$30 P Bass copy

[formula73]

The pictures didn't come out good. Here's what it looks like from a diagram perspective. The two helper magnets are aligned magnetically with the outside magnets but surround the poles like a P90.

I think the weaknesses of the Mudbucker design are that the stock magnets on the outside of the coils is the wrong place in relation to the poles. Also if there aren't magnets in the center close to the poles the magnetic coverage is poor. Lastly the magnetic field is strong in the middle but on the outer strings are weak so adding mass under E and G helps.

Nice. I was also trying to compensate for the perceived low output due to (basically) the lack of adjustability. A lot of these aftermarket muddies have only the top mags and some are alnico so I decided to spread the field my way and put 4 ceramics on both. They’re loud as hell, now.

 

[idsnowdog]

Nice. I was also trying to compensate for the perceived low output due to (basically) the lack of adjustability. A lot of these aftermarket muddies have only the top mags and some are alnico so I decided to spread the field my way and put 4 ceramics on both. They’re loud as hell, now.

The Artec I have is ceramic. I would think Neodymium would have better volume and clarity but with the string balance problem resolved I think I will leave it alone.

 

[formula73]

The Artec I have is ceramic. I would think Neodymium would have better volume and clarity but with the string balance problem resolved I think I will leave it alone.

I think the clarity issues are more related to the ENORMOUS magnetic window the strings pass through. I’m curious what it would sound like with just 2 center magnets on the inside of the coils, on top/bottom of the flat plate that runs though the center.

 

[idsnowdog]

I think the clarity issues are more related to the ENORMOUS magnetic window the strings pass through. I’m curious what it would sound like with just 2 center magnets on the inside of the coils, on top/bottom of the flat plate that runs though the center.

That is true the sensing window is so wide that it reads a large span of the string. If it just had magnets in the center the window would be narrower. I suspect the difference would be akin to a full size humbucker and a single coil sized mini humbucker.

 

[formula73]

That is true the sensing window is so wide that it reads a large span of the string. If it just had magnets in the center the window would be narrower. I suspect it would be akin to a full size humbucker and a single coil sized mini humbucker.

I REALLY want to try this.

 

[idsnowdog]

Finally done. Guyker adjustable width bridge installed, rebuilt bridge mini-humbucker, bridge pickup ring, brass nut, sidejack, 3 vols and one tone. The adjustable bridge really helped the string coverage for the bridge and neck pickups but the E on the bridge is still weak. The intonation screws on the Guyker bridge are way too long and there's no usable range because the screws do not go through the saddle like every other bridge. So I had to go to ACE Hardware and buy shorter screws to get a usable range.

I get that SD wanted a bright and loud pickup for the neck position of a 32in scale Rickenbacker bass but in a 34in scale instrument it's a bit much. Even with a 250K pot the neck is still the brightest position and a 100K pot would probably be better. Strangely in my Rickenbacker bass this pickup just gets lost even with 500K pots. So there's something about the position on a 34in scale instrument?