Wide-Range real humbuckers?

Hi! I'm Marco! I read your forum and you are great! I hope you could help me! Sorry for my English...!
I have a questions about the Fender Wide-Range humbuckers. I play a Fender Telecaster '72 Thinline (Mexican), i think they are great but i have a feeling about these pick-ups, seems like they have a low output... even more than a Tele single coil... Am i wrong?
Do you know the exact level of output compared to a PAF?
Thank you very much! Marco

The "output" as measured in dc ohms is not a truly accurate way to judge a pickup. Many times, a pickup with a low dc ohm reading but strong magnets, will sound louder than other pickups.

Have you ever taken your pickups out of the guitar or taken them apart for any reason? Sometimes it is possible to reduce output by improperly re-assembling the pickups or guitar.

Marco, I think I know what the problem is. Problem is, those pickups suck. Also, those are re-issues, which sound nothing like the originals.

It's really not so much a matter of their "output", as it is their sound. They are kinda dark, dank and stinky sounding. They seriously lack in the highs and upper-mids, therefore, they're muddy, so they just don't sound like they are cutting through. And they're not.

I had an American-made reissue thinline with these pickups. Liked the guitar, hated the pickups. Figure I could maybe have them re-wound and solve the problem. So I had them re-wound, and it was an improvement, but not enough for me to like it. There's just no overcoming their nature. I prefer a top-end clarity(even with humbuckers), and I suppose some people might like the "darkness" of the Wide Range's.

Point is that the Reissue has nothing to do with Wide Range pickups other than appearance. Fender dropped the ball by using these terrible pickups on the Reissues instead of making pickups to original Wide Range specs. I bet there would be a market for a faithful reproduction of the original Wide Range pickups.

The originals had hybrid alloy magnets
that are not in production anymore.
Nothing sounds as good as the original
wide ranges. Saw a band Saturday where the
lead player was playing a mocha
vintage widerange neck pup tele
thru a 60s AC30...STELLAR tone
Like em better than PAFs...
they are sweeter and clearer..
and worth the money for a real
vintage pup...

I have a '72 Custom RI and I know what you guys are saying about the dark sound. However, I find the RI neck pup useful for jazzier tones, as well as slide tones. For more "conventional" tele tones I think the HB blends well with the bridge pup. I'm not saying it sounds like the originals, but I think it has it's uses. JMHO

I think the closest sounding pickup to the original Seth Lover-designed Fender Wide-Range Humbucker would probably be one of those TV Jones TVTRons (his Filtertron pickup in a regular humbucker size):

http://www.tvjones.com/images/1tvt.jpg

I'd note that he also does a P-90 sized version that has me drooling...

Cheers, Tim

I like the wide range humbuckers of both eras.

Their full bodied tone gives me a lot to work with. True, they're different from other p'ups but isn't that the point? If I was looking for a typical humbucker sound, I wouldn't like them but taken for what they are, I find them rather unique and quite useful.

I also have a 72 Custom RI...and I agree with morroben.....
...one thing that I'm contemplating is fitting a S-D Jerry Donahue bridge pup..got a feeling this will be an interesting blend in slide work...

Gumbo in Sth Oz

I've just restored my 1976 Tele Deluxe with REAL vintage Seth Lover wide-range humbuckers. Before that,the tele was a kluge of duncans. The real vintage pups are paired with 1 Meg pots and sound incredible. There is an excellent variety from cutting clarity to grunge/shred if I want it. I suggest the high cost of real vintage WR pups is well worth the investment.

On the road to restoration, in my impatience, I got a pair of WR Re-issues. Fender specs use 250K pots. And yes, they sounded somewhat dark. I changed out to 500K pots (as most humbuckers use) and the pups really opened up. The clarity was quite good.

So, if you can't afford the real mccoy, then change out the pots to 500Ks and I think you will be very pleased.

Just my opinion.
Joe

We should not forget that the original widerange has cunife magnets and was wired with 1000K pots. The current widerange uses 250K pots. This difference could the biggest reason why the new ones are "darker" sounding than the old ones.

Thankyou very much to everybody for the answers!
Months ago i've changed the pot of my Thinline and the tone is very good now! I mean... With more Trebles...
I think those pickups has a very low output because they not saturate the amp more than the bridge single coil on my American Tele...!
The sound of those WideRange is very good and i really like it but maybe i'm looking for another kind of pickups with more output...
Do you think i can solve this with a pair of normal PAF, like the DiMarzio PAF Classic...? Or it's the same output...?
Sorry for my English...!

P.S. Let me say to you americans that you really make good guitars and amps! I've got a MesaBoogie Stiletto and it's great, really! Keep going! Thankyou!

I'm not sure if the PAF-style pups will give you more output, or a different sound than the widerange (or different enough to make you want to change pickups). From what I'd read, the paf has more bass and a thicker sound than the widerange. Keep in mind that the BIGGEST reason for this could be that the pafs are typically wired with 250k pots and .022uf cap, whereas the wideranges are wired with 1000k pots and .015uf cap.

The current widerange uses 250K pots. This difference could the biggest reason why the new ones are "darker" sounding than the old ones.
it is. the 250k pots actually make the wide range humbucker sound good in the bridge position, but they ruin the neck and make it totally muffled. it's not the pickup's fault that fender made horrible choice of pots.

I agree. The problem is that i like the Wide Range sound but i don't know if they have the same output of a PAF...

If you like the sound of the WR, why don't you just use a clean boost pedal to raise the output but keep the tone?

I had a Thinline RI with the Fender humbuckers, they definately were hotter than std single coils, have you tried adjusting the pickup height? being humbuckers you can get them pretty close to the strings, I've found height adjustment on any pickup can make a world of difference.
Also as mentioned, you can change the vol pot to a 1 MEG that will give you more output, or even 2MEG if you can find one.

I've tried to adjust the pickup height and now the sound is very very good!!
Somebody sad to me that the 1MEG pot gives me only more trebles but no more output... Is it correct?

Thank you very much to you all for the answers!

The WR pups are NOT low volume. The original Seth Lover vintage and the recent Re-issues are as "hot" as most any humbuckers. Your problem must be with the setup. Also, you are correct, the pots don't affect absolute volume as much as they do tone.

JMHO
Joe.

IMHO, the best sounding vintage PAF reissues are the Gibson Burstbuckers. They come in three output levels (1 - 3, lower to higher). My LP has a #1 in the neck and #2 in the bridge. You could try 2/3 for a hotter setup, or if you want to be a total madman, 3/3.

Then there's always Bardens.

I'm somewhat amazed by the consistent disdain for the reissue WR buckers. I have 2 Thinlines and a Deluxe with these pups. With nice 500K CTS pots and a good set up, I think they sound great.

I did search & find original 70's Lovers for one of my Thinlines, and they are worth the hype for the snarling tones I'm looking for (the neck pup is also very warm and sweet sounding). But, I think the RI pups get the job done. They're not so much like a Gibby bucker, but I don't think Deluxes, Thinlines or Customs were constructed to sound just like a Les Paul either. To me, both the RI and originals have more of a P90 sound... which is right up my alley.

...with Jeff at High Order pickups. He interviews his customers on the sounds their after, then builds handwound pickups to suit. And they're affordable - I got a pair last year for $110, and they're exactly the sound I was after. (But better!)

http://www.highorderpickups.com

I'm somewhat amazed by the consistent disdain for the reissue WR buckers. I have 2 Thinlines and a Deluxe with these pups. With nice 500K CTS pots and a good set up, I think they sound great.


I agree, and that's coming from a self proclaimed fullsized humbucker hater. I would hope that the reissues don't sound quite as good as the originals due to the price I had to pay for the original I just bought, but the reissues I've demo'd sounded pretty good to my ears; better than a "Gibson" style humbucker due to the added clarity.

Better than a "Gibson" style humbucker due to the added clarity.

I really like the clarity compared to a Gibson PAF.
But is the clarity due to the different kind of wood of the guitars?

But is the clarity due to the different kind of wood of the guitars?
a good deal of it is, at least. the reissue wide ranges are standard gibson type humbuckers, so there's no real way to account for the extra brightness other than the body wood.

the originals probably are more clear because of the design of the pickups, though. there's an interview with seth lover here (http://www.vintageguitar.com/brands/details.asp?ID=28)where he briefly describes designing them to have a brighter sound.

"It’s a humbucking pickup, my own of course, and Fender wanted it to sound just like Gibson’s. Well, I didn’t feel that way about it. Since Fender had a naturally brighter sound to their pickups, I decided to make this a little different. I used CuNiFe magnets in this one, copper/nickel/iron, and it can be threaded. Al-Nickel really can’t do that, unless it’s molded. This was nothing like Gibson’s."

I really like the clarity compared to a Gibson PAF.
But is the clarity due to the different kind of wood of the guitars?

I don't think it has THAT much to do with it. You can put a muddy humbucker in a Strat or a Tele and it's still going to sound like a muddy humbucker.

I think the WideRange is a little different compared to a Gibson PAF... I hear it in the attack... The thing that made me think about is the fact that the WideRange does not saturate the amp like a PAF... Seems like it has a lower output than a PAF...
What do you think?...
Thank you very much again to you all!