Degaussed Versus Regular Magnets

['59]

Re: Degaussed Versus Regular Magnets

The guy told me earlier that it was about 80% charged and he didn't know how it would sound fully charged on account that he has never tried an SSL-1.

So I assume the flat stagger of the polepieces will give a minor increase to bass and presence, the higher number of turns will roll of the treble, and the degaussed magnet might open up the lower mids a bit? Am I on the right track here?

 

[Discharged]

Re: Degaussed Versus Regular Magnets

Am I on the right track here?

Yep. In theory, that set should sound pretty close to a stock SSL-2 set.

/Peter

 

[Zhangliqun]

Re: Degaussed Versus Regular Magnets

Flatpole is better for string balance -- counterintuitive as that sounds. I learned it the hard way when I made a radiused set for a guy with a 9.5" radius. Nailed the radius in that it followed the radius contour just this side of perfect. But the D and G dominated, A and B were kind of there and the E strings sounded like they were coming from somewhere down the block. Then I read Lollar somewhere on line saying flatpole is best for balance and I would not have believed him prior to this experience. It certainly seems to be true. It also allows you to get the coil a little closer to the strings because there aren't those tall rods in the middle blocking those few extra twists of the screw driver so that may explain the overall punchiness and Tele-ish-ness of flapoles.

FWIW, I think rod magnet single coils and P90s sound better fully charged while buckers sound better with a little of the edge taken off. Again counterintuitive but what can I say...