A hopefully small request: HH design

[Runewalker]

Evening gents.

My first foray into building a wiring harness from scratch occurred before finding this site. I cut, pasted and lumbered into a design that works but certainly is far from elegant … and would like to re-do the wiring.

The Chassis is an ESP carved top, sort of looks like a Schecter C-1 (not to be confused with the GN2 C1) and I bolted up an unusual 24 fret Ibanez all maple neck, which fit the bod perfectly. HH configuration.

Here is the switching array:

S1 = standard Gibby SwitchCraft style pickup selector – N, N+B, B
S2 = Neck, on-on-on, Local Series, Single, Parallel
S3 = Bridge, on-on-on, Local Series, Single, Parallel
S4 = In or Out of Phase for Neck and Bridge combos.

The back-routed chassis only had holes for 2 pots and the SwitchCraft. So I used concentrics for the Neck and Bridge, which each concentric set up as a Vol and a Tone.

Since this was a first build it shows plenty of the things I did not know, like there is severe hum in the OoP setting, and I don’t think I have the Neck and Bridge singles, when together, configured to be humcancelling.

Keeping it HH, I would like to adjust this scheme to:

2 separate PushPull volumes, one for each pickup.

1 Master tone, or if advised by you experts, dual-ganged separate tones, or I could even go concentric.

S1 = will be a Mini pickup selector – N, N+B, B
S2 = Neck, on-on-on, Local Series, Single, Parallel
S3 = Bridge, on-on-on, Local Series, Single, Parallel
S4 = Neck PP, System Series/Parallel
S5 = Bridge PP, System OoP

I might have chosen a different scheme but I am constrained by having already drilled on the chassis long ago, and don’t want to sully the guitar any more than I already have.

I may do the trick I read about John H doing where he disassembled one of his humbuckers and flipped the magnet and direction of the current flow to enable obtaining RWRP on the adjustable poles of the opposing humbucker. Or I may just spring for pups with both coils of the humbucker having adjustable poles.

Anyway to cut to the request, If any of you remember me I was full of verbiage but contained little electronic knowledge … and in the words of Blanche DuBois in A Streetcar Named Desire, “I have always depended on the kindness of strangers” in realizing my dreams. In the case of GN2 the strangers became tolerant friends, at least tolerant of my lack of knowledge.

And to the old timers, I know I have been absent a long time, a change in work roles ate up my hobby time, at least the building parts of the hobby. Son-O has sort of reinvigorated my interests in completing up some of the parts bins and in rehabbing some former sloppy builds. But I never stopped flitting over to check out the good stuff, just have not been as active in posting.

So would one of you kind gentlemen be willing to help me with a wiring diagram of the above? I had previously cobbled one together and it was luck that it worked at all.

Thanks, as always.
RW

[newey]

RW-

I've got the week from hell upcoming, but I'll see what I can cobble together. Although I seem to recall someone else had a similar if not identical scheme a while ago, we may just have a diagram floating around.

Ever play an Explorer, with the 2 vol pots and one master tone? If you have, you'll want the dual-gang pot for the tone control. With that, it gets wired just like an LP, with the pots before the switching.

[JohnH]

Hi RW, great to see you are back into the wiring. Im happy to help, though not for a few days I dont get much time currently. Maybe I'll sketch a schematic?

what are the pickups? both the same? and covered or uncovered? I recently took the cover off my LP neck pup and it came to life - i dont want any more pup covers! But if they are covered, I think the screw coil is the only one worth hearing on its own.

cheers
John

[asmith]

Hi Runewalker / RW / R-Dubz,

Keeping it HH, I would like to adjust this scheme to:

2 separate PushPull volumes, one for each pickup.

1 Master tone, or if advised by you experts, dual-ganged separate tones, or I could even go concentric.

S1 = will be a Mini pickup selector – N, N+B, B
S2 = Neck, on-on-on, Local Series, Single, Parallel
S3 = Bridge, on-on-on, Local Series, Single, Parallel
S4 = Neck PP, System Series/Parallel
S5 = Bridge PP, System OoP

This all seems relatively "modular" - no "binary switching" or anything like that. Something has something working on it, then something else works on that module and another module, then something else works on... etc.


Here's some modules.

---

On-On-On Switch: Local Series / Single / Parallel



Up: Series / Middle: Single / Down: Parallel

---

P/P Pot + Gibson Switch: System Series / Parallel

---

P/P Pot: Out of Phase

---

You can throw those together in a grand scheme and everything should be fine, post-troubleshooting.

Hope that steers in the right direction.

[Runewalker]

Thanks for the replies gents.

To Newey's point I should have first asked if anyone was aware of a design that captures these components. And to Newey's and John's points of having plenty of distractions in the other world, absolutely understood. That is my issue as well, and we get to things when we can.

"Ever play an Explorer, with the 2 vol pots and one master tone?" Newey

No I have not had the pleasure but it is on my 'bucket list.' I take it from your inference that the Explorer config yields tone mud?

"what are the pickups? both the same? and covered or uncovered?" JH

I am not sure yet on the pups as I have a bunch in inventory. I lean towars putting in a Dimarzio XN2 in the bridge that I have had stockpiled for years and always wanted to play with that beast.

www.dimarzio.com/pickups/humbuckers/high-power/x2n

For the Neck then I have some other options. I have a GFS alnico zebra that is about 16K DCR that has a great sound in the bridge position. I have the same pup in the original HBD SG Mule:

guitarnuts2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=nutzoid&action=display&thread=3778

and there is a pix of the guitar with the zebra's circling the Texas Capital for a musical assault. And while that 'hot wound' pup seems like a potential wooly sound in the neck, it actually has a very acceptable single coil sound and the local parallel setting is very PAFish.

I might get crazy and get a Dimarzio neck Activator:

www.dimarzio.com/pickups/humbuckers/high-power/d-activator-neck.

Also I have been impressed with the sound to value ratio of the Entwhistles. I have tried two and have not found a tosser yet. So I may consider:

www.eyguitarmusic.com/Entwistle-Nemesis-Humbucker-Single-Rail-Hex-Screw-CR-Pickup-Ceramic-Bar_p_640.html

or
www.eyguitarmusic.com/Entwistle-X3-Humbucker-Double-Rail-CR-Pickup-Ceramic-Bar_p_377.html

or

www.eyguitarmusic.com/Entwistle-Dark-Star-Neodymium-Humbucker-Adjustable-Twin-Pole-Piece-Ni-Pickup-Neodymium-Bar_p_637.html

The neo mag single pup units surprised me at how smooth they were, so I am intrigued to try them in humbuckers.

Yes I know, those config options lean toward the metal spectrum.... So, what's your point? I am wanting a pure metal beast in the harem. Sometimes it is just what is called for. Metal without going to the active EMGs. I have a Jackson with the EMG and it does what it does, but little else. Even though it will have beastly capabilities I still like a little variety.

"i dont want any more pup covers!" JH

Yes I know what you mean. That does open them up. I like a couple of "dress guitars" with the shiny covers, but it does limit them. So this one will probably have the open coils. Do you find the open coil humbucker configs a little noisier, since they are missing the additional shielding? I wish I could find these type of covers:

www.guitarfetish.com/Surf-90-BlackChrome-Bridge-Position_p_1511.html

but I have had zero luck in sourcing them.

to asmith. you actually described how I built the first one ... found a bunch of modules and cobbled them together, but had some unintended consequences due to my ignorance (evidenced by the question that arose immediately on reading your post .... What the He|| is "binary switching").

The modules you pulled are exactly like the ones I used years ago... except for the System Series / Parallel PP since I did not have that feature on the original.

I am good with doing the modules. It is the interconnections in the harness that start confusing me. Also, the additional design goals I described are

• insuring that the cut coils are humcancelling when combined and
  
• eliminating the bad hum I was getting when the OoP option was engaged.
  

thanks all for your imput on this. This is not a groundbreaking design, but it works very well in live playing and is pretty intuitive in switch management. I recall that John found the 3 way local series/single/parallel to be in his terms "fiddily," but I never had difficulty with them. I like the exotics wiring schemes better, but I found myself still picking up this guitar frequently. My dominant scheme for HH and HSS is the HBD. I still have not settled on a fav for SSS guitars.

Thanks so much.
RW

[asmith]

What the He|| is "binary switching"

It's an example of controls affecting the operation of other controls. With two Push/Pull Switches, there are four options (in binary, they can be labeled 00, 01, 10 & 11). There are wiring schemes that give you four distinct results from these four options, so they're not "modular." If they were, switch A would do something and switch B would do something else on top of that - like your scheme.

Was the bad hum on OoP present when you were playing with only cut coils, or with full humbuckers as well? If it's the latter, it sounds like a dodgy connection somewhere. If it's the former, I can see how it happened. With cut coils using an On-On-On switch like the module I posted above, when the OoP is engaged, a coil hangs from hot, which may have been the source of your noise. Former / latter?

Anyway, that problem is easily fixed with a little modification to the On-On-On switch design, so that in all positions everything is either shorted or live; so nothing is 'cut' and can hang. Like so:



Ensuring the correct coils are cut. I had this problem when I modded an LP to Borsanova's JP scheme. Both slug coils were cut, resulting in hum when both cut pickups were played. It was fixed by swapping the wires round on one of the pickups, so that I had one pickup cut the slug coil and the other cut the neck coil.

I am good with doing the modules. It is the interconnections in the harness that start confusing me.

OK. Here's a complete wiring diagram of the scheme.
This is a previous version of that scheme - it worked, but Bridge Tone would change value when it was OoP.

Bear in mind that diagram will need one of the pickup's wire swapped around, as mentioned above, to ensure the correct coil is cut.

You can also achieve that "correct cut" in another way, by playing with one of the On/On/On switches, but my lift is here and I have to go.

EDIT: And now I'm home. If you swap the Black and Green wires on the On/On/On switch in the diagram, as well as the Red and Grey wires, it'll cut the other coil.

Hope that helps.

[newey]

"Ever play an Explorer, with the 2 vol pots and one master tone?" Newey


No I have not had the pleasure but it is on my 'bucket list.' I take it from your inference that the Explorer config yields tone mud?

Not mud so much, but for consistency of operation, the tone control(s) should sit before the volumes in the chain, where twin volumes are employed. If a single pot is used, you can't do that, it necessarily has to go after the 2 volume pots in the signal chain.

The Explorer, as well as the V, have twin volumes which are then connected to the selector switch, and the single tone control then runs off the common switch connection, then to output.

The operation of that leaves me cold, but then, some folks swear by it. And, of course, some folks never touch their tone controls in the first place and so don't have occasion to mind a bit of wonkiness.

Using a dual pot allows one to put the tone(s) in their rightful place before the dual volumes.

[reTrEaD]

why not start here:

guitarnuts2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=schem&action=display&thread=3159






this has everything you need except for the (local) series/split/parallel switching, and that was discussed above.

[JohnH]

asmith has it done. Id suggest changing the series/parallel switch so it overrides the toggle in series mode, and it then doesnt matter where the toggle is. (ie like on the HBD)

On humcancelling - we have no technology here that will allow the two single coils to be hum cancelling together in both in and out of phase modes, when using the dpdt on-on-on's. Its always the same coils that are cut to, so they cant do both. When you have just a coil cut switch(ie, not local parallel too), then it can be arranged to change coils when phase is reversed. So given a single switch, its a choice of getting the three sounds with an on-on-on, or just a two position switch to do coil cut with humcancelling oop, but no parallel. I think Id stay with the on-on-on's though, if you like the local parallel sound. The humcancelling issue is only relevant when both pups are coil-cut, and you can get in-phase correct and so oop then hums.

If thinking of combining different pup types, there are some entertaining coil/wire correlations and phase checks in your future....

John

[reTrEaD]

Nov 29, 2011 14:33:00 GMT -5 JohnH said:

On humcancelling - we have no technology here that will allow the two single coils to be hum cancelling together in both in and out of phase modes, when using the dpdt on-on-on's. Its always the same coils that are cut to, so they cant do both. When you have just a coil cut switch(ie, not local parallel too), then it can be arranged to change coils when phase is reversed.

yeah. with the series/split/parallel arrangement, you can maintain humcanceling with a 4pdt phase switch, but not with a dpdt.

[asmith]

Nov 29, 2011 14:33:00 GMT -5 JohnH said:

On humcancelling - we have no technology here that will allow the two single coils to be hum cancelling together in both in and out of phase modes, when using the dpdt on-on-on's. Its always the same coils that are cut to, so they cant do both. When you have just a coil cut switch(ie, not local parallel too), then it can be arranged to change coils when phase is reversed. So given a single switch, its a choice of getting the three sounds with an on-on-on, or just a two position switch to do coil cut with humcancelling oop, but no parallel. I think Id stay with the on-on-on's though, if you like the local parallel sound. The humcancelling issue is only relevant when both pups are coil-cut, and you can get in-phase correct and so oop then hums.

I'm confused.

If we swap the wires of the Bridge pickup on the diagram, so that the (Seymour Duncan-coloured) wires are laid out like so, then when coils are cut you end up like so:

Setting	Result
Bridge Single Coil (in phase)	Bridge Screw Coil
Neck Single Coil	Neck Slug Coil
Bridge +/* Neck Single Coils	Bridge Screw Coil +/* Neck Slug Coil (hum-cancelling)
Bridge +/* Neck Single Coils Out of Phase	Bridge Slug Coil OoP +/* Neck Slug Coil (hum-cancelling)

Am I missing something?

EDIT: Ignore me, I am talking complete crap.

[reTrEaD]

Nov 29, 2011 15:14:23 GMT -5 asmith said:

EDIT: Ignore me, I am talking complete crap.

I hate it when that happens.

Nov 29, 2011 14:33:00 GMT -5 JohnH said:

The humcancelling issue is only relevant when both pups are coil-cut, and you can get in-phase correct and so oop then hums.

Would it be better to have the oop humcancel and the in-phase not humcancel?

[Runewalker]

"Ignore me, I am talking complete crap." -asmith

Awww asmith, talking crap may be my favorite thing to do .... you know, stick with what I'm good at.

asmith has it done. -JH

Thanks asmith for drawing things up. I am not sure how to do John's other suggestion of making the series switch overide the pup selector, but I do have that on the HBD and it is a nice feature. Remember I am not too slick on knowing what I am doing. Just a solder mechanic, not a theorist.

"we have no technology here that will allow the two single coils to be hum cancelling together in both in and out of phase modes..." -JH

Alright! I did not know what I was doing and I built something and it worked exactly the way i told it to.... Now if I can only get my kids on that program.... i.e., doing what I tell 'em too. I know better than to ask that of the women.

So for this guitar I can give up the OoP setting. I use it most where it can be blended in just a touch for a little more high end articulation and that crazy OoP warble. On its on it is more of a novelty. I have plenty other guitars with OoP if I really feel the need for it.

John, with an open PP DPDT what would it take to add a buffer with an on/off capability? I guess that even with the stereo jack set up as a battery switch, it would still draw juice even if the PP was in the buffer-off position. But that would give a little more high end if I needed it. These will be pretty overwound pups.

"If thinking of combining different pup types, there are some entertaining coil/wire correlations and phase checks in your future...."

Right. Been down that road before and apparently am a glutton for punishment. Son-O ran into that before when he wired up a couple of P-rails and they had swiched the polarity on purpose so the adjustable coils would RWRP relative to each other. Had to do some wire chasin' and head scratchin'.

Thanks also to ReTread for weighing in. Yeah I thought about the "Houses of the Holy" LedHewitt PageCaster but it woulda taken too much adaptation and eroded my confidence.

Thanks to all of you for your comments and work.

RW

[reTrEaD]

Nov 29, 2011 17:54:13 GMT -5 Runewalker said:

Thanks also to ReTread for weighing in.

You'll probably regret thanking me cuz now I'll continue with my questionable opinions...

Nov 29, 2011 17:54:13 GMT -5 Runewalker said:

Yeah I thought about the "Houses of the Holy" LedHewitt PageCaster but it woulda taken too much adaptation and eroded my confidence.

It seems to me, the middle of that schematic is exactly what you want. Just change the ends of it to incorporate the series/split/parallel. If you can bring yourself to use a 4pdt minitoggle for the phase switch, you can maintain humcanceling in the oop. Else, place a dpdt PP phase switch between the "guts" of the schematic and one of the local mode switches.

No need re-invent the wheel, just change the tires, eh?



As far as adding a buffer selected by a PP...

You could do a "true-bypass" around the buffer (buffer stays power on at all times when a cable is plugged into the guitar.

OR

Have the input of the buffer always connected to OUT (on the schematic), then select OUT (on the schematic) or the output of the buffer, with one pole of the PP, to connect to the output jack.

The other pole of the PP could turn the power on when the buffer is selected.

(I like the first choice better. I think the battery life will be pretty long even if the guitar is left plugged in all the time.)

[newey]

reTread-

You've posted several times, but I don't think we've done our duty in the greetings dept. . . .

Hello and Welcome to G-Nutz2!

[reTrEaD]

thanks, newey. nice place ya got here.

[asmith]

Yes, I second that welcome, rT. It's not often someone just registers and jumps two-footed into articulately solving someone else's problem. Nice to see.

Nov 29, 2011 17:54:13 GMT -5 Runewalker said:

I am not sure how to do John's other suggestion of making the series switch overide the pup selector, but I do have that on the HBD and it is a nice feature. Remember I am not too slick on knowing what I am doing. Just a solder mechanic, not a theorist.

Actually, the diagram I posted will override the Gibbo switch when the Series/Parallel pot is pulled. Alright, so it won't "override it" as such, it just floods all the options with the same output - same difference.

EDIT: I should qualify that I first came across that no-dead-spots configuration from - no prizes - JohnH.

[reTrEaD]

Nov 30, 2011 11:53:23 GMT -5 asmith said:

Actually, the diagram I posted will override the Gibbo switch when the Series/Parallel pot is pulled. Alright, so it won't "override it" as such, it just floods all the options with the same output - same difference.

GuitarNutz 2 is the only place on the net where I've seen this done properly. The other versions I've seen have a dead spot in series mode, when the 3way is in the "coil 2" (your drawing) or "bridge only" (JohnH's drawing).

[sumgai]

Nov 29, 2011 14:33:00 GMT -5 JohnH said:

.......
On humcancelling - we have no technology here that will allow the two single coils to be hum cancelling together in both in and out of phase modes, when using the dpdt on-on-on's.

'Sfunny, I would've sworn we've discussed some of the various "dummy coil" tricks, such as propounded here:

guitarnuts2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=wiring&action=print&thread=1693


HTH




sumgai

[newey]

As a side note to sg's link to the dummy coil thread, members who have some trouble following the sequence of posts there should be aware that some posts by a certain member were deleted by that person, thereby rendering the come-backs to the deletions non sequitur.

Which is why we discourage removal of any posted material- edit if you must but don't delete stuff, particularly after others have responded!

[reTrEaD]

Nov 30, 2011 23:01:07 GMT -5 sumgai said:

Nov 29, 2011 14:33:00 GMT -5 JohnH said:

.......
On humcancelling - we have no technology here that will allow the two single coils to be hum cancelling together in both in and out of phase modes, when using the dpdt on-on-on's.

'Sfunny, I would've sworn we've discussed some of the various "dummy coil" tricks, such as propounded here:

guitarnuts2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=wiring&action=print&thread=1693


HTH




sumgai

This is going off on a tangent. I should probably clarify, before things get messy.


We weren't talking about making ONE single coil hum cancelling.
It's about maintaining hum canceling between TWO single coils (more specifically two split HBs) when changing phase with a dpdt switch.

1 - with two full (series) HBs, they each hum cancel, locally. So flipping phase on one pickup doesn't cause a loss of hum canceling.

2 - with two split HB's, you can maintain hum canceling when changing phase IF you use some clever wiring. This is accomplished by placing the phase switch "between" the split switch and the pickup itself. By doing this, you actually change which coil is being selected when the phase is reversed.

Example:
In-phase uses neck north and bridge south.
Oop uses neck north and bridge (oop) north.

But this kind of operation is dependent on the "split switch" moving the ground connection to the "series link". Switching the "ends" of the series connected HB by the phase switch change both the phase and which coil is enabled.


3 - You can't accomplish this kind of coil selection without a series link.

4 - If you use a dpdt on-on-on for series/split/parallel, you only have a series link when series mode is selected.

5 - If you try to combine a series/split/parallel and a "coil-swapping phase switch", the OoP will work in the series position, but give an open circuit in the split mode and parallel mode. That's a real loser.

6 - If you put the series/split/parallel switch between the phase switch and the pickup, all is well (in terms of no open circuits). But since this arrangement can't swap coils, the two split HBs can only hum cancel when in-phase (if you wire for a north split on one pickup and south on the other). OR if you wire for splits to north on both pickups (or south on both pickups), the two "singles" will hum cancel each other only in the OoP mode.



Clear as mud?

[JohnH]

all clear to me Mr re T! And thatnkyou for joining here and giving us 19 very sensible posts so far!

Back to Runewalkers guitar. Asmith pointed out that he already has the series override function, so I think his diagram is still a good option if you want some Oop. The only less than optimal setting is the two single coils oop, which is unavoidable (without a different switch) but which youd never need.

But I think the buffer is a good idea too, particularly to clear up the treble on those very hot humbuckers. I'd be tempted to just add another jack socket, which also controls the power, and avoid more switches if you would still want the phase switch

[sumgai]

reTread,

First:

Hi, and to the NutzHouse!


Second, John only slightly nudged this thing somewhere in the direction of "not quite on topic"... I helped that along, but again, only slightly. You brought it back quite nicely, but I do need to point out that the so-called dummy coil works anywhere, any time, no matter what the pickup layout might be. ... .... Well, that is, it works to a degree, and only after playing around with it for awhile. But it does answer the overall question about technology vis-a-vis humcancelling, should someone decide that's viable for them.

And do remember, please, that not everyone who's reading this particular thread is thinking in terms of "that's for me". It's just as likely that someone will spy out an "off topic" statement, and then they go "Aha! that's for me!" I think that falls under the heading of Serendipity, or some such.

Third, and if I'm not mistaken, lastly - I'd be highly interested in seeing your answer to Question 20 of this year's Trivia Quiz. ;D



sumgai

[reTrEaD]

Dec 1, 2011 4:16:07 GMT -5 sumgai said:

First:

Thanks!

Dec 1, 2011 4:16:07 GMT -5 sumgai said:

Second,

Series/one coil plus dummy/Parallel ? I can't wrap my mind around attempting that with a dpdt on-on-on

Dec 1, 2011 4:16:07 GMT -5 sumgai said:

Third,

At first glance, it looks like.... [Content deleted - see below] But it doesn't interest me enough to go past a first glance. *shrug*



(EDITed by sumgai to remove reTread's quite specific answer to Q. 20.)

[reTrEaD]

Dec 1, 2011 3:18:07 GMT -5 JohnH said:

Back to Runewalkers guitar.

Good plan!

Dec 1, 2011 3:18:07 GMT -5 JohnH said:

The only less than optimal setting is the two single coils oop, which is unavoidable

It is avoidable. But at a cost. He could make the two singles oop hum cancel, but then he wouldn't have hum canceling when the two single were in phase.

Nov 29, 2011 17:54:13 GMT -5 Runewalker said:

So for this guitar I can give up the OoP setting. I use it most where it can be blended in just a touch for a little more high end articulation and that crazy OoP warble.

If you use it that way, the two singles OoP would only get "just a touch" hum cancelling, if you had designed for hum canceling OoP at the cost of no hum canceling when the two single are in phase.

So it looks like "plan A" is the best choice (for this application) after all. Hum canceling on the two singles when in phase. Sorry for the detour.

Dec 1, 2011 3:18:07 GMT -5 JohnH said:

But I think the buffer is a good idea too, particularly to clear up the treble on those very hot humbuckers. I'd be tempted to just add another jack socket, which also controls the power, and avoid more switches if you would still want the phase switch

So the buffer input would connect to the "passive" output jack. And the "active" output jack would only connect the battery when a plug is inserted. Interesting.

[sumgai]

Dec 1, 2011 10:25:05 GMT -5 reTrEaD said:

Series/one coil plus dummy/Parallel ? I can't wrap my mind around attempting that with a dpdt on-on-on

Ostensibly, the dummy coil is in the circuit all the time, not just during single coil operation. That makes it redundant, to be sure, but then again, there's no absolute requirement that a DPDT switch is the only switching solution. As you point out so succinctly.

And FWIW, many players want a reduction in hum to a point where it's below the threshold of annoyance. That level isn't always the same as complete elimination of hum, I hope you'll agree. At that point, building/adjusting a dummy coil system to deliver the best compromise in hum reduction for all the pup selections is viable for a majority of players.

At first glance, it looks like.... But it doesn't interest me enough to go past a first glance. *shrug*;

I'm sorry to hear that. I was hoping that you might be the one to unseat ashcatlt, our current reigning champion.

newey - we better step up the effort next year!


sumgai

[reTrEaD]

Dec 1, 2011 20:24:36 GMT -5 sumgai said:

Ostensibly, the dummy coil is in the circuit all the time, not just during single coil operation.

Maybe I'm the only one, but that seems like a really bad idea.

Dec 1, 2011 20:24:36 GMT -5 sumgai said:

the best compromise in hum reduction for all the pup selections is viable for a majority of players.

Count me in the minority of players. Adding a coil so you can degrade hum canceling to "hum reduction" in most of your selections seems like a pretty high price to pay. And what's the reward? Hum reduction in a couple of additional selections? It would seem more sensible (to me) to leave the great stuff great. And add the switches and/or poles necessary to add the dummy coil only when needed.

Compromise sux. Take no prisoners!

Dec 1, 2011 20:24:36 GMT -5 sumgai said:

I was hoping that you might be the one to unseat ashcatlt

But then where would he sit?

[JohnH]

I can't see how to use a dummy coil effectively, without more switch poles, and we want to stay with what RW has got installed.

On series wiring, I can confirm that pups with their pots, wired in series works 100% great, but actually, it does depend on having treble bleed circuits. These should probably be added to the design here, unless a active buffer becomes the main output mode.

My LP works much the same way as others that RW and SoS have built. In series mode, you can go from one pickup only, and smoothly fade up the other pickup to get to full on both, and theres no nasty pot interactions or dull spots at mid settings.

cheers

John

[asmith]

In fantasyland, I'd use two dummy coils, fabricating a humbucker from two noise-free single coils.

After marketing it as the Dummybucker I would retire to my private island on the royalties. You are welcome to visit if you ask nicely.

However, back to the real world, what's Rune's opinion on where he's going with this? No OoP, buffer instead?

[sumgai]

Dec 1, 2011 21:53:10 GMT -5 reTrEaD said:

Dec 1, 2011 20:24:36 GMT -5 sumgai said:

Ostensibly, the dummy coil is in the circuit all the time, not just during single coil operation.

Maybe I'm the only one, but that seems like a really bad idea.

By no means are you in the minority here! I was just pointing out that some players think differently from us Nutz, that's all. That's obviously true on two counts: Our membership roster is anemically small, compared to, say, Guitar Center's number of unique purchasers; and if it were such a good idea, nearly every big manufacturer would be on that same bandwagon. Conversely, there are some small makers of this setup, and they've been at it for more than a few years, so somebody is buying into the idea, enough so as to keep those little guys in business.....

Compromise sux. Take no prisoners!

If you'll allow me a 'judicial' statement (ask c1 about that!), I predict that in a few more years, you'll be singing a different tune.

But then where would he sit?

Oh we have a special place already reserved for him, don't worry about that!



sumgai