Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum
Forum Ringside => Pickups => Topic started by: tomjackson on August 07, 2009, 06:28:52 PM
-
Just wandering how they generally compare?
I'm considering them for my new Tokai ES130, the Gotoh humbuckers are pretty good so I'm thinking if I changed them for more clarity the MQ's would be the way to go?
-
I have a set of MQs in my Reverend Mantay Ray which seems like the same ball park as the es130. I haven't really played em much on a real amp. Mostly through amplitube at the computer, but they do sound lovely. I'm really bad at explaining the tonal character so I guess I shouldn't even try.
If you're interested I've posted two clips, as far as I remember, and if you're interested I can throw together some new ones in a week or two. I just moved and there wasn't rom for the guitar in the car :(
-
I've had MQs and Riff Raffs in the same guitar - two guitars actually. For what I do, they're quite similar in what they give me.
In a hard sounding and bright Epi SG, I found the MQs were too much for me - the Riff Raffs were better.
In very warm and open sounding Gibson Explorer, the Riff Raffs were doing OK but weren't quite cutting through. When I put the MQs into it, that was it for me. It makes what I'd always imagined was "PAF" noises (I'm not sure they are really though :lol:). It can be creamy, it sings, it bites, it responds to fingers and volume/tone controls.
The Riff Raffs are now in my new SG, and I was doing some ABing the other night for pickup height adjustment purposes (actually ABCing - the Mule'd Tokai Love Rock was involved as well) - on the amp models I was trying out, the MQs in the Explorer have the highest output out of the three, it pushed the amps a fair bit more than the Mules or Riff Raffs.
I'm not sure what I'd put in a semi myself, but I would lean quite close to MQs I think. They give me very close to humbucker tone, and then with a slight turn of the volume, or lighter picking, they clean up and get all "jazzy" and bell-like on me... In the right guitar they're kind of the best of all worlds for me.
What would decide me would be what the accoustic tone was like - if it was a nice warm woody tone I'd be onto MQs immediately. If it was a harder, edgier tone, I'd be a little worried that they could be harsh for me - they are a very aggressive sounding pickup through the amp settings I use :lol:
Something to consider though - and Fourth Feline has found this as well (in a semi) - the MQs are really responsive to pickup height adjustment. You can get them fat and powerful nearer the strings, clearer and slightly less powerful further away. My Blackguards almost respond that much, but my other BKPs seem to give more subtle changes, very important changes, but less noticable than the MQs for me.
Lastly, how much do you want that "bridge humbucker crunch" for chugging chords and rhythm work? For me, the MQ gets me close enough. But I do agree with Philly - it's not quite the same with a P90, it's slightly less compressed and focussed than a humbucker.
EDIT: Just been reading something Wez posted elsewhere, what strings do you use? I use 11s - it's just crossed my mind that I might get a big kick from my MQs because of that: heavy strings and quite an agressive picking action. It's possible that the tamer version of MQs, Manhattans, might be a way to go if you're the same? (But on the other hand, you've got Blackguards, I've heard your clips, MQs are probably right up your street! :lol:)
-
Something to consider though - and Fourth Feline has found this as well (in a semi) - the MQs are really responsive to pickup height adjustment. You can get them fat and powerful nearer the strings, clearer and slightly less powerful further away. My Blackguards almost respond that much, but my other BKPs seem to give more subtle changes, very important changes, but less noticable than the MQs for me.
As Andy said, they are very responsive ( in a very useful way ) to pickup heights. I loved them in a Semi-acoustic, and only removed them as my 'budget' 335 copy might be given to a friend of mine, as I plough on blissfully with Manhattans in my Archtop. Very thick and 'chewy' whilst still defined near the strings, and sharper, more 'stinging' a bit further away - and I do mean only perhaps 1 - 2 complete pickup screw turns difference. It was all nice, just 'horses for courses'.
Hearing for the first time what a fat single coil / P90 type pickup could do in a hollow or semi-hollow guitar, made buying a pair of contrasting 'Manhattans' feel like a safe bet. All in all ( with M.Qs ) it's precise detail , but with richness you can dial in or out. Almost like a mutant cross between a smoother Tele bridge pickup - and the likes of an Alnico IV Stormy Monday. With the Bridge M.Q being Alnico V , and the neck Alnico IV, they are not "shy in the showers" either. :D
-
^ "not shy in the showers" :lol:
- now that's how to market MQs!!
-
I found the MQ I had was very hot and beefy, not that PAF like at all. Imagine them like a very, very overwound Strat pickup and you're there. A PAF is powerful but open sounding.
I would say the MQs wouldn't give you more clarity, probably a bit less and more warmth...
-
:lol: Yeah - I'm really not sure what a PAF sounds/feels like. About the most solid reference I've got is a Mule :roll: ... "powerful but open" kinda fits for me.
I didn't really address the clarity thing - partly because I get confused between brightness and clarity. I can't compare Mules and MQs properly, because I've never put them in the same guitar. But I can say that in my experience that MQs are brighter and more powerful than Riff Raffs - the MQs were too much in the hard Epi SG, the Riff Raffs were just about ok. The Riff Raffs in the meaty and warm Explorer were nice, but seemed a bit bland and powerless - the MQs on the other hand sound like what the Riff Raffs were reaching for, and turned the guitar into "instant smile" whenever I plug it in.
I'm really not sure what I mean by "clarity" myself, I suppose I think in terms of "can I hear individual strings in a chord when I'm using a certain amount of crunch?". And for that, I'd say that all my BKPs are so far ahead of the pickups they replaced, that comparisons between them are miniscule. There are differences, I can hear them, but then I get mixed up with brightness and the amount of distortion the pickup/guitar is generating! For ten minutes just now, swapping guitars like billy-o, I was swaying between "Mules are clearer" and "MQs are clearer" - and I still can't tell you :lol:
I think I agree with Twinfan, though... except for "Imagine them like a very, very overwound Strat pickup and you're there" :lol:
That might work for lots of people, and it's an accurate description, but it would have misled me when I was debating going for MQs! I've played all sorts down through the years, but never a P90-type. Mainly I've been a single coil player, and mainly strats. I've used humbuckers live, but they were usually too much for what I was wanting to do. So I think I might have a slightly different starting point for imagining a sound.
If instead someone said "Imagine them somewhere between a humbucker and a single coil, they're much more like a humbucker, but they respond to pick attack and guitar controls like your single coils do..." then I'd have been able to imagine what I've ended up with! :D
Basically, they ain't humbuckers, and they ain't strat pickups - they are something else in themselves. If you do go for them, it's going to be a bit of punt, and you'll probably need to spend some time getting used to them. I went out and tried some guitars with soap-bars (it was a PRS thing that convinced me) to see if I liked it. It seemed like I did, so I ordered MQs. After the "WOW" honeymoon period, it took me ages to stop thinking that they were a humbucker or a single coil type that I was used to - when I got my head straight on that is when I really started loving them.
-
Good points Andy, good points. They are a different breed. I personally found that MQs weren't as satisfying tonally as a true P90. They're in the ball park, but I found them too hot. The BKP90s I had in my Les Paul Special were much nicer - less hot, clearer defintion of each string and more restrained. The Fralins in my Fano JM6 have the same qualities.
I may be wrong, but I believe the bobbin shape under an MQ cover isn't the same as a P90 bobbin, so the coil shape is different and that's why they sound different...
-
I've wondered that about the coil shape. I like my MQs - and they are the pickups for my Explorer - but I've also wondered (since I got them) that Manhattans might have been a better choice if I'd been after "P90". The MQs appear to be comparable to the "hot" end of the BKP P90 offerings, the Manhattans are less so, so I'm guessing they might be nearer to "standard" P90?
I've just been noodling on the Explorer for the past hour or so (while listening half-heartedly to the woeful England performance in the Test Match...), I don't play this one very often, but when I do, the feel and the MQs definitely satisfy some sort of primal urge in me :lol:
-
The MQs appear to be comparable to the "hot" end of the BKP P90 offerings, the Manhattans are less so, so I'm guessing they might be nearer to "standard" P90?
Hi Andy, :)
Be warned ( again in a good way ) about the Manhatthans ; as they were designed around a 50s archtop pickup - with Alnico 3 magnets and appropriate bobbin / spacers / windings - they have an authentically 'plummy' yet ruthlessly transparent sound. I would say that in character they are lower in percieved 'push' than a standard P90 ; more like that Stratty sound that Twinfan refered to. Specifically that Stratty 'inbetween pickups' sound, but without quack or twang. The notes also bloom out very rounded too - or at least they do when used in the style for which they were originally aimed.
If we consider Mules and Stormy Mondays to be B.K.Ps early Les Paul bound P.A.F constructional clones, then the Manhatthans truly respond like they have just been lifted out of a 50's archtop. The description of what they have to offer in contrast to the lower output B.K.P Humbuckers is very similar to the enigma of trying tp describe M.Qs - but think even clearer, so 'open' that a draught can blow through - yet with a surprisingly elegant fatness blooming from each note.
If you thought M.Qs were great to use / hard to describe - try doing the same for Manhatthans ! :mrgreen:
-
All I can add is the MQs sound HUGE for me. They are warm yet clear and whenever I click on some gain the sound massive. Best type of word I can use really. My other BKP is a holydiver, and it sounds amazing, but less big, the MQ seems to fill out the sound a lot better.
-
Thanks for the advise folks :D
It certainly would be a punt, spending getting on £200 then all the trouble of swapping the pups in a 335 so I expect quite a while of consideration first.
Yes Andy, the clarity thing is hard to address, although it can go hand in hand with brightness, I think you can get dark picups with clarity and bright pickups without. I guess clarity for the stuff I play may diminish with output and from what you and Twinfan say these are pretty hot and fat.
So now I'm wandering if a lower wind MQ may be the way to go? But then Mr Fourth Feline I believe you play mainly Jazz with the MQ's where clarity is one of the main requirements?
With regards to the existing Gotoh MK2 pickups, does anybody know anything about these? I'm thinking if I know the magnet type and rough output I can make a more informed choice about what I want. And as I said before they are pretty nice anyway so I certainly don't need to rush them out of the guitar.
Has anybody got a MQ guitar I could try round Manchester?
-
So now I'm wandering if a lower wind MQ may be the way to go? But then Mr Fourth Feline I believe you play mainly Jazz with the MQ's where clarity is one of the main requirements?
Hiya Tom, :)
Specifically, the M.Qs where not used for absolute clarity in my 335 copy, but to get that nice thick but clean sound that Larry Carlton got on You Tube videos from his 'Sapphire Blues Band' tour. I realise that Larry actually used Gibson '57 Classics - but with his heavy pick and frequent string damping with the heel of the picking hand, he was getting a very tight, controlled and somewhat compressed sound. Here is an example :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNIXVw_kni4&feature=related
It's that 'chewy' sound, quite intense and compressed . He plays in this way for some time until his trademark 'bursting out' into a sharper more open tone later in the tune. The M.Qs can also sting, bite and snap when set a little further from the strings - but I wanted that dense glassy tone.
Ignore ( for now ) the seeming contradiction of the fact that I cite a '57 Classic pickup to demonstrate what the M.Qs did for me in a 335 copy - and just listen to that dense, compressed, yet still articulate tone heard here.
As Twinfan said, probably like a HUGE , thick Strat pickup in many ways. Whatever you make of the tones on the video, I feel they are a good indicator of the M.Q wound up closer to the strings - and their power delivering an authoritive tone, even clean and at lower volumes. There is no 'thin' in a M.Q.
For a 335 I always think M.Q. for a deliciously chewy clean, AIV Stormy Mondays for all round usage - and Riff Raffs for a Rock bias.
The absolute open clarity of a Manhattan is a different creature still. For open clarity but with more general usefulness, I guess it's the AIV Stormy Mondays. My only reservation about the AII Stormy Mondays, was that the Bass strings sounded a bit 'soft' in a semi-acoustic, as if even nickel plated steel strings were in fact made of soft nickel. Not 'bad' just different .
Happy hunting and deliberating ; the deliberating is indeed important when buying £ 200 pickups ! :)
-
As Derek says, MQs are FAT and clean. Not crystal clarity. And I like his summary:
MQs - Fat cleans, or fat grinding gain
AIV SMs - Great all rounders, open and tight yet warm
Riff Raffs - Tight, bright and rocking
The choice is yours!
-
I found that if I roll back the vol about 10-15%, and use a very slight gain boost to make up for the volume loss on the clean channel, I get a very clear glassy tone, that is very sensitive to input dynamics. Like a Strat neck pup that can get a little hair on it when you dig in hard.
It sounds contradictory, but it works.
I have a NB in the bridge. Switch in the middle position, both pups on gives amazing cleans as well.
-
that's a very interesting topic ! some questions are now jumping out !
If the MQ (and more generally talking the "P-90 soapbar family") is in between a single coil and a humbucker, does any humbucker handle high gain distorsion better than the MQ ?
do you think that the MQ is more fat and less clear than ANY of the humbucker of the BKP range ?
With what BKP bridge would the MQ pair well, in both power AND voicing. ?
I think I've read here that some people pair it with a WP in the bridge and I was wondering how come a D.C. 7K neck would pair well in volume with a D.C. 22K flamethrower in the bridge ? (even if I guess that the fatness of the MQ pairs well with the bass response of the Pig...)
-
that's a very interesting topic ! some questions are now jumping out !
If the MQ (and more generally talking the "P-90 soapbar family") is in between a single coil and a humbucker, does any humbucker handle high gain distorsion better than the MQ ?
do you think that the MQ is more fat and less clear than ANY of the humbucker of the BKP range ?
With what BKP bridge would the MQ pair well, in both power AND voicing. ?
I think I've read here that some people pair it with a WP in the bridge and I was wondering how come a D.C. 7K neck would pair well in volume with a D.C. 22K flamethrower in the bridge ? (even if I guess that the fatness of the MQ pairs well with the bass response of the Pig...)
Well to comment on the bits I have experimented with so far :
I can imagine many of the mid to higher gain humbuckers would certainly handle higher gain tighter - as the M.Q is still a nice fat single coil around an Alnico magnet - and as such is still ( to my ears ) vintage sounding.
The M.Q is fatter but perhaps less 'open' ( which could be a criteria of " clear " ) than my AIV or Alinico II Stormy Mondays or Mules. The edge on the notes possible with an appropriately set up M.Q gives a different style of articulate than the 'open sounding - but without sharp edges' sound of B.K.P's lower output Vintage P.A.F. type offerings ( excluding Riff Raffs and VHIIs of course ) .
To over simplify, a beefy Telecaster bridge pickup is in a way 'clearer' ( i.e removes more tooth fillings and smashes more wine glasses ) than a bridge Stormy Monday or Mule, BUT the Stormy or Mule could probably reveal more subtleties of vibrato - and other 'airy' qualities. Remember also that ( for example ) the B.K.P Peter Green specials are based on the Stormy Monday template - and they are made to get that fine detail of stuff like P.G's noodling on the original "Need Your Love So Bad" - or Snowy White's " Bird Of Paradise " ....
So which between a strident Tele bridge pickup and an open, breathy P.A.F fits your favourite definition of clarity ?
:D