The Last Bass Outpost
Gear Discussion Forums => Gibson Basses => Topic started by: vates on January 02, 2013, 04:22:38 AM
-
First of all: Happy New 2013 Year to all of you, dear forumites!
Well, the idea of T-Bird II build haunts me for the last few years already.
One of the unsolved questions is the issue of pickup placing on original '63-'65 Thunderbird II basses. Some pictures show it exactly close to the central pickguard screw (i.e. the pickup chrome frame upper right angle is placed right next to that screw), other show it an inch or more closer to the bridge.
So where is the truth?
One more thing: how does the pickup placing on original TBrids II relate to the neck pickup placement of modern TBirds IV?
Many thanks in advance!
-
3 1/4" from the fretboard to the side of the neck pup on the sixties ones, 3" on the Bicentennials, 2 1/2" on the post 87 ones. It crept forward over time. I just measured it on all three (and on various specimens to be on the safe side), funny it has never occurred to me before, I though they were by and large in the same position. So your question was a good one. :)
It (partly) explains why modern Birds have a bit more more oooomph and older ones a bit more roarrr.
-
On both of my 64s (a II and a IV): from the center of the 12th fret to the centerline of the pickup, 10 7/8" (277mm).
...As far as a 'modern' Thunderbird placement, I'm both ignorant and apathetic, don't know and don't care. "Sweet spot" is determined by the characteristics/design of a pickup. About the only similarities with original and modern pickups is 2 magnets and 2 coils, differences are alnico vs ceramic, short vs tall, thin wire vs fat, number of winds and metal vs plastic cases. All of those things make the pickups very different sounding. Not saying one design is "better" than the other, just different. You can guess which one is cheaper to make.
On my '77 it's around 10 5/8" 12th fret to centerline. Those are REALLY different design pickups. I wouldn't worry about where the pickguard holes seem to be. Critical distance is the one relating to the neck.
-
One reason I am not a big fan of the modern Thunderbird is the neck pickup placement. 3 1/4" from the base of the neck to the front edge of the pickup is the optimum location at least for me.
-
Thank you very much for quick and very informative responses.
However, I still need some clarifications, if you don't mind:
3 1/4" from the fretboard to the side of the neck pup on the sixties ones, 3" on the Bicentennials, 2 1/2" on the post 87 ones.
Thank you! Since we're on the same side of the pond, could you please give me the exact measure in millimeters as well? Also, do I understand it correct that you measured from the actual end of the fretboard (wood tip), not the metal wire of the 20th fret? I guess the length of a wooden tip beyond the 20th fret may vary on different birds...
On both of my 64s (a II and a IV): from the center of the 12th fret to the centerline of the pickup, 10 7/8" (277mm).
Thank you very much! Do you mean the physical center of the 12th fret (where dot markers are placed) or do you mean the wire of the 12th fret , i.e the actual 1/2 of the scale?
-
Thank you very much for quick and very informative responses.
Do you mean the physical center of the 12th fret (where dot markers are placed) or do you mean the wire of the 12th fret , i.e the actual 1/2 of the scale?
The centerline of the 12th fret wire.
-
Thank you, you are most helpful!
So, considering sixties T-birds were 34 3/8" (34.375") scale, 10 7/8" (10.875") shall be 31.636% of the scale length. Which means that with modern 34" scale that measure from the 1/2 point of the scale to the pickup's center line shall turn into 10.756".
-
Thank you, you are most helpful!
So, considering sixties T-birds were 34 3/8" (34.375") scale, 10 7/8" (10.875") shall be 31.636% of the scale length. Which means that with modern 34" scale that measure from the 1/2 point of the scale to the pickup's center line shall turn into 10.756".
definitely close enough for Rock and Roll!
-
I wonder, are the 60s T-birds really 34 3/8" scale length? I ask because Gibson (unlike everyone else) used an estimated compensated scale length in its guitar specs rather than the exact uncompensated scale length of 2x the nut-to-12th-fret distance. For example, guitars listed as 24 3/4" scale are actually 24 7/16" to 24 9/16" depending on the year, and the several EB-0Ls I've measured were 34" despite being listed as 34 1/2". The regular EB-0s I've measured were all 30 1/8" despite being listed as 30 1/2".
definitely close enough for Rock and Roll!
Agreed. I'm just asking whether the old ones really are longer.
-
I wonder, are the 60s T-birds really 34 3/8" scale length? I ask because Gibson (unlike everyone else) used an estimated compensated scale length in its guitar specs rather than the exact uncompensated scale length of 2x the nut-to-12th-fret distance. For example, guitars listed as 24 3/4" scale are actually 24 7/16" to 24 9/16" depending on the year, and the several EB-0Ls I've measured were 34" despite being listed as 34 1/2". The regular EB-0s I've measured were all 30 1/8" despite being listed as 30 1/2".
Agreed. I'm just asking whether the old ones really are longer.
On my '64 TBirds distance from front of the nut to 12th fret centerline is 16 15/16 inches. The same as Fender, Hamer, Warmoth, Vox and Epiphone (both Embassy and Explorer) 34 inch necks I just checked. So it's 34 inch scale.
Gibson mislocated the bridge. To properly intonate a '60s bird the bridge has to be moved closer to the neck, which is what a Badbird does.
-
:)
-
Brilliant! So I need an absolute value after all...
Dear uwe, could you please answer this question?
Thank you! Since we're on the same side of the pond, could you please give me the exact measure in millimeters as well? Also, do I understand it correct that you measured from the actual end of the fretboard (wood tip), not the metal wire of the 20th fret? I guess the length of a wooden tip beyond the 20th fret may vary on different birds...
...so the more actual measure will be from the metal wire of the 20th fret. could you please check this out? Vielen Dank im Voraus!
-
My dear metrical friend, stuck like I am among imperial measurement savages, I will dutifully centimeterize tomorrow when I'm back in the office.
-
On my '64 TBirds distance from front of the nut to 12th fret centerline is 16 15/16 inches. The same as Fender, Hamer, Warmoth, Vox and Epiphone (both Embassy and Explorer) 34 inch necks I just checked. So it's 34 inch scale.
Gibson mislocated the bridge. To properly intonate a '60s bird the bridge has to be moved closer to the neck, which is what a Badbird does.
Thanks, Carlo, that confirms my suspicions.
-
My dear metrical friend, stuck like I am among imperial measurement savages, I will dutifully centimeterize tomorrow when I'm back in the office.
uwe, you remind me Skipper a bit when you say so :)
(http://nick.mtvnimages.com/nick-assets/shows/images/penguins-of-madagascar/characters/character_thumb_310x175_skipper.jpg)
actually the accents in my numerous questions shifted to the issue of measure from the presumably constant 20th fret, not the presumably various wooden tips of necks' bases. thank you
-
Yes...My 3 1960's reverse thunderbird II's are 34" scale as well......Bridge should be moved closer to the neck by about 1/4".....or buy Scott's Badbird Bridges....
-
My dear metrical friend, stuck like I am among imperial measurement savages, I will dutifully centimeterize tomorrow when I'm back in the office.
Don't worry Uwe.....Baz and I and the millions of other Americans measure bullets in metric !!!
Plus we also fix out crappy import cars with metric wrenches after they fall apart ;D
-
Boeings used to have these nasty things called TRI-WING fixings back in the day... don't know if they still do...
I still can't think of my height in metric and the thought of not being able to drink a pint of London Pride... or maybe a Spitfire... :toast:
-
English pints are nice. When I really want to tye one on I go for a Litre. Hofbrau Dunkel is one of my faves.
-
I need a metric system weekend........ :rolleyes:
-
My garage is bi-standard. I have both SAE and metric tools.
I guess my garage should come out as "bi".
-
Don't worry Uwe.....Baz and I and the millions of other Americans measure bullets in metric !!!
That's really gunning for a point blank argument.
-
They're always better chromed ;D
(http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/veronicasteed/RD015-1.jpg)
-
A little bit too far out of the closet, me thinks... ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwzaifhSw2c
That's really gunning for a point blank argument.
Don't bite (the bullet) ... ;)
-
What closet, I cry!!! She's been out of the model train tunnel for long!
-
Ah, I can see off-topic is really among common decencies here :)
I'll try to bump the thread back to its original rails though:
My dear metrical friend, stuck like I am among imperial measurement savages, I will dutifully centimeterize tomorrow when I'm back in the office.
uwe, you remind me Skipper a bit when you say so :)
(http://nick.mtvnimages.com/nick-assets/shows/images/penguins-of-madagascar/characters/character_thumb_310x175_skipper.jpg)
actually the accents in my numerous questions shifted to the issue of measure from the presumably constant 20th fret, not the presumably various wooden tips of necks' bases. thank you
-
What closet, I cry!!! She's been out of the model train tunnel for long!
Just a different kind of fun :o
Most of that stuff is actually stage clothes.
-
Yeah, but what kinda stage...?
-
A few days before this metric discussion, I actually went out to three stores in NY trying to BUY a metric ruler or tape measurer and could not find one. I ended up coming home and having to convert U.S. inches to metric online, just to convert non-U.S. metric bass hardware measurement. I was trying to compare some to specs given on U.S. basses to metric replacement parts.
I do admit that metric measurements make a lot more sense...especially when our currency is already based on tens. I used to think we just didn't use it in the U.S. so foreigners would get frustrated and stay home...except our pals in Liberia and Burma (the only two other countries that still use our system) :)
But think of all the American classics that would be lost that have movie titles or song lyrics about "miles" or "inches" or "pounds." Maybe we just cannot change for art's sake?
-
Mark...is that Bullet Belt legal??? It soon may become Illegal under our current administration.........
-
Mark...is that Bullet Belt legal??? It soon may become Illegal under our current administration.........
It's legal Baz, yummy chromey .303's. Were I travelling outside the country with the band I'd be concerned about Customs, otherwise I'm fine ;)
-
Brilliant! So I need an absolute value after all...
Dear uwe, could you please answer this question?
...so the more actual measure will be from the metal wire of the 20th fret. could you please check this out? Vielen Dank im Voraus!
Voilà, from the 20th fret to the front edge of the neck pup in metric:
Sixties bird: 9,5 cm
Bicentennial: 9,0 cm
Post-87 Bird: 7,8 cm
-
Vielen Dank!
-
European weights and measures has had a glitch...
Somehow, they have discovered that the platinum"standard" for the kilogram is slightly the wrong weight... slightly lighter than they measured it last...???
-
Well, I browsed through this forum (a lot) and found this measures' picture of an original NR TBIV (see attached).
Could someone please verify if the neck pickup position of an NR is identical to reverse IV? (and presumably the neck pickup of the latter is in the same position of the TB-II...)
Or maybe there is a similar picture of a reverse '64 TBird and I've missed it: so please point me in the right direction.
I just want to make everything right ;D
Thanks!
-
That's George's pic - he'll answer that one I guess...?
-
If I ever measured my reverse birds I can't remember where the results are. Sorry! All I have of proper Gibson birds these days are a couple Bicentennials. Maybe Uwe can step in if he sees this.
-
What am I supposed to measure again? I will dutifully do so if exact orders are given.
-
Uwe, could you please check if the placing on your reverse-Tbird II is similar to the scheme above? You've already replied in this topic, so just to make everything clear. Thank you
-
If I ever measured my reverse birds I can't remember where the results are. Sorry! All I have of proper Gibson birds these days are a couple Bicentennials. Maybe Uwe can step in if he sees this.
They are the same.
-
Uwe, could you please check if the placing on your reverse-Tbird II is similar to the scheme above? You've already replied in this topic, so just to make everything clear. Thank you
It is. Exakt dasselbe.
-
Now that is strange. According to your previous calculations:
On both of my 64s (a II and a IV): from the center of the 12th fret to the centerline of the pickup, 10 7/8" (277mm).
276.22500 mm
The centerline of the 12th fret wire.
And the scheme above shows that there are 10 11/16 inches (271.4625 mm) from the 12th fret to the centerline of the neck pickup.
That is a difference of 4.7625 mm. And it is the latter that made me to renew this thread (after I found that picture and compared it to results of my previous insvestigation)
-
If you want to pick nits look at it again. If the front edge of the pickup is at 10" and the back edge is at 11 1/2" the centerline must be 10 3/4 or it is not the center line, it is the off-center line ;D
-
This reminds me of a very similar discussion on the Wishbass forum.
-
I could go & check my old Birds but I’m having too much fun reading all this, also I’m kind of afraid what I may find, once I wanted to see if the truss rod cover could be interchangeable, and both the ‘64s & the 77 screw holes were all different, and the ’68? Forgetaboutit!
-
Now that is strange. According to your previous calculations:
276.22500 mm
And the scheme above shows that there are 10 11/16 inches (271.4625 mm) from the 12th fret to the centerline of the neck pickup.
That is a difference of 4.7625 mm. And it is the latter that made me to renew this thread (after I found that picture and compared it to results of my previous insvestigation)
Gibson mislocated the bridge by 1/4" on both the Reverses and NRs. Are you going to do that with your build to be historically accurate?
Seriously, because of the mislocation of the bridge on both Reverses and NRs I believe the dimensions were supposed to be the same. The discrepancy is probably due to the set neck, either where the pocket was cut or the length of the neck heel or both. I think we've seen some sloppiness there. With a neck through there's less of a chance for variation in dimensions, though fretboard placement could be a factor.
Let's measure ALL the NRs and do a pie chart. Lemon meringue.
-
This particular measure is from a presumably stable 12th-fret. It is a constant that does not relate to bridge re-positioning and fretboard ends' cuts. Perhaps, Gibson moved the neck pickup closer to the well neck on NRs. That is possible, because on later reverse birds it crawled even further north. However, this comment somewhat ruins such hypothesis:
Quote from: vates on July 15, 2013, 06:03:39 AM
Uwe, could you please check if the placing on your reverse-Tbird II is similar to the scheme above?
It is. Exakt dasselbe.
-
This particular measure is from a presumably stable 12th-fret. It is a constant that does not relate to bridge re-positioning and fretboard ends' cuts. Perhaps, Gibson moved the neck pickup closer to the well neck on NRs. That is possible, because on later reverse birds it crawled even further north. However, this comment somewhat ruins such hypothesis:
"Presumably stable 12th fret." Why do you presume that when you're splitting millimeters?
I'm quite aware that bridge positioning has no affect on fret to pup route distance. I used that as an example of Gibson's ineptitude at not correcting the bridge misposition when switching over from Revs to NRs. I didn't say end cuts, I was referring to placement of the fretboard on the neck which would affect 12th fret distance to a pup route.
Perhaps Gibson moved the pickup purposely but I seriously doubt it. Do you have actual knowledge of woodworking techniques and tolerances or are you strictly a theorist?
-
AFAIK, Gibson misaligned the bridge on T-Birds due to the bad engineering of the bridge design: they did not take into account the mutes (maybe that bridge was designed without mutes and then thy added mutes due to marketing reasons: I've encountered different interpretations). So they had to move the bridge a little bit further on the final blueprints.
On the other hand, the calculation of the fretboard's part of the scale were consistent: so the position of the 12th fret should be stable on all T-Birds, rev. or non-rev.
And the only thing that matters in terms of sound is the position of a pickup in relation to the scale. So we should look at the scale's constant, 12th fret. What's wrong with that?
-
If you want to pick nits look at it again. If the front edge of the pickup is at 10" and the back edge is at 11 1/2" the centerline must be 10 3/4 or it is not the center line, it is the off-center line ;D
You're right. All those measures don't correspond to each other. For example, pickups' widths are different, and their centerlines are all over the place. Gonna forget about this picture and stick to the initial data :)
-
This reminds me of a very similar discussion on the Wishbass forum.
No doubt a few millimeters can make a huge difference in the nuanced tone of a Wishbass. :mrgreen:
Do they also discuss the effect of a tone knob that's not connected to the circuit?
-
This particular measure is from a presumably stable 12th-fret. It is a constant that does not relate to bridge re-positioning and fretboard ends' cuts. Perhaps, Gibson moved the neck pickup closer to the well neck on NRs. That is possible, because on later reverse birds it crawled even further north. However, this comment somewhat ruins such hypothesis:
This discussion is beyond the capacities of my mind but I would like to state for the record:
- I only measured to the front edge of the neck pup.
- On my Non Reverse Birds (both my 66 and my 67) that front edge is 5 mm closer to the 20th fret than on my 64 and 65 Rev Birds - it is a factor for the bassier sound that Non Revs have and are often liked for.
-
AFAIK, Gibson misaligned the bridge on T-Birds due to the bad engineering of the bridge design: they did not take into account the mutes (maybe that bridge was designed without mutes and then thy added mutes due to marketing reasons: I've encountered different interpretations). So they had to move the bridge a little bit further on the final blueprints.
On the other hand, the calculation of the fretboard's part of the scale were consistent: so the position of the 12th fret should be stable on all T-Birds, rev. or non-rev.
And the only thing that matters in terms of sound is the position of a pickup in relation to the scale. So we should look at the scale's constant, 12th fret. What's wrong with that?
IMO mutes have little to do with the bridge in the wrong place. Incompetence or indifference are the culprits. Someone should have checked the prototype and made adjustment.
Pickup choice is going to have a lot more to do with sound than a few mm either way in location. Will you be using Reverse or NR pickups?...they're different, in part to Gibson's inconsistency, no revolution counter on their pickup winder. They were wound to a timer monitored by the operator and the number of winds varied according to how attentive they were. This is well documented. When Gibson quit winding pickups Seymour Duncan bought the winding machines and installed counters.
Then we can talk about wood choice- are you using genuine Honduras? Big difference between that and what passes for mahogany these days and it does affect sound. Then the finish argument, fret width, strings etc. ad nauseum.
- On my Non Reverse Birds (both my 66 and my 67) that front edge is 5 mm closer to the 20th fret than on my 64 and 65 Rev Birds - it is a factor for the bassier sound that Non Revs have and are often liked for.
-The bassier sound has a lot more to do with the overwound NR pickups which reduce high end output. Very similar to any overwound humbucker.
-
Thank you all for your suggestions! Other issues like woods, pickup type, finish etc. will be disclosed in a dedicated build thread.
Here I wanted to get the exact figure for the neck pickup position of '64 TBird II.
The most valuable info was provided already on the first page:
3 1/4" from the fretboard to the side of the neck pup on the sixties ones, 3" on the Bicentennials, 2 1/2" on the post 87 ones. It crept forward over time.
One reason I am not a big fan of the modern Thunderbird is the neck pickup placement. 3 1/4" from the base of the neck to the front edge of the pickup is the optimum location at least for me.
Voilà, from the 20th fret to the front edge of the neck pup in metric:
Sixties bird: 9,5 cm
Bicentennial: 9,0 cm
Post-87 Bird: 7,8 cm
On both of my 64s (a II and a IV): from the center of the 12th fret to the centerline of the pickup, 10 7/8" (277mm).
The centerline of the 12th fret wire.
The picture of the non-rev bird with different figures just confused everything.
-
"On my Non Reverse Birds (both my 66 and my 67) that front edge is 5 mm closer to the 20th fret than on my 64 and 65 Rev Birds - it is a factor for the bassier sound that Non Revs have and are often liked for.
-The bassier sound has a lot more to do with the overwound NR pickups which reduce high end output. Very similar to any overwound humbucker.
You learn something new everyday. You mean sixties Non-Revs have different pups to sixties Revs? :o Because my sixties Non-Revs sound bassier than my two sixties Revs. No comparison to a modern - and here so often unjustly derided - TB Plus though (whether on a Rev or a Non Rev). The love for vintage pups is inherently nostalgic IMHO, there I said it.
-
You learn something new everyday. You mean sixties Non-Revs have different pups to sixties Revs? :o
Yeah, that's why I got Steve to make ThunderBuckers in various specifications: '63 (Reverse) and '66 (NR). The number of copper winds is greater on the NRs. More winds equal darker and louder. That may have been a conscious decision by Gibson, all the NR (chrome) pickups I've seen are hotter than the Rev ones. Basically the bridge Rev is a neck NR and the NR bridge proportionally hotter.
Then we went on to the MAX (Scott's favorite) which is overwound as much as possible using original thin wire (over 2 miles per pickup) and hotter Alnico magnets. Because of that a MAX is 3db hotter than a '66, twice the output. It's old technology taken as far as it can be.
-
Then we went on to the MAX (Scott's favorite) which is overwound as much as possible using original thin wire (over 2 miles per pickup) and hotter Alnico magnets. Because of that a MAX is 3db hotter than a '66, twice the output.
Dayum! That is a LOT HOEER. I have watched the discussions but didn't realize just how much overdrive there could be. :thumbsup:
-
Anything worth doing is worth overdoing!
-
Guilty as charged... ;D
So where does the Mudbucker figure in the overwound status of pups in general...? They are 2x15k iirc ...?
-
Guilty as charged... ;D
So where does the Mudbucker figure in the overwound status of pups in general...? They are 2x15k iirc ...?
Mudbucker is hugely overwound and is a different design, doesn't sound like any T-bird pickup.
-
That I know... I recorded some of the sounds of the split coil as a reference for when I (eventually :rolleyes:) get around to fitting the Lollar pup in the PC...
-
Novak Fatbucker, customer supplied for an NR I'm building. Two single coils in series. Note how big the wire visible in the bottom of the right coil is. It will sound very different from a Mudbucker...I don't know exactly how I'm going to adjust the thing yet, the screws are ornamental.
(http://i976.photobucket.com/albums/ae241/cata1d0/ME/P1040536_zps1be72c14.jpg) (http://s976.photobucket.com/user/cata1d0/media/ME/P1040536_zps1be72c14.jpg.html)
(http://i976.photobucket.com/albums/ae241/cata1d0/NR%202012/P1040493_zps1733645b.jpg) (http://s976.photobucket.com/user/cata1d0/media/NR%202012/P1040493_zps1733645b.jpg.html)
-
^^^ It would have to be clearer, wouldn't it? Bigger wire = fewer winds = less mud.
-
^^^ It would have to be clearer, wouldn't it? Bigger wire = fewer winds = less mud.
Yep, should be. Also a lot cheaper in terms of copper. It's a very nice looking pickup, looking forward to seeing how it sounds
-
the screws are ornamental.
You mean the central 4 screws? I think they don't play much role in this design anyway. That's a very nice pickup, please keep us (clip)posted! :D.
-
You mean the central 4 screws? I think they don't play much role in this design anyway. That's a very nice pickup, please keep us (clip)posted! :D.
On the originals they do have an effect on string response depending on height. Will keep you posted but the build is fourth in line after basses going to Japan and Italy. Probably late October before it's installed.
-
Yes, but the effect is minimal, that's what I mean. October doesn't seem very far away... ;)
-
Yes, but the effect is minimal, that's what I mean. October doesn't seem very far away... ;)
You're right, they don't do a lot!
-
^^^ It would have to be clearer, wouldn't it? Bigger wire = fewer winds = less mud.
...to a point: heavier gauge wire is going to have a larger inductive potential which means more current output as opposed to higher voltage output of overwound thinner gauge wire, and more current equals more low end. My guess is that the Novak should have a similar low end to a Sidewinder without being as nasal and limited in the highs.
-
Has anyone "mapped" the magnetic field of pups...?
-
...to a point: heavier gauge wire is going to have a larger inductive potential which means more current output as opposed to higher voltage output of overwound thinner gauge wire, and more current equals more low end. My guess is that the Novak should have a similar low end to a Sidewinder without being as nasal and limited in the highs.
Upon closer inspection this IS a sidewinder, Novak's mod being smaller coils (.5 x .675 ") and big wire. Reads 13.7k. He has (had?) another version that uses tele size bobbins straight up with rod magnets.
Another factor (according to Steve):what makes a mudbucker so muddy-over the top- is the millions of turns of tiny wire raises the resistance so high that the interwinding capacitance kills the highs. So if you want a lot of output but keep the highs you need to get the R down, and fatter wire will do that. If you still need a lot of turns, bigger wire needs more room, but a mudbucker can has LOTS of room.
Has anyone "mapped" the magnetic field of pups...?
Mapping magnets is something SS does for "fun". This involves improving electric motor efficiency by mapping the magnets leading to the optimum field.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0.1&thid=13f9cd527aa66972&mt=application/pdf&url=https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui%3D2%26ik%3Dd84ad732a7%26view%3Datt%26th%3D13f9cd527aa66972%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dsafe%26realattid%3Df_himd9usb0%26zw&sig=AHIEtbTF71-koUXseQFW2TvHVE-kOXYGkw
I guess he could do pups but there's really no benefit I can see. Sounds good, is good!
-
Go to bed Carlo... it's past your bed time...! ;)
(I need to sign up for that one but the tiling beckons or SWMBO will be on my tail)
-
mmm interesting pickup .a full fat sidewinder with added clarity could be mighty tempting.how many k ohms is it?
-
mmm interesting pickup .a full fat sidewinder with added clarity could be mighty tempting.how many k ohms is it?
It's neither full nor fat:
...smaller coils (.5 x .675 ") and big wire. Reads 13.7k.