Discussion in 'Guitars in General' started by phoenix 7, Dec 17, 2009.
I've seen this recommended a number of times. Anything to it or not?
I messed around with that and didn't notice a discernible difference.
I've seen techs also advocate going like this with the screws:
I've done it on three humbucking-equipped guitars and also noticed no discernable difference. The overall magnetic field remains the same-I think we get into "Eric Johnson's ears" syndrome with stuff like this.
I suppose it looks nice and symmetrical. Symmetrical and nice looks it I suppose.
it looks cool and allows other gear forum geeks to recognize you
i've actually started setting them all like this \ \ \ \ \ \ , on the theory that putting the slots at the same angle as the pick's travel (and 90 degrees from the pick itself) lessens the already remote chance of the pick snagging in a slot. otherwise, i see no relevance, apart from the actual heights of the screws.
Maybe it gives you Fahrvergnügen?
_ _ _ _ _ _ my OCB settings.
Symmetry is a fine thing.
Ha ha -- it does look like the VW logo!
Thanks guys -- yeah, I figured it was some kind of pickup voodoo thing.
On the Les Paul Forum someone suggested this for bridge and neck settings:
There was an article many years back in GP - "Gods of the Les Paul" issue (?) - that that pattern is how the Gibson Historic Shop sets the pole pieces for better response. They also adjust the height of each pole to match the radius of the finger board.
I always thought that was an LPF thing. That's where I learned it from.
I thought that the ultimate tone was achieved by filling in the slots with unobtainium.
I'm embarrassed to say I have no clue as to what this post is referring to. Woe is me.
I think it's referring to the polepiece screws on humbuckers? Sounds like voodoo to me.
it will direct the air flow caused by moving the guitar around to to cool down your glowing hand glowing hand while wailing a ripping solo or that overheating tailpiece. yep, thats what it is for... optimized air flow!
The polepeices are adjustable to balance string response. Since the nut and bridge are radiused, it makes sense to radius the polepeices as a start point.
If you put the outer poles flush, they'll typically be either / or \. When you adjust the rest to a typical Les Paul 12" radius, it'll tend to alternate.
We have a winner...! This is the reason. This was close to the shape some dudes saw on their pickups when they achieved optimal string balance.
My ears are not that great..
If you start with all the screw polepieces level, like a straightedge across their tops, this is supposed to be a shortcut to get the screws to follow an arc that matches the fingerboard. Like you back the A and B string polepieces a quarter turn more than the high and low E, and you back the D and G string polepieces a half turn more. You use the thread pitch to control the difference in height, and you use the screw slots to keep track of how far you turn each screw.
Honestly though I just turn each screw one at a time til the strings sound even, if I mess with the individual screws at all. The screws weren't put in because they really improve the sound, they were there to provide a talking point for a sales pitch.
You can do some interesting things with your pups by playing with the polepeice height, though. Crank up the treble side or the bass side and drop the other to change the treb/bass response, for instance.
It's definitely more of a fine-tuning thing.
Appears in one of Erlewine's books. No audible difference to me.
i would imagine that the original intention in angling the pickup screw slots was to
possibly prevent the strings or pick from somehow getting caught (snagged) by the slot of the screw.
just a guess, but it seems like a plausable explanation............
Does this have anything to do with a "crystal lattice"?