Pros and cons of reversing a P-PUP

[Beedster]

I saw Rocco Prestia playing a Precision with the PUPs reversed, that is, the top PUP (E and A strings) was closer to the bridge than the other. I assume this would make the A and E strings slightly tighter sounding whilst having the opposite effect on the D and G? Any thoughts/experience of this?

Cheers

Chris

[johnnylager]

Chris, I've had both on different basses & the only difference[i] I [/i]found is that the D/G side needs to be closer to the strings on the trad P to achieve a good balance between E/A & D/G. I'm not the most gifted listener though.

[pete.young]

[quote name='Beedster' post='840563' date='May 18 2010, 09:55 AM']I saw Rocco Prestia playing a Precision with the PUPs reversed, that is, the top PUP (E and A strings) was closer to the bridge than the other. I assume this would make the A and E strings slightly tighter sounding whilst having the opposite effect on the D and G? Any thoughts/experience of this?[/quote]

I have a BB800 with the PUP reversed and it doesn't make any appreciable difference.

[Metalmoore]

My first bass (a PJ) had the reverse P and i think it sounded nicer than the fender P bass (only the one lol) i've played, gives the D and G strings that something extra...

[Bassassin]

This was common on older Yamahas, not sure if they still do it.

My 80s BB400S fretless has this, there would appear to be some logic behind it as a design idea but I don't think in practice it's noticeable.

Jon.

[ikay]

[quote name='Beedster' post='840563' date='May 18 2010, 09:55 AM']I saw Rocco Prestia playing a Precision with the PUPs reversed, that is, the top PUP (E and A strings) was closer to the bridge than the other. I assume this would make the A and E strings slightly tighter sounding whilst having the opposite effect on the D and G? Any thoughts/experience of this?

Cheers

Chris[/quote]

Several comments here say that it doesn't make a difference but to my ears the reverse P on my BB2000 definitely tightens up the bottom end when compared with my regular P bass. It's not hugely different but does slightly change the character and gives a tighter sound.

[Mcgiver69]

In older models of P-Bass E-A used to sound boomy while D-G sounded a bit thin so the solution was to reverse the pickup, that way they could balance the sound making D-G more bassy and E-A tighter and brighter.

I had an old Yamaha with that configuration and the different is noticeable when you test against an old P-Bass.

[warwickhunt]

Warwick SS I basses have the P reversed and logic does dictate that it would tighten the E & A strings but you have to ask why old Leo did the way that he did in the first place?

[Fat Rich]

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='845236' date='May 22 2010, 05:47 PM']Warwick SS I basses have the P reversed and logic does dictate that it would tighten the E & A strings but you have to ask why old Leo did the way that he did in the first place? [/quote]

Probably to get the pickup closer to the control cavity to save an inch of wire! These things were designed to be as cheap as possible, it was partly down to luck that they sounded so good.

[thestick]

I have a Sanberg pm model and they are reversed!

[AndyTravis]

My 80's Jap Yamaha bb300 is reversed.

I'd say compared to a similarly aged SQ Series Jap Squier P, there is a more defined sound to the lower strings.

But, i dare say you're more than experienced enough to make your own shout on it - it may just be something and nothing. I have just tried it on decent AKG Headphones through a mixer, and it did seem to be a bit different - not taking into account slightly different age strings etc.

I'd think Rocco Prestia does it to tighten up the low end, with his staccatto 16th note patterns. Although he was last seen touting a Conklin thing.

Let us know what you find.

[SteveO]

So why is the pup split then?. I'd have thought it'd be easier and cheaper to make using a single pup instead of two smaller ones, so there must be a reason for it. Did Leo think a tighter D&G would be preferable? or was it a mistake caused by changing to a fresh pen half-way through the design?

[Ou7shined]

It's split for hum cancelling.

[SteveO]

[quote name='Ou7shined' post='845352' date='May 22 2010, 10:05 PM']It's split for hum cancelling.[/quote]
Thanks for that, It prompted me to google for more info and it appears that instead of having 2 pickup coils across all strings wired to cancel noise - which is what I thought was the only design for a humbucker - In his wisdom, Leo decided that it was better to sit the coils side by side on the P bass. Couldn't find a reason for them being staggered though. Maybe the coils were too fat to fit them in a line?

Edited May 22, 2010 by SteveO

[Lfalex v1.1]

Depends how close to the bridge you like your thumb-rest!

[MoonBassAlpha]

that may be a flippant comment, but if it MAKES you rest the thumb ever so slightly nearer the bridge, then the sound will be different, regardless of what the pickup itself is doing.

[Lfalex v1.1]

It wasn't entirely flippant. I had considered the implications, hence the knowing [i]idiot savant[/i] wink at the end!