Replace middle ssl-1

[numb3r23]

Hey, I’ve got a strat with SSL-1/SSL-1 RWRP/SSL-5 and I play between blues to hard rock.

I love the neck and the bridge, but i am so unhappy with position 2-4 that I only ever play 1 or 5. 2 and 4 sound like they are missing some frequencies, not at all like the quack/knopfler or something in that direction. The middle alone is bland, without bite or character. I fiddled with the height but could not get to something I like.

My idea is to put something with bite in there that mixes well. I thought of a ssl-4 or ssl-5 or even a dimarzio red velvet. Something that maintains vintage but stands out more and adds to it.
The other idea is to put something strong in there, a humbucker (duckbucker, (cool) rails, air norton, ...) but am worried it is too strong in comparison with the singles. But since I throw in the distortion quite a lot it might be interesting.....?

Any input is welcome

 

[gregory]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

A hotter middle will take you further away from traditional quack. Unless tapped, an SSL-5 or two in the equation will pretty well kill it.

Is neck + middle working for you at all?

A CS69 will help 2 and 4 but you will probably like 3 even less.

However(!), an SSL-5T with a 5-Way Super Switch could just be the ticket to do both jobs, though it may not quack as well as a CS69.

You could just move the SSL-5 into the middle position just to see how it sounds with the SSL-1 in the neck.

 

[Mincer]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

Something like the Cool Rails would certainly be too hot, and get you further away from the quack. Usually, a set of SSL-1s quacks like a paddling of ducks (that's the collective name for a group of ducks...the more you know!). I wonder why this isn't working in this case...

 

[gregory]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

something strong [...] (duckbucker [...] )

Duckbuckers aren't strong at all.

Per the recently closed topic, has another potential customer been misled by erroneous information on the Duncan product website page?

 

[gregory]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

Something like the Cool Rails would certainly be too hot, and get you further away from the quack. Usually, a set of SSL-1s quacks like a paddling of ducks (that's the collective name for a group of ducks...the more you know!). I wonder why this isn't working in this case...

I can tell you that they can sound like garbage in basswood. I have one that I wish wasn't that way!

 

[numb3r23]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

Thanks for the replies. I have no idea, whats going on really. I had an HSH ibanez RG and loved neck+middle, even with neck split (air norton). But with the fender it just sounds ... empty, lifeless, quack-less, hollow (but in a bad way).
What about the cs69 and wire the ‘3’ to neck+bridge if I dont like it alone? I’m not afraid of custom wiring...
Is it maybe a pu height thing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gregory]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

Maybe you have an atypical Fender or we have very different takes on quack, 'cause I think SSL-1s in the middle and neck sound great!

I'm not a fan of the combination of the bridge and neck personally, but YMMV.

If you haven't yet, try moving the middle tone control to the bridge, leaving position 3 without a tone control.

 

[PicoRiveraTele]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

Hey, I’ve got a strat with SSL-1/SSL-1 RWRP/SSL-5 and I play between blues to hard rock.

I love the neck and the bridge, but i am so unhappy with position 2-4 that I only ever play 1 or 5. 2 and 4 sound like they are missing some frequencies, not at all like the quack/knopfler or something in that direction. The middle alone is bland, without bite or character. I fiddled with the height but could not get to something I like.

My idea is to put something with bite in there that mixes well. I thought of a ssl-4 or ssl-5 or even a dimarzio red velvet. Something that maintains vintage but stands out more and adds to it.
The other idea is to put something strong in there, a humbucker (duckbucker, (cool) rails, air norton, ...) but am worried it is too strong in comparison with the singles. But since I throw in the distortion quite a lot it might be interesting.....?

Any input is welcome

The problem is the SSL-5 bridge, not the middle pickup, so replacing the middle pickups is not a good solution.

The best solution, if you want to have your cake and eat it too, is to split a bridge humbucker to single coil mode with a super switch. The catch is that the bridge humbucker has to be on the hotter side, so that a single coil of the humbucker will combine with the SSL-1 in the middle for a near matched inductance. The JB would work well for a full size, or a Hot Rails for a smaller sized humbucker.

Another alternative is to toss the SSL-5 for a lower output bridge, such as the DiMarzio Red Velvet, or even one of those stock ceramic pickups you find in cheaper priced guitars. The SSL-5 is a very hot-wound pickup, more than most people give it credit for.

 

[gregory]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

I like the SSL-5 in the bridge combined with an SSL-1 in the middle, but I don't think it sounds anything like traditional quack.

The JB slug coil sounds great split. One solution to taming it as a humbucker is to swap the screw coil with that from a 59B. For better or for worse, hybridizing it will change its character.

 

[Blille]

Replace middle ssl-1

I also vote for the SSL-5T.

Maybe before that you can lower/raise pickups to find a better neck/middle sound? Have you tried that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[numb3r23]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

I am in the process of setting up the guitar again and will check the heights.
I tried the jb in the ibanez HSH and didn’t like it at all. I know it comes with high praises, but it wasn’t my cup of tea. It is an idea and maybe its more suited here, but i am generally very fond of the ssl5 in the bridge. Similarly the neck ssl1 that just sings.
The controls are stock so i can see if a change there helps.
I do like the idea of a hb in bridge but i am hesitant to sacrifice the ssl5 sound.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gregory]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

Keep the SSL-5, just try it temporarily in the middle. If you like it then get an SSL-5T RWRP, or don't get the tapable version if you like position 4 with the full SSL-5.

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

I’ve never had much use for the sound of a vintage style middle pickup on a Strat by itself, but I do like the middle combined with the neck or bridge. Assuming your middle pickup is not hooked up out of phase (which will give you a thin, nasal, mosquito tone when combined with the bridge or neck pickup) I’d not replace it and instead play with the height. On my Strats I hold the strings down at the highest fret and adjust the low E side of the neck and middle to about 1/8” away from the underside of the low E string. The high E side about 1/16” away. As a starting point.

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

We recently had a thread where we found that a Lil Screamin Demon has potential between two single coils.

 

[gregory]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

Lil Screamin Demon has potential between two single coils.

The operative is potential.

The basis of the discussion you're talking about was one of Anders Osbourne's guitars. It only has a 3-way switch that is parked in the middle position. As such, the jury is very much out about it how compatible it will be between two singles. I probably misunderstood since it seemed so preposterous, but in the rig rundown that I watched it seemed as if he said the singles are somehow out of phase when they were selected (bridge-only or neck-only).

Anyway, reported success with with the Lil Screamin Demon in the middle isn't exactly news, however:
https://forum.seymourduncan.com/showthread.php?288643-Shout-Out-To-the-Lil-Screamin-Demon



It's likely not applicable to this topic, but the Cool Rails (or really any of the single-sized humbuckers) can work in the middle position if that's what you're into. I'm more inclined to use one of Duncan's neck versions or something like a DiMarzio Fast Track 1, but that's just me. FWIW and YMMV: I'm not a fan of the Duckbuckers or Vintage Rails. Give me one of the Cruisers or some kind of stacked single any day.

 

[Clint 55]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

You could go to 300k pots. When I had that set, 300k pots were perfect and really let the right amount of glass out, while 250 kind of blunted them and 500 was overkill. I don't know if this will solve your exact problem but when I had that set with 300k pots it had good glass and good quack in the notch positions. Position 2 is actually slightly darker than pos 4 because of the ssl5 but it still sounded good.

 

[numb3r23]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

I had the pu-switch job done in a shop and (now that's a little bit embarrasing), the middle was wired up the wrong way and the SSL-5 was put in the wrong way around (lowest pole-piece at A-string). At least I only paid for the pickups.
After fixing it and re-adjusting the height I must say the in betweens are cool and the middle alone ... well, it's got 2 great, 2 good and 1 other sound. I am curious to try some of the tweaks (wiring) but for now I see no reason to replace the PU. Yay. Although the SSL-5T sounds intriguing for the weak middle sound - I'll give it a try as well.
Many thanks!

 

[gregory]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

That's great news. I like that you loved the SSL-5 upside-down, too.

 

[Jacew]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

+1 Vote for SSL-5T that automatically taps when you switch to bridge/middle combo.

On the other hand, I personally like middle pickup to be hotter. It makes middle positions more lively sounding in my opinion. I can get enough quack from SSL-7 tapped in bridge + SSL-5 in middle.

I tried SSL-1 in the middle, but found it useless in that position.

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Replace middle ssl-1

I had the pu-switch job done in a shop and (now that's a little bit embarrasing), the middle was wired up the wrong way and the SSL-5 was put in the wrong way around (lowest pole-piece at A-string). At least I only paid for the pickups.
After fixing it and re-adjusting the height I must say the in betweens are cool and the middle alone ... well, it's got 2 great, 2 good and 1 other sound. I am curious to try some of the tweaks (wiring) but for now I see no reason to replace the PU. Yay. Although the SSL-5T sounds intriguing for the weak middle sound - I'll give it a try as well.
Many thanks!

I suspected that.

Which is why I wrote “assuming your middle pickup is not hooked up out of phase...”

Glad you got it worked out.

If it was my guitar I’d just set the pick up ht. using the the method I described as a starting point and enjoy it.

The SSL1’s and SSL5 is a terrific set.