All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

[Luke Duke]

Yes I'm stirring the pot. Yes this has been theorized, hypothesized, analyzed, and agonized. That said, I want some clarity from SD and company

Note the rough cast magnet, lack of potting, butyrate bobbins (look more like Seth coloring than regular bobbins and lack of cracks), and what's most interesting is that the magnet appears to be epoxied in place. If you'll look between the 2 and 3 slugs (from the left) you'll see the black stuff above the magnet. Upon a light scrape I find a tacky substance. I don't have a picture because I didn't have my meter at the time, but the pickup is also wound a little cooler if memory serves. So I'll try to get that checked out later tonight.

Frank talked about the regular Vs. 35th, Vs. Ant. JB Jazz here and here. This is the closest I've seen SD saying that they are different pickups. Also note that edgecrusher had a different answer from tech support than Frank provided, but never revealed it for one reason or another. Now that Frank is separated from SD I still doubt he can talk about all this, so I won't harass him about it, but I have to wonder if he was entirely too truthful for SD as they've perpetuated the myth that JBs are the same all the time.

I understand that SD is in the business of selling more pickups, and don't want everyone fighting over OLD pickups when they can buy new ones. But why perpetuate a myth instead of being honest and saying "yes we've changed some materials, but the wind is the same. This makes differences X and Y". The even better question is WHY were the materials changed? Obviously SD can approximate the rough cast magnets because they do on the Ants. every day. So why change the materials at all? If SD HAD to change them due to availability etc why didn't all JBs get the mag treatment Ants get? My gut tells me it was a cost cutting plain and simple, but again I ask WHY the dishonesty.

I guess I'm asking this in such a way because I sided with SD saying "oh yeah, they're exactly the same, the only difference you're hearing is maybe light degaussing, though most likely it's just your ears playing trick on you". So I personally feel like a chump and liar to ALL the people I have personally perpetuated this myth to.

Again, some clarity requested from SD and company.

Luke

 

[Artie]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Any company will always strive to improve and be more efficient in their production techniques. Thats business. But does that "goop" affect the sound? Have you listened to an old JB, in the same guitar with a new JB? Thats where the difference would be. I'm just askin'.

 

[loversmoon]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

they may have changed some things thru the years but Im pretty darn happy with my JB.

 

[the guy who invented fire]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

The point here is the changes in construction...

For years folks would come to this forum and ask about the differences between old JB's and new JB's and folks from SD would swear up and down that no changes were made...

This is clearly not true...

 

[loversmoon]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

cats out of the bag then

 

[zenmindbeginner]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

It's no secret that over time:

A). the maple spacer evolved into a metal one
B). The roughcast magnet changed into a smooth polished one
C). The bobbins changed from Butyrate to Polycarbonate
D). Thus, subsequently the pickup was able to receive more extensive potting due to the higher melting point of the new bobbin material (less potting turned to more potting)
E). The legs changed from long to short for more flexibility with more shallow routes.
D). The conductors changed from two to four.

Will all of this affect the tone of the pickup? That's for you to decide... it's a subtle change to my ears but enough justification to drive the introduction of the 35th Anny, Antiquity and JB concept models.

Cheers. : )

 

[Zerberus]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

The point here is the changes in construction...

For years folks would come to this forum and ask about the differences between old JB's and new JB's and folks from SD would swear up and down that no changes were made...

This is clearly not true...

That said, there are also 2 different "old JBs" to use as a reference point. A rare, pre-production pickup with unfinalized specs such as the one probably posted in the OP, and a production pickup when the specs WERE set in stone a few short months /years later such as my JBJ

What he has there taken apart is an old one with the "JB Model" sticker, and I don`t see a stamped logo on his baseplate, that alone tells me it`s damn near fossil type old, as in "Pre-production" era.

The "JBJ" I have in my Dinky on the other hand is as far as I can tell 100% identical to an SH-4 from 2009, just many years older, and just about anybody you ask will say a JBJ is an old JB wound by MJ..

It would definitely be interesting to hear from Duncan on this, but I`m theorizing that the disconnect lies somewhere along those lines, that starting at poinxt x there were no more changes, meaning all PRODUCTION JBs are in fact exactly the same pickup and the PUs before that were a bit more varied in spec by the nature of the beast not being finalized yet... Nobody will try to tell you that their pre-pro /R+D semi-experiments are the exact same thing as the production model, that`s just preposterous. That IS however exactly what this post may be indirectly inferring....

The ONLY reason I`m not specifically asking to see the top of the bobbins and a close up of the decal is that Luke is a long time member that I have no reason to believe has disassembled some random pickup for some decietful agenda. That said, if the sticker is worn to the point of illegibilty, all he really has to go on is the seller`s word that it`s a Jb. Could in theory just as easily be a distortion or custom.

Duncan has always been quite the honest company, I have a bit of a problem believing they would intentionally lie about something as trivial as this. In no small part because they know for a fact that people like myself will be the first ones to tear the Duncans out of every guitar they own and switch to Bareknuckle, just for the intentional deception and making US look like asshats for parroting it.

 

[DrNewcenstein]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

The company does not owe you an explanation for anything.

 

[ex-250]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

It was the JB on the grassy knoll.

 

[Luke Duke]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

That said, there are also 2 different "old JBs" to use as a reference point. A rare, pre-production pickup with unfinalized specs such as the one probably posted in the OP, and a production pickup when the specs WERE set in stone a few short months /years later such as my JBJ

What he has there taken apart is an old one with the "JB Model" sticker, and I don`t see a stamped logo on his baseplate, that alone tells me it`s damn near fossil type old, as in "Pre-production" era.

The "JBJ" I have in my Dinky on the other hand is as far as I can tell 100% identical to an SH-4 from 2009, just many years older, and just about anybody you ask will say a JBJ is an old JB wound by MJ..

It would definitely be interesting to hear from Duncan on this, but I`m theorizing that the disconnect lies somewhere along those lines, that starting at poinxt x there were no more changes, meaning all PRODUCTION JBs are in fact exactly the same pickup and the PUs before that were a bit more varied in spec by the nature of the beast not being finalized yet... Nobody will try to tell you that their pre-pro /R+D semi-experiments are the exact same thing as the production model, that`s just preposterous. That IS however exactly what this post may be indirectly inferring....

The ONLY reason I`m not specifically asking to see the top of the bobbins and a close up of the decal is that Luke is a long time member that I have no reason to believe has disassembled some random pickup for some decietful agenda. That said, if the sticker is worn to the point of illegibilty, all he really has to go on is the seller`s word that it`s a Jb. Could in theory just as easily be a distortion or custom.

Thanks for your confidence Zerb, in person the decal is pretty clear so I'll try to get another (non-phone) pic when I go back out to my bench. They guy I bought it from was a forum member who didn't even know how old it was his guess was only "80 something".

Duncan has always been quite the honest company, I have a bit of a problem believing they would intentionally lie about something as trivial as this. In no small part because they know for a fact that people like myself will be the first ones to tear the Duncans out of every guitar they own and switch to Bareknuckle, just for the intentional deception and making US look like asshats for parroting it.

I agree, they've always seemed pretty honest, but on a personal level I feel like I am personally wearing the egg on my face for "being an asshat and parroting" what I've taken to be the gospel from the company. Like you I'd tear down all my SD guitars over just such an act....that said I think we are in the minority because I remember us also sharing the same view on Dmz's marketing ideas.

The company does not owe you an explanation for anything.

Nor do you owe me a reply to this thread, but obviously you felt the need to post one.

As I said, after 10 years of blindly parroting what I've been told I'm feeling pretty foolish and am earnestly seeking some clarity.

 

[Zerberus]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

... As I said, after 10 years of blindly parroting what I've been told I'm feeling pretty foolish and am earnestly seeking some clarity.

I`m going to go out on a limb here and say that there are probably less than 5 people in the world that truly know the answer to this. Seymour himself, MJ, and...... yeah, really good question. Cathy, maybe? Or possibly some other employee that has been there from day 1, one that most of us are not familiar with?

As such, I would take an answer from more or less anyone else, including Frank and Evan, with a grain of salt, as, with all due respect, their knowledge is second hand.

And that itself poses an issue: I can`t remember most things that happened 20 years ago, including some things I actively did myself. So it`s not entirely out of the question for SD and MJ to have "faded ink" in ther mental documentation.

Again, I am very interested to see what the official answer to this ends up being, or if we even get one.... I say we may not get one because it`s entirely possible that somebody understands that it doesn`t really matter how this question gets answered, there are probably numerous people the answer will inevitably not satisfy that will react accordingly, at which time the worms will start jumping out of the can into the depths of the WWW, possibly causing significant yet unwarranted damage significantly greater than that which would be caused by not answering at all...

 

[misterwhizzy]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

I feel like the people who care about this are the same ones that think Guns N' Roses reuniting will bring about world peace or something. That happened then, and this is now. Does the JB work for you now? If so, play the hell out of it, and keep buying. If it doesn't, then shut up and buy a different pickup. History isn't going to change, and it has no bearing on what's being produced now.

 

[GilmourD]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

The only thing that I can see making a real difference, unless the wind is different, is the magnet.

 

[frankfalbo]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

I suppose it's all about what constitutes a change. I've said things as a Seymour Duncan VP of Product Development that I can sleep well on, and they are all searchable on the net. It's true, however, that I'll only speak in generalities at this point. I think if someone (either from the company or outside the company) said that the wind of the JB has never changed, it would be accurate. Again that's all stuff that can be searched in today's technology age. I see a lot of guys start talking about how their JB reads "hot" or "cool" and their assumption is based on the DC resistance. But companies have a range of tolerance for DCR.

So say a company (any company) posts a DC spec of 18k and you find an old pickup that reads 16k or 20k, it doesn't necessarily mean the company changed its recipe. There are so many variables that you'd never be able to know about from that. A winder could have the tension too high or low. A batch of wire could be a little thick or a little thin. A flat-out mistake could have been made, choosing the wrong wire off the shelf. Whether a company catches these things or lets the product through is up to the particular company, who's in charge at any given time, etc. None of these things should be considered a change at face value. A change would be more like if someone changed the winding spec up or down, or the pitch, etc.

I've never worked for Dimarzio, but I can say that I have seen first hand and owned various Dimarzios where the magnet size was very different. I've seen same model Ceramic pickup with a smaller magnet and a metal strip to connect to the poles, and others with a magnet that is rightly sized. I've seen and own same model Alnico V pickups where the magnet was extra tall, and others where it was standard height. I've seen readings from Rich at IbanezRules across multiple Jems (which had stock PAF Pros) and aftermarket PAF Pros that ranged from low 8k all the way up to 11k. I can't confirm that first-hand, but that's a huge range to report. I only state these things as facts, not to be negative, just to give an overview. In fact, Dimarzio has a pickup called the PAF that has been changed completely a few years back to include a lot of their new technology. They explicitly disclosed all of this, but they just left the model numbers the same, so you'd have to know what year yours was made to really know what you had.

So personally I wouldn't suggest any company changed a winding spec unless I personally sat there and hand-unwound some coils. Personally sent off metals for analysis, etc. So now we come to something like rough-cast magnets. As you guys can search and infer from posts I and others have already made throughout the years, rough cast are less consistent than ground magnets. The dimensions of ground magnets are extremely tight. So as a manufacturer, would you consider that an improvement? I might, if it was the 1980's and I was trying to build a company on quality and consistency, where other companies (like the big two guitar companies) were starting to make product that was all over the map. If you had a plastic that was too soft for bullet-proof wax potting, would you upgrade to one that could take the heat? If you weren't making a P.A.F. replica, and you could substitute a plastic spacer for the maple one, you'd get more consistency (no expansion and contraction with sweat or temp changes) would you choose the more consistent and much cheaper one?

What's missing from the 1980's to today is that no one would care about these things in the 1980's. They would probably care if their pickup became deformed from the heat of a car trunk, scratched easily, squealed, or worse, if you bought 5 more from the same batch and they were not consistent. So if I were building a pickup company in the 1980's I would probably value all of these things. Furthermore, there was not a huge internet forum community parsing all of these little idiosyncracies. Making a small manufacturing improvement didn't mean you "changed" anything because it fell so far under the radar. Now we have boutique pedals and amps, $200 cables, and we're sitting in our little home studios with our ears smashed against the speaker to hear the slightest differences between two gnat farts.

So now we get to the subject of misinformation, etc. and I believe reasonable people can agree that there are a lot of semantics involved:
"Are those the same pants you had on yesterday?"
"Yes, but they've been washed"
"Then no they're not, with each wash they've been altered"

As for taking every post with a grain of salt, that's a good idea always. But here's my advice, if you find one of my old posts, and it seems like its saying something different than someone else's post, I'd bet on mine...

 

[frankfalbo]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

I'll add this opinion: If you think your old JB sounds better than your new one, it is my experience with old JB's that the biggest contributor (aside from tolerances between two identical pickups) is simply age itself. Not the maple spacer, not the long legged baseplate, not the 4-conductor cable, not even the rough-cast magnet. But for those of you who DO think your old one sounds great, I highly recommend you purchase the Antiquity JB, just like if you think an old vintage-style humbucker sounds better than a new one, you should buy the Antiquity HB instead of the Seth Lover.

 

[kilphody]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Not to hijack but I think FB's headstock might look great w/ the Da Vinci tuners..

 

[Luke Duke]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

I feel like the people who care about this are the same ones that think Guns N' Roses reuniting will bring about world peace or something. That happened then, and this is now. Does the JB work for you now? If so, play the hell out of it, and keep buying. If it doesn't, then shut up and buy a different pickup. History isn't going to change, and it has no bearing on what's being produced now.

So what prompted you to post this nugget of wisdom if I'm so ridiculous or the thread is ridiculous? Why even open the thread?
I've tried newer JBs, and didn't like them very much. I bought this simply because of the novelty of it being an old dbl creme model and BAM this sounds different than my previous experiences with JBs do.

The only thing that I can see making a real difference, unless the wind is different, is the magnet.

I concur and thus one of the reasons for the thread...probably the MAIN reason I'd say.

 

[Masta' C]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

If you think your old JB sounds better than your new one, it is my experience with old JB's that the biggest contributor (aside from tolerances between two identical pickups) is simply age itself. Not the maple spacer, not the long legged baseplate, not the 4-conductor cable, not even the rough-cast magnet.

Frank - thank you for saying this.

For anyone who would argue otherwise, I would like to hear your HD comparison clips of a "new" JB and an "old" JB that you managed to keep vacuum sealed, insulated and protected against temperature, humidity, light, air and movement for the past 30 years...

Yes, the rough vs. polished nature of a magnet affects tone, but only very slightly and certainly not as much as different magnet types (A2, A5, oriented, unoriented, etc.).

I've always felt the biggest tone changer is simply that older magents can become "aged" (i.e. slightly degaussed from years of exposure, being bumped, coming close to other magnetic devices, etc.). I would venture to bet that, if you were to put a brand new, properly charged magnet of the same type in an "old" JB, it will sound identical to a brand new, production model JB.

The bobbin material, length of the legs, lead wire configuration and attachment method of the magnet (epoxy, glue, chewing gum, velcro, etc.) make no discernable difference to any pickup's tone.

 

[Luke Duke]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

I suppose it's all about what constitutes a change. I've said things as a Seymour Duncan VP of Product Development that I can sleep well on, and they are all searchable on the net. It's true, however, that I'll only speak in generalities at this point. I think if someone (either from the company or outside the company) said that the wind of the JB has never changed, it would be accurate. Again that's all stuff that can be searched in today's technology age. I see a lot of guys start talking about how their JB reads "hot" or "cool" and their assumption is based on the DC resistance. But companies have a range of tolerance for DCR.

So say a company (any company) posts a DC spec of 18k and you find an old pickup that reads 16k or 20k, it doesn't necessarily mean the company changed its recipe. There are so many variables that you'd never be able to know about from that. A winder could have the tension too high or low. A batch of wire could be a little thick or a little thin. A flat-out mistake could have been made, choosing the wrong wire off the shelf. Whether a company catches these things or lets the product through is up to the particular company, who's in charge at any given time, etc. None of these things should be considered a change at face value. A change would be more like if someone changed the winding spec up or down, or the pitch, etc.

I've never worked for Dimarzio, but I can say that I have seen first hand and owned various Dimarzios where the magnet size was very different. I've seen same model Ceramic pickup with a smaller magnet and a metal strip to connect to the poles, and others with a magnet that is rightly sized. I've seen and own same model Alnico V pickups where the magnet was extra tall, and others where it was standard height. I've seen readings from Rich at IbanezRules across multiple Jems (which had stock PAF Pros) and aftermarket PAF Pros that ranged from low 8k all the way up to 11k. I can't confirm that first-hand, but that's a huge range to report. I only state these things as facts, not to be negative, just to give an overview. In fact, Dimarzio has a pickup called the PAF that has been changed completely a few years back to include a lot of their new technology. They explicitly disclosed all of this, but they just left the model numbers the same, so you'd have to know what year yours was made to really know what you had.

So personally I wouldn't suggest any company changed a winding spec unless I personally sat there and hand-unwound some coils. Personally sent off metals for analysis, etc. So now we come to something like rough-cast magnets. As you guys can search and infer from posts I and others have already made throughout the years, rough cast are less consistent than ground magnets. The dimensions of ground magnets are extremely tight. So as a manufacturer, would you consider that an improvement? I might, if it was the 1980's and I was trying to build a company on quality and consistency, where other companies (like the big two guitar companies) were starting to make product that was all over the map. If you had a plastic that was too soft for bullet-proof wax potting, would you upgrade to one that could take the heat? If you weren't making a P.A.F. replica, and you could substitute a plastic spacer for the maple one, you'd get more consistency (no expansion and contraction with sweat or temp changes) would you choose the more consistent and much cheaper one?

What's missing from the 1980's to today is that no one would care about these things in the 1980's. They would probably care if their pickup became deformed from the heat of a car trunk, scratched easily, squealed, or worse, if you bought 5 more from the same batch and they were not consistent. So if I were building a pickup company in the 1980's I would probably value all of these things. Furthermore, there was not a huge internet forum community parsing all of these little idiosyncracies. Making a small manufacturing improvement didn't mean you "changed" anything because it fell so far under the radar. Now we have boutique pedals and amps, $200 cables, and we're sitting in our little home studios with our ears smashed against the speaker to hear the slightest differences between two gnat farts.

So now we get to the subject of misinformation, etc. and I believe reasonable people can agree that there are a lot of semantics involved:
"Are those the same pants you had on yesterday?"
"Yes, but they've been washed"
"Then no they're not, with each wash they've been altered"

As for taking every post with a grain of salt, that's a good idea always. But here's my advice, if you find one of my old posts, and it seems like its saying something different than someone else's post, I'd bet on mine...

A great post Frank. Thank you very much for chiming in. For me this is a matter of principle more than tone. I am not a huge JB fan. I've tried a few different ones, none of which I cared for....except this one. We all agree little incremental changes have been made it seems. IF the reasons were those you outlined that is admirable, but the fact is why did SD continue to insist the pickup was the same? I mean SD designed the Seth using butyrate bobbins and the right color dye (I remember Evan's story on that) to make SURE that the Seth would be EXACTLY what the patent outlined.

This is what SD's position tells me, a faithful customer, "all the little details mattered on the Seth, but they don't matter on a JB." Really? So what's good for the goose is NOT good for the gander?




Here are the pics from a little while ago. Also I'd like to note that of all the old JBs I've seen on here, TGP, Ebay, etc I don't remember any having a DCR as high as the specs say.

Again, if the changes were made for the reasons Frank stated why did SD hide the truth instead of saying the pickup has went through "optimization" for the modern guitarist. I mean that's what marketing departments are for, put a spin on it, be honest and sell even more for doing good by the players.

 

[Masta' C]

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

Re: All JBs are NOT created equal, Why Has SD Insisted They Are? <Old JB Photos>

For me this is a matter of principle...why did SD hide the truth instead of saying the pickup has went through "optimization" for the modern guitarist. I mean that's what marketing departments are for, put a spin on it, be honest and sell even more for doing good by the players.

Luke, I think you missed Frank's point that nobody really cared before our keyboards became our mouths and the internet built up this mysticism around the JB and its history.

The market for a "vintage correct" pickup, such as the Seth Lover, only exists because we are aware that changes had been made to the original humbucker design. However, the majority of these "changes" have zero affect on the tone and the few that do are minimal at best.

The same goes with the anniversary series JB and the Antiquity JB. SD markets them by highlighting their differences compared to the production version. That goes well against your claims.

Additionally, players who purchase these special editions are generally paying extra for the novelty of the vintage-style construction, rather than some tonal revelation that can be had over the standard production version.

In my opinion, SD has made no attempts to "hide" anything and has actually been very supportive/forthcoming about their designs and the JB in particular.

Suggesting that the company has "put a spin" on the truth and is somehow doing wrong "by the players" is downright ridiculous...