Fat sounding bridge with a BluesBucker

[Mid_Squad]

I looking for a fat sounding bridge p/u to match well with the neck. I was thinking of an Air Zone... Would that be a good match? If not, what would be a good bridge p/u?

I figured if I'm getting some triple shots installed, I should get some new pickups too, because the stock p/u aren't the most amazing.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Fat sounding bridge with a BluesBucker

I have an LP Std with a Bluesbucker neck (very nice) with 500K's and a Fred in the bridge with 250K's. Nice rich, fat tones on the bridge. I'm always pleased every time I plug it in. This is an ideal pair.

 

[Mononoaware]

Re: Fat sounding bridge with a BluesBucker

Depends on the sort of guitar you're putting it in, what style you play, and the volume/tone control scheme.

I've also got a Fred matched up with a Bluesbucker, and the volume match is great. But I'd never run a 250k, because I only have one volume and tone. The Bluesbucker shines with 500k's. The Fred has power, cut and chime with 500k's, but it's hardly fat that way.

If you've got a super-strat type, Air Zone would be a great place to start, and would match up well output wise. The Bluesbucker can keep up with most mid- to high- output buckers, so you might also look at the Breed (super smooth), Norton (very middy and kinda raw) or even a Super Distortion.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Fat sounding bridge with a BluesBucker

I've also got a Fred matched up with a Bluesbucker, and the volume match is great. But I'd never run a 250k, because I only have one volume and tone. The Bluesbucker shines with 500k's. The Fred has power, cut and chime with 500k's, but it's hardly fat that way.

The solution to a two pot guitar is to make both of them volume controls, one 250K for the bridge, & one 500K for the neck. Then attach a 250K tone pot to the bridge & tuck inside the control cavity (wrap it in bubble wrap so nothing gets shorted out). The tone pot's not accessible, but it warms the bridge signal much more than one 250K pot. That way you can keep a neck HB bright and articulate, and give the bridge more body & punch.

If you make both of those volume pots push-pulls, you can do a number of things like coil cut, phase, and coil swap. 2 pots are an easy limitation to overcome, and you can do far more with them than the typical unimaginative player does with 4 pots.

 

[Mononoaware]

Re: Fat sounding bridge with a BluesBucker

The solution to a two pot guitar is to make both of them volume controls, one 250K for the bridge, & one 500K for the neck. Then attach a 250K tone pot to the bridge & tuck inside the control cavity (wrap it in bubble wrap so nothing gets shorted out). The tone pot's not accessible, but it warms the bridge signal much more than one 250K pot. That way you can keep a neck HB bright and articulate, and give the bridge more body & punch.

A cool solution I hadn't thought of; might try that with my VHPaf.

But since he doesn't already own a bridge pickup he's trying to tweak, and he's looking to buy, why not recommend something that will get him there without extra tinkering?

 

[blueman335]

Re: Fat sounding bridge with a BluesBucker

But since he doesn't already own a bridge pickup he's trying to tweak, and he's looking to buy, why not recommend something that will get him there without extra tinkering?

Well to me, just about all bridge PU's sound better with 250K's, so the tinkering begins...

 

[Mid_Squad]

Re: Fat sounding bridge with a BluesBucker

Depends on the sort of guitar you're putting it in, what style you play, and the volume/tone control scheme.

Explorer shaped hamer, alder body, maple top, rosewood fretboard. I mostly play classic rock, some metal, and some blues. It's got 2 volumes and a master tone.

I was kinda hoping i could get both the neck and bridge covered. Is the Fred still the best choice for my guitar, because the look would kind of bother me, but I would rather have my guitar sound good than look good. And maybe a covered neck, uncovered bridge would look cool, seen it before, and I thought it was pretty cool

 

[blueman335]

Re: Fat sounding bridge with a BluesBucker

I was kinda hoping i could get both the neck and bridge covered. Is the Fred still the best choice for my guitar, because the look would kind of bother me, but I would rather have my guitar sound good than look good.

You can add covers to the PU's. I do it on most of mine, as I don't like the uncovered look. You or your friends have any old PU's laying around you can take the covers off of? I rarely solder them on, as the tape & wax hold them tight enough. If the holes are a little tight with the pole pieces or slightly off center, I use a 1/4" drill bit to open them up slightly.

I give a strong vote for a Fred (ideally with a 250K or two). Love that with a Bluesbucker in a LP of mine.

 

[Mid_Squad]

Re: Fat sounding bridge with a BluesBucker

You can add covers to the PU's. I do it on most of mine, as I don't like the uncovered look. You or your friends have any old PU's laying around you can take the covers off of? I rarely solder them on, as the tape & wax hold them tight enough. If the holes are a little tight with the pole pieces or slightly off center, I use a 1/4" drill bit to open them up slightly.

I give a strong vote for a Fred (ideally with a 250K or two). Love that with a Bluesbucker in a LP of mine.

The guitar came with covered p/u's, but the only problem is it says Duncan Designed on them. Is there any chance some type of chemical could rub it off?