|
Post by Runewalker on May 20, 2014 13:33:26 GMT -5
Historians here may have seen approach discussed and I missed it:
Edited May 22, 2015. Original YouTube post was removed by its originator.
Description: HH standard Gibson style switching, with a blender that shades in or out a mid pup in OoP only irrespective if the 3-way is in Neck, Both, or Bridge.
I am interested in trying this on a mule. Anyone here seen the wiring design or know where I can find it.
It also seems that when the mid blend is all the way off the other pups work, unlike the LP style where with in the Both position turning down one volume to zero cuts out the other pup as well.
Thoughts?
RW
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on May 20, 2014 15:13:13 GMT -5
I reckon the middle is being brought in by connecting its hot wire in series with a pot, using just two lugs (like on a tone pot). At max, it is fully connected in parallel with the others, and at min, it has a 250k pot in series with it, so has little effect. Actually, it should be a no-load pot, then it is fully disconnected. I think that arrangement is how most blender wiring is done in Strats. It works well here because it is not having to act on its own as a volume pot, it only has to combine with the other pickups, which have a normal type of wiring.
|
|
|
Post by newey on May 20, 2014 16:46:56 GMT -5
Rune-
We have had mid-blend discussions before, but having the mid permanently OOP, I don't recall that. It does sound like an interesting arrangement.
|
|
|
Post by Runewalker on May 20, 2014 16:50:07 GMT -5
Thanks John and Newey for weighing in. I was thinking of applying this to the HH Cubed design John helped me with. Make that ... did all the work on. I can't shove additional parts into that travel guitar --- the "toothpick," because every cubic mm is consumed in that tiny cavity, but I have a cheap HSH mule I want to try it on. The HH Cubed is a lot of fun, but the Duncan Designed set (like a JB/Jazz HH combo) are sometimes just too smooth and need a smidge of OoP warble from time to time. So I like how this approach seems to be able to add just a pinch of seasoning when it is called for, and to roll it right out when it has done what it needs to do. I have some stacked Entwhistles this would be perfect for in the mid S position. So does that sound possible with the way you describe the mid volume? I guess just for completeness I could put in a DPDT that puts the mid in or out of phase? Thanks RW
|
|
|
Post by newey on May 20, 2014 17:10:04 GMT -5
I knew there was something in the dim mists of my geriatric memories. . . 4real's DIY Sustainer mid-blend phase-o-casterThis is a SSS with 4real's sustainer circuit, but it does feature a mid-blend. It has phase switches for all the pickups. But a starting point, perhaps.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on May 20, 2014 18:07:22 GMT -5
I Would think that to add this mid blend circuit to the HH cubed, you would just connect its output (ie one side of blend pot) to the jack hot. Then it can be wound into the mix when wanted, without interfering with anything that might be happening in series or parallel between N and B and the other controls. Simple!
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on May 21, 2014 12:18:19 GMT -5
Rw, John's right, it is that dirt-simple. However, if you are introducing a single-coil pup into the equation, just remember that your hum reduction factor might head for the toilet, as you blend in the Mid. You know, it's the old two coils wound in one direction verses the other coil in the opposing direction thing - unbalances the equation and all that. You may find yourself needing to add yet another switch, probably an on-off-on (DP3T) to select which coil of the Hb to use so as to reduce the hum as much as possible. Of course, if your mule already has this "feature", then you should be good to go. Or I could be overly-imaginative, and there won't be any problem at all. That would be the best for all concerned. HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by Runewalker on May 21, 2014 14:34:29 GMT -5
Simple and easy sounds promising. I picked up a beater mule bod from GF --- they bought pallets of manufacturing quality control rejects and are selling them cheap ---- $24-5 ---- that will be good for an experimental chassis.
May take a some weeks to get to. If enough time goes by I will then be accused of "necroposting." kinda kinky.
______________________________
Did you guys hear that nailed Albert Collins tone? Whacky with humbuckers.
______________________________
Oh, SG on the "hum reduction factor". A couple of years ago I bought some inexpensive Entwhistle pups that were stacked single-coil form factor (SCFF)that I will use. They are ok, like most stacked SCFF pups I have tried, just no sparkle and no way to separate into a top and bottom single. The vid that I first started this with used Bill Lawrence 500R and 500XLs, Local Series only, with the mid stacked SCFF L-250. Similar to the Entwhistle.
So in the all humbucker settings it will all be .... humbucking. Of course I will have the issue you describe in Neck or Bridge single coil modes
Do you guys see any issues with adding a DPDT that throws the mid in or out of phase?
Thanks RW
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on May 21, 2014 16:54:01 GMT -5
You could have that dpdt phase switch.
The main thing is that there should be a fully disconnected setting. So if the switch and blender was to be on a pp pot, it should have a no load conversion. This seemed tricky to me, but greekdude did one.
|
|
|
Post by Runewalker on May 21, 2014 19:59:19 GMT -5
You could have that dpdt phase switch.
The main thing is that there should be a fully disconnected setting. So if the switch and blender was to be on a pp pot, it should have a no load conversion. This seemed tricky to me, but greekdude did one. Hey John. Yeah busting open a PP to scrape the carbon sounds trickericious. This beater bod has a big cavity, is back routed and and $24 I don't really care about the nicities ---- Meaning if I want more room I will just hog out more cavity. When it gets time to draw up a diagram I will probably shoot for two versions. One with it set up like the guy on the vid. That looks like a very easy set-up for a live musician. If you folks agree then we can post it in the schematics section. I don't think I have seen anything like it. (Although it may be buried in the 1000 page thread that Newey pointed to I knew I was not going to read through all of that to find the treasure.)Then I will do one with the HH Cubed, just because most of my playing is at home and I get a rise out of sitting with one guitar and covering a broad spectrum of tones and moods.
|
|
|
Post by Runewalker on May 23, 2015 8:52:51 GMT -5
I reckon the middle is being brought in by connecting its hot wire in series with a pot, using just two lugs (like on a tone pot). At max, it is fully connected in parallel with the others, and at min, it has a 250k pot in series with it, so has little effect. Actually, it should be a no-load pot, then it is fully disconnected. I think that arrangement is how most blender wiring is done in Strats. It works well here because it is not having to act on its own as a volume pot, it only has to combine with the other pickups, which have a normal type of wiring. then later: I Would think that to add this mid blend circuit to the HH cubed, you would just connect its output (ie one side of blend pot) to the jack hot. Then it can be wound into the mix when wanted, without interfering with anything that might be happening in series or parallel between N and B and the other controls. Simple! -JH Sono finally got around to muleing this in his MudCat labs. The mule was an HH Cubed circuit. We used a spare single coil, although if the circuit performed as expected we will sub in a Stacked Humbucker. We obtained the expected parallel values and the pot attenuated the amount of pup in the circuit. However, to quote Sono (MudCat): "...Parallel wiring with the SC/OOP is so anemic and does not get that strong HOLLOW tone at max or anywhere on the pot's variable [settings]" Rolled fully into the circuit the OoP never effected the expected thin nasally warble tone associated with OoP. You would hear increased treble but never the full aural effect. Any comments on this unexpected result? Questions: John you mentioned a 250K pot. Is there a problem with using a 500K pot. We used a spare dime sized pot pulled out of a stock harness somewhere. We have not tested the value but suspect a 250K pot. On the no load feature.... we would prefer that it be at the 0 position of the pot travel. Does that mean scraping the pot at the bottom of the carbon? If we wanted to put a DPDT switch in to add the mid pup in System Parallel or System Series, is that possible? If so, how? Thanks RW
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on May 23, 2015 10:56:05 GMT -5
Rolled fully into the circuit the OoP never effected the expected thin nasally warble tone associated with OoP. You would hear increased treble but never the full aural effect. Any comments on this unexpected result? Simple. The SC mid is not anywhere near loud enough compared to the HBs. Phase cancellation will be strongest when the fundamentals from each pickup are closest to exactly the same level. It gets a bit brighter because the inductance and DC resistance of the system is significantly reduced whether you can hear the mid or not. Roll back the V pot for the other pickup in the combo and you might start to hear some phasiness, though a "treble-bleed" network on those V pots will probably make that unpredictable at best. You could try lowering the HBs or raising the SC to get the balance closer. Switching to that stacked HB might help a bit. A bigger pot will give you less usable range - all the "good stuff" will be bunched more toward one end of the rotation - if you're not doing No Load, then the bigger pot will make the mid pickup "go away" more at the bottom, but it will probably stop having a real noticeable effect way before that. When you open up the pot to cut the track, it will be obvious. Turn the wiper to what you call 0. Cut at that end. The blend has to work differently in the two modes. In series, the pot wants to be across the mid pickup so that at 0 the pickup is shorted. Not sure you can accomplish that and the S/P switching itself on just 2 poles. John will definitely know for sure, but I got here first.
|
|
|
Post by Runewalker on May 23, 2015 14:03:20 GMT -5
Thanks for reading and replying Ash.
My thought as well and I believe we accommodated that --- The mule is the HHCubed design where the neck and bridge both have the on-on-on DPDT switch providing local series-single-parallel. So the bridge alone, for example, reads:
HB Loc Series measures 15.5K, HB Loc Parallel 3.9K, HB SC 8.0K
The mid single alone is 6.46K. So our thought is that at least on the Bridge single with the mid that the OoP effect would be pronounced.
Ok, let me think about that. Is that the case even if the pot is linear?
Thanks Ash!
Again thanks!
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on May 23, 2015 16:04:01 GMT -5
Pots for parallel blendingId expect that some of those thin quirky oop sounds could be found if the main pickups were turned down very slightly. That will take a bit off their volumes but also add to their resistances, so that the extra mid pickup can balance against them or even dominate.
The parallel blending, with a pot in series, as tried here really needs a log pot because the main action occurs over a very small range of resistance, to go from fully mixed in to substantially reduced. Then all of the rest of the pot resistance is needed to get it all out. Finally, at max on this type of blend pot, there is almost no effect from the pickup but the combination is still slightly loading the other pickups, so the no-load setting is needed if you want to get back to the full sparkle of the main pups. All of that points to a log no-load pot, with the cut at the high end, which is as it would be if it was used for a normal no-load tone control. Unfortunately, this also means that turning to 10 will be the fully off setting rather than fully on.
The perfect alternately is an antilog no-load pot, but they are rare. Cutting a normal log pot at 0 would be very annoying, might as well use a switch instead, there will be no transition that can be set as you back it off. So its better either to accept the reverse turn of the pot, or if it feels very important to have clockwise 10 as max blend, you can try a linear pot, but it will still probably be hard to set a blend. Id suggest a low value like 100k, with a no-load cut at the 0 position. That would work quite well and when it gets down to 0 there will be a bit of a step as it disengages.
In case anyone suggest that you can alter the taper of a linear pot with resistors, it doesn't help in this case.
Going back to normal log pots, a 500k is OK ish. You get 0 to 50k between 0 and 5 (same as the 100k linear pot), so you should be able to set some intermediate tones. But 250k log is smoother since on a log pot, it is only about 0 to 25k in the first half.
Summary, for parallel blender, in order 'best' to 'sux big-time':
1 = best = 250k no-load antilog, smooth blending with max blend at 10 2 250k no-load log, smooth blending with max blend at 0 3 100k no-load linear, good but not quite as smooth blending, max blend can be at 10 if you cut the track at 0 4 500k no-load log, good but not quite as smooth blending with max blend at 0 5 500k log, good but not quite as smooth blending with max blend at 0, possible slight tone suck at 10 6 500k no-load log, max blend at 10 (by cutting track at 0), no blending action, acts like a switch
On getting series and parallel out of this extra mid pup:
I think this needs a different wiring, more akin to the rest of this circuit.
It could have its own normal volume control with treble bleed, then another on/on/on switch to mix that in with the whole of the rest of the guitar. The usual on/on/on arrangement is series/single/parallel. In this case the 'single' middle position would be 'rest of guitar with all its controls and mid pup bypased'. While you are about it, given that this is a toggle switch and not a pp switch, why not add a pp phase switch to the M pickups volume knob? In this arrangement, the feel of how the blending works as you mix in the M will be very much like that of mixing the other pickups on this design, since the combinations are done the same way. As fiddly as this may sound, it is nice that in the middle position of this new switch, M is completely bypassed with no hanging or tone suck issues. Then flicking up or down, with the phase switch, you can mix in the M pickup, in or out of phase, in series or parallel, blended by it s volume knob.
But I think this will need a new forum category in the wiring schematics, for 'utterly crazy way beyond nutzoid' schemes.
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on May 23, 2015 16:12:56 GMT -5
HB Loc Series measures 15.5K, HB Loc Parallel 3.9K, HB SC 8.0K The mid single alone is 6.46K. So our thought is that at least on the Bridge single with the mid that the OoP effect would be pronounced. Of course, the DC resistance doesn't really tell us anything about the output. Maybe if the two coils were otherwise identical we could assume that they'd be within a db or two of each other, but that is definitely not the case here. Even if they were exactly the same, the bridge would be quieter because the string can't move as far, but that's only if they're the same distance from the resting string...Complications are. Yes. Different tapers will change things a bit, but when you're playing it against that 8K bridge SC, 100K will have the mid down more than 20db. Assuming you work the pickup heights to get the outputs matched, this will be like a third as loud as "essentially not there". 50K is probably about all you need if you're doing No Load at the bottom of the rotation.
|
|
|
Post by Runewalker on May 24, 2015 1:17:20 GMT -5
Thanks John for the advisory on the pot values. I see Ash weighs in with similar advice. Thank you both. I am not used to such low Pot values so that was unanticipated.
Hmmmm.... Yeah the reverse action would be awkward. Will the 100K value pot add "wooliness" impedance to the tone? So cutting the carbon at the 'bottom' of the track (9 position) will take it out of the circuit and with a 100K pot, mitigate the "shelf effect" of an abrupt change in of the Mid as it leaves the circuit?
The notion promulgating this experiment is the attempt to make a humbucker cut coil at the neck position to get as close to a vintage Strat neck sound as achievable.
We worked for years to find a reasonable cost single coil that nailed the classic Hendrix/SRV neck sound. We tried probably 20 brands, including real Fenders, seeking that sound and finally found some el cheapos that nailed it.
Now that we have a reference tone and reliable single coil set, we are trying to resolve the frustration experienced in cutting one coil of a humbucker and not achieving that characteristic and signature Strat tone. Yes it gets a "single coil like" tone but is generally a poor imitation. Adjusting the mix of OoP on the HBD design showed that a little OoP gave more chime to a cut coil humbucker. Still not nailing the Strat tone but getting much closer.
So this experiment is to add this as a feature to HH designs principally to get closer to that reference tone.
All that background is to frame the proposition that, while tempting --- in an "excess is best" mental state --- to pursue the more complicated design you suggest --- and man am I tempted --- I am trying to keep the focus on the above objective.
So far this experiment has not worked like I hoped. However, Sono reports after subbing an Entwhistle stacked humbucker for the single coil that the OoP effect is more pronounced. We will work some more with pup height balance and the pots you suggest to refine it further.
You guys are great as always.
not sure this one qualifies.
One that might however --- I have conceptually drawn up some designs with some odd 3 coil humbuckers (6 wire), 3 to a guitar neck ---- on a triple neck guitar (27 single pups total) that boggles the mind in terms of options, but that is just an homage to excess.
RW
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on May 24, 2015 12:12:41 GMT -5
The thing about the pot value:
If this was a Volume or Tone knob, 100K would be way too small. It would work against the inductance of the pickups as an RL lowpassing and kill a bunch of treble. But this one has an inductor in series with it. If we ignore the L of the other pickups, this makes and RL High Pass filter. Basically, those two filters are going to "undo" each other to the extent that the two pickups are similar in DCR and L. In practice, there may be a bit of a mid-scoop in the gap between their cutoffs, but I'm not sure it'll be anything you could put your finger on with all the other tonal changes that will accompany rotation of that pot. No Load means the whole thing is out of circuit when you turn it all the way down anyway.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on May 24, 2015 16:46:28 GMT -5
I believe a linear 100k will be fine if its no-loaded. Nearly all the blending action happens in the first 50k, from fully connected 100% at 0k to say 20% (subjectively) at 50k. That will happen from 10 down to 5 on the knob. In this application, it is the same range that an antilog 500k pot would go through over the same turn range. Then, just before the 100k reaches its cut at 0, Id expect it will be down to say 10%, ie a very small amount of M remaining.Then it will cut it off and you are left with the other pickups unaffected.
While this 100k pot is in circuit, the tones are the same as any other larger pot if set in the range 0 to 100k. There's no tone suck issues here, since it is just being used with 2 lugs to connect M to hot, not loading the signal from hot to ground as in a normal volume or tone pot arrangement.
But although this will work fine and you can make it do max blend at 10, the ideal pot is 250k no-load antilog (probably referenced 250k C, where A is normal audio/log and B is linear). This will give even better blend control in the 5 to 10 knob range (going through 0 to 25k), and get nearer to cutting M out completely at its max resistance of 250k, before cutting out fully.
You are known to be the master of finding odd but useful components (eg the dual-ganged push pull!), so finding a 250k antilog should be a walk in the park, if it exists at all!
On the M blending idea, Ill probably draw it up anyway as a module. It could work at the end of any guitar circuit, to mix in another pickup in series or parallel in or out of phase.
|
|
|
Post by Runewalker on May 25, 2015 10:21:44 GMT -5
I believe a linear 100k will be fine if its no-loaded.... the tones are the same as any other larger pot if set in the range 0 to 100k. There's no tone suck issues here, since it is just being used with 2 lugs to connect M to hot, not loading the signal from hot to ground as in a normal volume or tone pot arrangement. But although this will work fine and you can make it do max blend at 10, the ideal pot is 250k no-load antilog (probably referenced 250k C, where A is normal audio/log and B is linear). This will give even better blend control in the 5 to 10 knob range (going through 0 to 25k), and get nearer to cutting M out completely at its max resistance of 250k, before cutting out fully. You are known to be the master of finding odd but useful components (eg the dual-ganged push pull!), so finding a 250k antilog should be a walk in the park, if it exists at all! On the M blending idea, Ill probably draw it up anyway as a module. It could work at the end of any guitar circuit, to mix in another pickup in series or parallel in or out of phase. "...the master of finding odd but useful components..."Well, actually Sono found the dual-g push/pull. I was skeptical that it existed and the fact sheets from Mouser did not make it clear. To prove it he wrote Mouser and they confirmed it in an email. Hats off to Sono. We use that part frequently, so it was a good find for us... on the 250k no-load antilog ... They are out there --- the "C" hint was a good one. In fact Mouser has some Bournes pots in their GTR series: Mouser PageThe specific parts number is: Mfg parts no.: PDB181-GTR02-254C2This is the one with the solid shaft, which we prefer because we use Tele style domed knobs (with set screw) almost exclusively, and the knurled shafts can collapse with set screw torque. Although Bournes makes one of these with the knurled shaft. Question:If we get the reverse audio pot and wish to cut the carbon track to make it no load, we do so at the bottom of its travel, i.e., the zero point, correct? Or has the "reverse" feature turned me inside out? PlanningWe are still trying to find pickups where this arrangement makes sense sonically. So far the stacked humbucker in the mid position does work better, but we are not quite there yet. These humbuckers in the mule are overwound "hot" pickups, and with a nod to Ash's comments, perhaps a more PAF level or mid level humbucker will obtain more of the sound we are seeking. Purchasing this pot, albeit inexpensive, will probably wait until we can assemble a Mouser requisition list, as we need some other parts as well. CommentsThe destination sound is a vintage single coil neck position Strat. We will never get there completely, but the HBD setup has shown me that with the right mix (approximately 20-30% OoP) you can get a serviceable emulation. I am almost always frustrated that a cut coil humbucker is more single-coil 'like' than chimey. I am sure that is a separate discussion topic, but I suspect rod mags vs bar mags and the adjacent cut-coil to live-coil magnetic field affects that sonic difference. Thanks John and Ash for your insights and help. RW
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on May 25, 2015 15:26:20 GMT -5
If you had this 250k 'C' type antilog pot, and wanted to do no-load, it would be the high-resistance end that you would cut (as with a normal log pot). With a standard 'righty' knob on it, it would be the end where the wiper is at if the knob is a 0. Im not going to try to say which end of the track that is (because there is a big chance Id get it wrong), but if you picture that and keep it in mind as you disassemble the pot, it will be ok. I've got a couple of coil cut settings on my current players. On my HSS Strat, a simple coil cut to the more neckward bridge coil gives me a bridge single that seems to follow quite well sonically in the sequence of N, M and then the coil cut B, where N and M are Texas Specials. the humbucker is an 8.4k Fender alnico that they call Atomic, but its more of a nice crisp vintage kind of pickup. On the LP, the neck PAF cuts to a reasonable single (IMO only), and the bridge one is useful too but the full cut is too thin, so I bypass one coil with a 0.047 cap instead of a full bypass. That's worth a try. I can compare the coil cut LP neck with the basic Strat neck single, and they both do it, but true single has more edge to it. You can hear this difference in the first two clips below I did a clip comparing Strat to LP. It goes LP neck coil cut, then strat neck, Strat bridge hb and LP bridge hb: Strat v Lp test Both had new strings and recorded the same, then equalised only to match volumes.
|
|
|
Post by Runewalker on May 27, 2015 13:59:56 GMT -5
Folks I am traveling for the next 7 days and will continue to think about this. Not sure I understand the logic of the reverse audio pot, but what would like to achieve is:
at the bottom or zero point on the pot (over here that is max counter-clockwise position) I would like the mission to be complete out of the circuit... like that pup does not exist... switched off.
Then as you turn clockwise you gradually blend into the circuit the mid pup... 2 4 6 8 then 10. 10 is where it is blended in at full engagement.
Conventionally that 10 position is where I associate "no load carbon cuts" so the circuit loop essentially bypasses the pot. I will never have the oop full on so that is not a desired destination.
So will the anti log pot achieve the above?
Thx RW
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on May 27, 2015 15:02:13 GMT -5
Folks I am traveling for the next 7 days and will continue to think about this. Not sure I understand the logic of the reverse audio pot, but what would like to achieve is: at the bottom or zero point on the pot (over here that is max counter-clockwise position) I would like the mission to be complete out of the circuit... like that pup does not exist... switched off. Then as you turn clockwise you gradually blend into the circuit the mid pup... 2 4 6 8 then 10. 10 is where it is blended in at full engagement. Conventionally that 10 position is where I associate "no load carbon cuts" so the circuit loop essentially bypasses the pot. I will never have the oop full on so that is not a desired destination. So will the anti log pot achieve the above? Thx RW Yes indeed, 250k antilog, carbon track cut at the end where the wiper is when knob is at 0, will do exactly that.
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on May 27, 2015 23:24:08 GMT -5
Doesn't GuitarFreq do an inductor-to-ground tone circuit? If you put in appropriate values for the pickups and pots involved, it'd give you a pretty good idea of what it'll do.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on May 28, 2015 15:01:46 GMT -5
Doesn't GuitarFreq do an inductor-to-ground tone circuit? If you put in appropriate values for the pickups and pots involved, it'd give you a pretty good idea of what it'll do. Yes it does do that. But the current version can only use one input source and doesn't deal with two pickups unless they are considered to be identical and wired directly together. Mixing pickups partially, and out of phase, is very hard to capture in a meaningful way in an electrical analysis because so much of the end result depends on differences due to position and phase.
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on May 28, 2015 20:58:59 GMT -5
I guess I just figured it could tell you what the filter action would be, and if you vary the series resistance of the pickup as though it was the pot, a bit about how much the mid pickup would contribute to the final tone as the pot was turned. As with everything, it won't show the actual frequency spectrum that comes out from a given strum, especially with that OoP thing happening, but with a little creativity and a little grain of salt, it could help work out some of these questions re: pot values and whatnot. Course, you'd need to know the inductance of the pickups...
|
|