downfalls to p bass w/ added jazz pick up?

[stingray69]

Victor's bass has an active preamp, which neatly sidesteps a few of the typical PJ's bigger issues. It's a very different beast than a passive PJ with VVT controls.

I'm not seeing it - a preamp is not going change the pickup coil types, or the extra pot people demonize in a P/J setup. I'm sure his Fodera is not gonna turn into a Squire if the battery goes dead. Not trying to be snarky (well, maybe just a little, lol). But you know what I mean - I'm sure his Fodera would still sound incredible whether it sports an active preamp or passive VVT.

In fact, it seems to me the biggest beef a lot of people have on TB in regards to PJ instruments is simply that a P pickup and a J pickup dare to co-exist in the same instrument in the first place. J players don't like P's and P purists don't like the extra J - and both of those camps nitpick their reasonings to death on these boards. So the people who dig the P/J tone and benefits get caught in the middle. Ain't no preamp gonna sidestep that.

 

[eddododo]

is there a reason why one shouldn't own one of these basses? seems like you get the best of both worlds, having a p bass with a little bit more tonal options.

Here’s the whole answer-

*technically* with a j pickup and it’s respective pot in the circuit, the load is different than a standalone p pickup and pot. Now, to me, it still sounds like a P bass with the J pickup turned down, but if you have crazy golden ears, or if you need the purity then it is technically different.

When I want a P that can be a PJ, rather than just wanting a PJ, I will use a switching pot and take the J pickup out of the circuit when I want a pure P.. it’s pretty easy if you know how to solder etc in the first place.

 

[E2942]

If the hum cancelling pickup (let's say it's an inline hum canceller) has a few less turns, to where its inductance is lower than that of the single coil, yes, it would be more "responsive". You can also get a lot lower inductance by wiring it in parallel,

I'll have to concede that it's possible, but with the drawback of loss of output & back to not sounding as good as a single coil.
Does any manufacturer actually wire their inline humbuckers in parallel? I know DiMarzio allows the option with four conductors, but I think Nordstrand wire theirs in series by default. 33% output loss from series to parallel, that's not unnoticed.
As far as reducing the amount of windings, again with output loss. There's a limitation with the narrow J housing & aperture.

I've heard & played my fair share of parallel humbuckers & not even close to single coil character. However, we're talking about a switchable design, where the pickups weren't actually designed to be run parallel permanently.
Nordstrand could probably get close in their Big Split housing.

 

[E2942]

Ain't no preamp gonna sidestep that.

Have you not heard of buffering?

Ibanez used to wire their BTB with the volume & balance controls embedded in the preamp, it was a better design than their current passive balance.

 

[stingray69]

Have you not heard of buffering?

Ibanez used to wire their BTB with the volume & balance controls embedded in the preamp, it was a better design than their current passive balance.

I'm not talking about electronic buffering.

I said no preamp is going to overcome the biases of the P purist & J purist crowd.

 

[E2942]

I barely read past the misspelling of Squier, so I guess it's my fault.

 

[stingray69]

I barely read past the misspelling of Squier, so I guess it's my fault.

To each their own - if you want to barely read & barely comprehend a post before hastily posting a comment about it...we'll, that's one way to go about it.

 

[E2942]

Squire makes me think about Chris & then my eyes well up.

 

[sonojono]

I would favor a short scale PJ than a 34” scale but that’s just me..

 

[micguy]

I'm not seeing it - a preamp is not going change the pickup coil types, or the extra pot people demonize in a P/J setup. I'm sure his Fodera is not gonna turn into a Squire if the battery goes dead. Not trying to be snarky (well, maybe just a little, lol). But you know what I mean - I'm sure his Fodera would still sound incredible whether it sports an active preamp or passive VVT.

A passive bass with VVT controls is a circuit with a lot of interactions going on - everything depends on everything else. In an active bass, depending on how you do the preamp - separate inputs for each pickup so the loading on a pickup does NOT change at all, active tone controls, etc., you can, without too much trouble, completely get rid of ALL the interactions that compromise A VVT bass - including the extra pot issue, the volume controls that don't act as volume controls, the odd tapers of the pots, everything. Or you can take a VVT circuit and add a buffer to it, which fixes...nothing, really. I don't know what Fodera does, but I hope they don't do the second thing - that's a waste of circuitry..

 

[higain617]

Your tone may sound like the 90's a bit.

 

[micguy]

I'll have to concede that it's possible, but with the drawback of loss of output & back to not sounding as good as a single coil.
Does any manufacturer actually wire their inline humbuckers in parallel? I know DiMarzio allows the option with four conductors, but I think Nordstrand wire theirs in series by default. 33% output loss from series to parallel, that's not unnoticed.
As far as reducing the amount of windings, again with output loss. There's a limitation with the narrow J housing & aperture.

I've heard & played my fair share of parallel humbuckers & not even close to single coil character. However, we're talking about a switchable design, where the pickups weren't actually designed to be run parallel permanently.
Nordstrand could probably get close in their Big Split housing.

You're hung up on lower output level being "loss". It isn't. Professional dynamic microphones have much lower output than higher impedance "amateur" ones. But they also have a lower source impedance, and the benefits of that outweigh the "loss" of level, to the point where all the serious microphones are low impedance designs. Granted, that's not how Leo wired basses, but It's how I do. By reducing the source impedance, you get:

1) Lowered cable loading sensitivity. In fact, to counter the "thin" thing people talk about with parallel pickups, you capacitively load the pickups in the bass before the volume control. Want to run a 40 foot cable? with lower impedance, you can, without your bass sounding dull. Microphones often run hundreds of feet of cable, and they work fine - why? Lowered source impedance.

2) Tone tunability - by changing the capacitance in the on board load, you get the same response change as changing the number of winds on your pickup. Want the sound of a "hotter" or more vintage pickup? Change a capacitor - it'll cost you half a buck, and you'll know which way the resulting sound will go. A pickup swap is a hundred bucks, and it's usually a crapshoot as to which way things are going to go.

3) Volume controls that work as volume controls - with the loading cap on the same side of the volume control, the volume control is not longe in the middle of a filter. Lower the volume, the volume goes down. The tone stays the same.

4) Lowered sensitivity to hum and buzz - one of the reasons for low impedance microphones is they are a LOT less sensitive to external noise fields.

5) Lowered loading by DI's - a lot of DI's dull your sound. With a lower impedance source, that doesn't happen.

So, the drawbacks of a lower impedance instrument? You need a quiet boost pedal first on your pedalboard to overcome the noise of some pedals. That's it.

The "single coils sound better" thing is a myth. There is no real reason that you can't make an inline hum canceller that sound as good as a single coil. With parallel wiring, you can certainly make an inline hum canceller with more bandwidth, a higher resonant peak, and/or a brighter sound than a single coil - the hallmarks of what makes a single coil pickup sound good can be outdone by simple engineering, if you know what to do.The tough thing about doing a REAL test to prove this is that you need to do the test in a completely hum free environment. If you don't, the "single coils sound better" folks will hear some hum and....always pick that sound as "better". I'd bet if you did a good double blind test in a hum free environment, and added a bit of buzz to the hum canceller, the single coil folks would pick it as "better".

 

[overit]

It’s got it’s own sound, not a P or a J, and that’s why I love it. You might or might not.

 

[E2942]

the drawbacks of a lower impedance instrument? You need a quiet boost pedal

Seems to me that just using low Impedance (Inductance) single coil ACTIVE pickups would shoot right past the need for a boost pedal & extra tinkering.
If I remember right, EMG doesn't design them this way, however. I believe their pickups advertised as single coils really have a phantom hum canceling coil.

 

[GreyBeard]

The only downfall to the p-j configuration that I know of is that if and only if the j pup is a true single coil j pup, it will ALWAYS hum if it is engaged at all. Tone is a subjective thing and you either like it or you don't. There are so called hum cancelling single coil designs that look like a single coil but are really either split side by side or stacked humbuckers and don't sound exactly like a true single coil, close but not exactly. There are p-j models out there that use this hum canceling bridge pup, Sire comes to mind and I'm sure there are many others. If hum will be a problem for you then you might consider one with a hum canceling bridge pup.

 

[Doug Parent]

Back in 1972 a J pickup in that position was about all we had to work with. Lots of guys were switching necks back and forth like clock work so we were used to cannibalizing our basses. Honestly I can understand why Fender would capitalize on it but they did not come up with this idea! Contrary to popular belief this modifications came directly from the field first. My .02 is Pat Wilkins has the best PJ configuration going, with the J pickup right next to the P pickup. Solves that nasal bump problem sometimes.

 

[GretschWretch]

A board search will prove otherwise.
The real question is, why would anyone assume it'd be magical?
Would adding a humbucker to a P bass make it a magic bass?
What about a P bass with a humbucker and a J pickup?

I am going to have to respectfully disagree here. Sometimes it is magical. I've got a pawn shop parts PJ with a V-V- three position toggle in it, and the tone is just exquisite. I'm sure the dressing of the fingerboard has a lot to do with it as well as the EMG Select pickups. This is the only bass of mine I am keeping in spite of maximum acceptable weight limits. The tone is that enchanting.

 

[micguy]

Seems to me that just using low Impedance (Inductance) single coil ACTIVE pickups would shoot right past the need for a boost pedal & extra tinkering.
If I remember right, EMG doesn't design them this way, however. I believe their pickups advertised as single coils really have a phantom hum canceling coil.

Any basl with low impedance/inductance pickups needs a boost stage if its going to interact well with standard pedals and such - the lower inductance comes with lower output. So, you can put your boost in your bass or on a pedal, making a bass active doesn't get rid of that necessity

Active basses use circuitry on board to gain their advantages - there is as much, if not more "tinkering" in an active bass as in my system (a boost is a simpler device than most onboard active preamps). They certainly work, but there are tradeoffs in their designs - to lessen battery drain (make the battery last longer), they typically use low current op amps, which...are inherently noisier than one with draw a bit more current. I already have a pedal board, with power available there, and it doesn't matter if my boost stage uses a few milliamps of current.. Both an active bass and mine pass the signal to the next device with a low impedance connection. That's good for both. Mine works fine without a battery, and has lower noise to boot. I also like that the eq on my pedalboard is far more flexible than what is found onboard most basses.

EMG's "single coil" pickups do have a hum cancelling coil - they're stacks.

My beef with active basses isn't so much that they can't work, but that they usually aren't designed well - they're usually not designed by folks that understand low noise circuit design, they often have brittle sounding treble, and they don't put the eq centers in places that work for me. In addition, there really isn't a need to buffer a bass guitar signal - with a different choice of impedance level, you can get plenty of signal, plenty of dynamic range, less hum and buzz, and have a more solid frequency response that doesn't change with cable loading. One of the drawbacks of designing pro audio gear (which does all these things well) is that, when you look at guitars and basses, you see so much that could be improved with a few little changes. The stages we play on are full of devices that do all these things well, we just don't happen to have all those advantages in our instruments. Everybody else does (drummers, keys players, singers), but us string folks get the technical short straw.

 

[E2942]

Those old school Ibanez designs with active pickups & active balance & volume (no scoop) were a great thing, but then they went for the active/passive switch that's popular & threw all that away.

 

[jd56hawk]

I am going to have to respectfully disagree here. Sometimes it is magical. I've got a pawn shop parts PJ with a V-V- three position toggle in it, and the tone is just exquisite. I'm sure the dressing of the fingerboard has a lot to do with it as well as the EMG Select pickups. This is the only bass of mine I am keeping in spite of maximum acceptable weight limits. The tone is that enchanting.

Yes, magic can happen...once in a blue moon.