What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
- Thread starter jpage
- Start date
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
Shrill as in high end? The warmer mags are A4 (flat EQ), A2 (rounded high end with lots of mids), A8 (a good dose of mids with some treble), and UOA5 (A2 type dynamics and response; more treble than an A2, but less than an A8).
My first try would be with an UOA5 or A8.
Shrill as in high end? The warmer mags are A4 (flat EQ), A2 (rounded high end with lots of mids), A8 (a good dose of mids with some treble), and UOA5 (A2 type dynamics and response; more treble than an A2, but less than an A8).
My first try would be with an UOA5 or A8.
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
If the A8's too bright, which can happen, then an UOA5 or a 470K resisitor on the bridge volume pot will take care of it.
If the A8's too bright, which can happen, then an UOA5 or a 470K resisitor on the bridge volume pot will take care of it.
51501984
New member
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
Have you tried tweaking the settings on your amp , maybe adusting the pickup height or adjustable pole pieces? I know I`m not there hearing or playing thru your rig but I`ve never heard the Bro as being shrill. I actually thought it was pretty dark in my mahogany hardtail Charvel clone
Have you tried tweaking the settings on your amp , maybe adusting the pickup height or adjustable pole pieces? I know I`m not there hearing or playing thru your rig but I`ve never heard the Bro as being shrill. I actually thought it was pretty dark in my mahogany hardtail Charvel clone
jpage
New member
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
Yes I have worked with the settings on my amp (?). Every guitar is different, and nothing sounds like a historic Les Paul. Not even another historic Les Paul LOL, but definitely not a Charvel.
Yes I have worked with the settings on my amp (?). Every guitar is different, and nothing sounds like a historic Les Paul. Not even another historic Les Paul LOL, but definitely not a Charvel.
King IzzO)))
Ultimate Kitten Puncher
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
Bright? LOL
Bright? LOL
Boogie Bill
New member
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
If you have a Historic LP, try a 300K or 250K pot.
Bill
If you have a Historic LP, try a 300K or 250K pot.
Bill
jpage
New member
jpage
New member
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
Nah, worst case I go back to the C5, which matches up great with my rig.
Nah, worst case I go back to the C5, which matches up great with my rig.
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
You can use either a 1/4 watt 470K resistor or two 250K pots (volume and tone) on a bridge PU to reduce treble, which in turn makes the mids more prominent. Both give a richer, fuller tone. I've been putting 250K's on almost all of my bridge PU's for years, but recently switched to using resistors. Cheaper and easier. All you have to do is solder a resistor to the outside lugs of the bridge volume pot. That's it. Warmer bridge.
Some guys recommend using the guitar's tone knob, but it sounds different than using 250K pots or 470K resistors. It filters treble in a different way. To me, it does not sound as good. Since I don't want to be adjusting my tone pot everytime I plug in, I like to get the PU's relative EQ's squared away up front; do it once and you're all set. That way you can dial in one amp setting that works great for both PU's. What I've seen so many times is players dialing in their amp to one PU, and never use the other one the rest of the night because it's so far off. Dial in your amp to the bridge, and the neck will be dark and muffled; dial your amp in to the neck, and the bridge sounds shrill and thin. Drives me crazy. I want to use both PU's, and to be able to dial in my bridge tone at the amp, and know that when I flip the toggle, the neck will also sound nice. Simplicity.
Not everyone agrees with this way of doing it. Some swear by adjusting the tone controls, sometimes all night long. But this is the only way that works for me. On stage, there's enough going on getting set up and when you start playing. I want my tone changes to be predictable, either flipping a switch or stepping on a pedal. I don't want to be adjusting knobs mid-song. There's also the argument that 'You can't add treble once you take it away'; but I've never had the treble and presence controls dialed up to '10' on any amp, so there's always more treble available at the amp.
I play my best when I have a good warm tone with some high-end bite. I'm doing something right, because I always get compliments on my tones when I play on stage.
You can use either a 1/4 watt 470K resistor or two 250K pots (volume and tone) on a bridge PU to reduce treble, which in turn makes the mids more prominent. Both give a richer, fuller tone. I've been putting 250K's on almost all of my bridge PU's for years, but recently switched to using resistors. Cheaper and easier. All you have to do is solder a resistor to the outside lugs of the bridge volume pot. That's it. Warmer bridge.
Some guys recommend using the guitar's tone knob, but it sounds different than using 250K pots or 470K resistors. It filters treble in a different way. To me, it does not sound as good. Since I don't want to be adjusting my tone pot everytime I plug in, I like to get the PU's relative EQ's squared away up front; do it once and you're all set. That way you can dial in one amp setting that works great for both PU's. What I've seen so many times is players dialing in their amp to one PU, and never use the other one the rest of the night because it's so far off. Dial in your amp to the bridge, and the neck will be dark and muffled; dial your amp in to the neck, and the bridge sounds shrill and thin. Drives me crazy. I want to use both PU's, and to be able to dial in my bridge tone at the amp, and know that when I flip the toggle, the neck will also sound nice. Simplicity.
Not everyone agrees with this way of doing it. Some swear by adjusting the tone controls, sometimes all night long. But this is the only way that works for me. On stage, there's enough going on getting set up and when you start playing. I want my tone changes to be predictable, either flipping a switch or stepping on a pedal. I don't want to be adjusting knobs mid-song. There's also the argument that 'You can't add treble once you take it away'; but I've never had the treble and presence controls dialed up to '10' on any amp, so there's always more treble available at the amp.
I play my best when I have a good warm tone with some high-end bite. I'm doing something right, because I always get compliments on my tones when I play on stage.
Last edited:
King IzzO)))
Ultimate Kitten Puncher
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
Impatient little bugger, aren't ye?
For the record, I wasn't meaning to belittle your predicament, I just find it hard to believe that a bro is too bright and that a C5 sounds just right. I'm sure it's a dumb question, and I don't want to upset you further, but have you made sure it's wired right? Got a 1M pot or something?? That's just weird.
Anyway, here's a pretty good rundown that of mag swaps in the bro: https://forum.seymourduncan.com/showthread.php?t=225762
Conversely, I thought the stock bro was pretty tame, and I needed more aggression, thus my swap to a big ceramic. If you find the stock version to be bright you aren't going to like the Bro OC, it is punchier, and has a **** ton of low end, but it has a sizzly presence, nothing someone who can handle a PG would mind, but I don't think it would work for you. A8 is probably your best bet. I was adverse to using an A8 because I didn't want the monster midrange out of this pickup, but it might be your best shot. If that doesn't work, a UOA5 just might.
Hope that helps.
Impatient little bugger, aren't ye?
For the record, I wasn't meaning to belittle your predicament, I just find it hard to believe that a bro is too bright and that a C5 sounds just right. I'm sure it's a dumb question, and I don't want to upset you further, but have you made sure it's wired right? Got a 1M pot or something?? That's just weird.
Anyway, here's a pretty good rundown that of mag swaps in the bro: https://forum.seymourduncan.com/showthread.php?t=225762
Conversely, I thought the stock bro was pretty tame, and I needed more aggression, thus my swap to a big ceramic. If you find the stock version to be bright you aren't going to like the Bro OC, it is punchier, and has a **** ton of low end, but it has a sizzly presence, nothing someone who can handle a PG would mind, but I don't think it would work for you. A8 is probably your best bet. I was adverse to using an A8 because I didn't want the monster midrange out of this pickup, but it might be your best shot. If that doesn't work, a UOA5 just might.
Hope that helps.
Quencho092
New member
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
blueman's got the right idea, and I never knew about just soldering on a resistor across the outside lugs to darken up a pup! Very good advice. t
blueman's got the right idea, and I never knew about just soldering on a resistor across the outside lugs to darken up a pup! Very good advice. t
jpage
New member
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
Yeah, it's wired right and I'm not upset. It's so hard to generalize with pickups--different guitars illicit different reactions. Even between the same model and year instrument but DEFINITELY between different instruments and through different amps. In my Historic R8 Les Pauls, out of my modified DSLs set how I like them, bridge pickups tend to be 'airier' and neck pickups tend to be 'thicker'. I used to use Antiquities when I was playing through JMPs and they were perfect. When I switched to master volume amps everything changed. Same guitar, roughly same tone, but different amp--completely different story--neck seemed muddy--bridge got thin and anemic IMO. The C5 sounds great in the bridge now--probably would have been overpowering in the low end without any cut if I tried it with the JMPs. Still looking for a good match in the neck.
Yeah, it's wired right and I'm not upset. It's so hard to generalize with pickups--different guitars illicit different reactions. Even between the same model and year instrument but DEFINITELY between different instruments and through different amps. In my Historic R8 Les Pauls, out of my modified DSLs set how I like them, bridge pickups tend to be 'airier' and neck pickups tend to be 'thicker'. I used to use Antiquities when I was playing through JMPs and they were perfect. When I switched to master volume amps everything changed. Same guitar, roughly same tone, but different amp--completely different story--neck seemed muddy--bridge got thin and anemic IMO. The C5 sounds great in the bridge now--probably would have been overpowering in the low end without any cut if I tried it with the JMPs. Still looking for a good match in the neck.
gripweed
Jolvisologist
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
+1. Before you try a magnet swap, try this. I agree with that the Brobucker is not shrill. I'd try any and all of these things before I'd do any sort of magnet swaps.
+1. Before you try a magnet swap, try this. I agree with that the Brobucker is not shrill. I'd try any and all of these things before I'd do any sort of magnet swaps.
ErikH
Well-known member
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
I've used the Brobucker with just 250k volume pot, no tone, and it was plenty thick. Really nice sound. Naturally some of the power was taken away but it was still really nice. Probably one of the best humbuckers I've heard with 250k. I bet with 300k it would be sweet too.
I've used the Brobucker with just 250k volume pot, no tone, and it was plenty thick. Really nice sound. Naturally some of the power was taken away but it was still really nice. Probably one of the best humbuckers I've heard with 250k. I bet with 300k it would be sweet too.
King IzzO)))
Ultimate Kitten Puncher
Re: What mag fattens up the Brobucker best?
Might work parallel, but I'm pretty certain that would be a tubby mess in series.
One last suggestion for OP, make sure you've messed with heights of both the pickup and the pole screws. Contrary to what someone said being a contrarian to me in another thread today... raising the pickup and lowering the pole screws will be fatter, lowering and raising the poles will be brighter. This is only to an extent, go too high and you'll know it, too low will be thin and weak sounding.
Might work parallel, but I'm pretty certain that would be a tubby mess in series.
One last suggestion for OP, make sure you've messed with heights of both the pickup and the pole screws. Contrary to what someone said being a contrarian to me in another thread today... raising the pickup and lowering the pole screws will be fatter, lowering and raising the poles will be brighter. This is only to an extent, go too high and you'll know it, too low will be thin and weak sounding.