Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rewind of 63 J bass neck PU. Is plain enamel the only valid option?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rewind of 63 J bass neck PU. Is plain enamel the only valid option?

    Would the pickup gods strike me down if i rewound this armature with SPN? I'm not about the lacquer the coil either so why not just use the the wire I have?

  • #2
    I rewound a set of 70s Jazz pickups with PE because the owner wanted them to be as stock as possible. But I have also rewound old Rick pickups that had PE with SPN and they sounded fine.

    So it depends on how accurate it has to be as a restoration.

    Admittedly I have not done any listening tests between PE and SPN, but I'm planing on it in the near future.
    It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure. — Albert Einstein


    http://coneyislandguitars.com
    www.soundcloud.com/davidravenmoon

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by David King View Post
      Would the pickup gods strike me down if i rewound this armature with SPN? I'm not about the lacquer the coil either so why not just use the the wire I have?
      It kind of depends on what your charging, and what the customer wants.
      You can get a lb from Larry tomorrow at Remington.
      It wouldn't hurt to have a pound.
      42 AWG Plain Enamel Magnet Wire - Mini Spool Details | Remington Industries
      I figured that a 63 would have Heavy Formvar.
      What does the wire Mic?
      I guess that was a border line year.
      "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favourable reference of the Devil in the House of Commons." Winston Churchill
      Terry

      Comment


      • #4
        I don't think Jazz bass pickups ever used heavy formvar. Strat pickups did though.

        That's a good price on PE. I had just picked up a small roll from Mojo, but it would have been better to get that roll from Remington. I got some 43 SPN from them.
        It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure. — Albert Einstein


        http://coneyislandguitars.com
        www.soundcloud.com/davidravenmoon

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by David Schwab View Post
          I don't think Jazz bass pickups ever used heavy formvar. Strat pickups did though.

          That's a good price on PE. I had just picked up a small roll from Mojo, but it would have been better to get that roll from Remington. I got some 43 SPN from them.
          I'm no authority on bass pickups.
          I thought that the black bottoms were HFV, and the Grey bottoms were PE.
          I have rewound more grey bottom stuff than black.
          On the Remington wire I have purchased a lot of SPN, and HPN, but no vintage type wire.
          T
          "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favourable reference of the Devil in the House of Commons." Winston Churchill
          Terry

          Comment


          • #6
            This rewind is part of a large pile of stuff I need to get done on 4 basses. The 63 has been extensively modified already including new neck, routed for 9Vs, refinished several times, a Strat jack plate on the front. The bridge PU is all original which is the only reason I can see for sticking with plain enamel on the neck. If it were mine, I'd be tempted to put heavy polyester (HAPT) and add an extra 500 turns and then pot it in wax.
            One thing I know for sure is that the rewind won't cover the price of the PE spool and that's why I'd let someone else sub it if they were local. I guess Lollar still does rewinds and TV Jones too probably or Mike Lull. Possum? Magnut?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by David King View Post
              This rewind is part of a large pile of stuff I need to get done on 4 basses. The 63 has been extensively modified already including new neck, routed for 9Vs, refinished several times, a Strat jack plate on the front. The bridge PU is all original which is the only reason I can see for sticking with plain enamel on the neck. If it were mine, I'd be tempted to put heavy polyester (HAPT) and add an extra 500 turns and then pot it in wax.
              One thing I know for sure is that the rewind won't cover the price of the PE spool and that's why I'd let someone else sub it if they were local. I guess Lollar still does rewinds and TV Jones too probably or Mike Lull. Possum? Magnut?
              If it's been heavily modified, I would just go with the plan you have.
              Lot's of time in life It's Easier to get Forgiveness than permission!
              Rock On!
              "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favourable reference of the Devil in the House of Commons." Winston Churchill
              Terry

              Comment


              • #8
                Yeah, I just emailed the customer and he has no interest in selling the pickups later on so no need to order up fancy looking wire. thanks for the advice. This way I'll be able to A-B the two for some sort of reckoning. There's a dark cloud in every silver lining.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I always rewind jazz bass pickups with PE and you will get away with SPN but heavy formvar sounds shite.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thanks Johnson.

                    I referenced this thread: http://music-electronics-forum.com/t5165/
                    and Sam Lee guy's advice. The 7800 turns yielded a much smaller coil and only 6.4k on the neck. The original bridge coil is 8.02k and feels a lot fatter. I'd guess it has more like 8750 turns. I'd be happier if the neck coil came up to 7.6k or 7.8
                    I weighed the old wire I cut off and get 40.5g 1.375oz.
                    The original PE is .0026", the SPN is .0025" or so but I'm guessing the PE insulation is a little thicker than the SPN?.
                    Apparently Fender put wire on the coil until it looked about right.
                    I remember Shed had some specs for his favorite sounding Js that were in the low-mid 7Ks IIRC.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by David King View Post
                      The original PE is .0026", the SPN is .0025" or so but I'm guessing the PE insulation is a little thicker than the SPN?.
                      It could have been David. Old PE was all over the place. I have spools of 42 single measuring anywhere from .00265 to .0031 with DCR/1,000' from low 1,700k to almost 1,900k /1,000'

                      If your SPN is truly .0025" (very thin, even for today's wire) I'd start with about 8,500 winds and then keep an eye on the coil size.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by David King View Post
                        Thanks Johnson.

                        I referenced this thread: http://music-electronics-forum.com/t5165/
                        and Sam Lee guy's advice. The 7800 turns yielded a much smaller coil and only 6.4k on the neck. The original bridge coil is 8.02k and feels a lot fatter. I'd guess it has more like 8750 turns. I'd be happier if the neck coil came up to 7.6k or 7.8
                        I weighed the old wire I cut off and get 40.5g 1.375oz.
                        The original PE is .0026", the SPN is .0025" or so but I'm guessing the PE insulation is a little thicker than the SPN?.
                        Apparently Fender put wire on the coil until it looked about right.
                        I remember Shed had some specs for his favorite sounding Js that were in the low-mid 7Ks IIRC.
                        The older 60s pickups were wound a lot hotter and have a darker tone. Then they started winding them less for a brighter tone, which is where they are still today.
                        It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure. — Albert Einstein


                        http://coneyislandguitars.com
                        www.soundcloud.com/davidravenmoon

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Good to know, I figured as much but one sample isn't enough for me to derive conclusive results.
                          here's the masking tape around the magnets.

                          I have a lot of dimensional notes, I'll post them up when I have time.
                          Attached Files

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            That's interesting that they taped the magnets then, and then later stopped taping the magnets.
                            It would be possible to describe everything scientifically, but it would make no sense; it would be without meaning, as if you described a Beethoven symphony as a variation of wave pressure. — Albert Einstein


                            http://coneyislandguitars.com
                            www.soundcloud.com/davidravenmoon

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              That's what I thought. The mags and flatwork were dipped in very thick lacquer first. They taped over the center hole to keep the lacquer out.
                              The centering holes are tapped 4-40 through both pieces of flatwork.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X