Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

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...

I agree. That's been my experience too. Artie, you know I love ya, but I played with a JB JR. as the bridge pickup in a Strat for a year or two. Didn't care for it split or in parallel - to weak. Only liked it in series - the way it was intended to be used most of the time. Cool pickup!
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

Lewguitar said:
I agree. That's been my experience too. Artie, you know I love ya, but I played with a JB JR. as the bridge pickup in a Strat for a year or two. Didn't care for it split or in parallel - to weak. Only liked it in series - the way it was intended to be used most of the time. Cool pickup!
Click to expand...

Its funny you should say that. You know how, when you first install a new pup, and try new things, it sounds great? Then, as you play it more, the novelty starts to wear off? Thats happening with the JB Jr. I'm finding myself playing it more and more in the series mode.

I really need to wait 'til I've had a pup a month or so before I critique it. ;)
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

uOpt said:
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.
Click to expand...

Got a gibson 498t clone bridge pu with a dpdt switch on on on......get series, split, parallel Parallel is just as loud as the split.....4k parallel, 7k split, 14k series. Still it's just as loud.
Parallel is far from thin......I can go back and forth between split and par.....parallel has more bottom end.....it's like a cross between series and split.
 
Last edited:
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

Thanks to the OP for starting this thread. I am really surprised at the number of comments in which coil splitting is preferred.

Maybe I need to go back to the purpose of splitting or running parallel. We almost always pitch these options (as well as partial shunts and spin a splits) as a way to get a thinner tone for intricate rhythms or leads with less drive. As a result, the unmodified humbucker is considerably louder, it pushes the amp harder and its a great way to get solos to stand out without using a pedal.

So we are almost always looking for less output or we wouldn't be doing these kinds of mods in the first place. We will use the language of fenderish or Gibson like to help the uninitiated understand that there is a considerable difference. But we all know that a humbucker will never really sound like a tele or a strat when split... there are exceptions like the incredible quack that a JB coil gets in position 2 when parallel to a center pup.

But with all of that said, we probably end up doing three parallels for each split... actually the ratio would be even greater because we do quite a bit of spina splits and coil reductions and once again those come at the expense of single coil split.

So assuming we're going for a quieter sound, the reason we do many more parallels is partially due to keeping humbucking noise reduction mentioned before but also because the sounds tend to be more complex then a single coil by itself.

There are exceptions to the rule, but with our customers, they are clearly exceptions.

As a result there are many pickups that we just love for parallel. The pearly Gates is probably my favorite and it's beautiful in parallel at the bridge as well as the neck. Burstbucker 2 and 3s are wonderful.

And somebody mentioned the dual rail single coils out there... We do tons of spina splits because most of the dual rails are thicker then true single coils and when you roll off a little bit of a second coil, it's pretty easy to find a sweet spot were you still have quite a bit of noise cancellation but you have a thinner tone that's a little more Fenderish.

Again, it sounds like I am the exception on this thread and I'm looking forward to hearing more of the reasoning on both sides of the equation.









Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

Many years later, I still prefer split, except for certain humbuckers, like P-Rails and Hot Rails, which I like in parallel.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

Wow, some questions never die!


My extremely humble and totally indifferent opinion: it depends (on the pickup, guitar, etc.).


Split divides the inductance by 2 approxymatively, so it seems technically preferable for HB's with an inductance below 5H (IOW: most vintage specs humbuckers).

Parallel gives a bit less than 1/4 of the inductance in series, so it appears as interesting with high inductance pickups - which are also in most cases high resistance / high gain models.

Reason: the implicit template of tone is the inductance of Fender single coils, ranging typically from a low 2H to a strong 3H, rarely more or less than these values...


Examples?

In their 1978 catalog, DiMarzio promoted parallel wiring for the Dual Sound: http://guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/8775/vintage-dimarzio-info

As a matter of fact, the Dual Sound in split mode didn't sound good to my ears almost 40 years ago... Explicit reason: the inductance of this HB is high. High enough to sound fenderish in parallel but too blunt once split.

Same thing for the Hot Rails (12H in series, 3H once in parallel)... and even the Cool Rails - I've a Cool Rails bridge in neck pos. wired for series / parallel and it delivers a convincing single coilish tone in parallel, with an inductance of 1.9H.


Conversely, a Pearly Gates in parallel is too thin sounding for me. Reason: its inductance in series = 4.6H only.


Now, a Jackson 50BC should sound good in split mode, since it has an inductance of 5.27H... But it doesn't to my ears. Reason: ceramic magnet = lack of Eddy currents = harsh tone once split.

So, definitivly, it depends IMHO.

YMMV.

Sorry for this verbose post. I wish you all a nice Sunday. :-)
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

On an HH guitar I prefer to be able to split to both inner coils and both outer coils.

And I also like a parallel option too.

I think parallel doesn’t sound as spanky or twangy but if you’re using any gain then the absence of hum is advantageous

But when it comes to inner / outer coil splits I set it up so when both pickups are selected, both inner coils is hum cancelling, both outer coils is hum cancelling


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

I prefer Split if I want single coil tones.
I prefer Parallel to get ultra-clean Humbucking tones from a mega high-output pickup

Just depends on what I'm going for. They are distinctly different tones. Also - even split is quieter than regular singles, just due to coil proximity.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

Aceman said:
I prefer Split if I want single coil tones.
I prefer Parallel to get ultra-clean Humbucking tones from a mega high-output pickup

Just depends on what I'm going for. They are distinctly different tones. Also - even split is quieter than regular singles, just due to coil proximity.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the same for me.
 
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...

There are actually quite a few buckers that I like the tone of in parallel better than split.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

This thread is great to get other players' opinions. But it is useless otherwise. It all comes down to what you like. I agree with most of what has been said. even contradictory posts are accurate. There are some buckers that sound terrific split and others that sound better in parallel. But you see, now I'm being judgemental based upon MY likes and dislikes, and Blueman may disagree, or Artie, or Mincer. And it's all good.

Someone asked about the StagMag. I personally love that pup. I love it split. I love it in parallel. I love it in series. I love the P-Rails split to either coil (especially the P-90), and in parallel, but don't care much for it in series.

It's all personal likes and dislikes rather than what works best and why, or what sounds "best". Hey, try your pickups every way possible (including mag swaps) and decide for yourself what works FOR YOU.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

Depends on the humbucker. For most mid to high output 'buckers though, I prefer split. They can sound an awful lot like a regular single coil when split, and having the choice between single coils and 'buckers in the same guitar is more versatile to me than switching from series to parallel.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

Also, I will add that single coil-sized humbuckers all sound better in parallel rather than split.
 
Re: Humbuckers: Split or Parallel?

Never tried parallel but I know for sure I absolutely despise splitting.
It just ends up sounding wrong to me sooner or later.
So I might give that a shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top