|
Post by ourclarioncall on Jan 5, 2020 19:59:32 GMT -5
John
Nice one mate, very cool 😎 I like what your were saying about squeezing as many tones out as possible
|
|
|
Post by ourclarioncall on Jan 5, 2020 20:05:58 GMT -5
RT agreed, very cool design by John, I was having a think through what it would be like to play in a real life scenario. I may put Johns in another guitar or variation of it at some point. I’m glad he has posted it as I think i can learn quite a bit from it. For now I want to see if I can wrap mine up for the moment and build it. I’d like to add to volume and tone switches into it but may give everyone a break haha 😆 and come back to that at a later date. hows this looking ? And if it’s okay, what sounds will it give me?
|
|
|
Post by ourclarioncall on Jan 5, 2020 20:15:01 GMT -5
AngeIsbunny
sorry mate, I’m not sure if I’ve offended you ? I was trying to take on board the things you’ve shared. I tried out both those circuit tester links you posted. The diagrams you posted are a bit too difficult for me, I would need someone to sit me down and explain what they mean. I maybe give the impression I know more than I do but Im definitely kindergarten level 😊
im guessing the maturer ones among you will have differing views on teaching /defining things like HOOP, so il retreat into the safety of my ignorance and let you guys duke it out 😆
I just thought I’d give perfboardpatcher a response as not to ignore his engagement in the conversation. I am genuinely interested in his comment tho aswell as your own thoughts
|
|
|
Post by ourclarioncall on Jan 5, 2020 20:44:10 GMT -5
Not to confuse Frets its a shame you’ve hit a few hurdles . As you were addressing, the hoop stuff can be pretty challenging on the positive side , I just visited a local art gallery and your diagrams are better looking than half the paintings in there 😁 seriously , I would frame them and put them up on the wall. Maybe JohnH’s latest offering can give you a helping hand to come up with something if you still want to continue on. No pressure to do so tho, I don’t mind if you want to put it on the shelf for a while
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 5, 2020 22:46:44 GMT -5
RT agreed, very cool design by John, I was having a think through what it would be like to play in a real life scenario. I may put Johns in another guitar or variation of it at some point. I’m glad he has posted it as I think i can learn quite a bit from it. For now I want to see if I can wrap mine up for the moment and build it. I’d like to add to volume and tone switches into it but may give everyone a break haha 😆 and come back to that at a later date. hows this looking ? And if it’s okay, what sounds will it give me? It looks right to me. You, young Padawan, should tell me what sounds this provides. To more fully understand the circuit, this will be part of your training. You have four possible combinations of the two PSel switches: Down - Down Down - Up Up - Down Up - Up Describe which pickup(s) are in the circuit in each of those four conditions. And in your description, include whether the configuration is Single Parallel (or) Series To aid you in this, you might choose to create FOUR copies of the drawing. In each of the drawings, draw in the connection between poles and throws of the switches as I showed you before. With heavy red lines.
The regular phase switches are self-explanatory. So to reduce clutter you need not bother examining them. But for each of the four drawings with the combination of PSel switch postions, you need to examine the four possible positions of the 2 HooP switches. So that will expand your total number of drawings to 16. If you include the heavy red lines on the HooP switches, you can evaluate how the pickup(s) are connected in the circuit and what role the capacitors play in their connection. Yes, it's tedious. But the juice is worth the squeeze.
|
|
|
Post by ourclarioncall on Jan 6, 2020 19:23:17 GMT -5
RT
I set myself up for that one haha
Ok, il crack on with the assignment and report back
|
|
|
Post by ourclarioncall on Jan 6, 2020 19:46:30 GMT -5
I’m just away to sell my phone tommorow morning, so could be a minute before I get back to this with the answers.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jan 6, 2020 22:33:19 GMT -5
I know where all of this is heading. In about three weeks, this is what your axe is gonna look like:
Seriously man, you have way over-complicated this thing. Now there are laws hereaboots, such as
Thou shalt leave no lug unsoldered (copyright 2011 The Beta Particle Bombarder)
but you make that particular law look like a kiddy ride at Playland. Holy Jebus man, if you want to learn something, there are ways to do that without distorting your head (from all the banging against the wall), trust me.
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 6, 2020 23:34:08 GMT -5
I know where all of this is heading. In about three week, this is what your axe is gonna look like:
As much as I truly enjoy revisiting some of Runewalker 's shoops, Imma call that a swing and a miss, Slugger. Around the tail end of the first page, we were looking at this thirteen-switch monstrosity: guitarnuts2.proboards.com/post/91511/threadNow, he has trimmed that down to just six switches: I think he's moving in the right direction. However ... YMMV.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jan 7, 2020 13:07:17 GMT -5
Swing and a miss, eh? While 13 switches is indeed a monster, the ideas represented therein were straightforward, if limited in evidentiary knowledge. In attempting to reduce the parts count, several mistakes have come aboot.
I'm gonna get started with the first thing that caught my eye, the fact that a cap is connected directly to each of the pickup selector switches... that's gotta defy the intent of the switch right there. And to boot, the cap mounted on the HOoP switch is also controlled by the pickup selector (per pickup). In essence, the pup selectors and the HOoP switches are tied together in attempting to control the HOoP sound, and that flies smack into the face of logic.
Strike One, to continue the baseball parlance.
Then there's the fact that the HOoP switches are duplicating the function of the OoP switches, albeit with a tone-altering component in the signal path. As I see it, to get OoP and the HOoP sound together I need to flick only one switch (the HOoP), and if I want the HOoP sound only, I need to flick both switches. That's backwards from what I'd consider a logical operation. Do recall that the term "HOoP" is a descriptor of the resultant tone, and not an operator on the signal path.
Strike Two.
The fences are in sight, but the bat is a wee bit warped. Let's find a straighter bat, shall we?
occ, how deeply are you married to slide switches? Would you consider a Baja Tele switch to obtain a single-point control over pickup selection and series/parallel?
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 7, 2020 14:07:53 GMT -5
Swing and a miss, eh? While 13 switches is indeed a monster, the ideas represented therein were straightforward, if limited in evidentiary knowledge. In attempting to reduce the parts count, several mistakes have come aboot.
I'm gonna get started with the first thing that caught my eye, the fact that a cap is connected directly to each of the pickup selector switches... that's gotta defy the intent of the switch right there. And to boot, the cap mounted on the HOoP switch is also controlled by the pickup selector (per pickup). In essence, the pup selectors and the HOoP switches are tied together in attempting to control the HOoP sound, and that flies smack into the face of logic.
Strike One, to continue the baseball parlance. Have the prescription for your glasses updated, Ump. The pickup switch AND the Hoop switch work together with that cap so it's ONLY connected to the circuit when Hoop is enabled AND the pickup switch is in the OFF position (which is also SERIES mode when both pickup switches are off). This doesn't 'defy' anything. It's intentional. HooP MUST be accomplished through different means when the pickups are in series, than when they are in parallel. If you read through my posts in this thread, you'd understand why this is necessary.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jan 7, 2020 18:47:04 GMT -5
'TrEaD,
I have read the entire thread, and I agreed with your assessment of where to place caps vis-a-vis series versus parallel. But it still "feels" like the pup switch in participating in the control flow of selecting a cap. Perhaps that's the only way to achieve the desired results, I haven't sussed it all out yet - that drawing is not the easiest thing I've ever had to follow.
I'll spend a few hours tonight and see if I can't schematicize this thing once and for all. That should make circuit analysis easier, at least for me. Stay tuned....
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jan 7, 2020 22:23:38 GMT -5
I don't think anyone has said this specifically, but I'm assuming that the 4PDT switches are of the On-On variety, and that they operate such that all contacts are either "up" or "down", IOW, it doesn't go up-down-up-down.
Is there a reason to short each caps to itself, rather than just disconnecting them, when they are not being used at a particular position?
I'm wondering why the wiring between the HOOP switches and lugs 11 and 12 of the pickup switches is necessary.
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 7, 2020 22:40:34 GMT -5
I'm wondering why the wiring between the HOOP switches and lugs 11 and 12 of the pickup switches is necessary. When the pickups are in parallel, we need a capacitor between Hoop-1 and Hoop-6. When the pickups are in series, we need a wire between those two points. The easiest way to make that change is to shunt the cap. There's no need to disconnect it from the circuit. It's not like we're shunting a pickup coil. Completely different animal.
|
|
|
Post by perfboardpatcher on Jan 8, 2020 14:24:25 GMT -5
I was thinking this topic could do with some pics. My spreadsheet allows me to put a bleed capacitor across the toggle switch. In the past i've experimented with a cap (1nF) between treble (bridge) and output which resulted in more highs when playing in rhythm (neck) position. I've set up the spreadsheet especially for this Hoop exercise. C is 10nF. R and T pickups are humbuckers, their coils are identical L=2.9H, C=192pF, R=7k Master volume (full on), master tone (no-load) and varitone (off) come after the toggle switch. Set up this way the external load is about 290k in parallel with 470pF. There is an R-C combo (for the varitone) before the external load but its effect on the results is neglectible. The first 2 graphs deal with an A string. I can only do one string at a time. Scale length: 64.8cm Distances to bridge: 5.0 and 16.0 cm The next 2 graphs show the interaction (based on electrical properties) between rhythm(R) and treble(T) pups and C. Treble has the cap in series. Rhythm shows the voltage across R with R as voltage source loaded by C+T. Treble shows the voltage across R with T as voltage source loaded by C+R but in this case C+R acts as voltage divider. 1 volt across the whole frequency spectrum was used for the voltage sources. cheers, pp
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jan 8, 2020 21:33:25 GMT -5
When the pickups are in parallel, we need a capacitor between Hoop-1 and Hoop-6. I'll capitulate, a little bit. It turns out that the connection of the series cap could go in a couple of places according to the schematic, but physically the current physical layout makes the most sense.
Still, I do have one or two bones to pick at.... if one pup is Hoop'ed, and the other is not, then they are indeed both out of phase and half-out of phase. While that tonality may please some players, I'd bet that the majority will consider it too thin/weak to be useful. Of course, one can simply flick either OoP switch and cure that situation, but that's an extra operation.
More to the point though (my other pickable bone), is that when both pickups are selected, then both appropriate caps are in the signal path. I hesitate to speculate what the final tonality will be..... But one thing I would bet on, it won't be very close to the original intent of adding a cap to just one pickup of a pair.
I really, really can't countenance the extra switching options. They're fiddly, duplicitous, and wasteful of resources. One 4PDT and three DPDT's would do the same job, and get the same useful tones every time. If one were to listen to the trailblazers who have come and gone before, one would learn that Hoop in Parallel doesn't sound nearly as good/useful as Hoop in Series - that'd eliminate the 4PDT, and the parts count/soldering time would be cut pretty much to the minimum needed to get the same useful tonal variety as the current scheme.
(Hmmm, this ditty keeps running through my mind as I'm typing: No stems, no seeds, no fuss you don't need....)
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 9, 2020 13:56:57 GMT -5
I really, really can't countenance the extra switching options. They're fiddly, duplicitous, and wasteful of resources. One 4PDT and three DPDT's would do the same job, and get the same useful tones every time.No, that's absolutely wrong. When two pickups are selected it definitely matters WHICH of the two pickups is HooP.In SHooP, having the capacitor bypass the bridge pickup will sound different than having the capacitor bypass the neck pickup. Which one sounds better? Do you even know? And if it sounds better to you, can you say unequivocally that it sounds better to everyone? In PHooP, having the bridge pickup coupled via a capacitor will sound different than having the neck pickup coupled by a capacitor. Which one sounds better? etc. etc. Regarding the 'useful tones' thing, who are you to judge what tones someone chooses to audition? It should be painfully obvious this isn't intended to be anything other than a mule. Yes there will be redundancies. Yes it will be 'fiddly'. But ourclarioncall knew this from the gate.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jan 10, 2020 13:08:53 GMT -5
Who am I? Good question.
I don't claim to be the Golden Ear, or even to have a pair of 'em. What I do claim is to occasionally commingle with my fellow inmates of the asylum, and quite often I actually listen to what they have to say. On those days when I'm really lucky, I can even recall what they've said. Of course, the memory part works better when enough of them have said the same thing so often that I can recite it in my sleep.
Which brings me to the point: a test mule is a wonderful thing, but the fact remains that a vast majority of my peers (and yours too, I might add) think that PHoop is worthless regardless of which pickup is being partially bypassed, nor in which manner. This was stated again most recently just a few replies ago by my co-Admin. Does he know it for a fact, and can he state with impugnity that all others must think the same thing? No, of course not. And neither to do I. But do either of us need to put our hand in the fire to learn from personal experience that doing so is a bad idea? (Well, I can't speak for newey, but I certainly was a contrary dumbass when I was growing up, and took nobody's word for anything. But I was the exception, not the rule. Maturity was late in coming for me.)
You know from my past writings that I am generally a proponent of experimentation. In fact, there was a point here in The NutzHouse where I posted only when I thought someone was about to waste money, or commit a safety violation. I've departed from that viewpoint in the last year or so, mostly because I was simply isolating myself from my favorite community. Bad ju-ju, that.
Now I get to reveal the fact that I am, indeed, only parroting what I perceive as common wisdom. (And let me agree before you have to state it, common wisdom doesn't automatically confer "correctness".) From the very beginning of my time in the music biz, I have shunned humbucker-equipped guitars. They don't sound right, in my opinion. Too dull, to my ears. From a jazz player's perspective, they were a godsend. Those guys played much quieter than the next generation of players who turned to loudass rock 'n' roll, and killing off as much hum as possible was a requirement, not just a "nice thing to have". In the usual jazz context, a bit of restraint was the order of the day. To most of those guys, single-coil pups were shrill and jarring to the discerning listener. Just goes to show what you've stated, that there are different opinions, and what's "right" for one player is not necessarily right for the next guy down the line.
So who am I? Hell's Bells, I dunno! If you backed me up against the wall, I'd have to say that I'm just some schmuck who likes to share his opinion with a bunch of almost-like-minded sods, come what may. Now I want to ask you a question: Where is it written that whatever I say is the final word, eh?
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Jan 10, 2020 16:00:03 GMT -5
but the fact remains that a vast majority of my peers (and yours too, I might add) think that PHoop is worthless regardless of which pickup is being partially bypassed, nor in which manner. This was stated again most recently just a few replies ago by my co-Admin. Could you link me to that post, because I can't seem to find it. As for these other people for which you speak, who think that 'PHoop is worthless', have any of them actually tried it? As for me, I haven't. Only the traditional OoP. I'm not enamored of either of the 'straight' OoP tones because they are highly lacking in the fundamental frequency of the note being played. Of the two, I find SooP to be less objectionable. But I probably wouldn't bother to include either of them on one of my future guitars. I have one guitar which was given to me by a dearly departed friend. It has the option to put the two HBs in PooP and dislike that tone. PHooP is another story. Unlike the other three flavors, this one pre-castrates the bottom end from the contributions of one of the two pickups. So we can expect more of the fundamental from one pickup to remain unfettered by cancellation. The higher frequencies will see cancellation (and reinforcement, depending on which harmonic and the relative position of each pickup to the vibrating length of the string) so we should a different tone but still with a full 'bottom'. If I was going to investigate, PHooP would be very high on my list because it looks much better than the other OoPs ... ' on paper'.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Jan 10, 2020 16:26:47 GMT -5
I think build it all in if you want it! The only key thing is to make sure it can all be set to neutral and you still have a simple guitar using just the main knobs . that's why I suggested what I did. All switches down and it's a simple SS with a volume and a tone.
I've never configured a phoop setting, but I could imagine it being at least interesting. Snoop, is definately fun to play with if you want to tweak, particularly if you can control it with a pot.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jan 10, 2020 17:19:05 GMT -5
As for these other people for which you speak, who think that 'PHoop is worthless', have any of them actually tried it? Well, you've got me there. It could be that several/many/a vast majority have tried this, or it could be that only one person has tried it, and everyone else, me included, is just parroting his opinion... I don't know. You will forgive me if I don't spend the time and resources to find out exactly who actually started this particular rumor.
As it happens, I did the Poop trick to my very first guitar, a 1962 Jazzmaster that I purchased in early 1963. It sounded like what we now call a "cocked wah", and if I wanted to get into the Staples Singers, then this was the way to go. Unfortunately, it was truly a one-trick pony, and I reverted the wiring to Normal just a few days later. (Remember, this was before the days of push-pull switches, and I wasn't going to alter the appearance of my axe.)
Haven't gone there again for myself, but I'm happy to wire it up as such for others who do have a need/wish for this tonality. And yes, I think it's an even worse idea for Humbuckers, at least those on solid body rigs. Don't recall having ever heard it on a semi-hollow.
I see what you did there.
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jan 10, 2020 17:20:45 GMT -5
Snoop, is definately fun to play with if you want to tweak, particularly if you can control it with a pot. I think the Dogg would have something to say about that, particularly if dope was involved.... Just sayin', ya know.
|
|
|
Post by frets on Jan 10, 2020 19:45:41 GMT -5
Just what is PHoop?
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jan 10, 2020 23:27:04 GMT -5
Nothing a little Metamucil wouldn't take care of . . . . Parallel Half Out of Phase
|
|
|
Post by perfboardpatcher on Jan 11, 2020 15:03:52 GMT -5
Frets, Phoop (P for parallel, half out of phase) There are 2 coils, one of the coils has a capacitor in series. This combo and the other coil are connected in parallel. Shoop (S for series) There are 2 coils which are connected in series. One of the coils has a capacitor connected in parallel. The moderators over here seem to consider these coil configurations to be a special class of their own hence the name Hoop. But what half are they talking about and what oop? If it's not explained well this can not be taken very seriously, i'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by frets on Jan 11, 2020 15:44:54 GMT -5
Thanks Newey and Perfboard, I’m having a difficult time imagining where the capacitor goes when said, “coils.” Of course I know what a coil is; but, I can’t connect the dots in terms of a capacitor on on the coils. How does that look? Maybe someone has a drawing of it. If not, maybe a further explanation; albeit, I know everybody is busy.
From reading the guys message interactions, it seems like some definitively different tones can be created. I sure would love to construct them and hear them.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Jan 11, 2020 19:09:23 GMT -5
Thanks Newey and Perfboard, I’m having a difficult time imagining where the capacitor goes when said, “coils.” Of course I know what a coil is; but, I can’t connect the dots in terms of a capacitor on on the coils. How does that look? Maybe someone has a drawing of it. If not, maybe a further explanation; albeit, I know everybody is busy. From reading the guys message interactions, it seems like some definitively different tones can be created. I sure would love to construct them and hear them. Good question! Here are the 8 most sensible things that I can think of, to do with two coils and a cap: KeyTop arrow goes to output, bottom arrow to ground - but generally these are interchangeable '+' indicates the end of a coil that would usually go towards hot for an in-phase sound Red and blue identify where if you want minimal hum, one coil should be of opposite magnetic polarity (could be either) Summary So, 1 is the usual parallel way to combine two pickups, 2 is the usual series way to make a humbucker out of two coils. 3 and 4 are what we mean by parallel and series out of phase 5, I'm not sure if it has been named, nor how interesting it is, but its worth a try. Its a modified in-phase parallel sound 6, I can vouch for, a great way to make a thicker single-coil type of sound out of a humbucker or two singles 7 and 8 are what I think we are talking about in parallel and series half out of phase settings. Do we agree?
Cap valuesMy hunch is, that for maximum interest, the caps in the series combos 6 and 8 should be of the same order as a tone cap. Certainly, in 6, I like 0.047uF with my humbucker. Maybe likely range for experiments 0.01uF to 0.082uF? For parallel with cap (5 and 7 above) , I expect a much lower cap to be of most interest, maybe like a bass-cut cap of around 0.0022uF. But mot tested by me! Which coil the cap is applied to, be it in series or in parallel, should make some kind of a difference in theory, in most cases.
|
|
|
Post by frets on Jan 11, 2020 19:16:09 GMT -5
John, thank you so much. It makes 100% sense. I really appreciate you drawing it out. Now I can experiment. Thanks again.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Jan 11, 2020 20:22:19 GMT -5
John, thank you so much. It makes 100% sense. I really appreciate you drawing it out. Now I can experiment. Thanks again. Great! I'd reckon you could rig up some temporary/fugly but simple way to try different arrangements. It will be interesting to hear your opinions as to which seem worth having as hard-wired switched settings.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jan 12, 2020 9:38:57 GMT -5
perfboard patcher said:
PBP is right, we have been less than circumspect in our terminology around here. At times, we have referred to a cap simply bypassing one coil to be "Half out of phase". At other times, we have referred to "half out of phase" with respect to 2 coils out of phase, with one partially bypassed by said cap.
So, PBP, we'll settle this right now. JohnH:
From here on out, we do. 7 and 8 above will be deemed "half out of phase", "Phoop", and "Shoop".
JohnH's nos. 5 and 6 need a different moniker. We have spoken of "cap bypass" of a coil, I suspect that's as good as any name, but I'm open to suggestions
As for Phoop, etc., we can be more specific as to which coil is being bypassed by the cap by using a North or South modifier.
|
|