Do I really need a trembucker?

[punx77]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

Ok, thank you for explaining. Should I measure right where the strings connect to the bridge or above the bridge pickup according to your measurments above?

Above my bridge pickup I measure 2 1/8. I guess I have no choice but to go trembucker to be "safe"? Only now I worry the TB version will sound different than the SH version. Oh, the problems I have lol.

 

[Gibson 1964]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

Ok, thank you for explaining. Should I measure right where the strings connect to the bridge or above the bridge pickup according to your measurments above?

Those are of the bridge string spread. Personally, I would also measure right above the bridge pickup. (Ironically, I remember those better in mm.) But some of it is going to come down to your ears. You don't have mine and I don't have your ears. My ears don't suck, but lots of people hear stuff slightly different.

 

[Gibson 1964]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

Ok, thank you for explaining. Should I measure right where the strings connect to the bridge or above the bridge pickup according to your measurments above?

Above my bridge pickup I measure 2 1/8. I guess I have no choice but to go trembucker to be "safe"? Only now I worry the TB version will sound different than the SH version. Oh, the problems I have lol.

If what you have is not returnable, I would try it. It might work just fine.

I can't hear a difference really between G and F spacings if I adjust my spacing at the bridge. I like those schaller bridges.


Let's assume capacitance directly effects the sound. Their is a difference of a couple mm in a 50+mm width + same height of roughly 10mm bobbin. it is going to be somewhere in the neighborhood of a 3-4% variance roughly, being generous. Being as there is a 5%+/- resistance tolerance in any SD pickup, (IIRC from a thread) it is going to be in the same theoretical range as any two humbuckers of the same model. So really, there could be a difference, but in every way the same as two JBs of the same construction, spacing, etc might vary.

 

[punx77]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

So are you saying I could go with the SH just as well as with the TB or is TB the only "safe" way?

 

[Gibson 1964]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

So are you saying I could go with the SH just as well as with the TB or is TB the only "safe" way?

I am saying it can't hurt to try what you have if it can't be returned and would just be sold as used either way. TB would most likely be the better fit.

But I am saying you might try what you have if you already have it.

 

[Snake Aces]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

So my Fender Strat 50's Classic has a wider string spacing that in theory requires a trembucker over a humbucker. But I'm stuck with a humbucker to be installed. Is this a major problem? When googling, either people will say it doesn't matter at all and the rest just quote pages explaining the theory but without actually having experienced a bad combination themselves it seems.

So what to do, go through all the hassle of selling the humbucker, buy a trembucker, buy or have someone modify the pickguard and maybe even the routing because of the wider space?

Short answer: depends on the string spacing of the bridge but you probably would benefit from a TB.

I spent 5 years without one in the bridge position of a two point trem LP. I changed it out to a TB a little over two years ago bringing more volume and better articulation to both E strings. Bottom line: if your strings are not passing over the poles near the center of the poles you are losing out on some of the magnetic physics behind how the electric guitar captures the sound waves from string vibration.

 

[punx77]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

Thank you.

This is the guitar I have: http://www.fender.com/guitars/stratocaster/classic-series-50s-stratocaster/product-0131002.html

 

[punx77]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

Would it be crazy to have the bridge swapped out on my guitar for a "normal" one with more narrow spacing or would that just be too much trouble?

 

[DreX]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

You can get a sense of how much output drop there is from going off axis with the pole piece by doing a string bend, and listening to how the output changes as you get further away from center.

Also, don't forget that if you have the stock Strat saddles, you can push the string left or right between the two adjustment screws, and move them more towards the center if necessary, then you just move the other strings in between to make the overall string spacing feel even.

 

[Edgecrusher]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

clearly your fundamentals are drastically wrong, as the slugs and studs are magnets.

Yeah dude you got this so wrong... Look up what a pole piece actually is... ill give you a hint its called "pole" because it extends the pole of a magnet but that does not mean that it itself is a magnet.

You can remove the slugs and screws and the pickup will STILL function! You can try this yourself... unscrew the fricken screws and the pickup still works. The magnetic field does flatten and pancake out but its still there the pole pieces are only there to help direct the field but are not the sole source of it and its a field inverse law or not it doesnt disappear right above the pole you can be off the pole and still inside the field. If it did when you hit the strings hard the signal would disappear and reappear as the string vibrated in and out of the field.

 

[Gibson 1964]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

Yeah dude you got this so wrong... Look up what a pole piece actually is... ill give you a hint its called "pole" because it extends the pole of a magnet but that does not mean that it itself is a magnet.

Wrong. Dead wrong. It is a temporary magnet. You can see this by noting that string clippings and such will stick to the poles and screws. And that is not the reason it is called a pole I don't think.

You can remove the slugs and screws and the pickup will STILL function!

Not if you remove both the slugs and the screws.

You can try this yourself... unscrew the fricken screws and the pickup still works.

Because you still have the poles. Remove those and I am fairly certain you have nada. They will function as a single coil with dummy coil with just the screws removed.

The magnetic field does flatten and pancake out but its still there the pole pieces are only there to help direct the field but are not the sole source of it and its a field inverse law or not it doesnt disappear right above the pole you can be off the pole and still inside the field. If it did when you hit the strings hard the signal would disappear and reappear as the string vibrated in and out of the field.

You clearly do not understand how a pickup works to post this. The poles and screws are magnetized by the bar magnet. They function in the same way a single coil with alnico rod polepieces work. Your theory is just objectively wrong.

I have not said that the magnetic field disappears instantly off a pickup. Physics says that as the distance increases the field weakens. As you increase that distance sound will drop off. But the polepieces, and screws, being magnetic, because of the bar magnet underneath them, are the points at which you start to have the inverse square law begins applying.

 

[Edgecrusher]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

It is a temporary magnet.

Yeah your wrong on this definition too. " temporary magnet

A magnet, such as that made of soft iron, which retains its magnetism for brief periods, as opposed to a permanent magnet, which can remain magnetized indefinitely. Temporary magnets are usually characterized by low reluctance and low retentivity" This is different from a pole piece

You can see this by noting that string clippings and such will stick to the poles and screws.

string clipplings will also stick to the bobbins because the magentic is underneath them. The magnetic field does not only extend from the poles.

And that is not the reason it is called a pole I don't think.

You think wrong "A pole piece attaches to and in a sense extends a pole of the magnet, hence the name." that quote was pulled from wikipedia you can find it under the article titled "pole piece"

Not if you remove both the slugs and the screws.

Ive done it (and you havent your just guessing so go try it for yourself) with invaders trying to tighten up the sound and surprise surprise they still work. They lose a lot of balls and sound weedily but they still work.

Because you still have the poles. Remove those and I am fairly certain you have nada.

Nope nope nope again your talking from what you think not what you have actually tried or observed.

They will function as a single coil with dummy coil with just the screws removed.

Famously dimebag would push the poles out of his neck 59 pickups and his tone sure didnt sound like a single coil in the neck.

They function in the same way a single coil with alnico rod polepieces work.

No they do not and the fact that you call single coil alnico rod magets "pole pieces" shows that you are talking over your head. and in case you missed it they are rod magnets not pole pieces. The way they work is functionally different even the way the magnetic field is orientated is different.

I have not said that the magnetic field disappears instantly off a pickup. Physics says that as the distance increases the field weakens. As you increase that distance sound will drop off. But the polepieces, and screws, being magnetic, because of the bar magnet underneath them, are the points at which you start to have the inverse square law begins applying.

Ok so? The fact that it drops off is moot without stating at what rate it drops off. Thats what is actually important. Do you lose 10% for every mm you move off center or do you lose 70%? At what distance does the pickup actually stop sensing the string. And its quite a ways you can demonstrate this by dropping your pickup to the bottom of the ring. You can back it off 6 or 7 mm and its still sensing.

 

[Gibson 1964]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

Yeah your wrong on this definition too. " temporary magnet

A magnet, such as that made of soft iron, which retains its magnetism for brief periods, as opposed to a permanent magnet, which can remain magnetized indefinitely. Temporary magnets are usually characterized by low reluctance and low retentivity" This is different from a pole piece

Umm, no, it isn't. Your reading comprehension seems problematic here. If you use a magnet attached to a magnetic material, it will be magnetized as long as it is attached. It will not retain that magnetic charge.

string clipplings will also stick to the bobbins because the magentic is underneath them.

Not true. If this were true, clippings would stick between the poles. But you are dead wrong here, too.

The magnetic field does not only extend from the poles.

Never said it did, but the magnetic field does extend from the screws and slugs.

You think wrong "A pole piece attaches to and in a sense extends a pole of the magnet, hence the name." that quote was pulled from wikipedia you can find it under the article titled "pole piece"

I doubt it because there are a load of reasons including the fact that the materials are shaped like poles. Trusting wikipedia for etymology is rather dicey.

Ive done it (and you havent your just guessing so go try it for yourself) with invaders trying to tighten up the sound and surprise surprise they still work. They lose a lot of balls and sound weedily but they still work.

I'd like to see this. You can be assured I will try it with some warpigs. It really should work remarkably poorly if at all.

Nope nope nope again your talking from what you think not what you have actually tried or observed.

I am using basic theory.

Famously dimebag would push the poles out of his neck 59 pickups and his tone sure didnt sound like a single coil in the neck.

I have done it before and there are multiple videos on youtube about it. Dimebag's tone was more about his amp, hands, and the rest of his gear. Try removing the screws only, and it is functionally a slug coil with a dummy coil.

No they do not and the fact that you call single coil alnico rod magets "pole pieces" shows that you are talking over your head. and in case you missed it they are rod magnets not pole pieces. The way they work is functionally different even the way the magnetic field is orientated is different.

They are magnets. The magnetic field is oriented differently, but the way they work is fundamentally the same.

Ok so? The fact that it drops off is moot without stating at what rate it drops off. Thats what is actually important. Do you lose 10% for every mm you move off center or do you lose 70%? At what distance does the pickup actually stop sensing the string. And its quite a ways you can demonstrate this by dropping your pickup to the bottom of the ring. You can back it off 6 or 7 mm and its still sensing.

Wow, you really are out of your depth here. The inverse square law gives you how fast it decays. Which is why the fact that your screws and slugs are magnetic matters.

 

[Snake Aces]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

Thank you.

This is the guitar I have: http://www.fender.com/guitars/stratocaster/classic-series-50s-stratocaster/product-0131002.html

The link is not working for me. Probably because their server redirects international traffic.

 

[Edgecrusher]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

inverse square law is only meaningful if you put numbers into it... just saying its there doesnt mean much. How much field is there and how much does it decay... answer that please. At what distance, at what angle does the pickup stop sensing the string?

 

[Gibson 1964]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

Just tried it with warpigs. Absolutely huge volume dropoff. Almost gone altogether. The pickup is functionally dead without it's screws. Really shows my point actually. Not even close to the output with screws. In fact, the screws are still slightly magnetised from their long term exposure to the magnet in the pickup.

Start applying units of measure to the distance of the formula. Since the inverse square law will functionally go to 1/(infinity) It extends forever, theoretically.

 

[punx77]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

The link is not working for me. Probably because their server redirects international traffic.

Nah, the page is down for me too now. It's a Fender Stratocaster Classic 50's.

 

[Edgecrusher]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

Just tried it with warpigs. Absolutely huge volume dropoff. Almost gone altogether. The pickup is functionally dead without it's screws. Really shows my point actually. Not even close to the output with screws. In fact, the screws are still slightly magnetised from their long term exposure to the magnet in the pickup.

Start applying units of measure to the distance of the formula. Since the inverse square law will functionally go to 1/(infinity) It extends forever, theoretically.

This is far from your original statement that you would get nothing.... now your saying it does work with a large drop off in volume (which i also stated). You do know that the dimarzio air buckers are built with space between the magnets and the poles right? Its a field the poles serve to help direct and shape it but they sure arent beams that come straight out the top of the screws. For that matter the field actually travels across from one bobbing to the other looking a bit like a peaky tube. Its a circuit but the poles need not be touching to complete it

I will give you this though at least you tried something instead of pulling it out of the air and guessing what you think it might do.

 

[punx77]

Re: Do I really need a trembucker?

Ok guys, thank you for all the great input, you've been really helpful. I'm locking it now, no need to argue anymore