chase
Apprentice Shielder
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
|
Post by chase on May 1, 2010 16:57:39 GMT -5
Hi Nuts! I've been looking closely at the Ultimate Utah Switching Schematic, designed by CheshireCat based on Mike Richardson's mods and posted in this thread: guitarnuts2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=schem&action=display&thread=3126I like this scheme a lot, since it offers: (a) the standard 5 Strat positions where you'd expect them (b) an alternate "mode" with the missing bridge and neck pair as well as all of the series pairs (c) the two standard parallel pairs become series pairs with a flip of the mode switch (d) no dead spots or duplicate positions (e) with the exception of hybrid series/parallel combinations and phase (which can easily be added), easy access to all but one of the basic 3-pickup permutations while using only two switches Mike Richardson's mods, which inspired this one, are also pretty clever, but one of them leaves out the middle-only option (which I like), and another has 3 different triplet options but no bridge/neck pairs, so for me the the UUSS is more appealing. I took the liberty of redrawing it based on CheshireCat's original diagram and John Hewitt's helpful markup, partly for anyone who prefers this kind of drawing and partly to make it easier to modify for myself: If I made any mistakes, corrections are very welcome. I have a couple questions about this schematic: (1) Am I reading it wrong or isn't the neck coil hanging hot, since N+ is always routed to volume? Is there any way to avoid this, or is it not something to really worry about? (2) I'm guessing the neck coil was chosen because it's generally the lowest resistance (and thus quietest) coil. On the guitar I will use this for, the bridge pickup is an (unsplit) humbucker. Would it make sense to switch the wiring so that the bridge is hanging hot, since it has a RWRP coil and should be less noisy, or is it not worth the effort? Thanks to anyone who can answer these questions! Once I had drawn this out and worked out the switching logic, I came up with two variants. The UUSS has one three-pickup combination, all-3-in-series; the one basic combination missing is all-3-in-parallel. From what I've heard, the hybrid series/parallel triplets don't add much, but I decided I'd rather have the parallel version, which I figured shouldn't be too difficult since it's simpler than the series version. This is what I came up with: Finally, the UUSS has a logical order to the alternate mode (based I think on how hot the output is), but it made more sense to me to have the triplet (all-3-parallel) option in the middle and the bridge-neck pairs at either end. This way when you flip the mode switch to go from standard to alternate, any pickup(s) active in standard mode remain active. The 2 & 4 pairs go from parallel to series (as they do in the original UUSS), bridge or neck by itself becomes bridge & neck, and the middle position becomes all-on: EDIT: sumgai spotted some mistakes, new diagram #3 is posted a little further down. If it passes inspection I'll put it here but in the meantime, learn from my screwup!I figure this should be fast, easy to remember, and very versatile. Again, corrections or suggested improvements welcome. I put B+N in position 5 and B>N in position 1 because I figured I was more likely to go from bridge to B+N than the other possibilities, but it could easily be the other way around. (And if I've posted this in the wrong place, please move it wherever it should go.) Thanks, Charles.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on May 1, 2010 17:38:19 GMT -5
Hi chase - first a big GN2 welcome to you! I'm gonna give you a +1 straight-off just for the quality of your diagrams, what are you drawing them in? Haven't studied them yet in detail, so I'll let you know if I spot anything. On the hot-hanging issue, yes we try to avoid that but it seems to be inherent in the design and it is not a show-stopper. If you have a choice of which one to 'hang', and you had a covered hum-bucker and an open single coil, then Id choose the Hb, because the shielding from the cover would help the issue of controlling pickup of interference. You have a few variants there on the theme of super-switch plus 4 pole toggle. This is my as-yet unbuilt version, not to say its better, just pointing to it for interest, but it was my selection of combos given those ingredients. John
|
|
chase
Apprentice Shielder
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
|
Post by chase on May 1, 2010 18:34:45 GMT -5
Thanks John! It's nice to get such a warm welcome. I use OmniGraffle Pro on a Mac (and I realized after I did them that I could have made the connections all orthogonal like most of the other diagrams on here, but I figure this way they look a bit like they're "hand-wired").
I appreciate the answers on the hanging hot issue. The humbucker isn't covered, so I guess there's no benefit to changing it. Wouldn't be hard to do, though, just reverse B+ and N- and turn the superswitch around.
Thanks for the link to your Strat 5+5, I should dissect it and compare it to the UUSS, which I'm sure will be very educational (does it have a hanging hot coil too?). I've examined some of your other wiring schematics, like the ToneMaster2, which I like a lot as well. The superswitch + 4PDT appeals to me because it offers a lot of variety but remains quick to use; the Strat 5+5 is an intriguing variation. Your enhanced tone control also looks interesting.
Charles.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on May 2, 2010 2:34:43 GMT -5
Charles, Hi, and to the NutzHouse! For the record, I too award you the much-coveted "+1" for your drawing skills. But your methodology is also very good, I consider it an example of how one should go about designing and/or modifying a circuit, and bringing it to fruition. Good work! John's thoughts on hanging hots leads the predominant school of thought here in The NutzHouse. In most cases, unless you're in an extremely noisy environment (electrical noise, that is), then you can probably ignore the issue. If somehow you do end up with a noise problem that needs abatement, let's take it up at that time, OK? And it's late, I'm tired (drove over 550 miles today, sat in Portland's fabled I-5 parking lot, visited Teleblooz, all on 5½ hours of sleep), so I'll get into your diagrams in more depth tomorrow. However, taking a quick glance at position 1, (DPDT down) of your California mod - it sure looks to me like you have the Middle pup on and the Neck pup off....... But I am tired, so if I'm wrong, please try to keep the flogging down to only one wet noodle! sumgai
|
|
chase
Apprentice Shielder
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
|
Post by chase on May 2, 2010 4:59:19 GMT -5
Thanks sumgai, I appreciate the kind words! And despite your exhausted, sleep-deprived state you're exactly right, position 1 *is* wrong, as is position 3. When I swapped the alternate mode wiring for positions 1 and 3, I completely forgot to check the standard mode wiring too. I've marked the erroneous diagram and will post a modified one very soon. Thanks for catching that!
|
|
chase
Apprentice Shielder
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
|
Post by chase on May 2, 2010 14:08:21 GMT -5
Okay, here's take 2: I moved the purple wire and one blue wire to bring in the bridge pickup in position 3-Alt, moved the jumper between Southwest-1 and SW-2 to go between SW-2 and SW-3, and removed a violet wire and a blue wire. I'm pretty sure everything should work now, but of course corrections are very appreciated. Thanks again for the catch, sumgai, you've probably saved me some trouble! Charles.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on May 2, 2010 17:00:03 GMT -5
Charles, I'm looking at your diagram now, even as I scribble this epistle. One thing I was going to say earlier is that when you do have a hanging hot issue, the better way to eliminate potential noise problems is to simply connect the pickup's negative lead to it's hot lead, thus causing a direct short. Any noise picked up will, in theory, be counterbalanced by coming out of both ends at the same time, and in the same place. No guarantees on that of course, but that's how it's supposed to work...... Knowing that, you can now envision how I "caught" your errors - I was searching for ways to make the Neck negative lead hot (when not selected for output), and found that it was going to be rather difficult..... I'll be back in a short while, don't go away! sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on May 2, 2010 17:44:55 GMT -5
Charles, OK, I've checked it out, and it gets my squeal of approval! ;D ;D One thing I'd "discuss" with you is operational parameters. Consider: A series connection is usually a bit darker, but also louder, in some small measure. John calls it a Lead tone as versus a parallel combo being more of a Rhythm tone, in his way of thinking. From that, I'd wonder about position 5 going from Bridge only to Bridge in parallel with the Neck - seems to me that's a bit of a thinning of the tone, with a possible lowering of the volume level. (Slight, if it exists at all, but worth consideration, in my estimation.) Ditto for position 1 - from the Neck only we go to the most ballsy tone in your entire arsenal, Bridge in series with the Neck. For these two reasons, I'd seriously consider reversing the "Alt" positions on the switch, such that position 5 remains in strong contention for Lead tones, and position 1 remains milder by comparison, regardless of where the 4PDT is set at any given moment. Just a thought, lonely as it was.... HTH sumgai p.s. I probably shouldn't say anything, but around The NutzHouse, we usually prescribe the use of the asterisk to denote a series connection. B*N for example. MR was the one who used a "right arrow", and so far, he's been quaranteened pretty successfully, there've been only a few outbreaks since those early days, way back in 2004 and 2005. ;D I mention this only in the interests of consistancy, that's all. Helps to avoid newcomers asking "what's this symbol mean?" all the time. Not to mention that it's not just here, but many other forums "skim" our best postings, and offer them up for their users. Again, we'd like to present a consistant face to those other sites, if we can help it.
|
|
chase
Apprentice Shielder
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
|
Post by chase on May 3, 2010 13:50:24 GMT -5
Thanks sumgai! I originally chose B+N for the alternate Bridge setting because it's my favorite dual-pickup setting (and the bridge is my favorite single-pickup setting), so I figured I'd put the two I expect to use most often together. However, your logic makes a lot of sense, so I've swapped the Alt-1 and Alt-5 positions (hopefully without breaking anything else): I also switched to using asterisks, as you can see... the ">" for series was due of course to the Mike Richardson lineage of these diagrams (and made sense to me), but it's an easy change, so I'll edit the others when I get the chance. Thanks again for your help! I'm still looking for a way to eliminate the hanging hot coil and dissecting John's excellent Strat 5+5 mod, so I hope to have more to post soon...
|
|
chase
Apprentice Shielder
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
|
Post by chase on May 3, 2010 15:12:22 GMT -5
It occurs to me that you could also just swap the bridge and neck pickups in the take 2 drawing and get the same result, plus some potential (but untested) benefit from having a humbucking bridge pickup as the hanging hot instead. You'd also need to turn the superswitch around 180°, which shouldn't matter unless your switch is bigger on one side than the other and the cavity is cramped.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on May 3, 2010 21:33:55 GMT -5
chase, Your personal playing conditions over-ride any concerns of anyone else, including me. I was only suggesting a theoretical starting point, but the end result must be to your satisfaction, not mine. I'm out of time for the evening, so I've not checked your latest diagram, I'll let John (or someone else) take a crack it this time around. As for the 180° physical rotation of the superswitch itself, that might be a bit difficult, in some cases. I can't say that's true for absolutely all guitars, of course, but I'd bet even money that it is for the majority of them. HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on May 4, 2010 6:04:32 GMT -5
Your latest version also seems to do what it says on the packet, so well done on that.
You obviously have the inner thinking of this design sussed. I'll admit that although I have checked each setting I have not grasped its underlying architecture.
I think it is well worth thinking about the quick changes that you might like to make within a song. If B+N is your favorite, as an alternate to B, then Id put those so that flicking just the toggle lets you make that change, as in your previous version, but if you want a more powerful volume boost from B to B*N, then your last one does that.
On hot hanging, I think the main thing is to shield the guitar, then I doubt that neck-single or open bridge-hum-bucker is much different. Given a choice of which to hang from hot in a shielded guitar, given the Hb is not covered, then I'd go with the neck single, since it has a smaller presence outside the shielding - a minor point IMO.
(If you are interested enough to decipher my 5+5, the idea behind it is that two poles of its super-switch mimic a standard Strat switch. The 4pdt disconnects from those and puts all pickups in series. The other two super-switch poles shunt various parts of that series chain to make series combos, and also do the extra thing with the tone control. So on that design, I don't have any parallel combos in the second set of sounds)
cheers
John
|
|
chase
Apprentice Shielder
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
|
Post by chase on May 14, 2010 1:31:27 GMT -5
No worries, guys, I didn't feel any pressure. Sumgai's suggestion was a good one so I went ahead and made the diagram, partly as an exercise to see if I could pull off another permutation and partly in case someone else wanted to use it. I still have only a pretty rudimentary understanding of this stuff, so I find that redrawing an existing diagram is a good way to suss out the logic behind it. Another thing that helps a lot is to break the circuit into pieces and ignore the ones that aren't currently active in a given setting (for instance, the 4PDT can be treated as four separate switches, only one or two of which is relevant to the position of the superswitch at any given time).
John, I'm still dissecting your 5+5, which takes a very interesting approach that's distinctly different from the Mike Richardson family of mods. Making the alternate mode all series is pretty smart; in my case I want some parallel options in the secondary mode, but I'm learning some useful things from your design. I expect I'll have some questions for you once I'm done.
Thanks again for all your help, both of you.
|
|
chase
Apprentice Shielder
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
|
Post by chase on Jun 24, 2010 0:23:57 GMT -5
OK, I'm back! Sorry for disappearing, I had to move house and a bunch of other things, so I've been rather distracted.
John, I spent some time analyzing your Strat 5+5 diagram and I have a question for you. If I'm reading your drawing right, it looks like in a couple places you've removed a pickup from the circuit by connecting its positive and negative leads together - for instance, the series-3 and series-5 positions remove the middle pickup this way, and series-1 removes the bridge pickup. Am I reading this correctly? For instance, in series-3 N- is grounded, N+ is routed to both M- and M+ (effectively linking them together) as well as B-, and B+ is connected to the output via the volume pot.
This was eye-opening for me, since I had assumed the only ways to remove a pickup from the circuit were to ground it out, leave it hanging hot (not good) or cold (better), or disconnect both leads entirely. Does looping a pickup back on itself also work, and if so, are there any drawbacks to this approach - does it "suck tone" or introduce noise or anything?
Because if the answers are respectively yes and no, I think I may have found a solution to the "hanging hot" issue in the Mike Richardson/Utah-derived schemes we've been discussing here.
Since I last posted I had a 3-pickup guitar wired up following my version 2 drawing (but with neck and bridge swapped), and while it works very well (and gives a great variety of sounds), the hanging hot definitely seems to be picking up some garbage in the rather noisy room I'm in at the moment. Switching from Main-3 (middle only, but bridge hanging hot) to Main-2 (middle and bridge in parallel, so the only change is that the bridge pup is grounded), the noise level drops noticeably, particularly at the lower end of the frequency range. Since my bridge pickup is humbucking, this is not caused by it being RWRP with the middle, because it's not. My bridge pickup by itself is nice and quiet, but the neck+middle (with handing bridge) position is not, so unless my pickup winder forgot to make them RWRP, I've turned one of my pickups into an antenna in 4 of the 10 positions. I've been wracking my brain trying to come up with a clever wiring twist that would eliminate this one niggle and had just given up and started looking for 8P5T Megaswitches when it struck me that your diagram may have offered a solution!
Awaiting your reply with bated breath... ;D
(I'll post a pic of the guitar in question over on the Gallery too.)
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Jun 24, 2010 1:44:32 GMT -5
What I have done in a few designs, for simple control in series, is to put everything in a single series chain, then shunt certain parts to switch them off. It does seem to work fine in practice but I have not fully rationalised why it is better than hanging, it just seems to be. On the first guitar I tried (Tonemonster 2 - see schamatics), I could select a single pup by switching the other two off, and in series mode this involved shunting and in parallel mode it did not. I could not detect any difference in noise or tone.
The other issue that we discussed here years ago was that when shunting a coil, an induced current is allowed to run, sucking some extra energy from the string. I convinced myself that this effect is negligible, practically by setting up a gross version with several shunted coils.
So I use that method quite often to control coils in series.
John
|
|
chase
Apprentice Shielder
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
|
Post by chase on Jun 24, 2010 2:08:45 GMT -5
Awesome, John. I think I've also seen this referred to as "shorting" the pickup elsewhere on this site ("short" is a little hard to search on, since it's often used in the context of a problem to be solved). Seems to me that if a coil is shunted, it doesn't contribute anything (or much of anything) to the signal since there's nothing for the string energy to push against, the current in the coil just moves in a circle. But as I said, my understanding is pretty rudimentary. Given that this works, I think I was able to solve the hanging hot problem in my diagram by shorting the bridge in positions 4, 3-down, and 5-down. This can be done by adding two wires (one blue and one magenta, in this diagram): One wire links the southeast-4 lug on the superswitch to the northeast-5 lug and thence to the output and B+ (so B- is always tied to B+ in position 4), the other wire is added to the 4PDT toggle (between 1-down and 3-up) to tie southeast-3 and southeast-5 to the output (and B+) when the toggle is in the down (Main) position. Hopefully I got that right. Will give this a try as soon as I can and report back. Thanks again for all your help, John, I've learned a lot!
|
|
chase
Apprentice Shielder
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
|
Post by chase on Jun 24, 2010 23:02:26 GMT -5
One thing I was going to say earlier is that when you do have a hanging hot issue, the better way to eliminate potential noise problems is to simply connect the pickup's negative lead to it's hot lead, thus causing a direct short. Any noise picked up will, in theory, be counterbalanced by coming out of both ends at the same time, and in the same place. No guarantees on that of course, but that's how it's supposed to work...... Knowing that, you can now envision how I "caught" your errors - I was searching for ways to make the Neck negative lead hot (when not selected for output), and found that it was going to be rather difficult..... Man, I just realized that sumgai pointed out the answer himself right here two months ago and I just didn't get it! Sorry SG! I swapped the neck and bridge pickups in my final design, but I hope I succeeded in doing what you were suggesting.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jun 24, 2010 23:30:40 GMT -5
Chase- Looks good to me.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jun 25, 2010 12:59:28 GMT -5
....... Man, I just realized that sumgai pointed out the answer himself right here two months ago and I just didn't get it! Sorry SG! No problem. I've done the same thing myself, and to The World's Greatest Forum Member, ChrisK hisownself..... to my everlasting shame. Your latest also gets my squeal of approval - nice job! Just wish CheshireCat would come around again to see what's been happening with his circuitry. BTW, have you ever checked out his axe (over in the Gallery)? Ellas Otha Bates would have been proud. ;D MR still lurks from time to time, we may yet hear somewhat from him [fingers crossed]..... sumgai
|
|
chase
Apprentice Shielder
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
|
Post by chase on Jun 25, 2010 17:03:37 GMT -5
Cool, thanks for looking it over, both of you. And thanks again for the shorting suggestion, even if it did take me a while to figure out what you meant (it's been very educational at least). I'll let you know how it turns out.
Yeah, it's too bad CheshireCat seems to have become scarce. I'll check out his guitar, too!
|
|
aufr
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
|
Post by aufr on Oct 21, 2019 3:32:55 GMT -5
Hi, I'm very new to this, but I gave this wiring (v4) a go.
Though, I would like to have tone1 controlling neck and middle, while have tone2 controlling the bridge pickup.
Is there some way to make this happen with this wiring? Probably abundantly clear, but I know nothing of schematics or how it works, but I can solder and I can follow a visual diagram like the one above.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Oct 21, 2019 5:05:46 GMT -5
Hi aufr, and welcome to GN2
The original of this scheme by Cheshire Cat was one of the first on GN2 and gives a nice range if settings. Is the one your'd be doing the last one above on this thread, by Chase?
But on the tone control question, I think it's probably not feasible to have two in that way because in schemes like this, the pickups get shuffled and combined in several ways and the logic of one for B and one for N and M breaks down.
If you'd like to have a great tone control scheme with two knobs, how about a no-load treble pot (preserves high treble which can get dull in series mode), and a bass-cut control? easy to add to that scheme.
|
|
aufr
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
|
Post by aufr on Oct 21, 2019 13:18:04 GMT -5
Hi JohnH!
Thank you and yes it is the last iteration of the wiring I'm looking to do. I see the problem with the logic of the wiring going all different kinds of directions.
As for your suggestion, I think that sounds like a good idea. Does the bass cut need to be a "no-load" pot or can I use the standard 250k log pot?
Thank you for replying even though the thread is old.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Oct 21, 2019 13:49:37 GMT -5
You can try a 250k for a bass cut, but it doesn't have much range. The best value is usually 1M, or at least 500k to get the greatest amount of cut.
Also, if you want it ideal, a reverse log should be used so that max bass (=no cut) is at 10, but they can be hard to find. But its fine to use a normal log and wire it so max bass CUT is at 10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2019 23:24:47 GMT -5
I tried bass the C1M rev log And tried 500K felt it only worked 250K-1M, what would be the rev log. So as a cheat dual put with 2nd one end of the pot board cut. Input to 250k and lug1 of cut pot. 250k to lug1 of normal pot. Lug2 (lug3 too shouldn't make any difference) to Output Cut pot Lug2 and Lug 3 to Output. This should give range of 0-250K-750K if using 500K pot. {Might have more bass tone if using 333K resister 0-333K-833K}
|
|
aufr
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
|
Post by aufr on Oct 22, 2019 7:57:13 GMT -5
Thanks for all the help guys! Just so that i understand this correctly... Would this wiring (the three pots) be correct in combination with the rest? (disregard the super switch and position guide as this is sourced from another site)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2019 11:47:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Oct 22, 2019 12:57:23 GMT -5
Thanks for all the help guys! Just so that i understand this correctly... Would this wiring (the three pots) be correct in combination with the rest?(disregard the super switch and position guide as this is sourced from another site) Hi aufr The location where you've inserted the Bass cut pot and cap won't work well. You have it between the wiper of the volume pot and the output jack. The bass cut is dependent on the resistance of the volume pot providing a 'load' on the bass cut circuit. Instead, break the connection (blue wire) between the superswitch and the CW terminal of the volume pot and insert your bass cut circuit there. The wiper of the volume pot will connect directly to the output jack.
EDIT:Instead, remove the orange wire which connects the CW lug of the volume pot to the CCW lug of the treble cut. Then connect the blue wire from the Superswitch to the CCW lug of the treble cut instead of the CW lug of the volume pot. Then, connect the bass cut circuit between the CCW lug of the treble cut and the CW lug of the volume pot. The wiper of the volume pot should connect directly to the output jack. Also, the choice of which lugs to use on the bass cut pot depends on the taper of the pot. With a reverse-audio taper, the choice you've made will be good. With a standard audio taper, the cut will happen abruptly at the clockwise end and rotation near the counter-clockwise end will make very little difference.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 23, 2019 11:23:06 GMT -5
(The following bit has been left in for continuity beyond this post, but the problem I presented has been corrected, so no point in leaving my original dissertation intact.) .... Mama mia, that'sa gonna be messy! sumgai
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Oct 23, 2019 12:51:30 GMT -5
Mama mia, that'sa gonna be messy! Yes, it would have been. I've corrected that post. With the treble pot at '10' the bass cut circuit would have worked properly. With the bass cut control at minimum resistance, the treble cut would have worked properly. Other than that, the controls would have been very interactive.
|
|