Double P, reverse double P or both?

[baa]

I'm about to solve the mystery of Double P/Reverse P or a combination thereof.
(At least for myself)

I had a friend put a router in one of my six Vantages.
Now I can place them in all three variations and see for myself if I hear a difference and if so, which I like the best.
When i've decided, my plan is to fill in the empty spaces and wrap the bass in printed vinyl to cover up the mess.

 

 

 

Edited October 31, 2021 by baa

[bloke_zero]

Cool - my gut feeling is option 1, but there is something very pleasing visually about option 2, but it's got to be about the sound right? My next build will be a double P in 1 of those two configuations so i look forward egarly to your findings. Just moving the pickups a cm or so really changes the tone, let alone reversing them!

 

What will the controls be? I was thinking the ultimate would be 60's jazz bass style with stacked volume and tone for each pickup, but you already have 3 post and a switch there...

[warwickhunt]

You do have other 'options' though, I'm sure mathematically I could tell you how many... if I put my mind to it! 

 

e.g.  #3 Neck pup E+A closer to bridge / Bridge pup E+A away from the bridge.

 

 

[baa]

1 hour ago, bloke_zero said:

Cool - my gut feeling is option 1, but there is something very pleasing visually about option 2, but it's got to be about the sound right? My next build will be a double P in 1 of those two configuations so i look forward egarly to your findings. Just moving the pickups a cm or so really changes the tone, let alone reversing them!

 

What will the controls be? I was thinking the ultimate would be 60's jazz bass style with stacked volume and tone for each pickup, but you already have 3 post and a switch there...

 

I think the same way. Probably #1, but #2 somehow looks better...

The controls are V/T for each pickup, but the shaft for the bridge pickup Tone is broken, so I am probably just leave inside the cavity and wrap over the hole.

Edited November 1, 2021 by baa
misspelling

[baa]

56 minutes ago, warwickhunt said:

You do have other 'options' though, I'm sure mathematically I could tell you how many... if I put my mind to it! 

 

e.g.  #3 Neck pup E+A closer to bridge / Bridge pup E+A away from the bridge.

 

 

The sky is the limit 😀

I'll see if they fit at an angle a la Dingwall.

Edited November 1, 2021 by baa
misspelling

[dudewheresmybass]

There is a video on YouTube, which goes through the options of placing p pups in both configurations. 
for me- based on the video- I’d go option 2 ( standard at the front, reverse at the bridge)

[warwickhunt]

4 minutes ago, dudewheresmybass said:

There is a video on YouTube, which goes through the options of placing p pups in both configurations. 
for me- based on the video- I’d go option 2 ( standard at the front, reverse at the bridge)

My Warwick is Option 2 and I have to say that the bridge pup in solo doesn't give you a lot of beef!  It's fine for tightening up the neck pup when you blend but not on its own, too far back on the E/A IMHO.  

[bloke_zero]

I don't know if you've seen these:

 

Table with pickup positions

 

 

[bloke_zero]

 

[bloke_zero]

 

[baa]

26 minutes ago, bloke_zero said:

 

That bass is the reason for my experiment! 😀

[baa]

52 minutes ago, dudewheresmybass said:

There is a video on YouTube, which goes through the options of placing p pups in both configurations. 
for me- based on the video- I’d go option 2 ( standard at the front, reverse at the bridge)

The way i do it, I can test all three options in the same bass.

It hurts a bit to "sacrifice" a bass.

But i have spares

It won't be empirical evidence for the one and only truth, but it will finally end my curiosity! 😄

Edited November 3, 2021 by baa

[dudewheresmybass]

On 03/11/2021 at 09:12, warwickhunt said:

My Warwick is Option 2 and I have to say that the bridge pup in solo doesn't give you a lot of beef!  It's fine for tightening up the neck pup when you blend but not on its own, too far back on the E/A IMHO.  

for me, that is why I would choose option 2 - I don't tend to use the bridge pup solo'd

[baa]

On 03/11/2021 at 10:12, warwickhunt said:

My Warwick is Option 2 and I have to say that the bridge pup in solo doesn't give you a lot of beef!  It's fine for tightening up the neck pup when you blend but not on its own, too far back on the E/A IMHO.  

 

21 hours ago, dudewheresmybass said:

for me, that is why I would choose option 2 - I don't tend to use the bridge pup solo'd

 

I play with either both pickups or neck solo'd.

Always with the controls on 10.

I'm eager to see if the reverse P is useful on the bridge pickup.

[LeftyJ]

I like it! With those big routs you suddenly have a lot more options than just split-coils too. You can fit J pickups, many types of humbuckers or any combination of those. 

[baa]

1 hour ago, LeftyJ said:

I like it! With those big routs you suddenly have a lot more options than just split-coils too. You can fit J pickups, many types of humbuckers or any combination of those. 

I could...
But i'm a Double P kind of person 😄

[Henrythe8]

I went through teh same kind of existential crisi 🙂 

Therefore, My Stradi bass has a special feature. 

It has two Delano "The eXtend" pickups those are quad coils. 

 

Mine are specifically wired in order to have P/QuadCoils/Reverse P so I can choose. Each pickup also has its own preamp. 

Turns out the difference is quite subtle, but really useful when playing with the EQ. 

I'm pretty sure the most difference comes from the pickup placement 

 

[baa]

28 minutes ago, Henrythe8 said:

I went through teh same kind of existential crisi 🙂 

Therefore, My Stradi bass has a special feature. 

It has two Delano "The eXtend" pickups those are quad coils. 

 

Mine are specifically wired in order to have P/QuadCoils/Reverse P so I can choose. Each pickup also has its own preamp. 

Turns out the difference is quite subtle, but really useful when playing with the EQ. 

I'm pretty sure the most difference comes from the pickup placement 

 

Those sound like my ideal pickups! 👍

[Maude]

I'd go for option 4. Reverse P in neck position, standard P in bridge position. 

 

Contrary to popular belief Leo got it wrong the first time. 

Reverse P is where it's at in a classic P position, (tighter, punchier lows and richer warmer highs) but I'd be inclined to stick with standard P orientation if close to the bridge as you'll lose to much bottom end. 

 

🙂👍

[pfretrock]

P pickups have different magnet polarities in each half (one side is North pole, other side is South pole). This means if you use a P/J configuration then each of the  four strings are in phase when mixed. Due to the two halfs of the P pickups being wired "back to back" to produce a humbuck effect, the magnets need to be so arranged, to bring both sides back into phase with the J.

 

You might need to consider this when you arrange the P/P configuration?

 

You can check magnet polarity by using a weak magnet to check which side repels the magnet. Strong magnet to be avoided some modern magnets are VERY strong, best avoided and its easier to feel when the poles repel.

 

Actually Leo's split P pickup was genius, presumably avoiding the Humbucker Patent. It is wired as a humbucker, back to back.

[pfretrock]

Excuse the scruffy drawing. Here is a P and J pickup. Assuming the winding start and end is in the same direction for all windings. The P is wired back to back as required for humbucking and I've made all the magnets the same polarity. The bass side has the same magnet polarity on both pups and the wiring is the same phase. But there is a problem on the treble side. the P and J signals are out of phase.

[pfretrock]

The out of phase problem can be fixed by reversing the magnets in one side of the P  to south poles. Both sides are now in phase.

Every P I have looked at has the magnets arranged like this.

What I'm not sure of is has it always been like this? When Leo made the first split P did he have a different polarity in each half, on the assumption that it is a requirement for matched humbucking?

I've no idea if this is the case, or if it is a requirement.

 

Perhaps someone with a vintage P can check this. It may be in a Patent if Fender patented this.

 

So if you are using various  P/P configurations, you may need to check the phase is correct. I've no idea what the effect of having one half out of phase is,  I've never tried it but I suspect it could be a problem. Or it might just sound great!

[pfretrock]

Yes, Leo had the magnets different in both sides. Presumabnly this is a requirement for the humbucking effect (or he thought it was). Either way, it was good fortune when J pups were added!

 

US Patent number 2, 976, 755 Filed 1961

 

 

 

[pfretrock]

It seems that Leo thought the magnet polarities did not affect the humbucking. But clearly the magnet poles were different in each half in Fig 2 and 5.. This is a happy accident. Everyone copied his assembly.

 

From the Patent:

 

"Although the voltage induced in coils 41 and 44 due to vibration of an associated string 16 are additive, the violtage induced in such coils due to the effect of an extraneous field , such as that produced by a power line, are in a bucking relationship. This is because the coils 41 and 44 are reverse wound relative to each other, and the magnet polarities are not important in regard to extraneous fields"

[baa]

8 hours ago, pfretrock said:

Yes, Leo had the magnets different in both sides. Presumabnly this is a requirement for the humbucking effect (or he thought it was).

 

 

 

 

Seems that I might have to do some trial and error...🤔