“Equivalent" pickups

[Rex_Rocker]

Honestly, for me.

JB, Tone Zone, Aldrich, SSH+, Baker Act, Fluence Classic, and many others follow that same recipee... except each does it differently.

 

[beaubrummels]

I could make an argument that certain models can form a progression, either weaker to hotter, or increasing treble/bass etc.

Something like, 59 >> Pearly Gates >> Whole Lotta Humbucker >> Custom (Custom) >> JB/A2; or Jazz bridge >> Custom 5; but I'd have to cite all the caveats, like in a Les Paul through a Marshall, and all the nuanced differences, brighter on top, softer on top, etc.

 

[zionstrat]

I could make an argument that certain models can form a progression, either weaker to hotter, or increasing treble/bass etc.

Something like, 59 >> Pearly Gates >> Whole Lotta Humbucker >> Custom (Custom) >> JB/A2; or Jazz bridge >> Custom 5; but I'd have to cite all the caveats, like in a Les Paul through a Marshall, and all the nuanced differences, brighter on top, softer on top, etc.

That's a logical list... wouldn't change a thing 95% of the time.

 

[Mincer]

It would be interesting to plot pickups on a graph..EQ and output, providing those could be measured the same way.

 

[zionstrat]

It would be interesting to plot pickups on a graph..EQ and output, providing those could be measured the same way.

What's it take to make this happen? It would easy to strum chords into Ableton, but how would you insure consistency?

 

[eclecticsynergy]

It's remarkable how close some pickups can seem in their specs yet still sound very different.
Just goes to show that the criteria most use to evaluate them are only part of the picture.

 

[beaubrummels]

What's it take to make this happen? It would easy to strum chords into Ableton, but how would you insure consistency?

This is the very reason BMT charts are often misleading. No one knows how they were measured exactly, and they are so over simplified they can't tell you what's really different in the sound (compression, sensitivity, dyanmics) between two pickups.

 

[Clint 55]

When I mag swapped the SNS set it sounded exactly like a hotter Jazz set to me.

 

[zionstrat]

When I mag swapped the SNS set it sounded exactly like a hotter Jazz set to me.

I'm not a magnet guy... Can you tell me which magnets you switched?

 

[Clint 55]

I got the A4s out of the SNS and tried a few different magnets to get a sense for the wind. I think it was A2, A5, and A6. The wind sounded scooped in eq and glossy in character like the jazz to me.

 

[Mincer]

What's it take to make this happen? It would easy to strum chords into Ableton, but how would you insure consistency?

It would take someone who knows a lot of pickups across many companies. Or has access to test them. It would need a set of testing methods that are consistent, as well.

 

[El Dunco]

What's it take to make this happen? It would easy to strum chords into Ableton, but how would you insure consistency?

The frequency response charts that come with microphones come to mind but those aren’t entire accurate, they always smooth them out to some degree.

 

[freefrog]

The frequency response charts that come with microphones come to mind but those aren’t entire accurate, they always smooth them out to some degree.

I won't repeat here my whole post 23 but the measurements that I listed can be accurate and instructive. Similar food for thought here (and that I prefer to share instead of talking too much just to say the same thing):

https://www.premierguitar.com/mod-garage-exploring-outlaw-pickup-parameters

In 2012, a cheap brand like Artec still included in its catalog resonant frequencies of guitar pickups as they would resonate with various capacitive loads (IOW: with various lenghts of cable):

http://artecsound.com/catalog/Pickups_ARTEC_2012.pdf

Many winders and pickups geeks still do such measurements and publish them.

The "Guitarfreek" Excel calculator is also interesting since it allows to mimic the comb filtering due to pickups location + harmonic nodes of vibrating strings:

https://guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/3627/guitarfreak-guitar-frequency-response-calculator

Something else done here for more than 20 years now is to record any tested pickup direct to the board, through a 1M input, with standardized gear and settings. Then an analyzer stacks all the frequential peaks produced during a whole track, wether notes are played in chords (from unfretted strings to 12th fret) or separately, from unfretted low E to 22th fret of high E... It has been found consistent enough to seem reliable for our needs. And sharing the idea doesn't harm.

 

[zionstrat]

I won't repeat here my whole post 23 but the measurements that I listed can be accurate and instructive. Similar food for thought here (and that I prefer to share instead of talking too much just to say the same thing):

https://www.premierguitar.com/mod-ga...kup-parameters

In 2012, a cheap brand like Artec still included in its catalog resonant frequencies of guitar pickups as they would resonate with various capacitive loads (IOW: with various lenghts of cable):

http://artecsound.com/catalog/Pickups_ARTEC_2012.pdf

Many winders and pickups geeks still do such measurements and publish them.

The "Guitarfreek" Excel calculator is also interesting since it allows to mimic the comb filtering due to pickups location + harmonic nodes of vibrating strings:

https://guitarnuts2.proboards.com/th...nse-calculator

Something else done here for more than 20 years now is to record any tested pickup direct to the board, through a 1M input, with standardized gear and settings. Then an analyzer stacks all the frequential peaks produced during a whole track, wether notes are played in chords (from unfretted strings to 12th fret) or separately, from unfretted low E to 22th fret of high E... It has been found consistent enough to seem reliable for our needs. And sharing the idea doesn't harm.

So there is a standard.. thanks for all the input! that would be a fun but not lucrative job

It's hard to imagine who could fund this kind of but I'd be glad to be part of it

 

[beaubrummels]

I won't repeat here my whole post 23 but the measurements that I listed can be accurate and instructive. Similar food for thought here (and that I prefer to share instead of talking too much just to say the same thing):

https://www.premierguitar.com/mod-garage-exploring-outlaw-pickup-parameters

In 2012, a cheap brand like Artec still included in its catalog resonant frequencies of guitar pickups as they would resonate with various capacitive loads (IOW: with various lenghts of cable):

http://artecsound.com/catalog/Pickups_ARTEC_2012.pdf

Many winders and pickups geeks still do such measurements and publish them.

The "Guitarfreek" Excel calculator is also interesting since it allows to mimic the comb filtering due to pickups location + harmonic nodes of vibrating strings:

https://guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/3627/guitarfreak-guitar-frequency-response-calculator

Something else done here for more than 20 years now is to record any tested pickup direct to the board, through a 1M input, with standardized gear and settings. Then an analyzer stacks all the frequential peaks produced during a whole track, wether notes are played in chords (from unfretted strings to 12th fret) or separately, from unfretted low E to 22th fret of high E... It has been found consistent enough to seem reliable for our needs. And sharing the idea doesn't harm.

The #1 problem with charts generated by measuring the pickup itself is that by the time that pickup is installed in a guitar, strung up, plugged into an amp and played through a speaker cabinet in a room, that frequency curve is absolutely not what players actually hear. So those curves are almost meaningless, because they don't show the nuances that a player actually hears from a guitar into an amp using that pickup vs another pickup.

 

[freefrog]

The #1 problem with charts generated by measuring the pickup itself is that by the time that pickup is installed in a guitar, strung up, plugged into an amp and played through a speaker cabinet in a room, that frequency curve is absolutely not what players actually hear. So those curves are almost meaningless, because they don't show the nuances that a player actually hears from a guitar into an amp using that pickup vs another pickup.

My discourse in the post 23 was not far from what is said there, for the record...

To anyone taking in account what I actually say, it should be clear that I've never promoted any tech reductionnism. For instance, I find that characterizing pickups only by their resonant peaks leads to neglect the importance of magnetism and to ignore what happens in the "time domain" (attack, decay, sustain, release).

That's precisely why a comparative recording procedure, in "real life playing" conditions, is applied here for more than two decades.

That said... I'll repeat that knowing things like inductance / stray capacitance / resistive load / input impedance / Gauss or Tesla levels / impulse responses / resonant frequencies and their Q factor allows an educated guess. When I've some of these infos at disposal, I can generally predict for myself how a pickup will sound. If it wasn't the case, I wouldn't waste my (nor our) time to share about it - kind of contribution which is effectively not "lucrative", zionstrat, nor even... rewarding in many cases. ;-)

Enough said: for me, back to life and to music.

 

[Aceman]

The #1 problem with charts generated by measuring the pickup itself is that by the time that pickup is installed in a guitar, strung up, plugged into an amp and played through a speaker cabinet in a room, that frequency curve is absolutely not what players actually hear. So those curves are almost meaningless, because they don't show the nuances that a player actually hears from a guitar into an amp using that pickup vs another pickup.

Indeed;

The Guitar components change the response
The Cable changes the response
The Amp's gain, EQ, and output change the response
The Speaker changes the response

And then there is your ear's functioning. we are rock guitar players. They are damaged more or less for the most part...

 

[jeremy]

My discourse in the post 23 was not far from what is said there, for the record...

To anyone taking in account what I actually say, it should be clear that I've never promoted any tech reductionnism. For instance, I find that characterizing pickups only by their resonant peaks leads to neglect the importance of magnetism and to ignore what happens in the "time domain" (attack, decay, sustain, release).

That's precisely why a comparative recording procedure, in "real life playing" conditions, is applied here for more than two decades.

That said... I'll repeat that knowing things like inductance / stray capacitance / resistive load / input impedance / Gauss or Tesla levels / impulse responses / resonant frequencies and their Q factor allows an educated guess. When I've some of these infos at disposal, I can generally predict for myself how a pickup will sound. If it wasn't the case, I wouldn't waste my (nor our) time to share about it - kind of contribution which is effectively not "lucrative", zionstrat, nor even... rewarding in many cases. ;-)

Enough said: for me, back to life and to music.

i think your comments, every time, are informative and valuable. so thank you sir!