshop in Mt. Vernon, north of Seattle. There's a big Scottish music scene up there (Celtic Arts Foundation), very heavily focused on pipes and fiddles. My fiddler S.O. attended a workshop there, and I tagged along on mandolin. I did run into one other mandolin player there... I can't remember the name... maybe someone here?

Anyway, we traded instruments for a short spell, my Lebeda and his Deerstone. We both used BC picks, but neither of us wanted to use the other's picks. He was a mainly (I think?) Bluegrass picker and had a heavier thickness than I like, as a mostly Irish/Scottish player. It was fun trading off instruments for a few minutes, but there was no way we were going to trade off picks.

[Mike Snyder]

Yeah, I find very few pickers who are loving my 100 thickness BC. All personal preference, of course, and I meet pickers who sound fine with generic "guitar" picks, so maybe a $50 BC is affectation. Next best, in my hand, is a Wegen Trimus 250, so thick and thick does the trick. But I play tenor banjo with a Wegen 140, so
maybe my skull is thick, too. By the way, it takes a lot of mute stuffed in the back of that banjo in order not to be run out of an old-time session.

[Drew Egerton]

I've had 60, 55 and 50. I like the 50 on guitar but it's a little thinner than I like on mando. I never thought I'd like anything less than 60 until I lost it and decided to try the CT55 as a replacement. Haven't used anything else since it arrived.

[bobrem]

I love my big triangle TAD 80.

[music man]

I just tried my first blue chip pick its a tpr 40 I'm hooked.but might try a 45 or a 50 the f5g really sounds great with the 40 but its the first one I've had.

[CES]

I like TAD 40 on guitar, 50 on Octave Mando, and CT 55 on mando. I've used the heavier two on guitar with very good results, esp for flatpicking, and before I got the 50 I'd use my 40 on OM, but don't like the 40 on mandolin. I thinks it's just a little too flexible (though, ironically, that's why I like it on guitar, esp if I'm doing a lot of strumming).

If I want to be quiet, I either just play quietly, use my Mandobird unplugged, or will use my Golden Gate. I swear I just can't easily get volume and tone with those thick rounded points without really wailing on it, regardless of pick angle.

[LadysSolo]

My Blue Chip picks arrived this week, and I tried them today, comparing to others I had. I can't believe the difference in tone. I bought a TAD 35 and TAD 40, and I really like the sound. I am sold on them, but I hope I don't follow my usual habit of misplacing picks.....Could get expensive.

[JeffD]

I am sold on them, but I hope I don't follow my usual habit of misplacing picks.....Could get expensive.

Don't hope, just don't misplace it.

[KGreene]

I've been burdened with a bad case of PAS for some time now and always seemed to gravitate back to the Primetones (specifically the 512 and 513's).... So I finally broke down and purchased a BC TAD-50....I'm hooked!... It's amazing to me the difference in tone (at least to my ears...and my wife's). I tried the D'andrea 1.5, the PT 512/513 and the BC on the 600VS, the F2 and the F5G...The BC came out on top hands down. I particularly like the fact that it doesn't readily slip in my fingers, even with the smooth surface, and how it glides off the strings.

[yankees1]

I have both a 40 and 55. I choose the pick depending on the song. Actually I ordered a 45 and I like it better than the 40.

[Mandobart]

I'm a thick pick picker. 2.0 mm is the minimum for me. The only picks they offer in this thickness are the jazz picks, TAD and TD. I like the shape of my SR and TPR but I prefer the thickness of my Wegen M200's, so that's what I play with.

[yankees1]

I'm a thick pick picker. 2.0 mm is the minimum for me. The only picks they offer in this thickness are the jazz picks, TAD and TD. I like the shape of my SR and TPR but I prefer the thickness of my Wegen M200's, so that's what I play with.

How is your tremolo with this 2.0 mm pick ?

[Mike Snyder]

Tremelo isn't a problem with thick picks, at least I don't see it as a problem. Hold it deep on the index finger, lots of thumb, a little on the loose side. I can only do it with big triangles. TADs or Wegen Trimus 250. It just feels natural at this point. I appreciate that clean triplets are easier with a thinner pick, but I pull off a sort of "Americanised" ITM triplet on the tenor banjo with a Wegen 140. The trad purists don't care much for my "old-time" style on the tenor anyway so no big deal on the funkily placed triplets.