Yeah i can get on board with the wax potting changing the tone but what about the increased output of the newer ones? why would that be?One difference, the originals were unpotted.
For me the newer ones just seem too hard edged in tone and have way too much output.
.
Bah - more likely they have them in different guitars, wired differently, changed the pots etc..
bah
Maybe it has to do with the initial magnetic charge strength of the magnets?
might also be a slightly different recipe of ceramic (most ceramic mags today are Ceramic 8)
nice info how weres the older ceramics made? are they available anymore?
this would explain a sweetness factor or output issue between the two.
I learned from blueman that mags are crucial to the tone:approve:
I guess you call up Dimarzio. As mentioned, may be the old ones weren't fully charged to capacity. Like alnicos, ceramic has variations, I recently learned that ceramic 1 and other weaker ones are unoriented kind, whereas 5 and 8 are oriented.
Not the best tone example to really make sure but kind of proves a point? at least it is through the SAME guitar/gear.
the newer is here warmer and hotter than the 70's one
so according to this comparison THEY ARE DIFFERENT!:approve:
You can obviously account for the difference in sound by black vs. cream. Duh.
If you want to go down the rabbit hole search for one of the early threads on this board when the VPAF/VHPAF came out. There is a link to a review from a guitar magazine where the reviewer swaps out his 70's SuperD from his 70's Les Paul Custom and writes that the V/VHPAF is nearly identical in output to the 70's SuperD.
That reviewer has tp put down the pipe! The VHpaf and Vpaf were both almost HALF the output of any super d that is workin right
super D 425mv
VHpaf 265mv
Vpaf 230mv
.:cool2:
Maybe it has to do with the initial magnetic charge strength of the magnets?
might also be a slightly different recipe of ceramic (most ceramic mags today are Ceramic 8)