A look inside a Lane Poor MM5.

[automan]

I got a price list from MWS a while back, but can't seem to find that paper work since packing everything up and moving from Boston to Nashville. I'll see if I can dig it out tonight.

[Joe Gwinn]

Originally Posted by David Schwab

Wow, that's a truly dreadful website! They don't really tell you much of anything there.

Yes. Old line industrial firm that was told by some consultant that they need a web presence.

I've seen those varnishes before. A bit pricey, no?

Yep. That's their business.

On the other hand, Glyptal will be happy to sell you a railcar of varnish.

Actually, I don't know their minimum order.

[Possum]

As a web developer I can tell you that most industrial companies are way behind the internet revolution, even now. Totally freaking amazes me they are still living in the 1980's. Then there are those that hire professionals to do nice websites and give them an email account and RFQ forms, then they never hire anyone to run the website and miss out on thousands and thousands of dollars worth of business because they don't have a clue. Thank God for companies like McMaster who got their shit together.

Now all that said are their liquids made specifically to pot coils and raise capacitance of the coil?

[Possum]

Oooops, are you talking about the Allied Electronics website? That ones is great. they do have Glyptal Varnish there, just saw it. Ordered their catalog, some cool stuff they have....

[David Schwab]

Originally Posted by Possum

Oooops, are you talking about the Allied Electronics website? That ones is great. they do have Glyptal Varnish there, just saw it. Ordered their catalog, some cool stuff they have....

No, the Glyptal web site, if you can call it that.

Glyptal Home Page

[David Schwab]

Originally Posted by Joe Gwinn

On the other hand, Glyptal will be happy to sell you a railcar of varnish.

I would hope it would be cheaper than $10 for 2 oz!

I've been using spar vanish, which works fine. Before that I was using polyurethane.

[David King]

The problem with lacquer and other aromatic/ solvent based matrixes is that they need air to polymerize and air won't ever get into a coil so you have some strong reducers or solvents sitting around your insulation and trying their best to eat their way through it for 20 years. The solvents do gas off slowly over time but as they do the remaining material keeps shrinking down tighter and tighter around the coil.

Glyptal is a material that doesn't shrink much but it does need heat to polymerize. That's good. It's also designed to allow one to rewind a motor coil later on, you can probably burn it off or cut through it easily.

Epoxy is probably easier to deal with, it soaks in extremely well and cures completely from the inside out without any shrinkage. There are formulations that will give it flexibility or that might give it the same rates of thermal expansion as copper.

[belwar]

So that seems relatively easy, you need a material that uses a catalyst or hardener. It has to be thin at initial mix, and reach a good hardness within a few hours or after baking. Probably around 45-50A hardness.

A catalyzed RTV silicon would probably work very well. I use one to make quick molds that cures in 8 hours, and has a 45A hardness. mix up a batch, drop some coils in and vacuum out the air. Remove the coil, clean it off and 8 hours later you're done! No heat, no nothing.

[Sheldon Dingwall]

Originally Posted by David Schwab

Has that actually happened though? I have a Hi-A pickup I bought in 1976 and several very old EMGs and an even older Overlend EMG, and they all still work fine.

Yup, hence my interest in this topic. The EMG humbuckers that Steinberger used had a problem with a coil cutting out too. They were really good about replacing them.

[tubby.twins]

Originally Posted by David Schwab

I'd like to see one of the side winders... but this is what I expected of the humbuckers, and said so back in one of the original threads on LP pickups.

So, if the humbuckers weren't the "sidewinders" (or the "bilateral twin coils" as Lane called them), then which were? The wide aperture pickups? Has anyone opened up one of these yet?

[David Schwab]

Originally Posted by tubby.twins

So, if the humbuckers weren't the "sidewinders" (or the "bilateral twin coils" as Lane called them), then which were? The wide aperture pickups? Has anyone opened up one of these yet?

I'm confused as far as his nomenclature. I would think the humbuckers were the wide aperture pickups. How could he get wider than that?

And you cant have a wide aperture sidewinder, since they sense a single point on the string (unless they are Q-Tuners).

From the article Belwar posted in the other thread:

Lane classifies electromagnetic pickups into two groups, moving coil and moving magnet. Within the moving magnet variety there are four classes, single coil, humbuckers, stacked coil, and the bilateral twin coil. The bilateral has the advantage of hum cancelling, and still sounds like a single coil, the cleanest you can get.

So, it seems the bilateral twin coil is the side winder. The wides must be the humbucker, and maybe the narrow is the stack?

Also from that article:

After winding, the resulting armature is insulated with tape, the output cable is soldered into place with a brass sleeved strain relief, and the armature is entirely shielded with lapped seam 0.001" brass foil. This assembly is kept in the oven at 110, this in order to encourage rubberized epoxy to completely surround the windings. The armatures are placed in a bath of the rubberized epoxy, and evacuated to 29.33" in a Bell Jar. They cycle it 5 times to insure no bubbles remain between the wires, insuring ultra-low microphonics.

The rubberized armatures are then compressed from the sides and top, placed in the oven again, and allowed to cure overnight. These rubberized armatures are then prepared for the dedicated molding process. With less that the thickness of a guitar pick from the side of the armaure to the mold, precision is an absolute must! They attach precision cast spacers that hold the armature away from the tops and sides of the molds. They evacuate the proper amount of mixed epoxy, pour it into the molds, and then evacuate the molds for three complete cycles, at five minutes each. Then, it's back into the oven again for overnight curing.

So he used rubberized epoxy, including for the coil assembly.

[David Schwab]

OK, I went back and looked at the catalog scans.

So the wide and humbucker were two different things.

[tubby.twins]

EDIT: I retract my earlier mention of the original paperwork, since that was just posted.

Belwar's earlier dissection of a Precision style pickup shows that it seemed to be neither a narrow nor a wide aperture pickup, at least when compared to the soapbar shapes (Bart or EMG). That pickup obviously wasn't a sidewinder, but it didn't have the pole pieces that Lane also mentioned as a central component of the narrow aperture pickup.

Originally Posted by David Schwab

So, it seems the bilateral twin coil is the side winder. The wides must be the humbucker, and maybe the narrow is the stack?

I'd guess that the wide aperture is the bilateral twin coil, and the narrow is either a stacked-coil or a single coil. That would match up with my earlier findings (in a separate post) using magnetic paper on my existing bass with one of each. Also, I recently had the chance to remove another pair of Lane Poor pickups (one wide and one humbucking) and noticed that the magnetic paper showed some really interesting results on the wide aperture pickup. It didn't look anything like any other pickup that I've seen. I got a better look because I had the pickup all the way out of the body this time. I'll take and post pictures.

I'm considering sacrificing these for science, but I lack the following: proper equipment to expose their innards, desire to tear apart a really sweet-sounding wide aperture pickup, and a corresponding matched set of SGD sidewinder pickups to use as replacements. Perhaps in the near future.

[David Schwab]

Originally Posted by tubby.twins

I still have the original paperwork that came with one pair of Lane Poor pickups which I ordered directly back in 2000. It included diagrams of all three aperture types: narrow, wide and humbucking. I'll try to get this scanned in and posted. (I thought someone had posted this on a forum some time ago, but I can't locate it now.) But in any event, it was pretty clear that there were indeed 3 types of pickups. (This excludes the dual-aperture or dual-voice MM variants.)

It's in the older thread on Lane Poor info. That's where I got the image I posted.

Any valuable info on Lane Poor MM pups?

Belwar's earlier dissection of a Precision style pickup shows that it seemed to be neither a narrow nor a wide aperture pickup, at least when compared to the soapbar shapes (Bart or EMG). That pickup obviously wasn't a sidewinder, but it didn't have the pole pieces that Lane also mentioned as a central component of the narrow aperture pickup.

Yeah, well a P pickup is already a different type of configuration, so I guess it makes sense to keep them split coil.

I'd guess that the wide aperture is the bilateral twin coil, and the narrow is either a stacked-coil or a single coil. That would match up with my earlier findings (in a separate post) using magnetic paper on my existing bass with one of each. Also, I recently had the chance to remove another pair of Lane Poor pickups (one wide and one humbucking) and noticed that the magnetic paper showed some really interesting results on the wide aperture pickup. It didn't look anything like any other pickup that I've seen. I got a better look because I had the pickup all the way out of the body this time. I'll take and post pictures.

That makes sense.

I'm considering sacrificing these for science, but I lack the following: proper equipment to expose their innards, desire to tear apart a really sweet-sounding wide aperture pickup, and a corresponding matched set of SGD sidewinder pickups to use as replacements. Perhaps in the near future.

I'm curious to hear my side winders compared to the Poors.

[belwar]

Originally Posted by tubby.twins

Belwar's earlier dissection of a Precision style pickup shows that it seemed to be neither a narrow nor a wide aperture pickup, at least when compared to the soapbar shapes (Bart or EMG)

The MM5 was constructed physically the same way as the P. Just a longer magnet. 1/4" tall coil wrapped around ceramic magnets. Approximately same number of turns of wire.. the MM just has ALOT more wire because of the size.. The P as like 1.25k DCR and the MM was like 3.75k.

Originally Posted by tubby.twins

I'm considering sacrificing these for science, but I lack the following: proper equipment to expose their innards, desire to tear apart a really sweet-sounding wide aperture pickup, and a corresponding matched set of SGD sidewinder pickups to use as replacements. Perhaps in the near future.

Well you may think this is stupid, but i'll gladly do what I did to the MM for you with that pickup. I've got a couple M4.0W's and a J pickup to hack apart. Both the M4.0's I have are wide. if I could find a narrow i'd be in heaven. I somehow doubt any of the LP's are stacked or side winders now. Do you know anyone that would trade an M4.0W for an M4.0N? Do you have one?

If you sacrifice your M4.0W, and we can trade for an M4.0N, i'll sacrifice another one.

[tubby.twins]

Originally Posted by belwar

I somehow doubt any of the LP's are stacked or side winders now. Do you know anyone that would trade an M4.0W for an M4.0N? Do you have one?

If you sacrifice your M4.0W, and we can trade for an M4.0N, i'll sacrifice another one.

I don't have a M4.0N, and I think I'm going to keep the M4.0W and M4.0HB in this current bass. They are my first set of Lane Poor pickups that I purchased (directly from Lane!) and I am a bit attached to them, so I will probably keep them here for a while.

However, I have another bass with one JB4250 (narrow aperture) and one SB4250 (wide aperture) that *may* be available for research in the future.

[David King]

I don't think Lane's "narrow" PU's were stacks. I'm guessing both the narrow and wide aperture are sidewinders but the magnet/ bobbin heights are different. The narrow having shorter coils and the wide having taller coils. Of course this coils would be on their sides.

[Sheldon Dingwall]

Originally Posted by David Schwab

Fender still uses lacquer on the bass pickups.

I use vanish. I don't have a vacuum setup yet, but it does get all the way to the inside.

And vanish and plumbers taper work really well together.

Ebay is your friend for vacuum pumps. Or if you have a compressor, Harbor Freight has an inexpensive ventury pump.

What's plumbers taper?

How long are you letting the varnish cure before epoxy potting?

[David Schwab]

Originally Posted by Sheldon Dingwall

Ebay is your friend for vacuum pumps. Or if you have a compressor, Harbor Freight has an inexpensive ventury pump.

My friend has a vacuum pump with the bell jar and everything. But I'll probably pick up my own on eBay. I had one for many years I got from a printing plate making vacuum frame, but when I got married I had to make some room and wasn't using it.

What's plumbers taper?

Tape. That R had no business there!

How long are you letting the varnish cure before epoxy potting?

A two or three days, preferably until I can't smell it much. I used to use polyurethane, but I've been looking for something that cures faster, so I gave vanish a try. It's just as slow. CA works great, but I can't rewind the coil.

I've tried skipping the potting step before using the epoxy, and it was very microphonic. I might just start using wax, since it's quicker.

[Joe Gwinn]

Originally Posted by David Schwab

I've tried skipping the potting step before using the epoxy, and it was very microphonic. I might just start using wax, since it's quicker.

Has anyone tried shellac or dilute shellac? It doesn't take much gluing effect to prevent microphonic loose turns.

Potting a waxed coil in epoxy ought to work, so long as there is a way to ensure that the waxed coil isn't too close to any surface.

Some SAW (Surface Wave Acoustic) filters are first protected with wax and then epoxy-dipped. Later, when the epoxy has cured, the assembly is heated to drive the wax off (it wicks into the porous epoxy) to leave an air-filled void.

[David Schwab]

Originally Posted by Joe Gwinn

Has anyone tried shellac or dilute shellac? It doesn't take much gluing effect to prevent microphonic loose turns.

Rick Turner uses shellac on his horseshoe pickups.

Potting a waxed coil in epoxy ought to work, so long as there is a way to ensure that the waxed coil isn't too close to any surface.

EMG pots their coils in wax before they encapsulate with epoxy.

I figured the epoxy would have gotten right into the coil, but for some reason on two pickups I tried it, it didn't, and they were extremely microphonic. I can probably talk into them.

[Joe Gwinn]

Originally Posted by David Schwab

EMG pots their coils in wax before they encapsulate with epoxy.

I figured the epoxy would have gotten right into the coil, but for some reason on two pickups I tried it, it didn't, and they were extremely microphonic. I can probably talk into them.

Are you saying that the EMG pickups were microphonic? If so, that would imply that the wax potting wasn't deep enough.

[David Schwab]

Originally Posted by Joe Gwinn

Are you saying that the EMG pickups were microphonic? If so, that would imply that the wax potting wasn't deep enough.

No, two separate things.

I said EMG does wax pot their coils, and then I was referring to my earlier comment:

I've tried skipping the potting step before using the epoxy, and it was very microphonic.

On one set of pickups I didn't pot the bobbins in anything first, just filled the pickups with epoxy, and it they were both very microphonic.

[belwar]

I wonder if vacuum potting with 24hour epoxy would penetrate to the core... Probably would be too brittle over time.

[David King]

Most epoxies wick like crazy. I can't believe a epoxied vacuum-potted PU wouldn't be completely solid. Lane had a terrible time because his outer epoxy would wick way up inside the shielded wire lead and cause it to be brittle and break. He had to use a thick cast jacketed Beldon wire that was awful to work with and didn't fit down wiring tunnels.

He did finally migrate to a mogami console wire but the wicking was still a problem.

[belwar]

Where pray-tell did you learn that?

I'm going to tear apart the J pickup (narrow) I have and one of the M4.0 (Wide) this week. I just have to finish schematicing the Wal Preamp first. Too many projects on the go. :/

Well Actually im far off, i've copied the PCB's and located the parts, but havent finished the schematics, cause Im an idiot and dont know how to do that.

bel

[-Elepro-]

Originally Posted by belwar

I just have to finish schematicing the Wal Preamp first. Too many projects on the go. :/

Well Actually im far off, i've copied the PCB's and located the parts, but havent finished the schematics, cause Im an idiot and dont know how to do that.

bel

post two big photo of top and bottom side of the original pcb.... and i try to help you....

[Possum]

You have to be careful with shellac. The older your stock is and the more you've opened the lid the more water gets absorbed by the alcohol. then the stuff goes into your coils and it never really dries out. This is even worse on wire thinner than 42 gauge. I used to use that stuff all the time then a couple coils that were muffled and dark, cutting them open they were wet inside, so I baked them, and that didn't help either. I quit using it and stuck with wax....

[Joe Gwinn]

Originally Posted by Possum

You have to be careful with shellac. The older your stock is and the more you've opened the lid the more water gets absorbed by the alcohol. then the stuff goes into your coils and it never really dries out. This is even worse on wire thinner than 42 gauge. I used to use that stuff all the time then a couple coils that were muffled and dark, cutting them open they were wet inside, so I baked them, and that didn't help either. I quit using it and stuck with wax....

Don't use old epoxy either. Or old varnish. They all have a shelf life and a maximum open-can lifetime.

Baking will remove moisture, if done correctly, although it may be slower than desired if the temperature isn't high enough. Vacuum plus heat is very effective, as the low pressure lowers the boiling point of the solvent. If one is above the boiling point, dryout proceeds quite rapidly.

[Joe Gwinn]

Originally Posted by David King

Most epoxies wick like crazy. I can't believe a epoxied vacuum-potted PU wouldn't be completely solid. Lane had a terrible time because his outer epoxy would wick way up inside the shielded wire lead and cause it to be brittle and break. He had to use a thick cast jacketed Belden wire that was awful to work with and didn't fit down wiring tunnels.

He did finally migrate to a Mogami console wire but the wicking was still a problem.

I would be tempted to daub the entry point (where the jacket ends after the wire was stripped) with a little thick urethane floor varnish as a sealer. Epoxy will stick to urethane just fine. Floor varnish is tougher and more flexible than non-floor varnish, and thus more suited to sealing a cable.

One could probably use one of the sanding sealers to prevent wicking as well.

I suppose one could use wax, but this will prevent the epoxy from bonding to the shield braid (if any) and the vinyl wire jacket, mechanically weakening the attachment.

[belwar]

Ok, I now have an M4.0W and M4.0N. Over the next couple of weeks im going to disect them and post the results.

Anyone have any predections as to what makes it "narrow" or "wide?"

bel

[David Schwab]

Originally Posted by belwar

Anyone have any predections as to what makes it "narrow" or "wide?"

I'm guessing how far apart the two coils are.

[tubby.twins]

Here are my completely off-the-wall predictions.

The "narrow aperture" pickup will look like a standard single-coil pickup, with a number (up to 9) of individual pole pieces surrounded by a coil of wire, with a magnet underneath. It will otherwise be similar in construction to the Precision-style Lane Poor pickup which was previously dissected, except without any type of sidewinder, split coil or humbucking arrangement.

The "wide aperture" pickup will be the sidewinder. I wouldn't expect to see any pole pieces or blades in this. It's probably going to look similar to the visible internals of the Q-Tuner.

[David Schwab]

Originally Posted by tubby.twins

Here are my completely off-the-wall predictions.

The "narrow aperture" pickup will look like a standard single-coil pickup, with a number (up to 9) of individual pole pieces surrounded by a coil of wire, with a magnet underneath. It will otherwise be similar in construction to the Precision-style Lane Poor pickup which was previously dissected, except without any type of sidewinder, split coil or humbucking arrangement.

But didn't he also make the single coil version?

The "wide aperture" pickup will be the sidewinder. I wouldn't expect to see any pole pieces or blades in this. It's probably going to look similar to the visible internals of the Q-Tuner.

You have to have some kind of poles or blades in a side winder. You won't get too much signal without them. Q-Tuners obviously have poles.. three rows of them. Also the magnets are facing each other, so they want to repel. It could also be a bar magnet as the pole, and two air coils.

Also a sidewinder sounds like a single coil, which is now what I hear from the description of a wide aperture LP. I think the wide will be like the P but with two coils in a typical humbucker arrangement. Probably with ceramic magnets as poles.

[Achiles]

I did open a LP 5 string jazz model.
it´s two ceramic coil centered by 9 1/8" x 5/8" slug spaced in 1/2".