Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

DarkMatter

Unprofessional Toneologist
I heard back from Scott on some things pertaining to the Zebro. Apparently the middle dead zone is a big issue. If you bend up with the G or pull down on the D there is noticeable signal loss. As far as cost, he didn't have any numbers, but did describe a significant amount of work involved in making something like this. As an alternative, the Custom Shop already makes a 3+3 humbucker with either rod magnets or a bar magnet and pole pieces. This pickup will still get many of the things that Zebro supporters want without its drawbacks. Yes, other manufacturers make these as well, and yes, the novelty factor is not as high. However, it wouldn't cost any more than the hybrid, and it would probably sound much better.

We can have any sort of discussion on this or the hybrid in this thread. My current plan for the re-vote will be to leave it open for 2 weeks and to make it public.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

I heard back from Scott on some things pertaining to the Zebro. Apparently the middle dead zone is a big issue. If you bend up with the G or pull down on the D there is noticeable signal loss..
IIRC, early on I brought this subject to the group's attention, and I even provide a link to a Fralin p'up which takes care of of this very issue in such a good way that's patented. ;)

The proposed solution is essentially a Wide Range p'up.

Is everybody good with this? I, for one, still think my idea of the misnomed "Hybrid" neck p'up, as a matching pair to the '59/Custom is much more of a plausible and useful offering.

If there are other proposals, NOW is the time to hear about'em.

HTH,
 
Last edited:
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

Bad bends on G or D would be a huge deal breaker for me.

I think a normal humbucker voiced to be a match for the C/59 would be a better idea... though I get the feeling it wont cause much excitement.

The fact that few (I would almost dare say zero) of the zebro supporters own a 3+3 from the creamery or anyone else says a lot for the feelings about that design.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

Bad bends on G or D would be a huge deal breaker for me.

I think a normal humbucker voiced to be a match for the C/59 would be a better idea... though I get the feeling it wont cause much excitement.

The fact that few (I would almost dare say zero) of the zebro supporters own a 3+3 from the creamery or anyone else says a lot for the feelings about that design.

I might be open with it if I knew more about that design. Is it just essentially two humbucker coils and half of each coil has screws? Sorry if that seems ignorant, but could you elaborate on what the 3+3 is supposed to or does accomplish?
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

I didn't catch the results of the previous vote which resulted in the pickup with the D&G bend dropout... Are there only three poles on each side with the Zebro design?
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

To be clear, are we to discuss the two previous (re)designs or offer new alternatives?

I'm still interested (although TBH not as much as before all the ups and downs) in a humbucker with mismatched coils (I too dislike how misleading the "hybrid" misnomer is) as long as it's hot enough and clear enough to handle more aggressive tones (the Fugly was enough) while still musical and sweet enough to sound good when dialed back.

As another idea I found interesting, the P90-Tele-rails thingamajig might be worth exploring.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

The major difference between the Zebro and the 3+3 was that the coils were supposed to half sized like the G&L Comanche, so I'll ask of anyone who knows, what is the difference in tone between a 3+3 and a G&L Comanche?

The Wide Range Humbucker isn't really comparable because it has 12 pole pieces, magnetic or otherwise, with the poles being forced under the cover, by design.

Also I agree that losing bending volume on the D and G is trivial, at least for me. I have to admit, I don't understand the technical reason for this, since as it gets further from one coil, it's getting closer to the other.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

Definitely not trivial here, the G and B are the ones I bend the most as they are thin enough for a deep bend relatively easily still thick enough to not cut in my skin or worry about breaking...
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

Lets look at what we ended at last time and work from there

Time for the big choice. Zebro or a Hybrid. Either will be available as a set. Both will fit a humbucker rout.

The candidates.

1. Zebro is a split coil design like a Pbass pickup. It will combine single coil aspects with hum cancelling. The voicing will be based on a P90, aggressive, full, great harmonics.

2. The hybrid concept is based on getting a good hybrid pickup in the neck position to pair with the 59/Custom. It will be made as a original set, the voicing starts with the 59/Custom but will have more upper mid focus, more controlled bass, cleaner, clearer. It will still have the hybrid complexity.

With the zebro, I think we need to ditch form factor and focus on sound. Let the custom shop work out if its a 3+3 or whatnot and we just let them know we have a desire for a p90 style sound with the above descriptors and no hum.

For the hybrid, I think we need to stop calling it a hybrid and call it what it is, a pickup with mismatched coils. I suggest we use an acronym, since "pickup with mismatched coils" is a mouthful. Maybe FMCH for forum mismatched coil humbucker? I think the basis of the sound working off the 59/custom hybrid is still a good starting point.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

Also I agree that losing bending volume on the D and G is trivial, at least for me.

Agree with who? for me its dead in the water if it has volume loss during bends.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

With the zebro, I think we need to ditch form factor and focus on sound. Let the custom shop work out if its a 3+3 or whatnot and we just let them know we have a desire for a p90 style sound with the above descriptors and no hum.

For the hybrid, I think we need to stop calling it a hybrid and call it what it is, a pickup with mismatched coils.

Wholeheartedly agree. Personally that would be awesome. I would love a p90esque humbucker and would leave the cs full free reign on the design.

And while I personally have not been the biggest fan of mismatched coils, I like calling it what it is, rather than what it isn't.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

I don't understand why the hybrido would be more affected by the G bending than the already existing CS 3+3 pickups?
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

I always thought the hybrid was supposed to be an actual hybrid. Meaning two different coil geometries, and most likely 2 different wire gages.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

I always thought the hybrid was supposed to be an actual hybrid. Meaning two different coil geometries, and most likely 2 different wire gages.

Ok, a quick review of past threads shows that was still unclear.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

The major difference between the Zebro and the 3+3 was that the coils were supposed to half sized like the G&L Comanche, so I'll ask of anyone who knows, what is the difference in tone between a 3+3 and a G&L Comanche?

The Wide Range Humbucker isn't really comparable because it has 12 pole pieces, magnetic or otherwise, with the poles being forced under the cover, by design.

Also I agree that losing bending volume on the D and G is trivial, at least for me. I have to admit, I don't understand the technical reason for this, since as it gets further from one coil, it's getting closer to the other.

...why...more affected by the G bending than the already existing CS 3+3 pickups?

I've made pickups like this in the past, and I own a G&L Comanche.

First to address Drex's question, the reason SOME split coil pickups can have dropout in the center is because the magnetic circuit is such that between the two coils there's a magnetic void. I'm not using void as a technical term because there is magnetism there, there is flux, but the way that flux drives audio into the coils makes for a section in the center where a lot of information is out of phase with other, competing information. And this is most certainly the case with side-by-side hum cancelling single coils. Fralin's split single attempts to deal with it by smearing the flux around and manipulating the return path: http://www.fralinpickups.com/images/splitBlade2_big.jpg Even Fralin doesn't 100% get rid of the issue.

I hope I'm explaining it well enough. It's not a volume drop out like when you're between two pole pieces on a Strat. It's a "phase out" and entirely due to the fact that you have a north magnet on the G, and a south magnet on the D, (or vice versa) and when you have smaller 3x3 coils, the edge of the coil takes input from the flux of both magnets.

So one thing that helps the situation is to offset the coils, like Z-coils or Fralin's P92: http://www.fralinpickups.com/images/p92_nickel_100.jpg Offsetting the coils brings the magnetic field further apart, but also the harmonic content of the string is different when one coil is sensing just a few mm's behind the other, so there's less phase cancellation in the audio. The G&L's use a different magnetic circuit, where there's a large ceramic on the bottom of the coil.

If the Custom Shop is having trouble with phase-out between the two coils it just means they haven't got the coil geometry and the magnetic circuit right. You could lay one full sized humbucker magnet down between the two coils, and just flank it with two half-sized ceramics on the outside of each coil and it would work. The field's return paths would guide the flux to the right places. It absolutely can be done. I mean, if any of you wanted to perform a poor-man's test to see what I'm talking about, you could take something like a Full Shred or Screamin Demon and pull out 3x3 poles. It shouldn't really phase out in the center when you bend.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

Thanks for the detailed info Frank, your posts are always on point.

And to further clarify, Scott never said they couldn't or wouldn't make the Zebro as we have it.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

I think that 3 magnet configuration would also help with the p90 like voicing requests due to having a wider magnetic field.
 
Re: Forum design pre-revote discussion (Zebro construction update)

I bet the idea of flanking the poles with half or quarter sized magnets would be really effective, especially if it were supposed to have a P-90 like output, but it might be costly to get/make magnets of that size.
 
Back
Top