Reverse P bass P/Up ??

[Blake Bass]

How does a reverse P bass pickup sound compared to the regular P bass configuration? I am considering a J-bass with a reverse P-bass and J bass pick up configuration.

 

[luknfur]

FWIW:

if you used the same pickup it would sound pretty much as the different placements indicate.

See pup FAQ Dimento's P pup experiment - near the end, effect of P placement or something like that.

 

[MuzikMan]

I don't have golden ears but I couldn't hear the difference when I switched my split coils to the reverse configuration. I did notice a BIG difference when I moved the J-bridge pickup closer to the bridge (I mention that for the sake of comparison).

 

[GlennW]

I want to do that to one of my basses - not for sound, but to get the D/G half out of the way of my fingers.

 

[PilbaraBass]

I want to do that to one of my basses - not for sound, but to get the D/G half out of the way of my fingers.

hmmm...interesting, but valid reason

the only Rev-P bass I've ever played was a cheapo Ibby GSR-100...the bass sounded aweful, but I'm convinced that it had nothing to do with the pickup placement...

 

[62bass]

I've played a cheap Ibanez GSR200 with that placement and it sounded pretty good with decent strings on it. The factory roundwounds were terrible.

 

[Jim Carr]

hmmm...interesting, but valid reason

the only Rev-P bass I've ever played was a cheapo Ibby GSR-100...the bass sounded aweful, but I'm convinced that it had nothing to do with the pickup placement...

Bassist Willie Weeks (Stones, Nashville session ace, Donny Hathaway, etc., etc.) has a 5-string P/J made by Sadowsky. He has a reverse P pickup (neck position). I read somewhere that he likes to call it "The Willie Weeks Model."

I'm pretty sure he did it for tone reasons.

 

[cabcreaser]

Bassist Willie Weeks (Stones, Nashville session ace, Donny Hathaway, etc., etc.) has a 5-string P/J made by Sadowsky. He has a reverse P pickup (neck position). I read somewhere that he like to call it "The Willie Weeks Model."

I'm pretty sure he did it for tone reasons.

I think the reverse P is supposed to tighten the sound of the low B string (I guess by picking up the signal at a point in the string that is a little bit tighter due to its proximity to the bridge).

Leland Sklar uses the reverse setup to improve the clarity and even out the sound of the E and A strings, but his setup is unique due to the location of the pickups (he put reverse p pickups in positions similar to a Jazz bass - one close to the neck and the other by the bridge). I would imagine, though this is only a guess, that a reverse p pickup would sound very similar to a regular p pickup when used in a 4 string bass with standard p pickup position.

 

[Blake Bass]

Thanks for all of the info..it sounds like the general concensus is that the reverse p p/up doesn't make a huge difference. It is the actual placement of the pickup that really counts. I do see how it could help to tighten the B string though.

 

[Bluesy Soul]

I think the reverse P is supposed to tighten the sound of the low B string (I guess by picking up the signal at a point in the string that is a little bit tighter due to its proximity to the bridge).

This has always seemed logical to me. Though I've never tried or knowingly heard a reverse-P pickup, I've always thought you might balance the response of a traditional Precision bass pickup--and thereby decrease the need to EQ in certain situations--by "picking up" the wider oscilaation range of the (B,) E and A strings closer to the bridge and the narrower oscillation range of the D and G strings closer to the neck.

Does anyone out there have any experience with this?

Bluesy Soul

 

[tbone409]

there is a special edition warwick with a regular p at the neck reverse p in the center and a soapbar at the bridge

 

[centralharbor]

I always thought the purpose of the reverse p was:

since the d and g strings have less mass than the e and a strings, the d and g strings have a lower output. Since they have lower output due to less magnetic mass, you put the pickup closer to the middle of the scale length (closer to the neck) and the amount of string vibration is bigger when closer to the middle, so the output would be louder.

Another reason was because the d and g strings were too bright because they were physically thinner than the e and a, so when you switch it, its more mellow (same principle as playing closer to the neck vs. closer to the bridge in that you get a brighter sound when nearer the bridge, so when you want more of a mellow sound, you play closer to the neck).

Choose your flavor, but that's just what I've read. I haven't really tested this.

 

[Bluesy Soul]

I always thought the purpose of the reverse p was:

since the d and g strings have less mass than the e and a strings, the d and g strings have a lower output. Since they have lower output due to less magnetic mass, you put the pickup closer to the middle of the scale length (closer to the neck) and the amount of string vibration is bigger when closer to the middle, so the output would be louder.

This is another way of stating what I was trying to say about wider/narrower string oscillation ranges.

Another reason was because the d and g strings were too bright because they were physically thinner than the e and a, so when you switch it, its more mellow (same principle as playing closer to the neck vs. closer to the bridge in that you get a brighter sound when nearer the bridge, so when you want more of a mellow sound, you play closer to the neck).

This seems logical as well.


Doesn't anyone have experience with a reverse-P configuration they can share?


Bluesy Soul

 

[syndrome666]

Well I can share a bit of something on this issue, I play both and both sound great and different. Depending on what pickups they are and what woods are used. I own both, a '93 Ibanez SR800 (Japan made) and a Warwick Fortress Rock-bass. Both of these are 4 string as the perfect basic examples. Ibanez uses their own designed pickups for the higher end stuff with AFR labeled pickups as the stock pickups on these particular models, the lower end stuff (under SR800) is usually DXP and some other crappy pickups like EMG-hz, where the higher end soundgears use(d) popular names like EMG, Bartolini, and Ibanez's higher end pickup line such as the AFR and the C series. Anyway, enough blabbing here, in short the Ibanez has the revearse style P-pickups, the higher end MIJ made models don't come with P-pickups these days anymore, don't know why, it's a shame if you ask me, because these pickups on a soundgear kick major ass, especially mixed with the J pickup in combo, the bass is a able to produce something like the Fender P bass tone, but with more growl to it, very neat set up and electronics. So far my favorite bass and configuration of the many pickup configurations I've tried. As for the Warwick Fortress Rockbass, well it's an '07 model, and even though it's China made, it plays really well, and sounds very organic, like what warwick is known for. The P-pickup is the standard style on it, but sounds nothing like the Fender P-bass tone. This one has more of a bright woody tone, with lots of low end punch and growl. This bass also has a single J pickup at the bridge and can be blended with the p-pickup for a bit of a brighter/sharper sound. The reason I think this bass sounds so bright is probably because of the Warwick electronics and the MEC pickups, which are German made and are the same electronics and pickups that come on the handcrafted German made warwicks, which are known for the tone/sound characteristics as mentioned above.
Also if I'm not mistaking, B.C. Rich plaaces P-pickups on some of their custom shopped models on both bridge and neck positions, don't remember if their standard or reverse, but I'm sure when custom shopping a bass, you are the boss of how you want the pickup configuration to be.

 

[SamanthaCay]

I’ve had a couple basses with reverse p pickups over the years. one was a charvel and the other was a bc rich eagle. both basses sounded good in there own right but there is know way I can say they sounded any better or worse then any of my other p’s with the standard setup, there totally different basses. so I guess the point I’m trying to make is if you really want to know just how big of a difference it makes you will have to take your bass, rout it out for both and try both, same bass, strings, amp settings, etc........

 

[mongo2]

I took my reverse P/J Guild Pilot out for a spin the other day and noticed the E-A strings definitely have more clarity than my regular P (both with EMG actives).

The Guild also has a solid maple body and a heavier bridge so that could also have something to do with it.

 

[Chowderboots]

I've got a Jackson and a Charvel with the reverse P placement. I like it a lot, but I'm not as comfortable with it as I am with the way Fender did it. With the reverse setup, the lower strings are tighter and the higher strings are woodier--as someone said, like playing closer or farther away from the neck. With the non-reverse style, you get a deeper sound from the low strings and a punchier, twangier sound on the high strings. The reverse placement yields a more even tone across the strings than the non-reverse placement, which gives you slightly more variation between the strings, from my experience.

The difference is definitely noticeable, but not necessarily so noticeable that you could pick it out in a recording out of 5 and say "Ah! That's a reverse P!" Or maybe it is...

Both of the basses that I have with the reverse placement play very comfortably and have incredible sound. The Jackson is equipped with EMGs (the bridge pickup is an EMG HB--gives you some serious snap on the top strings and growl on the bottm) and they are decently loud. When playing through a clean amp with the reverse P soloed, I can hear and feel the difference, but with the bridge pickup blended in, it's hard to tell. When the E/A coil is closer to the bridge, it's a lot punchier and great for what the basses I own are made for--appealing to a more hard rock crowd.

 

[mups]

Hello everyone,
A couple of years late, here's my input on this topic.
From what I gathered (correct me if I'm wrong), Leo Fender had the same idea in mind when he designed the Tele or Strat angled PU and the (second) P-bass PU: he wanted to obtain a wider range. By picking up the bass strings further away from the bridge, where they have more amplitude, the sound has more body. And the other way around for the treble strings. In short, bassier lows and treblier highs. Also, back then, people mostly played picking style, which called for that kind of balance. And, apparently, Leo's hearing wasn't too good, highs wise...
As a bass player, the result of this somewhat theoretical design (Leo was not a musician) bugged me for a long time. I don't like to have a big boomy E string and a tiny twinky D string. And after years of playing, recording and, mainly, mixing, I understood that, in general, the narrower the range of the instruments, the better (for my taste and my rock music). So I searched for ways to make my basses more even, more balanced from string to string. As I mainly owned precious old Fender's, I only experimented with string gauges and came to use custom sets (50-70-85-100), with good results. Some improvement but not quite what I expected...
Then, about ten years ago, I was working with Rocking James Trussart when he was designing his new line of instruments. He went for the reverse P configuration with apparently good results (he still makes them that way). See here
A little more recently, I got a Lakland Bob Glaub that I didn't feel guilty about murdering a little. After some minor routing and a hand-made pick-guard, I move the D-G block on the other side of the E-A block, further away from the bridge. [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
This time, with the custom 50-100 strings, major improvement !! The only downside is that, when I now use my cool old P-basses, they lack the balls that the lakland has on the D and G strings. So my next project is to get another BG (maple neck, this one), on which I'll just reverse the two blocks while keeping the whole PU where it originally is. So, compared to my current BG, the PU will be about an inch closer to the bridge, for a slightly tighter sound.
The bass also improved greatly because, while I was at it, I worked on another typical problem that happens almost exclusively on Precisions: why do some of them sound good played with fingers and pick, some only with fingers, some only with a pick. Not to mention the ones that sound completly different whether the pick is doing upstrokes or downstrokes... Hint: the anodized guard ones don't have that problem. It's because the classic plastic pick-guard shrinks with the years and pulls the two blocks together, causing the pole-pieces to drift from where they were spec'ed to be. For a homogeneous sound, the strings should run exactly between the two pole-pieces. If they don't, you get an uneven sound, depending on how you play. A shifty bass, in a way...
I remember Joe Osborne saying in a BP interview that Lakland had done a perfect replicate of his 1960 Jazz Bass, but better, minus it's flaws, be them from design or ageing.
So I find it kinda weird that they went through the trouble of cloning Bob Glaub's 64 P without solving this problematic issue...
In other words, I dig the reversed P configuration. As hendrix dug the reversed Strat bridge PU !!!
Bon, enough for today.

 

[M.R. Ogle]

I have a bass with the "reverse P" pickup mounting. It sounds a bit more "even" across the strings to me, a big plus... but I have no comparable "control" bass to directly compare it to.

To further shoot holes in that observation, it's actually a G&L MFD P-type pickup, so it's got a lot of range anyway. Again, this may not be a fair comparison.

But I certainly like the theory, and see no downside to doing it. In fact, I may build a Reverse-P bass and purposefully "stagger" the two halves of the P-type pickup AWAY from each other a half-inch or so to FURTHER exaggerate the effect.

I don't expect to find the "holy grail" of tone doing that, but I DO expect to learn something by doing it.

 

[SanDiegoHarry]

Seems like I've seen this thread over and over recently...

I did this to a P-bass years ago. I prefer the sound of it the way Leo made it (provided you add a J to it at the bridge!)