RCA5 vs A4 vs A2 in a '59?

[Rex_Rocker]

Want to soften the attack and fill out the mids on a Duncan '59. It's great as is, just wanna fine tune it.

As it is, the output level is fine. I feel like RCA5 would not drop the output (which I'd prefer), but the change would be the most subtle, right? I feel A2 would make the largest difference in EQ, but the output might take a hit. Is A4 a good middle ground for what I want?

Opinions?

Thanks!

 

[freefrog]

A4 is surely in the middle theoretically, since A2>A4>RCA5 inductively and conversely when it comes to magnetic strength (most likely, if those magnets have comparable size/mass and were charged in a similar way).

Now, frankly, I'd just try. IME, a very same pair of A4 giving a glorious tone to a P90 might have the opposite effect in a set of humbuckers or make 'em squeal... So the final answer is always in direct experience IMHO.

Do what you want and be happy.

 

[Ascension]

I have a A 3 mag in the 59 in the neck of my Orange 95 Washburn MG 102 with a JB in the bridge. True Swamp Ash body bolt on superstrat and it works very well.
I recorded all the electric parts here through my one off 100 watt Fender Prosonic head.
https://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=7804039

 

[Spaghetti Bolo]

A6.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

A6.

What's A6 like?

 

[jeremy]

id start with rca5. the ones i have present a softer top end and a bit more mids than my normal a5, though they are from different manufacturers. im such an a2 humbucker junkie, but everyone wants different things and runs difference rigs.

 

[eclecticsynergy]

RCA5 is a fairly subtle difference in the highs and won't affect the output. Its softer highs make the mids seem a little more prominent.
(I do like the old 59s with the blue-black magnet, not rough like a sandcast mag but unpolished.)
It sounds as if this would be the best option for subtle fine-tuning; other alnicos are likely to alter your tone more fundamentally.

A6 has stronger mids and rounder top end, with similar bass - and feel - to A5, plus a slight boost in output.
​
Are we talking bridge or neck position here? I really liked UOA5 in a 59B (and A4 in a 59N) for a Les Paul.
UA5 has richer mids and a more vintagey attack character. For me, it did not lower the output as predicted.

A4 or A2 work well in either bridge or neck, and either one feels more PAF-ish to me than the stock A5.
For a slight drop in output and a more vintagey tone I'd say A4 is your best bet.
A2 has a looser feel overall, especially in the bass, with extra midrange.
While technically be weaker than A5, it punches above its weight because of the strong mids.
A3 drops the output noticeably and feels especially PAF-ish. Great at the neck, though it can be a little thin in a bridge hum.

Type of guitar and the character of the individual instrument often make a lot of difference too.

 

[EmiAba]

I have experienced boominess using a 59 in one of my Les Paul. So I cured it with an A4. Less output (just a bit) but almost flat Eq. The magnet reduced both highs and lows. And the pick up lost a bit of its character. That is why I don't like A4 for bridge slot. On the other hand the RCA5 is highly recommended for a 59 bridge. It fills up the mid while reducing the highs. RCA5 was the magnet Blueman335 preferred the most
​

 

[eclecticsynergy]

Wasn't Blueman's favorite the UA5? I think he was the one who turned me on to them, years ago.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

I have experienced boominess using a 59 in one of my Les Paul. So I cured it with an A4. Less output (just a bit) but almost flat Eq. The magnet reduced both highs and lows. And the pick up lost a bit of its character. That is why I don't like A4 for bridge slot. On the other hand the RCA5 is highly recommended for a 59 bridge. It fills up the mid while reducing the highs. RCA5 was the magnet Blueman335 preferred the most
​

I don't have a problem with boominess so much as too much attack at times, really. But I do have it paired with a Custom which is kinda bassy in itself, so in context, it sounds fine. It's a really nice pickup, honestly, I just wanna play around to see if I like it even better.

 

[misterwhizzy]

Roughcast A3. It was the only magnet of A2, A4, A5, and UOA5 that actually made it act right in my Les Paul. But the WLH neck in parallel is better.

 

[beaubrummels]

I tried RCA5 and it sounds like a loud A2. It was fine in the bridge, in the neck it wasn't clear. I tried A4 and it sounded like a vintage PAF and I've never taken it out.

 

[EmiAba]

Wasn't Blueman's favorite the UA5? I think he was the one who turned me on to them, years ago.

Yes right my intention was to write UA5 not RCA5...

 

[Chistopher]

The downside with RCA5 is you sound like a corksniffing snob if you ever try to talk about it

 

[Rex_Rocker]

The downside with RCA5 is you sound like a corksniffing snob if you ever try to talk about it

Honestly, it does sound odd to discern the differences between a magnet in a pickup, and the same magnet material, just with tiny bumps, LOL.

But I do love my CS JB with the RC magnet. *raises pinky*

 

[freefrog]

Honestly, it does sound odd to discern the differences between a magnet in a pickup, and the same magnet material, just with tiny bumps, LOL.

But I do love my CS JB with the RC magnet. *raises pinky*

I won't pollute your thread with boring thoughts on RC vs smooth and the differences that it implies but if we just talk about changing magnets...

When testing bars of a "same" alloy with a Teslameter / Gaussmeter, results can be extremely random. In some cases, measured values are similar if not identical. In other comparisons, there will be clear differences, with an A5 1,4 less charged than the next one for instance (as noticed here with one of the vintage blueish Duncan magnets mentioned above by eclecticsynergy)...

And that kind of change certainly makes perceptible tonal nuances with a pickup at the same height under the strings... as admitted even by theoricians swearing by bode plots : Zollner explains that AlNiCo alloys make "no difference" by themselves and that only magnetic flux count (I won't discuss that here)... But he also counts 8 kinds of A5, shows 8 different BH curves to characterize 8 A5 bars and writes (I quote him) : "Obviously, a “typical” Alnico 5 material does not exist"...

That's why I've repeatitively shared here the idea that A5 or other AlNiCo alloys from different eras and foundries might differ sonically...

... and that's why, for years, I've a simple approach with mag swapping: I ignore alloys / data and change magnets until my ears are satisfied, regardless of the tech measurements that I always do nevertheless.

Mileages may vary. What counts is having fun with music whatever is the road to this, anyway... ;-)