P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

[GuitarDoc]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

Yeh, I really love the P-90 (I got turned on to P-90s about a year ago, now it's my main PU). However, I just expected the rail to sound brighter, like a Strat or Tele, but it's darker than the P-90.

In humbucker-series mode Empty Pockets gets a boost in the lows and highs making it sound mid-scooped. I get just the opposite, the mids are really boosted and the highs are attenuated.

I think I'm gonna try Frank's suggestion to turn it around with the rail next to the bridge and see what that does. I expect it will get more like what I was expecting...a brighter sounding rail and thicker sounding P-90 relative to each other. I'm afraid that with the P-90 (the stronger coil) closer to the neck, the humbucker-series mode might be even thicker in the mids than it already is. I guess I'll see what actually happens.

Understand that I'm not really unhappy with the P-Rail, it is just different than I was expecting. But, like I said, I really love the P-90's bite/edge. Wouldn't mind if it got a little thicker with the reverse orientation though. If it gets too thick for my liking, I can always swap out one of its A8s for an A5.

 

[blueman335]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

My approach has been to put in a Phat Cat or two, swaps magnets (those twin stock A2s are awful), and have a great sounding P-90. Simpler, and I think I'm coming out ahead, instead having a P-Rails with only one good sound. I'd rather have it do one thing very well, than do two or three that aren't quite what I want.

 

[Conker09]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

I think I'm gonna try Frank's suggestion to turn it around with the rail next to the bridge and see what that does. I expect it will get more like what I was expecting...a brighter sounding rail and thicker sounding P-90 relative to each other. I'm afraid that with the P-90 (the stronger coil) closer to the neck, the humbucker-series mode might be even thicker in the mids than it already is. I guess I'll see what actually happens.
.

Let me know how that turns out. Really, the P90 will move maybe a half an inch inward which shouldn't change the tone too drastically, whereas the rail will move about an inch and a half which should really make a difference.

 

[bryan the rocker]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

That's what I suspected might be the case with P-Rails, which is why I haven't gotten one. In HB mode, it seems like it'd be way too hot and dark. When I want a P-90, I put in a Phat Cat or other HB-sized P-90. If you try to get too many things from a PU, how many options are really usable? I'd rather have one great P-90 tone, and skip the rest.

I remember when I was new to the forum, tried the P rails, and posted that I dont like it and was slammed by Forum members who loved them, I am happy I am not the only one who doesnt like it. Its like a jack of all trades, but a master of nothing. The Humbucker mode and the rail single coil mode needs improvement IMO.

 

[ImmortalSix]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

I just installed a P-Rails Hot in a Triple-Shot mounting ring in the bridge of my LP. The P-90 sounds nice and bright yet full. The Rail sounds very similar, just slightly darker and not quite as loud. In humbucker-parallel mode it sounds about the same as the P-90 but maybe just a bit more open sounding. I'm describing almost imperceptible differences here, these three options sound almost identical. When I switch to hum-series, it sounds very dark and bassy, the highs are gone, it is muddy, and it is noticably louder. Of couse you'd expect it to be a bit darker and louder in series, but this is WAY darker, like turning the tone control all the way down.

That is exactly how mine sounds.

 

[blueman335]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

I remember when I was new to the forum, tried the P rails, and posted that I dont like it and was slammed by Forum members who loved them, I am happy I am not the only one who doesnt like it. Its like a jack of all trades, but a master of nothing. The Humbucker mode and the rail single coil mode needs improvement IMO.

I saw the specs and decided to hold off. Seemed like a mishmash of conflicting things it was trying to do. I was hoping for three good vintage type tones, but that may not be possible with the design. Problem is if you get the P-90 dialed in (with magnets and/or pots), you may throw off the HB mode even more. I thought for the Fender mode, it'd have 6 rod magnets. Good idea on paper, but...

Hey, don't feel bad. I've been slammed here a few times myself for not going with the crowd. I'd rather go in a different direction, and know why, then follow everyone else and not know why.

 

[Empty Pockets]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

just wanna update and i can see what the OP was saying about "attenuated highs" when switching to the full-on humbucker mode...but i also noticed that all the brightness i wanted could be dialed in while in parallel mode.

still, i didn't get the pickup to get Tele twang or PAF crunch, i got it so i could have a P90 with some options.

 

[matizadomrb]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

I experimented this as well when I first tried the P-Rails on a friend's guitar. The idea is great but a tough one to actually achieve. It's the best of three worlds into one package but let's not forget that there's a lot more going on in the wiring scheme and construction of a guitar that defines the tone you get from the pickups, namely the value of the potentiometers, the value/type of the capacitors, the position of the pickups, the type of wiring, the type of guitar, the wood on the body, the wood on the fretboard, and even the strings gauge. In the end, all this contributes to the tone you get from the pickups when you connect the guitar.

Humbuckers, P-90s and Rails are pickups designed to function with a set of specific characteristics on regards to wiring and construction, so throwing the three of them together into one guitar with a generic scheme and expecting them to all be great in their own field of action is really difficult (even though I'm sure SD designed them in such a way that this could be somehow approximated). That's why I could never cope with the proposed scheme of using 500K pots, 0.047uF caps, rails inside positioning of the pickups (for all options on the P-Rails on every type of guitar).

When I first tried the P-Rails, my friend's guitar had that configuration and I thought they sounded ok (in part due the fantastic guitar he had'em installed in) but they were definitely not great. Still I think these pups have awesome potential and a lot of people have reported great results although they are mixed ones (most get great results with the P-90s, some have managed to get nice crunching humbuckers and others report getting some twangy rails... But I've yet to see someone reporting on getting all options to sound great). That's why I have a strong disbelief that you can be achieve excellent results for all options with a generic scheme.

First I think you need a VERY special guitar (versatility is the word that comes to my mind). Second you need to find a way to combine and switch between different wiring schemes that can help bring forward the specific tonal characteristics of each possible option within the P-Rails. If you're not willing to mod the heck out of your guitar to achieve this then I think you'll have to compromise with one generic scheme and settle for having the P-Rails be great at one of its options and ok at the rest (considering them as added gimmicks as some have pointed out).

I'm actually doing some HEAVY modifications to my Epiphone Supernova to try and achieve this with three P-Rails and three Triple-shots (nalo1022 is helping me with the design in another thread... You're all welcome to check it out but I must warn you that there are some LONG posts in there!). It's definitely not a project for everybody. If you're not an insanely compulsive "tweaker" as myself, all you'll perceive is a complicated guitar with zero practicality that requires A LOT of investment.... But I'm funny that way! I'll report back when the project is done.

Cheers!

 

[Natman]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

in all honesty I'm about to ditch my P-Rails because the guitar they're in is spectacular (Hamer Newport) and it deserves to sound as great as it is. I love the versatility the P-Rails give me but overall so-so tone (reflects my so-so playing ironically). I have no idea what to try next, probably Magnatrons. But I digress... my point is that over 2 years later I'm not so enthused and I think I can do better. The Seths the guitar came with did a great job tonewise but nowhere near the versatility of P-Rails.

 

[GuitarDoc]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

OK, so last night I reversed the orientation of the P-Rails (rail toward the bridge and P-90 toward the neck). Very little, if any, difference in the sound of the P-90. But this actually made a big difference in the sound of the rail...much brighter/twngier. As a result, the humbucker in series also sounds brighter. Again, very little difference between the P-90 and the humbucker in parallel.

This weekend I'm going to try different magnets and see what happens.

 

[Conker09]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

OK, so last night I reversed the orientation of the P-Rails (rail toward the bridge and P-90 toward the neck). Very little, if any, difference in the sound of the P-90. But this actually made a big difference in the sound of the rail...much brighter/twngier. As a result, the humbucker in series also sounds brighter. Again, very little difference between the P-90 and the humbucker in parallel.

This weekend I'm going to try different magnets and see what happens.

Cool, keep us posted. I may have to try this.

 

[frankfalbo]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

The P90 sound hardly changes if you flip the P-Rails. I always meant for people to try it flipped around but a pair of P-Rails in a 2 humbucker guitar is by far the most common use. And the stratty 2/4 hybrid sound only happens with the rails inward. If you have a middle single coil though, you can orient them however you want and you'll still have a great "real" 2 and 4 sound. In an H/S/S superstrat I can totally see someone flipping it around. You can order "Shop Floor Custom" P-Rails with the logo on the other side, too.

Another thing I've found with the P-Rails Hot is that both coils are pretty strong, so the P90 tone and the Rail tone are somewhat similar (less similar than a standard humbucker though) but the real difference is when combining with the neck P-Rails. If you have the neck P-Rails on, and you toggle between the two coils on the bridge pickup there is a much greater difference. In other words, "inside Rails" sounds stratty but "Rail + bridge P90" does not. It is a different sound.

 

[matizadomrb]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

Hey Frank,

In a three P-Rails and three Triple-Shots scheme (with SHPR-1n on neck, SHPR-1b on middle and SHPR-2b on bridge) and the posibility of selecting any pickup combination posible (N, M, B, N/M, N/B, M/B, N/M/B)... How would you recommend placing the pickups?

I'm working on such a layout for my Epiphone Supernova and I'm thinking of flipping the neck and bridge so that the P-Rails are facing outwards, but I'm not really how the middle would work best in situation like this (my first instinct is leaving it as is with the P-Rail facing inwards).

Of course I'll try it both ways and see what works best but, your expert opinion will be greatly appreciated because I do have to decide in advance how I want the logos placed (I'm gonna buy Floor Shop Customs)

Cheers!

 

[GuitarDoc]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

UPDATE:

OK, so I flipped the P-Rail so that the rail is now toward the bridge. This did make an improvement in the twanginess of the rail and it brightened the series mode a bit as well. Yesterday I swaped the A8 mag next to the rail with an A5 and this added more improvement.

The rail is a bit brighter, there is a little more difference between the four different options of the P-Rail, but the rail is noticeably weaker sounding than any of the other options.

So next I think I'll try replacing the A8 next to the P-90 with an A3 and see what happens.

Again, I'll keep you posted.

 

[GuitarDoc]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

The A3 wasn't much of an improvement. I tried putting in a ceramic at the rail and an A8 at the P-90. = Disaster. It got some brightness, but it really reduced clarity. I don't know how to describe it, but it sounds like the magnets are fighting each other. Kind of a nasally unstable sound like it's just about ready to break up or explode.

So I guess the next most logical selection would be 2 A5s. I'll try it tomorrow, hopefully.

 

[GuitarDoc]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

UPDATE: (again)

I put in 2 A5s and now the P-Rails (Hot) sounds terrific. The A8s were just too much for this already hot wind. But that wind plus the 2 A5s works perfect. I think Seymour really went too far on this PU. The idea of having a hotter P-Rail was a good idea for the bridge, but hotter wind plus A8s is overkill (and really not a very pleasant sound).

I have to admit that the wood in this particular LP is extremely resonant and it seems to make pups sound just a little bit hotter than they do in other guitars. Is this really possible, or is it my imagination?

The Rail side is still a bit weaker than any of the other options, but that's to be expected being a smaller coil. It sounds good, though. Nice and Tele bright. The parallel setting is crisp and clear and strong. It works great for country when I want a bit more guts than the rail alone can offer. The series mode is, well, humbuckerish. Big, strong, full, gutsy, heavy, distorts very well. Still a little darker than I would prefer in a bridge PU, but very useable. The P-90 is like, well...a very bold steroidal P-90. Crisp, clear, great bite, in-your-face mids. With distortion it keeps the great mids distinct and has a cutting, biting edge to it that doesn't just get washed out and muddy. Great attack that lets you know it means business, and it delivers in spades. This P-90 sound is what makes rock and roll ROCK.

With one amp on clean slightly overdriven, the other Mesa tripple rect on a solid crunch/mid-gain setting this PU can't be beat for classic rock.

Anyway, I think I'm loving my guitar again.

 

[Conker09]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

UPDATE: (again)

I put in 2 A5s and now the P-Rails (Hot) sounds terrific. The A8s were just too much for this already hot wind. But that wind plus the 2 A5s works perfect. I think Seymour really went too far on this PU. The idea of having a hotter P-Rail was a good idea for the bridge, but hotter wind plus A8s is overkill (and really not a very pleasant sound).

I have to admit that the wood in this particular LP is extremely resonant and it seems to make pups sound just a little bit hotter than they do in other guitars. Is this really possible, or is it my imagination?

The Rail side is still a bit weaker than any of the other options, but that's to be expected being a smaller coil. It sounds good, though. Nice and Tele bright. The parallel setting is crisp and clear and strong. It works great for country when I want a bit more guts than the rail alone can offer. The series mode is, well, humbuckerish. Big, strong, full, gutsy, heavy, distorts very well. Still a little darker than I would prefer in a bridge PU, but very useable. The P-90 is like, well...a very bold steroidal P-90. Crisp, clear, great bite, in-your-face mids. With distortion it keeps the great mids distinct and has a cutting, biting edge to it that doesn't just get washed out and muddy. Great attack that lets you know it means business, and it delivers in spades. This P-90 sound is what makes rock and roll ROCK.

With one amp on clean slightly overdriven, the other Mesa tripple rect on a solid crunch/mid-gain setting this PU can't be beat for classic rock.

Anyway, I think I'm loving my guitar again.

Thanks for the updates.

I actually just flipped my prails around last night in my S-1 Elite to put the rail towards the bridge. I definitely like it much better that way. As you said, p90 doesn't really change at all, it still sounds like a beast. But the new position of the rail helps add more twang and brightness, which in turn brightens up the series mode greatly.

I now love the series mode of my guitar. Hell, I only really want to play a humbucker when I want a fuller darker sound anyways (and when I say dark, please do not confuse this with muddy. I have never found the prails to be muddy at all). Other than those times, I choose a p90 over one any day.

I don't think I want to change the mags on mine though. I really like great mids and am too scared I'll lose the power and mid action of my P90 if I throw A5's in there. I actually would consider throwing 1 A5 along with the A8 as so many people suggest that combo.

 

[GuitarDoc]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

Thanks for the updates.

I actually just flipped my prails around last night in my S-1 Elite to put the rail towards the bridge. I definitely like it much better that way. As you said, p90 doesn't really change at all, it still sounds like a beast. But the new position of the rail helps add more twang and brightness, which in turn brightens up the series mode greatly.

I now love the series mode of my guitar. Hell, I only really want to play a humbucker when I want a fuller darker sound anyways (and when I say dark, please do not confuse this with muddy. I have never found the prails to be muddy at all). Other than those times, I choose a p90 over one any day.

+10. P-90 all the way any day.

I don't think I want to change the mags on mine though. I really like great mids and am too scared I'll lose the power and mid action of my P90 if I throw A5's in there. I actually would consider throwing 1 A5 along with the A8 as so many people suggest that combo.

So, do you have the original P-Rails or the Hot P-Rails? The original has A5 mags in it already. If you've got the Hot, then your guitar must be a much brighter guitar than mine. My LP is HEAVY and has great acoustic tone, terrific sustain, and is naturally dark sounding. The A8's in the Hot P-Rails were just too much low mids for my guitar. I had to get rid of them and the A5's did the trick. I tried A8+A8, A8+A5, A5+A3, A8+A3, A8+ceramic, and A5+A5. I was surprised that the A8+A3 combo didn't sound any different than A8+A8.

If you're happy with the way it is, don't change it.

I've got a GFS Mean 90b in another LP which I really love and didn't want to change AT ALL. But since I was doing all of this experimenting anyway, I swapped out one of the A5's for an A8 in the Mean 90. It didn't make a lot of difference, but it certainly didn't hurt it any. If anything, I think it sounds a bit fuller and stronger, but without losing any of its edge and snap.

I've got to tell you that I'm in P-90 heaven right now. Man, what a great sounding PU. How could anyone NOT like the P-90?!!

 

[frankfalbo]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

I'm glad you're loving it. P90's are definitely a bag of awesome. If I get a chance, I'm going to take my P-Rails Hot guitar in to work and flip it, maybe make some sound clips both ways. Mine's an H/S/H and I've wanted to flip both of them anyway. I have another similar guitar with H/S/H as well that I can leave rails inward.

 

[GuitarDoc]

Re: P-Rails...is it supposed to sound like this??

That would be interesting.