parallel, split...output?

[hermetico]

Re: parallel, split...output?

Not to thread jack, but how do you wire for half out of phase? And does that hum or is it still humbucking? Thanks.


Sent from my armored space station using Tapatalk on iPad

Er... you are in my ignore list, dude.
Anyway, I will answer your question, because it can be of help to rest of mates.

This is what is being called half-oop mod:

[hermetico]

Re: parallel, split...output?

+1.

I'll add my worthless 2 cents to this topic. Below is a screenshot of the "resonant frequencies" produced by a Hot Rails and a Cool Rails, in series and parallel, when they're excited by a low impedance coil.

One can see how the resonant peaks are higher in the spectrum when the PU's are in parallel, and how it diminishes the output level along the "useful frequencies" (roughly 80hz-1100hz, which are the fundamentals produced by the strings all along the fretboard).

[ATTACH=CONFIG]37991[/ATTACH]

Here are the inductances measured on these PU's (or at least what I vaguely recall of these values):
-Hot Rails: almost 12H in series and roughly 3H in parallel.
-Cool Rails: 6,3H in series and something like 1,8H in parallel (= the difference between a P90 and a Telecaster neck PU).

Now, the peak voltages that I measure when I brush the strings altogether:
-HR: 565mv in series, 300mv in parallel.
-CR: 209mv in series, 110mv in parallel.
The two PU's being rather far from the strings in this case.

Sorry, I've nothing here regarding these pickups splitted... Too much data saved in too many hard disks, many corrupted files, not enough intact brain cells for faithful memories... :-(

That said, the inductance would be higher (divided by two) with only one coil of each pickup and therefore, the resonant peaks would be lower in the spectrum, hence probably a slightly higher output in single coil mode than in parallel (I say "probably" because I don't take in account the wider magnetic window which senses more lenght of vibrating strings when the two coils are enabled)...

Are those measurements correct?
That means about 48 % of output lost, while I've "sensed" around 40% of lost!.
Interesting.

[hermetico]

Re: parallel, split...output?

This video was linked to in another thread but it does a lot to answer the question of series/split/parallel volume output.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu5PA...layer_embedded

The video shows 3 guitars with 3 different humbuckers played in series, parallel and split single coil modes.

The final numbers from the video come out to:

Series to Parallel volume drop 0.60dB
Series to Split volume drop 1.15dB

So in his testing the split single coil has the lowest volume output. His results agree exactly with what I hear when I play my guitar. Parallel mode in general does not have a "weak and anemic" tone. It's typically brighter than series and similar in tone and volume output to split mode but parallel has the benefit of hum cancellation.

Can we get the FAQ updated and delete the -3dB for split and -6dB for parallel numbers?

My doubt is what is he actually measuring?. SPL Peaks or RMS?.
I mean, the loudness sensation comes from RMS level, not from Peaks (that's mainly why we often use compressors during mixing/mastering tasks).
I would probably bounce each individual take and run some kind of tool like the TT Dynamic Range to check which are the RMS dB for each take.

[GoldenVulture]

Re: parallel, split...output?

While this thread is back up: There's some incorrect assumptions in prior parts.
When talking DB/SPL, 3DB is the smallest percievable volume difference for most peoples ears. 6 DB is not a monsterous volume change as suggested earlier.

I connect my buckers in parralell. If the magnet/s are in a traditional humbucker setup there will be a minimally percievable volume drop which will be about 3 DB.

Alternatively I use pole magnets in both coils and alighn them all north [ as opposed to a bar magnet producing North in one coil and South in the other coil ]. Done this way there is no volume drop.

Switching back to series with the magnets all north it has a percievable drop in volume and the sound is more like an out of phase setup.

Why it does this I don't know but i"m speculating that the parralell connection changes the phase relationship between the coils and the magnets.[ not the coils ]
If you don't believe me , try it.

[hermetico]

Re: parallel, split...output?

While this thread is back up: There's some incorrect assumptions in prior parts.
When talking DB/SPL, 3DB is the smallest percievable volume difference for most peoples ears. 6 DB is not a monsterous volume change as suggested earlier.

I connect my buckers in parralell. If the magnet/s are in a traditional humbucker setup there will be a minimally percievable volume drop which will be about 3 DB.

Alternatively I use pole magnets in both coils and alighn them all north [ as opposed to a bar magnet producing North in one coil and South in the other coil ]. Done this way there is no volume drop.

Switching back to series with the magnets all north it has a percievable drop in volume and the sound is more like an out of phase setup.

Why it does this I don't know but i"m speculating that the parralell connection changes the phase relationship between the coils and the magnets.[ not the coils ]
If you don't believe me , try it.

Well, while talking about peaks, both are negligible but, if we talk about RMS, history changes.

+3dB RMS is to go from a 50W-RMS to a 100W-RMS amp (preserving all the rest the same).
+6dB RMS is to go from a 25W-RMS to a 100W-RMS.

A difference of +3dB or +6dB in peaks / transients means nothing (except clipping in digital audio).

[GoldenVulture]

Re: parallel, split...output?

When talking SPL; we hear in a non linear manner [ Logarythmic ].
The Fletcher Munson curve is a representation of how our ear responds over the dynamic range {DB] Because it is non linear it is represente by units called Phons.

The lower the volume the less even are our perceptions of the frequency range.
It is most even around 100Phon/DB. This is why studios monitor at such volumes. It's also one reason why CD's dynamic range is set at 98 DB.

There is going to be a difference perceiving volume and frequency range changes at a low volume compared to a high volume.

All this is going to affect our sound observations. You can include air pressure in this equation too as it affects how well the SPL is carried.

[Grindspine]

Re: parallel, split...output?

Does this sound right to you guys? I always thought that splitting a humbucker is like cutting the output in half, while parallel is like cutting the output by around 30%. That's not what it says in the FAQ!

"What are the differences between coil splitting and parallel wiring?
While coil splitting and parallel wiring sound very similar to most players, there are some differences. One difference is output. Splitting a 16k ohm DC resistance humbucker results in an 8k ohm single coil and that translates into a -3 db lowering in output. Wiring a 16k ohm DC resistance humbucker in parallel results in a 4k ohm DC resistance and a -6 db lowering in output."

Now here's the glossary definition for parallel:

Parallel - The electrical linking of two coils in a parallel or side by side fashion. The sonic effect compared to a series configuration is approximately 30% lower output but with additional brilliance and clarity on the high end. (See "Series").

Am I misunderstanding what I'm reading or is this a real contradiction? And which explanation is correct???

From what I recall of basic electricity, that is what I would estimate: a parallel coil should show half the resistance of a single (split) coil. However, perceived volume will not be reduced to a quarter. With enough gain/compression, one would notice the tonal differences more than the volume difference. Playing with no compression, parallel will still be perceived as quieter, but not that much reduced since the way we judge volume as opposed to power through the coils is not a 1:1 ratio.