Help with enhanced strat circuit ideas?

[megi]

Hi folks, me back again needing more help from the wiring gurus... I'm building a strat (just at the parts ordering stage) and considering what I want regarding the circuitry/sounds available/ease of use/appearance. What I conclude is:

a) The standard 5-way switch and associated pickup combinations must be there - for me it's just too much an essential part of the whole strat "thing".
b) I wouldn't mind having a couple of series pickup combinations available, specifically N*M and M*B (don't know if there is any appreciable difference between N*M and M*N , but you get the idea) I think these would be useful for fuller sounds which also are hum-cancelling.
c) Maybe nice to have the other 2 parallel combinations: N+M+B and N+B, though possibly I could do without them.
d) Just a personal thing but I don't like push-pull pots - so if additional switches could be kept down to just one mini-switch that would be good - I don't want anything massively complex, or to alter the stock appearance too much.
e) Trying to keep the guitar "stock-ish" in looks, so it will have 3 pots, including a master volume. Don't like the idea of no tone control on the bridge pickup - simple master volume/tone would be fine, but then I would like the 3rd pot to do something useful! Maybe 2 tones would be OK just for a simple solution.
f) I'm open to any interesting enhancements I might not have considered, as long as they don't make things very complex to operate, and don't conflict with my other requirements above.
g) I have a spare 5-way super switch kicking around, so great if that gets used, no worries if not.

Help please! I find it a little hard to come up with good circuits of my own, and I know there are lots of really great circuits on this forum, but I've not found exactly what I need (apologies if it's there and I've missed it though). Finally thanks very much for taking the time to read this ramble! Cheers! ;D

[newey]

magi-

You have numerous options, although "keep it stock" and "I don't like push/pulls" does limit things somewhat.

Is it just having to pull up on the knob that you dislike? If so, a "push/push" pot is available.

Another idea would be to use a master volume and tone, then put a rotary switch in place of the third pot. This can be wired such that "position 1" (arbitrarily assigned) on the rotary bypasses to the 5-way, so you get all the regular 5-way selections, then turning the rotary to 2, 3 or 4 (or whatever, depending on how many rotary positions you want) would give a selection of series tones and/or series plus the 2 missing parallel tones.

I think there is a similar scheme around here somewhere. I'll have to dig around in the basement . . . .

Another idea if you just want to add a single toggle is to add a "Neck On" switch using a three way DPDT toggle. One position the neck pup is off, so you can get your regular 5-way selections, turning the neck on gives you the N+B and N+M+B. The third position puts the neck in series with the 5-way selection, so you get N*B, N*M, and N * (M+B).

There is also the "Free Neck On" scheme which uses a tone control to turn the neck pickup on at 9-10 on the knob. Below about 8 on the dial, you're back to whatever you have on the 5-way.

BTW, in series the order of pickups doesn't matter, N * M = M * N.

[asmith]

Hi Megi.

a), b), c), d) & g)
I'd recommend one of the Mike Richardson schemes, which use four-pole, five-throw superswitches like the one you have. If you like the original settings, with "Middle pickup only" in the five-way switch's third position, his second scheme may be of more interest to you than others.

Now, the MR schemes have some positions that "hang from hot," so if you go for one of his schemes, I'd consider shielding your guitar before you implement these mods, if you haven't already. Hell, I'd recommend shielding your guitar anyway.

I would imagine many people here on the board have tried fixing these hangs from hot without using extraneous equipment from the original scheme. I personally have found it akin to solving Fermat's last theorem.

And as an aside, there's no difference between N*M and M*N.


e)
Mike wired his tone controls across certain pickups. In his first scheme on the linked page above, he's put tone controls across the Neck and Bridge pickups. When those pickups are in parallel with other pickups, the tone control will affect them as well.

Say you have a control acting on the Neck pickup. If you play "N+M," it affects both pickups. Also take into consideration that if you have a control acting on the Neck pickup and a control acting on the Bridge pickup, if you play "N+M+B" both controls will be active, and you'll have double the capacitance acting on the pickups. This could make for some really cool tone options.


Having gushed all this about the MR Scheme, Newey's idea of a rotary switch in place of the third control is a good idea, and could open up all sorts of options.


f)
Have you thought about attaching a beer-holder to the back of your headstock? Invaluable.

[megi]

Cheers for the reply newey - I realise I'm limiting things a bit (sorry!) but also I don't really think I want masses of extra options, so hopefully it can be accomplished. The rotary switch sounds like a possibility...

As to my dislike of push-pulls, I'm afraid it would extend to the push-push type also - somehow I just don't like having a control used for more than one thing. Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word "stock" - I did say "stock-ish" I think - really one extra mini toggle would be fine with me. Anyway, please humour me on this, we all have our quirks, this is one of mine... ;D

Actually you guys did come up with a great neck-on circuit for my recent 3 pickup telecaster build - that's just about complete now - I had a problem with an unanticipated route to ground from the bridge pickup (via pickup base-plate/shielding) in the series setting, but shortly will have that fixed. For this strat though, I really would like to have M*B as well as N*M, which the neck-on doesn't do. I'm probably being awkward I know, sorry...

[megi]

Oct 29, 2011 14:30:15 GMT -5 asmith said:

Hi Megi.

a), b), c), d) & g)
I'd recommend one of the Mike Richardson schemes, which use four-pole, five-throw superswitches like the one you have. If you like the original settings, with "Middle pickup only" in the five-way switch's third position, his second scheme may be of more interest to you than others.

Now, the MR schemes have some positions that "hang from hot," so if you go for one of his schemes, I'd consider shielding your guitar before you implement these mods, if you haven't already. Hell, I'd recommend shielding your guitar anyway.

I would imagine many people here on the board have tried fixing these hangs from hot without using extraneous equipment from the original scheme. I personally have found it akin to solving Fermat's last theorem.

And as an aside, there's no difference between N*M and M*N.


e)
Mike wired his tone controls across certain pickups. In his first scheme on the linked page above, he's put tone controls across the Neck and Bridge pickups. When those pickups are in parallel with other pickups, the tone control will affect them as well.

Say you have a control acting on the Neck pickup. If you play "N+M," it affects both pickups. Also take into consideration that if you have a control acting on the Neck pickup and a control acting on the Bridge pickup, if you play "N+M+B" both controls will be active, and you'll have double the capacitance acting on the pickups. This could make for some really cool tone options.


Having gushed all this about the MR Scheme, Newey's idea of a rotary switch in place of the third control is a good idea, and could open up all sorts of options.


f)
Have you thought about attaching a beer-holder to the back of your headstock? Invaluable.

Cheers for the reply, I'll have a good look at the MR schemes, maybe one will work for me. Embarrassed not to know M*N is no different to N*N, but at least I've got that straightened out now. The beer holder is indeed a cool enhancement I hadn't considered! ;D

[JohnH]

Megi - Your intent is very good and you have lots of options. The MR schemes are very well liked and recommended around here. Just to stir the pot however, this is my favourite simple scheme that I didn’t design, by our late friend ChrisK:

S-none

3 single coils and the S none switch

Just look at the last diagram on the first post. The only new part is a dpdt switch, which he shows as a push-pull but which could be a toggle. The 5-way is standard, and in addition to standard Strat settings it gives M in series with B or N and a few others.

Strat SP

This is one of mine that I’m interested in, using your super-switch. Leave off the phase switch and use a dpdt toggle for series/parallel. This is designed to be very simple to operate, focussing on N, NM, NB, BM, B, with all the combos in series or parallel and some interesting settings where you can mix the series proportions if you wish:

Strat SP

John

[megi]

Thank you John, I think looking at those 2, plus the Mike Richardson schemes, there are more than enough options on the table. On the face of it, the S-none sounds like it does everything I want, and a little more (no harm there!) quite nicely. Your Strat SP does a bit more too, but I like it a lot - it has a certain elegance which I seem to notice in all your designs if I may say so! Looking at the description, the standard 5 way operation is not quite there, but middle pickup alone is still available by using the fade control in series mode? Anyway, it's a rather nice circuit I must say.

Cheers to you all for helping though - it appears (no surprise) that I had indeed managed to miss these circuits. I'll update on which one I go for when I've managed to make my mind up! Decisions, decisions.... ;D

[JohnH]

Oct 29, 2011 16:53:09 GMT -5 megi said:

Looking at the description, the standard 5 way operation is not quite there, but middle pickup alone is still available by using the fade control in series mode?

Yes indeed, using Neck and Middle in series, then fade down the neck

Good luck with your deliberations!

J

[megi]

Inconsistent of me, but actually looking at the Strat SP, I think I like it so much I might cancel my ban on push-pulls, or maybe go to 2 extra toggles. I did once do a mod with Alpha push-pull pots, and although it all worked, I really didn't like the quality of the Alpha push-pull pots - there was a bit of play in the turn position of the pot - they didn't quite stay in a definite position, maybe one reason I was put off them. Would you guys be able to recommend a brand of push-pull pot if I decided to try them again?

[JohnH]

To be honest, I share your feelings about push/pulls, but I only have them on one guitar and they are Alpha. They work fine and reliably but as you say, they feel a bit unsubstantial. I was OK with this on a Strat copy, but when I rewired my LP with lots of options, I kept the nice solid full size CTS pots and got my switching combos in other ways. So I'm also interested if anyone can advise a good solid feeling push/pull.

The other thing, about phase switches, that being the second switch that youd need if you wanted the full Strat SP scheme. I like to figure out and build phased designs,and I have them built, in some form, into all four of my electrics. But again, being honest, despite playing every day and jamming every week with the guys, I have never actually played through an entire song with an out of phase sound! There always seems to be a better bright option by just moving towards the bridge or a single coil setting.

but YMMV!

John

[megi]

Cheers for that John - it might have to be the 2 toggle switches then, or possibly I'll miss out the phase switch. I have another guitar I put a phase switch on, and it's fun but like you I never actually use it in an actual playing situation. But I'm a sucker for a nice circuit like your Strat SP, and in a way I don't want to dilute it at all! I do wish CTS would make a push-pull though...

[megi]

John, can I just check I understand the full implications of the Strat SP circuit regarding the fade control and universal phase switch? Am I right in saying that with the fade control plus the phase switch, you could in effect dial in just the amount of "out-of-phase-ness" you wanted - a kind of a subtle sound shading facility? If so I think I want to do the full circuit with both phase switch and fade control included - it's just too cool an idea to leave out.

[JohnH]

Oct 30, 2011 15:36:12 GMT -5 megi said:

John, can I just check I understand the full implications of the Strat SP circuit regarding the fade control and universal phase switch? Am I right in saying that with the fade control plus the phase switch, you could in effect dial in just the amount of "out-of-phase-ness" you wanted - a kind of a subtle sound shading facility? If so I think I want to do the full circuit with both phase switch and fade control included - it's just too cool an idea to leave out.

Exacta-mundo!

When two pups are out of phase, the full cancellation of the fundamental note needs a very precise balance, usually involving turning down the pup with the most bass ie that nearer the neck. That is what the 'fade' knob will hopefully do, giving quite a wide tonal range as the fundamental is fully or partly suppressed. Its a more dramatic change than doing the same with all in-phase pickups (though I like that one too)

BTW FYI etc This 'fade' control has not been tested in exactly this form, but I've tried several designs using volume and blend controls that do similar things, so it should work out OK.

John

[megi]

Cheers John - this circuit is going into my guitar! I'm going to use a couple of mini toggles for S2 and S3. On the pot values, I notice in the original thread you suggest 500K log for volume and tone, and 250K log for the fade - do you still recommend that (I also noticed in the Strat SP hss thread you go with 500K log for the fade). Also interested to know the reasoning behind the pot values for the fade control, just in case I might actually learn something, cheers! ;D

[JohnH]

Good spotting - and I guess it could be either. There's no reason why those two designs should be different since the fade knob is acting on single coils in each case. 250k will give a smoother spread of control, but a 500k will work fine and may leave a bit more edge by loading the coil less. I think Ill say 500k! . Really, it should be tested...

[megi]

Cheers John - I guess that's the end of my questions (you may be glad to hear... ;D) - I might just be the one to do the testing - I've got a spare 250K log pot, so could try that first, then sub in 500K log and see what I think.

Can't wait to try this one out though, it sounds too good! (haven't even started to build the guitar yet though, so will have to wait). Cheers again!