Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

[Lewguitar]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

You misunderstood the point. Using same wire, putting more winds raises all of capacitance, inductance and resistance.

If some winding method raises or lower only one of those values (and not the others) then you create a sound that you could not have created just using a different number of winds.

It is good to see confirmation that somebody measured scatter wind as lowering capacitance. Myself I would still ask whether this is simply the result of the larger physical volume of the coil, which means a similar effect could have been created by using a wire of the same copper diameter, but with thicker insulation.

I have five Duncan 59b pickups. Three from the 80's, one from the 90's and one from 2016.

They measure 7.9K, 8.1K, 8.16K, 8.5K and 8.6K. I put Addiction FX Roughcast A5 magnets in them all, although the original magnets were not highly polished and were a bit rough as they were.

I like them all, but if I had to rate them, my personal favorite would be the brand new one that measures 8.16K and my least favorite would be the two from the 1980's that measure 8.5 & 8.6K.

In terms of sound, the 8.5K and 8.6K 59b's are the most dense. The most opaque. The least transparent.

But they are not a lot "louder" or "higher in output" than my 7.9K-8.16K 59b's. Maybe a little but not much.

They are "thicker" and more dense sounding.

If I think of my 8.16K 59b as being a clear glass of water, the 8.5K and 8.6K sounds like I mixed some Jello into the water.

 

[uOpt]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

I have five Duncan 59b pickups. Three from the 80's, one from the 90's and one from 2016.

They measure 7.9K, 8.1K, 8.16K, 8.5K and 8.6K. I put Addiction FX Roughcast A5 magnets in them all, although the original magnets were not highly polished and were a bit rough as they were.

I like them all, but if I had to rate them, my personal favorite would be the brand new one that measures 8.16K and my least favorite would be the two from the 1980's that measure 8.5 & 8.6K.

In terms of sound, the 8.5K and 8.6K 59b's are the most dense. The most opaque. The least transparent.

But they are not a lot "louder" or "higher in output" than my 7.9K-8.16K 59b's. Maybe a little but not much.

They are "thicker" and more dense sounding.

If I think of my 8.16K 59b as being a clear glass of water, the 8.5K and 8.6K sounds like I mixed some Jello into the water.

The difference in resistance might be significant enough to be audible, especially since you perceive the fatter ones as overloaded. Might be confirmation bias, but you don't seem to be emotionally attached to an outcome.

As an experiment I could think of switching the screws, maybe even the slugs?

Do they have identical baseplates?

 

[freefrog]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

I like them all, but if I had to rate them, my personal favorite would be the brand new one that measures 8.16K and my least favorite would be the two from the 1980's that measure 8.5 & 8.6K.

In terms of sound, the 8.5K and 8.6K 59b's are the most dense. The most opaque. The least transparent.

But they are not a lot "louder" or "higher in output" than my 7.9K-8.16K 59b's. Maybe a little but not much.

They are "thicker" and more dense sounding.

I've owned successively four "Seymourized" SH1's from the late 70/early 80's and have still two of them. I totally get what you mean: the old ones are more "dense" sounding.

Compared to the new ones, in fact, they have noticeably different resonant peaks, reminding the focused response of T-Tops - but I think that I've already posted about that, so I won't ramble.

I'll just share two things that I've done with these pickups:

-I've set their screw poles 1 to 3 mm above their bobbins but the pickups themselves not too close to the strings;

-I've wired them with a no load tone pot;

Since I've done that, they are my favourite for the guitar in which they're currently mounted (a Flying V) and sound extremely close to actual vintage Gibson pickups that I've directly compared to them.

Not claiming that I've found a magic recipe: just saying that any pickup with its specific character can do wonders once mounted in the "right" guitar with the "right" harness and settings... )

 

[thanaton]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

You misunderstood the point.

Bare Knuckle claims "Scatterwinding by hand can be time consuming but it has many advantages over conventional machine winding, not least a far superior sound." Regardless of where you stand on this issue, there are not "many advantages, there appears to be only one that is known of, and whether it's superior sound or not is personal preference. That's the point.

Using same wire, putting more winds raises all of capacitance, inductance and resistance.

If some winding method raises or lower only one of those values (and not the others) then you create a sound that you could not have created just using a different number of winds.

Scatter winding technically decreases the inductance also, since magnetic coupling drops for the same reason capacitive coupling drops. It's a known compromise that has to be made in inductor and transformer design. Since you lose both capacitance and inductance, you get a higher resonance for a given DC resistance.

It is good to see confirmation that somebody measured scatter wind as lowering capacitance. Myself I would still ask whether this is simply the result of the larger physical volume of the coil, which means a similar effect could have been created by using a wire of the same copper diameter, but with thicker insulation.

The argument is that scatter puts more space between windings. It shouldn't matter how the space is added, so long as the space is added. For every bit of added space, the overall size of the coil must grow by that proportion, so no matter how you look at it, the drop in capacitance will correspond to the overall geometry.

 

[thanaton]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

Another question here is - what kind of sound change would you get if the bobbin has a bit more circumference? That means the first winds of the coil are a bit bigger/longer/morewire.

If the entire coil starts out and ends up with a bit more physical volume, how do the base electrical properties change? (capacitance and inductance, we assume same amount of wire used, so resistance is same). That affects the frequency of the resonance peak.

In addition, are there mechanical effects?

And how does the different placement of the coil as a whole inside the 3D magnetic field generated by the bar magnet, shaped by the polepieces, affect the sound?

The latter is a huge can of worms. And any answer to it would also affect the scatterwound versus non-random wind answers (using standard bobbins).

A Zexcoil blog post was linked here a few days ago that discusses the magnetic field https://lawingmusicalproducts.com/news/dr-lawings-latest-blog-post-how-does-a-pickup-really-work , and the gist of it is that the magnetic field should be seen as emanating from the guitar string, and not the magnets themselves. Inductance works on "change", and it's the string that changes magnetically. The pole pieces are magnetic, but they don't change, so they don't matter, other than for the fact that they magnetize the string.

The "can of worms" is not so huge. The sound you get ultimately depends on the aperture width of the pickup, because there is harmonic information being produced by the string, and the question is what information is collected, and what is discarded. Since the string will only report back movement that is magnetized (unmagnetized movement is electrically invisible) the aperture width is decided by the magnetizing pole piece. The coil is already wider than the pole pieces, so most coils collect the majority of what there is to collect already.

As a coil is made to be wider or taller, it's increasingly less productive as a "pickup". In the case of a tall coil, the bottom half of the coil is far away from the changing flux of the string, and in the case of a wide coil, the outer reaches of the coil are permeated by the return flux of the string, cancelling out some of the voltage that had been created by the primary flux path.

 

[Zhangliqun]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

My experience is the wider the coil, the beefier it is because it sees the longer wavelengths of the lower freqs better. The more width of the overall magnet matters too, which is why the problem with neck P90's -- with not one but two bar magnets laying side by side -- overpowering the bridge in vintage sets is even worse than the vintage humbucker sets. Solution for the overly fat P90 neck? Narrower magnets, problem solved.

 

[freefrog]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

My experience is the wider the coil, the beefier it is because it sees the longer wavelengths of the lower freqs better. The more width of the overall magnet matters too, which is why the problem with neck P90's -- with not one but two bar magnets laying side by side -- overpowering the bridge in vintage sets is even worse than the vintage humbucker sets. Solution for the overly fat P90 neck? Narrower magnets, problem solved.

A funny experiment that any of us can do with a P90 is to pull off one of the two mags then to hear how the sound gets weaker and thinner… not to mention that the tone varies when the sole magnet is directed towards the bridge or towards the neck… )


@ SJ318: we can see once again in this topic how theoretical questions about guitar electronics always tend to become a “huge can of worms”, to quote a recent answer. Various communicational factors are at work in such cases:

-pickup makers are quartered between…
1-a gratuitous/generous willing to share,
2-an understandable need to recall their presence to customers if not to justify their products,
3-a necessity to keep some data for them and some possible pre-existing divergences with their concurrence - with a potential necessity to sound “different” compared to this concurrence, by producing for example an alternative theoretical discourse: see the Zexcoil blog to know what I mean;

-a few customers have passed years to experiment on transducers and to think about it. If they start to disagree with each others, adamant and infinite arguments are to expect because each writer will literally defend a whole part of his life (his years of experience and reflection) against a different “whole part of life” embodied by another knowledgeable member…


That’s why my own answers above have been either evasive, either anecdotal on purpose – and I think that I’m not alone to have practiced this implicit kind of diversion in the previous posts: many of us can’t afford to waste our limited free time in endless online arguments… and anyway, it was better IMHO to let you build your own answers on the basis of a few links and hints instead of treating you as if you were stupid and ignorant


If I had something to add, I’d say that I always handle theoretical models about magnetic transducers for what they are IMHO: “heuristic models” – IOW: pedagogical / analog metaphors produced to allow, to ease or to refine our understanding…


Sterile arguments happen and end with a closed thread when the actual heuristic nature of these theoretical models is forgotten and when they are taken literally, as a faithful transcription of physical reality – while any theoretical model is nothing but a rational projection of human mind(s) on this reality… But I digress, and the humble freefrog doesn’t plan to find himself stuck in an endless sterile discussion because of this last statement on his epistemological position. LOL.


Now that I’ve devoted to this post the few minutes that I could spend on the Duncan forum before my daily job, I wish you all a nice day, full of enjoying music.

 

[SJ318]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

Thanks to all you guys, especially the winders,
Zhangliqun, etc. Very knowledgable and a huge range of questions and answers, some above my pay grade,
Still, thank you for participating.
Steve Buffington

 

[thanaton]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

My experience is the wider the coil, the beefier it is because it sees the longer wavelengths of the lower freqs better.

Wider pickups are louder, but it really has to be the pole piece that is wider foremost, because you require more flux to get more voltage. If you only make the coil larger, it's like you're catching the same sized fish, but with a bigger net. The larger pole pieces actually increases the size of the "catch", so to speak.

In general, a P-90 is very fat sounding, but don't they generate six henries or more of inductance? That will make any pickup sound fat. An SSL-5, for example, is pretty fat.

The more width of the overall magnet matters too, which is why the problem with neck P90's -- with not one but two bar magnets laying side by side -- overpowering the bridge in vintage sets is even worse than the vintage humbucker sets. Solution for the overly fat P90 neck? Narrower magnets, problem solved.

Decreasing AlNiCo mass also reduces eddy currents and inductance. It so happens that reducing the inductance and eddy current losses of a pickup also make it sound less fat. It could be the difference in magnetic shape, it could be the reduced inductance and eddy currents, it could be both.

 

[darthphineas]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

we can see once again in this topic how theoretical questions about guitar electronics always tend to become a “huge can of worms”, to quote a recent answer.

some might suggest there's been a trend of "theoretical questions" going on for quite a while. wasn't someone saying that one person got such a kick out seeing people debate that they opened at least 1 alternym to debate themself so as to keep the back-and-forth going between forum members?

-a few customers have passed years to experiment on transducers and to think about it. If they start to disagree with each others, adamant and infinite arguments are to expect because each writer will literally defend a whole part of his life (his years of experience and reflection) against a different “whole part of life” embodied by another knowledgeable member…

That’s why my own answers above have been either evasive, either anecdotal on purpose – and I think that I’m not alone to have practiced this implicit kind of diversion in the previous posts: many of us can’t afford to waste our limited free time in endless online arguments… and anyway, it was better IMHO to let you build your own answers on the basis of a few links and hints instead of treating you as if you were stupid and ignorant

very much so. something that's earned is much more valuable to the holder than something that's gained without an investment. Cathy Carter Duncan has said (and it's been a few years, so I'm paraphrasing) that Seymour put time into his craft to be able to start (in the 1970s) what is now the Duncan company... and that it makes little/no business sense to openly give away decades of earned experience just because someone wants to know.

people like Frank Falbo (as one example) can stop by and share what he can (or what he's allowed to share), but that does not mean that people are entitled to certain knowledge because they think it's their right. even more so when they want that uninvested knowledge "on demand".

I'm fuzzy on the whole "Rick Turner incident" from years ago, but didn't Rick try to participate and got so much guff from some people that he's not been back? whatever the specifics, it seems there was a consensus that Rick was not treated well. while maybe not apples-to-apples, I think it is clearly an indicator of how things could be if people that are willing to share are handled haphazardly.

Sterile arguments happen and end with a closed thread when the actual heuristic nature of these theoretical models is forgotten and when they are taken literally, as a faithful transcription of physical reality – while any theoretical model is nothing but a rational projection of human mind(s) on this reality…

it can appear that these "theoretical" threads can at time push the limits of otherwise rational members/customers. could there be those that think that people that develop a trend of starting "theoretical" threads and then actively participate in fueling the pursuant debates/arguments might be seen as violating forum guidelines/rules?

 

[Mincer]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

it can appear that these "theoretical" threads can at time push the limits of otherwise rational members/customers. could there be those that think that people that develop a trend of starting "theoretical" threads and then actively participate in fueling the pursuant debates/arguments might be seen as violating forum guidelines/rules?

When it provokes members to attack each other (usually we get complaints from the participating parties). I don't care if people debate theoreticals, but doing it without intentionally provoking each other is the key. I'd say there are many instances we had where it looked like intentional provocation. That is the kind of stuff I don't want here, and isn't useful to anyone.

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

people like Frank Falbo (as one example) can stop by and share what he can (or what he's allowed to share), but that does not mean that people are entitled to certain knowledge because they think it's their right. even more so when they want that uninvested knowledge "on demand".

I think it heats up when someone asserts that because an NDA prevents professionals discussing specific detailed research results and information they have, that somehow discredits all their knowledge on the subject and makes their input suspect to be discounted completely.

The Turner situation was where it started being portrayed as just a luthier getting on the forum to discuss guitars and technology, but someone or certain few individuals took offense that it wasn't publicly disclosed up front that the discussion leaders were actually trying to sell something they had a financial stake in.

 

[thanaton]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

Bill Lawrence is an example of a pickup winder who was willing to get very specific about anything and everything, and his opinion was that there was nothing to scatter winding, or by extension, winding patterns. It only seems to be those winders who are no forthcoming that also believe that scatter and pattern make a real difference, one that goes beyond simply reducing the coil capacitance.

There are now hundreds of "boutique" winders on the market. Laws of numbers says at least a few of them would report back on their adventures in scatter winding and layering patterns. I've looked, believe me. I want to see what they have to say, but I've found nothing. Not all 100+ of them are bound by an NDA or paranoid that China will steal their hard fought secrets.

You say I'm talking theory, IMO it's the notion that this scatter winding and layering makes a difference that is the real unproven "theory", and when you call to ban people who ask questions, you might not realize it, but you're attempting to create a "safe space" forum, where only people who all operate on shared assumptions, are allowed to make use of this resource.

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

Some flawed math going on there. 100s of winders does not equal 100s of scatter winders. And 100s of winders does not mean all 100+ had the resources and laboratories to conduct controlled experiments to identify differences in manufacturing techniques. And the number of folks speaking or not speaking out has no bearing on whether something exists. And winders who 'believe' in a difference do so because they empirically observed a difference in testing.

 

[esandes]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

back in the 80s i bought my first aftermarket pickup, the PAF pro and after many years of loyal service it went kaput and i got another one. but what i remember was the low E and A strings had way more wire than the bottom strings in the first pickup. the tape wrapping around the pickup was bulging out of the pickup edge at the lower strings and at the high E the tape/wire was well below the pickup face edge. what was that all about? some kind of sick scatter wind? a changing wire thickness? the new one looks nothing like it as it has an even thickness around the bobbins.

 

[thanaton]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

With all those little boutiques, scatter winding is more the rule than the exception. The reason revered vintage pickups were scatter wound is because they didn't have expensive, modern CNC winders in the 50's. Most of those 100+ bedroom boutiques are doing things the 50's way, with a basic winding machine and hand guided and tensioned spooling.

The other problem with taking winder's at their word, even if they won't disclose the processes they use, is that they could be making mistakes in terms of how they try to be objective. For example, if a winder says, "I wound several pickups to 6.0k DC resistance, and I tried different wind patterns, and they all sounded different", then it might be that they just changed the inductance and capacitance, while maintaining the same DC resistance, and those changes will change the tone. They would have to say "I wound several pickups, and I tried different wind patterns, I ensured that they had identical inductance and resonant peaks, and they all sounded different", to at least assure the world that they ruled out other possibilities, so that only the wind or scatter pattern could be identified as causing the critical difference.

 

[jeremy]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

With all those little boutiques, scatter winding is more the rule than the exception. The reason revered vintage pickups were scatter wound is because they didn't have expensive, modern CNC winders in the 50's. Most of those 100+ bedroom boutiques are doing things the 50's way, with a basic winding machine and hand guided and tensioned spooling.

The other problem with taking winder's at their word, even if they won't disclose the processes they use, is that they could be making mistakes in terms of how they try to be objective. For example, if a winder says, "I wound several pickups to 6.0k DC resistance, and I tried different wind patterns, and they all sounded different", then it might be that they just changed the inductance and capacitance, while maintaining the same DC resistance, and those changes will change the tone. They would have to say "I wound several pickups, and I tried different wind patterns, I ensured that they had identical inductance and resonant peaks, and they all sounded different", to at least assure the world that they ruled out other possibilities, so that only the wind or scatter pattern could be identified as causing the critical difference.

"scatter winding" is not a definitive term, it means different things to different people. to me, it means hand guiding the wire with a random pattern. you can hand guide with a much more controlled pattern than that even with a very simple setup. in the 50's there were machine winders, you think most transformers were wound by hand? fender single coils were hand guided until the mid 60's but gibson pups were machine wound in the 50's.

in your second paragraph you say that hypothetically a winder wound three pups at 6k with different wind patterns and they sound different. if we assume a single coil, inferred from your 6k dc resistance, and that the winder used the same wire on the same machine on a similar bobbin with the same number of turns but three different patterns... could it be the winding pattern causes a change in res peak? could that be part of the point of different coils geometry?

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

Another flaw in the supposition there is winders wind to a turn count, not to a DC measure.

 

[AlexR]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

With all those little boutiques, scatter winding is more the rule than the exception. The reason revered vintage pickups were scatter wound is because they didn't have expensive, modern CNC winders in the 50's. Most of those 100+ bedroom boutiques are doing things the 50's way, with a basic winding machine and hand guided and tensioned spooling.

The other problem with taking winder's at their word, even if they won't disclose the processes they use, is that they could be making mistakes in terms of how they try to be objective. For example, if a winder says, "I wound several pickups to 6.0k DC resistance, and I tried different wind patterns, and they all sounded different", then it might be that they just changed the inductance and capacitance, while maintaining the same DC resistance, and those changes will change the tone. They would have to say "I wound several pickups, and I tried different wind patterns, I ensured that they had identical inductance and resonant peaks, and they all sounded different", to at least assure the world that they ruled out other possibilities, so that only the wind or scatter pattern could be identified as causing the critical difference.

If the wind pattern results in different tone with the wire type being the same, then it is proof wind pattern affects tone. Inductance and capacitance are simply metrics used to quantify this, and are aspects that change with different physical properties of wire and wind......(along with res freq and q) - they are not separate.

 

[thanaton]

Re: Searched, could not find info:scatter, loose, tight, normal wind

Another flaw in the supposition there is winders wind to a turn count, not to a DC measure.

Nothing correlates more closely with turn count than DC resistance.