• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Why did Leo do this?

CaribooBass

CaribooBass

Nov 30, 2017
686
1,360
Cariboo
#1
There is a lot of Fender Gurus in this forum and I would like to find out some information about the jazz bass pickup placement changes.
Trying to get this time line straight.

There are Jazz basses that where made in the Sixties and they where well on their way to being the well loved basses they are today.
The Seventies show up and Sir Leo changes the distance between the pickups.
Yes, and again Mr Fender creates a bass that has become the well loved basses they are today. ( Yes he was a blessed man).

So the questions I am asking are:
Why did Fender change the pickup distance?
What changes did this make in the instruments ?
Did they also change the pickups themselves ?
What was the end result?

Thanks
IQ36ESM
 
  • Like
Reactions: El_Charro, Mr Cheese, butterfingers1 and 2 others
#7
Some interesting info I wasn't aware of...the why, that is.
So, what about other companies that make their own J Basses?
Is the preferred spacing the '60s or the '70s spacing, or do they go either way?
My three...the Imola spacing seems a bit different.
Photo-Collage-1640044705718.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: butterfingers1, Rip Van Dan, Digital Larry and 1 other person
#12
More or less, different PU locations puts it under or near different nodes of the string. Also, the nodes (harmonics of the fundamental) both get higher and more "bunched up" as you approach the end of the string. So, the closer your pickup gets to the string, the more reduced the fundamental is and the more it favors the higher harmonics.

That may be an oversimplification and with errors, but that's the general properties of moving PU's closer to the bridge. This can give you a more nasally tone with higher harmonic content.

On my Fender Jaco, the bridge PU is in the "60's" position and on the Tony Franklin it's in the "70's" position (1/4" closer to the bridge or something like that). The bridge PU on the TF is a lot hotter than the one in my Jaco, but it definitely has a more squeezed, sharp kind of tone to it over against the bridge PU on the Jaco.

So the difference in these PU positions is a real "thing" and not just placebo. But it's fairly subtle and generally more noticeable when soloing the bridge PU.

As for why Fender moved the bridge PU around, pick your poison on the various explanations out there. I first heard the cosmetic report (tuck it under the ashtray a little more), but since then I've heard other reports like tooling necessities, etc. It doesn't sound like it was done for the actual tonal results, and those were lucky accidents only. Since Leo Fender is dead, we can't ask him about his involvement in it, if any, so we'll probably never really know for sure.

My personal preference is the 60's position. It's a little easier to pluck directly over the PU by a few hairs....

L
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ekulati, butterfingers1, Williethump and 1 other person
#13
My understanding is that Leo spent a lot of time experimenting with pickup placement. Supposedly he placed the pickups at specific points relative to the harmonic nodes (for example the neck pickup of a Fender guitar is above the 4th harmonic node) to get specific sounds.

Moving one pickup for cosmetic reasons would not have occurred to him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rollie 55, fishdude101101, butterfingers1 and 1 other person
#14
Lowendchamp said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't basic physics dictate that the closer you are to the bridge then the less vibration the strings can create? Doesn't it stand then to say that the sound a pickup would get would be more high pitch than one say closer to the neck? I'm sure engineers in the 70s knew this too.
Click to expand...
The pitch (frequency of vibration) is the same, wherever the pickup is, but the volume (how far the string goes when it vibrates) and tones change. The nearer to the bridge, the quieter the note and with less bass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: butterfingers1
#15
tpaul said:
My understanding is that Leo spent a lot of time experimenting with pickup placement. Supposedly he placed the pickups at specific points relative to the harmonic nodes (for example the neck pickup of a Fender guitar is above the 4th harmonic node) to get specific sounds.

Moving one pickup for cosmetic reasons would not have occurred to him.
Click to expand...

I've heard that before about putting the PU under harmonic nodes but why? The nodes would change as soon as you fret a note right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: nnnnnn, lunarpollen, 2cooltoolz and 7 others
#17
tpaul said:
My understanding is that Leo spent a lot of time experimenting with pickup placement. Supposedly he placed the pickups at specific points relative to the harmonic nodes (for example the neck pickup of a Fender guitar is above the 4th harmonic node) to get specific sounds.

Moving one pickup for cosmetic reasons would not have occurred to him.
Click to expand...
The nodes change with each note along the string length.
 
  • Like
Reactions: butterfingers1 and bobyoung53
#18
Lowendchamp said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't basic physics dictate that the closer you are to the bridge then the less vibration the strings can create? Doesn't it stand then to say that the sound a pickup would get would be more high pitch than one say closer to the neck? I'm sure engineers in the 70s knew this too.
Click to expand...
There are multiple frequencies present on the string when you initiate the note. The lowest, the fundamental, is kind of like a jump rope, secured at the two stopped ends. The 1st harmonic is a sine wave with a node in the center. The second harmonic has two nodes; and so on; a theoretically infinitesimal string mass having an infinite series of harmonics.

Anyhow, all of those modes are present on the vibrating string. The location of the pickup simply changes the relative amplitudes in the transducer signal in the pickup slugs; since the fundamental has less physical displacement on the string closer to the bridge, while the higher harmonics remain relatively constant.

Hope that makes sense.

BTW, neither Leo nor the CBS folks did any calculation for placement. Leo had a breadboard instrument, and just moved them around until he liked the sound; kind of like this:


The CBS folks just did what they thought looked good.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Amano, P. Aaron, JRT64 and 12 others
#19
Pre-CBS Fender refers to the "Leo" years.
In 1965, Leo sold Fender to CBS. (with a 10 year non-compete clause)

As they entered the 70s, CBS became increasingly "out of touch".
It's entirely plausible that decisions such as changing pickup placement were made purely for cosmetic reasons, and any resulting tonal impact could have been considered of little consequence at the time.

By they time (cbs) Fender changed the Jazz bass bridge PU position, Leo was likely already secretly tinkering with the position of the Stingray Humbucker.

More importantly, why did Leo change the spacing of the dots at the 12th fret by '64?!
And then CBS later tried to sweep the controversy under the rug for good by going to block inlays! :eek:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ric Vice, Justinian, hennessybass and 4 others

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back