Increase quack on Strat

[genmce]

So - to start with this is not about a specific pickup or set of pickups - so mod if you would move it to where you deem appropriate - I would appreciate it.
This seem like the place - since people would normally think, at least I did, that pickup selection would have great impact. Sorry for the digression - on to it then.

I really like that quacky sound on postion 4 (stock strat wiring) - I have been looking for info about increasing that quack. I tried several different wiring schemes and was not sure why I was not being rewarded with the duck prize I wanted. I found several references - I think it was on a fender forum, however, I looked so many places I don't recall to properly attribute it. Here are two suggestions

1. Lower the middle pickup - since this seems like the most non-invasive way to quack (besides buying a duck)I think it should be first. Break out that screwdriver and lower that middle pickup on your sss or hsh.
I have no way to quantify the results except to say - "quack" increased, perceptually, for me when I did this.
Try it. I would love to know why this and how low can you go before the effect fades?

2. I also read about not using reverse wound middle pickup is better for more quack. Perhaps the quack is in the hum?

I would like other suggestions on increasing quack on 3 pickup guitars.

[JohnH]

My un-substantiated theory is that if you can keep the load off the pickups, the duck quacks more clearly, Im using a no load master tone pot on my strat, and I think it helps, even more than the single settings, for no logical reason. Conversly, the traditional Strat wiring where two tone pots are active in the N+M setting sounds liek a muffled squawk.

[newey]

genmce-

I would move this post, as you're right, it really doesn't belong here. But I also can't think of where else to put it, so I'll leave it for now.

We've had an extensive discussion about quack in the past, but my searching has failed to lead me to the thread of which I'm thinking.

But it's a combination of a couple of things. First, it's the location of the middle pickup on a Strat. Leo just spaced them out sort of evenly, and made no attempt to place the middle pickup under a harmonic node. So, a Strat's middle pickup, while electrically in phase with the other two, is harmonically out-of-phase with the others. Sometimes, you'll hear that also called being physically out-of phase.

If you think of the vibration of a string like a sine wave on an oscilloscope, the string would reach a "peak" over the neck and bridge coils, and a "valley" over the middle pup. That's a gross oversimplification of what's really going on, but it may help with the thought process.

The other major factor is the single coil pickup, which gives a better high-end response than other types. Use a HB and the quack disappears . . .

Quite a while back, we had a fellow post a wiring scheme that he called "Dial-a-duck"

Unfortunately, his wiring diagram has disappeared into the ether. But essentially, he claimed that by wiring a Strat with a separate volume control for the middle pickup, one could "dial in" the amount of quack desired. He wired the controls like on a Jazz Bass to get this effect.

On my 4-single coil "4caster", there are two middle pickups, spaced evenly, so I don't have a middle pickup in the traditional location. One of the reasons for doing this was to see what was available with the middle pickup(s) placed elsewhere. What I found was that this guitar does not have the traditional Strat "quack" sound. It does have many interesting other sounds, and running just the two middle pickups alone does begin to approach a "quack" sound, but the regular "quack" isn't part of the program.

Note also that (thanks to the late ChrisK), I angled both middle pickups a bit, so that there is a progression of the angle, between a straight horizontal at the neck to the angled bridge. Each middle pickup is slightly angled, and th ethird more than the second.. Another confounding variable in the mix!

Just so you get the idea of what it looks like, here's a photo. This was while it was being built, it's not strung up at this point and the pickguard isn't attached yet:



Of course, changing pickups is the major variable you can alter, since you're "locked in" as far as position of the pickups. This can get to be an expensive pursuit. People may tell you this pickup or that is better for "quack", and they may even have a video to supposedly "prove" this, but it's difficult to tell much from an internet video and caveat emptor applies.

I don't think RWRP middle has much to do with it, people talked of "quack" on the vintage Strats, before Fender started using a RWRP middle and providing an actual 5-way switch. Getting the "quack" was the reason many folks filed slots in their Strat 3-way switches to get at the "notch positions".

One other thing that may have an effect-at least I've heard this claim being made- is that the reverse angle of the bridge pickup helps. Think Hendrix playing a right-handed Strat upside down, the pickup angles in the opposite direction. You could experiment with this by having Warmoth make up a custom pickguard ($25-$30), they allow you to specify a reverse-angled bridge pickup.

[Deleted]

Sept 8, 2013 5:43:11 GMT -5 genmce said:

1. Lower the middle pickup - since this seems like the most non-invasive way to quack (besides buying a duck)I think it should be first. Break out that screwdriver and lower that middle pickup on your sss or hsh.
I have no way to quantify the results except to say - "quack" increased, perceptually, for me when I did this.
Try it. I would love to know why this and how low can you go before the effect fades?

+1 from me. I remember having a generic cheapo (but good sounding) middle SC and along with Dimarzio Super Distortion on the bridge, it produced a helluva quack. So it might have with the output difference between the bridge (or neck) against the middle pup.

Sept 8, 2013 5:43:11 GMT -5 genmce said:

2. I also read about not using reverse wound middle pickup is better for more quack. Perhaps the quack is in the hum?

I cannot see a connection here.

[genmce]

Sept 8, 2013 7:53:46 GMT -5 newey said:

genmce-

snip -
Quite a while back, we had a fellow post a wiring scheme that he called "Dial-a-duck"

Unfortunately, his wiring diagram has disappeared into the ether. But essentially, he claimed that by wiring a Strat with a separate volume control for the middle pickup, one could "dial in" the amount of quack desired. He wired the controls like on a Jazz Bass to get this effect.

So can I run the middle pickup hot wire directly to a 250k pot then to the 5 lever switch?

[newey]

So can I run the middle pickup hot wire directly to a 250k pot then to the 5 lever switch?

Yeah, it gets wired "across" the pickup before the switch, just as on an LP with individual V and T controls.

[murrayatuptown]

Not really a question about increasing quack , but does anyone recall reading something about the response time of different neck designs playing a role?

What I think I read is that the bolt on Fender style neckhas the most phase shift, a dovetail set neck has less, and a through neck has the least.

I don't recall where I read it& wiuld like to verify or refer someone I was duscussing it with. t this point I don't know if I am recalling wrong info.

Man is the type small on my phone!

[newey]

MurrayUT-

Welcome back! Good to hear from you again.

You're testing my institutional memory here,but I don't recall that we ever had any discussion of necks vis-a-vis the elusive "quack".

I'm frankly skeptical that the style of neck joint would have much to do with it. And I'm not understanding where "phase shift" enters the equation with neck joints.

The basic issue with all of this stuff is that "quack" is in the ear of the player, it's wholly subjective and can't even be reliably described, much less tested. So, when we talk of having more or less of such a thing, we can only mean, essentially: "more or less of one person's idea of what such a thing sounds like".

[haydukej]

For the ultimate quack, one not need to look further than 1986.

[newey]

AHA! The secret of more quack is clearly a Charvel with an angled HB in the neck and only a single pot to load the circuit . . .

[lunaalta]

......and I thought the secret was to eat more pond weed......

[nikogo]

Please let me come closer to a pond and quack my opinion too.
If you would try to compare in JohnH's GuitarFreak the characteristics/graph of a single coil pickup and the graph of two single coils connected in parallel (with no load filter state) you would notice the peak on the treble end increase for two singles. It can be typical filtering effect of inductance connected in parallel (reducing lows, pushing up highs) or shifted resonance peak. The two coil graph looks similar to a wah pedal diagram bump.  
Anyway two parallel single coils close to a bridge give quite bright tone. The movement from moderate lows of middle pickup to bright and more powerful trebles quacks for itself. 
Lowering the middle pickup may increase overall brightness. 
And of course the pickups should have good treble level.
Does it sound reasonable?

[ashcatlt]

If by quack we mean the comb filter action that comes from combining two pickups where the harmonics are out of phase between them, then it should be pretty obvious that we will get the deepest notches when the two level of a given out of phase harmonic is the same in both pickups. As one gets louder than the other (doesn't really matter which, nor whether you're turning this one up or that one down), the notches get shallower and the effect becomes less pronounced.

It's complicated quickly by the fact that the proportions of the harmonics at the two pickup positions is quite different. That actually has more to do with the distance to the bridge, or maybe more specifically distance from the center of the vibrating length of the string, which of course changes as you fret the guitar. That there is the biggest complication of that whole thing. It might quack alright at the open position, but up by the 12th fret it's a completely different game. I'd tend to think that your best bet for quack at the M + B would be to fret low on the neck (close to the nut), and try to set the two pickups so that the middle harmonics come out about the same from each. That balance can be affected either by pickup choice, pickup height, V pot, or whatever.

[1150lefty]

An idea popped in my head the other day and I keep kicking it around when I get some free time to think. I decided to come here to see if it was even worth pondering and I saw this thread. The Tele "twang" trick, where you put a bar underneath the pickup to mess with the magnetic field. I'm also wondering about magnets, and different magnets or none on the pole pieces. Could this be used to somehow create more quack?

Some good reading here - thanks Newey! And everybody else, for that matter. I could be wasting this brain cell on Facebook.

[Tim]

Sept 8, 2013 7:53:46 GMT -5 newey said:

Quite a while back, we had a fellow post a wiring scheme that he called "Dial-a-duck"

Unfortunately, his wiring diagram has disappeared into the ether. But essentially, he claimed that by wiring a Strat with a separate volume control for the middle pickup, one could "dial in" the amount of quack desired. He wired the controls like on a Jazz Bass to get this effect.

Thanks for the mention. I managed to resurrect my wiring diagram. Here you go...

[newey]

Tim-

Welcome Back! Thanks for reposting that. I'll link it back to your original post.

[vinnie1971]

I have found that using passive midrange tone shaping helps enhance the quack such as 4.7 nF or 2.2nF cap in series with an inductor, but not as much as wiring the middle pickup out of phase with a .1uF cap in series with the signal. A bit like half out of phase this subtly bass cut filter bit like half out of phase but only the low bass frequencies are cut hence these frequency cancellations are reversed and put back into the signal.
I have half out of phase in my middle pup and 3/4 out of phase with .cap on bridge/ I use no load blend pot so I can out of phase nasal quack combining with middle or neck, but you can decide which pup you want this on. Maximum quack on the middle.
Here's a demo

[dralf]

Sept 8, 2013 5:43:11 GMT -5 genmce said:

So - to start with this is not about a specific pickup or set of pickups - so mod if you would move it to where you deem appropriate - I would appreciate it.
This seem like the place - since people would normally think, at least I did, that pickup selection would have great impact. Sorry for the digression - on to it then.

I really like that quacky sound on postion 4 (stock strat wiring) - I have been looking for info about increasing that quack. I tried several different wiring schemes and was not sure why I was not being rewarded with the duck prize I wanted. I found several references - I think it was on a fender forum, however, I looked so many places I don't recall to properly attribute it. Here are two suggestions

1. Lower the middle pickup - since this seems like the most non-invasive way to quack (besides buying a duck)I think it should be first. Break out that screwdriver and lower that middle pickup on your sss or hsh.
I have no way to quantify the results except to say - "quack" increased, perceptually, for me when I did this.
Try it. I would love to know why this and how low can you go before the effect fades?

2. I also read about not using reverse wound middle pickup is better for more quack. Perhaps the quack is in the hum?

I would like other suggestions on increasing quack on 3 pickup guitars.

[dralf]

Aluminum foil wrapping the back of the pickups.
Amen.