software

The thread about quot;The Magquot; got me to wondering. I have some quot;cheapyquot; singles that came out of a couple guitars. They are of the bar-magnet-glued-under-pole-piece construction, but they sound pretty good.

Does anyone know what the distinction is between using the poles as magnets as opposed to bar magnets layed underneath?

Thanks;
Artie

I'm not sure what you mean by quot;the distinctionquot;, but the stock pickups in my MexiStrat had two ceramic bar magnets with what looked like steel pole pieces stuck in between them. They actually sounded pretty good - a very good tone for high gain.

While I certainly woudn't ever choose NOT to put in a promising pickup just because it had pole-piece magnets, I do like the fact that bar-magnet designs seem to allow for the pickup to be closer to the strings -- a real boon when you're dealing with very low output pups (Duckbucker, anyone?) or your neck pickup is so hot that even with it flush against the body, you need to get your bridge pickup very high to balance properly.


Originally Posted by ratherdashingI'm not sure what you mean by quot;the distinctionquot;,

I think what I mean is, was there some design reason they chose poles for singles and bars for 'buckers, or was it just luck of the draw?

Artie


Originally Posted by ArtieTooI think what I mean is, was there some design reason they chose poles for singles and bars for 'buckers, or was it just luck of the draw?

Artie

I think humbuckers ended up with a bar mag and adjustable poles because that's how Gibson had made their P-90's, so they used some spare parts from the 90's in the PAF's.
BTW, I think that when you use a bottom loaded mag and steel poles it affects the inductance of the pickup, which would roll the highs off a bit.