New flavor Fender pickups - tempting
- Thread starter justFred
- Start date
freefrog
Well-known member
Having modified a CuNiFe Wide Range for split operation, I understand why they offer SC's with these mags: this recipe sounds very good IMHO/IME. Not sure it gives "more of everything", though: CuNiFe are weaker than AlNiCo mags and the use of "ringed-covers" probably introduces Eddy currents much more than it tames the "hum" (I've used this trick to drag a bridge Strat single coil towards the tone of lipstick Pu's in the same guitar and it worked well enough, precisely thx to Eddy currents)...
Now, weaker magnetism + Foucault currents = a flattened resonance, efficient for giving the impression of a more hi-fi sound.
Regarding the DCR: they might have overwound a bit their new PU's to compensate a bit the weaker magnetism of CuNiFe, but it's hard to tell because a Strat SC wound with 44 AWG or 44.5AWG would have the DCR announced here by Fender without having more turns than usual...
The use of FeCrCo mags seems more original to me: I see it as the "newest" thing of the bunch.
End of my tedious rambling. Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Now, weaker magnetism + Foucault currents = a flattened resonance, efficient for giving the impression of a more hi-fi sound.
Regarding the DCR: they might have overwound a bit their new PU's to compensate a bit the weaker magnetism of CuNiFe, but it's hard to tell because a Strat SC wound with 44 AWG or 44.5AWG would have the DCR announced here by Fender without having more turns than usual...
The use of FeCrCo mags seems more original to me: I see it as the "newest" thing of the bunch.
End of my tedious rambling. Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Rex_Rocker
Well-known member
I'd love to try an overwound hot CuNiFe humbucker.
Rex_Rocker
Well-known member
What do WRH's sound like compared to, say, PAF's?
To my ears, the treble goes up to a higher frequency (think like a single coil) and the bass goes lower. Very hi-fi, and much better for clean sounds where you need a bigger frequency spectrum. I don't think they work very well with any kind of overdrive- at least not to me. Through a very clean amp (like a Twin or Dual Showman), they are great for a 1 guitar band.
freefrog
Well-known member
I'll reply too, on the basis of my own subjective experience.
To me, this model should be named "Flat Response" rather than "Wide Range".
It has not extended high frequencies because of a robust inductance. But it has a more EVEN spectrum than most Gibson style humbuckers.
When it comes to harmonics and touch sensitivity in single notes, it's somewhere between regular HB's and SC's: its screw poles having a weaker magnetism than AlNiCo rods, it's not so agressive, nasal and bright than a Fender SC, even in single coil mode. But it's clearer than a normal humbucker, albeit with less focus on the resonant peak and therefore, more sonic space for other harmonics. Hence the "hi-fi" perception, that I personally attribute to the softened resonant peak, a bit like with a single coil whose tone pot would be lowered to 6.5/10...
If I keep talking about P.A.F.'s (that I write with dots because "PAF" without dots has been registered as a trademark by DiMarzio), I'll end on a very ironical paradox: to me, a Wide Range has MUCH in common with a real vintage Gibson HB from the 50/60's... As if it was an attempt to recreate by different means in the 70's some qualities typical of early P.A.F.'s.
Which would be logical since the Wide Range has been designed by... Seth Lover.
I share below two pics showing neck pickups played in chords from unfretted strings to the 12th fret, direct to the board.
This first one is about a CuNiFe Wide Range vs a modern (and to me mediocre) Gibson neck PU:
The tighter bass and low mids of the Wide Range can clearly be seen and the pickups have comparable treble responses because they have in fact the same inductance: 4.8H (even if the WR has a DCR of 10.34, illustrating once again how DCR can be misleading).
Here is now a comparison with a vintage Gibson Patent Sticker (7.3k):
The "wider" sonic "range" actually comes from... the P.A.F. successor and it's normal since this pickup has a lower inductance (3.9H) than the Fender WR.
But the WR has the same kind of even bass + low mid response, avoiding the syndrome of the boomy neck PU...
In short, how WR's compare to Gibson style HB's appears to depends on the era evoked. IMHO. IME. YMMV.
Mikelamury
New member
I'll reply too, on the basis of my own subjective experience.
To me, this model should be named "Flat Response" rather than "Wide Range".
It has not extended high frequencies because of a robust inductance. But it has a more EVEN spectrum than most Gibson style humbuckers.
When it comes to harmonics and touch sensitivity in single notes, it's somewhere between regular HB's and SC's: its screw poles having a weaker magnetism than AlNiCo rods, it's not so agressive, nasal and bright than a Fender SC, even in single coil mode. But it's clearer than a normal humbucker, albeit with less focus on the resonant peak and therefore, more sonic space for other harmonics. Hence the "hi-fi" perception, that I personally attribute to the softened resonant peak, a bit like with a single coil whose tone pot would be lowered to 6.5/10...
If I keep talking about P.A.F.'s (that I write with dots because "PAF" without dots has been registered as a trademark by DiMarzio), I'll end on a very ironical paradox: to me, a Wide Range has MUCH in common with a real vintage Gibson HB from the 50/60's... As if it was an attempt to recreate by different means in the 70's some qualities typical of early P.A.F.'s.
Which would be logical since the Wide Range has been designed by... Seth Lover.
I share below two pics showing neck pickups played in chords from unfretted strings to the 12th fret, direct to the board.
This first one is about a CuNiFe Wide Range vs a modern (and to me mediocre) Gibson neck PU:
The tighter bass and low mids of the Wide Range can clearly be seen and the pickups have comparable treble responses because they have in fact the same inductance: 4.8H (even if the WR has a DCR of 10.34, illustrating once again how DCR can be misleading).
Here is now a comparison with a vintage Gibson Patent Sticker (7.3k):
The "wider" sonic "range" actually comes from... the P.A.F. successor and it's normal since this pickup has a lower inductance (3.9H) than the Fender WR.
But the WR has the same kind of even bass + low mid response, avoiding the syndrome of the boomy neck PU...
In short, how WR's compare to Gibson style HB's appears to depends on the era evoked. IMHO. IME. YMMV.
Very nice comparison and nice graphic charts. I'm interested in what the FeCrCo jazzmaster bridge pickup will sound like. I anticipate to start a jazzmaster project soon, when these come out (projected May) I'm going to get the hybrid jazzmaster set with the FeCrCo bridge and the CuNiFe neck pickup for my project. Will report further later down the road.
