|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 15:48:25 GMT -5
The guy said his 345 sounded like out of phase only when the two pickups were used together. Together with the description of what happened when one of the volumes was turned down to 9 or 8 this is the proof that they were actually parallel out of phase. Probably a previous owner wired her up in the well-known B.B. King manner.
As for the rest we're saying pretty much the same things with different analogies. But you are talking about string phases and I'm talking about electrical current phases. Since the first translate into the latter the difference it not so big, but it exists. In particular, only in an electric current the oop-cancellation could, at least in theory, completely cancel the signal.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 11:04:48 GMT -5
I don't know if octu is actually talking about oop, but the source he cites certainly does. I have a 345 copy with oop switch and it does the same thing. I wonder about the actual explanation, there, though. I always thought that it was the parallelization (reduction) of the overall resistance which caused two coils in parallel to be quieter. But what do I know. As for the explanation, you can imagine your string signal like a diagram curve with peaks and downs much like you can observe on an equalizer. When you put two pickups in parallel, their curves (signals) mix, if you put them in series they add. But if you put one of them out of phase, it is as if one of your curves was flipped upside down, that is the two signals subtract. It is a wonder that there is still so much signal left. Probably it is due to the fact that pickups in different positions pick up quite different string signals. This seems to be more true for the higher frequencies and that is the reason why the higher frequencies are retained, while the lower ones are almost completely canceled out.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 10:39:13 GMT -5
Hello newey,
I don't know how to do that. If you want to do it for me, I'll be fine.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 10:36:17 GMT -5
Update: I built this guitar two years ago after doing some other little variation. Most of all I have moved the out of phase serial position down below the standard option (from 6 to 2), in order to create a progression from thinner towards heavier sounds. Here is the new schematic: Now everything works as expected, except the second broadbucker configuration in position 4. In fact I cannot state any difference between position 4 and 5 and I have not been able to sort this out. Since it is necessary to move the whole wiring out before doing any resoldering and it's a hell of work to get that stuff back into the thin hollowbody, I finally gave up on it. In any case, position 3 is it all worth with a really fantastic broadbucker tone, very rich and dramatic. Position 2, the series out of phase, is also great and a good alternative for soloing or funky rhythms. Position 6 appears a bit too heavy in my ears (well it always did) and therefore I am really glad that I have now the two alternatives in positions 3 and 2.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 10:04:04 GMT -5
Sorry, I saw this request only today. Here is the lookup table for the Twenty Dual master or mix: Les Paul Twenty Dual (master/mix) No. PU BV BT NV NT 01* R dn == == dn neck humbucker 02 R dn == dn up neck screw coil 03 R dn == up up neck slug coil
04* T dn dn == dn bridge humbucker 05* T dn up == dn bridge dual (parallel) 06 T dn up == up bridge screw coil
07* M dn dn dn dn bridge and neck humbuckers parallel 08* M dn up dn dn bridge dual and neck humbucker parallel 09 M dn dn dn up bridge humbucker and neck screw coil parallel 10* M dn up dn up bridge screw coil and neck screw coil parallel
11* M dn dn up dn bridge and neck humbuckers parallel out of phase 12* M dn up up dn bridge dual and neck humbucker parallel out of phase 13 M dn dn up up bridge humbucker and neck slug coil parallel out of phase 14* M dn up up up bridge screw coil and neck slug coil parallel out of phase
15* == up dn dn dn bridge and neck humbuckers in series 16* == up up dn dn bridge dual and neck humbucker in series 17 == up dn dn up bridge humbucker and neck screw coil in series 18* == up up dn up bridge screw coil and neck screw coil in series
19* == up dn up dn bridge and neck humbuckers in series out of phase 20* == up up up dn bridge dual and neck humbucker in series out of phase 21 == up dn up up bridge humbucker and neck slug coil in series out of phase 22* == up up up up bridge screw coil and neck slug coil in series out of phase
The combinations signed with * should be fully hum-cancelling. Moreover, by turning down the neck tone to zero, the combinations 15-18 can be turned to a broadbucker (TM) configuration with contemporarily more trebles and bass. The effect will be most evident with combination no. 16.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 9:34:56 GMT -5
To all users: Please notice that this diagram is NOT flipped upside down, like in my wiring instructions above. It is drawn as if you were looking through a glass pickguard. This is why the upper positions are now on the lower side and vice versa. This is indeed a problem that continues creating confusion. My schematics are always taking a front view of the guitar. When you work on wiring, you have to rotate the connections. A simple way to do this is by flipping the schematic upside down with a graphics programme like Paint or anything else. When you start soldering, make sure that you turned your guitar the same way (vertically), in order to look at the same picture.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 8:48:57 GMT -5
Sound 3 on this guitar is actually a broadbucker configuration.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 8:33:06 GMT -5
My point is: since I can only split to the screw coil, and since the screw coil will sound basically the same as the slug coil from a "voicing" perspective, then the next best thing to do is physically rotate the humbucker around so that the slug coil is now closer to the bridge. Does this make sense? Now the screw coil would farther away from the bridge and when active alone, it would pick up less high frequencies... Yes, this is a very simple mod that should have no other consequences on hum-cancelling or else.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 8:23:42 GMT -5
Yes, S2 is still inverted, perhaps I should try and invert white and green wires again? I'm almost sure I made swapped wires correctly, but it won't hurt trying it again, to see if the phase is switched. Yes I think I would do that too if I was you It is not enought to swap white and green wires. You must swap all four wires to fix this. So swap white and green and then swap the other two as well. this should not only fix the S2 switch, but also introduce the hum-cancelling with both pickups in single coil mode.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 8:17:55 GMT -5
But when I pull S2 and S3, it seems I get equal output from both coils! Resistance-wise, only one coil is in the circuit...I don't know what to make of this. Again, I appreciate your help. I'm reading through this thread and I understand you had a hard time when building this guitar. At least I can sort this point out: it is all ok that you hear both coils connected when touching with a screw driver, because in this position the second coil is shunted, that is, it is hanging from hot with both sides.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 5:46:22 GMT -5
This is the original post introducing the broadbucker configuration. Time to get it back on top!
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 5:41:43 GMT -5
I have a gibson es345 ('69) with original PAF humbuckers. When I put the switch in the middle position the guitar sound out of phase, which is very annoying. When I bring down the level of one of the pickups, the sound fattens up, clearly a phase problem. I allready had two repairmen check the guitar but none could solve the problem. The wiring seems to be OK. My repairman told me it has to be a problem with the humbuckers. Have you heard of this problem before, and do you think It could be a problem with the humbuckers? What is described here is absolutely correct, it is not a bug and the repairman has no idea of guitar wiring. It happens because in an out-of-phase config the two pickups are cancelling each other out (at least partially and mostly for the lower frequencies). The effect is most prominent (a very sharp and twangy sound) when both pickups are about the same volume. Now if you lower one of the independent volume controls the cancellation diminishes since the other pickup starts to prevail. Thus the sound gets fatter and louder. This is possible only in a Les Paul config with independent volume pots for each pickup. It is not a wiring problem and can be very useful to achieve very different sounds without switching, just by turning your volume knobs. I use it for switching between rhythm and solo parts. I use the 10/10 out of phase for rhythm and when it comes to the solo I simply turn down the neck volume to 8 or 7 in order to have a full humbucker bridge tone. All the other suppositions like pickups loading each other are AFAIK not involved. Btw: The same principle is used in modern astronomy: When you want to observe a faint planet close to a much more brilliant sun you use an out-of-phase config of your observatories to cancel the sun out and maybe get a glimpse at the planet.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 5:16:36 GMT -5
Hi John, what is a post 61?
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 11, 2010 5:13:43 GMT -5
Oh, sorry, I'm stopping by after a few years of inactivity and I find everybody talking about the "broadbucker" configuration, a term I introduced in 2004 with my Twenty-Dual design. That's why I thought you were talking about that.
I think your idea of switching around the neck tone cap is very good. It would be easy to achieve with a 4PDT on the series/parallel switch. I'm sure that it would be very useful.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 10, 2010 20:14:15 GMT -5
But then I went and switched it back to Parallel mode and guess what I got. MUD! This is to be expected I suppose. In Parallel mode each T basically acts as a master, and I had one of them turned all the way down. So, to get from the Half-Series tone to a wide open Parallel tone requires twisting two knobs. I have plenty of other things to do with my hands in the middle of a song. Hi ashcatlt, are you still enjoying your 22 Dual? Yes, when you want to mandage 22 different combinations and a broadbucker config too, you need to get organized. Btw did you build the master version? In that case you can prefix your 3-way-selector to your preferred pu when returning to parallel mode. That because, if you choose the bridge pu, your neck tone pot won't affect the sound. I do it like this: series mode with bridge tone pulled for dual sound and neck tone control muffled gives the best broadbucker sound. Now if I have put the 3-way-selector preselected in the bridge position, I only need to push the bridge volume pot to get back to a much cleaner sound, i.e. bridge dual sound. I don't know if that is exactly what you are looking for, but it should come quite close. As you suggested there might even be a wiring solution to the problem, but I'm afraid it's not so simple.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Sept 10, 2010 19:52:41 GMT -5
BORSANOVA IS BACK!
Hello guys, I'm impressed: you have been discussing for eight pages on my design! I have read just a few of them and I'm sorry if I haven't been completely clear in my drawing.
I found one misunderstanding right at the start: My drawing is not looking at the guitar from the back, but from the front! This should sort out a few issues as to where the neck and bridge pickup are as well as the lugs on the pots.
Please let me know if you still have other specific issues and I'll be coming by from time to time to try and help.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Jan 26, 2007 20:14:24 GMT -5
Great reading, really instructing. Are you a teacher? Hey, this post gained me my second star! Now I'm a junior member!
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Jan 24, 2007 17:57:18 GMT -5
I'd have no hesitation in adding Borsanovas bridge-parallel addition if someone wanted it, since it is clever and adds extra sounds and hum cancelling combos, probably at the slight cost of a 'hang from mid'. I don't know exactly the meaning of "hang from mid" and I had no knowledge of these wiring principles when I did my guitar, but now I've checked the schematic and I've found that the tapped coil on the bridge pickup is actually disconnected and hanging only from the ground (is this any bad?). The tapped neck coil is however shunted and with the basic switches at disposition I can see no way to eliminate this, due to the fact that this pickup has to work also in reverse for out-of-phase. But then, anyway, when I choose the neck single coil I guess it's not the brilliance I'm looking for...
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Jan 24, 2007 9:54:57 GMT -5
system parallell = down. Dark and Mean = up.* *i wonder if this one should actually be inverted. if one does want that tone to be quickly accessed for a Lead, slapping the switch down, requires less thought and accuracy, than pulling it up. Hi mickey, I'd agree with this variation. But the problem is that most players start their thinking from the stock version of this guitar and they want to have the standard looks with the standard configuration. But if you look at the JP as an independent design, there is no reason why three switches should be making the sound thinner when pulled and one makes it thicker. Moreover I confirm that pulling out the series switch while preparing for a solo can become a quite annoying exercise. I have the alternative with the pulled bridge tone control and I can say that a slam on that one is much easier done. When I play songs like Weezer's "Island of the Sun" I start with both pickups in single coil mode for a clean rhythm guitar, at the second verse I slam down the neck control to get the neck HB-bridge dual sound combination and before the refrain I push the bridge tone control too (two humbuckers in parallel). For the solo I'd like to give it another boost with both humbuckers in series, but usually I stop here because I find it to complicated to get my nails under the knob of the volume control for pulling it out. This becomes even more difficult when I'm actually looking for the broadbucker sound and after pulling the bridge volume I have to complete another passage by turning down the neck tone control. On my guitar I already use the neck HB - bridge dual sound as the standard configuration from where to explore other realms. Thus the bridge tone control is always pulled when I pick it up and therefore having the bridge volume control pulled too wouldn't be a problem even esthetically. That's why I'd probably wire the series switch upside down, if I had to do it again. Thus all four switches would make the sound thicker when pushed and thinner when pulled.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Jan 22, 2007 18:59:33 GMT -5
Thanks for your advice, John. I've just updated my schematics to your suggestions.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Jan 21, 2007 7:08:47 GMT -5
Borsanova - thanks very much for your comments. thats what this forum is all about. Let me also say that I felt slightly bad about posting a JP design right next to yours, but then they are different and I think we can all learn by comparing and discussing. No problem, that's how this forum works. One thing that the LPmax and this new design will do is that all single coil combos, whether in or out of phase, are humcancelling. It does this by, when phase swapping the bridge, also automatically changing to the other bridge coil, so hum negation with a neck single is maintained. This is the case on my design too, but I can't give the color codes because I used one Duncan and one DiMarzio and I had to try it out before I got it right. In the end I have only 7 non-hum-cancelling positions (out of 22) on my guitar, that is the three single coils and the four three-coils combos, while your guitar has 11 out of 21 that are not hum-cancelling. The 1nF and 220k treble bleed values that I show are my best selection so far. Got that, but I wanted some illustration on the best quality. I know that many swear upon orange drop caps, but they are extremely hard to find. So what would be your second best choice? Each has some unique features. I think the main novelty in your design is the use of the controls in serial mode. Your design preserves the same functionality of the parallel mode when both pickups are on. Any guitar player who has ever laid his hands on a Les Paul knows this feature and thus it may be an advantage, because you don't have to learn a new configuration. On the other hand I believe that those super distortion and broadbucker sounds will be used mostly when playing solo, and then a master volume might be useful. Soundwise I admit that your configuration has a little more flexibility, because it allows to dial out not only the neck, but also the bridge pickup. But since those super distortion sounds are already less brilliant, I don't think this adds too many useful choices to your sound spectrum. Maybe it can become a bit more interesting with serial out-of-phase combos. But in the end it seems a question of players preferences. In any case I've been thinking about how to implement this feature in my Les Paul and it's quite easy: simply cut the grounding connections of the bridge controls and connect them to the center lug of the series-switch. I don't think I'll build it, because I prefer the master volume, but I've adjusted my schematic and here it is (this preserves the local parallel wiring too): Version updated to the improvements suggested by John.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Jan 20, 2007 13:43:36 GMT -5
Hello John, I like the way how you manage to draw your wiring schematic with a minimum of crossings and other complex structures that make mine so confusing So here is my comment on your wiring: First let me say that I did my wiring in the first place not to add just another version to all the others, but to build my guitar without the faults of the Gibson edition and with the improvements that would suit me well. Before heating the iron I did my schematic by hand, a really awful drawing. My girlfriend tried several times to throw away the papers, because she thought it was just some scribbles to make my ball-point pen work. I did the computer drawing only much later to document the benefits of my improvements. So first I want to defend the local parallel wiring option (dual sound) for the bridge pickup, which doesn't only shine in its own right (at least with a Duncan JB), but is also extremely useful in the series and broadbucker combinations. You wrote: "I find the change from Bridge Hb to neck single to be very powerful,..."This combination is in fact not excluded in my design. Just pull the neck tone control (with all others pushed) and you're there. It is however the only one that is not hum-cancelling with both pickups on. As regards the volume controls forward or backwards I can't tell much about the difference. My Epiphone was already backwards (though I had others which weren't), so I preserved it. In any case both of my volume controls work with series mode: the bridge volume is the master and the neck control serves to dial in and out as much of the neck as you like. Your design seems to be different though and it seems you don't have a master for series mode, but two independent volume controls like in parallel mode. As regards treble bleeds and buffers your competence is far beyond mine. I had treble bleeds installed in my guitar, but I omitted them in the schematic. I had cheap small yellow plastic blocks saying InQK100 or InOK100, but I wasn't too convinced about them and thus with the last modification I threw them out to verify the difference they made. Now I'm indeed missing a bit of trebles when rolling back the volume. Another impression is that the treble bleeds help to get smoother mixes in out-of-phase mode. That's why I'm thinking about putting them back in again, but this time a better variety. Which quality can you recommend? In a first moment I thought that the biggest downfall of your wiring was the fact that the signal passes first through the neck and then through the bridge. Usually this way you lose the biggest option of all: the broadbucker sound. But with your design this doesn't seem to be the case, since both neck controls aren't grounded in their own right and in series mode return the signal to the bridge pickup. So I guess turning down your neck tone control could give you the broadened sound. In addition it seems you can play the same trick on the the bridge pickup (though this is actually little use soundwise). If you build your guitar, maybe you can check this (I'd be particularly curious about it, because I'd like to upgrade to broadbucker my Ibanez 345 which has the same neck-bridge serial wiring as your guitar. So your design could be a solution without a major rewiring which is extremely annoying in a semi-solid). So it seems your design has broadbucker as well. But then again you'd need dual sound (local parallel) for the bridge to get the most brilliant of power sounds... For the theories of broadbucker wiring look here: guitarnuts2.proboards45.com/index.cgi?board=wiring&action=display&thread=1166627614
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Jan 20, 2007 11:42:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Jan 21, 2007 11:52:13 GMT -5
Isn't she a beauty? And this is where i placed the switch:
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Dec 16, 2006 19:51:06 GMT -5
It is quite funny that nobody has yet commented on my most revolutionary idea:
What happens if you put a tone control between two pickups in series?
If you hook up first your bridge pickup, then the tone control and at last the neck pickup, you can get super distortion bass and mid frequencies while keeping the full trebles sound of your bridge pickup. This is particular effective with a very brilliant original bridge pickup and that's for instance what Slash is trying to achieve with the piezo in the bridge of his Les Paul. But a simple Jimmy Page wiring can do the same job (see my post on the Les Paul Jimmy Page wiring)!
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Nov 4, 2006 13:51:05 GMT -5
Only one switch for humbucker & out of phase! Here is a smart trick to get three new and very different sounds out of one switch. I designed it for my Korean DeArmond T-400 semi-acoustic with two DeArmond USA single coils and a bigsby. But it will work on any guitar with two pickups and four controls like a Les Paul. I found this guitar on Ebay when I was looking for a replacement for my DeArmond Starfire Special. The Special was a fantastic blues guitar and I was really sad when I sold it (for a lot of money though). The T-400 is much harder to find. Mine is in perfect conditions and with new Dean Markley strings 10-52 it delivers really incredible sound. With both pickups on you get an excellent twang, perfect for the Duane Eddy and Link Wray thing. The neck pickup is good for jazz and similar, while the bridge pickup gives an excellent blues tone. So this guitar sounds already fantastic as it is, but unfortunately I'm always asking myself how other pickup combinations would sound. Especially with the DeArmond single coils I would have wanted to know how they sounded in humbucker mode. I didn't dare to do this to my Duo Jet and neither to my Starfire Special, but on the T-400 I found that the modification was extremely simple to achieve without altering the looks. Still I wouldn't have done it, if I didn't come up with a new circuit design for two different new sounds with just one switch: humbucker and parallel out-of-phase. Can I hear someone say impossible? It's really simple instead, but as with most simple solutions I guess I first had to built my Les Paul with four push-pulls to find it. So here is what I did. First I flipped the in and out connections on both of my volume pots so they didn't cancel out each other anymore with the pickup selector in the central position and one of the two turned to zero. This first step is most important to achieve the full benefits of the modification, because otherwise the out-of-phase mode won't work. Then I placed a single switch in the lower f-hole, so nobody will ever notice. I used a lever switch which I soldered to the neck volume pot (this was really tricky and you should consider well where to place your switch, since there are several alternatives like glueing it below the top, a push-pull switch or a mini switch through the top). The rest of the rewiring however is quite easy and quickly done. After flipping the connections on the volume pots (see above), you cut the outgoing connection (to ground) on the bridge pickup and solder a new shielded wire that you connect to the center of your new switch. One side of the switch must be connected to the ground and the other to the neck volume pot's outer lug at one o'clock. That's all. This modification preserves your standard configuration (with the only difference that with your pickup selector in the middle position putting one volume pot to zero won't shut down the guitar anymore). By switching you get a whole range of new sound possibilities. With both volumes to ten and the pickup selector in position 2 or 3 you'll get the neck pickup alone and in position 1 you'll have both pickups in series for a full humbucker sound. Chet Atkins complained that DeArmonds didn't have bass? Here you got it all. But the good thing is that you can also use your controls for further effects. So put the selector in position 3 (neck alone) and turn the bridge volume to zero and you'll be surprised how your sound turns thin and sharp (allowing to emulate even some Shadows tones). In fact this position creates a reverse current in the bridge pickup and puts both pickups in parallel out-of-phase. You can also use both volume (and tone controls) to mix the signal. Put the neck volume to 8 or the bridge volume to 2 and you'll see how your sound turns fatter as the other pickup starts to prevail. This trick can be used to maximum benefit even on the humbucker configuration. Maybe you'll find that your humbucker could sound a bit more brilliant? Just put your neck tone control to 0 and you'll find how the sound turns brighter. In this configuration you'll have a humbucker only at the lower end (the bass frequencies) while the trebles signal leaves the guitar before passing through the neck pickup. Thus at the higher end you'll have the bridge pickup alone. While the full humbucker still conserves some twang, this last trick takes the twang completely out and gives an incredibly broad, full, rich and bright sound. The versatility of this guitar is now really suprizing. With both pickups in parallel bend your lower e-string and you get the full Duane Eddy thing (or the James Bond Theme if you like). If you put the two pickups out-of-phase you can even sound like a slightly rougher version of Hank Marvin. Then put your T-400 in humbucker mode, turn down the bridge tone control a bit and you'll get an incredibly creamy sound (think of Dire Straits' Brothers in Arms). And finally use the trick with the neck tone control for a bass humbucker/trebles single coil combination and you'll smoke even Peter Green (Bandit). The DeArmond T-400 is far better than any Guild I played and it burns even the Gretsch 6120N I once had. And with this mode one switch is enough to really launch it into the stratosphere!
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Jan 22, 2007 17:43:30 GMT -5
Your parallel/single switch is clever. I like how you can have that, and still get the combinations of single coil modes when you want them. I got it when studying the possibilities of reducing the number of three-coil combos which are never hum-cancelling. Now the only one remaining is the neck SC - bridge HB combination which is quite useful. My main suggestions for improvement would be to put the tone controls on the pickup side of the volume control, where they can interact with the pups consitently at all volumes. Otherwise, as volumes are reduced, the impedance seen by the tone control rises greatly, and the tone control will cut much more deeply. Do you mean I should connect the tone controls not to the one o'clock lug, but to the two o'clock lug (I call them one, two, three o'clock, though in my drawing they are actually at two, three and four o'clock)? I don't use those lower volumes too often, that's why I didn't care about that. But today I've checked it and I've noticed that especially in series mode with the master volume rolled back the master tone is a real sound killer. For simlar reasons, I question the use of the reverse volume controls in series, where turning them down adds lot of resistance to the output impedance, resulting in the cable capacitance cutting more deeply into treble. I think ChrisK has a design where in series mode, the reverse volume controls become just a bypass to the pup, without the added resistance. Today I was trying Mick Ronson's pickup selector trick at the end of John I'm Only Dancing and it was the first time I found it annoying that my Les Paul can't be shut down in the middle position. Since I'm planning to play that song with my band, I guess I'll have to fix that too (as well as the treble bleeds). So I'll have to invert the in and out connections on my volume controls. Well at least in this case the tone connections can remain where they are, right? I'll fix this in my schematics, too. But I can't do the same thing on my DeArmond T-400 design, because on that guitar the reverse current is needed to put the pickups in parallel out-of-phase. But the DeArmond has a master volume anyway, so this should be no problem. guitarnuts2.proboards45.com/index.cgi?board=schem&action=display&thread=1162666265
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Jan 21, 2007 7:58:01 GMT -5
As pointed out in the comments on my schematic, in series mode my guitar has different funtionality for the controls: the bridge controls work as master volume and tone, while the neck volume allows to dial in and out the amount of neck contribution and the neck tone allows to go for broadbucker sounds. Since those super distortion and broadbucker sounds will be used mostly when playing solo, I think that a master volume is indeed a very useful feature. However, JohnH has recently posted a JP-design with a different solution. In series mode his wiring preserves indeed the controls functionality of the parallel mode when both pickups are on, allowing to go for maximum flexibility in the mix, but without a master volume. Any guitar player who has ever laid his hands on a Les Paul knows this feature well and thus it may be an advantage, because you don't have to learn a new configuration. Soundwise this configuration has a little more flexibility, because it allows to dial out not only the neck, but also the bridge pickup. But since those super distortion sounds are already less brilliant, I don't think this adds too many useful choices to the available sound spectrum. Maybe it can become a bit more interesting with serial out-of-phase combos. In the end I guess it comes down to a question of players preferences. That's why I've been thinking about how to implement this feature in my Les Paul schematic and the solution is quite easy: simply cut the grounding connections of both bridge controls and connect them to the center lug of the series-switch. I don't think I'll build it, because I prefer the master volume, but I've adjusted my schematic and here it is (this preserves all other features of the "master" version, including the dual sound, but not the master volume in series mode): This is the version with the improvements suggested by JohnH (the former version above will be deleted soon): So now you got two versions of the Twenty-Dual: the Twenty-Dual mix and the Twenty-Dual master. Maybe you can let me know which one you prefer. How about a little poll?
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Jan 14, 2007 12:57:55 GMT -5
I've implemented my serial pickup selector bypass and everything works fine. It is a good improvement for switching flexibility, though the old configuration had some switching advantages too (especially when you sometimes find it hard to pull the bridge volume switch when going to solo). But for the rest the new design is better.
For a first evaluation I played Time Waits for No One starting with all single coil out of phase and then passing slowly to fatter sound until playing the second solo with all four coils in series. The passages were smooth and it is easy to get along with the push-pull switches. Just remember that pulling the bridge volume makes the sound thicker, while the other three will make it thinner.
|
|
|
Post by borsanova on Dec 19, 2006 9:10:03 GMT -5
Yesterday Steve Ahola has put to my attention an old Schector wiring schematic with a selector bypass for the serial mode. Since this feature is a significant improvement for the switching flexibility, I've implemented it in my design. Now I've redesigned my schematic and I post it here below. In the process I've also cleaned up and rationalized my drawing, so don't panic if it appears quite different. Everything is still the same except for the pickup selector bypass in serial mode. Now I can't wait to implement the new feature on my guitar. This is the version with some more upgrades suggested by JohnH:
|
|