banner

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

3 Humbucker Rock n Roll Config

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • papersoul
    replied
    Re: 3 Humbucker Rock n Roll Config

    Chuck, I am alittle lost. Who makes the Morse pickup?

    Anyway....I am thinking the C-5 is the perfect bridge pickup for most situations and I can always add mids at the amp. The C-5 just seems to balance so well in a Les Paul.

    Actually, a few guitarists commented that I had a definite Tool vibe with my stock Burstbucker Pros in my LP. Remember, I have a two HB guitar.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lightning
    replied
    Re: 3 Humbucker Rock n Roll Config

    PaperSoul Man,

    I started the APC thread to tell you about a 3 pickup idea you might like, but it seems more applicable here. Do you remember those Morse pickups... 19k #43 neck (same as Fillmore neck) and 20k #43 bridge? I'm convinced that 18-22k #43 will give you that APC guy's bridge pickup power cord tone.

    Let's blip for a moment. A friend of mine bought an EPI Ace Freeley Les Paul. He thought something was wrong with it because the front pickup was louder than the rear 2 together. It had 3 DiMarzio Super Distortions (this is also a pickup you might like because it's also vey thick and creamy). The guitar's selector switch was wired front/all 3 in parallel/rear 2 in parallel. Obviously, 2 equal pickups on a 2 pickup guitar would have this problem, but the rear 2 being in parallel (which lowers DC resistance, and like frequencies are not additive) compounds the problem. I suggested getting a lower output front pickup (I think that's what he should have done no matter what he did to the rear group), but what we did was convert a tone control to push-pull and wired the middle and bridge pickups to the switch to provide middle or rear selectively. What I wanted to do was put in a 3 position switch (middle/mid bridge parallel/bridge) or 6 position rotary, which adds series in and out of phase as well as parallel in and out of phase. Now, from your main selector you get the neck pickup/neck pickup in parallel with whatever combinmation you have selected from the rear group/the rear group.

    Blipping back to pickups... Morse 10k #43 neck, C5 14k #43 mid, Morse 20k #43 bridge.

    Okay, if you don't find the 20k functional for all bridge pickup solos what I've learned from moving the JB to the neck position is that the further you get from the bridge the more the mids are enhanced, solving the C5 problem and giving you a different pickup that provides those explosive mid-range power chords in the bridge position.

    Another variation would be SD 10k #43 neck, C5 14k #43 mid, JB 16k #43 with A2 bridge. The JB w/ A2 could be substituted with Mighty Might Motherbucker (#43) or the Hi Z Bill Lawrence pickup.

    The Idea is the mid pickup gives you the Tool Bridge pickup tone, and the bridge pickup gives you the APC Bridge Power chord tone.

    Later,
    Chuck

    Leave a comment:


  • papersoul
    replied
    Gearjoneser has killer advice about the C-5..........great p'up!

    You could also look at the standard JB.....

    Personally I find the 59n a little muddy and might look at the PGn.

    My personal fav is the Gibson burstbucker neck.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kent S.
    replied
    Originally posted by slash857
    i was lookin at the pups on the seymour website... does the 59 cost more to get it with a four conductor cable? beacuse i would like coil tapping. if so , how much extra would it cost? also the guitar i want to put these pups on has a floyd rose bridge, so i should get a trembucker spaced in the bridge right?
    Trembucker, yeah ... upcharge for four conductor ... I don't know if they upcharge for that or not, if so it's not much ... call your local dealer and ask if they've got it in four conductor. Don't have a local dealer ... give Lew or Bloodrose Customs a shout, they'll fix you up.

    Leave a comment:


  • slash857
    replied
    i was lookin at the pups on the seymour website... does the 59 cost more to get it with a four conductor cable? beacuse i would like coil tapping. if so , how much extra would it cost? also the guitar i want to put these pups on has a floyd rose bridge, so i should get a trembucker spaced in the bridge right?
    Last edited by slash857; 03-25-2004, 10:40 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stratoplayer
    replied
    Originally posted by Lewguitar
    I also didn't like hitting the middle pickup with my pick constantly! Lew
    How bout making a guard that extends up and over the pups, or the mid one at least maybe? I know I've seen a bass that had a detachable guard, but damned if I can remember who makes it.
    Last edited by Stratoplayer; 03-26-2004, 08:51 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kent S.
    replied
    Originally posted by Lewguitar
    Generally, I think pickups should be hottest at the bridge and weakest at the neck. The middle should be the same as the neck or a little stronger, but not much. Just my opinion.
    That's pretty much the way to go universally, the same output works well also, but then people tend to put those pups lower and lower as they get towards the neck (same idea in essence)...
    The PG is a bit hotter than the '59 (to me anyway), and with something like the DD or DC in the bridge it would seem to balance rather nicely (the guitar in question had a DD in the bridge). Plus you probably might want to lower the PG a bit anyway. I just found that having that PG's top and mids created a nice voice to that B&M pups combined position. I don't remember the PG being lowered on this one though, and I didn't notice anyway level problems. Plus you got that parallel connection thing going on anyway ... I thought it gave a nice blend, real spanky in that middle position ... I would imagine
    (emphasis on the word imagine) that the effect wouldn't be as pronounced with the DC, and that the transition between the middle position and the bridge position would be a bit smoother, and less dramatic.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Kent S.
    What, no love for the PG in the middle ... I always liked the idea of each pup having a personality that complements it's position ... the PG is a nice inclusion to the middle (even being in parallel with a hotter bridge).
    Generally, I think pickups should be hottest at the bridge and weakest at the neck. The middle should be the same as the neck or a little stronger, but not much. Just my opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kent S.
    replied
    Originally posted by Gearjoneser
    In 3 pickup LP's. The bridge and middle are on in parallel when the selector is in the middle. The C-5/59 combo sounds great on a normal Paul, so it's perfect for a bridge and middle.
    The 59 neck is pretty much the industry standard.

    Trust me on this, if you get a 3 pickup guitar, the C-5/59N/59N
    is about as perfect as it gets. If you picked up my black beauty,
    you'd buy that combo the next day!
    What, no love for the PG in the middle ... I always liked the idea of each pup having a personality that complements it's position ... the PG is a nice inclusion to the middle (even being in parallel with a hotter bridge).

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Stratoplayer
    The C5/59/59 has sounded like a great combo for a long time. But what about a C5/59/Jazz? That sounds like a good idea to me. You get a little more clarity, and if you add a switch or push-pull pot, you can turn the C5 on anytime and get the C5/Jazz combo which I really like too. I'd love to give both setups a try.
    I'd probably like that even better! I had a late 50's three pickup LPC back around 1970. Hated the the non-existent frets but loved the tone. It was one of those fretless wonders that never made any sense to me. I also didn't like hitting the middle pickup with my pick constantly! But I loved the tone of the bridge and middle pickup combined. Liked it so much I put a middle P90 pickup in my Les Paul Jr. It got in the way too...but sounded great. Lew

    Leave a comment:


  • Stratoplayer
    replied
    The C5/59/59 has sounded like a great combo for a long time. But what about a C5/59/Jazz? That sounds like a good idea to me. You get a little more clarity, and if you add a switch or push-pull pot, you can turn the C5 on anytime and get the C5/Jazz combo which I really like too. I'd love to give both setups a try.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gearjoneser
    replied
    In 3 pickup LP's. The bridge and middle are on in parallel when the selector is in the middle. The C-5/59 combo sounds great on a normal Paul, so it's perfect for a bridge and middle.
    The 59 neck is pretty much the industry standard.

    Trust me on this, if you get a 3 pickup guitar, the C-5/59N/59N
    is about as perfect as it gets. If you picked up my black beauty,
    you'd buy that combo the next day!

    Leave a comment:


  • slash857
    replied
    cool thanks so far im just lookin to see as many 3 pup combos as possible then pick what i think would suit my style best

    Leave a comment:


  • Gearjoneser
    replied
    My Les Paul Custom Black Beauty had the cardboard sounding
    57 Classics replaced with gold covered Custom 5/ 59N/ 59N

    I get shivers just "thinking" about the tone that guitar produces
    now. Sometimes, you can get away with just replacing the bridge. Go C-5! It's the current favorite on this forum right now.

    See the thread about Humbucker Poll Pt. 2

    Leave a comment:


  • Kent S.
    replied
    If you go with the traditional bridge, bridge and middle in parallel, neck (such as the three pup LP set up), then I'd suggest Duncan distortion in bridge, pearly gates in middle, and '59 in the neck.
    A guy I met one time had that set up in a LP and it sounded great, covered a lot of sytle well. In something with a bolt on neck and longer scale I'd opt for the alnico II pro in the neck though. You might even want to change to brdige to a duncun custom in either as a further option. Ladies and gentlemen, other suggestions please ...
    Last edited by Kent S.; 03-24-2004, 11:10 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X