Some highlights from Seymour's 1978 interview with Seth Lover

Lewguitar

New member
SWD: We talked about the addition of adjustable poles pieces; would that change the sound any, the magnetic field-disbursed through the bobbin?
Seth Lover: On the humbucker the adjustable pole piece extends out the bottom. If you had a magnet that was quite weak you could absorb some of the energy, depends on how far through that screw was, because it’s going to absorb some of the energy there. But as a rule, with a good magnet there wasn’t too much.

SWD:
How did the mounting ring come about? In the drawing in your patent...
Seth Lover: I used the old ES-125 (dog-ear cover) as a start because we didn’t have any mounting ring for this. So this was not acceptable as a mounting ring I felt. Because you notice this there was a slight slope to it--slightly different here and here (neck angle). I designed two different mounting rings. One near the bridge and one near the fingerboard. One near the fingerboard is quite shallow at the front edge; and, I tried to set that so the thing would have the slope of the strings when you were fretted at the last fret. And then the one that was back near the bridge, it had to be held up a little higher so I wanted to bring the pickups up close to the string. Because the closer you can keep the pickup to the string the more output you are going to have. It doesn’t do any good to bring--to put the pickup down and bring the screws up to compensate because you’ve lost--you’ve got to get the pickup as close as you can to the strings.

SWD:
Because you're losing your magnetic field?
Seth Lover: That’s right, the magnetic field comes up to the stings there and magnetizes the strings. That’s one of the things that most people don’t understand. They figure that string is waving there and cutting the magnetic lines of force. Nuts. That isn’t it. The magnet, all it does is magnetize the string. Now you’ve got a waving magnetic field. And we have a fixed coil with a waving magnetic field to induce voltage. If you want to, take the magnet out. One you’ve magnetized your strings, it will play until the string loses it. Players think the string, the magnetic field from the magnet comes up to the string and by twisting the magnetic flux back and forth that’s what induces the voltage. That’s not what happens. There’s a certain amount of that, but that’s minor. What is happening is you have a magnetic field that is moving back and forth across the coil. And when you move a magnetic field back and forth across the coil you induce voltage. If you move the field up and down it wouldn’t induce any voltage. It’s the motion back and forth across the pickup that does it.

SWD:
How did you come about using alnico magnets?
Seth Lover: If I’m not mistaken I think the Oscar Moore pickup had tungsten carbide magnets or some such name as that. In other words what ever as the best magnet available-pre WW II (World War II) Well after WW II alnico magnets became quite popular. They started using it for the magnets in speakers and things like that. And finally electrodynamics died out and we had the alnico magnets. And of course everybody was selling speakers, selling alnico magnets and we found that we could get alnico magnets fairly reasonable, small in size for the amount of strength and the only thing that you run into with alnico’s was they were cast which means if you wanted to keep a dimension you had to pay the price for grinding the edges. And if you wanted an assembly to fit exactly between those pole pieces, you had to make sure that your dimensions didn’t vary too much. As cast, they ask as much as plus or minus .030” thousands. That means as much as 16th of an inch variation. We didn’t care about the thickness varying that much because one would be a little bit stronger and another a little weaker. You could live that. But the distance across the width had to have ground surfaces. They were ground to dimensions. We tried to hold within plus or minus .005” which is pretty tight.

SWD: What is the material and purpose of the bottom plate?
Seth Lover: The bottom plate is a non-magnetic material so that you did not detract from the magnet. You wanted the magnet to go through the pole pieces and the pole screw to the strings. That’s the path you wanted the magnetism to follow. That’s why on most of those you’ll find brass screws in the bottom. I didn’t want to detract any from the magnet into those brass screws.

SWD: Some pickup manufacturers use steel screw to secure the bobbins to the bottom plate.
Seth Lover: If they are willing to accept that loss, well fine. When I designed it, I wanted brass in there. I didn’t want to take away any of the magnetic strength in a useless point.
 
Re: Some highlights from Seymour's 1978 interview with Seth Lover

What is happening is you have a magnetic field that is moving back and forth across the coil. And when you move a magnetic field back and forth across the coil you induce voltage. If you move the field up and down it wouldn’t induce any voltage. It’s the motion back and forth across the pickup that does it.

I hate to argue with The Man, but that's not correct. It's the motion "up and down" that generates the voltage. You can do a simple test. Connect the output of a single-coil to an o'scope. Move a screwdriver back and forth over the top. You get very little voltage. Now move the screwdriver up and down, (fore and aft), of the pole piece and you get a large voltage. If what he was saying was true, then rotating a pup 180 deg's in its mount would reverse its polarity, and obviously, it doesn't. It's what allows us to use the same pup for neck or bridge.

When you energize a solenoid coil, it pulls the plunger into it. Not move it sideways across the top.
 
Re: Some highlights from Seymour's 1978 interview with Seth Lover

Thanks for pointing that out Artie. Ever look at a guitar string vibrating under a strobe light though? They vibrate up and down, side to side and all around. I'm sure Seymour and Seth knew that. Probably just didn't say it correctly.
 
Re: Some highlights from Seymour's 1978 interview with Seth Lover

Yes Lew, I have noticed that. Its a cool affect. Its like the string vibration is "orbiting" around an axis.
I wonder if it rotates the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere? :scratchch
 
Re: Some highlights from Seymour's 1978 interview with Seth Lover

....
SWD: Because you're losing your magnetic field?
Seth Lover: That’s right, the magnetic field comes up to the stings there and magnetizes the strings. That’s one of the things that most people don’t understand. They figure that string is waving there and cutting the magnetic lines of force. Nuts. That isn’t it. The magnet, all it does is magnetize the string. Now you’ve got a waving magnetic field. And we have a fixed coil with a waving magnetic field to induce voltage. If you want to, take the magnet out. One you’ve magnetized your strings, it will play until the string loses it. Players think the string, the magnetic field from the magnet comes up to the string and by twisting the magnetic flux back and forth that’s what induces the voltage. That’s not what happens. There’s a certain amount of that, but that’s minor. What is happening is you have a magnetic field that is moving back and forth across the coil. And when you move a magnetic field back and forth across the coil you induce voltage. If you move the field up and down it wouldn’t induce any voltage. It’s the motion back and forth across the pickup that does it. ...

This would directly support what I´ve said for years, that magnet material as such is more or less irrelevant, it´s the strength of the magnet that matters. :)

Nice to see that somebody seems to agree with me for a change. That that somebody happens to be the late Seth Lover, Father of the humbucker, just makes it that much cooler :cool:

Yes Lew, I have noticed that. Its a cool affect. Its like the string vibration is "orbiting" around an axis.
I wonder if it rotates the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere? :scratchch
While I don´t necessarily think the Coriolis effect should have any noticable effect on teh vibrations of a string, it would definitely be an interesting experiment to try, ideally both left and right handed (since a leftie strikes the string from the other side, that would theoretically reverse the oscillation, too)....

But then again, aren´t the words "oscillation" and "reversal" semi-exclusive of each other? On the other hand, it´s impossible to deflect in all 360° simultaneously.... I think this really would be cool to try out. ;)
 
Last edited:
Re: Some highlights from Seymour's 1978 interview with Seth Lover

I'm wearing my Seth Lover t-shirt today in tribute to this thread (well, I was wearing it anyway)...
 
Back
Top