P vs Reverse P, what’s better?

[LiptonJigglers]

Simply leaving the DG half in place and moving the EA to the bridge side will yield a nasally honky mess of a tone, nothing "P" about it.

I'd be more inclined to leave the EA and move the DG towards the neck to thicken up the top end...

 

[TonyP-]

I've no use for, and don't ever want to hear, soloed bridge pickups of any kind. Honky nasally mess, IMHO of course.

Your not alone in that…

Although I’m a fan of the reverse P, I’m not a fan of the back pickup alone. My signature Lulls have the pan pot bypassed and both pickups wired in series.

 

[sc_precision]

I had a Sandberg with a reverse P and a soapbar/music man style humbucker at bridge. I honestly didn't like it. The P pickup sounded good but a bit less warm than a standard P pickup (so my Player P won that round) and the humbucker sounded nothing like a Stingray which is what they were trying to go for. I think the standard P with a regular Jazz in bridge sounds much warmer, aggressive and fuller but that's just me. I ended up selling the Sandberg because it sounded too nasally.

 

[Ricky Rioli]

I believe that sooner or later I'll reverse the P on my LB-100.

It's a stock-wind Fralin, the strings are Chromes.

Heaven knows how long I'll spend deciding whether to swap the halves, or simply shunt the treble half to the neck side of the bass half....

 

[J Wilson]

Of course, the pickup itself is important.

But as far as reversing the placement, some hear a difference, some don't, and I think that it's not a big magic bullet solution.

But it's an easy enough thing to do: Ya just turn the template over to rout!

 

[Jazzdogg]

I'm beginning to think that achieving the P-bass sound in my head (fretless, full-bodied yet articulate) may be accomplished more easily by playing a short-scale strung with TI flats than by reversing the P'ups on my '73 P-bass.

 

[DCCat]

I had a Sandberg with a reverse P and a soapbar/music man style humbucker at bridge. I honestly didn't like it. The P pickup sounded good but a bit less warm than a standard P pickup (so my Player P won that round) and the humbucker sounded nothing like a Stingray which is what they were trying to go for. I think the standard P with a regular Jazz in bridge sounds much warmer, aggressive and fuller but that's just me. I ended up selling the Sandberg because it sounded too nasally.

Was that reverse P one in which the positions of the two coils were simply reversed? If so, I could see how you might have those kinds of reservations about it. Possibly a reverse P in which the EA coil position is unchanged, with the DG moved above it, would produce a somewhat different reaction.

 

[sc_precision]

Was that reverse P one in which the positions of the two coils were simply reversed? If so, I could see how you might have those kinds of reservations about it. Possibly a reverse P in which the EA coil position is unchanged, with the DG moved above it, would produce a somewhat different reaction.

It was a Sandberg. No idea if that was the case. Sounded like a hot p pickup with a good amount of treble/click at the end of notes.

 

[Ritter667]

I had a Sandberg with a reverse P and a soapbar/music man style humbucker at bridge. I honestly didn't like it. The P pickup sounded good but a bit less warm than a standard P pickup (so my Player P won that round) and the humbucker sounded nothing like a Stingray which is what they were trying to go for. I think the standard P with a regular Jazz in bridge sounds much warmer, aggressive and fuller but that's just me. I ended up selling the Sandberg because it sounded too nasally.

Do you play the upper 2 top strings much?

Could very well also just be those pickups, and not the fact that the P was reversed orientation in specifics.

 

[Zbysek]

Could very well also just be those pickups, and not the fact that the P was reversed orientation in specifics.

That's what I thought when I read that. It could also just be the Sandberg bass he didn't like...

The fact that I prefer the reverse-P configuration does not mean that I will prefer any reverse-P instrument over any standard-P-configuration instrument...

 

[Zbysek]

I bought this five-stringer from AV Basses second hand...asked the manufacturer to reverse the P pickup... I love it!

 

[maturanesa]

My logic says in order to cut better in the mix you want your low notes bit chunkier and the treble ones brighter.
Why a reverse P? I dont know

 

[ctmullins]

My logic says in order to cut better in the mix you want your low notes bit chunkier and the treble ones brighter.
Why a reverse P? I dont know

Define "chunky".

What I want out of low notes is clarity, not mud. That means rolling off the lowest lows. An HPF can do that, but so can putting the low half of a P pickup much closer to the bridge. It works, man, it works!

 

[maturanesa]

Define "chunky".

What I want out of low notes is clarity, not mud. That means rolling off the lowest lows. An HPF can do that, but so can putting the low half of a P pickup much closer to the bridge. It works,

Traditional P pickup is not muddy in the low strings at all, its kinda "the spot". There is consensus about how it cut in the mix better than another configs. I dont see all of that session guys ruinning albums with their Ps. When using a single pup closer to the bridge you have to cut the midrange to fit into the track. You end up sounding just thinner, not more clear.

 

[Paul New]

I like the split P as designed.

 

[ctmullins]

Traditional P pickup is not muddy in the low strings at all, its kinda "the spot". There is consensus about how it cut in the mix better than another configs. I dont see all of that session guys ruinning albums with their Ps. When using a single pup closer to the bridge you have to cut the midrange to fit into the track. You end up sounding just thinner, not more clear.

You bet your buccellato those “session guys” are being high-passed at the desk.

Exactly how close to the bridge to place the pickup is a bit of an art. Definitely not “too close”, else you get the thinness indeed. But put a reversed P “not too close” to the bridge and you have lows that are tight and highs that are round. That’s where I want to live.

 

[maturanesa]

You bet your buccellato those “session guys” are being high-passed at the desk.

Exactly how close to the bridge to place the pickup is a bit of an art. Definitely not “too close”, else you get the thinness indeed. But put a reversed P “not too close” to the bridge and you have lows that are tight and highs that are round. That’s where I want to live.

Yes i get it. Like the P pickup of a Warwick. They Are mostly reverse Ps and sound great, but thats more a Warwick sound, nasal and tight. I would take both the warwick and the classic since its like ying-yang, they fit different styles

 

[jdjk7]

I think that if you're comparing just a single-pickup P or reverse P, the different is negligible. I think where the differences really shine is when a second pickup is added. For a P/J situation, I say reverse P. If you want an HP/Billy Sheehan type of layout, regular P.

 

[tvbop]

Classic P here. I love the thunder of the E and A and then the thinness of DG for lead and the rise upwards in a tune... Maybe thats what Leo was thinkin? Last thing I need is eveness across the strings. Its dynamics baby!

 

[Old Geezer]

Okay. The "thunder...thinness" line above answers the question as to why the players that primarily play P-basses on YouTube play almost exclusively on the E and A strings, even going up way up the neck to hit notes, rather than using the D and G strings.

Not being a P-bass player, I've wondered that question for a while.