Pole piece design question

[Zenrad]

I'm a new Stingray owner, simply in love with my new bass I've been wanting a 'Ray for the past 20 years and finally got one and I've been staying up way too late every night playing it - just can't keep my hands off of it.

I'm curious about a design element on the Musicman basses, I did some searching but didn't come up with an answer. I notice that the pole pieces don't line up under the strings, the outer two strings on a 4 string are over the inner edge of the pole piece, the A and D are more or less centered. It's a bit more pronounced on my SLO neck (and I guess the Sterling) with the more narrow string spacing. This is obviously by design, and it doesn't affect much at all unless I really bend the G string at the higher frets, but I'm wondering why it's made that way?

Here's my guess - the size of the pole pieces requires them to be a certain distance apart, so the A and D strings are centered and the others are placed an equal distance a part. Rather than make the pole pieces smaller which could change the sound, they are left larger and line up the way they do.

Again, just curious.

Thanks.

 

[ivbenaplayin]

I'm a new Stingray owner, simply in love with my new bass I've been wanting a 'Ray for the past 20 years and finally got one and I've been staying up way too late every night playing it - just can't keep my hands off of it.

I'm curious about a design element on the Musicman basses, I did some searching but didn't come up with an answer. I notice that the pole pieces don't line up under the strings, the outer two strings on a 4 string are over the inner edge of the pole piece, the A and D are more or less centered. It's a bit more pronounced on my SLO neck (and I guess the Sterling) with the more narrow string spacing. This is obviously by design, and it doesn't affect much at all unless I really bend the G string at the higher frets, but I'm wondering why it's made that way?

Here's my guess - the size of the pole pieces requires them to be a certain distance apart, so the A and D strings are centered and the others are placed an equal distance a part. Rather than make the pole pieces smaller which could change the sound, they are left larger and line up the way they do.

Again, just curious.

Thanks.

I've noticed this on my basses too, but to me it really doesn't matter how or why it's like that because they look & sound killer!

 

[Zenrad]

I've noticed this on my basses too, but to me it really doesn't matter how or why it's like that because they look & sound killer!

Yes, but just like there was a reason for changing to a compensated nut there must be some kind of reasoning behind leaving the pole pieces misaligned.

 

[mynan]

Since magnets create a "field" and not a "beam", it really doesn't make any difference whether or not the strings are directly above the pole pieces.

This is an illustration of a guitar pickup, but it gives you an idea of what the magnetic field over a pickup looks like.

There are hot spots and cold spots close to the pole pieces, but if your strings were that close there would be other problems. At the distance where the strings would be, the field is pretty constant.

 

[Zenrad]

Since magnets create a "field" and not a "beam", it really doesn't make any difference whether or not the strings are directly above the pole pieces.

This is an illustration of a guitar pickup, but it gives you an idea of what the magnetic field over a pickup looks like.

There are hot spots and cold spots close to the pole pieces, but if your strings were that close there would be other problems. At the distance where the strings would be, the field is pretty constant.

At the factory specified 6/32" away from the underside of the G string measured from the top of the pickup cover as stated in the FAQ (4/32" from the top of the pole piece), the G string will clearly fade in volume when bending a note in the upper frets, say above the 12th fret. The magnetic field isn't broad enough to produce the same amount of output once the string moves away from the area over the pole piece. In another area of the FAQ it's stated that the distance should be 6/32" away from the top of the pole piece. That gives less of the fading effect during a bend but it's still there.

Not the biggest deal to me because I don't often bend notes that far, but I'm still curious, from at least a design standpoint, why this remains unchanged over the years on an instrument so well built and thought out. G&L pulls it off with the L-2000 and other basses.

 

[MadMatt]

<snip>...but I'm still curious, from at least a design standpoint, why this remains unchanged over the years on an instrument so well built and thought out. G&L pulls it off with the L-2000 and other basses.

I would imagine doing it differently either makes no difference in sound or simply does not sound as good.

If you look at the illustration you see that the magnetic field is slightly stronger directly over, and just outside of the outer pole pieces. I imagine the designers wanted to keeping the E and G sting outside of this area to make the sound more even. Especially with the neck pickup as the string moves more the closer you get to the neck.


Just my 2 cents. As long as my EBMM sounds as goog as it does I'm happy.
-Matt

 

[maddog]

At the factory specified 6/32" away from the underside of the G string measured from the top of the pickup cover as stated in the FAQ (4/32" from the top of the pole piece), the G string will clearly fade in volume when bending a note in the upper frets, say above the 12th fret. The magnetic field isn't broad enough to produce the same amount of output once the string moves away from the area over the pole piece. In another area of the FAQ it's stated that the distance should be 6/32" away from the top of the pole piece. That gives less of the fading effect during a bend but it's still there.

Not the biggest deal to me because I don't often bend notes that far, but I'm still curious, from at least a design standpoint, why this remains unchanged over the years on an instrument so well built and thought out. G&L pulls it off with the L-2000 and other basses.

all that from the drawing, huh?

 

[Zenrad]

all that from the drawing, huh?

No, all that from working on MY BASS.

If you read my first post you'll see I just bought one.

With all of the posts everywhere about weak G strings and then having to do a bit of experimenting on my bass to get it to even out, and then noticing the fade in volume if I do aggressive bends I thought I'd ask a question.

 

[spideyjg]

Yes, but just like there was a reason for changing to a compensated nut there must be some kind of reasoning behind leaving the pole pieces misaligned.

Whether or not it makes a sonic difference is one point but looks is another.
No doubt that Leo Fender changed the spacing in the Sabre and "fixed" the alignment issue. The EBMM Sabre, with covered pickups, had a 16 pole piece neck pickup. Was it for sound or looks alone? Only BP could answer that.

FWIW my Sabre does not have a weak D or G.

Compared to an HH EBMM

The Sabre was a commercial failure and EBMM dropped it. Years later when the HH, HS came out EBMM did not use the "fixed" spacing or their 16 pole piece rendition. Even though especially in the HH Sterling it looks farthest off.

Why? Only BP could answer that.

Jim

 

[spencer]

You guys are over analizing.

I 100% doubt the put the g and d off center, I never noticed g on any of my ernieballs. (10)

ithink it's more of a factor of keeping the saddles uniform and the magnet spacing uniform and the nut string spaceing uniform with strings that are un uniform I lt just aligns that way.

 

[maddog]

With all of the posts everywhere about weak G strings and then having to do a bit of experimenting on my bass to get it to even out

Sorry, I've never experienced this "weak G" phenomena that everyone posts about. Maybe I just pluck harder to make up for it or something.

, and then noticing the fade in volume if I do aggressive bends I thought I'd ask a question.

Dunno. I thought the fade was from moving the string, changing the clamping force and the overall string tension.

But what do I know. I just PLAY 'em.

 

[1kinal]

I sincerely hope that the pickup alligment on my classic will be better than spideyjg 2nd picture.

Not to offend anyone but really, it's not right...even if it don't change anything to the sound, it's the least to expect from a so well-made instrument to have the pole pieces allign under the strings.

Making an instrument is art and the visual aspect is important just as the usual aspect.

 

[maddog]

art is in the eye of the beholder.

play more, worry less.

 

[oli@bass]

Thanks for posting this. The mangentic field characteristices and response are the reason why I always tell players to move the pickups away from the strings if they have any sort of loudness or balance or sound problems.

 

[mynan]

i thought the fade was from moving the string, changing the clamping force and the overall string tension.

But what do i know. I just play 'em.

+1

 

[bizmarckie]

art is in the eye of the beholder.

play more, worry less.

Seriously +1

Never noticed a weak G here

 

[roadrunr]

Is the Miami Vice color an option

 

[Zenrad]

Seriously +1

Never noticed a weak G here

Yeah, my personal Toyotas have never exhibited a problem with the accelerator. The problem cannot exist. Those who think they have this problem should not be so picky and just drive more. Toyotas are perfect the way they are.

Again, I was just looking for answers for a question about design and function. When set level, the pickup delivers less output on the G string (measured on a VU meter, with my normal playing style, and also recorded with different basses playing the same part into Sound Forge as a comparison) and it's not as bright sounding as the other strings. New strings didn't change the brightness quality but I was able to even out the volume.

I'm not new to electric instruments or setups...I own 4 basses and 6 electric guitars, I've been building acoustic instruments since 1990 as a hobby, I've been repairing guitars and basses for just as long. While I can take the time to make 1mm x 1mm logs that make up a soundhole rosette, I can appreciate the fact that a mass produced instrument won't be accurate to within 1mm or less especially for a price point of under $2k.

But there is no reason why a pickup can't be redesigned and the pole pieces repositioned aside from it maybe being cost prohibitive from a production standpoint.

While I really do love my new bass and won't be parting with it - I think the pole piece placement looks sloppy as if it's just kind of an afterthought, or it's tossed in because that's what they have and that's what you get. I don't see that on my Les Paul, Strat, Tele, G&L Broadcaster, my Jazz bass or not even my Westone Concorde.

I still think this is a valid question, and I don't think it, or those who would ask a question about this brand, should be dismissed.

If I knew that asking a question here would cause so much hoopla I would have asked elsewhere.

 

[rizzo9247]

I raise the G side of my pickups for more volume on my past single pu basses, just my personal preference. I don't feel I need to on my SR5HH bass, it sounds great right where it is.

I'll check my ray and see about the pole pieces and string alignment and such; never took notice if it.

 

[bizmarckie]

Yeah, my personal Toyotas have never exhibited a problem with the accelerator. The problem cannot exist. Those who think they have this problem should not be so picky and just drive more. Toyotas are perfect the way they are.

But there is no reason why a pickup can't be redesigned and the pole pieces repositioned aside from it maybe being cost prohibitive from a production standpoint.

Easy there tiger, just stating from experience, as I have also owned and played quite a number of instruments (My J-bass strings didn't line up over the neck pickup, never noticed a difference on the sound either FWIW). Besides, I think you answered your own question there... I personally love this company and the fact that BP doesn't make changes that will increase the cost of these amazing instruments just for an aesthetic issue...