|
Post by dannyhill on Sept 18, 2013 15:53:37 GMT -5
Sorry for resurrecting a zombie thread but what is the difference in sound between broadbucker single coils and broadbucker HBS?
D
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Sept 17, 2013 6:41:34 GMT -5
I want to go back to bed. How did that #5 get in my head?
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Sept 17, 2013 6:25:45 GMT -5
Hi Newey,
"Adding the cap isn't changing the phase of the signal, it's still 180° OOP" Not sure that is true, see the following from wikipedia capacitor page:
Impedance, the vector sum of reactance and resistance, describes the phase difference and the ratio of amplitudes between sinusoidally varying voltage and sinusoidally varying current at a given frequency. Impedance decreases with increasing capacitance and increasing frequency. Capacitors are different from resistors and inductors in that the impedance is inversely proportional to the defining characteristic; i.e., capacitance.
"Not talking #5, we're talking upper left pole, lug #1. As shown currently, a light blue wire connects that lug to lug #4, upper right pole. That wire needs to remain there. Lug #4, upper right pole, then needs to be jumpered to lug #1, upper right pole, which is in turn connected to the output. We thus eliminate all of the light blue wiring to the lower left pole.
All three of those lugs need to be connected to output, that was my point. You're only adding one new wire to do so."
The upper left pole contains dark green/blue wiring. From the way ASmith has numerated his positions/wiring, #5 is just to the right of the common lug. On the upper right pole it is to the far left of common. I agree that the first wire needs to remain there. I agree with the jumpering. Although we are elminating the light blue wiring to the lower RIGHT pole, not the left. But this is what I posted before. We didn't understand each other :-)
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Sept 17, 2013 5:12:48 GMT -5
Hi Newey,
Pls check the wiring again, maybe we are talking at cross purposes but to me its not necessary. Position 5 connects the bridge pup to the hot output via the light blue track. ""Hoop"= "Half out of phase" (which is a misnomer, it's not actually 90° OOP as opposed to 180° OOP. I guess 90° would be "half out of phase", if it existed in guitar wiring.)" Not really, it is 90º or Pi/2 out of phase, with 180º or Pi being totally OOP or just simply 'out of phase'. Sp half means half way between totally out of phase and totally in phase.
D
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Sept 16, 2013 15:10:54 GMT -5
SHOOP - Series half out of phase? SFOOP - Series fully out of phase SOOP - Everything in between? Similary: HOOP FOOP OOP I don't see why the upper left needs to be connected.
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Sept 16, 2013 8:16:16 GMT -5
So you did! So, broadbucker, i.e. non-variable, is a SHOOP in reverse pup wiring configuration?
EDITED: BTW I need to jumper the upper right 1st and 4th connections as well for it to work, right?
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Sept 16, 2013 7:11:49 GMT -5
Kinda of a fixed broadbucker?
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Sept 16, 2013 4:28:48 GMT -5
Hello! I am looking to wire ASmith's superswitch plus scheme on a Tele and Jazzcaster I have: It all checks out! Nice one ASmith! However, I would also like to use this for a Squier VM Jag I have. Only thing, in Position 2, we go into 'Broadbucker' mode and the Jag is wired differently with the volume passing to the volume pot AFTER passing to the hot lug of the tone pot and then out to the volume hot via the tone wiper. As I understand this (?), and discussed with Sumgai and others here: Jaguar wiring discussionPickup load: It results in up to 56kOhm added in series with the pickups which means the 1MOhm volume and tone pots in parallel are then across both resulting in an increase of load across the pups, from zero up to 56KOhm as tone is rolled down from 10 to 0. Gradually taking more and more of the highs off of the pickups before tone roll off and volume roll off are considered. Tone roll off: It decreases (?) the taper on the tone pot, so where you would have a 900KOhm path to ground for the highs, now they see 936KOhm 153K€ instead of 100KOhm and 56KOhm instead of 0KOhm. So slightly less highs rolled off. As Sumgai said, to go below 56KOhm you need to switch over to the Rhythm circuit. How does that sound. Seems like one compensates for the other with the sole advantage that you never go to zero on the tone control. That it? So the problem is this. In ASmith's circuit, it assumes a regular tele wiring scheme, i.e. switch output to volume pot and then connection to tone pot to roll off the highs except in position 2 where the connection from the volume pot (to the tone pot) moves to just after the hot end of the neck pickup before it enters the ground end of the bridge pup withi which it is in series. Is there anyway to modify the switching scheme so the positions stay as they are except that the output of the switch goes straight to the volume hot and the tone connection goes to the tone wiper i.e. as a regular tele? Or do I just have to forsake the broadbucker for the Jag and have a SHOOP position instead at position 2? How would that look wired? Just wire across the lower right lugs all together and have a cap going to ground from the upper right number 2 lug? Plus jumper the upper right number 1 and common ground lower right before sending them to the hot lug of the tone pot in a jaguar volume/tone pot wiring scheme? Anyway, something to sharpen our minds going into the week :-) Cheers, Danny
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Sept 11, 2013 13:20:36 GMT -5
Actually, now I got my head around how a superswitch's lugs connect, it all checks out! Great stuff! By the way, in the second position with SW2 up, the SHOOP you have uses the tone pot. Most I have seen use a fixed cap from 0.001 to 0.100uF, gradually thickening up from smaller to larger cap. What will happen here with the tone pot added into the circuit?
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Aug 17, 2013 16:45:47 GMT -5
Sorry to pull you away from trouble shooting but I wondered if this scheme could be made up using a superswitch in order to get combinations and avoid some of the deadspots instead of adding toggles left right and centre? E.g. as well as the bridge in phase toggle, neck in parallel toggle and bridge phase toggle I add neck phase to get both N+M and B+M out of phase, plus neck in series to get BXM and NXM etc. Actually I use one switch to swap N and B pickups on 5 way switch poles to get this, but later I get other restrictions which means that I have to add another switch for neck phase. So anyway we can get 10 different positions from one toggle pull with a superswitch, or 15 from an 2P3T and superswitch? Sonething like we did for the Dano? Many thanks in advance,
Danny
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Aug 11, 2013 4:04:17 GMT -5
Great! I would have 3 or potentially 4 guitars use this wiring. I realised that using a super switch and/or S1 switch, although perhaps not so intuitive would save on adding 2-3 toggles and repeat throws. Looking forward to you checking this through.....
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Aug 9, 2013 9:06:45 GMT -5
Hi Newey!
Wrt SHOOP comment I'm trying to follow the symbology. "Position 4, Phase Switch on." Shouldn't that be position 2, phase switch on? Position 2 is parallel, surely?
" - N with treble roll off/B with treble roll off""
"Do you mean a fixed cap for both neck and bridge pickups? Or, by "roll off" do you mean something to do with the tone control?" Sorry, yes I meant a fixed cap treble cut. Have fun at work! Cheers,
Daniel
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Aug 9, 2013 5:46:28 GMT -5
BUMP.
Anybody check this out and/or get this working? I'm looking to implement this, as well as 3 extra switches to permit: N with treble roll off/B with treble roll off SHOOP (any difference in tone where the cap goes?) Treble and bass cuts on neck which is parallel to the bridge/Treble and bass cuts on bridge which is parallel to the neck
Do I need an S1 as well, or will just a couple of p/p DPDTs plus another DP3T get me this? Cheers,
Daniel
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Jul 7, 2013 5:13:58 GMT -5
Hi guys,
I'm looking to wire up a black beauty copy with a 6 (free) way switch, triple shots and 4 pushpulls and optional back cover slide switches for maximal tonality! CUrrently thinking, B, B+N, N / B+M, B+M+N, M+N from the six way, this would be pup coils in parallel, series, slug or coil for each of B, M and N independently with the triple shots. Thereafter I would like reverse the phase on the neck and bridge pup outputs, should be easy enough with a couple of p/ps. What about switching between parallel and series connections between pups? Can this be done from just two p/ps for all combos of parallel and series between pups? Anyone know of an existing diagram? Of course on the back, on the cavity covers I can add 3 DP3Ts for tamers/HOOP/strangle switches (none, 0.01uF, xUF) for each pup and a DP3T for tone cap switching (0.033, 0.022, 0.01) Cheers,
Danny
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Jun 29, 2013 15:56:06 GMT -5
Hi John,
I reversed the pickup wiring and swapped the output for input and vice-versa to get the caps on the hotside of the pups only I now get popping in and out of one position from either side plus to another from one side only, i.e going from 3 to 4 and 5 to 4, and 3 to 2. Originally the neck ground was tied to ground and the bridge ground was on a common pole. Now the neck hot is tied to the output and the bridge hot to a common pole. Seems the pups are now hanging more from hot? Time for a diagram UPDATE: I neglected to mention that the switch, that might have seen better days is ok volume wise in 5, 4, 3 but is low in volume when in 2 and 1 is fine, or fine in 2 if I pull to one side but then low in 1. Cheers,
Daniel
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Jun 20, 2013 13:37:32 GMT -5
BTW John,
Is there any difference in signal or noise if both pickups are reversed? These being tele pickups and shield wires have been separated from their grounds. Cheers,
Daniel
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Jun 11, 2013 5:04:08 GMT -5
Thanks for that titbit John, I'll keep it in mind and apply it where I can.
Danny
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Jun 8, 2013 7:29:53 GMT -5
Hi John,
Your comment in this thread, same page:
Apr 10, 2013 at 5:19am Quote Post Options Post by JohnH on Apr 10, 2013 at 5:19am My model is the same tonally, but upside down for better grounding of the second pup, for less noise
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Jun 7, 2013 15:46:44 GMT -5
Hi John,
Sorry for this reply on this old thread. I just saw that you mentioned the cap being 'behind' the pup as being noisier than if it was 'in front'. Is there really any noticeable difference in an AC circuit, or just on switching? May have to re-design all my circuits :-o Cheers,
Daniel
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Apr 29, 2013 16:14:34 GMT -5
Thanks for that guys. I'll look into that more tomorrow. I can probably work something up for this on most of my single coil guitars (1Ms already on Jag, 1M and TBX on my JazzCaster, can swap the second tone for a 1MEG p/p on Strat wired for strat lovers strat) already on except for my proper Telecaster: On that tele I have two pushpulls (250KOhm vol and 250KOhm tone) for master bass cut and switch in series cap in 4th and 5th position of Modified Anderton wiring, and one DP3T toggle (neck bass cut) and one 4P3T (swap pup wiring/reverse neck wiring) and there aint room for any more :-)
I had a TBX on there before but removed it for the extra p/p option. I did try a 500 vol/TBX tone once, but it sounded a bit too hot even with the TBX set to 250KOhm. I guess if I go with 2 p/ps its the best compromise? With a 500KOhm volume pot its easier to roll of the tone from 10 to 1 on a 250KOhm p/p tone than 5 to 1 on a TBX. I refer here above to the modified TBX control.
Modified: Are bass cuts 'going to get me there' or is it a bit 'crude' compared to larger pots? How do bass cuts affect series profiles? Update: I modelled these in 5Spice and they only seem to affect the low end, and its not until about 0.047uF when the profile looks like a PAF for two hottish single coils in series with 500K vol and 250K pot, 0.027 for 1M and 250K. Experience tells me at these values output it louder and bassier than its single coil/parallel coil output. I guess in the end the caps would need be smaller, especially on a tele as the further apart they will produce largely different EQs. So perhaps my 0.0047/0.0068/0.01 options aren't so far off? Of course these also can combine in series for smaller overall cap values too. I guess, first thing first is to swap the 250K vol for a 1MEG and start experimenting again. :-)
Another option would be go with a S1 on the volume pot instead of the 4P3T, could I wire it to get different options instead of the: B/B+N/N/N treble cut or N in parallel with B with bass cut and treble cut/BXN with or without series cap Then the reverse: N/B-N or B HOOP N/B/B treble cut or B out of phase and parallel with N with bass cut and treblecut/Bx-N with or without series cap. Confused? I must finish my diagram. Thanks again, Daniel
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Apr 29, 2013 10:03:37 GMT -5
Hi everyone,
As a single coil fiend/closet humbucker appreciator, I often thrown in one or more single coil in series with another option. In a typical telecaster that would result in 0.047uF cap, 250kOhm volume and tone pots to tone shape the output of that fat sound (farther coils are apart the thicker the mid-range output). So what has more effect on making that tone more 'PAF like' - a larger volume or tone pot (easy to switch to a larger tone pot on a strat), a smaller tone cap or a cap in series with the pups and volume pot for 'taming the series output'? I expect JohnH will suggest 5Spicing it but how do generate a 2 sc HB waveform? Cheers,
Daniel
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Apr 10, 2013 3:45:05 GMT -5
You're Sumgai!
The idea was to create a very middy tone from the two pups. The wiring I have also allows the lower cap in parallel with one of them which makes it very bassy.
What I have to say is that 0.01 with 0.0047 did not sound the same as 0.0068 with 0.0056 even though they both provide between 0.0031 and 0.0032. Doubt 0.022 and 0.0033 will provide same sound at a combined 0.0029
Cheers,
Danny
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Apr 9, 2013 16:10:55 GMT -5
Hi John, 5Spice is our friend. What I had in mind was the following: Is that what you modelled? The great thing is that the caps can be different. On rolls off just the LH pup treble and then its bass and then combines the resultant with the other pup? Or is it much more 'interactive' than that? Cheers, Daniel
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Apr 9, 2013 5:16:50 GMT -5
Hi guys,
Here's a quick one. two regular tele pups in parallel, only the bridge has a 0.0033uF cap across it and another from its ground side to the ground. The neck pup is in parallel with all of this. How would you describe this sound? I heard a sound clip and it sounded like a neck with less highs and lows plus slightly less lower mids. Kind of like a bridge and neck in series but with single pup loudness and less bottom end and more upper mid end.
I guess this really, comes back to the question, how do two pickups combine electrically in parallel? I always thought differences are amplified. Did I ask this before? Still haven't got my head around it. Cheers,
Danny Daniel
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Apr 5, 2013 15:53:09 GMT -5
Hi again, For what its worth, on the Squier VM Jag with both vols on full, and rhythm tone on full the closest they match for the neck pickup is when the lead tone is between 2 and 3. ? sumgai - I'm good for bass cut I think. :-) Cheers, Danny
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Mar 13, 2013 3:58:32 GMT -5
Hi John, Thanks for that. Obviously there is something I am missing here. What is wiper %? When I set them to 100 for the two pup volumes all my curves sit on top of each other. D
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Mar 12, 2013 17:21:00 GMT -5
Hi John, I fixed that. How's this looking for 2vol, one master vol one master tone? Rolling off the master tone, master volume at max, 2 vols at max: Rolling off the master volume, master tone at max, 2 vols at max: Whats the solution to avoid the midrange dip when rolling off the tone? Cheers, Daniel
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Mar 11, 2013 16:21:47 GMT -5
Hi John, Is this right for no tone load, two volumes in middle position with pups in parallel?: Seems a bit odd, but then I don't remember when I last saw two pickups combined modelled. Cheers, D
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Mar 7, 2013 18:47:49 GMT -5
Interesting Sumgai.
I may be being dim but that doesnt explain why the pup goes first to the tone pot instead of the volume, does it?
D
|
|
|
Post by dannyhill on Mar 7, 2013 17:31:29 GMT -5
Cool. More tomorrow.
D
|
|