Thinking of going low output - thoughts?

[Markdude]

Unpotted pickups are more prone to squeal, but Tim playes unpotted Mules with quite a bit of gain without troubles.  Never had unpotted pups, so I can't tell you exactly how much ampvolume/gain they can handle without any squealing.

That's actually something I'm kind of interested in.  :D

Well, I don't want them to squeal microphonically, but since I've heard the nature of their design makes them more prone to interact with speakers, maybe I'll be able to obtain 'good' (musical, from sustained notes/chords) feedback at somewhat low volumes (from studio monitors). I don't know a ton about pickup design, but it seems kinda plausible in my mind, haha. I could be totally wrong though.

[ericsabbath]

I used a hair drier to remove some of the wax potting when I took the cover off my neck mule
also did it to my riff raff, although I put the cover back for the weird coolness (I love unmatched looks)
the difference isn't huge, but I can tell the mule now sounds more open and airy (it already was, anyway), but I removed cover AND a lot of wax (not only from the top and sides, but from the coils as well)

I have a friend that used to do that with his gibson 500t pups
the difference is definitely audible

both riff raff and mule are amazing rock pickups
they are both bright and open sounding, but the riff raff is edgier and middier, while the mule is warmer and juicier, but still retains some of the glassy top
hard to make a decision indeed, but it's a win/win situation

[Markdude]

I think I'll just bite the bullet and go RR/Mule, both unpotted.  :D If there are any problems, I suppose I could just get them potted later.

Is it true that having a cover on unpotted pickups can increase the chances of squealing? I've read that the cover vibrates more and that it's preferable to have no covers if you're going unpotted. But now I've kind of grown accustomed to the look of covers on this guitar. Damnit, I can't win.  :lol:

[Telerocker]

Just go for it. BKP has a return policy.

[DaveyHoran]

I wouldn't go unspotted unless you really really really really think they will make a difference to your sound and you can control your feedback

[Markdude]

I wouldn't go unspotted unless you really really really really think they will make a difference to your sound and you can control your feedback

Well, like I was saying, I actually want feedback!  :lol: I record direct and it's hard to get any kind of feedback from studio monitors unless they're cranked uncomfortably loud and I put the guitar right next to them. So I'd actually like something that interacts with the speakers as much as possible. This guitar would be for studio (direct) use only, so I'm not really worried about live squeals. I'd gig with a cheaper guitar.

I've done a lot of searching but it looks like I'm the only person on the web who has pondered the potential use of unpotted pickups for controlled feedback in low volume studio recording. I'm actually kind of surprised...I've done some REALLY heavy searching and haven't been able to find a single other person with this idea. So I guess I'm probably just going to have to be a guinea pig.  :P I know BKP has a return policy, but I've already changed my mind once (outside of the return period and took a loss on selling them, but that's what I get), plus I'm in the US, so if I ordered something and changed my mind again, it'd be quite a long turnaround. I'd prefer to do as much researching and question asking as possible beforehand this time (at the expense of probably annoying the hell out of the forum  :lol:).

I'm making progress though. I feel confident in picking the RR bridge and Mule neck, whereas before I felt very overwhelmed with the choices. I also feel like unpotted might be worth trying because if I don't like it, I can always just get them potted later. But if I went potted from the start I'm sure I'd always wonder "what if". I guess my last concern is just whether having a cover on an unpotted one would be a bad idea.

[Kiichi]

Well you can hardly annoy us as we have all been here. If you completly ignore what we tell you at one point it might happen, but having doubts and conciderations is normal mate, all good ;) My first thread here was even worse I feel^^

I personally agree with the PU choice you have made and the thoughts of potted unpotted. Makes sense in my head (not that that says anything xD).

[Telerocker]

This forum is full of patient and helpful people so you can annoy us for a while more.. :lol:

[PhilKing]

I can get lots of harmonic feedback from my potted BK's, including the Stormy Mondays.  I do have unpotted SM's in my 335, and they sound great, no squeal.  I believe BK do pot the magnet even on the unpotted, so it is just the coils which are not dipped. 

[HTH AMPS]

I've had a lot of BKPs over the years, including the Mule and Abraxas sets. 

The Abraxas neck is clearer than the Mule on the wound strings, but not quite as 'flutey' if you want that Slash thing on the neck pickup.

The Abraxas bridge is deceptive with the high output specs - it's voiced like a 'fuller' PAF, not dark/smooth imo - still plenty of cut in the top end, but the bass and mids are fuller.  I thought the Mule was underpowered for what I like (broadly classic rock).

I found the Abraxas set could turn its hand to many styles, here's some clips I did way back...

Abraxas neck and bridge (clean)...
http://youtu.be/zzYzVdtZuYU

Abraxas bridge (dirty)...
http://youtu.be/yDQ2twawdIk

[darrenw5094]

I think those clips above were the reason i finally ordered the Abraxas for my Gibson Les Paul Standard.
Fuller mids than the Mule, but definately not as much highs as the Mule. But a slight turn on the amp treble knob would fix that. Mules really have a vintage output compared to most pickups.