psw

SwedishLuthier, that is more along the lines of what I'm looking for. I've always found it odd that luthiers invest so much time in making the curves and contours of their guitars so aesthetically pleasing, but then they use a boring, shiny metal rectangle for their pickup covers. I guess we follow tradition, but you'd think we'd put more thought into the look of the pickups and how they enhances the overall look of the guitar being that we are the designers. I don't know, maybe I'm the only one bothered by this.

There is no end to the way you can dress them up really...but also there is so much mojo and fetishness about pickups, people often like to 'see the engine' kind of thing...notice how a lot are branded and uncovered and all that side of things...

There is not reason though not to consider the pickups in an aesthetic scheme...I tend to...here's my latest LP with tortoiseshell pickup bobbins that go with the colour and some of the subtle additions...similar touches on me tele as well...

There are serious disadvantages in making 'non-standard' pickups in a guitar, you are kind of stuck with them, what if you want to change or a new owner gets a hold of the thing...sound matters more I would have thought, along with options. And similar with the custom market, where is the sales bass for none-standard pickups...you'd have to work out what works for that kind of format, construct custom parts like bobbins, mounting rings, covers, magnets...all expensive stuff, and not worth it unless there was some significant sound benefit I suspect...

My Tele has a fender wide range Hb, a very interesting pickup and quite valuable in it's vintage form...but a bit of a PITA as it is huge compared to say a standard HB...so have to make custom mountings and routings to have the thing in there...and you better like it's bright 'clang' cause there is no easy way back to something more 'standard'...

Part of the 'theme' of this guitar was the 'chrome'...but the pickup is made more distinctive by mounting in a huge custom brushed aluminium plate 'ring' and tortoiseshell stripes...just takes a little imagination there to make something 'look' different.

Then you see there are some that have tried hiding pickups completely...like the Variax and an old fender model...almost universally people think they look weird by the lack of a pickup being visible...just a thought!

You could consider making covers from wood to your own design and shape and putting in the bobbins from something like a P90 or single coil or whatever you choose, or have something made...and use the techniques as Zwaan describes perhaps to put them together to give a unique look and shape...just have the poles close to or through the surface of the wood...use a veneer perhaps...all kinds of options there.

And, yes, a normal pickup size and shape doesn't mean a 'normal' pickup...so many variables and things that can be done regardless of shape and size...again custom winders abound that could help.

Also, you seem low on details other than 'aesthetics' as to what you actually want the things to sound like...non-traditional' might as easily be code for bad as some standard designs can be...

Sounds good, the 3mm thing is mostly so that the bulk of the coil is near the strings and the profile is thin limiting the spread of EMI...but yeah, 4mm is probably ok...the 3mm should easily hold a hand wound coil with plenty of overlaps and is a guide.

Sounds like that wire you had was a losing deal, never heard of such a thing, but no doubt the coating was being stripped.

7.9-8.3 ohms, ideal...just let it set...good to hear from someone that took their coil apart and found it to be solid, there are a lot of people that doubt the suggested glue and technique, but 'glue winding' is the only way to get that kind of saturation and it 'does' gap fill...and as you found, there is the option of pulling things apart.

There is the length of the wire and at times the amount of overlapping and such can effect readings a little...clamping while drying as I showed, especially on the sides where the coil can bulge creating air gaps...and there is a fair bit of tension in such a coil, especially at the ends you might have noticed, the slower gluing time allows things to 'settle' a bit and over time there is some give. Plus, it's safe, sure, cheap and works!

I probably have some pics of the switch wiring, and that seems like a decent enough plan. Basically, a 4pdt switch is 4x spdt switches ganged together...each with three terminals. In more recent guitars like my tele, I have connected the bridge pickup directly to the circuit...hard wired. Two of the 4pdt switches I use to lift the entire selector and short together, ground and hot. Another connects the bridge pickup to the controls (so around the selector) and the last one generally connecting the batteries ground to turn on the circuit.

The upshot is that when you turn on the sustainer, the bridge pickup is connected automatically regardless of the selector position, and it returns to whatever the selector is at when turned off. All other pickups are completely disconnected from the guitars circuit. The power is only connected when the sustainer is on, saving power and keeping the guitar stock...as in, it will work without the battery as it used to, not a feature in commercial units, and prolongs battery life quite a bit.

It can take a while to dry, but generally as long as it is basically 'set' you can bind it up with PVC tape and test it out.

When planning wiring or testing, you need to keep the wires relatively short...remember the leads coming off of the coil is an extension of it and will be giving off a bit of EMI...twisting it together can help a bit and when laying it into the guitar, try and keep it away from signal components as best you can.

The harmonic switch is just a simple 'phase switch' that reverse the leads.

just thought also, the magnet really needs to be 'glued on' as it may try to vibrate

...

On the improvement thing...there is some scope but there is more to these things that some expect and a lot of work exploring areas that are not profitable, or are just based on some faulty ideas. It can be a long road. Always, the best approach is to try to achieve the best possible response from a simple system. There are also 'value judgments' about what you actually want the thing to do, respond and sound like. Col's circuit was particularly aimed at low power and a very 'mild' controlled sustain and good fundamental response on the lower strings...mine is a very dynamic system generally, the newer ones have a different kind of 'drive control' as well. That is not to say one approach is 'better' just a choice...so be careful on the notions of 'improvements'. Also, you need to set some strong criteria for things, and in my case there has always been a lot more criteria that I tried to meet and generally achieved than just 'performance'...for instance, my homemade circuits are 1/4 the size of the commercial units. they are significantly smaller and adaptable to many types of guitar, combinations with pickups or stand alone drivers, various driver designs adaptable to different situations, power only required when the guitar is on, conservative in power use for increased battery life...etc.

Now, some have gone for "improvements" and often just come up with bigger power hungry circuits that require guitar modification, power on all the time, even some requiring remote power as a battery isn't practical...all these kinds of things of course break my personal criteria and so couldn't be regarded as an improvement...and they don't sound significantly better either...but each to their own in that regard, as long as you have something to aim for and if you want it enough, if you can create custom circuit designs (and not just crib together other known circuits that are not for this purpose specifically which has some unique qualities) there is some scope. However, the basic design accredited to me is that of a coil that will run from just about any suitable amplification that can power it...no phase compensation or agc and such are absolutely necessary. It is one of the reasons that circuits are kept 'secret' in that some may take a design such as mine that took a few months to develop, change a few none critical components or replace with a virtually identical op-amp and call it their own...which of course is not the case. The driver coil is the heart of things anyways and took quite a bit to develop despite it's simplicity, the circuit is virtually incidental by comparison. It is not the only design that could work, but to develop those, you'd have to go all the way back to scratch and test and retry everything...and to be really impressive, get a demonstrably better result for the effort. You will notice that I only used muti coil designs, like the bilateral, rails and even hex things...in an effort to install say into the middle slot or even by the bridge on some...or in the pickup ring in others. When tested as if a single coil, they generally worked, but were so much harder to make and some were darn right quirky! So, some scope with 'improvements' but it is a crap shoot and you need to ahve a good idea where you are headed and prepared to forge your own road I suspect.

Hmmm.... I may try this on a trem guitar I have going! Seems like a good compromise between my 3-a-side design, and straight string pull! I also like the fast that since you've got it on the truss rod cover, it's pretty reversible if you don't like it, except for some holes UNDER a cover.

Chris

Well with this thick plate, the only holes 'under the cover' are the screws holding it on, the rollers are entirely held on and exclusive to the "plate". On mine it is a bit larger than average, this gives a bit more mass (being 3mm aluminium), strength to the headstock join, a bit of a decorative touch and allows for a more 'decorative' arrangement of the rollers and string slaying to the tuners. However, they could be arranged in-line and much closer to the nut with a more average truss rod cover.

Oh...they also serve as a string tree to reduce sympathetic vibrations on that side of the nut...though less important with an angled back headstock as on most gibsons than with fender types.

So, yes reversible...the main thing is to affect a straight string pull across the nut which is good to have either with or without a trem really.

I notice that the 'modern' there has the two e's pulling slightly in and perhaps with a bit of tweaking you could fix that. But there are lots of guitars that could benefit from this kind of thing, such as explorer type hocky stick types which also don't pull straight across the nut, or any kind of novel design.

Thanks...yes, it works well...of course with a trem the strings are moving all the time so things need to move freely.

I used the ball ends of strings with a rivet shaft as the 'axle' so they move freely not touching the bottom or top of the plate or rivet (the rivet press fitted into the aluminium with a touch of super glue). There is quite a substantial 'side pressure' on the things, try pulling the strings to centre while tuned up and you can feel the pressure. I had thought it was only a partial success, but a small dab of vaseline in the roller ensures everything moves freely, the nut is teflon lubricated...so it stays in tune perfectly now (oh, and locking tuners)...

Not sure if you will find suitable screws to fit a ball-end roller, but I'd be making them as long as possible to resist the side pressure on them and make sure they move freely. It would need to be a pretty small screw, perhaps something like that used to attach tuners for instance might be the ticket. If the 'plate' isn't parcticaly, perhaps two ball ends on top of each other might be an idea to give height and support so the screw doesn't just bend to the side...as I say, get a guitar and feel how much pressure is on the things...'the plate' on mine is over 3mm thick and takes it right up to the level required so there is plenty of support there without going into the wood at all.

Glad the idea made an impression, one of my better ones!

Well...you could check this old thread at GN2 GN2 4real Link...cols circuit might have been included there, or in the tutorial, before it closed I added things into there as they developed from the original thread. My understanding is that it went through quite a few different developments, and certainy the aim was for a different response and tested with an HB driver as well...

I don't recall what a 4558 is, but I assume it is an op amp. All the "power" is coming out of the LM386, all the preamp stage is doing is overloading the input creating distortion and square wave compression and noise. However, if a general preamp design, you can adjust this to zero or even less to a theoretical infinite (power allowing) gain...but this is not preamp gain, not actual raw power that a power amp designed to run a speaker or driver requires.

The idea of pushing the circuit and distortions were well and truly discussed and tried in various forms but again and again it comes back to a clean signal close to the signal of the vibrating strings themselves (strings don't actually vibrate in a distorted square wave you understand). Don't mistake distorted with loud or power, it is actually the opposite in many respects...

Well...I'm not sure at all about "familiar"...the LM386 should be very stable especially with those extra caps and such, and a proper zobel (if you have messed around with that there could be a problem)..of course if you send a signal into the input with a gain or 100 times, especially with any decent powered hot pickup, you will just get 'mush'...attach a speaker to the circuit in place of the driver and listen to the thing!?

"My circuit"...well there have been so many. The more recent versions are a typical LM386 100uF output cap kind of thing and pretty much a buffer only stage and a light adjustable AGC that can be defeated or gives a preamp gain down to zero or "off"...so, no gain at all in the preamp stages for maximum clean and efficiency...but I make a darn good driver! I don't give away my current circuit, but details and pics of previous circuits exist and are based on the basic principles. It is not as 'magic' as people assume and the driver is the heart of things, but I can tell you it is and unusual discrete transistor and contains a novel design...the zobel is only coincidentally associated with the AGC and runs in parallel. There were some interesting ideas floated about on different values, but I can't speak to that. The main purpose of the 'preamp/buffer' is to prevent loading (which you seem to have) and I have a pickup input impedance into the buffer stage of 1Mega ohm...if you have cribbed designs form ordinary audio circuits you might have 10-100K ohm and this may be too small!

No...no gain stages at all, it's all power amp and clean no gain in the preamp with no loading at all on the pickup.

Well, if you have a different design and wont tell me, I cant speak to that either.

The principle of reversing the phase of the driver (or in fact the signal in) is that the sustainer will attempt to stop the fundamental and drive the next loudest harmonic. As you can tell from natural harmonics, these change throughout and start again after the 12th fret and although musical, is not always intuitive.

Well I don't know what side shielding is, but you do realize that copper shielding wont help with electromagnetic interference. You need to pull all ground and hot pickup leads out of circuit (usually by pulling the entire selector from the guitars circuit) and directly attach the bridge hot and ground directly to the circuit input (this can be a permanent connection)...I've published the 4pdt switch to achieve this around and you can see it in the tele thread.

"clean sustain" is what you need to aim for, you can add distortions as much as you like in effects or amps. I ahve no idea why you should be getting problems with effects unless you are getting a huge signal from the driver into the pickup and running into the input of a digital effect or something...so hard to tell because you mention so many variables and no details for me to assess it.

To get clean sustain, you want low power and no signal being picked up by the bridge pickup causing fizz.

Now, think about it. If you plugged your guitar into a 100x preamp booster before your amp, it would turn to much....well, not clean! This is exactly what you are doing to that little LM386 which itself isn't known to be that 'clean' especially if driven at hi gain...this will cause oscillation and distortions because everything is overloaded, presumably in the false premise that 'more power is more better'. In fact, it sound like you are getting micro-phonic feedback which can sound like oscillation and definitely what you don't want. Thin k of a PA and microphone, if it gets too close or too loud or too distorted or compressed, it is going to 'whistle' till you turn it down and or move the microphone away from the speaker...this is exactly the same as the pickup and driver in this system...the feedback you want is regenerative not oscillating and your strategy seems to be begging for such problems.

Col's circuit, well...see first paragraph, maybe send him an email....but it is a completely different thing. Similar principles but even more 'control' and mild effect than mine...basically you have very little gain in both the LM386 and the preamp stages for clean, filters and AGC for control...so even goes further than mine.

My suggestion is before you go off exploring seemingly 'good ideas' build the most basic clean design and slowly modify it to improve performance so you can hear the effect of each strategy. When you do this, I think you will find that lower power is better, clean is better and watch those impedance's.

did i forget anything?

in your circuit is it have any additional gain stages like mine there? opamp or transistor? what is the exactly the dramatic effect of changing output or input cap? other than harmonic bloom

Output cap is to give a bit more of a treble bias to drive the high strings a bit better. However, the result is that it struggles, especially at higher powers, to drive the lower tones (below C 5th fret g string) at the fundamental...it will bloom into a harmonic usually an octave and a 5th above on these notes. If you use a bigger cap, like col did, you may find that high strings struggle, it is in part to compensate for the characteristics of my driver though, he used a completely different driver with his circuit.

Not sure what has been going on with that wire, but enamel coated wire is a pretty tough coating that generally needs sanding or scraping off to get any kind of reading. Can't think how more turns or length could reduce resistance unless shorting except more common is perhaps not using a multimeter properly. You must have the settings in the correct range, remember 8 ohms is very low...so you don't want it set to Kohms or 1,000 of ohms for instance (as in a pickup), this might give such readings as you start winding into it's range. Generally about 160 winds will get you into an 8 ohm region but it depends on the winding and the bobbin to be sure, reading is necessary. Test you reading ability by taking readings of speakers that you know the value of...say 8 ohms...so you know you are doing it right.

I would hold off on your HSH conversion thing...this is not an easy guitar to do...no, a mid pickup will not work for you, so do not even think about it. Many of us tried that, the mid driver of mine was close but nowhere near good enough and very difficult to make...no one quite got it working, certainly not in an HSH guitar, possibly 24 frets...you just don't have the distance. The details are hidden in the huge thread, but in the end I abandoned it through lack of performance and the newer 'wafer' coil designs that are now in that guitar.

Your best bet for an HSH is perhaps to get an old HB pickup and wind a driver to the neck most coil...you will be losing your neck pickup though effectively. With an HB you don't have the throw to lower them too much and get any decent sound and again, technically difficult to piggyback on to...my LP experiments might be in the sustainer threads thing, it can work a bit, but certainly not 'good enough' and you lose the neck pickups effectiveness completely lowering it that much.

The thicker 5 and 6 strings are the easiest to drive, relatively slow moving with lots of metal in them. What you are trying to create is an electromagnetic device with enough force at low power to move even thin strings (10's are better with any sustainer guitar, see sustainiac, et al) at all frequencies which will be several thousand times a second it needs to be able to change states. If your magnets are too strong, they are going to be working against that, too much power and it is going be hard to reverse the flow quickly, any loose coils will create unwanted signals and effect performance...and of course there are so many factors like resonance and inductance...a lot of these things are taken care of in the basic simple design and specifications, which is why they are important.

PVA btw will not effect the enamel insulation on the wire, but it will' repair' the occassional reading spots. You may even get a faint wine from even the best potted coils (like my completely solid tele driver if you turned up the power and listened very closely acoustically)...there is a lot of energy in these things.

Take your time and try one at a time. A small coil will likely make 4 drivers, it really isn't that much wire or turns, easily done by hand. Building on top of pickups can be tricky and you risk wrecking the pickup if not confident, but it is possible on single coils.

Once you get into anything 'exotic' like dual coils and such, there is potential, but no formula to work from...what is the ideas to get the qualities you want in such a design, what wire gauge, series or parallel, how to avoid leakage into the very nearby bridge pickup if you put it in the middle right near it? Many if not all of these have no definitive answer. Sustainiac holds a patent on the concept for strats, but no product...that might be a clue...I am sure it could be done with enough money and determination and time and a lot of ingenuity...but in all this time, nothing has come too close. My last one was a compact bi-lateral on a standard tele between the pickups...but no dice...so, feel it a bit of a lost cause...and not all guitars are suitable you know.

For an HSH guitar, sustainiacs solution is to use a compact HB coil sized HB...like a JB Jnr with their driver right up close to the neck...possibly a scheme to consider...or move the neck pickup back a bit...if you ahve the nerve and wood skills and a small enough driver that works.

That said, test everything till you have it working before getting too far ahead of yourself or anticipating success with something like a mid driver...best of luck

I may have to make another post on finding someone to make non traditional custom pickups.

I found that to be the main thing about this book, that there are non-traditional approaches...it's more of a springboard for ideas I suppose. For instance, side coils on edge or epoxy molding of the pickups themselves, incorporating wooden covers...this is all fairly unusual things and the techniques for building them sound enough and transferable to experimentation...I can't think of another book that goes in that direction really.

I am sure there is a market for something on pickup building...but a lot of it is an 'art' that comes from knowledge and technique...I suspect what a lot of people are going to want is prescriptive, do this, get that...and that is inviting controversy as we all have our biases and preferences and opinions.

Yes, he is the Q-tuner guy...he is a little 'off the wall' but I kind of liked that, and of course the book is about making fretless bases, whixh is not clear, and half of it about pickups of his own design. In that respect though, it is interesting as it exploress quite a few 'different' ideas and construction techniques...all the designs are for bases though.

I kind of liked the quirky nature of the book, I used some of those kinds of ideas in making some of my sustainer designs, but it is not really that useful for making 'pickups' for the guitar...

Good...sounds like you are well on the way if you are getting sustain with that coil...just follow the guidelines, make it solid as you can and close to 8 ohms (7.5 is fine).

Winding such coils is not hard, but it is something that people don't do a lot of, so extra care and or a few goes may be necessary. Fortunately the wire should only work out to be a couple of bucks per coil and take about 10 minutes to wind once things are prepared.

Test the circuit with a speaker to get an idea of it's sound, it is an amplifier after all, and add and learn to adjust things to get a reasonably clean sound and you can adjust things. A 1K trim pot between pins 1&8 of the LM386 adjusts gain in the power amp, the preamp volume pot adjusts the volume going into the power amp. If your preamp power is too hot, you will overload the input (perhaps strong pickups or too much gain) ... it is exactly like a master volume amp, and you need to be able to adjust things and know what they do...of course with the sustainer coil on it, you will not be able to 'hear' it, only the effect, so you do need to understand how this works to get the effect you want.

Again, the easiest and probably cheapest way to build a driver is to use an old SC pickup (or even half an HB)...block it up to leave 3mm at the top to wind on to, use plenty of glue. This provides a neat end product, height adjustment, the bobbin and a suitable magnet structure all in one, all you really need to worry about is the winding and potting. A guitar store may even give you some cheap or broken pickups to play with if they know what you are doing.

Well, if you have a distortion circuit feeding the driver, this is a poor strategy...you want to have a clean efficient signal driving the strings and with just enough power...likely you are getting EMI into the pickups...in testing, are you getting clean sustain without any effects or distortion or unusual noise...generally the aim is for the clean guitar sound not to change with the sustainer on or off, other than the effect of the string driving...you can add distortions and such all you like to this.

You will also want to adjust the gain and power of the circuit to achieve this goal.

Each guitar can be a bit different as well, the pickup feeding the circuit obviously has an influence on performance, the distance between the pickup and the driver, characteristics of the circuit...if you put a distortion unit in the circuit to the driver you are creating a huge compression, cutting off the top of the wave forms, and boosting every single frequency, not just the dominant tones of the guitar and pickup combination...which could explain a lot if that is the arrangement you are trying.

Mostly it is about efficiency and that is why a very good driver coil is important, then less power so you stay clean and under the EMI threashold. Other circuits work, I still tend towards and have gotten very good results form an LM386 type circuit...the preamp or buffer stage is almost entirely there to avoid loading, there should be no change of tone or volume for switching the circuit in or out other than the effect of driving the strings.

So...

#1 hard to tell exactly what is going on there, however, the harmonics will change over the fretboard rising as you get to about the 12th fret and reverting back again there after...you may need to adjust the 'bias' of the circuit, I change my output cap to 100uF to get great high string fundamental sustain but the lower notes tend to become harmonics, potentially you could switch such components for a variety of 'effects' or responses. In ahrmonic mode, I get harmonics on all strings, all the way up...but as I say, they will alter with the overtone series and the arrangement of the guitar. If you are using a distortion of overdriven circuit, you will be boosting the harmonic content and so it may be having trouble driving the fundamentals alone with all this other 'stuff' in the signal.

#2 Cant speak to sustainiac, my design is very different in many ways so not a fair comparison. In particular, sustainiac has onboard electronic swithcing, half power may just be switching electronically any number of variable and it isn't the 'power' at all that is being altered, just he switches control signal.

#3 Not quite following this, the volume knob of the entire guitar? A volume knob loads the guitar and circuit, that's how it works. How it interacts with pedals, to hard to tell, as for the direction of the knob...that could be a wiring issue. Sounds like there are 'issues' and perhaps it is in your strategy of using distortion or something. As I say, aim to adjust the circuit so that you can get clean sustain with minimal noise (or none) with a clean signal on the amp. The volume control will operate as an intensity thing as loading this will also generally load the signal into the circuit driving the strings...it depends a little on how it is wired though...ideally you should get exactly the same sustain even with the volume to zero so you can do volume swells into note and such, the signal to the driver should be taken directly from the bridge pickup and remember that all other pickups need to be completely bypassed (hot and grounds) to avoid issues there.

I would really need complete details of wiring and symptoms, but this is a DIY project where you may need to do a lot of experimentation to get things just right.

I had my sustainer guitar with me yesterday on my weekly jam and haven't played it for a while, the battery is fairly old now as well, but the thing still works perfectly with your basic 3mm coil and fairly simple LM386 circuit. When I talk about 'clean' I am not making a value judgment on the kind of tone people might choose, it sounds great distorted, but this comes from the amp or pedals and you can go nuts with all kinds of effects, but the signal coming out of the guitar should remain the same and certainly shouldn't suffer for having this device in it...the only way you are going to be able to hear what is going on is if you use a clean signal for testing, and to get predictable and superior results, a pretty 'straight' signal driving the strings, something akin to the vibration of the strings themselves...hope that makes sense and is of use...

There is a product called the x-batt as I recall...sends power through a stereo cable to the guitar sharing the ground with the -ve volts...building your own powersupply is not advisable and really, not economical compared to what you can buy in a proper regulated supply...plus, it is so unnecessary and inconvenient as people have pointed out.

A solution without an actual problem...now a power hungry sustainer or onboard digital effects, maybe...but in reality batteries tend to last at least a year!

Something that might be of interest that I read recently from an old Adrian Legg modifying nook that is pretty clever...

Install a mercury switch into the guitar as well as the jack switch to disconnect power...this sense the physical position of the guitar and can be set up so that the power is turned off when the neck is upright...so, put your guitar on the stand and the power is off and your guitar is silent, till you pick it up and put it into a playing position.

And yes, I suppose you could make a pretty stupid "kill switch" with it

Plastic is good...however...

There is a lot of tension in a coil and the closer the winds are around the blade or core the better, the windings are electromagnetizing the core so any gap will effect efficiency is my concern.

good luck

The design is fairly specific, while you can try any number of variations and some may work to some degree, the big sustainer thread covers most of these experiences if one wants to go their own way.

You may have seen my Telecaster from a few years back which uses essentially the original design with a more advanced construction method and being see through, you can see exactly what you need to be aiming for...

http://projectguitar.ibforums.com/index.ph...leful&st=15

I used 4 craft ceramic magnets on a 3mm ordinary steel core sitting above it. The coil was wound with 0.2mm to 8 ohms ensuring that the sides are pushed in tight and the whole thing kept neat...and is of course as solid as a rock!

All these materials were found cheaply and locally, steel can be found at a hardware store or around the house and can be shaped (unlike magnets), I suspect that these magnets were used for making fridge magnet kind of thing and was found in a pack of 10 of $2...bobbin material that has proven successful includes plastic from old folders or packaging!

No, it is not practical for the beginner to attempt to build exactly this, but the only difference between this and one with a bobbin (as shown in the one in the tutorial built on top of a pickup) and wood glue is that it is self supporting in construction, otherwise this is exactly what you should be aiming for...the core steel was even cut from the same piece!

...

The easiest way is to simply convert an existing pickup bobbin...the tutorial I linked to shows very clearly how this can be done...

This does use the wood glue and shows a neat coil wound around a 3mm space made to the top half of an old single coil pickup stripped of it's windings, magnets are included in the device, once taped and the cover put on it looks exactly like a pickup and has been a successful technique many, many times to build this device. Notice how similar it looks to the coil on the tele or in fact an of the successful projects built on this design, again...what you need to be aiming for!

...

If you can build something that is essentially this device, then you can expect to get good results, but it is somewhat sensitive and is an "electronic component" with specific characteristics that you are trying to create. It does not have to look pretty, but it does have to function at the best efficiency you can make for it.

You will also see a lot of the installation requirements for this particular guitar and the complications of wiring a sustainer into a guitar in that thread.

The design is fairly specific even if it does tolerate a fair amount of variation...

I've found consistently that a 3mm steel core cut and filled to size works well, however seperate poles as on a full sized SC pickup conversion works too.

So, in mine the thickness is 3mm as this is the stock, the depth of the coil 3mm, plus the thickness of any bobbins, plus the magnets under it.

As for magnet strength, like power, this makes things worse, you need just enough no more...pretty much the kind of power you would find in a pickup. A very strong magnet will actually make it difficult for a string to vibrate freely in the magnetic field and may even pull the strings out of tune!

The "hollowed out" coil sounds like a bad idea...like the coil, the blade and the coil need to all be close and rock solid...if it is removable the blade inside will be the first thing that will try to vibrate, yes?

...

I think you have the very broadest idea about the concept but not considered the details of what you are trying to achieve and this is leading you to think that just about anything will work!

Broadly, you are taking a signal from the guitar, amplifying it so you get an alternating voltage and current, then putting it through a coil (with the appropriate dimensions and qualities) to create an alternating magnetic signal N,S,N,S,N,S as fast as the frequency of a sting, many thousands of times per second for some frequencies, certainly very fast! There is a tuned metal string directly above it, so of course this will vibrate, etc...

You seem to have the vague concept down, but to build one, especially if you are going to design variations into things....you do need to understand the details better...

Any metal or magnetic thing near the device is going to be affected...so if you have a lose fitting metal core or magnet....this will of course be the first thing to try and vibrate and buzz, create inefficiency and mechanically can not vibrate as fast as a string and has it's own resonances or "tuning"...that can't be good. Similarly, when powered, every single bit of wire will be come electro-magnetic...and of course want to vibrate, hence if it isn't solid, buzz city.

And...you have pickup coils in there, these are designed to pickup the tiniest variations in magnetic fields...such as the vibration of a string in a weak magnetic field above it...these coils will pickup the magnetic signal as well and create noise and squeal if too close by inducing quite large currents in it...consider how a transformer works, same thing!

It is a balancing game, you need enough distance and isolation for any coils or other components that would allow the signals of the sustainer to get into them. This is done by distance, or by reducing power most effectively. You need just enough permanent magnet, not too much...etc

It is probably not worth going over all this again and again...

...

However, the easiest, cheapest and most successful way to build a driver is to make it out of any old cheap pickup as per the instructions aiming for the quality shown in the picture above and takes about 10 minutes! This provides a bobbin, magnets, neatness, cheapness and a way of mounting and adjusting height as well...as long as it is super solid, wound tight with glue all the way through as you wind it (and as shown!), pushed in tight and taped up so there is zero vibration...you will have achieved your aim and the minimum requirements of the project to get any kind of real success. It certainly is a place to start before creating massive variations without understanding the deeper principles or working with materials that perhaps you don't have the skills to do an adequate job of constructing with.

So, you know...good luck as always...be aware that the mistakes you have been making are exactly the same as countless others and explained again and again and draws the project into disrepute. It does work, as described, it characteristically doesn't work through poor workmanship, wrong specs and naive variations and a 'it'll do' kind of approach. It is not "hard" but the details are there for a reason!

Paint tin lid ... I hope this material is non-magnetic or even metal

Magnet inside the core + not usually a very good idea ... a magnet is N/S and this coil thin (3mm deep) so you will have the coil wrapped around half of one and half the other potentially neutralizing out quite a bit of effect.

Also ... internal magnets are hard to find with a suitable sized core and difficult to shape without damage to them.

Rare Earth Magnets ... also generally not a good idea for this design. These things are generally very powerful but their field very condensed around them, they are most strongly attracted to themselves and while powerful have a short sphere of influence.

(note that the MikeG tutorial has some flaws and the device was not as successful as it could have been. One glaring one was he used two rare earth magnets on the ends of his core, not a good plan nor the design. Wrong gauge wire affected high string response and the SS core material was probably not ideal for this purpose.

"white glue" seems ok ... there are always variations, a blurry pic is not the best information however, if it says it is made of PVA then that is what it is you know, very common stuff.

...

The design is fairly specific, while you can try any number of variations and some may work to some degree, the big sustainer thread covers most of these experiences if one wants to go their own way.

You may have seen my Telecaster from a few years back which uses essentially the original design with a more advanced construction method and being see through, you can see exactly what you need to be aiming for...

http://projectguitar.ibforums.com/index.ph...leful&st=15

I used 4 craft ceramic magnets on a 3mm ordinary steel core sitting above it. The coil was wound with 0.2mm to 8 ohms ensuring that the sides are pushed in tight and the whole thing kept neat...and is of course as solid as a rock!

All these materials were found cheaply and locally, steel can be found at a hardware store or around the house and can be shaped (unlike magnets), I suspect that these magnets were used for making fridge magnet kind of thing and was found in a pack of 10 of $2...bobbin material that has proven successful includes plastic from old folders or packaging!

No, it is not practical for the beginner to attempt to build exactly this, but the only difference between this and one with a bobbin (as shown in the one in the tutorial built on top of a pickup) and wood glue is that it is self supporting in construction, otherwise this is exactly what you should be aiming for...the core steel was even cut from the same piece!

...

The easiest way is to simply convert an existing pickup bobbin...the tutorial I linked to shows very clearly how this can be done...

This does use the wood glue and shows a neat coil wound around a 3mm space made to the top half of an old single coil pickup stripped of it's windings, magnets are included in the device, once taped and the cover put on it looks exactly like a pickup and has been a successful technique many, many times to build this device. Notice how similar it looks to the coil on the tele or in fact an of the successful projects built on this design, again...what you need to be aiming for!

...

If you can build something that is essentially this device, then you can expect to get good results, but it is somewhat sensitive and is an "electronic component" with specific characteristics that you are trying to create. It does not have to look pretty, but it does have to function at the best efficiency you can make for it.

You will also see a lot of the installation requirements for this particular guitar and the complications of wiring a sustainer into a guitar in that thread.

I've been reluctant to 'help' too much with these projects as already there has been so much information, these posts are in an 'unusual reference section of the forum, and I can be contacted directly if there are specific questions.

I would refer people directly to things like the pickup/driver winding tutorial in this section as well as this is really very succinct with plenty of pictures...psw's pickup driver tutorial

An alternative is this tutorial...http://diy-fever.com/misc/diy-sustainer/

Most people have problems because they misunderstand or don't appreciate the importance of the details, don't follow the specifications or construction requirements and/or can't build to the quality required.

That means, glue potting is a requirement of the project and a vital part of it...why is this...

Does anyone know what actually causes these vibrations? I plugged a small 8 ohm speaker into the amp, and with or without an input signal, when i turned the volume/gain up to a certain point, it started buzzing the same as my unpotted driver coil. What causes the vibration? Will simply securing the coil with wax, or glue or similar fix it? It just seems too simple to be true

You need a coil with as close to zero internal vibrations. Why are their vibrations? Because when there is an AC current going through the windings of the coil they all become magnetic and alternate at the frequencies or frequencies of the signal driving them. In addition there are resonances of the coil structure itself plus, if the windings can vibrate, they will and create still further signals!

PCV wood glue is recommended for a reason, not only is it safe, but able to be pulled apart if you want to have another go and wont stick so well to the plastic bobbin parts, provides gap filling properties and lets face it, drys effectively to a kind of PVC tape, so a fantastic 'liquid insulation'. Obviously you want to wind it with as few 'gaps' in there in the first place and bound up tightly while it dries. Wax potting after winding is not really suitable, and there definitely is no need to make a winding machine, you are only winding about 160 odd winds around a 3mm form. Also, super glues are very bad idea for many reasons and so to just about any epoxies that you would find in say a hardwarestore. There are reasons for this, yes they have been tried, yes they have generally failed!

If using a steel core, yes it will rust...but it should be shaped (the ends rounded so as not to cut into the wire) and perhaps protected with PVC tape over or a coating of 'varnish' such as super glue or perhaps nail varnish which will give it a plastic coating in short order. All these things are well illustrated in the step by step photos I would have thought.

As for the circuits, there are specifications and suggested modifications and somethings such as the required 0.2mm wire are crucial and can't be bought of a store shelf easily. This requires that you seek out and learn what is required to make these things successfully. In general, I have found a 100uF output cap on the circuit to have a better 'response' from these kinds of drivers and is typical of the kind i use.

As for wiring the device into the guitar, this can vary greatly with the setup of the guitar, primarily if there are any other pickups in there other than the bridge Pup. With one pickup, all is required is to turn the power on (a dpdt provides the harmonic function)...if any other pickups exist, these must be completely removed from the guitars circuitry...both the grounds and hots of all other pickups, not just "not selected' where the grounds may still be connected.

As I say, this depends on each persons guitar, but generally a 4pdt switch is required for any multipickup guitar...two poles to take out all the selection and pickups, another to connect the bridge pickup alone, and another to turn on the power.

However, before modifying anything or getting to carried away with such things...

build the/a circuit and test it as an amplifier with small speaker to ensure it works in this manner. It is not going to sound HI-FI but you don't want it sounding like a fuzz box and should aquaint yourself with the gain structure (pins 1&8 of the LM386 adjusts gain from 20x-200x amplification) so that your pickups and preamp are not overdriving the amp into saturation.

Build a solid 3mm, 0.2mm solid vibration free driver glue potted while being wound to around 8 ohms, give or take 0.5 ohms...run this from the bridge pickup and test the driver by holding it and it's leads (which are an extension of the driver coil)...and make sure all leads are reasonably short...then hold the driver above the strings well away from all pickups (over the neck) and test that you are getting proper clean sustain on all strings. Use only the bridge pickup for testing the device and take the signal directly from the bridge pickup to the circuit in addition to the guitars controls and amplifier system.

Then think about how you might integrate the system into your guitar with the requirements listed above for bypassing other pickups.

Do all tests with a decent 9volt battery power supply, do not use a power supply as these tend to add noise and are impractical anyway...

...

The heart of the project is the driver and the design, that is what will allow it to work with any number of suitable (buffered-power-amp) very simple amplification circuits. You need to be aware that it is very simple, but a precise electronic component. In essence you are actually building a type of electric "motor" to move the strings...

You are not building a pickup though similar, but a quite powerful tuned electromagnet that is putting out quite a signal to move the strings as you wish and as such it is designed to produce rapid electromagnetic fluctuations and create vibrations...this is the point.

As every single winding once power is applied becomes it's own magnet and vibrating, of course they will attempt to oscillate against themselves, this has to be restricted or eliminated...hence the glue...so that all the force is applied to vibrating the strings themselves and no other 'signals' or 'noise' is created by internal vibrations or interference by other nearby coils (such as other pickups), grounded areas, excessive leads (the leads from the driver coil in particular are simply extensions of the driver coil itself and put out a lot of EMI and can cause interference, etc.

Also be aware, we are talking about Electromagnetic Interference with this thing EMI...not radio interference for which copper shielding or humbucking pickups are dealing with..."shielding" such as this will have no effect (often it can actually cause problems as currents can be induced in such places) on EMI. The best defense is to create a di8stance between the source (bridge pickup) and the driver...too close or too much power and you will get squeal.

More power only creates more problems as well, you need efficiency and just enough power to run squeal and distortion free as possible. If not efficient enough ask yourself, is this driver vibration free built to spec and up to the task...have i got the circuit working properly, have I followed the testing procedures. So more power = more problems, rarely solutions!

...

Ok, well been a long time and of course this has been repeated ad-infinitum, I hope it has helped a bit and all I can offer is good luck and attend to the details, don't cut corners and enjoy. As I say, for specific problems, I can be contacted by email but bear in mind this is a DIY project and 'finding bits and pieces' in your part of the world is going to be radically different than it is for me in my tiny island at the bottom of the world...pete

I did write a return but the fates or the power company thought that shutting down the island momentarily (not that uncommon lately) should delete it...

I did sense a bit of entrapment to go back to something with diminished returns and you further post seems to reinforce that...

You are really going to get more depth than these kinds of articles and superficial analysis than this, interesting as it is and true at a surface level, perhaps this is where you are getting your ideas from and not seeing further...ed roman was worse, but even here he's saying the same thing as the rest of us have...

Adding another layer of complexity, there are actually two of these filters on each string, one determined by the bridge-pickup distance, and the other determined by the distance from the pickup to the fretted position on the string, which of course moves constantly as you play. For every string, at every fret, there is a pair of filters that determine with the pickups how the string sounds.

Yes, complexity, changes with every fretted note...

And there are some interesting if superficial overviews in such an article, but it too disputes your theories about there being a "sweet spot" and that even if one were to subjectively prefer a 'sweet spot' location for a pickup, the relative sweet spot would move with the length of the string.

I use combined pickups a lot if not most of the time for various reasons. This is where some of this is relevant, but along with numerous other factors.

On strat quack, this is the position 2 or 4 strat sound, a filtering effect that is related to the pickup positions, but plenty of other factors including the qualities of the pickups for example. This article doesn't really talk about it in any depth and I am surprised that you would not be aware of this term and phenomenon as it gets so much debate.

When one puts in "strat quack" into google, the first thing I get is def eddies article...

what is quack, anyway???

The tone that is generally referred to as "quack" - the classic Strat 5-way throw #2 and #4 spot tones - is created by a pair (or more) of pups, parallel IN PHASE - NOT out of phase.

And yes, the "quack" is caused by "filtering' between two pickups...and it will alter in quality with the distance between the pickups, and the length of the string. Quack will be different in different locations on a strat, even if it sounds quacky all over.

The specific frequency response (tone) that we have come to call "quack" is what happens to the tone when you play two pickups with the same tonal characteristics mounted in CLOSE PROXIMITY to one another. Actually, it's quite simlar to what happens when you play two pickups with one out of phase - not as dramatic, certainly but it is the same principle at work. The "quack" happens as frequencies produced by one pickup are emphasized or cancelled out but the output of the other pickup, leaving a notchy, quirky tone. Change the location of one pickup or the other, and you change the sound/frequencies that pickup produces, and that changes which frequencies are cancelled between the pair - changing the "quack factor."

The classic Strat quack is, I BELIEVE, caused in equal parts by the fact that (A) the pups are close together and ( the pups are so similar in frequency response and output (the combo of all three Strat pups on, in parallel, also is a nice quack). If you unmatch yer Strat pups - that is, swap ONE pup out for something dis-similar - it will have a distinct effect on the quack factor. That's why home-built H-S-S Strats lose some of the sweet quack in throw #4, unless you have a coil-shunt happening (like the Fender Fat Strats have).

But def eddies half a page also doesn't go into a lot of detail, but it is enough to get a feel for things and how it might appear in other guitars.

While the pickups are not "out of phase" via the wiring, it does have an 'out of phase' quality, a cancellation of frequencies because they are in part 'out of phase' buy virtue of their location. So, as you would know, the wave in the string may be going on an up swing over the bridge pickup, and a down swing over the neck potentially, so physically "out of phase". But this is only touching on the complexities that can occur and need to be considered...and alters with the changing length of string.

There are lots of things that determine a pickups character, certainly design. Splitting a coil as wes points out on an HB will not produce an SC sound because the magnet fields shape and qualities will alter. You won't be getting stratitis from an HB even if split for instance, because the two opposite and attracting fields have less "throw". (It's one of the reasons I still favour the simpler single coil sustainer driver much to the chagrin of those who seek more complexity, but I don't want to open that can of worms ) Some have proposed or tried to get a 'true single coil" split by mounting two actual strat pickups next to each other as an HB, but this too will have it's magnetic field completely altered by the nearby other pickups field regardless of it's electrical connection.

I’m not trying to pull the wool over anyone’s eyes and I don’t have anything to lose or gain. I was completely skeptical when I first heard about this but I didn’t make a conclusion until I actually heard it for myself, and that was a span of about 32 years. So I understand that people have reservations but I don’t understand how their opinion can be firm without doing the experiments (no offence)

This kind of thing just indicates that you seem wedded to the idea regardless of the logic or the facts, let alone the opinions experiences or understanding of others. I realize you mean well, but there is some logical flaws, particularly with the length of string and reinforced in the article that you cited...again...

For every string, at every fret, there is a pair of filters that determine with the pickups how the string sounds.

But regardless. I've shown you that I have a guitar for years for the express purpose of being able to mount pickups, locations and other devices and do wiring remotely from a host instrument...does that not indicate that I have done the kinds of things you are playing with in a similar way for years...do you really think you are the 'first'? But, one need not have that, many here make many many guitars and have built 24 fret and 22 fret and all kinds of combinations and pickups, some make their pickups and many have played with wiring and locations of pickups. This is effectively the same thing, not to mention playing existing guitars....do you really think that people have not made these observations.

I literally have my amp and guitars set up here at all times, often I'm just taking a break from playing to type these kinds of things to take a break. It was not that I resisted making your observations, I've made such things for years...and at one time perhaps I did have a naive understanding of things. That I and WezV say get different results, me with an actual LP as suggested, is a testament to all the variables involved and that there can't be such hard and fast rules. This LP will sound differently from the '69 original under the bed though the pickups are in the same place too. When you suggested your ideas, even though I could see some logical problems, of course I tried a few things to see.

No one is disputing that location is an important factor in the sound of a pickup. Even more so with combined pickups which will involve string length, relative location of a the pickups along it, relative location to each other, plus the cancellation and reinforcement resonances of the instrument (alterable say by my neck plate thing, or just construction and materials, neck joint, etc), the qualities and similarities between the pickups and many other factors...and, the wave cancellation that occurs as a result. As the string length alters dramatically with fretting, the location of the pickups by ratio too will move so I feel that such a factor is of lessor importance than some of these other factors that affects every note. Putting all your eggs in one basket would be ill advised.

...

Interestingly, I have been considering adding a middle pickup to my blue tele that you may be familiar with...

psw's tele

I'm not sure that I want to do this yet, but it was interesting that this conversation should turn to ideas about 'quack' and I might do some experiments to test this out to see if the results would be worth altering this guitar that is already a little complicated.

Now, bear in mind that I have done some experiments over the years, but this is how I might go about this on this unusual guitar.

I like my guitars quiet, but I happen to have a noiseless fender sc floating around. The guitar is complex enough and not really wanting to add more switches to it, plus like something a bit "different" as a rule.

So, my proposal would be to mount a strat pickup between the HB and tele neck pickup in the hope of getting some interesting, perhaps quacky sounds. I'd be proposing to operate the middle pickup with its own volume in place of the tone pot...so, you could dial in the amount of "quack" or middle pickup into any selection. I've done this before on a strat...

Tempting to call it "dial a duck "...however...

What a lot of people don't realize is this. The locations of the pickups in combination will produce a filtering effect, and the quack is because in these locations there is some 'physical our of phase-ness" (altering in quality with the pickup qualities and the varying positions of the guitar, etc). So, there is cancellations and reinforcement producing the effect. However, if you put one pickup wired out of phase with the other, you reverse the effect. So, instead of a hollowed out acoustic like quality typical of the 'strat quack positions' you get the reverse, a warmer almost HB like midrange-y kind of sound...what was canceled is now reinforced and vs-a-v. Fortunately, this guitar already has a phase switch to reverse the neck pickup and create such an effect between a middle and neck pickup if I chose, plus even more complexity with all three pickups and combinations of phase.

OK...tempting. But, what location for this pickup and pickup combinations on this guitar for the kinds of music and effect I want to achieve. After all, it means some wiring (the sustainer in it is a bit complex), loss of the tone control (I wouldn't mind on this guitar) scratch plate alteration and some minor routing into the guitar for the middle pickup.

Well, as is typical, and showing that people do do such experiments. I could wire the middle pickup directly and test it over the strings, perhaps mounting it over the strings on a stand that could be taped in place and moved around and played before making any commitment to the idea.

So, yes, there may be a 'sweet spot' for me on this guitar, with these pickups...and for the kind of music and tone I want to achieve and location is a part of that. But, there are ways to find such a "sweet spot". However, I would not be so arrogant or wrong to assume that this would be the right position with different pickups, a different guitar, or a different combination of pickups...or indeed a different player.

The problem with your hypothesis is not just that there seems to be things that your resist (the relative position of the pickup in relation to the changing length of string primarily) or that there are so many other factors, it's the notion that your 'sweet spot' is a given regardless of all these other influences and the perception of another player.

The problem with it is that this will hold you back and commit your to false premises that prevent finding and experimenting with a whole world of variables and influences that would help you in developing your craft of guitar making. I'm hoping that you can see that there is more and that your thoughts and experiments are not unique, nor the logical traps that people fall into. What would be of benefit would be if you can see the veracity of these things and make use of these ideas that you have explored. You don't want to become the laughing stock that someone like ed roman is fairly universally seen to be. A 'grain of truth' is not enough, and you really can't ignore something as obvious as the lenght of sting being a huge variable in the data.

Well, a power outage saved you from a more detailed "sea of words"...however

# I have a Les Paul plugged in next to my computer. It has identical pickups, both coils slug coils, and wound in series. It easily reproduces harmonics at the 12,7,5,4,3,2 frets on any open string with the HB pickup alone...so, disproving your "theory"...

# I also have a telecaster with an electromagnetic driver that is located at the 23rd fret, and in "harmonic mode" dampens the fundamental and drives the harmonics...this too disproves your thesis

# I also have had for some years a test-bed guitar which has allowed me to locate pickups of all types at most locations, so I have done much of what you have put forward in support of your ideas...

# I have heard opinions, flawed generally, from the "internet forums" and I don't believe that these at all support your argument or are of value. I have not seen real data that holds up to scrutiny or even ideas that are credible on a superfical level...

I saw your unattributed powerpoint presentation, not sure of the relevance there or how it supports your ideas in any particular way. However, these things are pretty basic and superficial and seems to just be put forward like "internet opinion" to give a veneer of science to proceedings.

Notwithstanding that I have an LP and several guitars that demonstrate differently, and a logic flaw in your argument that obviously I am not the only one who shares, put many times to you in this thread and the previous one...

String length changes with fretting = relative position of neck pickup changes in relation to every waveform of the string

"the question" is, how is this "not true"? If so, how does your theory stand?

Now, since you are citing "authority", I've not played that "card" nor have others, but in addition to the kinds of "research" you have done and having seen plenty of physical evidence to the contrary, and I think shown something of a logical flaw that obviously you and Roman and obviously others are not alone in taking on wholesale...

I studied the "physics and psycho-acoustics" of sound in 1984 at LaTrobe University in the physics department as a part of my music degree that also included a lot to do with things like additive wave form synthesis. With a score of 99%, you can be assured that I studied these things diligently and with great interest and my ideas were also treated with the same diligence that I apply to yours.

I'm treating your hypothesis in the same way as I would any other claims and looking for errors and counting down the logical fallacies that are all "red flags" while still giving you the benefit of the doubt and not entering into a war of "qualifications" as a "reason" but reason alone.

So, in short, I am not out to "prove you wrong" but to engage honestly with this idea, an idea that has been put forward many times as something of a "lore" or "mojo" or "myth" as I would have thought that was the intention of publicly airing such things. While I never claimed any "right", I certainly have not set out to "prove you wrong", anymore than I can see the ravings of Ed Roman that PRS is in a conspiracy to make substandard guitars by relocating the neck pickup.

There are a lot of "influences" about such things, and we have been saved from me expanding on the things you haven't perhaps considered as alternative hypothesis and tests that categorically disprove your ideas. Like most things, there is a "kernel of truth" in these ideas, but not in this application and not in such simplicity. Such a discussion could profitably be put into why and how one might go about producing a preferable outcome regardless of pickup position or a pickup position that is preferable for a certain kind of sound, or perhaps the kind of pickup quality that might have a preferable outcome for a 24 fret guitar. Or, some more depth about how pickups are sensing the string and why they have the qualities that they have. Such work can not proceed though while holding faulty beliefs such as what would appear to be the case.

It was quite simply pointed out years back to me on this forum for instance, that once you start fretting notes high up the neck, you have a string that is fixed in a location (fret) much like the bridge pickup is to the bridge end of the string permanently, and so exhibits many of the same qualities of that pickups location. Unlike the bridge pickup, across the range of the guitar, the neck pickup has more tonal variation because of the effective mobile sensing location relative to the strings length, while the bridge pickup is permanently at the tail end of the strings vibration. That the bridge pickup has a consistent higher "harmonic content", meaning that the amplitudes of the waves relative to each other are more even, because of this and that the neck pickup too will exhibit such qualities as a string is shortened.

But the reality of the tests that you suggest contradict your findings on the superficial level, the fact is that my LP does produce the 4th and other higher harmonics well, they are not canceled out, and there is more to it than you suggest and your "data" may well be wrong because it is based on a "theoretical model" of additive wave form synthesis which is not a direct analog of the real world nor takes into account the complexities that overwhelm such ideas as you propose and many others based on these ideas alone.

String length changes with fretting = relative position of neck pickup changes in relation to every waveform of the string

Move the pickup slightly from the crusader/roman hypothesis = a significant difference to harmonic cancellation tests

Supporting Data = hand drawn hypotheticals in support of argument

More conclusive data = real waveforms and a comparison of such things as suggested by the fretting of notes with a slight movement of the neck pickup

I've repeatedly pointed out the apparent "flaw" and you have read it multiple times, yet have not addressed it adequately in my opinion. But then, I didn't, twice in a year, put forward this theory nor am I saying it is necessarily "wrong" just that there is no hard data and some glaring irregularities yet to answer.

As usual, hard questions get responded by mojo supported by "lester" and "guns" and "les paul sound" and "I know" and personal slurs against anyone who dares ask the obvious, even when these same questions were raised, and not only by me, a year back and have been consistent with this subject whenever raised...

By not doing the tests or addressing these things sensibly with people who actively engage with your ideas, at your invitation by posting them on a public forum, it only makes one question them more. Especially if the only reply to such things are hand drawn diagrams in support of your theories, unreleased information and method of extracting such data, and subjective ideas based only on your own analysis.

But the red flags for most of these kinds of things, is of course to point to psw personally...hardly credible evidence of anything and intellectually bankrupt

No...I in fact have a genuine interest in these things...plus I may well be "wrong"...

All I am saying as so many have here and a year ago when you last brought this up is that as the length of a string changes with fretting, so too must these waveforms you present and as a result of the pickup position being fixed, surely the harmonic mix will therefore change...

Now you say you have data to prove that this is apparently not the case, yet the moving of the pickup a 1/2" either way does make a difference and am engaging in the scientific process which is to "test a theory" till destruction...

If you are right such a simple question, put to you for at least a year now, and the most obvious potential flaw in this long running "argument" in the guitar mojo thing should not be hard to at least show to be misguided, on my part...

It seems really important to you to prove me wrong

Are you suggesting that there is something "wrong" or just shooting a personal slur? Really, as put earlier, it is the scientific method and you claim not to believe or have an idea or theory now, but to conclusively "know"...

It's not "rocket science", though put a big enough engine on a house brick you'd get it into orbit. The question is kind of simple, yet the answers are not forthcoming...

I do believe that there are preferential positions of pickups and that there are reasons for some of the effects you describe, but I don't think the tact you have decided accounts for them is wholly legitimate for this reason...string length variable, relative placement of pickup effectively changes, theory of fixed pickup position would at first assessment be therefore flawed. If not so, there must be a way of demonstrating it, and I have suggested ways in which to do that. If you can actually show a conclusive 'theory' that holds water and addresses these questions, then I am even prepared to independently take my test guitar and any of a number of pickups and replicate your work and publicly prove you right...

I have this test bed guitar as I mentioned specifically for this kind of thing...

Plus, if you are right, it would have significant implications for the sustainer driver in which such questions as you have posed by your hypothesis has had some discussion over a number of years. Just the idea that there is a conclusive "best" placed scientifically proven location for a pickup would be of great benefit and I'm offering what I can to either prove or dispel any myths about it...there have certainly been enough around...

And surely, that's why you posted this stuff on this forum, for scrutiny and feedback from people who are going to actually put time and energy into really looking at it? No need to take it "personally" or to suggest it of me, all I have posed is a fundamental question that would on face value be a flaw in the logic and I simply have not been able to see why this isn't the case. You say it is, but instead of showing how the shortening of the string does not undermine the relative location of the pickup and so undermine your theory, you dodge the simple question and suggest that by me taking your ideas seriously that I have personal motives against you...what possible reason would I have for that?

You could well be right, but I have not seen conclusive answers is all...but I'll leave it if that's what you wish and the whole thread can be left inconclusive and fade away...

I agree, it's a hypothesis and simplistic. For one there is no "data" as such and a lot of assumptions.

Two, you again use the 5th fret, a harmonic division, and the 12th fret, the octave division and avoid the crucial questions put again and again, and a year ago...

The problem is that logically, with every note played, the waveforms shorten with the length of the string, what holds true for the open strings and strategic divisions like the 5,7,12 fret for instance, must be different perhaps radically, from those of the fretted notes between. Just as it may be argued simplistically that an open string will have an "advantageous" wave form, then so too must if be that between the open string and the next occurrence of this advantageous condition, there must be a place in which the opposite occurs, perhaps the third fret for instance, or a # or b note perhaps. But the reality is that there is very little if any real radical difference other than the character of the guitar itself...a subjective thing in most respects.

You have not gone about this scientifically, as WezV has pointed out, you have come to a conclusion it would seem and gone about looking for the answers, dodged the questions which are crucial to anything even approaching "a theory". You can't "know" but you can't get a consensus if you are not prepared to have the ideas 'peer reviewed'. I'm not a scientist either, but I can think of other reasons for many of you 'impressions' that have lead you to this impression, but it would seem that you have sought out this 'conclusion' for a very very long time and wedded to it.

I agree that of course a lot of higher order harmonics are 'faint' when sensed further along the string than an end point, but do they suddenly reappear if you move your pickup 1/2" one way or the other. But you seem also to be treating these harmonic modes of vibration as if they are equal in amplitude and 'weight' where in reality they are not.

Your citations of "pure tones" and additive synthesis theory is not directly analogous to the "real world" of a vibrating string, but I would be content to put aside a lot of these other factors, but that need not lead to the reasons you are citing for your research. The string does not move in all these different modes of vibration and resonance, by plucking a harmonic and damping a fundamental or other vibrationalary modes, you are significantly altering the manner in which a string vibrates. The reality is that the string moves in a complex wave of these forms "combined" not all these waves independently that together may synthesize a note.

Lets just say, there seems to be a logical flaw in the hypothesis and I am open to it being explained, but have as yet not seen anything conclusive or 'scientific. You didn't need to evoke "Ed Roman" to show how these kinds of things have been put before and as an example of bad science and self aggrandizement. You surely must have known (as any scientist would have done an exhaustive research before attempting experiments in earnest and picked it apart for obvious flaws) that such 'voodoo' existed, you as much as said so from the beginning. You also did know many of the issues and questions that would inevitably be raised even in a forum like this and be prepared to answer these things after discussing them a year ago.

I in fact own a 'test bed' guitar, a strat that has an open rout and capable of mounting pickups at any of these places pretty much and have done so in order to replicate conditions of other guitars for the sustainer project (a device that electromagnetically dampens strings and drives harmonics from the neck pickup position or there abouts). However, it is not necessary at this stage for me to repeat you experiments looking for evidence to support your hypothesis.

What you seem to be suggesting with things like the "capo/harmonic" experiment is that there is no difference in the harmonic being heard no matter how short the string is. So, this huge variable makes no difference? But, there is a significant variable when a pickup is moved ever so slightly from your 'preferred location'. If so, then surely moving the pickup just a little away would surely magically make all these attributes reappear and cancel out others. Your task is to rigorously try and 'disprove' your hypothesis by doing such tests and presenting such evidence that showed that this is true, not in a hypothetical way to be conclusive (which is to set up real world experiments) but just at the surface level as you are touching on here.

There may be something to your hypothesis, but it needs more, far more and questions raised should be addressed not dodged nor shrouded in dogma.

As for the equal temperament thing, I raised this as it is this that to some extent, I believe, that makes for the 'preference' of canceling out some harmonics and favoring others in the real world of marrying these things. The neck pickup is often given the term "rhythm pickup" because it lacks the complex harmonic content generally and so chords that combine notes and the resultant complex of harmonics are limited and so less jarring in a chordal context.

But, yes the idea of additive waveforms as a model for a single vibrating string is very well established, and content to work with you on this, but the question is still again posed...

Is it not logical, that as a sting is shortened (by fretting a note) that all the waveforms are shortened and so move in respect to the fixed pickup regardless of where it is placed? And, that as a result, what is true for the open string or convenient subdivisions, surely these effects (cancellations, nodal points, etc) move in respect to where the pickup is located. Does moving the pickup ever so slightly suddenly reverse things like the 4th harmonic/capo experiment? These kinds of things would give actual physical weight to your argument and encourage others perhaps to repeat your experiments and so give you the status of a cohesive 'theory' and consensus that seems to me is sorely lacking.

"no hotlinking allowed" indicated on all the links...so no pics here either

Get a 'friend" to ask him about the bodies, maybe if he could build something similar to entrap him into either telling the truth or claiming credit for "building them" himself.

People have different definitions of "building" guitars you know. It's one thing to carve out a body from a piece of wood, another to make a good neck especially if slotted and headstock. But there is also an art to "assembling" and finishing a guitar as well.

A lot of people "build guitars" from parts, me included. I don't have the resources to do fine gloss painted finishes or the tools or skill to do fretwork beyond what can be easily bought as parts. If there was something particularly "original" in the design say of the neck or body that you can make claim to, hmm. If the bodies and neck were made to a standard (say a strat neck) or to the buyers specs and design. It is stretching things a little, though still a bit foul, to say who "built things.

My guitars have all tended to be unique instruments though I did not make the bodies or frets generally. I did conceive of the features, many of them "original" and obtain or build rare parts, sometimes I have had bodies painted for me by professional spray painters even. But, the conception and the realization and a lot of the "work" was still my own and to that extent "I built them" but never claim that I physically ran the router around a plank of ash into the shape of a tele for instance.

But yeah, beware "facebook friends" and perhaps find a way of getting him to fess up or lie openly before getting too mad about things. There are pretenders everywhere, you would think that making a guitar to your specs, finishing a guitar well, or even a setup or wiring thing would be enough, but alas, not always so. many people get involved in this kind of activity for the kudos, sometimes because it's easier than playing the darn things!

But hey, if he's giving GFS credit for parts, sounds a little 'low brow' in the custom guitar market. Oil finish by chance?

I hear you, but I would be interested in the "design"...yours, his, or did you both steal it from fender or gibson or PRS for instance. No "law' was broken and to many if they buy parts from warmouth or whoever, they still are building the things...do warmouth get upset about not being 'credited' for all the guitars that they "built" that others take claim for, or do they simply chalk that up to another "sale" and hope for more.

My inclination would be to get some kind of 'entrapment' in order to see the extent of the 'deception'...he may come straight out and give you a big fat plug if called on where he got the bodies from...so a win. If not, you know decisively where he stands, can choose to elevate the prices to him or not sell in future perhaps, and call him out publicly as well perhaps...if he lies. But ideally, you'd be 'looking for a win' and that would be that if people like the 'guitars' he voluntarily gives you a great big plug. But you know...there are a lot of details missing from this scenario...who put up the specs and design for instance, if you are selling parts, you have to expect that the buyer is going to "build" something from it. You may wish in future to ask that customers credit your hand in things, but there is no compulsion to doing so. It's not "right" but what can you really do about such things? Don't sell guitar parts?

I read as much as I could from Ed Roman but frankly, never seen so much BS and manufactured mojo and misinformation...plus absolutely not real support, appeals to higher authorities, name dropping and unsupported "science" followed by contradictory stuff...oh, but it doesn't apply to "my" stratocasters because people like the sound of the pickup located there (not that those pearl scratchplates come made conveniently with such thing) PRS changed fro their 24 fret guitars to make an inferior instrument that I now copy because by doing so they will sell more guitars (the illogical conspiracies) and wheeled out a "name", unknown, untraceable and with no published research with the same superficial hand drawn open string wave form scenarios as if this is "science" and not simply conjecture.

This in support of the idea that a 24 fret guitar is better and that everyone out here is dumb and blind to this overwhelming evidence, the artists, the builders of guitars...everyone but JJ and ed...astonishing.

Any scientist would simply run the guitar through a scope and spectrum analyzer and produce hard data from every fret. Any depth would take into account that the whole system of equal temperament tuning and is at odds with the overtone series and that many of these overtones will be out of tune with the notes played and their function in western music....

I haven't done it, but really, these tools are available free with software. The problem is that logically, with every note played, the waveforms shorten with the length of the string, what holds true for the open strings and strategic divisions like the 5,7,12 fret for instance, must be different perhaps radically, from those of the fretted notes between. Just as it may be argued simplistically that an open string will have an "advantageous" wave form, then so too must if be that between the open string and the next occurrence of this advantageous condition, there must be a place in which the opposite occurs, perhaps the third fret for instance, or a # or b note perhaps. But the reality is that there is very little if any real radical difference other than the character of the guitar itself...a subjective thing in most respects.

It's this kind of "fool the kids" misuse of science and namedropping self serving self aggrandizing mojo that makes people like me require much more than more mojo to support it.

I think the 'facts' more support the idea that 24 fret guitars came to dominance and appeal in the shredding, turn it up to 11 philosophy of the 80's. That PRS used it as a point of difference, "2 frets more" than the competition as a marketing tool. That the distance between the pickups is important and that 24 fret guitars pushed the pickups closer with less variation and that with a lot, the structural join between body and neck were made weaker by this join and pickup placement to some degree. I hardly think it likely that PRS produce a lessor product (as Ed actually suggests) at the height of their acceptance, retool and everything and go back on their already strong 2 frets more thing, to sell more guitars to a conservative audience that had already accepted the product wholeheartedly a making PRS a third force against the "big two". Ed is going to have to come up with more than highlighted texts and self quoting to make that fly I'm afraid!

...

Ok...well, enough of that for now...

The plate thing...here's what I put on my new LP guitar...

This plate is 3mm aluminium plus 1mm of decorative plastic. It comes to within a 1mm of the strings exiting the nut and butts up hard to it with a bevel. The side rollers guide the strings straight across the teflon nut to aid with the full floating kahler tremolos action. These also reduce the vibrations of the strings behind the nut. The LP has no volute to strengthen the very flexible and vulnerable neck/head scarf, this plate adds considerable stiffness to this very flexible area of the neck. There is a slight increase in 'mass' at the headstock end, mainly a change in stiffness and resonance.

The end result as has been demonstrated in products and can easily be replicated, is that the neck is stiffer and the resonance of it is altered and so changing the character of the 'tone' not just in open strings, but on the whole guitar. But, it is subtle and the reason for it is primarily for tuning stability and strength which it does achieve on this guitar.

...

See, Ed Roman is using the same diagrams and arguments you appear to be putting forward, to argue something of the opposite. 24 fret guitars "sound better' even though by having 24 frets it prohibits putting the pickup at the 24th fret. You argue for 23 frets on your model, a product differentiation and use the same arguments that ya pickup be placed at the 24th fret. Neither account for the idea of the fretting of a note will shorten the string and so completely alter the waveform in relation to a fixed sensing position. And it looks at the thing in isolation, I use both pickups at once and the distances between them and the pickup qualities are by far the more important factors that affect things. He contradicts his arguments with "the strat" saying people prefer the traditional placement for a particular sound, but in reality the strats combined pickups are what creates the "quack" and it is the distances between the middle pickup and the other two that are more crucial to this effect. So, you could get a similar effect by moving both the middle and neck pickups or come up with his own intriguing take on the strat "quack", but then he'd need to make his own pick guards and we can't be admitting that, better to undermine ones own unsupported theory and use rail pickups that themselves are likely to have radically different characteristics that undermine the effect anyway!

There is a danger that this conjecture is really just falling into the same trap. There may well be a subjective preferred location for the neck pickup, but I can't see it being supported by this wave form theory.

Much of this can be 'corrected for' anyway with the radically different qualities of pickups and the fact that they don't sense string vibrations from a concise point. You found this for instance in the PAF thing, it is common for coils in such pickups to be radially different and just the basic construction of an HB with screw and slug coils typically creates a difference in induction (not measure by the resistance measurements of the coils) for a start.

I'm just a bit resistance to call in superficial "science" to support an argument without addressing the logical consequence of it. If the 24th fret location is important, does it not then follow that as the string is shortened by fretting, none of this theory then applies?

"lester to guns and beyond"...now you are starting to sound like ed...you know that 'lester' did all kinds of experiments in building guitars and designing the apparently flawed LP, dropped his association with Gibson when the design changed, and played the guitar that bears his name his entire career. Slash and his ilk traded on the 'iconic' image of the LP and it's association with guy's like page. Page found it to be a great stage guitar, quiet and bullet proof and versatile and had the "looks', but for his classic sounds favored other instruments.

But if it's "not rocket science" and there is a real difference other than subjective, do you not think that others would have already done such experiments or more than moving the pickup around? Is it plausible that such a long standing 'theory' was not put to the test more conclusively and that only the likes of yourself or ed roman know the "truth" of the matter when it is apparently so simple? For me the problem is with the simplistic use and co-opting of the scientific method and the ignoring of something that seems to be a logical fact related to the fretting of notes shortening the string and undermining the theory, and that just smacks of marketing mojo that people like Ed are renown for and simply don't stand any kind of scrutiny.

I don't think there'd be any problem really with the idea, thought of doing it myself. You have to consider that a strat is substantially hollow, in fact I've had it put that a lot of strats (especially with bathtub pickup routes and the like) are seentiall a hollow body guitar with a 'plastic' pickguard top.

Combine a bathtub route with the trem cavity and you are likely to go right through...I've even extended the cavity on one guitar to be even more to fit electronics and cut a 'sound hole' in the upper bout all the way through to the back without structural mishaps (though you end up with a very light body that way!)

So for sure, as long as there is enough strength and room for the spring or mounting, could be perhaps 1/4" thick...you wouldn't want it as thin as a plastic guard and put bolts through it for strength and potential for cracking...but a singly coil bobbin is about 10+mm thick.

A lot of single coils are built so you you could mount from the top like a soapbar kind of thing with bolts between poles and some foam under for a 'spring' but the problem is the triangular side wire mount more than the mounting ends...a delicate at best operation there.

The thing to watch perhaps is the neck pickup route perhaps. When I was contemplating things I was considering mounting everything through the trem cavity slightly extended perhaps.

It can look good, but so too can top mounted pickups in a more conventional way...my contemporary strat has this on a mahogany body for instance...

Reminds me that I need to clear the decks and finish the rewire and pickup redo...2 years later!