samlc
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 3 
Likes: 0
|
Post by samlc on Jan 21, 2018 9:13:38 GMT -5
Like it says in the title: I have 2 Humbuckers, i push-pull volume, 1 push pull tone (am not getting more mods like triple shots etc.). And I want to have the possibilities: 1. Toggle Volume to get parallel on both HBs 2. Toggle Tone to get coil split on both HBs Note: The Seymour Duncan wiring page doesn't show this option. However, something similar is this: guitarelectronics.com/2-humbuckers-3-way-toggle-switch-1-volume-1-tone-coil-tap-series-parallel/But, it say "tap" and not "split"; and "to access the series mode, the pickup selector switch must be in the neck position". Does it mean that in this setup the bridge and middle positions will never be in series? Anyway, is this diagram suitable or is my project not possible at all? |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 21, 2018 11:37:34 GMT -5
Hello Sam. One of our Awesome Admins will probably be here shortly to give your official GN2 welcome. Meanwhile, I'll split your post into two parts to make it clear what I'm replying to. We'll take the second part first.  1 - GuitarElectronics says tap when they mean split. So it will indeed split both HBs with one push-pull. In this case the one on the volume control. But that switch could have been on the tone control with the master series on the volume control. 2 - To understand what they're doing with the 'master' series/parallel switch, we need to introduce you to the concept of Local and Global. Local means what happens within the pickup. HBs are normally connected in Local series. The two coils of the HB are in series with each other. Local parallel would be putting the two coils in parallel. Global means what happens to the pickups in relationship to each other. Global parallel means having the two pickups in parallel with each other. When a typical LP is in the 'both' position on the selector, that's Global parallel. The push-pull on the tone in that drawing puts the two pickups in Global Series. And it does so poorly. A Global Series override switch like that doesn't need to be dependent on the position of the selector. It should just put the two pickups in Global Series and just 'ignore' what position the selector is in. 3 - Whether it's suitable for your project is up to you. It doesn't and can't be made to do what you originally asked for. With refinement it could give you Global Series regardless of the position of the selector. The Local configuration of the HBs would be Series or Split. But Local parallel is not an option. Like it says in the title: I have 2 Humbuckers, i push-pull volume, 1 push pull tone (am not getting more mods like triple shots etc.). And I want to have the possibilities: 1. Toggle Volume to get parallel on both HBs 2. Toggle Tone to get coil split on both HBs Before we discuss number of poles required and what's possible, you need to think about the fact that you have Four combinations of the position of the Two switches. So logically, if you choose to have only Three conditions, one of the functions must take priority to get those three choices. For instance, the Series/Split switch might ignore the position of the Parallel switch, unless the Series/Split switch was in the Split position. It takes two poles to make the two connection moves to go from Series to Parallel. It takes four poles to make the four connection moves to do that to both pickups at the same time. There's no getting around that. So to change the Local configuration of two pickups at the same time, we only have one pole from each switch we can use for each pickup. Let's see what we can do with one pole from each switch and how that we can use them to affect one pickup's local configuration. V = Push-pull on volume control T = Push-pull on tone control 0 = Down 1 = Up Three choices, Series / Split / Parallel V T - local configuration0 0 - series 0 1 - split (can be wired to use north only or wired to use south only) 1 0 - series split, same as above1 1 - parallel Four choices, Series / Split North / Split South / ParallelV T - local configuration0 0 - series 0 1 - north coil 1 0 - south coil 1 1 - parallel ------------- Take some time to digest all that and let us know how you'd like to proceed. - Refine GuitarElectronics diagram for Global Series without warts? - Three choices? - Four choices? - Other? Cheers! |
|
samlc
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
|
Post by samlc on Jan 22, 2018 4:00:27 GMT -5
Thank you for the reply. Most of what you said is understood  I tried wiring before your reply , but the pickups are responding poorly in all positions. I was just about to unsolder them all... I want the 3 choices option which is: Three choices, Series / Split / Parallel
V T - local configuration
0 0 - series
0 1 - split (can be wired to use north only or wired to use south only)
1 0 - series
1 1 - parallel
So could you give me the refined GuitarElectronics diagram? |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 22, 2018 4:44:15 GMT -5
I want the 3 choices option which is: Three choices, Series / Split / ParallelV T - local configuration 0 0 - series 0 1 - split (can be wired to use north only or wired to use south only) 1 0 - series <---- I don't know what I was thinking, this isn't series. It's split, same coil as above1 1 - parallel If this will work for you . . . Three choices, Series / Split / ParallelV T - local configuration 0 0 - series 0 1 - split (one coil) 1 0 - split (same coil as above) 1 1 - parallel . . . The best plan would be to have the split so you use a North coil from one pickup and a South coil from the other. That way when the two split pickups are on at the same time, they will hum-cancel. If your pickups are oriented so the screws on the neck pickup are closest to the neck and the screws on the bridge pickup are closest to the bridge, we should use the south (screws) on the neck and north (slugs) on the bridge. btw, what brand / model are your pickups. Knowing which color codes to use will be useful when someone makes a drawing for you. |
|
samlc
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
|
Post by samlc on Jan 23, 2018 9:52:36 GMT -5
I have seymour duncan hot rodded set.
I had gone ahead and wired them to company specifics of - vol p/p as global split and tone p/p as phase. (It was stupid of me cos I had decided on local splits, but I worked on the wrong diagram duh...). As of now, I cant seem to find use of the phase so I wont mind going back to local splits wiring.
Either way, since I would be building a diy set in the not so near future, I wouldnt mind keeping your diagram... So I would be very happy if you could go through the trouble. But I dont understand the difference between your 0 1, and 1 0. I am cool if it means neck split for the former and bridge split for the latter.
PS 1 Someone mentioned that 2 HBs in middle position are already parallel! Is that so? So confusing...
PS 2 I know its already too much to ask of you, but could you throw in the 4th choice as well? In case, my mind changes when I am actually starting the build for the next guitar.
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 23, 2018 10:59:39 GMT -5
I was thinking about this last night. 4 choices seems to actually be the only way. So it would end up like this: V = Push-pull on volume control T = Push-pull on tone control 0 = Down 1 = Up Four choices, Series / Split North / Split South / ParallelV T - local configuration 0 0 - series 0 1 - north coil neck, (south coil bridge) EDIT: should be south coil neck, (north coil bridge)1 0 - south coil bridge, (north coil neck) 1 1 - parallel That's the color code most use when drawing a wiring diagram so if we can find one that's already done . . Remember when we talked about Local and Global? The selector switch handles what happens to the global connections. The additional switches we're talking about here will handle the local connections. I'm juggling a lot of other things right now, so I'll send a notification to Yogi B . Perhaps he'll join the conversation. |
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Jan 23, 2018 22:36:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 24, 2018 15:16:27 GMT -5
Looks good, Yogi. You got a like from Sam and one from me so far. A couple of notes: No matter how you slice it, this necessarily has a loose end when it comes to hanging from hot when split. And it's always going to shunt one coil when split. That can't be made 100% clean. The way you did it shunts one coil to ground and leaves a coil on the other pickup hanging from hot. I probably would have had the unused coil hanging from hot, also being the one that's shunted. Not sure that it matters much, though. This is likely to become a favorite. You should: 1 - Give it a name. 2 - Put your name or forum name on the drawing. 3 - Make a new thread in the Schematics section so we can easily find it. 4 - Consider drawing the fraternal twin to this where pulling up on the volume PP gets you the screw coil on the neck, slug coil on the bridge. 5 - Fun Fact: If one of the two pickups is spun around, this will get you the Inners / Outers thing. |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jan 24, 2018 21:11:52 GMT -5
RT is right, put this one up where we can find it.
That is up to the creator, certainly. But it is in the nature of a variation on what we've called (via ChrisK) "Binary tree switching", so the name might reference the lineage.
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jan 24, 2018 23:00:55 GMT -5
"YogiB's version of ChrisK's binary switching for 2Hb, 1vol & 1tone"
Nah.
"Ser/Par/SC/Reversed SC for 2Hb, 1v & 1t, by YogiB"
The second seems to be short enough to make sense, it doesn't drag on and on.
newey, lauding ChrisK is a always a good idea, but in this case, I think the honors should be noted in the body of the originating post, not so much in the title. Even leaving off Yogi's name from the title would be better for brevity, but sometimes....
Yogi,
Come to that, if you're gonna put in some effort on this, then I would suggest that you consider first making and posting a more basic, 'modular' diagram by dropping the vol and tone pots from your first diagram. Then add in the one above, with references (and kudos) to this thread/poster. After that, make one that incorporates 2v & 2t, per normal LP and SG configurations. That should cover 95% of all the nominal requests that we have gotten, and will continue to get, but with the proposed new thread, we could just point people in the right direction.... Yeah! 
sumgai
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 25, 2018 8:38:22 GMT -5
I suppose he could name it 'Wiring Possible?' but
Yogi B(inary) HH-1v-1t-2pp
has a nice ring to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Jan 26, 2018 1:30:43 GMT -5
I probably would have had the unused coil hanging from hot, also being the one that's shunted. Yeah, though I'd be tempted to short the coils in either situation (by adding a wire from each of the south finish (red) connections to the unused terminal on the opposite switch) -- such that if someone wishes to use a DPDT to reverse the phase of a pickup, the coil that was hanging from ground doesn't become hanging from hot when out of phase. That being said it would be preferable to use a 4PDT for phase reversal in order to retain hum-cancelling split positions, so your suggested method is still probably the way to go. The same thing happens if you accidentally end up drawing it with one of the pickups reversed, as I did at first.
But it is in the nature of a variation on what we've called (via ChrisK) "Binary tree switching" Uh, of course it is! Why didn't I realise that earlier? Each DPDT is formed from a north coil switch and a south coil switch from opposite binary switch groups and 'gluing' them together.
"YogiB's version of ChrisK's binary switching for 2Hb, 1vol & 1tone" Nah. Especially since whilst it's very closely related, this isn't actually forming a binary tree switching arrangement. Plus I already have a version of actual binary switching
P.S. Am I just going, well nutz, or wasn't a similar arrangement to this previously discussed not that long ago (maybe within the past year)? I thought so, but I can't find it if so. |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 26, 2018 1:58:36 GMT -5
Right. The branches are binary but the trunk (3-way) is not.
I just put up a quick list to the General Guitar Schematics. It's organized by date created (oldest at the top). If you can't find it near the end of that list, there might have been a discussion but no diagram posted in schematics.
So creating a new thread there would be a good thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Jan 26, 2018 2:53:53 GMT -5
Right. The branches are binary but the trunk (3-way) is not. That's not really my issue. It's more that with traditional binary switching each pair of switches has independent control over two sub-groups (either two coils / pickups, or two groups of further switching), whereas here the two push/pulls influence four separate sub-groups (the four coils). A year was probably optimistic, I think I might've been misremembering this / this. |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 26, 2018 9:33:19 GMT -5
That's not really my issue. It's more that with traditional binary switching each pair of switches has independent control over two sub-groups (either two coils / pickups, or two groups of further switching), whereas here the two push/pulls influence four separate sub-groups (the four coils). I see what you're getting at. This is sorta binary, but Brother Bridge is married to Sister Neck because there are only two switches rather than four. Reminds me of one of those Jeff Foxworthy things. If your family tree doesn't fork... ... you might be a redneck. Holy Moly! I vaguely remember drawing that. Crude drawing. Kinda clever thought, considering it came out of a brain full of mush. One of these day's I'm gonna get you to talk through getting started with a drawing program. |
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Oct 11, 2018 23:25:34 GMT -5
That is up to the creator, certainly. But it is in the nature of a variation on what we've called (via ChrisK) "Binary tree switching", so the name might reference the lineage. Up to the creator you say... someone better go ask Seymour then. It's taken me the best part of a year to subconsciously twig, but now I know where I've seen this sort of switching before. It's wired up differently, but performs essentially the same function as this Seymour Duncan wiring diagram for a pair of P-Rails. |
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 13, 2018 11:25:27 GMT -5
Up to the creator you say... someone better go ask Seymour then. Yogi, I must admit, I'm surprised at your sentiment. As a recent University graduate with an EE degree, you should've known.... S. Duncan certainly wasn't the first to come up with this idea, in fact he is way down in the chain of historical events leading to this kind of scheme. Hell, I was doing it in the 60's, modifying Fender Mustangs for friends... and by no means was I "the first on my block" to pull this stunt. When playing through that oh-so-hot brand-new Gibson Fuzz-Tone (pre-Maestro branding), a series combo sounded even better - to most everyone else. I wasn't a fan of distortion back then, and for the most part, I'm still not.
And I'll bet that you got the notion (perhaps merely reinforced, perhaps for the first time) from your programming classes, no?  The concept was bandied about for use in file systems as Unix (and other OSs) were coming into play, in the late 50s and early 60s. Things like B-tree and BTRFS come from this school of thought.
Informally, I'm pretty sure the Ancients knew of this concept, but formally, we usually give the nod to Blaise Pascal for codifying it. (That's nearly 3,000 doggy years ago!)
sumgai
|
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Oct 13, 2018 19:02:08 GMT -5
As a recent University graduate with an EE degree, you should've known... What EE degree is this? Mustangs with humbuckers? I'm not specifically referring to binary switching, but rather the notion of two sets of binary switching that aren't switched independently. This has me wondering what happened to my copy of Andrew Thomas' We Are Not the First. My sentiment is, perhaps, more inline with this than is obvious through what I wrote. My intent was more to point out that this exact thing has been done before. It's not likely that SD was first either, but then again naming rights don't often go to who first proposed, formalised, or demonstrated a theory, but rather who popularised its use within their particular field. |
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 14, 2018 20:54:01 GMT -5
As a recent University graduate with an EE degree, you should've known... What EE degree is this? Well, then, just what kind of degree did you graduate with?  Inquiring minds wish to know.... |
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Oct 15, 2018 22:38:19 GMT -5
Let me restate that:
Well, then, just what kind of degree did you graduate with? What kind of degree? The nonexistent kind. |
|
|
|
Post by thetragichero on Oct 16, 2018 17:12:13 GMT -5
hey I got one of those too!
|
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 18, 2018 10:38:43 GMT -5
Let me restate that:
Well, then, just what kind of degree did you graduate with? What kind of degree? The nonexistent kind.
Well, that's an embarassment. . . I was sure that you had said something to that effect, back when you first reappeared in the hallowed halls. Guess I must have been reading between some imaginary lines, using my usual Rose-colored glasses. You know, the kind that gently distort my vision. 
Sorry 'bout that.
sumgai
|
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Oct 18, 2018 15:18:52 GMT -5
Well I reckon Yogi has The Gift' of being able to see circuits. We should bestow an honorary EE degree from the University of GN2.
But, Id also say, as a teacher of students getting (non-electrical) engineering degrees, that most can learn to pass but far fewer really 'get' it. So I reserve maximum respect for those who show that they can actually 'do' it in practice.
|
|
The concept was bandied about for use in file systems as Unix (and other OSs) were coming into play, in the late 50s and early 60s. Things like B-tree and BTRFS come from this school of thought.
Inquiring minds wish to know....
