re: UBC pickups

Hey all,

I'm a Newbie Westone (almost) owner. Waiting for a Dynasty to be delivered this weekend. Got interested while collecting Electra instruments and after reading about UnBalanced Coil pickups. Mr. Presley's posts were fascinating and informative and I thank him and you all for a lively forum.

I've got three essential questions on the UBC's that beg personal use.

In your opinion based on hands-on (and/or listening) use:

1) Is there a noticeable, worthwhile tone difference to YOUR ears? Is it all hype or do they have substance? I know this is subjective, opinions are useful.

2) When did working UBC pickups become available in your Westones?

3) Can you detect a UBC pup by measuring the resistance on a multi-meter through the input jack? Would they have a resistance reading, when "coil tapped", higher than half of the full on reading?

I've read the technical information on your site, what I'm hoping for, once again, are personal reviews, anecdotes, etc.

Mr. Presley states that they weren't available until mid '85 or so, the catalogs/descriptions have them as far back as '84 till early '87 when Matsumoku closed. A short life span. What about the early Korean instruments using Mat materials? What do the members say?

I'd hate to waste any more GAS on guitars (such as the '84 Dynasty I bought that apparently doesn't have UBC's) without better guidelines. It's getting expensive! ;~)

Thanks,

Dan

Hello Dan. I'm glad that you read the discovery and technical details of Tom Presley's UBC pups. He's the inventor/genius behind innovative Westone designs and other Matsumoku products, and his appearance here was certainly a major event!

Did you also see this bit of information on the Westone info site: http://www.westone.info/ubc.html That site is maintained by our own Thorn who is an avid collector with a wealth of knowledge about Westone and its history. He very succinctly outlines the kind of information you're after.

As for sound, I think the early ("bad") UBC's are OK on full and at quiet or studio levels, but nothing remarkable. On stage I found I really had to boost the amp to help it cut through the mix. In fact, I ended up removing the bridge and replacing it with a Schaller rail. On coil-split they're really thin sounding and not of much use at all.

The "real" UBC's are quite serviceable and have a decent output in both modes, with a good mid to upper range. And if you have MMK45's? Well, you've got one of the best pups Matsumoku had...great power with a broad tonal range.

To take your questions in order -

1 - no noticeable tone difference. (At least between a UBC pickup and an MMK45, I haven't really compared the UBC humbucker and coil cut sounds, if I want a single coil sound I use a Concord)A minor difference in volume loss when coil tapped.
2 - It varies, depends on which pickup it is. My Spectrum ST (Nov 85, Magnaflux I UBC) has the genuine UBC pickup. So far I haven't come across any earlier examples of that one. My Spectrum FX (April 86, Magnaflux II blade pickup) has UBC pickups and is the earliest one I've seen - I've come across Dec 85 and Feb 86 ones that don't have UBCs.

3 - I would think so - haven't tried it myself, but the coils aren't split at the halfway point, it's closer to 2/3 of the total resistance in the coil that isn't cut. (The Magnaflux I is about 9.7k, 6.5k when coil tapped)

Korean instruments - which ones? There are two distinct lines, the ones produced for SLM in the USA which I have no experience of but are supposed to be good, and the line made for FCN in the UK (spectrum series II, clippers) which I do have experience of. The higher end models are OK, I wouldn't touch the rest.

Thanks so much for the insight. A person suffering from obsessive GAS could spend years and many hundreds (hehe) of dollars acquiring that knowledge! It appears the timeline for UBC pups is even shorter than I thought. Ah well, I'm the determined sort and I'm sure there's a set in my future.

Thorn, thanks for your comments. A UBC equipped Spectrum FX or LX is currently on my wish list. The info on resistance is exactly what I was hoping for. And thanks for Westone.info, a great site that I spend much too much time at.

I regularly measure resistance through the input jack with a simple 1/4" plug ending in two alligator clips and using a multimeter. Doesn't everybody? I'm so new (10 mos.) to this field of electric guitars that I've little concept of what constitutes general knowledge.

Oh yes, the Korean instruments I refer to are the ones Mr. Presley mentions in his post, the Saehan (?) factory they shipped necks, UBC's and other components to after Matsumoku ceased operations.

Thank you as well Barry. That "ears-on" review is just what I was looking for. Congratulations on a wonderful collection of guitars. You're the one I'll have to blame for the recent addition of Vantage to my growing list of obsessions!

If any members have any further observations or want to amplify (pun intended) please feel free.

Dan

danagos wrote:...Thank you as well Barry. That "ears-on" review is just what I was looking for. Congratulations on a wonderful collection of guitars.

You're welcome and thanks. I should add that I recently (finally) replaced both the one remaining bad UBC and the Schaller rail in my ST with a lovely pair of MMK45's! Ahhh, much better!

You're the one I'll have to blame for the recent addition of Vantage to my growing list of obsessions!

Happy to help.

Yeah; good thread, thanks, guys!!!

Hey guys, just posted an album detailing the Dynasty and a Capri I purchased and assembled (with a lot of help, see the "Capri 5102G" thread).

https://s793.photobucket.com/albums/yy213/danagos/Capri%205102G/

I'm getting the impression that UBC pups may be a tough item to have and hold. I'm pretty sure (?) that there's no hidden cache. Anybody ever try custom winding some of these? Seems like a wonderful idea whose patent, if there ever was one, has probably expired. Just a thought.

Enjoy the pics, I need some rest!

Dan

That Capri is a beauty!
I'm a bit more sensitive to it right now because I've just been playing my Gibson ES330 which looks very similar (except it has a set neck of course )
Just a wonderful guitar (mine as well as yours I'm sure) but It's a '64 and in dire need of a strip and clean so I followed your pictures with some interest as I'll be battling that wiring harness very soon now!

Hey Barry,

Thanks for the kind words on the Capri, it is lovely, very different than what I'm used to playing. Pretty much an Aria twin from what I can tell. Frenchy helped me get on track with comparisons at Matsumoku.org. Differences that are apparent are 'buckers on the Aria.

I take it your ES330 is together at this time. My advice is DON'T TAKE IT APART!!

It really is a chore without a control cavity. I have a lot of pics of the proceedings. Obviously the wires were pushed into the body and brought out to snare the pots, switch & jack. My buddy Bob is used to this and I defer to him in these matters. If you'd like, pm me and I'll pass on his e/m address. Wonderful guy who is always ready to help a fellow guitarist.

You probably noticed the short pieces of heat shrink attached to said pots, etc. Do this, helps a lot. If you must.

Actually, it was a Labor of Love, but kept us up most of the night. I learned quite a bit that I'll remember for as long as I can!



Dan

danagos wrote:...My advice is DON'T TAKE IT APART!...

Yeah, that's the coward's way out!
Unfortunately, the wring has gotten rather "fuzzy" inside (yuk), and a couple of the pots are getting tight. No worries though...I'm not luthier by any stretch, but I am used to stripping and refurbishing guitars at this stage in my life. And this old gal and I go wa-a-a-y back together, so it too is a labour of love. I just hope the wiring itself hasn't become so brittle that it can't withstand the movement.

Word of advice on the subject Barry.
If you plan to get some 2mm thick TIG welding rod.
I use aluminium.

Thing is that apart from using thin threads asf a piece of weldrod costs of nothing and works like sort of a prong in this case.
You insert one end in the open end of respective pot.
Then twist and turn the rod as needed to get the pots where they need to go.
Works like a charm and furthermore takes out a lot of the guesswork with threads and what have you not.
This can be used for outputjack as well as pots.
For switches tho...well..

I highly recomend handing that old axe some well deserved service.
If the pots are still there so to say,just give em a liberal shot of electronics spray of long life sort.
Don´t forget to service the output jack as well,or better yet have it exchanged.
50yrs of use can make the best of components go more or less belly up..and a good quality switchcraft is penauts all things considered.
Likewise with pup selector switch.
Either use very fine grit emery for the contact or simple replace the whole unit.

Those little things will go a LONG way towards improving tone.

Racing wrote:If you plan to get some 2mm thick TIG welding rod.
I use aluminium...Works like a charm...

Thanks for the idea Jesper. Another method I recently heard of is to use small diameter plastic tubing, and push the end over the pots, etc and pull the harness components through: VIDEO LINK
I think I like your rod idea better though.

As for replacing parts, I'm not too keen on doing that unless absolutely necessary, and so far nothing's broken (fingers crossed). But the electronics do need some attention. The frets were lightly dressed many years ago but are showing wear again. They're very low and should probably be replaced, but...so far no buzzing so I'm going to leave 'em alone for now. :bball:

danagos wrote:
2) When did working UBC pickups become available in your Westones?

I've had to revise my opinions on this one.

Magnaflux I - I thought the later plastic backed pickup with the hex pole pieces was the genuine UBC. I never actually checked the pickups on my November 85 Spectrum ST, I just bought it to see what parts i could replicate. Checked them tonight - they are not UBC pickups. total resistance is 6.5k, 3.22 coil tapped, the same as the first attempt at UBC pickups (Plain metal back, philips head pole pieces)

Magnaflux II - I did a dumb thing with this one, since I knew that Spectrum FXs up to Feb 86 didn't have UBC pickups, and they all had twelve pole pieces, I assumed that my April 86 FX had the UBC pickup (6 pole pieces on one coil, blade on the other). Just checked that one tonight - the coils are equal, 11.2k total, 5.6 coil tapped. Not UBC.

I've updated the UBC pickups page. I can't point to a single guitar I've ever come across that definitely has UBC pickups - I would love to hear of anyone who can confirm they have UBC pickups by measuring the resistance (Full on and coil tapped) since I'm beginning to think they don't exist.

Hey David, I wondered about your original conclusion too.
The remaining Neck pup in my '85 Spectrum ST tested out as 6.5 full coil (3.4 split), and had a plain steel back with green epoxy(?) on the screws.
My '85 Spectrum S shows as Neck: 6.52 (3.30 split) Bridge: 6.23 (3.12 split) and both have black plastic backs one marked A the other B.
Finally, my '85 Spectrum DX is: Neck 6.30 (3.20 split) Bridge 6.22 (3.17 split), and the backs are steel as described above.
All pretty much the same.

The only guy who can shed more light on this of course is the guy who invented them, Tom Presley. He's written about the discovery and creation of the idea in his thread, but as far as I recall, nothing about when these were actually manufactured and distributed. Perhaps even he doesn't know.

OK Thorn & Barry,

Are yis takin' the piss with me, boyos? The UBC pups are both fantastic and non-existent?

I seem to 'member Mr. Presley stating they were available in mid '85 (he thought).

Perhaps the testing methods are questionable. I had hoped that inserting a 1/4" output jack ending in two alligator clips, those being attached to multi-meter leads, (as I usually test resistance on pups) would be a reliable test. Coil tapped versus full 'buckers. Non? hmmm

I'm gonna run that one by a trusted friend who has more experience than I.

Maybe I should stop buying guitars for awhile, no, I KNOW I should stop. Doesn't mean I will.

Dan

I described UBC pickups in an email to Seymour Duncan a few years ago.

Within a year, he had introduced his P-Rail.

UBC's on a Dynasty. These are stamped MMK 45. 11.74 ohms, split-- 5.70ohms. The other coil 6.04
Could be a total miss wind but it'd definitely unbalanced. That's the bridge pup. Neck, 12.30/6.02. A spare one 10.79/5.44. Not all that consistant. But all sound 'king good.

Not UBCs - the MMK45 is the Hammer I pickup, AKA the magnet F 450 and HF450, used on lots of the early Mats guitars (Thunder I, IA, Jet, Raider, Paduaks, Concord HII and III, Prestige 117). Most pickups have some difference between one coil and the other , and the difference between 5.7k and 6.04 isn't enough to make it a purposefully designed difference. To be a true UBC pickup (According to the blurb in the catalogues/pricelists) a pickup clocking in at 11.7k should be split more like 7.8k / 3.2k

danagos wrote:
Perhaps the testing methods are questionable. I had hoped that inserting a 1/4" output jack ending in two alligator clips, those being attached to multi-meter leads, (as I usually test resistance on pups) would be a reliable test. Coil tapped versus full 'buckers. Non? hmmm

I don't use that method myself, I measure the pickup out of circuit so there's no other components loading it.

Most Matsumoku pickups are great - when it comes to UBC pickups, or at least ones that are supposed to be UBC pickups, some are great (But not unbalanced coils) and some aren't (The low resistance ones, which also don't have unbalanced coils). It's beginning to look to me as if the whole UBC thing was nothing more than marketing hype.

danagos wrote:...Perhaps the testing methods are questionable. I had hoped that inserting a 1/4" output jack ending in two alligator clips, those being attached to multi-meter leads, (as I usually test resistance on pups) would be a reliable test...

It is a good and reliable test. As I stated in my original post it obviously cannot compensate for switches and pots in the signal chain. But it comes extremely close, probably within 5% or so.

The point here is that we're testing similar guitars with similar control layouts, and even allowing for the above, their readings are all obviously within the same specification tolerance, which is leading Thorn to his conclusion. No matter what method is used, as long as you're consistent with it in the comparisons, anything which is significantly different would indicate a different construction. And so far, we're not seeing it.
Perhaps later model years would show a significant difference, indicating a switch to those elusive UBC's. All mine are 1985.

I think I mentioned being a "determined" sort of guy, sometimes flying in the face of reason, and have "proved" it once again by shelling out hard earned shekels.

Just bought a "UBC" pup on ebay. Supposed to be from an '83 Pantera X300, which doesn't exist. It's also supposed to be an MMK45 pup.

So, at least two suspect claims. No pic of the back, blade on the bottom coil as on an X300. If it's at least an MMK45 I'll be happy, assuming it's working.

Keep you informed when it arrives and gets tested.

link

Dan

Aaarrrggghhh

Got the supposed UBC MMK45 pup. Disappointed, but not surprised to find it isn't UBC. Tested 11.4 and 5.8.

It is an MMK45, so I'm keeping it and thinking about putting it into a circa '72 Electra 2242 (LP model).

After receiving it I advised the seller (living2extremes, Scott Jones) that it wasn't UBC, he was unconcerned. His reply, "I can resale it easy". Unfortunately that's probably true.

That seller wouldn't or couldn't send me test results or a real serial # for the supposed Pantera it came from (kept making them up). Although he stated that: "The guitar was outfitted with Dimebuckers last week, so I no longer need the pickup." in his listing.

I WILL keep looking for the "UBC Holy Grail", Caveat Emptor,

Dan

Pics at: https://s793.photobucket.com/albums/yy213/danagos/MMK45/

Hi Guys,

Forgive me butting in on this one, but I feel as someone may be missing a point (could be me). Do I take it that the search for these UBC pickups are based on their performance or just for their Westone rarity? We are in an age of pickups and there are loads of various designs to be had. The UBC pickup is not the only pickup that displays the even volume tapping quality and these others are not as difficult to find. I know of two such humbucking pickups off the top of my head from Bartolini and also Gordon Smith Guitars Ltd. I am pretty sure that the likes of Bare Knuckle pickups will have something of this nature and if they haven't they will wind one to suit, or Rainbow Pickups who also wind to suit. This is but my humble opinion, but the beauty of the Japan made Westones are in the wood choice and their solid construction, most of the pickups however are pretty average (I can hear all the hardcore members gnashing their teeth). If you like the guitar to play and find a pickup type that you like the sound of or that suits your needs, get it transplanted into place and rock & roll. Revel in a guitar that performs to a new standard rather than one that belongs with a collector.

Martin.

You've obviously havn't heard a Prestige 250(mmk 75's) or a 150 or a Thunder II with mmk 53's.
Agreed not all the westone pups are as good or as bad sounding of some current issues.
Consider that they were produced in the 80's, technology has moved on.
Did Gibson wax their pups?(paf's) No, they were thrown together but folks pay a fortune for them?
The choice of pups are today immeasurable, spoilt for choice.
In the ear of the beholder.

Precisely!

I've gotta say - from a purely personal POV - that the MMK45s in my LX are pretty bloody awesome things, and that the MMK53s in my Vantage VA900 are also pretty bloody frightening - in a good way! My ST which has the 'good' UBC's was good enough to take out and gig with 2 or 3 times but.... the MX seems to be a little.... flat in the bridge possie; the s/c in the middle and neck are lovely, really nice and full but the 'bad' UBC at the bridge will go.

I suppose, Martin, that a little of the hunt for UBCs and the like are for the purist thing; simply for the "Westone-ness" if you like!! I have no hesitation swapping 'em out if I don't like the sound, but I'll tell you this for nothing... I won't be putting EMGs in any of my guitars!! I do, however, like the Bareknuckle range...