Humbucker positions

[cosmic gumbo]

b-b-but Wes....

[Herbie]

b-b-but Wes....

Good point!

And did Wes turn only the pickup or did he turn the ring too?!?

[rolijen]

Don't be hatin' on neatomic! He's helpful and well-intentioned, IME


(.....even if I don't get what this is all about)

I hope my contribution wasn't interpreted as hating' on our neatomic. I enjoy his wealth of info and have been a fan of his for years on this forum. Be safe, everyone! And all the best to you neatomic!

[neatomic]

I hope my contribution wasn't interpreted as hating' on our neatomic. I enjoy his wealth of info and have been a fan of his for years on this forum. Be safe, everyone! And all the best to you neatomic!

appreciate the kind words brother!! thank you so much...i don't let forum disagreements get the better of me..we are all trying to put forth what we (think) we know best...no animosity...but always nice to hear from those who get it..most appreciated..be safe everyone, indeed!

cheers

[lawson-stone]

Honestly when I saw "Humbucker Positions" after just coming from the brazilian boobie-shaking thread, I thought, "Kama Sutra for pickups????"

A thread of pictures with pickups in unnatural positions... no... don't even go there

[Peter C]

I hope my contribution wasn't interpreted as hating' on our neatomic.

Oh, definitely!

[pingu]

Good point!

And did Wes turn only the pickup or did he turn the ring too?!?

Wes left the pickup where it was
He sure turned the Guitar round tho

[Cunamara]

whenever you can adjust the screw polepieces at the harmonic nodes you have an advantage, over non threaded polepieces

why all the major manufacturers have positioned pups just that way... since the cc pickup!!

They're only under the harmonic node with open strings. Jazz doesn't use open strings very much. As soon as you're playing at, say, the fourth fret in E flat the pickup is no longer under the harmonic node. So that theory is BS. Try again.

And your theory also does not account for the millions of guitars where the pickup is not under a harmonic node.

[sgosnell]

For the reason the pickups are oriented the way they are, see post #16. Sometimes things are simpler than they seem.

[lawson-stone]

So I wonder why on the L4ces they have moved the pickup to the end of the fingerboard on otherwise the same scale?

[oldane]

b-b-but Wes....

Many years ago, I tried to turn around the neck PU of my 175, inspired by Wes' example. To be frank, I couldn't hear any change in tone - and I was young and had good hearing back then.

And Wes - why did he (or who it was) do it? Many jazz guitarists strive for a darker tone, but it is said that Wes went the other way, given that his thumb picking softened down his attack. On some of his early records (Wes' tune, Old folks etc.) his sound is indeed very dark and muffled, not very projecting. Maybe the reversed PU was also an attempt to brighten the tone and give it more projection on top of his amp settings. Whether it worked or not is an open question.

[oldane]

They're only under the harmonic node with open strings. Jazz doesn't use open strings very much. As soon as you're playing at, say, the fourth fret in E flat the pickup is no longer under the harmonic node. So that theory is BS. Try again.

And your theory also does not account for the millions of guitars where the pickup is not under a harmonic node.

It's not that the PU under the 24th fret is some magic position and I agree that the string node is not important, but it's farther up than on say the 175. The closer the PU is to the fretboard, the more spread (scooped?) and lush the tone. The closer to the bridge, the more compact and midrangy the tone. A mm more or less probably isn't detected and neither is turning around the PU. But there's a clear difference in sound between a neck and a bridge PU. There's also a difference in sound between our "normal" archtops and the Ibanez Joe Pass (old 1970s model). An an L4 sounds less compact than an 175. Joe Pass' last (custom 175) had the PU in the same place as on an L4 and it did sound more like an L4 than an 175.

[JaxJaxon]

The question for me is why cover the other poles with a metal cover. is it to just get a diffrent type of sound/tone like the diffrence between a under wound to a over wound pickup.

[starjasmine]

The question for me is why cover the other poles with a metal cover. is it to just get a diffrent type of sound/tone like the diffrence between a under wound to a over wound pickup.

Back in my rock days it was common to remove pickup covers in order to get a bit brighter, hotter tone. IDK whether it really works, but everybody did it.

[TOMMO]

Back in my rock days it was common to remove pickup covers in order to get a bit brighter, hotter tone. IDK whether it really works, but everybody did it.

I once did the opposite: a guitar I purchased had the covers removed and I replaced them with nickel silver covers - couldn't hear any difference - another myth in guitar lore...

[Bezoeker]

Indeed TOMMO, staggeringly myth-driven.

And hilarious when one takes a given accident or fashion (like pole piece or “node” location) and reverse-engineers an imaginary cause and (unobserved) effect.

The particular (but purely incidental) nut-wad on this thread (and many others) could have just as well postulated that flared jeans created a back-wash airflow over the testicles of the greats of early rock - thus affecting their “tone”.

Then post a compendium of pics of 1968 rockers in their flared jeans (and aerated testicles) as “proof”.

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

Of course PU placement generally affects amplified sound as “oldane” describes.

And of course there is no magic whatsoever to open-string “node” placement, as many here have noted.

”Jeez-Louise” as my 4 year old grandson would say. Surely this forum can move past the gas-bag mythos?

[Betz]

They're only under the harmonic node with open strings. Jazz doesn't use open strings very much. As soon as you're playing at, say, the fourth fret in E flat the pickup is no longer under the harmonic node. So that theory is BS. Try again.

And your theory also does not account for the millions of guitars where the pickup is not under a harmonic node.

What about harmonics? Pickups placed at the 24th fret are typically at the 5th fret string node and therefore no string vibrations at the node. Thus the lack of a 5th fret harmonic on Tele’s (and some Strats). You can verify this by playing an un-amplified harmonic at the 5th fret and then directly above the 24th fret pickup. Same harmonic note; both points are nodes.

Also, in a typical humbucker the slugs are larger in diameter and have more mass than do the screws. This is going to have a direct impact on the magnetic field and the resulting signal that is generated by the vibrating string.

So these things do matter . . .

[Bezoeker]

And yet, they do not when making actual music.

[Bezoeker]

Here, grab a Stratocaster - since it focusses the issue very clearly, and has a characteristic sound most will know.

Select the neck PU.

Now play for a while - whilst picking more or less over the neck PU and fretting around the 12th fret.

The classic tone will be overwhelming. You know this sound.

This tone (and I will avoid the word used by a famous blues-rocker in flared jeans to describe it) is recognizable and definitely a measurable and repeatable artifact of a very suppressed first order harmonic (the octave harmonic of notes played around the 12th fret).

But note that this “tone” is not intensely stronger at the exact location of the 12th fret. One can noodle around in the general vicinity of the 12th and retain this classic sound.

There is no actual measurable and observable magic to the EXACT location of a sensor at a given location along a string.

There is no actual and measurable difference in the sound of a slug vs a screw at a given distance from a string.

There is a clear and measurable difference in the harmonic content of a plucked string based on the general distance of the PU from the bridge AND from the fret location. There is also a clear and measurable difference in the harmonic content based on the location of your pick or finger when you play the note.

*******

String vibration is a complex mix of fixed (standing) wave patterns, moving wave patterns, and transient atonal vibrations.

If one only considers the standing wave content and ignores the rest - and ignores the location of the pick/finger - and ignores the location of the fret used - and ignores actual measurable and observable things - then one can embrace the mythos.

Which is fine I suppose.

[Betz]

There is no actual measurable and observable magic to the EXACT location of a sensor at a given location along a string.

There is a clear and measurable difference in the harmonic content of a plucked string based on the general distance of the PU from the bridge AND from the fret location.

Sounds like a contradiction to me.

[Bezoeker]

And yet it is not. Both in principle and in practice.

Oldane described the general principle regarding distance from the bridge.

I will check on the person that noted the oft-ignored concept of the distance from the fretted note.

EDIT: It was KirkP who noted the idea of the PU location relative to the fretted note coming into play. This is both conceptually and empirically true - KirkP being given to accuracy in both regards. (Plus he can play, which is immaterial maybe , but fun to note.)

[Bezoeker]

“String vibration is a complex mix of fixed (standing) wave patterns, moving wave patterns, and transient atonal vibrations.”

I suspect that this part is often ignored or not understood - and where many go sideways and begin to imagine precisions and effects that are simply not there in practice (nor in theory for that matter).