software

-What are the physical differences between the different alnicos, ceramics, and all of the others?

-What are the tonal differences between the different magnets? Is there a generalization about each one (brighter, thicker, bassier etc.)?

Thanks for answering.

--Watroba

Ok, I do my best . The physical differences between the Alnico magnets is the blend between ALuminium, NIckel and CObalt. The ceramics are made by ceramic material - that´s different. Alnico 2s are smooth in the higher register, but can be mushy in the lower (gibson humbuckers). The alnico 5s are clear and piano-like in the lower registers, but often tend to to be harsh and trebly in the higher (fender single coils). Alnico 3s would be perfect, but the Teles from the 50s, which often had alnico 3s, are not known to have the perfect sound. Generally ceramic magnets have a more aggresive tone, are more trebly, sometimes over the top. Great for heavy metal anyway, and is often used also by country guitarists.


Originally Posted by Watroba-What are the physical differences between the different alnicos, ceramics, and all of the others?

-What are the tonal differences between the different magnets? Is there a generalization about each one (brighter, thicker, bassier etc.)?

Thanks for answering.

--Watroba

from : localhost//website....shtml#magnets

There is also a lot of very detailed info within quot;Seymours Qamp;Aquot; under the support section.

Alnicos are warm and smooth while ceramics are sharp and bright. Ceramics are almost always used on high output (metal, heavy rock) pickups because the more wind you put on a pickup, the more the midrange it has and the more treble it loses. True high output passive pickups are about 13k ohms and above, where the midrange is so strong and the treble loss so great that the sharp/brightness of a ceramic magnet is necessary to balance that out.

As for the various Alnicos:

Alnico 2......2nd lowest output, very flat frequency response (in other words, it is not bassy, midrangy, or trebly) and very clear and bright. If anything it has a slight roll-off on the low mids and bass, but only slightly. Those who don't like it call it quot;syrupy sweetquot; but it really depends on what pickup (and guitar) you put it in.

Alnico 3......Lowest output of all, but only very slightly less than Alnico 2, so slight that just moving the pickup just a little closer to the strings makes it sound louder than Alnico 2 especially considering that tonewise, it is otherwise very similar to Alnico 2 but with a slight BULGE in the low-mid/bass.

Alnico 4.....2nd highest output. Like a louder, slightly beefier Alnico 3.

Alnico 5....The loudest and rudest of the Alnico Bros. Take an Alnico 4, add more output and jack up the bass and treble but leave the mids alone.

As for which Alnico is quot;rightquot; for you, it all depends on the individual pickup, guitar, amp, and -- of course -- your touch on the guitar and your personal taste.

/

Now already have tried to solve this problem, by introducing the Five Two concept: that is Alnico 2 on the three high strings and Alnico 5 on the three lower. Life´s wonderful, isn´t it?

Now already have tried to solve this problem, by introducing the Five Two concept: that is Alnico 2 on the three high strings and Alnico 5 on the three lower. Life´s wonderful, isn´t it?

Where can I find more info on this?

Try the homepage

See quot;productsquot;, quot;electricquot;, quot;stratocasterquot;, quot;progressivequot;. It´s the last one in that category, called quot;SSL52-1 Five-Twoquot;. I´ve never tried it myself, but I probably will in the future.

But perhaps I should say that different magnets is not all there is with the sound of a pickup. I just see the Five-Two as an interesting experiment.


Originally Posted by Watroba-What are the physical differences between the different alnicos, ceramics, and all of the others?

-What are the tonal differences between the different magnets? Is there a generalization about each one (brighter, thicker, bassier etc.)?

Thanks for answering.

--Watroba

And by the way...is it me, or is Satriani looking more and more like Paul Schaeffer these days?


Originally Posted by ZhangliqunAnd by the way...is it me, or is Satriani looking more and more like Paul Schaeffer these days?

Yeah, that bothers me.....