Anyone try Brandonwound Wide Range humbuckers?

[ruger9]

CuNiFe = copper nickel iron

FeCrCro (my bad on the incorrect spelling) = Iron Chrome Cobalt

-I can find zero information about FeCrCro being "similar to ceramic", from what I'm reading online (magnet manufactures), they are different. They compare it to Alnico5, no mention at all of ceramic.


Here is what BrandonWound had to say about FeCrCro when I asked him:

"There is a small diameter version but strong like A5 and a larger diameter weaker like A2. THE A2 strength is closer to the original CuNifE strength. I use the A2 strength magnets"



Iron Chrome Cobalt magnets (FeCrCo) have similar properties to cast Alnico 5 but, unlike cast alnico, the FeCrCo magnets are actually reasonably malleable. The FeCrCo magnet material is semi-hard magnetically and exists in bar, rod, wire and also as thin rolled strip.

They are a replacement for CuNiFe magnetic material (CuNiFe is not commercially available any more).

http://www.eclipsemagnetics.com/row/magnetic-materials-iron-chrome-cobalt-fecrco/

 

[hongaku]

It's FeCrCo.
Fe: iron
Cr: chromium
Ce: cobalt

It is an alloy. Nothing remotely akin to ceramic. Similar to AlNiCo and CuNiFe for certain applications. As for use in guitar pickups, it's more like AlNiCo than CuNiFe, but it has its own character that isn't like either one.

Edit: ruger9 beat me to it by editing the above post whilst I typed mine [emoji12]

 

[fender4life]

Well, then thats good to know because i'm not partial to ceramic.

 

[Jason Lollar]

no its not ceramic its iron chromium and colbalt. its a machineable magnetic alloy compared to alnico which would be really difficult to machine- you would have to grind that or with a wire edm but that wouldnt be useful for making threads. sorry someone posted while i was!

 

[ruger9]

Well, then thats good to know because i'm not partial to ceramic.

We agree!!!! I think the earth just stopped spinning!!!

 

[Zepfan]

Thanks for that info guys.

 

[DavidP]

Very interested in these pups, please post when you get them installed.

This thread emerged at a very appropriate time, as I'm getting ready to send my older MIM WHRB from my 72 RI off to... well, now I'll have to figure that part out!!

 

[ruger9]

They're in.

This is NOT A REVIEW, its more of a COMPARISON- it wouldn't be fair right after installation, using the same amp settings and new strings. I used the same amp settings ON PURPOSE so I could compare the differences between the Telenator MOD1s and the BrandonWound WRHBs.

Remember, the MOD1s use A2 rods and the coil is wound by Fender- they are only around 8.5K ... The BWs use FeCrCro threaded magnets and are wound by them- to the correct WRHB output of 10.5K (bridge; he winds the neck to 9.5K for better balance with the bridge).

Let me start off by saying I LOVE the MOD1s, and still do after now hearing the BWs in the same guitar. My ONLY complaint with the MOD1s is that I wish for a little more output... they are "polite". But I love them. Enough to have a "nicer/quieter" thinline with MOD1s in it... they are closer to vintage single coil-like output. They remind me of my regular tele. The BWs are hotter than the MOD1s.

NOTE: I left the stock Squire 250K pots in the guitar ON PURPOSE. Again, I've been playing MOD1s for months with those pots, and I wanted a direct comparison. BW I think recommends 500K, and I'll decide later, but frankly, I'm not sure I see the need. The FeCrCro has a gritty high end (that Telenator told us about, compared to CuNiFe and AlNiCo) that actually benefits from 250K pots. There's no lack of high end here. For those of you who "can't get enough high end", you may like 500Ks better. And for those of you who play primarily on the neck and middle positions, I can almost guarantee that you'll like 500Ks better. For me, the jury is still out... more play time, and pickup adjustment, and amp dialing, is needed....

Observations:

The MOD1s are smoother. More polite. Great round highs. Take pedals VERY well. More of a vintage single coil type output, but with the WRHB tone. I love them. With a light OD pedal, or the dirty channel of my SS22, I REALLY love them.

But, I knew I had to try some "real" WRHBs- (or as close as I could get without CuNiFe)-wound up to proper output- or I would always "wonder."...

The BWs are grittier. Mostly in the high end. Louder. Less polite. They might also have more bass, as I did turn the bass down on the amp a bit. Right now, they don't seem to like my OD pedals as much- the high end gets brash, fast- maybe that's the FeCrCro Telenator was talking about? This is on the BRIDGE pickup; the neck pickup doesn't suffer this, due to it's position under the strings. More high-mids in the BWs too.... [keeping in mind I haven't really changed the amp settings yet...]

Again- this isn't a review, I have to play them awhile and do some tweaking.... but, out-of-the-box, while I prefer the output of the BWs, I think I prefer the smoother tone of the MOD1s... maybe that's the FeCrCro vs A2, IDK... and like I said- theses are BRAND NEW STRINGs, so obviously I'll have to come back later after living with the new setup awhile...

MOD1 tone with the gritty output of the BWs would be my holy grail WRHB tone (I'll bet that's what CuNiFe WRHBs sound like....sigh....)

 

[hongaku]

Don't forget that Telenator also has a mod that consists of a rewind and a mix of CuNiFe and AlNiCo mags, as well as the mod 2 with AlNiCo... I will say that having a good bit of experience with FeCrCo and vintage original WRHBs, that the vintage are more "polite" as you put it in terms of smoother and rounder highs, with the mid focus more on the low mids. I actually like FeCrCo equipped WRHB repros and I feel they largely get into the right ballpark tone-wise. They are different though and I prefer vintage if I had to choose. The FeCrCo ones I've tried sounded best to me with 500k pots, especially in the neck position. I also found it best to have them lower than I would set the vintage ones (vintage I set around 4/64" or 6/64" from bottom of string to top of cover with low and high E depressed at last fret, FeCrCo about 8/64"), and the way the poles are adjusted matters a lot for vintage or the FeCrCo ones - the low and high E poles should be no higher than flush with the cover and the B string pole I always lower a couple of turns below flush with the cover; the others to taste but more or less staggered to match the radius of the fretboard (so basically the same method as the overall height of the pickup, but from the bottom of the string to top of respective pole piece). These are just my preferences, but once your strings break in a bit you might find them useful for a starting point (or not). One cool thing about the FeCrCo ones with regard to something they "have over" the vintage ones is they hold together much better when using high gain - the vintage ones can get a little mushy or undefined with too much gain. This means nothing though if you don't ever use high gain.

 

[ruger9]

If I was willing to drop the cash, I would have already bought Tolerator's CuNiFe set... but the set would cost MORE THAN TWICE what the guitar did!

If I had a REAL '72 that needed new pickups, then I could see it.... but $800 worth of pickups in a $300 Squire? No... (no offense Telenator- you know I love & praise your stuff!)

Hongaku-
As for the rest of your post, THANK YOU! It was very informative, especially for someone who has not owned (I have played) actual, vintage, WRHBs....
so, you're using 500K with your FeCrCro repros?

 

[ruger9]

One cool thing about the FeCrCo ones with regard to something they "have over" the vintage ones is they hold together much better when using high gain - the vintage ones can get a little mushy or undefined with too much gain. This means nothing though if you don't ever use high gain.

Telenator has said the same thing, but- today's initial impression (as stated above), seems to me the highs can get harsh fast on the FeCrCro..... I think I liked higher gain more with the MOD1s... BUT, all the caveats listed in my comparison above....

Something else:

If I ever want "really nice cleans"... like SRV "Lenny" or Jim Campilongo, the MOD1s seem better at it than the FeCrCro.... altho Telenator has said the real CuNiFe ones REALLY do the "clean" thing best of all.... the FeCrCro seems to never be REALLY clean... they are relatively hot pickups, compared to single coils and eve PAFs... and the high end seems to always have a "grit" to it, which, unless I'm misunderstanding Telenator, seems to be the nature of FeCrCro?

Man I love this stuff, I find it fascinating....

 

[ruger9]

Hongaku,

Have you tried the MOD1s?

 

[hongaku]

No, I have no experience with Telenator other than a small repair on a vintage WRHB of mine (which was very well done and very reasonable in price). I want to try several of his offerings out at some point though. I actually sold all the FeCrCo pups I had with the exception of a standard humbucker sized WRHB from the Creamery. But yes, when I had them I tried several values (250, 375, 500, 1meg) and 500k was the best for me along with the adjustments I described above. I don't know what to tell you about the grit you refer to as I didn't have any problems getting pristine cleans from any of the ones I had. The cleans were not as "rich" sounding as vintage WRHBs, but I attribute that to the high mids vs low mids focus of the two. I don't know if what you're talking about is unique to the Brandonwounds or what.
To be clear, I would buy FeCrCo equipped ones again and I like them just fine - I simply prefer vintage ones when I can get them. I've gone through several of those as well over the past few years.
As for the price, they are steep for sure. I don't usually think about gear in those terms though (except a Klon; I would never even consider it). The way I see it as far as pickups, that's 90% of the base sound of an electric guitar and I'm willing to pay more for certain sounds. I happen to be one of the people who really digs the vintage WRHB sound and whilst I've managed to get good deals on the vintage ones I've bought and sold (averaged about $300 each), I couldn't rule out getting one or two from Telenator at $400 a pop.
I've had 3 guitars equipped with WRHBs (both vintage and FeCrCo at different times). I currently have only a tele custom I put together with a vintage WRHB in the neck. I will eventually get/put together either a thinline again and/or a deluxe and I will be going to Telenator first. Lately I've just been more into pedals and most of my time has been going into learning how to build them, so I haven't been thinking about acquiring and modding guitars as much these days. Plus, I made a big move about 6 months ago and around that time I suddenly found the pressing financial need to downsize my guitar and pickup collection...

 

[fakeplastic]

ruger9, did you set the BWs at the same height as the MOD1s? I wonder how the BWs work set farther from the strings, since they seem like they are strong and loud pickups, it might benefit them to be set lower, especially the bridge pickup.

 

[ruger9]

ruger9, did you set the BWs at the same height as the MOD1s? I wonder how the BWs work set farther from the strings, since they seem like they are strong and loud pickups, it might benefit them to be set lower, especially the bridge pickup.

Well, as I said, I haven't done a ton of tweaking yet- altho I did lower the B string poles (normal on all pickups) because it was really loud.

What I normally do is, set the bridge pickup as high as I can get it (to get body & beef out of it), then drop the treble side until the highs round off a little. THEN I set the height of the neck pickup to match the bridge in volume.... I use all 3 pickups, so they really need to be matched in volume.

That being said, I wouldn't be able to drop the neck pickup much- it's already pretty low to compensate for the bridge volume. Believe it or not, even tho the BWs are 9.5K neck/10.5K bridge, the Fender/MOD1s seem to be better matched in volume for their respective positions... BUT I have to do more tweaking, I'll start with the "1st and 6th string poles should not be higher than the pickup cover, than adjust the others to match", which was the official "instructions" from Fender on the original WRHBs... just like Hongaku said above.

 

[hongaku]

*should NOT be higher than the pickup cover
Yes, the Fender guidelines are often a good starting point I've found. Not gospel or anything, but definitely can be pretty close to where things are going to be fairly balanced.

 

[ruger9]

*should NOT be higher than the pickup cover
Yes, the Fender guidelines are often a good starting point I've found. Not gospel or anything, but definitely can be pretty close to where things are going to be fairly balanced.

Thanks for catching my typo! Fixed!

 

[ruger9]

OK, have adjusted them according to tips in this thread, and this pic of Tab Benoit's guitar, since he's one of the hallmark tones I'm after, and you have to start somewhere.....

Out of the box the BWs had many of the poles up above the cover, I guess they are "supposed" to be at or below.... so I adjusted them all flat with the cover, then lowered the B poles a little, then adjusted height and tilt to match Tab's, again just as somewhere to start.... (I had the pickups higher than he did)

Much better. There's more clarity, less boom, not as much high mid range, they balance really well.... all this is kind of subtle of course, but it does make a difference when you add it all together....

It would hard for me to give an A/B opinion vs. the MOD1s now, simply because it's been too long since I played the MOD1s, and I don't trust myself. But I think I can safely say this:

The MOD1s are smoother, less gritty, have less midrange, are "more polite"- more of a vintage output

The BWs are a LITTLE less smooth/more gritty, have more mids, are "hotter"- more of a hot vintage output

I think the best way to describe it would be comparing, say, Fender "regular" tele pickups (vintage output) to Texas Specials. For a Jonny Lang/Tab Benoit thing, the BWs are probably better... I always felt like with the MOD1s I needed a TOUCH of an OD pedal to add that "little something" and get the right "Feel"...

OH- and when I swapped the pickups, I also converted to 50's wiring/Fezz Parka Mod for better volume rolloff, and it didn't work very well.... but now that I lowered and adjusted the WRHBs, it works much better.... like my #1 tele which has had that wiring for many years.

Also- for some background, my #1 is a regular tele with a Rio Grande Muy Grande in the bridge and a Texas Special in the neck- so kinda' "hot vintage" if you will.... I always wanted the thinline to be "up to" where #1 was, and the MOD1s were a little too polite... the BWs match #1 tele very well now.

All that said, I still LOVE the MOD1s, and am keeping them for a future project, or at the very least to, someday, after I have lived with the BWs for awhile, put the MOD1s back in to re-visit my opinions.

 

[hongaku]

Awesome!

 

[ruger9]

also interesting....

I've been sitting here reading all the threads on WRHBs, and came across a Telenator recommendation.....

Regarding pot values, Telenator said "FeCrCro is very bright, and I would start with 250K". I knew my ears weren't fooling me.... I realize the original CuNiFe ones work best with 1M, and the general rule is 500K for humbuckers, but I've never been much for "rules", and listen to my ears... I use 250K or 300K on P90s, and I have used 250K on Filtetrons... I think the 250K is just fine on these Brandonwounds....