Toaster pup observations...in 4001 neck position

cerrem · Post by **cerrem** » Wed May 10, 2006 9:33 am

I tried out two versions of the toaster pick-up..
One is a new made one called the "vintage toaster" scatterwound and measures in at 7.5K ohms.... The other is a toaster from the early 90's and measures in a 13.5K ohms....
I tried both out in the neck position...
As I suspected, the 13.5K provided the right thump and power I was looking for, also it matched equally in volume to the stock 1975 treble pup(7.25K)...So that is all well and dandy..
The only problem is that it is a bit murky on the highs, I hear a bit of phasey-ness in the highs from the excessive winding capacitance...
I still prefer the sound/tone of the new 7.5K scatterwound due to better clarity and it's a bit more musical sounding...The only problem is that it has a lower volume level than the treble pup.... Now I have to make a decision ....
Chris

bob_atherton · Post by **bob_atherton** » Wed May 10, 2006 9:46 am

Chris, how does it sound if you trim the volume a bit on the bridge PU with the scatterwound?

I tend to like a bit more output from the bridge anyway.

On my '72 I set it up with a bit of volume trim on the neck and a bit of tone trim on the bridge.

jnbass · Post by **jnbass** » Wed May 10, 2006 10:10 am

sabbath_of_bass · Post by **sabbath_of_bass** » Wed May 10, 2006 10:42 am

Yeah... I agree with Jared... Just get both. Its always the best answer

.

But I think bob is right... just roll back on the bridge some. Or play over the neck more?

jps · Post by **jps** » Wed May 10, 2006 2:15 pm

I would lower the bridge pickup to get the tone balance you want and then turn up the amp, this with the 7.5 K toaster in place. The greater winding on the 13.5 K toaster is the cause of the reduced treble response.

jmh · Post by **jmh** » Wed May 10, 2006 2:53 pm

Then which becomes the more desirable pickup in the neck position, the 13.5 K toaster or a high gain?
I assume rolling back the bridge high gain cuts some desirable treble bite and/or growl?

jps · Post by **jps** » Wed May 10, 2006 3:20 pm

For me it is the toaster.

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Wed May 10, 2006 4:09 pm

The hi-gain neck pup will sound very similiar and murky (indistinct) as the 13.5K toaster. Jps suggests lowering the bridge pup to attain volume balance - excellent suggestion that works. I use a toaster in the neck and unwound my hi-gain treble to 7.29K and have them balanced volume-wise. I also like the switch to add/remove the cap on the treble pup. Gives two types of tone, both valid.

jmh · Post by **jmh** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:43 pm

Do you lose much desirable bite or growl by lowering the bridge pickup to volume-match the weaker neck toaster?

cerrem · Post by **cerrem** » Wed May 10, 2006 9:09 pm

I tried to lower the bridge pup and lost the punch and agressive attack that I love soo much about this bass...Unless I can make a scatterwound at 10K ...that just might be the compromise that could work..
Chris

cerrem · Post by **cerrem** » Wed May 10, 2006 9:18 pm

Yes, I do loose the growl if I lower the bridge pup..
My bridge pup is original from 1975, it has the aluminum plate on the bottom and measures in at 7.25K...But it is very loud and punchy..more so than my (gulp) P-Bass....Through the old SVT set-up it can knock down a wall

Chris

cerrem · Post by **cerrem** » Wed May 10, 2006 10:27 pm

I have heard it mentioned here a few times but can't seem to grasp the concept about how the treble pup has the E-pole closer to one side on the bobbin than the other??? I looked at my pup and measured and it is symmetrical...So whats up with that??

Best Regards
Chris

johnallg · Post by **johnallg** » Thu May 11, 2006 4:07 pm

Chris - I believe I lost more of the distorted or murky type of growl unwinding than any from lowering. I get a clean growl (you'd think that was an oxymoron!)(cap in) as is, and with the cap out still get quite a bit of the hi-gain type growl.

I think what the offset E-pole situation really might be is the coil assy. not symetrical in the metal mount.