Seeking a Source: Dual Concentric 25K...

[Runewalker]

I am not having any luck finding what appears to be an unusual pot array, at least for guitars:

Dual concentric, center detented, 25K pots. Preferably with a long enough bushing for a back routed guitar.

Any Ideas among the luminaries at GNtz-2?

Thanks all.

RW

[R]

you could try www.potentiometers.com/ they have just about every type of pot even custom ones and triple concentric pots mouser.com might even have them too

[UnklMickey]

25k? not 250k? whatcha up to? puttin' in a preamp?

[Runewalker]

Unk: Thanks for asking.

[

color=Brown]25k? not 250k? whatcha up to? puttin' in a preamp?

[/color][/blockquote]

Yep, scored a near freebe on Ebay for a three band tone and gain circuit. w/ 4 knobs that eats up some real-estate, and of course I still have to install Switches, because GN2 has turned me into a maniac, Ok. "released my 'inner maniac'".

The bass, mid, treble are all 25K, whereas the gain is 50K.

This looks destined for a bolt-on SG chassis I have with a large control cavity. The body is pristine and has 6 holes. The 3way toggle takes one, and I can move the jack to the side with some surgery. 2 pups, JohnH's 2X5-way rotaries for each pup, on board gain and EQ, Series/Parallel, and if I can figure out the space, In/outta phase. Alnicos because I have abandoned ceramics.

Counting it up (2 pup rotaries, 4 Active pots, 1 3 way = 6 holes) that leaves me short one hole (excluding the mini for the Series/Parallel) if I use the Active's standard 4 pots. This is before I add the blender pot, which for me is critical. So I am trying to consolidate two tones into one hole. What I really need is one dual gang concentric, center detented with 25K/25K, and another with 25K/50K.

If you have labored through the Tone Monster thread you may have seen my comments that in that design my objective was EQ management via switching, combos and geometry, with an bias towards never useing the tone-cut unless absolutely necessary. The blender is a major component in the EQ through passive circuites approach.

This active will go the other way and concede that the switching and geometry approach is in the end not completely perfect, but gets durn close. Going active violates the objectives above, but hey, at $10.50 )+postage) what could I do?

I am not so much interested in additional gain to overdrive, I get plenty of that with my tone modeling device. Rather I am trying to normalize the output between the vast array of switching options --- 3 pups in Series vs. 3 in Parallel is a pretty hugh contrast in output. I also seek more on board control of EQ. The tone cut of tone pots just leaves me flat, it sounds so muffled. Could not figure a way to put a twenty band slider EQ on-board for #10.50 so 3 bands will have to do.

So this is an experiment and moves a bit away from the better tone-through geometry approach. (remember Dupont's, "better living through chemistry," commercial? I knew several folks who made that a personal mission).

But after all, is the search for the the perfect tone not a journey instead of a destination?

This is such fun! What a great community we have here.

RW