spindlebox

On 11/16/2022 at 4:20 PM, curtisa said:

Pretty sure it's the width of the bobbin. Can't be anything else.

The calc specifies length, height, flange and width. The names are a bit weird, but given the default sizes shown I take 'width' to be the innermost width of the bobbin where it wraps around the poles and 'flange' to be the outermost width of the bobbin where it cannot exceed because the pickup case has to slide over the completed coil. The four dimensions quoted are the minimum required when specifying the dimensions of any coil.

I know for a fact what these measurements are now:

LENGTH = distance between outside of high E and low E poles, placed in the flatwork (horizontally)

WIDTH = thickness of the poles themselves (it's one of the choices when purchasing)

HEIGHT = inside measurement of bottom and top flatwork - clearance for wire

FLANGE = width of top bobbin flatwork (as you stated)

I'm going to give this a go, I was waiting for some longer pole pieces so I could get a .5" height.

That makes sense.

Understood, but I just wish I knew what "FLANGE" was.  I sent a message to the creator of this calculator a couple days ago and haven't heard back.

Maybe it's the base of the flatwork.

You know what is the difference between the height and the flange? I can understand the other measurements but I don't know what the flange is.

1 minute ago, curtisa said:

What I meant with my initial suggestion about using the calculator...:

...was that going for finer wire to get a higher resistance pickup does not mean the pickup will be hotter.

If you use the 'Strat 1967' in the calculator aiming for a 10k pickup using 44AWG (easy to get) the pickup is entirely buildable using that sized bobbin. If you use 50AWG you can also build the pickup on the same bobbin, but because the cross-sectional area of the wire is much smaller the resistance per unit length is about 4 times higher than 44AWG. So if you aim for 10k resistance it'll just take fewer turns to get there. Less turns will yield a lower output pickup, so much less that the calculator is suggesting that the 50AWG version of the 10K pickup has about a third of the number of turns of the stock 'Strat 1967' pickup option with 42AWG, and will therefore have a third of the output.

 

They might be using finer wire than AWG44, but the calculator also indicates that it's possible to build a 20k single coil using 44AWG on a 0.5" tall bobbin using a mechanical winder and packing the turns in tightly. And the number of turns are also high (17000+) which will give a higher output than the stock single coil option.

 Yeah but I wonder if that's something somebody could do with  A hand built scatterwound. I doubt it.

I just find all of this interesting. It's fun to experiment.

11 hours ago, curtisa said:

50AWG is super fine stuff. Half the diameter of 44AWG, which is generally considered the de facto wire size for overwound pickups. Your chances of breaking it while winding are pretty high. Small wire might yield more turns per bobbin resulting in a hotter output, but it will be at the expense of higher resistance and inter-winding capacitance, which results in loss of highs and higher loading effects from the downstream circuitry (eg, volume/tone pots, the amp input etc). You sure you want to do a pickup with such fine windings?

Anything smaller than about 45AWG starts to get a bit esoteric and hard to find. You won't get it from any pickup suppliers. You'll have to extend your search to specialty coil winding suppliers. Doing a search for '<insert AWG here> enamel copper wire' will yield results on Google, but be prepared for the the prices to match the rarity of such a product.

YES, because until I do, I won't know what it's like.  It's for a customer and I like a challenge.  Bare Knuckle Has their "SINNER" line which boasts 15-20K per, they must be using wire like that.  I have a few messages out to wire manufacturers right now, so we'll see what I find out.  I'll post here in case anyone is curious.

10 hours ago, curtisa said:

As mentioned in your other thread, a higher number of turns with finer wire will get you there (ignoring the practicalities of working with such fine wire). But higher resistance has counter-effects on the sound. Resistance isn't the be-all measurement of a pickup's output.

Is a single-sized mini humbucker off the cards for your customer (eg, Hotrails)?

A hot P90 can be in the low-10k's for resistance, but by all accounts they're quite dark sounding.

Using your calculator I can get 44AWG to fit in a 0.436" tall bobbin targeting 10K using their 'Strat 1967' menu option. Takes nearly 9000 turns to get there though. Probably something for a mechanical winder only.

He just asked me to make him a really hot ~10K pickup and I like a challenge.  Everything I do that I haven't done before is a learning experience.  No, he wants a single coil.  Yeah, looks like I need to get some finer wire.  If you'll notice, that calculator goes up to 55!  Bare knuckle pickups have their "SINNER", line that boast 15-20K.  They must be using wire like that.

I am looking for sources for wire that is smaller than 44 AWG.  50 and up!!

I am looking to make some super hot single coil pickups.

Your assistance would be appreciated!!

OK I have done a little bit more research and apparently I can use a smaller gauge wire to make it happen.

I'm gonna post again again in here so I can get a little bit more eyes on it, but I'm looking for a source for a wire that is above 44 AWG. I would love to get 50.  I can't find anything above 44 at the moment.  Sources?

Hello all.  I am wondering, (and I've done some Googling with little luck), if anyone knows if getting a 10K single coil pickup is even possible?  I have a customer that wants one, and I would need to get at least 10K winds on a bobbin to do it - according to this calculator (http://www.jdguitarworks.com/coil/coil.html)

I have had trouble - with the current poles I have, even getting 7500.  Now, I guess I could get the tallest poles available (.780) and try that?  See, the 7500 got me a reading of 6400 and he wants WAY more than that!  I'm still kind of new at  this - just wondering if there's anything I can do to "juice it up!"

Thanks!!!!

2 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

It depends a bit on the pickup design.

For humbuckers the width varies from 69 (N) to 71 mm (B) and the outermost pole spacing from center to center from 50 to 53 mm. SeymourDuncan seems to use .414"/10.5 mm between individual pole pieces on some of their models, both 6 and 7 string versions.

For single coils the outer diameter of the housing varies from 66 to 70 mm and the outermost pole spacing from 48 to 50 to 52 mm for a three pickup Strat design. I could also find one example of adjacent poles being 10.3 mm apart so it's basically the same as with humbuckers.

All this information was gathered using Google Image search using phrases "humbucker dimensions" and "single coil pickup dimensions".

OK, so I'm going to start with 50 and 52 and go from there.  Thanks!

3 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

Yepp, there's several commonly used spacing and pickup widths. For the latter it also matters where you're going to put that pickup, the neck PU often is wider although not always. And a slanted PU should also be wider to make the poles match with the strings.

Then again, when set perpendicular to the strings the width doesn't matter much. The difference between a neck and bridge humbucker is usually 2 mm at the most. Divided between 6 strings that's 1/3mm in average. Or rather the outermost strings will be about 1 mm off center and the rest even less. Considering that the pole pieces are about 5 mm in diameter, that's 20% off center at the maximum. Not too much to affect tone in an audible measure, I suppose.

 I guess in answer to your very 1st statement, what would those be?

2 hours ago, Crusader said:

Its not entirely necessary but there is something satisfying about having the strings going over the centre of the pole pieces. I sometimes would like to build a Les Paul with Fender style single coils, but how would you make a pickup with different spacing? I'm not very fluent at Dutch LOL

 I mean you could do it if you had a way to design your own flat work and even 3-D print them, Or manufacture them somehow.  There are a couple of things I am considering for future, 3-D printer for just such type work and CNC machine for templates.

Hello all!  All a beginning luthier, I'm trying to decide on what string spacing to use - generally - for my guitars.  Something that will enable me to use a greater variety of bridges, etc., for my builds.  I'm just looking for something that will work in most cases.

I'm planning on purchasing a jig, for instance, that will make pickup making a bit easier.  (https://tlcguitargoods.com/nl/flatwork-pers-jig-54mm-string-spacing.html); I assembled a single coil bobbin yesterday and it was pretty difficult without a jig - though I put together a few handmade items which made it easier, and I was ultimately successful.  Problem with this is, a jig is only good for ONE string spacing.  This is why I want to get one that might serve me moving forward, as I plan on making my own pickups.  It will extend of course to the actual flatwork I purchase as well, and I want to buy in bulk.  This is the main reason for this thread.  I would even consider using a couple different spacings if it will serve me better as well.

What say you?  I know Fender can vary from 52 to 55mm for instance.  I don't have a set maker of hardware that I use yet, though I have had good luck with Wilkinson, and of course Fender for some of their items.

I just thought I would start a discussion, and pick your brains a bit!  Thanks in advance.

2 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

For what I've used and seen the clear dust collectors aren't transparent for too long, same goes for their longevity. At our workshop there's several brands of routers, none of which has that left.

A wide vacuum port at the edge of the routing table might help, we have one on the floor at the workshop and it's very convenient when brooming the floor! I'm not sure if a shop vac has enough power, though. Ours is huge, serving more than a dozen big power tools with 6" tubes and hoses.

Yes, the KREG table has a wide port that works VERY well.  Like I said, for table routing this thing is excellent!  Thanks for your input.

I just did a little research on the internet, and I found a thread here on ProjectGuitar that specifically recommends the Dewalt hand held router I'm looking at (DWP611), saying it can "manage virtually all jobs".

2 hours ago, ADFinlayson said:

I had the slightly smaller 1/2" version of that router (the 1100w one) and it was useless to be honest. the first thing I noted after the excessively high pitched motor was the clear yet completely opaque dust port you mentioned. A couple of the features stopped working not long after I got it, firstly the fine adjuster would slip gears then the speed dial would move of it's own accord during use, after about 6 weeks it stopped working entirely so I ditched it and went back to my old cheap Ryobi, What was most aggrivating was that Amazon wouldn't let me return it after 30 days and Triton didn't want to know either so I was well out of pocket. 

I've got the Trend T11 now which is superior in every way IMO, although the dust port has just broken so I need to replace that. But that was 50% bad design and 50% down to my miss handling of it.

I do use a trim router for odd jobs but IMO you're better off with something with at least 2hp motor and a solid build for routing bodies, pickup cavities etc, smaller routers and much more likely to dance around and eat your work piece. 

Ok good advice!  Sorry for your experience with Triton.  Like I said, as a router for my table, it's unbelievably great and I'm pretty happy with it.  I just did get that new attachment and hose I mentioned above, and it fits NICE and snug in that clear port, so I believe I have that solved.  I just wish I could see better while I'm routing.  Thank goodness for templates and roller bearings!

So even if you pre-drill cavities/pockets with a forstner bit, you still need at least a 2hp router?  I would think it would make short work of it after that.

So I have the Triton MOF001 and it's a pretty fantastic machine, except for a couple things.  Firstly, the dust collection port is excessively difficult to use, and a few adaptors I've bought have underperformed miserably.  I think I'm on the right track by getting the blue tipped collar type (pictured on this thread) for the dust port, and I am optimistic about it, as it is supposed to be slightly flexible.  The problem is with the port: there is nothing for a connector to grab onto, and everything slides out easily.  I've taken to duct taping the end onto the router and that's worked, but it's obviously not ideal.

if it wasn't for the next problem, I'd probably be content. However, when using this router, is it EXCESSIVELY difficult to see what I'm doing through the plastic guard surrounding the base, which is also necessary to create a proper vacuum for the dust collection.  That and it helps keep projectiles to a minimum.

Anyone have this router and do you experience the same thing?  I DO have to say, I have a KREG benchtop routing table, and I use the Triton with it, and I couldn't be happier!  It's a FANTASTIC router for my table, so if it was just used for that alone, I wouldn't even be talking about this right now.  Obviously, when I need to do other work with the router on the guitar body (pickup cavities, etc.), I take it off the table and then use it for that - experiencing everything I've talked about above.  It's fairly easy to remove and replace on the table, but it's still a process.

Really, I'm considering getting a PALM/Compact router for a few of these reasons.  I'm wondering how many of you use one for pickup/control cavities, etc. on your guitars?  They seem to be a bit easier to use for things like that, and not as unweildy as my big plunge router (which is kind of heavy too).  Wondering about type/brand/power needs - and also if dust collection is a consideration on these smaller routers?

Thanks in advance!!

PS, I'm considering the Dewalt, I'm a fan of their products, but Bosch is a close second!

4 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

It's funny how similar ideas we seem to have all around the globe!

My first thought after having read the question was to use wood instead of carbon fibre as a hidden laminate. There's some good wood species that are stiff and don't break easily. I took a look at the Wood Database and did some filtering to find lightweight woods with a high Modulus of Rupture and low Volumetric Shrinkage and found some relatively common woods there: https://www.wood-database.com/wood-filter/?fwp_average_dried_weight=49.80%2C59.80&fwp_modulus_of_rupture=20130.00%2C30970.00&fwp_shrinkage=7.20%2C12.80

Yes!  I love this idea.  I was also thinking of BAMBOO - but other than SKEWERS it's a bit hard to find what I had in mind.  Maybe I'll grow it!!  HAHA.  

Definitely going to try getting some Ebony and cutting strips - but it's good to have these as viable alternatives too.  I think "JANKA" hardness is what we're looking for here?  Honestly, for this build, I'm using some Bloodwood for my fretboard, and I have a piece that's not QUITE long enough for a fretboard - I may cut a couple strips and inlay that for this guitar I'm building.  

28 minutes ago, curtisa said:

Probably the more critical question that should be addressed is whether your neck needs reinforcement in the first place. I personally wouldn't add anything extra if the materials used or the stresses they'll be under don't require additional reinforcement. If you're making your neck from good quality, strong, stable materials and not subjecting them to unusual loads there shouldn't be a structural reason to add carbon fibre rods. That can apply to multi-lamination necks too.

Having gone through a phase of installing carbon fibre in necks that probably didn't need it, I actually found them counter-productive. In those necks they made the process of adjusting the trussrod to get the neck to provide some degree of relief for playability nearly impossible. The necks were simply too stiff.

If you feel you do want to experiment with it though, the key thing to look for in a reinforcement material is finding something that has more bend resistance in the same direction as the material you're removing from the neck to replace it with. Maybe some aluminium U channel from the hardware store, or two aluminium strips inserted either side of the truss rod with the skinny edges facing up? If the reinforcement material is lighter than the wood it's replacing it also makes sense, which is why carbon fibre is a popular material to use. Maybe you could go to a waste recovery centre or thrift shop and see if anyone has thrown away an old kite/RC helicopter/tent that you can harvest the carbon struts from?

All great ideas.  Actually, I am getting some Aluminum Billets that I'm going to have to take 1/2" (12mm) off, (I'm making some Fretboard Slotting Templates with them for my Miter box), so maybe I'll try and use that!!  I'll see what it looks/feels like when I get here.  Like the idea for the tent materials too.  They usually use those graphite rods of some sort to put inside and those might serve well in this purpose too.  Yeah, those purpose made ones for sale - somebody's making a killing on 'em, and this is the first and last time from me!!!

Cheers everyone!!

7 minutes ago, ADFinlayson said:

I bought some carbon fibre rods once, similar dimensions to what you've got pictured above and I noticed they actually had quite a lot of flex, so from then on I decided they were a waste of money. I might change my mind if ever I have a neck twist, but I'm also of the opinion that if it's going to, it will twist eventually with or without fibre rods. My other argument for not using them is that anything that stiffens the neck is making the job of the truss rod harder so it's more likely to snap or suffer a stripped nut.

As to your question re alternatives, a friend of mine is a classical builder and as a traditionalist doesn't believe in truss rods, but he uses a centre strip of ebony as neck reinforcement - Imagine routing a 1/4" truss rod channel and just glue in some ebony. It's slightly heavier but ebony is way strong and you could route a 3x6mm channel either side of your truss rod and glue in some quarter sawn ebony. I expect you could get 6-8 trips out of a single fretboard blank. 

Man, that's a great idea.  I will consider that for sure!!!  I mean, you could also do a laminate neck with ebony too and that would look cool and do the same thing.

These things seem unreasonably expensive online, so as I do with most things, I try to find viable alternatives for just about everything.  I'm a Chef by trade, and I do this a lot in the kitchen as well.  It's just my nature.

Has anyone used different materials to do this, with the same results?  I'm just curious.  Especially if there's something that we can reclaim to do this.  I don't mind doing a little extra work to save money, and from keeping things out of the landfill.

Looking forward to your replies!

Gotcha.  I appreciate it.  However, as I stated, I'm going to be using stamps/stencils to do the lettering.  I want it to look hand done.

Thank you!

By width I meant the width of the characters, not the spacing in between.  I did desktop publishing and graphic design for many years so I understand the terminology.  Anyway, perfection and exactness of lettering and logos is an individual choice and design and is not necessary in all things.  Fender's logo is simply a script for instance.  Some makers use their signatures.  I am going for a raw - "handmade" vibe, so I'm not concerned with that.  In fact, my logo may be the only thing that's consistent, and I may get a brand for just that, and then hand-do the name/serial using Pyrography methods and stencils.

Yes, I am looking into everything, including making my own brands.  Since I first posted this thread in early September, I have gotten much closer to where I need to be and what I'm going to do.  Thank you for your input!