Dr. DIMENTO'S ONGOING "HB" STYLE PUP EXPERIMENT

[74rickbass]

Yes, I understand what you are saying. but I actually use just the EB-O pup on its own quite often, dont have any problems. Then again, I dont bend strings too often.

Oh, and I have tried the EB-O pup in the P-bass position, and I loved the sound. It was really fat, but with some punch. Unlike when its at the neck. Its really fat, but lacks punch.

I've put a capo at the 2nd fret, and tuned down a full step (to simulate short scale) Used flatwounds. Used just the EB-O pickup. Put foam at the bridge and cut the highs... what a tone!!!

 

[A9X]

There are some basses that these pickuos fit, not right up near the neck due to better string spacing. For example, I've run Dimarzio Model One (which is an EBO 'upgrade') in the neck position of my Hohner B2 Steinberger clone and the spacing is perfect, and the similar Dimarzio G pup which has wider spacing at the bridge. I only tried them both as HB as I didn't bother to wire in the switches for SC/Series HB/parallel HB due to no room.
Both gave a much bigger tone, were punchier and had better definition than the stock EMG selects. All around I like them better, and I think both cost about $40+shipping off the bay. The G makes the bass look a bit odd as it's creme, in an otherwise all balck bass.
I've also got an X2N (guitar version) for $10, so next time I restring, I'll try it. Sounded OK held above the string in the bridge position.

I've also tried both in my cheezy plywood shortscale samick, but they sounded muddy. Didn't rout for the bridge to try there.

74rickbass, I like the 3 pups on your P. Must give a huge range of tone.

 

[luknfur]

FWIW:

There aren't many pups made with small diameter 4 poles and bending is usually only an issue with the perimeter E & G strings when bent out of the magnetic field. Tone is variable and a personal preference issue at that but design of the poles is something I didn't think about till after the fact and presented limitations for me. I'm guessing any pups with 4 smaller diameter poles (ie. Rics) may present a similar condition.

The initial mention was basically a post to any reader that when mixing pups with exposed poles (especially 4 small poles), whether all poles on all pups will line up with the strings adequately as planned is something to be considered.

Regardless feedback on pups is alwasy welcomed and may be just what someone needs to read to set their plans in motion or complete a project. It's all good so to speak.

 

[luknfur]

SCHALLER DOUBLE J

1 3/8" X 3 9/16" with standard J screw mounts both sides

passive allen wrench adjustable bi-pole, 8 lead, quad - this pup has practically all the bells & whistles you could stick in a bass pup (looks like a pair of DM Model J's fused together)

wired parallel front coils and parallel rear coils

Loaded into an acoustically bright bass with the back J in standard position, bridge only no neck pup. Average output, maybe a little better. No hum/noise. Sensitivty to attack above average. Better than average sustain. Some finger/pic transfer but nothing of consequence. The pickup will produce an unpleasant "tick" if you strike the pup poles during solo or soft tunes. Pups worked well to both finger and flatpick.

Fun pup to play. Depending on setting and tune it was good vintage Fender J, or Ray bottomed, or decent vintage P. Pronounced characteristics were serious punch and bulge on E & A strings, strong low mids, pleasant but noticeably thinner mids and top. The punch could be a handful at times keeping volume under control as the E & A output was distinctly more apparent than D & G - but some tweaking should resolve that. It could also be moderated through tone adjustment but much tastier tone quality by controlling attack. I would have liked more bite in upper mids and top and a little more extension of frequency on the top but mids and top cut well so what's there comes through and is adequate, although I frequently found myself digging in more on D & G strings - but it worked well. Generally soft, rounded tones. Some rawness, growl, fuzz, and crunch.

Pup is sensitive to small variations in tone adjustment - a little tweaking went from no go to there. Also sensitive to variations in attack. More on the responsive than sensitive side to variations in hand position. Tone could be darkened/dirtied easily, cleared up to a lessor degree, and mids through top more thinned than brightened. Volume, tone, sensitivity, clarity, and cut as mentioned previously.

Pup worked better than average to all tunes with the exception of a couple, three tunes I couldn't get the tone before I was on to the next one (most tunes are abbreviated versions in order to fit them all in within a couple hours). Pup could and did function well without a neck pup and put out some pleasant tones that could work solo - though not what one would typically classify as a solo type sound.

FLUFF:

This pup was dropped in as I recieved it. I'm guessing adjusting the poles may even out the imbalance characteristics mentioned previously. The only time I've messed with adjustable poles, which are fairly rare except dimarzios, is with the DM DP 122 Model P and G&L L 2000's and I found doing so made no difference I could tell.

Not your ordinary pup from the gitgo. By far the most interesting pup purchase I can recall, most of which is amusing and was fun for me but of little value to anybody else. Suffice it to say there are others among us who took part and share this unusual pup so it will be interesting to hear feedback from them. Like LP's, To my knowledge, it's discontinued - and doesn't surface very often.

This is the first play of these pups and I'm looking forward to more and jacking with the myriad of wiring options at some point. Seems I recall there's a balance to be had between poles that's of significance and it's even possible I had these out of sync cause I didn't mess with looking into it. I wouldn't be suprised if the first guy that threw pups out of phase didn't say man that's screwed up but BB King said I do believe I'm sit'n on a goldmine. What I heard was good enough and better than most.

UPDATE:

As if this experience hasn't been bizarre enough, this guy just emailed me and says he has a few HUNDRED of these pups!!!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=41426&item=7320617860&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW

 

[luknfur]

DEARMOND STARFIRE (Mid-position)

2 wire w/ground dual coil
Alnico 5 magnets, polysol wire, and nickel silver pickup cover
2 pairs of single poles* (large slotted adjustable row and small unslotted row)
Narrow EBO pole spacing
(13/16" x 1 13/16" x 2 7/8")

Single HB loaded into an acoustically bright bass mid position for this run. Output about average. No hum/quiet. No finger/pic transfer of consequence. Sensitivity to attack roughly average - more or less depending on setting. Deceptively better than average response to hand position and little better than average to technique - more a case where a few variations were very useable and different than there were a lot of them. Sustain average to better than average.

Finger picked was a nice mix - warm and cozy and tame to some rawness and primitive old school tone (Beatles Love Me Do-like). Punch, growl, noticeable burp, purcussive, and woody quality depending on setting, hand position and technique. Nice range of very useful response to technique/hand position. Could get a nice dirty EBO-like surround sound bottom and a defined mid that cut through anything. Could go cleaner and thinner, with a Fender-like J tone. Never could get the mids right for a good consistent P tone but was marginally passable. Overall, not variations in sound so much as tweakable tone that was flexible in application.

Mids were often melodic in character, especially on D & G strings and from the 5th fret up. Mids were ample, cut well, and were often relatively clear. Bass was often thumpy but was hollow/lacking at times (probably due to the narrow pole spacing placing the perimeter strings at the outside edge of their related poles - and with this pup I believe that made a difference. I will verify that when I run them split P fashion). Flexible top end that was pleasant, very useable, and not harsh or annoying.

The flatpicked tunes in the mix are few and scattered so not much opportunity for tweaking or adequate assessment but tone to them was consistently too dark overall. I sat down afterwards and messed with some flatpick riffs and a flatpick REALLY brought out the sound of the TI flats, woodiness, and percussive quality. Some extremely melodic mids. So I'd venture to say there are some cool solo tones that await. Hand position made a major difference in tone and I could get appealing variations in tone almost from neck to bridge. After-the-fact discovery but I'm guessing that I wasn't playing back far enough to the bridge to brighten the tone for tunes played - not in the habit of playing that far back fingerpicking.

Tone was VERY sensitive to mixes of bass and treble. Mids were practically always full cut. In spite of the fact there was a lot of range for useable tone control, sensivity to controls, and sensitivity to hand position/technique, I'm guessing no excessive tweaking would be required with familiarity. Although settings were spaced on the dial, the operating ranges for tone were quite narrow and few, so actually quite predictable. Too much bass or too much treble readily made tone boxie. Most often adjustment was to remove the boxieness and get the clarity I wanted. Bass could be effectively thinned and treble effectively cut (like for Reggae - interesting Reggae tone) but there were no tones to tunes where string pairs were faded to any use. Tone could be effectively darkened but brightening tone tended to get boxie.

Pup played passably to about 90% and better than average to roughly 25% of those. Those lacking were flatpick or too boxie. More experience would likely up it some. Volume, tone, sensitivity, clarity, and cut balanced across the board for tones to tunes within the pup itself except the bass previously mentioned.

 

[andertone]

Hi:

Still hoping you run into the EMG-HB pickups
that were standard on a Steinberger. I have them
in my 69 guild starfire II.

Speaking of which, with all the excitement with
Fred Hammons "Dark Star" pickups, which are improvements
over the original single coil Haggie pickups used during
that era, I have a set of original 1969 Guild Haggie
pickups that might be of interest, since the DeArmond
humbuckers replaced them and were considered to be
much different (for the worse) sounding.

Of course, these are sacred. What is your proceedure
for shipping/receiving these pickups, as I have a project
that involves them.

Best!

Phil Anderson
Tucson, AZ

 

[luknfur]

Hi:

Still hoping you run into the EMG-HB pickups
that were standard on a Steinberger...

Sent an email on the other stuff.

I like EMGs but the price tags on their used soaps are relatively inflated so haven't extended myself to pick any up. Pups runs have become a hobbie of sufficient volume that I focus on a break even rate and that keeps it fun and free - less time and frustration. There's been too many other more reasonable opporunities. I would pick some up if I ran across them at a decent price or went through a dry spell where there weren't better options and was going through withdrawal/DT's.

And too often I screw up and pass or miss an opportunity that doesn't present itself often.

Also there's a thing about EMG's that they can be had by anybody anytime. So it's not like the opportunities not always there or they're not easily replaced. In my experience, EMG's are probably the most consistent pup I've heard. An EMG L-J5 is an EMG L-J5 no matter which one it is or when it was made. You can't say that about Fender J's (and probably others I have less experience with) - although definitely the same model pup, they will be noticeably different.

I picked up a set of toastie hard to come by Jim Cairnes pickups that a guy replaced with EMG's. I like guys like that.

 

[luknfur]

RICKENBACKER SIDE BY SIDE SOLO COMPARISON

ORIGINAL 70'S RIC 4001's / DUNCAN SRB-1B/SRB-1N / BARTOLINI 6RS/6RC


SETUP NOTE:

Without going into boring detail, what is critical in a comparison is like conditions. The only thing (uncontrolled variable) here that is not the same is the bass (which obviously is not possible to eliminate live). The basses used are all acoustically midrange to the point that in playing them for 2 years, tonewise I haven't been able to single out any characteristic one has the other doesn't. This experiment is solo tone comparisons both played and recorded, to the same series of settings using a passive V/V/Tw/.0473 cap harness, both fingerpicked and flatpicked, to the same riff.

CONCLUSION:

All 3 pup sets had the unique Ric tone/qualities. In essence, the similarities were such that they could be the same pups using different tone settings or that the differences could be compensated for with technique or, at extremes, minimal alterations like cap size. I would speculate that variations in tone and qualities between these pups were no greater (and perhaps less so) than would result from comparing two Rics of like model or taking an original Ric and altering variables other than pups (strings, rigging, whatever)


CONDENSED VERSION OF RESULTS:

I've condensed the following to cut the length, make it more readable, and provide some detail to explain the conclusion. Regardless, it reads more like a bassists version of "Who's On First" than a review. These are merely excerpts pulled out of context. The intent is that you come away with some understanding of how alike they are under different conditIons in spite of how different they appear under like conditions. Since the original Rics are the benchmark, most of the expressed comparsion was the SD's and Barts compared to the originals.

For Ric Diehards and true Masochists, I'll include a follow-up with the full length version and complete setup details if there appears to be any interest in it.


MAXED TONE CONTROL/BRIDGE PUP ONLY MAXED VOLUME

Fingerpicked the Ric had much more air, was thinner, softer with less clarity, and had the least output. Most apparent was initial attack and a focused tone within the midst of poorly defined frequencies. Also mild 60 cycle hum when not touching the strings.

Fingerpicked the SD was noticeably soft and similar to the original but darker and distinctly more full in tone with blatant but less air than the original. More frequency spread as bass, mid, and treble frequencies were more apparent.

Fingerpicked the Bart was distinctly darker than both the original and SD, bassier, more rounded, relatively muffled in tone, with little air. Also lacked clarity relative to the SD but more clear than the original. Distinctly Ric-like but less like the original than the SD

FULL CUT TONE CONTROL/BRIDGE PUP ONLY MAXED VOLUME

Fingerpicked the Ric air turned to a muffled P tone and made tone seem the darkest of the 3. Output was least of the 3. Recorded tone was much more appealing and very Fender P tone in nature but darker with a nice warm, rounded, vintage mid timbre to it.

Fingerpicked the SD was P toned but markedly brighter than the original, still noticeably airy, with quasi-round tone and fairly clear.

Fingerpicked the Bart output was midway between the originals and SD. The Bart was clearer fingerpicked than the original was flatpicked. Recorded tone was quite similar to the original P tone but with a bit of air and not as warm as the original.

MAXED TONE CONTROL/NECK PUP ONLY MAXED VOLUME

Fingerpicked the Ric was soft, airy to the point of boxie, moderately dark, thuddy with the least resonance in tone of the 3. Recorded tone was distinctly P in nature, retained the softness, was more clear with less air, warm with a nice swell to tone in the bottom end, and noticeable click to attack on the top end. .

Fingerpicked the SD was most similar to the original with a soft character, noticeable thud, but more clear definition in tone, and treble frequencies more pronounced. Recorded tone was clearer compared to the original, noticeably more full in tone, little less warmth, and bassiest of the 3.

Fingerpicked the Bart had noticeably more output, was not as dark as the original and SD, and relatively alive sounding without the thuddiness. Soft character with more clarity than the original but less than the SD. Trebles brighter than the original but less so than the SD.

FULL CUT TONE CONTROL/NECK PUP ONLY MAXED VOLUME

Fingerpicked the Ric put out a suprisingly colorful tone: dark with very little top half, noticeably dirty, almost thuddy, warm P tone. Flatpicked tone was clearer with a defined top half and produced a hardness that was not complimentary to bottom end.

Fingerpicked the SD was similar to the original but not as dark, clearer, and no warmth of significance. Recorded tone was more like the unrecorded original flatpicked: clearer with more tone definition, still soft with rounded tones and a little dirt but not much warmth,

Fingerpicked the Bart was most like the original but clearer, with a distinct top end to tone that was noticeably muffled, and not as warm. Recorded tone was most like the original and best of the 3. Still soft and rounded, fairly warm, with good definition of tones yet retained some dirt.

 

[luknfur]

RIC SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISON SOLO TONE II

This one's more of along the lines of probably what most expected from the first one, more cut and dry, and much more readable. Ideally, I had intended from the outset to use 3 different experiments hoping to draw conclusions that were accurate and with some consistency. The next (and last) comparison I plan to be to music.

METHOD:

This experiment was simply using one setting (Maxed Tone Control/Bridge Only Volume Maxed) from the previous experiment as a starting point and trying to adjust the SD and Bart to sound like the Ric. Having done the previous experiment, I had some idea of where to look for like tones and chose this setting since the SD was already close (and even that produced an oversight). I played the same riff as before swapping basses back and forth for some 30 minutes or so total, then recorded them, then played along to the Ric recorded version using the other basses to fine tune (a handy method to use when trying to cop a tone). I then ran the frequency spread on each bass at those settings.

RESULTS:

I was not able to get all three exact but close enough that in the recorded versions, I literally had to play through the recording in sequence in order to know for sure which bass was which (since I knew the order they were recorded in). The hardest part was getting the air and top end like the original.

For the SD that amounted to adding a little neck volume to muddy tone up a bit and cutting tone and some neck volume as the Ric was brighter and clearer from the outset (since I had to cut Ric tone to adjust for the Bart). Still, it was noticeably clearer with a little more click on the top than the original.

The Bart was more difficult since from the outset it was clearer and darker with top end lacking. No real place to go since bridge and tone were already maxed, so some tone was cut on the Ric (which meant going back and readjusting the SD). Adding neck volume to cloud tone some and using a medium flatpick with light palm mute and playing back toward the bridge a bit to brighten tone brought it very close, but again was noticeably clearer, with a little more click on the top compared to the original.

Frequency Spreads (Maximum value 10 and TB format won't allow for columns to remain in line but they're in sequence and simply need to be shifted over under the appropriate frequency for those interested)

Hertz 50 1.2C 4C 5C 8C 4.5KHz 10KHz

Ric 2 7.5 3.5 2 3 0 0

SD 1 8 4 2 3.5 0 0

Bart 1.5 8 2 1.5 2.5 0 0


CONCLUSION:

One again, splitting hairs and I'd be suprised to find few if any players that know's Rics that would not instantly identify all 3 pups as Rics. They all had that Ric hi-gain sounding bass swell, burp-like mids, distinct top with click to attack, and air. But if someone knew only one was the original, I'd speculate the SD would be the one most players would pick as the original in this particular case. The frequency spread on the SD combined with the difference in clarity accentuated the Ric qualities the most.

I haven't come to a conclusion on how useful these frequency spreads are but I guess I'll keep doing them regardless till I do. In this case, it's interesting that the Bart is the most dissimilar and was the only one flatpicked to get matching tone (frequency's spreads are all fingerpicked for consistency for comparisons between pups).

 

[luknfur]

RIC SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISON TO MUSIC
70's Originals/Barts/Duncan

Basically ran all 3 pups through the standard tunes leaving the amp unchanged for the most part and working off the basses for control. Played each bass during each tune some merely adjusting tone to fit tune and observing results from listening not thinking. Started out all fingerpick then flatpicked the Barts about the last half as indicated.

What stood out most is the Barts being darker and least like the originals using identical harnesses in the bass. Flatpicking would bring the Barts comparatively close to the originals as well as accentuating their Rickness. It could be touchy to keep the click and excessive brightness of the pic out of tone. Fingerpicked the Barts weren't even remotely bright even with tone pot and bridge pup maxed and neck pup full cut. But flatpicking brought trebles more in line with what would be a typical expectation fingerpicking. The Barts were also most adept at camouflaging their Rickness via fingerpicking. I'm guessing a change in cap would be all the compensation needed to forego flatpicking to get original tone. The neck pup on the Barts also seemed the most useful neck of the 3.

Under like conditions the SD's were most like the originals, noticeably clearer with less air but often difficult to distinguish from the originals. They were more inclined to be more lively, brighter, and more blatantly Ric like in more tunes than the originals. They also struck me as having the most flexibility in frequency range, versatility in application, most consistently appealing tones, and most enjoyable to play overall.

Perhaps a bias from knowing the difference, but the originals seemed more original overall - which includes their failings (ie., seeming least capable of adapting to a variety of styles) as well as the positive qualities they're known for. More raw, less refined, more old school flavor to them.

There all responded in a like manner to control changes regarding quality of tone. They tended to retaine their Rickness about them. They did put out a good vintage Fender P tone with the ability to cop that punchy low end, warm P mid and defined top combo that's hard to get. Very passable J substitute as well, ableit typically with a noticeable Ric twist.

 

[luknfur]

PEAVEY T-40 HB

Dual coil 3 lead with ground
One pup mounted at the bridge position with the bridge coil in line with standard J pup placement.

Loaded into an acoustically dark bass. Ouput less than average. Some noise killed by touching strings. Some finger/pic transfer depending on setting but nothing that couldn't be worked around to satisfaction. Worked well to flat and fingerpick. Sensitivity to attack, position, and technique about average in terms of apparent affect on tone but it made a big difference played to tunes. Below average sustain.

Plug and play for the most part with one setting fits all less minor control, position, and technique adjustments. Basically a J/P mix tone: less clarity and a tad on the dull side compared to the stereotypical single coil and closer to stacked/split HB's that put out equal low end. Very Fender like and very close to a vintage Fender P tone with the same settings used for J tunes. Play toward the neck for P and toward the bridge for J. I could get very close to a vintage Fender single J tone with adjustments but it didn't work to tunes.

Adequate low end. Broad range of warmth from mids depending and, for some tunes, as warm as any pup I've had to date. Mids appeared fairly flexible in terms of tone variation but nothing that proved of any significant value in application. More top end than I needed with no problem moderating it to fit tunes. No slap tone from tones to tunes. Didn't try to get a slap tone but it's got the top and bottom for it.

With or without the Sans, in playing around with various gear, I had a lot of trouble trying to get a focused tone with the bottom and top half I wanted (which threw considerably delay into this review). Too transparent and wouldn't cut adequately. Not boxie but sort of like a hard air with edge to it - as if the focus on the fundamental and harmonics were reversed. I could pull the bottom in and the top would go, and visa versa. I also had considerable difficulty with noticeably lower output/cut from the E string. Found a workable combination for this run with only occassional traces of either of those issues.

Rawness was subtle, predominately either a noticeably refined passive tone (Bart-like in that sense) or in the form of low to mid overtones with a corresponding woodyness when I dug in. Some nice bulge/punch on some settings, a little growl.

The T-40 isn't considered a classic but it's a standard with a solid reputation and track record - the main reason I wanted to check it out. Fun pup to play to a share of tunes, mostly blues. Played well to all tunes and excelled at maybe 20%. Probably at about the 90th percentile in the pups I've played. Volume, tone, sensitivity, clarity, and cut balanced across the board other than as mentioned previously. Without music, tone was airy with no solo tones noted.

Frequency Spreads (Maximum value 10 and TB format won't allow for columns to remain in line but they're in sequence and simply need to be shifted over under the appropriate frequency for those interested)

Hertz 50 1.2C 4C 5C 8C 4.5KHz 10KHz

0; 8; 4.5; 2.5; 4; 0; 0


FLUFF:

Kind of unusual wiring in that the 3 leads are all connected. Seems the initial wiring I tried when I first got the pup was neck coil only. Trying to hit an HB combo I got both coils but the neck coil had significantly less output than the bridge coil. With the lower output I'm guessing maybe HB parallel. Wierd pup wiring wise. So whether that's the design or I'm still missing it, I don't know, perhaps you do. If so, let me know.

Played through various rigging but this run was with a Sans driver into the THD Univalve. Sometimes the Sans was on, sometimes by-passed. I often played to the same tune both ways but completely laid off the Sans for roughly half the tunes. 90% of the choice tones to tunes were with the Sans by-passed. Both ways were typically appealing. The Sans added some versatility to tone control and put out a beefier, electronic, synthesized spin on the tone but lacked the warmth (as I had it set anyway). The Sans didn't alter amp tone at all using it's bypass.

 

[luknfur]

DEARMOND STARFIRE HUMBUCKER (Bridge position)

2 wire w/ground dual coil
Alnico 5 magnets, polysol wire, and nickel silver pickup cover
2 pairs of single poles* (large slotted adjustable row and small unslotted row)
Narrow EBO pole spacing
(13/16" x 1 13/16" x 2 7/8")

* A buddy of mine has one of these and said something about the small set not actually being poles. I'll have to ask to clarify. They pick up when tapped on but it's noticeably hollow so may be a referent sensing as the entire cover is metal.

This is the identical pup ran before at mid position.

Reading "FLUFF" at the end of the review first will probably help add some context to the review.

Loaded into an acoutically midrange bass in bridge position. Output about average, maybe a little better. Quiet, not hum. No issue with finger or pic transfer. Works well to finger and flat pick - good funk and Ric tones here. Sensitivity to attack, technique, and hand postion better than average. Excellent sustain.

Interesting pup. Very broad range of frequencies although not what I'd call full in terms of thick. Ample bottom that can be made very punchie. Pronounced softness, airiness, and presence to the top half but cuts well. Even though airy it's not transparent in the sense of fading into the mix. Tones in general had a noticeably focused but somewhat thin broad tone surrounded by airy harmonics. Top end generally noticeably bright yet still soft .

All frequencies lend well to adjustment so it's not difficult to roll the top back as needed or cut mids for a good scooped slap tone. Don't tap but I'd speculate decent for tap tones. Airiness can also be adjusted/toned down significantly but the pup gets progressivly darker, less lively, and more dirty/dull in the process. Tone was more controllably brightened or darkened rather than going fat or thin and tone became more focused as it was darkened. The primary useful variation to that was that cutting bass really brought out the low end punch.

Good single coil tone and close to a traditional vintage Fender J. More playing with the amp would likely do the job but it was close enough yet different - punchy but not as clear or bright. Does a very passable vintage Fender P tone and I could probably nail that with more tweaking as well - again top not as clear/cutting. The airiness also cut's into warmth quite a bit and overall is only mildly warm. Pup can be darkened and dirtied up with tone and technique adjustment so old school EBO-like tone there to be had but it tends to be more dull than lively. Regardless, a very vasatile pup. Can take a fair amount of tweaking to get the sound type but once you're there, not a lot of adjustment thereafter. Familiarity with the pup would reduce roaming time considerably I'm sure.

Good punch/bulge on E/A strings; little growl, burp, woodiness; noticeable rawness - not a hi-fi sounding pup at all though I'd speculate a compressor would obtain that. Some passable but different solo tones - very acoustic sounding so some different sounding arpeggios, chords and double stops. Very good for the typical brief "in song" solo's as the breathing space afforded from the absence of vocals/lead instruments permits the focus portion of tone to come forward more. No fading of strings noted.

The E was significantly more pronounced volume wise but the pup is so physically thick my routing was a bit shallow (pup was seated flush to the route floor, no padding). Plus the large poles are 1/8" thick in addition. They are adjustable but real stiff and I didn't jack with them. I'm guessing they're as high as they'll go but should at least adjust flush with the face of the pup. At any rate, nothing I couldn't compensate with attack.

Played to all tunes passably, better than average to probably 25%, and excelled at about 10%. Pretty dark Reggae. Volume, tone, sensitivity, clarity, and cut even across the board except the E string as noted previously.

In all, good choice for a different yet similar sounding pup for someone with flexible gear that can tap the broad range of tones this pup can produce. It will cover whatever range you rig does which is to say it's not an inherently bottom or top half pup. Really makes me wonder about the Dark Stars - which are supposed to put these to shame (and priced accordingly).

Frequency Spreads (Maximum value 10 and TB format won't allow for columns to remain in line but they're in sequence and simply need to be shifted over under the appropriate frequency for those interested)

Hertz 50 1.2C 4C 5C 8C 4.5KHz 10KHz

1; 8; 4; 2; 3; 0; 0


FLUFF:

This was the same stereo mix from the last run. Sans DI > THD > micro cab w/vifa speaker (from a Mackie monitor) mic'd using both the Audix F12 dynamic (40Hz-10kHz)/Art MP and F15 condenser (100Hz-20kHz)/Studio VTB1 into seperate channels of the QSC to the GS 112/L-Acoustics. The Sans Di was by-passed about 70% of the time with the remainder ran through it clean.

I changed pre tubes a couple times 2/3's way through when I got to some J bass tunes trying to get more focus and cut the airiness. The 12at7 helped but an Amperex 12ax7 is what was sufficient.

Also remarkable was a recent change of TI flats. TI's have a nice round ring when they're new but lose it in about 10 hours or so of playing time. These still had some ring for this run but it was on the way out. Something to take into consideration for some comments that are atypical of previous reviews.

 

[luknfur]

BARCUS BERRY HUMBUCKER (Bridge position)

Single lead within braided ground dual coil
no exposed poles/smooth face (string sensing on only half the pup)
(5/8" x 1 15/16" x 3 7/16") Pup only, that doesn't include the surround
Stenciled Logo: 3 gold parallel lines broken midway by barcus-berry
.

Loaded into an acoutically midrange bass. Output average or better. No hum, dead quiet. Noticeably strange sounding finger transfer that I can't put into words. Nothing of consequence in this run but could be potentially, primarily higher frequencies. Worked well to finger and flatpick. Sensitivity to attack, technique, and hand postion about average. Less than average sustain.

Interesting pup. On a brighter setting I got a moderately dark vintage Fender J-like tone but without the edge, more mellow than warm, noticeably more melodic, a hi-fi clarity and muffledness to tone (sort of Bart-like in that sense), and not the range on the top end. Darker setting produced a very close but actually more appelaing P tone than the vintage Fender P track I play to. Comparatively not as clear or bright as the track on the D & G strings but with a more full, mellower top that cut well to compensate. The Barcus maintained a very appealing punch and fatness to notes across the board and up the neck to R&B and Blues tunes. Found myself doing a Stevie Wonder impression to those tunes.

Solid low end, good mid spread, and top that was adequate and no more but it cut well. An enjoyable plug and play pup that put out a tone that worked to all tunes, most with a natural fit and the rest with a different spin sound but definitely not an objectionable no go sound. Basically one sound that I made darker or brighter. No adjustment beyond switching the MXR on as I had it set or by-passing it. Could get a marginally passable Ric tone using a flatpick close to bridge.

Nice punch, a little bulge, minimal growl, a little rawness. Flatpicked it became very percussive with a thin pick and noticeably woodie. Medium pick could cut the percussiveness considerably.

Pup worked passable to all tunes, better than average to roughly 40%, excelled at about 30% of those. Nice Reggae. Volume, tone, sensitivity, clarity, and cut even across the board. No fading of strings. No solo tones noted - sounds much more airy solo. Does work well for those brief "in song" bass solo's since it cuts well and loses the airiness played to tunes.

Frequency Spreads (Maximum value 10 and TB format won't allow for columns to remain in line but they're in sequence and simply need to be shifted over under the appropriate frequency for those interested)

Hertz 50 1.2C 4C 5C 8C 4.5KHz 10KHz

1.5; 7.5; 4; 3; 3.5; 0; 0

FLUFF:

This run was MXR M80 DI > THD Univalve tube> micro cab w/vifa speaker (from a Mackie monitor) mic'd using both the Audix F12 dynamic (40Hz-10kHz)/Art MP and F15 condenser (100Hz-20kHz)/Studio VTB1 into seperate channels of the QSC to the Aguilar GS 112 for top and L-Acoustics 15 for bottom. The MXR DI was incorporated about 30% of the time, by-passed othewise. Could fatten, darken tone but tended to dull noticeably in the process and cut into rawness which the pup doesn't have much of from the outset.

 

[DavidRavenMoon]

The piece about the EMG soap/P's is interesting. The EMG PJ's I ran have more bright than I need but I doubt the P was the source (Which reminds me, I never ran the EMG P in the standard P position - maybe tonight). Too much bright is not a problem as long as it can be cut without adversely affecting tone. Seems the main problem I run into with trebles is either not enough top end, getting excessive finger transfer at the treble level I want, or a treble tone that just doesn't work.

The EMG soupbar P's (and also the two piece Fender style P's) are wired in parallel, which accounts for the bright top end. I find the P has a more extended topend than the EMG J, which is more middly sounding.

Also the original humbucker sized EMG bass pickup (a la the Steinberger pup) is a P style split pickup on the inside, and also wired in parallel.

I'd love to get an EMG P wired in series for more mids.

 

[luknfur]

Can't get in to edit the first page table of contents any more so I guess the remainder will just be added on without mention there. So if you go to the contents and don't see it, doesn't mean it may not be here, just may have been posted after the last pup listed was.


Dimarzio X2N-B

Side by side HB
4 lead with bare ground
Double blade ceramic mags
Wired series/parallel
Narrow scale: 2 3/8” string coverage (designed as Stien Replacements)

Synopsis

Very interesting pup. Hi-output and prone to distortion with a warm/mellow old school tone with plenty of rawness yet melodic. Works well to broad range of styles with minimal adjustment. Works well for finger, flat pick, slap, and solo. Pretty responsive to technique and control adjustment. Heavy bass accent with a complimentary but less pronounced midrange and Bart-like soft top (in terms of presence not tone).

Whole Enchilada

Loaded into an acoustically midrange bass bridge position. Output is pretty plunder and pillage (above average). Ran straight to the power amp output was comparable to a Sans DI. Prone to distort through most gear so you might want to dust off those old 12au7 black plates that have been laying dormant and pluck the 12ax7‘s for a while. Dead quiet, no trace of hum. Sensitivity to attack, technique, and position above average. Above average sustain. No finger transfer of consequence and pick transfer is variable and tone enhancing. Good slap tone.

Pretty impressive pup with a long list of positive attributes. Heavy bass accent with a complimentary but less pronounced midrange and Bart-like soft top (in terms of presence not tone). Solo, trebles and mids were much more present at the same setting played to tunes. Most tone adjustment on the 3 band VB pre (Victor Bailey) hovered around flat for mids and trebles with bass cut in varying amounts. Pups pretty responsive to tone adjustments. Pretty user friendly pup overall, with almost no adjustment to about half the tunes. Not hassle free but better than most.

Cuts very well. A bit of a Dimarzio signature tone. Very melodic and clear quality to tone solo that is hardly apparent to music and mostly shows up as warmth, sort of a mix of the two when finger-picked. Flat-picking brings out a Ric quality to tone (toastie Aero Walk This Way). More full and grindie with less precussive“tong” than I get with a Ric. One of the few pups I’ve run across that play well solo and to music. At the same settings the pup takes on a completely different character solo as played to music. In fact I’d love to hear this pup in a fretless. I’m guessing it’d wail like a T-rex.

Has a nice old school rawness I can’t seem to find words for. Nicer round ring quality to tone even with the TI flats. Serious bulge on E string and good punch E-D. Nice growl. Brass tuba-like quality to tone at times. More P tone oriented but works well to both P and J tunes.

In general the E sounds more pronounced, punchy, and comparatively dull while the G was on the soft side - yet the mix worked well (and was different) so there was no point in dinking with it. Otherwise volume, tone, sensitivity, clarity, and cut even across the board. Ballpark: excelled at roughly 60% of the tunes, better than average to about 25% of the tunes, and at least average to 15%.

Series/Parallel Experience

Parallel softened the pups up a lot and resolved the distortion touchiness. Tamed the beast noticeably. Blatantly different tone solo but not so much played to music, enough to give the edge needed to a given tune without jacking with tone controls. Improved Reggae tone significantly but still not quite where I wanted on the E string. However using fingers instead of thumb on the E got it close enough. Perhaps punch/bulge is created by vertical waves (which many pups don’t read, and these may not for all I know). Regardless I noticed throwing more horizontal movement into the string reduced it significantly. Warm became mellow in parallel, clear became less defined but more audible cause the frequencies shifted upward, frequency spread become more monotone with frequencies less distinguishable, and lost quite a bit of the rawness (punch etc.,), responsiveness. Grossly it was sort of a J/P tone variation.

Nevertheless the parallel option was useful and more appealing a few tunes, less than appealing for about 30%, and not much different from the rest. This is with basically same tone adjustments cause just switching series/parallel halfway through a tune was all the fun I could stand. Some pups are naturally inclined so controls can be set to get parallel tone in running series but it’s not something I paid attention to with this pup and it’s easier just to throw a switch in if a parallel tone is useful in a pup.

FLUFF:

Ran straight to jack > Victor Bailey Pre outboard > GEB-7 > Art Mic Tube Pre (unknown old 12au7 black Plate) > QSC parallel > pair Aguilar GS 112’s.

I stuck a GEB-7 between the VB and Art pre and used it to even volume between series/parallel modes - which also removed the distortion in series. Switched from series to parallel half way through each tune clip.

Frequency Spread (highest value is 10 and the TB won't format allow for the columns to align but they're in sequence and merely need be shifted over):

Hertz 50 1.2C 4C 5C 8C 4.5K 10K

4.5; 8; 2.5; 1.5; 2; 0; 0 (series)

2.5; 7.5; 3; 1.5; 2.5; 0; 0 (parallel)

Never have determined how valuable the frequency spread thing is but you can see a little of series/parallel variation. Just a piece of the puzzle I actually got the idea from DM for. Friend told me the DM site list the X2N-B as balanced frequency wise but does'n't sound that way to my ears, although the top end is not void by any means as indicated by the preceding spreads.

 

[DavidRavenMoon]

Dimarzio X2N-B

Side by side HB
4 lead with bare ground
Double blade ceramic mags
Wired series/parallel
Narrow scale: 2 3/8” string coverage (designed as Stien Replacements)

Just as an interesting side note... the X2N-B and the Model G are pretty much the same pickup, except the Model G replaces the X2N's steel blades with hex screws. The smaller poles combined with the air gap between the coil and the poles, due to the fact that the bobbins have the big slot in them for the blades, makes the Model G a little cleaner sounding.

The steel blades in the X2N increase the inductance, which along with way more wire then is needed, makes it a loud pickup with muted highs.

I have taken a Model G and made thin steel blades for it, which made a nice sounding hot pickup.

 

[luknfur]

Just as an interesting side note... the X2N-B and the Model G are pretty much the same pickup, except the Model G replaces the X2N's steel blades with hex screws. The smaller poles combined with the air gap between the coil and the poles, due to the fact that the bobbins have the big slot in them for the blades, makes the Model G a little cleaner sounding.

The steel blades in the X2N increase the inductance, which along with way more wire then is needed, makes it a loud pickup with muted highs.

I have taken a Model G and made thin steel blades for it, which made a nice sounding hot pickup.

Hmm. Interesting. I had a Martin EB-18 that probably had a Model One in it. They changed to the Model G later in manufacture but Martin didn't specify the serial change over so I'm guessing I caught the tail end of the Model Ones. I didn't bother trying to figure the pup ID out when I had the bass. It was a neck only pup and I never could get a tone out of that bass I could tolerate. May have sounded fine to me at the bridge. Don't know. I didn't like the bass otherwise so wouldn't have really mattered anyway.

 

[joshwilson3]

Are you going to try the Dimarzio X2N-B pickup in the neck position? I'd like to here what that sounds like.

Did the X2N-B sound thick in the bridge position? I've noticed alot of basses sound thin when using just the bridge pickup, and I say it is due to the pickup.

thanks

 

[luknfur]

Are you going to try the Dimarzio X2N-B pickup in the neck position? I'd like to here what that sounds like.

Did the X2N-B sound thick in the bridge position? I've noticed alot of basses sound thin when using just the bridge pickup, and I say it is due to the pickup.

thanks

Hmm, hadn't really thought about it. I'm not really the best guy for a reference for neck pups. I pretty much stopped checking them out a while back becuase I never met a neck pup I liked.

There's exceptions to everything so usually I give something I haven't had much luck with another go periodically just as an update.

I'll toss one up there and see what it does for kicks and grins. As loud as that thing is at the bridge it's a scary thought though. Considering it's unique characteristics, may be interesting.

Update: got the pup shifted up and getting started. Not sure what you call neck but it was in a 2 octave bass which is not ideal. But it's at 27 3/4" from C nut to C pup so the bridge coil is basically in the same position as a Fender Jazz neck. That's more like mid position compared to Ric or EBO stuff.

 

[luknfur]

Are you going to try the Dimarzio X2N-B pickup in the neck position? I'd like to here what that sounds like.

Did the X2N-B sound thick in the bridge position? I've noticed alot of basses sound thin when using just the bridge pickup, and I say it is due to the pickup.

thanks

Sorry for the delayed response. Tried the X2N-B in the neck and it sounded like exactly that. Lost definition. Probably no worse than neck and P pups I’ve played in the past but I’ve pretty much become a bridge player so I’m just not the guy to go to for neck pups. Probably if I liked it, it would sound like a bridge pup. I gave it a go several times but I knew what it sounded like at the bridge and I just couldn’t be objective with it.

In fact I had a friend that emailed during that period and said he’d contacted Steve at Dimarzio who told him something about the pup and wanted to know if it was “whatever”. I pulled it down off the wall and fired it up to check and couldn’t get a decent sound out of it. I looked at the pup and realized it was still in the neck position. I just emailed back and said I don’t know, I’ll check when it’s back at the bridge.

Maybe somebody will read this that’s done it and can give you some feedback.

Also didn't notice the question about thickness. Haven't played it at the bridge in a couple months. Reading through my review it wasn't thin but what I recall it was essentially a more full Ric tone for lack of a better description - not as airy as a Ric. Good Aero "Walk This Way" tone.

From what David said, the model G may be a better go at the neck.