Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Is it possible ?


DynoByte

Recommended Posts

Is it possible that engineers at Gibson have overlooked pickup focus ? I have a theory and ongoing experiment with a LP standard. The theory is what if pickup focus is dependent upon mass and location. The width of string vibration increases from the bridge to the 12th fret when struck open, meaning the further away from the bridge the pickup is, the narrower it is creating a narrower magnetic field to accommodate wider string vibration and retain focus on midrange. I installed a '57 classic on the bridge and a mini on the neck for this test and they're a match made in heaven . With the full size on the neck it just seems to pick up bass and mud unlike the mini. I'd like to test this on a 3 pickup Custom but unfortunately there isn't a mid sized pickup invented yet, a mid bucker ! Can anyone see this ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should make a guitar with a single pickup, mounted on a track so you can slide it to whatever position you want.

 

Or mount as many single-coils as you can, each one with opposite polarity to the one next to it, and a switch that goes 1/2-2/3-3/4-4/5-etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should make a guitar with a single pickup' date=' mounted on a track so you can slide it to whatever position you want.[/quote']

 

A single pickup wouldn't cut it , the placement is dependent on pickup size . See my avatar for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The width of string vibration increases from the bridge to the 12th fret when stuck open meaning the further away from the bridge the pickup is' date=' the narrower it is creating a narrower magnetic field to accommodate wider string vibration and retain focus. [/quote']

 

Yes, the envelope of the vibrating string increases towards the mid point of the string. But the spacing of the strings becomes narrower the further away from the bridge. There are plenty of options to alter the tone and output of a neck pickup such as magnet size, type, orientation and distance from the strings. Coils can be underwound, and of a different gauge wire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Is it possible that engineers at Gibson have overlooked pickup focus ? I have a theory and ongoing experiment with a LP standard. The theory is what if pickup focus is dependent upon mass and location. The width of string vibration increases from the bridge to the 12th fret when stuck open meaning the further away from the bridge the pickup is' date=' the narrower it is creating a narrower magnetic field to accommodate wider string vibration and retain focus. I installed a '57 classic on the bridge and a mini on the neck for this test and they're a match made in heaven . With the full size on the neck it just seems to pick up bass and mud unlike the mini. I'd like to test this on a 3 pickup Custom but unfortunately there isn't a mid sized pickup invented yet, a mid bucker ! Can anyone see this ?[/quote']

 

A few days ago someone posted a link to a build your own pick up web page... You caould make your own any size you want... Do a search of the forum. I think it was Build your own Humbucker or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thought here. I do have a high fidelity magnetic field simulation model as well as a nonlinear string vibration model. Maybe I'll put a student on this to see what the differences are really all about...

 

That's what I've been waiting to hear. Also try taking the pickups off, raise the action and put a mini up and down from the bridge to neck, by hand. Put a cloth underneath it and hook to a spectrum analyzer, you can see the lower mids and bass roll off as you move towards the bridge.. I recommend comparing the mini with a 'Burstbucker 1 as they are almost a dead match, even in output, just a wider field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I think...actually I don't care that much

 

 

That's deep thought , so we'll be taking you off the list for the new Les Paul Custom "Focus" triple ? You know, the one with the dual pole piece rows on the center pickup , oh wait , they didn't invent all that yet ! Personally I don't think I'll sleep until it arrives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Modeling sure was a waste of time, we were wrong about the magnetic field to begin with and led astray. The answer was much more simple - "coil width = frequency focus" and changes exactly like a parametric eq, meaning coil width is crucial to placement between the bridge and neck. Asymmetric? Yes. It's pretty simple science, why it was missed I do not know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't give you any advise about your theory but I strongly believe (no scientific proof) that 'mass' has a great deal to do with tone. One thing that distinguishes LPs from other guitars is the amount of 'mass' in an LP body. I believe that has a lot to do with LP tone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree about the wood, it's the signature of the guitar and as far as the Les Paul goes , it's achieved perfection. What I'm referring to has nothing to do with body construction and applies to all electric guitars made of wood, metal or plastic, excluding piezo and other type pickups. Here we are in the 21st century and 99% of guitar makers are still using trial and error methods from the 50's to put pickups on a guitar and calculate their coil size, are we all on board with this? We are well into the the computer age and what improvements or breakthroughs has this wonderful new tool given us in the line of pickup mass or placement ? Absolutely nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer was much more simple - "coil width = frequency focus" and changes exactly like a parametric eq' date=' meaning coil width is crucial to placement between the bridge and neck. Asymmetric? Yes. It's pretty simple science, why it was missed I do not know.[/quote']

 

From the early days of pickups it was known that coil width affected tone. We all know that the wider coil of a P90 gives more mid and less treble than a Fender single coil. Nothing new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1978 Seth E. Lover Interview on Gibson Humbucking Pickups

Interview by: Seymour W. Duncan (SWD), 6-13-78.

(This interview transcribed from audio tape.)

Location: Garden Grove, California-at the residents of Seth E. Lover - Inventor of the Gibson “Patent Applied For” Humbucking pickups.

 

 

SWD: How did you figure out the distance between the pickup and the bridge, not making it too close or too far away?

 

Seth Lover:That was pretty much trial and error. You used what was basically used before as the position. And you might have tried it a little forward or a little backwards to see if you could get any particular improvement, but I thing that it was pretty well mind set by a musician as to the position. They liked to have certain--they thought was correct for the pickup. And if you started fighting a musician by moving it to some place he didn’t like you could get into trouble. Now if you came back too close to the bridge you could get it a little brighter, but you had a tendency to lose volume because the string vibration did not move as far. If you lost too much volume because then you were in the dog-house because you were not as loud; therefore, you were not as good.

 

 

 

 

From the early days of pickups it was known that coil width affected tone.

 

Of course it did, they just knew absolutely nothing about focus. Ask them, and Fender as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

Hello!

 

Are we talking here about the phenomenon of the harmonics being wiped off between the two rows of the polepieces of a humbucker?

 

If so, stacked humbuckers would help. Get a Les Paul Recording. :)

 

Cheers... Bence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello!

 

Are we talking here about the phenomenon of the harmonics being wiped off between the two rows of the polepieces of a humbucker?

 

If so, stacked humbuckers would help. Get a Les Paul Recording. :)

 

Cheers... Bence

 

No, we're not. Not even close . . . msp_biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...