Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

[Joey Voltage]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

I’m very aware of what you are talking about, and the theory behind it, any schmo with rdh4 would be aquatinted, but you have so far presented no real world work, measurements, numbers, or bench results to back up your thesis. Please provide those. I’m not interested in seeing a cited reference, I can go to my bookshelf for that, I want to see your work.

FWIW, Others have tried this technique and have even removed the VV slugs from their pickups, and have reported a significant enough difference. So the fact that it even does something, makes it valid. Now it’s your turn to dispel it by doing the same. Get to work, I’ll be looking forward to your published results.

 

[PicoRiveraTele]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

I’m very aware of what you are talking about, and the theory behind it, any schmo with rdh4 would be aquatinted,

You say that, but you don't seem especially 'acquainted' with the issue, so...

but you have so far presented no real world work, measurements, numbers, or bench results to back up your thesis. Please provide those. I’m not interested in seeing a cited reference, I can go to my bookshelf for that, I want to see your work.

So I have to present "real world work, measurements, numbers", but you don't expect the same from the DiMarzio guy? Quite the double standard.

The onus should really be on DiMarzio to demonstrate that their "improvements" result in tangible performance increase. The company has not provided any facts or figures to this effect.

FWIW, Others have tried this technique and have even removed the VV slugs from their pickups, and have reported a significant enough difference. So the fact that it even does something, makes it valid. Now it’s your turn to dispel it by doing the same. Get to work, I’ll be looking forward to your published results.

Subjective claims are subjective. We don't really know if it made a difference or not. You can't ask me for numbers and measurements, but then not demand the same of all these people who claimed to observe a difference.

 

[vinnie1971]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

Increasing the inductance gives you high end loss, too, as inductance lowers the resonant peak. Peak frequency = 1 / (2 x Pi x SQRT(L x C)), L is inductance.

I doubt the slugs do much, they displace only a very tiny portion of air gap in the magnetic circuit with iron, and I suspect the extra labor and sourcing for materials involved results in higher costs than had you just added a hundred or so more turns of wire on the coils. Not every idea is a good one.

I’ve replaced the poles and it made lots of difference. Especially pole length.

On pickups with 12 x 14mm hex poles where there was not much bass, I replaced them with 16mm poles and much more bass. It could have been the material. I used high tensile carbon steel M5 hex bolts which are so close to 10/32 that it makes no difference in getting them in.

I have also clipped 1mm from each of the fillister screws in a muddy pickup and that fixed that.

I’ve also made my own “air” pickup where the original pickup was over sized ceramic and I replaced it with standard alnico 8 but retained the oversized spacer and put a regular spacer in to creat the “air” gap. It wasn’t as successful as placing the magnet between the hex poles where it made contact.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Joey Voltage]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

You say that, but you don't seem especially 'acquainted' with the issue, so...

And you’ve reached that conclusion because I disagree with your methodology of argument. I could say you don’t seem to be very aquinted with real working examples or experience. Nor do you have the working numbers to prove your point. So... Yeah, I’m afraid I need to see your measured data, complete with before and after spectrum analysis. Let me know when you start working on it. Now is their method they way I would do it, no, but I’m not the one refuting their technology doesn’t work either, and I’m quite indifferent to it to be honest.

So I have to present "real world work, measurements, numbers", but you don't expect the same from the DiMarzio guy? Quite the double standard.

The onus should really be on DiMarzio to demonstrate that their "improvements" result in tangible performance increase. The company has not provided any facts or figures to this effect.

May I remind you, you are making the claim on an online forum, not in a peer review with DiMarzio, and it’s you who are refuting the claim here. If you are here yapping, I’m expecting you to demonstrate your counter claim, With real working examples and measurements, just like you are asking them to demonstrate it does to you. You are provoking the double standard.

Subjective claims are subjective. We don't really know if it made a difference or not. You can't ask me for numbers and measurements, but then not demand the same of all these people who claimed to observe a difference.

No, YOU don’t know if it made an audible difference or not, and your not likely to see if it does, yet at the same time making and reaching objective conclusions on the matter. see the difference? I’m really looking forward to seeing your results!

 

[PicoRiveraTele]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

I’ve replaced the poles and it made lots of difference. Especially pole length.

We're talking about the little iron slugs, not the steel poles or screws.

 

[PicoRiveraTele]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

May I remind you, you are making the claim on an online forum, not in a peer review with DiMarzio, and it’s you who are refuting the claim here. If you are here yapping, I’m expecting you to demonstrate your counter claim, With real working examples and measurements, just like you are asking them to demonstrate it does to you. You are provoking the double standard.

DiMarzio never demonstrated their initial claim. What is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

The real question is not why don't I provide proof, it's why do you not expect the same from DiMarzio?

No, YOU don’t know if it made an audible difference or not, and your not likely to see if it does, yet at the same time making and reaching objective conclusions on the matter. see the difference? I’m really looking forward to seeing your results!

We don't know if it made a difference. People claiming something happened does not mean anything actually happened.

Again, you are picky choosy about who you do and don't demand proof of. You want it to be true that those iron slugs make a difference, and so you cherry pick standards that allow you to accept it as true.

 

[Joey Voltage]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

DiMarzio never demonstrated their initial claim. What is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

The real question is not why don't I provide proof, it's why do you not expect the same from DiMarzio?

So in other words, you still have no test results to share.

Again, you are picky choosy about who you do and don't demand proof of. You want it to be true that those iron slugs make a difference, and so you cherry pick standards that allow you to accept it as true.

Ah assumptions, gotta love em. Not at all actually. My personal views of the matter is I couldn’t care less if it’s true or not on a functional basis. Its not a concept I have to rely on in any way. It certainly doesn’t shape a political, religious, or any general belief I have to structure my existence around, nor is my livelihood affected by it - I dont work for said company, and my name s certainly not on that patent. I have no personal Affiliation, or anything to win or lose out of this.


Which brings me to this, and let’s approach the logic a little differently. DiMarzio is a large enough company that most likely can dedicate substantial enough resources for R&D. They are not some ma and pa shop being run out of a basement or garage, neither is Duncan. As such they could dedicate a large enough portion of resources for r&d and to hire any technical consultants they want. And most companies like that typically test their theories long before they even file for a patent. On top of this, once the company holds that patent, they don’t actually have to use the technology they have filed for.

Now DiMarzio is fully aware that they don’t need flashy technology to sell their products. They have international retail and oem deals out the ass, and know they could sell whatever they put out, especially if it has some big endorser name slapped on it. on top of this, their average consumer probably couldn’t care less how or if their technology really does or doesn’t work, so the technology itself is not the biggest selling point for them. DiMarzio is well aware that their consumer base isn’t likely to be drawn to the technology itself.

Logically, it would make no sense for a company like DiMarzio to waste the resources particularly labor costs to perpetuate a technology that proved not to work. They obviously are gaining some sonic result out of it, or they wouldn’t waste the money and resources to do it. They are not the Theranos of the pickup world, and don’t have to rely on the technology working or perpetuating a lie to make sales. So they must have deemed their technology through trials to be of enough use to achieve a sonic result.

 

[PicoRiveraTele]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

So in other words, you still have no test results to share.

Neither does DiMarzio, so we're even. You can push this double standard all day long, it won't get you anywhere.

Ah assumptions, gotta love em.

Let's call it an educated guess.

Which brings me to this, and let’s approach the logic a little differently. DiMarzio is a large enough company that most likely can dedicate substantial enough resources for R&D. They are not some ma and pa shop being run out of a basement or garage, neither is Duncan. As such they could dedicate a large enough portion of resources for r&d and to hire any technical consultants they want.

But that, that's a huge assumption. We can't even presume to know what their cash inflow and outflow is, they're a private company. The appearance of being big and successful could very well be just that: an appearance.

And most companies like that typically test their theories long before they even file for a patent. On top of this, once the company holds that patent, they don’t actually have to use the technology they have filed for.

That's a whopper of an assumption. Do you think the patent examiners are guitar pickup experts? Would you deny that the "improvement" has marketing value, even if it has no real value to speak of?

Now DiMarzio is fully aware that they don’t need flashy technology to sell their products. They have international retail and oem deals out the ass, and know they could sell whatever they put out, especially if it has some big endorser name slapped on it.

Then why do they still do endorsement deal with guitarists? That's practically the definition of flashy marketing. Even if a company makes a lot of money through one venture, doesn't mean they don't wish to make a lot more money through others as well.

on top of this, their average consumer probably couldn’t care less how or if their technology really does or doesn’t work, so the technology itself is not the biggest selling point for them. DiMarzio is well aware that their consumer base isn’t likely to be drawn to the technology itself.

Then why do they boast about their technology on all of their product pages, and even have a section called "tech talk" if their customers are supposedly so technologically illiterate?

You also don't seem to consider the possibility that DiMarzio doesn't even realize their own invention doesn't make much difference in the end result. We don't really know what sort of testing they have or have not done to judge the efficacy of the iron slugs.

Logically, it would make no sense for a company like DiMarzio to waste the resources particularly labor costs to perpetuate a technology that proved not to work.

It does make sense: 1) it's a selling point to people who are none the wiser, and 2) they might even be deceiving themselves.

They obviously are gaining some sonic result out of it, or they wouldn’t waste the money and resources to do it. They are not the Theranos of the pickup world, and don’t have to rely on the technology working or perpetuating a lie to make sales. So they must have deemed their technology through trials to be of enough use to achieve a sonic result.

When it comes to "sonic results", nothing is "obvious". People trick themselves into hearing what they want to hear. That's really what the whole legend of the '59 PAF is all about, an absurd notion that for some inexplicable reason, in one given production year, using all the same materials that had and have been used, they somehow got an amazing "sonic result". It's all just wishful thinking making it's way from the brain to the ears.

 

[PicoRiveraTele]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

Well it looks like someone did measure a DiMarzio pickup with and without the slugs, http://guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/7771/dimarzios-embedded-slugs , they only increased the inductance by a paltry 150 millihenries.

 

[vinnie1971]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

We're talking about the little iron slugs, not the steel poles or screws.

I got that. But the same logic can apply to slugs, screws, hex poles. I did have some double slug pickups I was going to take the slugs out and try hex poles instead ... I bet M5 would self tap!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PicoRiveraTele]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

I got that. But the same logic can apply to slugs, screws, hex poles. I did have some double slug pickups I was going to take the slugs out and try hex poles instead ... I bet M5 would self tap!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's easy to understand why someone would think the iron slugs would make a difference, because it's not a question of whether they have an effect or not, because there is an effect, what is in question is the magnitude of the effect, and it happens to be small. To know how much of an effect is caused by swapping screws and slugs, you'd need an LCR meter. You can go by ear, but then you run the risk of convincing yourself that you're hearing the outcome you hoped that you would hear. It's the same ubiquitous "honeymoon" phase when people love the sound of a new piece of gear, but in this case it's buzz over a new modification.

 

[Joey Voltage]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

Neither does DiMarzio, so we're even. You can push this double standard all day long, it won't get you anywhere.

I didn’t ask DiMarzio, I asked YOU. Your the one making the counter claim and calling the technology into question, you should contact DiMarzio and should try to set up a peer review, Otherwise put up your bench tests please. I want to see YOUR work and YOUR results. Otherwise it’s just your “educated guess” against theirs. Do you not see the double standards you have built around all of your arguments as well? Get to work, I’ll be waiting eagerly to see your results. You are the one calling the technology into question, not me. Time to lace up your work boots and back up your thesis with measured results.

Let's call it an educated guess.

Based on a general disagreement on how you approach tings?

But that, that's a huge assumption. We can't even presume to know what their cash inflow and outflow is, they're a private company. The appearance of being big and successful could very well be just that: an appearance.

And you are implicating the same counter assumptions. You could probably make another one of your educated guesses to deduce that they are most likely doing okay.

That's a whopper of an assumption. Do you think the patent examiners are guitar pickup experts? Would you deny that the "improvement" has marketing value, even if it has no real value to speak of?

Never claimed that it had absolutely no value, just that it’s not likely the primary value. Remember, “improvement” isn’t a universally agreed upon defined concept when it comes to anything of the aural nature. For it to be an improvement it actually has be one and nobody can agree on what that is.

Then why do they still do endorsement deal with guitarists? That's practically the definition of flashy marketing. Even if a company makes a lot of money through one venture, doesn't mean they don't wish to make a lot more money through others as well.

Uh... I think you missed the point on this one. The flashiness of the marketing wasn’t in question. Their Endorsements are likely one of their bigger selling points, and I’m quite confident that they are well aware of this. I can also speculate they are aware of which selling points fall where in their marketing hierarchy. If they pulled all the overly fluffing of their patented techniques off their pickup descriptions how much lost revenue do you think it would cost them in the grand scheme? I personally don’t know of anyone who would refuse to buy a pickup if it didn’t fall under a certain patent number. Maybe you do, but it’s certainly not the first thing I would consider.

Then why do they boast about their technology on all of their product pages, and even have a section called "tech talk" if their customers are supposedly so technologically illiterate?

First, don’t confuse illiterate with indifference, and second, their tech pages is not an avenue for in depth technical analysis, it’s a very basic synopsis. Also, as was pointed out to you months ago, they are very careful about which products incorporate any of their patented techniques and which don’t. Not all do, and some of their long lasting, biggest sellers most likely don’t. What do you personally you think the biggest selling point to their evolution is? That it falls under the 4501 patent, or that it’s Steve vai’s signature? Even if it is a selling point, it’s not the primary.

You also don't seem to consider the possibility that DiMarzio doesn't even realize their own invention doesn't make much difference in the end result. We don't really know what sort of testing they have or have not done to judge the efficacy of the iron slugs.

Sure, but just as you like to make “educated guesses” I could make the educated guess that it’s not the most likely scenario. Certainly possible, but not likely. Even if they have, that data wouldn’t be open source, nor would the makeup of the material they use. it would be considered a trade secret, and they would never relinquish it to you. You would have to test the efficacy yourself.

When it comes to "sonic results", nothing is "obvious". People trick themselves into hearing what they want to hear. That's really what the whole legend of the '59 PAF is all about, an absurd notion that for some inexplicable reason, in one given production year, using all the same materials that had and have been used, they somehow got an amazing "sonic result". It's all just wishful thinking making it's way from the brain to the ears.

Only to some, and thats very conditional. You can’t lump everything everyone in together. You are also relying on an assumption of intentions. The same phenomenon you just gave in the PAF example has swung the opposite way as well and led to disappointment by people who wanted to believe and were sold. So it can’t be that the expectation is always mirrored in the result.

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

You two are acting so lame.

 

[Joey Voltage]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

Well it looks like someone did measure a DiMarzio pickup with and without the slugs, http://guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/7771/dimarzios-embedded-slugs , they only increased the inductance by a paltry 150 millihenries.

It looks like it increased it more than 150mh in screw coil. Plus inductance looked to be increased by only a slightly less proportional magnitude than the poles themselves, so it’s increasing to the effect the poles might. What did the magnetic field look like with both? And how and if the response differed. These are things that should accompany any analytical scrutiny not just readings from the inductance meter.

The way that guy described his way of doing something similar is exactly how I would do it, encapsulate a large ferrite core within the bobbin.

 

[Joey Voltage]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

You two are acting so lame.

You’re right. I’m dropping it on my part.

 

[PicoRiveraTele]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

It looks like it increased it more than 150mh in screw coil. Plus inductance looked to be increased by only a slightly less proportional magnitude than the poles themselves, so it’s increasing to the effect the poles might. What did the magnetic field look like with both? And how and if the response differed. These are things that should accompany any analytical scrutiny not just readings from the inductance meter.

How did the response differ? What do you mean by that?

The purpose of the iron slugs is to increase the inductance, nothing more, and it does that to the tune of 150 millihenries, which as I suspected earlier, is equivalent to adding a few more turns of wire. The reduction in capacitance is as trivial as the inductance gained. DiMarzio calls this "Virtual Vintage" technology, so regardless of it's effectiveness as an inductance increasing technique, it serves a marketing purpose.

 

[vinnie1971]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

It's easy to understand why someone would think the iron slugs would make a difference, because it's not a question of whether they have an effect or not, because there is an effect, what is in question is the magnitude of the effect, and it happens to be small. To know how much of an effect is caused by swapping screws and slugs, you'd need an LCR meter. You can go by ear, but then you run the risk of convincing yourself that you're hearing the outcome you hoped that you would hear. It's the same ubiquitous "honeymoon" phase when people love the sound of a new piece of gear, but in this case it's buzz over a new modification.

I don’t have a meter but I recorded before and after using the same amp settings. In that pickup the sound was definitely by design. I do that with all my experiments.

I actually made one set of pickups sound not so good with experiments using different poles and magnets and returned them to standard.

Incidentally it was Maxon pickups got El Maya, similar specs as super 70 but using the oversized ceramic magnet and adjustable hex poles rather than roughcast alnico 8 And slug/screw. I thought longer poles and polished standard sized alnico 8 ( not at the same time in one go) would help tame the ice pick highs, but it made the overall EQ unbalanced. I also tried an air gap.
They lost their nice pronounced upper mids and rich harmonics, ended up quite scooped with too much bass and a ping at the top end, a kind of clanky sound. so I went back to standard and just play with the tone pot rollled back half way.

Definitely the original poles work best but I’m curious to hear how oversized rough cast alnico 8 would sound though. But I’ll leave them alone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Joey Voltage]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

How did the response differ? What do you mean by that?

The purpose of the iron slugs is to increase the inductance, nothing more, and it does that to the tune of 150 millihenries, which as I suspected earlier, is equivalent to adding a few more turns of wire. The reduction in capacitance is as trivial as the inductance gained. DiMarzio calls this "Virtual Vintage" technology, so regardless of it's effectiveness as an inductance increasing technique, it serves a marketing purpose.

Well the self capacitance is pretty irrelevant regardless, I’m not even really considering it as a factor. So my personal feeling on this is that I’m not even 100% convinced a huge increase in inductance was the true goal in practice regardless of what they filed in the patent states, so long as the practice itself is still covered by the patent, their covered. From experience in working in big corporations that do that kind of thing as regular sop, it wouldn’t surprise me if they do too. That’s where my skepticism regarding patents comes from.

That said, “virtual vintage” is not really something or a term I personally would associate with a big increase of inductance though. It would usually be something I would associate with trying to produce and increase losses or using a lossy core material if anything. Just increasing inductance can be done in more practical or effective ways, we even discussed some above. shifting a higher q resonance frequency down can be too. So that’s what is leaving me less than 100% convinced that’s the real reason they are using it.


Oh I completely agree it has marketing value, but my argument was the realistic value of that marketability in comparison to everything else.

 

[PicoRiveraTele]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

Well the self capacitance is pretty irrelevant regardless, I’m not even really considering it as a factor.

Your feelings about it aside, the patent actually states that the intention was to get more inductance for less capacitance.

So my personal feeling on this is that I’m not even 100% convinced a huge increase in inductance was the true goal in practice regardless of what they filed in the patent states, so long as the practice itself is still covered by the patent, their covered. From experience in working in big corporations that do that kind of thing as regular sop, it wouldn’t surprise me if they do too. That’s where my skepticism regarding patents comes from.

There is no reason not to take the patent's claims at face value; the iron slugs do in fact increase the inductance... just by a very small amount. You can claim they were after other improvements that are not cited in the patent, but there's no logic or evidence to support that, that would be purely imagination.

That said, “virtual vintage” is not really something or a term I personally would associate with a big increase of inductance though.

DiMarzio pairs the trademarked term "Virtual Vintage" with products citing their patent for the iron slugs. Agree or disagree, it's what DiMarzio chose to do. It should go to show that what an "improvement" does and how that "improvement" are marketed do not have to be one and the same.

 

[eclecticsynergy]

Re: Alnico 8 vs. Ceramic.

Okay, a whole different concept- over on the PRS forum I read a post from someone who replaced the slugs in a PRS SE humbucker with A5 rods.

Anybody here tried this?