Toaster Pickup Pole-Piece Question

[mrsparkle]

I have a question about the pole-piece magnets on toaster-top pickups which I've never seen addressed anywhere. On my 1967 360, the rhythm pickup's pole-piece magnets do not extend beyond the pickup's bottom plate, while the bridge pickup's magnets extend out about 1/4". On every other Ric I own, all pickups, which include several versions of the vintage repro toaster-tops (scatterwounds, pre-scatterwounds, etc), are the same in all positions, with all having the extended pole-pieces.

Does anyone know the story on that?

[SixtyFour]

I have a question about the pole-piece magnets on toaster-top pickups which I've never seen addressed anywhere. On my 1967 360, the rhythm pickup's pole-piece magnets do not extend beyond the pickup's bottom plate, while the bridge pickup's magnets extend out about 1/4". On every other Ric I own, all pickups, which include several versions of the vintage repro toaster-tops (scatterwounds, pre-scatterwounds, etc), are the same in all positions, with all having the extended pole-pieces.

Does anyone know the story on that?

The pole piece configuration that you mentioned on your '67 360 is correct, later pre & post scatterwound toaster pickups do not
have the extended pole pieces.

[jingle_jangle]

Paul, I'm a bit confused by your reply. Which is correct--the short or long? Or one of each? And what do you mean by "later pre and post"?

Please clarify

[mrsparkle]

I, too, was a bit confused by Paul's statement. Anybody else out there who might have something to add regarding the pole-piece length differences on the toasters?

[rickinroma]

I have no other contribution, but both my 66 330/12 and 67 360/365 have their bridge pu with extended poles

[SixtyFour]

Paul, I'm a bit confused by your reply. Which is correct--the short or long? Or one of each? And what do you mean by "later pre and post"?

Please clarify

Hi Paul,

The models from the late 1950's thru the 1960's be it two or three pickup versions were configured
with the "extended" pole piece toaster in the bridge position, ..."one of each" is correct.

To answer your other question, "later pre & post" toasters; Early reissues cir '86 - '98 had approx. 12k [ohm] values,
when the "scatter-wound" version arrived cir 1999 they closely resembled the originals with approx. 7.4k resistance values.

I might add that I have never come across a "scatter-wound" toaster, [reissue] with "extended" pole pieces.

[jingle_jangle]

Thanks Paul! Now my muddled brain can get it...

My '83 320 (which came with hi-gains) has a set of '91 toasters (12K approx.) that you refer to.

They are incredible.

[wints]

There is no one rule for all here, but the short pole magnets usually occupy the middle pick up position on the 3p/u guitars from the 60's IIRC. Of course, as with anything from this period, you may find them in the other positions as well...

My '64 4001 Deluxe bass has a very shallow cavity and it took me over two years to find the correct toaster, that came from a '64 425 incidentally.

Most basses from around '69 until the end of '70 usually have a short pole or recessed magnets as well.

[jingle_jangle]

Wow. No matter how deeply we get into these gitars and basses, there's still always lots to learn!

[jps]

My '67 4005WB has short magnets at the neck and long magnets at the bridge. The output of the two seem comparable.

[soundmasterg]

On my BBR 350V63, I had a friend rewind an old high gain that I drilled out and put in 1/4" holes to around 12k, and I can take the magnets in and out at will because I didn't glue them in yet. Right now I have some shorty A5 magnets that I got from John Allgair (sp) but plan to try other types too, including longer ones. I've got this pickup in th ebridge and stock scatterwound 7.4k toasters in the neck and middle, though I've rewired the blend to be volume control for the middle pickup.

Greg

[mrsparkle]

What I'm most curious about is why Rickenbacker might have done this in the first place, and why would it not have been carried over to the vintage repro guitars. Was it, maybe, an attempt to balance the output levels of the two pickups relative to one another? Did Ric determine that it made no difference in sound, or did they possibly forget this little detail from the past when they designed our vintage repros?

[wints]

John,

The neck position cavity on both guitar and bass from this period are usually somewhat shallow, to aid neck strength and stability. I always thought this was a general factor in the short pole application, as there is not much difference in sound, certainly from my experience with the bass models, even though these are the same six pole magnets as used in the guitars.

Maybe John Simmons, or a couple of others who have owned many 60's guitars could "chime" in here...

[soundmasterg]

Another possible factor could be that they just weren't as exact on their parts specs back in the day. Gibson and Fender sure weren't....the only requirement was that it was a magnet sometimes. It could have been that they ordered magnets in such and such a size, but the supplier was short for those, so they sent shorter ones and RIC made them work. I'm sure with the shorter pole, those pickups have less power than one with a longer pole. I like my hot bridge pickup in my 350v63, but will be trying out longer magnets to see about the effects. I would think that the short pole pickups would work really well for a neck pickup on the 21 fret guitars myself.

Greg

[ted_williams]

I read somewhere an explanation similar to what Wints described. The pole pieces on the neck pickup were shorter so as not to interfere with the integrity of the neck. Since the neck doesn't extend to the bridge pickup, that pickup's cavity could be routed deeper.