Why does a "PJ" configuration sound so refined and elegant?

[jumbodbassman]

my favorite pickup setup. 3 of my foderas have it, most of my non vintage p basses have had one added...

[NKBassman]

I recently tried and love a P/P pickup combo, but I'd take a PJ in a pinch.

[Joebone]

I love P/J. Preferably in a V/V/T configuration.

I particularly love Nordstrand pickups in this context - they make a J pickup that is humcancelling but sounds a whole lot like a single-coil.

[gunlak]

I've got one!

[Mykk]

How do you guys feel about a P/MM set up?

I am slowly talking myself into installing a Duncan SMB-4A in my P-bass copy already equipped with Duncan SPB-3's

I realize the MM pickup doesn't line up to StingRay specs due to pickup overlap, but I would imagine this combo would sound thick with a growl. Anyone have any experience with this set up?

[makkE]

"Elegant" describes it very well imho, when both pickups are involved.

I'm the proud owner of a new BB1024x, and I really like the tones it gives me.
Chunky P for the traditional tone, cutting J if it's supposed to be harder or nasty, and both just give a well rounded, sort of sophisticated sound.

[bassbo2112]

Originally Posted by icecycle66

I don't think there are enough PJ basses in the Fender line up.

They have 30 different versions of P basses.
50 different J basses.

and only a few way more expensive PJ basses.

+1!!

[gunlak]

Originally Posted by Mykk

How do you guys feel about a P/MM set up?

I am slowly talking myself into installing a Duncan SMB-4A in my P-bass copy already equipped with Duncan SPB-3's

I realize the MM pickup doesn't line up to StingRay specs due to pickup overlap, but I would imagine this combo would sound thick with a growl. Anyone have any experience with this set up?

I was thinking of that config for a while, though I'd like mine to be passive.

I have SPB-3's on the neck too, will that over power an MM in Parallel? (passive)

[Mykk]

Originally Posted by gunlak

I was thinking of that config for a while, though I'd like mine to be passive.

I have SPB-3's on the neck too, will that over power an MM in Parallel? (passive)

I was thinking of keeping mine passive too (with series/parallel switches). I don't know if one set of pickups would be dominant over the other.

[Ancient Tone]

I've got a Modern Player Jag bass with the P/J combo and love, very versatile. I usually play with the P full on and the J around 7 with the tone rolled off just a little bit. Has a nice full low end with some bite and the J help's it cut through the mix. I'm thinking of trying to pickup a California Special with the P/J combo as a backup bass, I love p basses but just felt they were missing something when trying to find new tones in the studio.

[Rutherford_Fan]

Hey, everyone!

Thanks for all of the enthusiastic replies. I thought people might have thought I was a bit 'nuts-o' in my extreme love expressed for this configuration, but clearly others have had similar (although perhaps less 'dramatic') thoughts about it.

I really like the pictures some of you have posted, and while there is no PJ bass club, I would love to see people post some more pics of great PJ basses.

And I think one person eluded to something quite deep:

If FODERA's number one model (the Yin-Yang STD) is a PJ arrangement, there MUST be something pretty great about it!

Now, I have never played a Fodera, but from what I absorb by reading about them here, they are truly a 'cut above the rest' and actually merit their prices. It seems like they do A LOT of research before making a bass so if the PJ is on a lot of thier basses, someone in New York City must think 'like me' haha.


Someone ELSE mentioned the P-MM setup which I think deserves a bit of talking about. I have actually never played a P-MM before, but 'in theory', they should sound amazingly good. In fact, I now want to buy a Squier Classic Vibe '60s P bass and put either a MM or a Humbucking Soapbar down by the bridge and run it through a preamp. Hm...

I would imagine it would be a little less "direct" than a PJ setup due to the lack of the single-coil 'bite'. BUT, if one wired the MM pickup in parallel, things could sound interesting I would think. I would probably picture the P-MM to have an incredible articulation- from low E (or B) to the 24th fret of G would probably sound very balanced. If I had my choice, I would put the MM pickup REALLY darned close to the bridge to really take advantage of the "humbucker stability" as far as I can stretch it.

Although, I could be like Billy Sheehan and put the Humbucker at the neck. I don't think Billy's tone is useful in ALL situations, but it certainly has a charm to it that would be useful for particular tunes and genres! I believe his Humbucker is a Gibson or built on that concept, but a MM could easily be imagined there as well.

This brings up another great config: The P-TJ or P + Twin Jazz setup. My father owns a 1980s Hondo "Eddie Van Halen F[l]ame" bass with this configuration and it has an awesome tone to it. In fact, my Dad (after hearing how good my MIM Fender Jazz sounds with EMG's in it) is considering swapping out the crapper p-ups in it for something good. He probably will leave it passive however, which has it's advantages to be sure.


Well, keep up the PJ love and throw out any other crazy design ideas you can think of!

[Bongolation]

Originally Posted by Rutherford_Fan

I know this sounds a but silly and over-dramatic.
[...]
1. Why I am so obsessed with it....

This is not a question I can answer.

I don't share your enthusiasm. I mean, it's OK, but nothing that's going to really stand out in a live band context and probably not in a final mix of real recording of real music. Nothing else matters.

[Mushroo]

PJ is my second-favorite pickup configuration (after P ).

[dmusic148]

I think PJ's are cool when they're active. Not so cool passive IMO/IME. For passive gimme a straight P or J.

[pbassnut]

Originally Posted by dmusic148

I think PJ's are cool when they're active. Not so cool passive IMO/IME. For passive gimme a straight P or J.

+1

I've found the same thing to be true ... especially when considering old school passive Fender P and J type pickups. I don't dislike the PJ sound, but find that the P alone sounds better to my ear as does a stock JJ setup. On the other hand, I once had a top-o-the-line pre-Kramer Spector NS-2 with an EMG PJ setup (reversed P pickup) and an active preamp that sounded wonderful.

[Thundar]

Originally Posted by Bongolation

This is not a question I can answer.

I don't share your enthusiasm. I mean, it's OK, but nothing that's going to really stand out in a live band context and probably not in a final mix of real recording of real music. Nothing else matters.

I couldn't disagree more....sorry but I CAN tell the difference in tone...recorded or live...a full-on set of P/J's absolutely has a specific sound, however if your not a fan and not "invested" in that tone, I wouldn't expect you to be able to tell the difference. So it DOES matter

[kai_ski]

I play in a pop/soul/blues/rock outfit with a heavy handed pianist. If it wasn't for my Lull PJ to give me a cut-through and "modern" sound at the same time, I might as well sit out every night. When I really want to be heard I play my Fender AVRI 57 Precision, which clears the few front rows with every note. The Lull PJ5 has been my go-to since I first played it in 2010, I even had a MV5 during that time, it lasted about 6 months.

IMO, compared to a PJ, a Jazz bass (even active) just sounds weak.

[electracoyote]

Precision standard split pickup configuration--love it.

Jazz standard two-rail configuration--love it.

PJ? No sir, I don't like it. Here's why:

I completely fail to see how this is the best of both worlds, when I depend on two Jazz rails to get my Jazzers to sound good. I'm either slightly rolling off the neck or the bridge to dial in a good Jazz tone, but I need both rails, and that capacity is completely lost with a PJ configuration.

In addition, I am far too enamored with the classic split P tone all by itself to dilute it with any other kind of pickup blend.

If we can term the PJ configuration yet a third option, and some people like that option, that's great. But it's not the best of both worlds, it is in reality neither of both worlds, it is a seperate entity all unto itself (unless you solo the split P, but what's the point of that? and I think it's in a different spot as well).

But if the PJ is your tone, I am sincerely happy for you.

[electracoyote]

Originally Posted by dmusic148

I think PJ's are cool when they're active. Not so cool passive IMO/IME. For passive gimme a straight P or J.

+1

I own the MIM Special Deluxe active, and it kicks ass.

But it's active, and that makes it even more remote from a standard P or J than is a PJ.

[SGD Lutherie]

Originally Posted by electracoyote

Precision standard split pickup configuration--love it.

Jazz standard two-rail configuration--love it.

PJ? No sir, I don't like it. Here's why:...

No, the P is in the same spot. it's just an added J.

This configuration got started when most players used P basses. Some wanted a little extra brightness. So they added the J. So you can solo the P and it sounds like a P. You can solo the J and it sounds like a J. Together you get a lot of P with some top end added. It's not the J with both pickup on tone, it's something else. I like it better than a Jazz bass. That sound is getting annoying.

You can hear this on the classic Jeff Beck album Wired. Wilbur Bascomb added a Bartolini Hi-A J pickup to his P bass.