How to get the most "Quack" on a H-H guitar?

[Jack_TriPpEr]

i think that whole thing doesn't make sense considering all the stratty tones we love are 2 and 4 positions which are noiseless by default, TGP can be a weird place

Vintage Fender strats and even many modern SSS guitar models made today, are still made *without* the middle pickup being RWRP. So no, its not as common as you're suggesting, for Positions 2 and 4 to be hum-canceling.

I just acquired a Year 2004 Squier HSS Strat, everything is stock, and the middle pup is not RWRP. So Position 4 isn't hum-canceling.

 

[Jack_TriPpEr]

allright, quack aside, would a neck in parallel come closest to the 2 position on a strat? the split inners does quack but seems to be a bit more like a tele, i'm looking for that polite, almost acoustic-y 2 position sound that i had on a Jackson DK2, it was a 24 fret guitar with duncan STK-1's in the neck and middle, that 2 position sounded glorious!

btw: is the STK1 strat pickup discontinued? shame because i really liked that one!

BTW, the position you're describing (neck & middle) is Position 4. Position 2 is bridge & middle. Some manufacturers and diagrams name their positions in reverse of this, but they're the exception to the norm. Industry standard is based on Bridge pup only as Position 1.

 

[Reee]

BTW, the position you're describing (neck & middle) is Position 4. Position 2 is bridge & middle. Some manufacturers and diagrams name their positions in reverse of this, but they're the exception to the norm. Industry standard is based on Bridge pup only as Position 1.

neck as position 1 makes more sense to me

But that's just it. They are only noiseless with an RWRP middle. With a non-RWRP middle, a Strat has NO noiseless positions.

right, but all the quack you love from recordings and what not was recorded on strats with a RWRP right? I can't think of a strat that isn't noiseless in 2 and 4 position

Ah, ok. You could try the Neck humbucker in parallel. But i would suspect outer coil of Neck humbucker in parallel with inner coil of Bridge humbucker would be closest.

Since it sounds like you're going to be trying various coil combinations at first, I recommend you buy and use a set of Seymour Duncan Triple Shot pup mounting rings that gives you access to all four modes of each humbucker (in series, in parallel, inner coil, and outer coil). https://www.seymourduncan.com/single...ct/triple-shot
Once you figure out which 5 pup combinations you want, you could remove them, switch back to normal pickup rings, and then wire up a 5 way superswitch to give you quicker, more ergonomic on-the-fly access to those 5 positions you decided on. I or a few other members here could help with the how-to on the wiring if you need it. Then the rings are available to you to do some experimentation on another guitar in your collection. Or, you could keep them installed if you don't mind the extra hand movements required to throw the two switches per pup on-the-fly.

The STK1 is still in production: https://www.seymourduncan.com/single...ack-plus-strat

so it's the stk1 but they call it the stk4 now?

 

[PFDarkside]

I agree with Beau and Jack, it’s tough without that middle coil. Even an HSH split in 2/4 doesn’t sound like a Strat, it’s got a different sort of tone. The first time I heard it, instantly recognized it as the Steve Vai tone. (Something like the into to Answers, it’s quacky but in a different way).

There are a lot of cool tones available with HH, splitting, phasing, series/parallel, the Jimmy Page style wiring lets you explore a lot of them to find your preferences.

 

[PFDarkside]

right, but all the quack you love from recordings and what not was recorded on strats with a RWRP right? I can't think of a strat that isn't noiseless in 2 and 4 position

Unless you are talking about modern tones, no most classic 2/4 tones are NOT RWRP. Fender didn’t even include a 5 way until 1977 and didn’t offer RWRP until 1986/1987. I’m not sure when Duncan and Dimarzio started offering them. Anything recorded with a 1950s or 1960s Strat is not noiseless.

I’ve done it both ways, on the list of items that give quack and great 2/4 tone, non-RWRP is maybe 5% Max. The magnet change plays a very small part, I think it’s less jarring hearing buzz/quiet/buzz/quiet/buzz as you switch through the positions.

EDIT - I’m thinking this through and even 5% is too generous. It’s a very small difference. Generally for me the noiseless nature far outweighs the tonal change.

 

[Reee]

Unless you are talking about modern tones, no most classic 2/4 tones are NOT RWRP. Fender didn’t even include a 5 way until 1977 and didn’t offer RWRP until 1986/1987. I’m not sure when Duncan and Dimarzio started offering them. Anything recorded with a 1950s or 1960s Strat is not noiseless.

I’ve done it both ways, on the list of items that give quack and great 2/4 tone, non-RWRP is maybe 5% Max. The magnet change plays a very small part, I think it’s less jarring hearing buzz/quiet/buzz/quiet/buzz as you switch through the positions.

interesting, well in any case favorite 4 position was from a neck and middle STK1 and my favorite 2 position was a Dimarzio tonezone with a INFS1 middle, I'm not sure how this one was wired, but it must have been either the slug or the screw coil of the TZ split because that position was super glassy!

I think I will go with this configuration:

1: bridge
2: inner coils
3: outer coils
4: neck parallel
5: neck

that should give me a wide variety of "quack", "glass" and "cluck"

 

[PFDarkside]

interesting, well in any case favorite 4 position was from a neck and middle STK1 and my favorite 2 position was a Dimarzio tonezone with a INFS1 middle, I'm not sure how this one was wired, but it must have been either the slug or the screw coil of the TZ split because that position was super glassy!

I think I will go with this configuration:

1: bridge
2: inner coils
3: outer coils
4: neck parallel
5: neck

that should give me a wide variety of "quack", "glass" and "cluck"

I think that’s a great plan that will give a great variety of tones. If I had the same setup there’s a high likelihood I’d do that exact plan or just split neck in 4.

 

[Jack_TriPpEr]

neck as position 1 makes more sense to me



right, but all the quack you love from recordings and what not was recorded on strats with a RWRP right? I can't think of a strat that isn't noiseless in 2 and 4 position



so it's the stk1 but they call it the stk4 now?

Oops.... even though i used "STK1" in my internet search, the results gave me that link, which i didn't notice said STK-4. I'm finding some comments online saying the stk-4 replaced the stk-1. Other members here besides me would know better the status on that.

 

[Artie]

I think I will go with this configuration:

1: bridge
2: inner coils
3: outer coils
4: neck parallel
5: neck

that should give me a wide variety of "quack", "glass" and "cluck"

I like that combo too. The only thing I'd do different is substitute Bridge parallel for neck parallel. I like that because it provides a quasi-bridge-single tone.

Oops.... even though i used "STK1" , the results gave me that link, which i didn't notice said STK-4. I'm finding some comments online saying the stk-4 replaced the stk-1. Other members here besides me would know better the status on that.

I think you're right. I'm pretty sure Mincer can clarify this for sure.

 

[Artie]

I found an old "tone chart" from my archives. They aren't quite the same thing. The STK-S1 was a hotter wind, with A2's. The STK-S4 was designated "Plus", and had A5's. (Lower DCR.)

 

[Jack_TriPpEr]

I found an old "tone chart" from my archives. They aren't quite the same thing. The STK-S1 was a hotter wind, with A2's. The STK-S4 was designated "Plus", and had A5's. (Lower DCR.)

Awesome info. I just downloaded it and filed it away. The recently revised SD product pages are hit or miss about mentioning the Model #, unfortunately.

 

[ErikH]

Get more "QUACK"? Install a Duckbucker!

 

[Jack_TriPpEr]

BTW, in the last year i have switched over to a TruTone CS-12 power supply that features "triple filtered switching power supply technology". I use it for my pedals and BOSS MS3 unit that I use as a pedalboard-based amp into my PA. With that power supply, my non-noiseless singlecoil pups and split coils have only a very faint amount of 60 cycle hum. Of course, that may not hold true at a gig venue with dirty power setups or if you're using a traditional amp, but that's what I am finding at home with my setup. So a good isolated power supply may alleviate alot of the 60 cycle noise if you decide to use some non-hum-canceling coil/pup setups. YMMV.

 

[Artie]

Awesome info. I just downloaded it and filed it away. The recently revised SD product pages are hit or miss about mentioning the Model #, unfortunately.

I'll try to upload the whole chart. 1st attempt failed. It might be too large.

Still unreadable. I'll break it up.

I put it back. Let me know if this works.

Still not working.

 

[Jack_TriPpEr]

I'll try to upload the whole chart. 1st attempt failed. It might be too large.

Success!

 

[Artie]

Success!

So, you got it ok?

 

[Jack_TriPpEr]

So, you got it ok?

Yes - thanks!

 

[Reee]

maybe the STK1 is not listed on the website anymore but is still being made? they are still available at Thomann in any case

 

[Mincer]

I would think if you really wanted one, they would make it for you.

 

[Artie]

It would be fun to hear them side by side. The STK-S4 pretty much nails the classic single coil tone, while remaining noiseless. I'd love to hear an STK-S1.