variation in tone between the same magnets of different manufacturers?

[gimmieinfo]

I'm talking about the same type, IE: A2 or A5 etc, same surface, IE: polished or sand cast, and same length. Has anyone experimented with different manufacturers and found a notable difference in tone and if so, any manufacturers that tend to be best? Not talking about throback, as theres no way i'd spend $59 for a freakin magnet ! I'm gonna put A5 polished set in a set (has A5 now but those were borrowed from another set just to see how i liked A5 in them and they are going back in) and want to know if theres a manufacturer to get them from or should i just buy any old A5 and expect the same result with any of them?

 

[Artie]

I can't answer your specific question, but Duncan sells some parts. Pots, etc. It would be nice to see them sell official Duncan mags. I bet they'd make some money.

 

[jeremy]

i bought a good size batch of mags from all star magnetics many years ago so will probably never need to buy polished a2, a3, a4, a5, or c8 again. for other things, ive used philadelphia luthier supply

 

[freefrog]

I've already testified many times here about the fact that effectively (IME at least), there are potential differences between magnets of a same alloy but of different origins (foundries, eras and even batches).

If it wasn't the case, how Throbak describes his magnets wouldn't make sense and I wouldn't have NOS magnets in my LP number one.

So, no, you won't obtain the same result with any old A5. They'll give a same sound only if they exhibit close flux strenght readings and give a same inductance to the pickup used as a Guinea pig.

EDIT - And to me, there's no "best" manufacturer. Depends on the pickup involved. In some cases I try half a dozen of magnets in a same humbucker as a same bar magnet can contribute to a stellar tone in a given transducer and to a dull sound in the next one.

 

[gimmieinfo]

Well, i found out for myself. I have a classic 57 that i put a A5 in and rally liked it but i was curious if a different A5 could make a difference. So i looked thru my magnets and tried to figure out which was a duncan i had taken out of a 59/hybrid years ago. I figured it out and tried it. It sounded very similar but there was a notable difference in that the duncan sounded a tad thinner and slightly less sustain. makes me wanna try some other A5 like a un oriented and un polished.

 

[freefrog]

Years ago, a guy did post a YT comparison involving a same vintage Gibson pickup (Early Pat. Stick.) and a dozen of vintage or "vintage correct" magnets, shown on the screen. A same track was played clean through a Kemper with each of these bar magnets, with pickup at the same height under the same strings. I wish his video remained public (he made it private after a while). Some magnets didn't change the tone although they looked very different. Others were bringing obvious differences sonically. The most striking example was a short magnet coming from a 1962 PU: it was visually the shortest and was making the sound fatter than any other bar in the sample...

I had found that interesting since it reflected my own subjective experience.

I wonder if I've not recorded these tracks and archived them somewhere. I'll search and share the result if I find something.

 

[gimmieinfo]

Well TBH i doubt i could hear the difference that i heard in a recording. When u r playing it thats 10 times more obvious than in a recording, to me at least. If i culd hear the same pickup with even different alnico versions ilke 2 vs 5 in a recording i doubt i could hear it. If i were playing it however it's as obvious as a punch in the face.

 

[freefrog]

I've found the tracks. They were effectively in my archives, among Audacity files.

Agreed, such audio samples are not always meaningful. Anyway, I don't feel authorized to share tracks recorded by someone else. So, I've done something : I've pasted in one screenshot the frequency response displayed by Audacity for 6 magnets in the test aforementioned. Pic below.

There were two magnets from the 50s, unknown alloy, called here "A" and "B". The short A5 from 62 gave the response shown in the upper right... The bottom shows the response of a vintage correct Throbak A5, of a Gibson A2 magnet (it was from a Burstbucker, not from a 57 Classic) and of a Duncan A2 borrowed to an Antiquity. Having listened once again to be sure I was on the "right tracks", I can confirm the samples seemed all identical regarding notes and settings... Hence my surprise when I've seen the upper right spectrum, hence the fact that I remembered that, hence the fact that I share this pic now FWIW.

 

[jeremy]

that is an interesting set of pics. ive only played with short mags a bit, and usually in the neck. this leads me to believe i should try them in the bridge and do a bit more exploring

 

[freefrog]

that is an interesting set of pics. ive only played with short mags a bit, and usually in the neck. this leads me to believe i should try them in the bridge and do a bit more exploring

Well, short magnets spread the magnetic field a bit differently but honestly, I'm not sure the singularity of the 62 magnet in the pics above was due to its shortness and I wouldn't bet money on the idea that it was an A5... Several winders have documented the use by Gibson of short A2 bars and it would make sense to me in this case.