Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

PylonRacer

PylonRacer

New member
What do you prefer?
Splitting HBs is a very popular option for a push-pull or switch; but why not wire in parallel (hum cancelling, brighter, with less volume drop) What do you all prefer & why?
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

I've tried both and think coil cuts are far better. Example: a 14,000 ohm HB in series, is 7,000 ohms in coil cut & 3,500 ohms in parallel. That's pretty weak, along with being very thin & bright. Not really even usable in the bridge position.

Coil cuts give more volume & a fuller EQ, and therefore can be used in the bridge & neck. The noise isn't that much, especially with covered PU's. Look at how many guys use Fender style single coils and live with noise. As far as what HB's split better, that's a matter of wood tone and personal preference.

Some guys say coil cut & parallel are interchangeable, but there's a big difference. For some players, on some songs, parallel can work (on the neck PU), but I think its pretty limited.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

My experience is with the PG neck model, 59 neck and bridge, Jazz neck, EVH/78 bridge, and JB, Custom, Custom Custom and Custom 5 bridge pickups. I have a 3 way switch for each pickup in one of my dual humbucker Strats and each switch lets me split the pickup, use it in parallel or use it in "normal" series mode.

Parallel is humbucking but lower in output than the same pickup split. I much prefer splitting the pickup and rarely use the parallel sound. It's just to weak compared to the split sound.

In a two humbucker guitar I do like to split the neck humbucker for clean rhythm tones - but I rarely use it for solos split.

I also like to split the bridge and combine it with the split neck for a Tele-ish kind of tone.

I never use the bridge humbucker split by itself though - to thin and weak. I only use it split when combining it with a split neck humbucker.

Anyways: series has the most output, parallel has the least output and split has the most Fenderish single coil tones - IMO.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

While both Lew and Blueman are correct, what they're saying can be a bit misleading too. The static DC resistance of two coils in parallel is meaningless. The voltage that the meter provides for taking ohms measurements is divided between two devices. If I was measuring two speakers, that are driven by an amp, the measurement would be valid because thats the load the amp is going to "see". A pickup isn't a driven device though. It generates a voltage. You would never put an ohm meter on the output of an amplifier to see how much power it produces. Its apples and orangutans. Consider two AA batteries. Each is 1.5 volts. Put two in series and you have 3 volts. Put two in parallel, and you still have 1.5 volts. Same with two pickup coils. The output in parallel will be the same as split, but, with one consideration . . .

When we split a pickup, we almost always split to the stud coil. The stud coil has a slightly stronger output than the screw coil. Its even more pronounced on the bridge pup, where the stud coil gets a better "bite" of the string vibration. Its like having 1.5 and 1.2 volt batteries in parallel. So, if we compare split-to-stud to parallel, there can easily be a bit more output. Its important to understand this because it will matter under certain conditions. For example, right now, I have a JB Jr. in the middle position of my Strat. The JB Jr, like most of the single-sized humbuckers, has two screw coils. The output of both coils is matched, and so, the parallel mode is just a tad stronger than either coil split. This is partly because the two coils in parallel have twice the current capacity as a single coil and can carry the load of the volume pot, cable, and amp input impedance a little better. Consequently, the parallel mode would probably be more desirable to split with any of these style pickups.

So . . . it all comes down to what pickup you're going to split/parallel and what position its going to be mounted in. The tone of my bridge Invader, in parallel, is one of my favorite sounds. Always try to mount a switch, even if its temporary, so you can hear the difference for yourself, when making these types of decisions.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

Parallel is even thinner than split (frequency of resonant peak is higher due to capacitance and resistance combination of the parallel coils) and it still loses that single-coil "dang" that gets canceled out when both coils are active.

The only humbucker sounding good in parallel is the Invader.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

You need to hear a JB Jr in parallel. Definitely more "air" and complexity there. I'll see if I can post a clip later on.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

Artie, you're talking about some highly overwound PU's, which isn't the case for many of us. In bridge PU's that aren't as heavily dosed in testosterone, splitting a '59B to coil cut for example, gives a decent tone, but in parallel is next to useless (at least for the bridge position). Although the ohms drop to 25%, I know that the output doesn't decrease by that much; I believe I read that parallel output is 70% of series. But still, in parallel you get such a weak, thin sound unless you either limit it to neck PU's, or start with a sizzling overwound bridge PU.

The main argument I see presented for parallel is its noise reduction, not tone quality. After trying both, some of us would rather live with a little hum, rather than lose so much volume, sustain, mids, & lows. I just don't see where I could use it.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

My reason for splitting is to get a single coil sound. Splitting does it, parallel doesnt, it just kinda, maybe something like it. My washburn had the VCC (knob to roll from series to parallel) and it just wasnt very useful to me. I changed it out to splitting and liked that much better.
I split the neck and the bridge opposite though, so the middle posistion is still hum canceling.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

In full sized humbuckers I like the split tone over parallel. In bridge humbuckers I prefer the stud coil over the screw coil when used by itself, however the screw coil can be very nice when combined in parallel with a neck pickup stud coil.

The rails pickups for strat do the parallel thing very very. Best example is the vintage rails, which duncan internally wired in parallel until the revision. Hard to compare that to a split VR because you can't really split the VR. The cool rails is also nice when wired in parallel.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

strat with single coils in position 2 & 4 are a parallel. same with tele in middle position.

id be curious to hear a stag mag in parallel. and i'm sure the new p rails sounds dandy in parallel mode. cool rails in parallel is also supposed to be neato.

nice to have parallel in the arsenal, but to choose absolutely coil split vs parallel seems kinda limiting.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

prophetofthor said:
...and i'm sure the new p rails sounds dandy in parallel mode.
Click to expand...

I was curious about the P-Rail parallel vs. series in relation to the volume difference when switching from humbucker to split. Would it be more prudent to wire the mini-switches 90/parallel/rail to avoid the big spikes in volume when changing modes? Has anyone here tried the P-Rails both in series and parallel to compare tone vs. volume?
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

I find the prails parallel volume is lower than the volume of the p90 but higher than the volume of the rail. It is closer to the p90 than the rail.

I have two neck prails in a semi hollow, I wanted to keep the output a little lower. I do use the parallel mode quite a lot, I can get a tone close to a full acoustic out of my set up.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

I don't like neck parallel any more. Too weak. If I had to mod a guitar after it was made, 3-way switch with two humbuckers, I'd install push-pulls to split each separately. I used to have an LTD like that.

However, I think Schecter's C-1 Classic is a smarter switching concept:
schecter_c-1_classic_switching.jpg
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

blueman335 said:
That's a great idea. So why do almost all HH guitars have a 3 way toggle?
Click to expand...

I don't know, I wasn't the one building them :D

Still, 3-way can work if you have the push/pull for splitting and/or phase and other stuff. The Jimmy Page wiring comes to mind.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

blueman335 said:
Artie, you're talking about some highly overwound PU's, which isn't the case for many of us. In bridge PU's that aren't as heavily dosed in testosterone, splitting a '59B to coil cut for example, gives a decent tone, but in parallel is next to useless (at least for the bridge position). Although the ohms drop to 25%, I know that the output doesn't decrease by that much; I believe I read that parallel output is 70% of series. But still, in parallel you get such a weak, thin sound unless you either limit it to neck PU's, or start with a sizzling overwound bridge PU.

The main argument I see presented for parallel is its noise reduction, not tone quality. After trying both, some of us would rather live with a little hum, rather than lose so much volume, sustain, mids, & lows. I just don't see where I could use it.
Click to expand...

Yup. I agree completely. Mainly, I just wanted to make the point that anyone who's starting to venture into guitar wiring should try both, rather than relying on others opinions. The pup and the position can make a difference. ;)
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

ArtieToo said:
You need to hear a JB Jr in parallel. Definitely more "air" and complexity there. I'll see if I can post a clip later on.
Click to expand...
Great info Artie. Yes, my splig/parallel frame of reference is a JBjr. So maybe that's why I'm in the minority. The pups I am looking at modding are Seths. So maybe the split is the better way to go with the lower output pups.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

PylonRacer said:
Great info Artie. Yes, my splig/parallel frame of reference is a JBjr. So maybe that's why I'm in the minority. The pups I am looking at modding are Seths. So maybe the split is the better way to go with the lower output pups.
Click to expand...

From what I've heard, yes. If you have a 7k or even 8k neck humbucker, splitting results in half of whatever it is full (3.5k to 4k), so you lose output, but not so much. With parallel it's 1.75k to 2k: that's going to be low. I had a Showmaster with a '59 neck that had a neck parallel position. It was so little output that it almost sounded like an acoustic guitar somehow (don't know why).

Bottom line, my suggestion is try to stay at the ohms you are at already, or close to it. I had a LTD once that the Jazz was on its own push-pull pot. Split it was weak, but not as weak as parallel. Still, it was weak. I see almost no point in running a 7k neck pickup in parallel.

This is why I like the Schecter wiring so much: pair it with the bridge (JB, 7k per coil) and you get a much more usable sound than a neck parallel. In this case, you get 2 and 1/3 ohms in parallel, which is more output than 1.75 ohms. That, and running it with a bridge coil in parallel to my ears sounds more balanced, since you have one coil in each pickup, so they're getting a better balance of frequencies when combined.

Still, a killer position is the "third humbucker" position, i.e. one coil of each in series to form a "third" humbucker. I'd much rather personally have that position than any neck parallel.

This is why I think the Jimmy Page wiring is cool also.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

Split!

Easier to wire, and it isn't so different of a sound that I wanna go mess with my amp.

Bridge HB split with the neck humbucker full on gives a great rhythm tone IMO.

My D-activator has some balls as a single coil. I like it.
 
Last edited:
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

I think it depends on the pickup and how it is constructed. I have a Lace neck humbucker 7.?k and it sounds almost the same in parallel OR split. At first I thought it was wired wrong but that is not the case. Split may be a BIT brighter but as far as volume AND tone it sounds about the same.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top