Post by antigua on Mar 19, 2017 15:42:18 GMT -5
www.tonerider.com/vintage-90
www.tonerider.com/hot-90
I bought the P-90 Classic set to replace the stock Epiphone P-90s, which appeared to be on the hot/dark side. I bought the Hot Bridge by mistake, I didn't read the product description carefully on Amazon, but this means I now have it on hand for testing, so that's good.
The Toneriders have a fairly similar DC resistance and inductance to the stock Epiphopne P-90s, but there is a pretty big difference with the capacitance. Capacitance is nearly halved with Toneriders what is seen in the Epiphones, 92pF bridge 102pF neck, to the Epiphone's 168pF bridge and 249pF neck. The lower capacitance results in a higher resonant peak for the Toneriders, but not to such an extent that they would be much brighter. The bigger take away is that the low and consistent capacitances of the Toneriders show better production consistency. The Epiphone neck P-90 really shouldn't have a capacitance of 249pF if the bridge only shows 168pF. All Tonerider pickups tested to date have had a consistent and low capacitance, so it's safe to say that this is a feature of the entire brand.
Even though both the neck and bridge have AlNiCo 2 bars, I see a distinctly higher flux density at the tops of the neck pickup's screws.
Based on the LCR bode plots, it appears that the neck and bridge pickup have near identical performance. The inductances differ by about 600 henries, but at this higher stratosphere of inductance, it makes for a smaller overall difference.
An obvious difference between the Toneriders and the Epiphone P-90's is that the Toneriders have a nickel silver base plate, where has the Epiphone has a copper or brass base plate. Brass causes greater eddy current losses, which manifest in the form of a lower Q factor. Since the Epi's have AlNiCo 5 bars, the only fair point of comparison is the Hot 90, which also has AlNiCo 5 bars, and the Epi shows a peak dB of 5.9dB and 6.2dB, where as the Hot 90 shows a peak of 9.1dB, which is fairly substantial, from a measurable standpoint. The Epiphone P-90's also have rather large screws attaching the bobbin, which might contribute to the difference. The loaded peaks differ by only 1dB, so the difference isn't so substantial, once you account for the damping of a parallel tone and volume pot.
I haven't had any "high end" Gibson P-90s to contrast these with, just the "cheap" Epiphone variety, but given the nickel silver base plate, the low capacitance and high Q factor, it's hard to imagine that much exists to be improved upon. It should be noted that the differences are small, 1dB peak difference, and 150Hz - 300Hz differences in resonant frequency. I don't consider this purchase a waste of money because it was a learning experience, but in general, these variances don't justify a $60 expense, let alone $120 for a Gibson or Seymour Duncan. You can increase the Q factor with a 1 meg pot, if that's what you want.
Tonerider Vintage 90 Bridge
- DC Resistance: 8.26K ohms
- Measured L: 7.383H
- Calculated C: 92pF (102 - 10)
- Gauss: 300G AlNiCo 2
unloaded: dV: 8.3dB f: 5.80kHz (black)
loaded (200k & 470pF): dV: 1.5dB f: 2.15kHz (red)
Tonerider Vintage 90 Neck
- DC Resistance: 8.11K ohms
- Measured L: 6.751H
- Calculated C: 102pF (112 - 10)
- Gauss: 350G AlNiCo 2
unloaded: dV: 8.3dB f: 5.80kHz (green)
loaded (200k & 470pF): dV: 1.7dB f: 2.25kHz (gray)
Note the remarkable overlap of the unloaded peaks. That's presumably unintentional, though.
Tonerider Hot 90 Bridge
- DC Resistance: 8.41K ohms
- Measured L: 6.666H
- Calculated C: 100pF (110 - 10)
- Gauss: 400G AlNiCo 5
unloaded: dV: 9.1dB f: 5.87kHz (green)
loaded (200k & 470pF): dV: 2.2dB f: 2.30kHz (gray)
The "hot" bridge actually appears to be lower output than the Vintage 90. On Tonerider's site, they list an inductance of 6.6 henries for both the Vintage 90 and the Hot 90, but I measured 7.4H for the Vintage 90 bridge, and 6.6H for the Hot 90 bridge, as specified. The Vintage 90 bridge has a loaded peak of 2.15kHz to the Hot 90 bridge's loaded peak of 2.30kHz, so the Vintage 90 is definitely the hotter wound of the two. The bode plot above contrasts the Vintage 90 and the Hot 90 bridge pickups, and it can be seen that they differ very little, but the Hot 90 peaks out a bit above the Vintage 90.
However, the Hot 90 does have AlNiCo 5 bars, reading 400 gauss at the screw tops, versus 300G from AlNiCo 2 bars for the Vintage 90. Note that 400 guass does not equate to a 33% increase in output, as the relationship between absolute flux density and voltage generated is far from linear, though there should be a slight boost in output.
I don't have a Hot 90 neck to test, but I see that it has an inductance of 6.6H, so I strongly suspect that, here again, the neck and bridge pickups are essentially interchangeable.
Also, on an amusing note, I measured exactly 6.666H inductance in the Hot 90 bridge, I included a pic down below for proof.
Pics:
www.tonerider.com/hot-90
I bought the P-90 Classic set to replace the stock Epiphone P-90s, which appeared to be on the hot/dark side. I bought the Hot Bridge by mistake, I didn't read the product description carefully on Amazon, but this means I now have it on hand for testing, so that's good.
The Toneriders have a fairly similar DC resistance and inductance to the stock Epiphopne P-90s, but there is a pretty big difference with the capacitance. Capacitance is nearly halved with Toneriders what is seen in the Epiphones, 92pF bridge 102pF neck, to the Epiphone's 168pF bridge and 249pF neck. The lower capacitance results in a higher resonant peak for the Toneriders, but not to such an extent that they would be much brighter. The bigger take away is that the low and consistent capacitances of the Toneriders show better production consistency. The Epiphone neck P-90 really shouldn't have a capacitance of 249pF if the bridge only shows 168pF. All Tonerider pickups tested to date have had a consistent and low capacitance, so it's safe to say that this is a feature of the entire brand.
Even though both the neck and bridge have AlNiCo 2 bars, I see a distinctly higher flux density at the tops of the neck pickup's screws.
Based on the LCR bode plots, it appears that the neck and bridge pickup have near identical performance. The inductances differ by about 600 henries, but at this higher stratosphere of inductance, it makes for a smaller overall difference.
An obvious difference between the Toneriders and the Epiphone P-90's is that the Toneriders have a nickel silver base plate, where has the Epiphone has a copper or brass base plate. Brass causes greater eddy current losses, which manifest in the form of a lower Q factor. Since the Epi's have AlNiCo 5 bars, the only fair point of comparison is the Hot 90, which also has AlNiCo 5 bars, and the Epi shows a peak dB of 5.9dB and 6.2dB, where as the Hot 90 shows a peak of 9.1dB, which is fairly substantial, from a measurable standpoint. The Epiphone P-90's also have rather large screws attaching the bobbin, which might contribute to the difference. The loaded peaks differ by only 1dB, so the difference isn't so substantial, once you account for the damping of a parallel tone and volume pot.
I haven't had any "high end" Gibson P-90s to contrast these with, just the "cheap" Epiphone variety, but given the nickel silver base plate, the low capacitance and high Q factor, it's hard to imagine that much exists to be improved upon. It should be noted that the differences are small, 1dB peak difference, and 150Hz - 300Hz differences in resonant frequency. I don't consider this purchase a waste of money because it was a learning experience, but in general, these variances don't justify a $60 expense, let alone $120 for a Gibson or Seymour Duncan. You can increase the Q factor with a 1 meg pot, if that's what you want.
Tonerider Vintage 90 Bridge
- DC Resistance: 8.26K ohms
- Measured L: 7.383H
- Calculated C: 92pF (102 - 10)
- Gauss: 300G AlNiCo 2
unloaded: dV: 8.3dB f: 5.80kHz (black)
loaded (200k & 470pF): dV: 1.5dB f: 2.15kHz (red)
Tonerider Vintage 90 Neck
- DC Resistance: 8.11K ohms
- Measured L: 6.751H
- Calculated C: 102pF (112 - 10)
- Gauss: 350G AlNiCo 2
unloaded: dV: 8.3dB f: 5.80kHz (green)
loaded (200k & 470pF): dV: 1.7dB f: 2.25kHz (gray)
Note the remarkable overlap of the unloaded peaks. That's presumably unintentional, though.
Tonerider Hot 90 Bridge
- DC Resistance: 8.41K ohms
- Measured L: 6.666H
- Calculated C: 100pF (110 - 10)
- Gauss: 400G AlNiCo 5
unloaded: dV: 9.1dB f: 5.87kHz (green)
loaded (200k & 470pF): dV: 2.2dB f: 2.30kHz (gray)
The "hot" bridge actually appears to be lower output than the Vintage 90. On Tonerider's site, they list an inductance of 6.6 henries for both the Vintage 90 and the Hot 90, but I measured 7.4H for the Vintage 90 bridge, and 6.6H for the Hot 90 bridge, as specified. The Vintage 90 bridge has a loaded peak of 2.15kHz to the Hot 90 bridge's loaded peak of 2.30kHz, so the Vintage 90 is definitely the hotter wound of the two. The bode plot above contrasts the Vintage 90 and the Hot 90 bridge pickups, and it can be seen that they differ very little, but the Hot 90 peaks out a bit above the Vintage 90.
However, the Hot 90 does have AlNiCo 5 bars, reading 400 gauss at the screw tops, versus 300G from AlNiCo 2 bars for the Vintage 90. Note that 400 guass does not equate to a 33% increase in output, as the relationship between absolute flux density and voltage generated is far from linear, though there should be a slight boost in output.
I don't have a Hot 90 neck to test, but I see that it has an inductance of 6.6H, so I strongly suspect that, here again, the neck and bridge pickups are essentially interchangeable.
Also, on an amusing note, I measured exactly 6.666H inductance in the Hot 90 bridge, I included a pic down below for proof.
Pics: