|
Post by blademaster2 on Nov 3, 2023 23:01:16 GMT -5
I recently had to buy some solder that is not my normal brand. Well the stuff sucks. So I wanted to share the absolute best inexpensive solder on the market, Whizzo Tech 60/40. A pound goes for $27. Cant go wrong with this stuff. What I have learned (from a NASA soldering inspector) indicates that the solder itself, even with rosin core, works better if you use good quality rosin in addition to what is in the core. He preferred mildly-activated rosin if you are in a position where thorough cleaning afterward is not practical (and yet he insisted on thorough rosin flux removal afterwards, regardless, but the mildly-activated rosin cleaned off easier). He also recommended cleaning the solder wire itself by wiping with alcohol on a lint-free wipe to remove oxides before using it. Both techniques gave me soldering results that were beautifully wetted and filleted, and acceptable for spaceflight applications (and my soldering is still in orbit right now and working). He did not say that switching to any particular different alloy was needed, but this is usually indicated by the type of metal and/or plating used for the contacts being soldered. For example, gold-plated contacts are not good for high reliability solder connections since it causes solder embrittlement, and usually needs several repeated cycles of solder being applied and removed so that the gold layer is at least partly removed before the soldering job is performed. Pure tin contacts are not permitted for aerospace applications, and neither is lead-free solder, due to tin whisker growth concerns (which I have seen myself) although it is mandatory for non-military and non-space. That changes the flux type and soldering temperature as well but I do not think the above photo shows a lead-free type.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Jun 11, 2023 18:02:47 GMT -5
I am sure you meant "electromagnetic" interference, right? Electrostatic is a charge that is built up in a material, not moving anywhere (static). If it moves from there to a place of differing charge/voltage then it is electrostatic discharge (ESD), like lightning. A one-time event usually. The wavelength of a radio wave at 50Hz is 6000 km, so we are always in the "near field" where hum interference is concerned. This means in practice that the varying electric field may be modeled as an electrostatic problem who's intensity we then vary. So "electrostatic" where we are considering only the electric field and to distinguish it from the pure "electromagnetic" which has no useful application in this case. From my background I must disagree on this point for terminology. Even a DC electric field from a battery or capacitor, which has a wavelength of 'infinity', is generally not called electrostatic. A DC electric field and the field from an electrostatic source might be the same thing in many respects, including being of infinite wavelength, but I have never seen the general use of these terms equated in my years of engineering practice and teaching engineering at university. Perhaps the distinction in terminology stems from the source of the field, electrostatic usually being a triboelectric phenomenon or other induction method, or from the way the charge is stored and its source impedance since static electricity is usually a charge contained in a high impedance material or insulator rather than a good conductor. Additionally, regardless of wavelength all of these fields - even DC fields created by a static charge - are electromagnetic. For DC fields whether from a static charge or a DC voltage source the magnetic component of the phasor has zero amplitude since the charge is not moving through space. I do not think James Clerk Maxwell made any distinction based on the wavelength. At least that is what my engineering theory tells me.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Jun 7, 2023 19:29:37 GMT -5
When creating a cavity shielded against electrostatic interference, the type of material has virtually no effect as long as it is reasonably conductive.
I am sure you meant "electromagnetic" interference, right? Electrostatic is a charge that is built up in a material, not moving anywhere (static). If it moves from there to a place of differing charge/voltage then it is electrostatic discharge (ESD), like lightning. A one-time event usually. I have only ever observed electrostatic 'discharge' causing noise in my guitar if I run my dry hands along the finish of the neck and my hand triboelectrically charges and then discharges to the neck surface and causes a crackling sound picked up somehow through the amp. I am not aware that shielding or humbuckers would prevent that but I have not tested for it. As for the other points in this thread: Humbucking is a cancellation of induced signals through the sum of two opposite polarity signals created by the reverse winding of one of the coils. Reversing the magnet polarity allows the induced string signal to sum with additive results rather than cancelation, so you hear the guitar signal. In theory this is not specifically for low frequencies, however there is a predominance of 50/60 Hz electromagnetic noise in the air so that is usually the source of the noise ('hum'). This cancellation technique is most effective for magnetic fields that shielding cannot 'block', but works for both electric or magnetic field noise. Shielding on the other hand creates a faraday cage that prevents electric fields from being formed inside of it and is usually created with a braid on cables (or a metal enclosure or enclosure lined with conductive tape or paint). It blocks electric fields but cannot 'block' magnetic fields (they can only be canceled by humbucking or other differential technique). Braids do not provide 100% coverage, and they therefore probably have inductance, so they in theory work well at most frequencies up to a limit (far higher than human hearing). Shielding also must be 'zero' resistance/impedance to work perfectly, so the properties of the conductive material and its resistance/inductance will degrade from the ideal, hence the selection of copper versus aluminum versus conductive paint. Anything greater than zero (resistance or impedance) will allow some level of signal to exist inside.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Feb 21, 2023 23:22:05 GMT -5
It is not a Les Paul, but it uses LP- style pickups and mounting rings Clue, right there. The word "style" does not mean "exactly the same in all respects".... as you obviously found out for yourself. Here's hoping that other viewers here pick up on that little factoid, and don't succumb to thinking that if the label says "LP", then it is automatically the correct part. (The same can be said for almost any manufacturer, be it Fender, Ibanez, or any other 1st tier company.) cynical1's rule of thumb - Measure it four times, and you'll double your chances of getting it right. HTH sumgai Yeah, but as this is my own homemade guitar that is about all I can say about it. Not Fender humbucker dimensions for sure - I was using LP-style pups back then. The original pup rings came from somewhere separate from the pup, but as it has been more than 30 years I could not even begin to think where I sourced them. And I think the pickup was a DiMarzio PAF, but it could have been an Epiphone one from a buddy who had swapped his out. Since I potted it with auto-body filler into the metal cover I will never be able to find out. And of course the rings I just bought were inexpensive and there were no specs on it (and I am frustrated to see that many vendors - including StewMac - do not always give the mounting hole spacing, just the dimensions of the inside surfaces).
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Feb 20, 2023 20:56:51 GMT -5
I am having an odd challenge right now. I ordered a new pickup and I also wanted to replace the mounting ring for it on a guitar. It is not a Les Paul, but it uses LP-style pickups and mounting rings
What I am finding is a variation from product to product for the spacing of these mounting holes.
I would have expected a more or less standard spacing that would make swapping rings a simple job, but I don't see that. For example, I see on the web a range for the screw hole spacing (for Gibson/LP style humbuckers) from 81.75mm - on my existing rings - to 83mm and up to 84mm along the longest dimension I see depending where I look online. Oddly, I see less variation on the narrower dimension.
That amount of difference makes the boresight of the mounting ring holes not line up well at all into the drilled holes in the body. I am aware that the slight curvature of a Les Paul might alter the plastic ring spacing so it 'wraps' onto the body contour, but this seems extreme. The bottom line is that the rings I just bought, and others I see online, are not compatible with those on my guitar. If I cannot find any with compatible hole spacing then I am never going to be able to swap them out (or I need to plug those old holes and re-drill them elsewhere).
I never heard of this before. Is there any other experience out there with this variation?
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Nov 9, 2022 23:09:40 GMT -5
Yes, that would work out OK. The only "drawback" would be the size of any such connector. Even the smaller ones are going to take up some room, so I suggest that one should shop with all due diligence. HTH sumgai I did that on one of my guitars, as I was experimenting with configurations and was not sure of the polarity I wanted. I bought solder-cup connector contacts, quite skinny, gold-plated things. They worked well but it might be good to heat-shrink a shroud over one of the mating pairs (shrunk only where it grips the wire) to mitigate the possibility of shorting within the cavity. I have had mine short here and there, and now I do not see that because have ugly electrical tape there. An insulating shroud would be better.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Sept 30, 2022 17:41:22 GMT -5
Hey Cyn1, in case I was not clear I am on your side on this.
I am less impressed than many people with him, and I think his public image (to some) as a 'technology genius' is rather naïve.
He's got *something* going on that is positive, and it might pave the way for improved infrastructure to support these type of vehicles so we will be ready once that new "unobtainium-based battery" emerges on the market.
Until then I think we are yet to see the tidal wave of complaints as folks see how the full life-cycle cost of batteries is higher than they expected, and (hope I am wrong) there is an inferno with all of the batteries unleashing their stored energy all at once after a collision.
Now back to the DART Mission. Diverting anything that big or bigger in space is risky. It is possible that it would otherwise have missed the Earth, but now after this it might be on a collision course. We cannot predict far enough out in time to know for sure. I'd hate to think that my eventual great-grandkids are now doomed because of this. Still, if we *can* divert a known threat sometime in the future so that it misses us it would save the planet and justify all of the money ever spent on space technology. That is a noble quest.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Sept 29, 2022 19:51:12 GMT -5
my issue is that homeboy doesn't actually invent anything. when he buys a product he also buys the inventor's rights so that he can claim he invented things and act like he's the smartest guy in the room. he ain't, he just came from an extremely wealthy family from apartheid south africa True. The main difference between him and any other person/organization with similar vision/goals is that he controls/attracts money to turn his (others'?) ideas into realities without the customary necessity of chasing down the money and/or approvals to spend that money. He has shown no reluctance to spend money to re-invent solutions for problems that have already been solved, and suffers little or no repercussions for frequent unnecessary spending and failures. It does mean that he eventually achieves something within a faster timeline than others would. I also agree that electric vehicles of all types are still too new to fully exhibit benefits that may eventually come into reality, and it seems that battery technology, as impressively improved as it is, still has some way to go before it can fully replace gasoline-powered engines (i.e. specific energy and energy density, recharge time, lifecycle cost and replacement cost to name a few). It may get there, but there is still a *very* large performance gap of around 2 orders of magnitude: gasoline at 47.5 MJ/kg and 34.6 MJ/liter; lithium-ion battery packs at around 0.3 MJ/kg and about 0.4 MJ/liter. I admit that this ignores the mass and efficiency difference between gasoline engines versus electric motors.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Mar 10, 2022 19:36:29 GMT -5
I am glad you looked at these, thanks for the data. I asked this forum if anyone knew anything about these pickups three years ago but no one showed interest at the time.
I have a friend who plays professionally in a speed metal band and only installs SD Black Winter pups for all of his guitars, so I bought a pair based on his recommendation. While they do metal very well, their split coil tone is very clean and bright and in some ways it seemed to be a disservice to these pickups to limit their marketing to metal players.
I also have a guitar with Dimarzio Super Distortion pups (actually, Dual Sound) and they, too, sound great playing clean in either setting but the Black Winter pups are possibly better for metal.
Will you be producing any frequency response plots for these? I would be very interested to see them.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Feb 18, 2022 23:18:52 GMT -5
If you like everything else about it, you could try a warranty claim.
I recently bought a new set of saddles and screws from Stewmac for my guitar with a Tune-o-matic. Pretty inexpensive (around $30), and the new ones are fine. Try that perhaps? Failing that, replace the entire bridge would be the next step.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Feb 16, 2022 18:18:10 GMT -5
I have a Warmoth Partscaster with a maple neck and ash body. One of the things that I notice after finally reassembling my Fender Blacktop Stratocaster with a maple neck and alder body is just how much brighter and snappy it sounds when unplugged - even when playing open strings. So my question is - why? I would like my Partscaster to sound brighter and snappier when unplugged. This issue still is apparent with new strings and I have the same gauge on both. I have a graphtech tusq nut in the Partscaster - would this be the cause? The unamplified string can only be influenced by: - the two ends from which it vibrates - the stiffness/resonance of the body and neck in between supporting the string tension - anything the pickup could do to absorb energy from a vibrating string. Here is my experience FWIW. I managed to noticeably improve the snap and sustain of an electric guitar through three little jobs I performed on it: 1) Ensured that the neck was properly and snugly mounted to the body. I removed a 'credit card strip' shim and fashioned a complete, wedge shim made from rosewood scrap to get the hardness maximized. Then I bolted it in firmly 2) Re-Filed the bone nut (perhaps I replaced it, cannot recall off hand), after looking at the string exit points and seeing that there was lateral movement of the strings within the nut slots. This robs the string energy, for open strings only of course. 3) The guitar had a Gibson bridge, so I purchased new saddles so I could file fresh slots and again ensured that the string was securely held in the channel slots like I had with the bone nut. On another guitar I had a single fret that was dull sounding and I discovered that the fret had not seated firmly onto the fingerboard when it was installed. Luckily it did not throw off the frets around it and require a new dress/crown job. I also hear that the angle of strings pulling down onto the bridge and nut can influence this but I have never addressed that. Besides that, I can think that pickup height if too high has been reported to reduce sustain. Then of course there is the fingerboard wood and body wood, which will dull a guitar if the wood is softer/less crisp than another by comparison.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Jan 27, 2022 20:38:56 GMT -5
I agree with ReTread, based on my own experiments. These formed my opinions expressed below:
Body wood is not a huge factor in tone, but I have experienced the difference between woods (and the fretboard and neck must therefore contribute as well). I refrain from the term 'tonewood', which to me is simply a type/species that is stiff/dry such that it resonates in the frequency range of interest for guitar sound. I "think" overall tone produced is partly the relative movement of the pickup on the slightly-vibrating body relative to the strings, plus the tone that the strings take on when vibrating on the bridge that is mounted to the body wood (and similarly for the neck/fret at the other end). Volume in the room, causing the strings and body to react and feedback slightly, also plays a role (which is why it sounds different - better - to crank it up)
Nonetheless, pickups and their placement/height/mounting have more influence on the tone than the wood does in my perception. Then there is the amplifier, picking material and technique.
The above is impossible to prove with lab equipment tests or attempts at 'controlled' experiments. It is all based on what I experience when playing and listening. Moreover, even my own guitars, that sound unique while I play them, cannot be distinguished from each other in my old recordings once I forgot which one I was playing when I recorded it. Similarly I would not likely know which one someone else was playing if I was in the room but blindfolded - much of the difference is very tactile and subtle, especially with body wood differences.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Jan 19, 2022 23:55:21 GMT -5
Thanks all!
Newey was correct - the truss adjustment is near the neck pup, and adjusts with any metal rod inserted into holes in the threaded nut. It can be adjusted with full string tension as long as I carefully pull the strings apart to have room to move the tool.
The backbow, which was subtle, was 50% removed by my sanding and the other 50% from the pull from the 0.011" strings. It actually needed a small adjustment on the truss rod to bring it straighter, so I am pleased about that. The action is now so low and smooth for bending I actually have little problem going from my usual 0.009" strings on my other guitars to this one.
I can now bend farther than any other guitar I have, and even as far as the Gilmour solo on "Another Brick In The Wall" (but with 0.011's it is a pretty hard push to go that far).
This 53 year old plays so well now it has a whole new lease on life, and the tone is unique. Loving it!
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Jan 18, 2022 22:12:20 GMT -5
A few years ago I lamented that there seemed to be no way to easily correct a backbow on my 1967 Teisco MJ-2L. It was a small backbow but with the low/worn string nut and worn frets it was almost unplayable. Using 0.011" strings help the bow a lot, but barely - and the other troubles were still a problem. I decided to refret and reprofile the fretboard since the problem was fairly small, and I have had very limited experience removing fingerboards and it was not a great success when I tried it. Once I removed the frets I also found that the fret slots were to narrow for the newer fret tangs (old slots were 0.019" or so but the tangs are 0.021"). I decided to widen the slots rather than trim down the fretwire with an expensive StewMac tool, so I modified a Dremel tool and was able to easily and quickly drag it through the slots, creating a straight and clean, wider slot. Using the 12" radiused sanding block, fret bender tool and tang nipper I was able to quickly install the new frets into a much flatter board, slightly correcting the backbow (knowing the strings did the rest). Tapped them in, trimmed them up, made/installed a new bone nut, and dressed the frets and it is all done. It plays better than ever now and looks so clean and crisp. This guitar has a unique tone, warm and clear, and the best vibrato design I have ever tried if you want a true vibrato and do not want to dive bomb. The head stock is also a fabulous design to keep the strings at a straight and gentle angle over the new nut.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Dec 13, 2021 20:25:11 GMT -5
That is wonderful.
I can think of no greater satisfaction than getting a pleasing result from one of your own creations - especially if it is one of a kind. The enjoyment lasts for the rest of your life.
Congratulations!
I trust you will keep this guitar for your own enjoyment? I know that I would.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Dec 5, 2021 14:44:22 GMT -5
Very nice, clean work! It is gorgeous. The body design seems to address all of the minimalism needs for a solidbody guitar and also look nicely balanced.
I am interested in how you think it sounds, and plays.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Nov 7, 2021 20:06:42 GMT -5
I ordered a Switchcraft tall toggle switch (for a Les Paul-style pickup selector) for a client. It is not installed yet, however I have discovered that the switch works fine on its own but not when the colored plastic knob is threaded onto it. The plastic knob prevents the switch from traveling far enough to the sides to properly latch, and in one of the positions it will not stay there at all and immediately flips back to the center.
I cannot install it like this, and although it is probably easy to re-shape the knob to make it skinnier at the base and get it working I feel that these switches are rather expensive and should not require this correction.
I have contacted the (well-known) website from which I purchased this item and await their reply.
Is this a common problem with these switches? I must say I am not impressed by such a fundamental design flaw for a costly item.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Oct 13, 2021 23:10:02 GMT -5
Yes, all points that I had considered as well.
The handwired amplifiers are made with turret boards (there might be a better name for these) as opposed to printed circuits. They look totally different compared to the printed circuit versions. That means that the dielectric material insulating the conductors for many connections in it will be different, and *perhaps* the resulting differences in parasitic capacitance is more evident in a high-impedance tube circuit than we might expect for a lower-impedance transistor circuit. I do not myself ever expect to hear any difference, of course, but it is conceivable that the complex wavefronts of audio signals and their transient responses will be subtly different in this type of construction for a tube amplifier.
The circuitry is therefore harder to construct, and might be necessarily simpler/different than a printed circuit implementation (which is why I want to see the circuit myself). One thing for sure is that it will be easier to service, including the pots (I have been frustrated in other items where a pot is easy to find with the same value and taper, but much harder to find where the replacement will install easily onto the printed board). It may well have more reliable solder joints also.
"Marketing-speak"? Quite possibly - and since I cannot A-B compare against a PCB amplifier of the same design, and will not spend the money to do so, I will never know if I could ever vouch for any difference at all. I will never become a salesman for these models but I am also aware that subtleties that are audible are difficult or impossible to measure with instrumentation, observe, or prove in a scientific sense. The craftsmanship of the cabinet is also noticeably superior to, say, my VOX AC15C1. For me, it is an indulgence I can afford and I am willing to pay the difference (also employs Americans to do the assembly, and although I am Canadian I do like the notion of supporting our North American continent however I can as opposed to offshore).
You are correct to remain skeptical, no question. I am also.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Oct 13, 2021 18:52:34 GMT -5
Thanks!
As a handwired circuit I can imagine some differences, but the AA764 printed on the card that sat on the top pf the amp - and the accompanying description - do not match what is on that website. Additionally it does not fully match the AA1164 either since the preamp tube is different.
I will keep digging.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Oct 13, 2021 5:21:08 GMT -5
I picked up a Princeton '64 handwired combo recently and I was hoping to find the schematic (for reference, I have no intention of modding it).
Online (Vintage Fender Amp Repair) I saw the AA1164 listed for the Princeton Reverb, which looks to be the same circuit as my amplifier based on the features and tube configuration and the title block, however the literature that came with the amplifier said it was a handwired AA764 circuit.
Looking up the AA764 circuit on the same site it is for a Blackface Champ instead, had fewer features and cannot be the same as my amplifier. I cannot imagine Fender listing the incorrect schematic reference in their literature, so the only explanation I can see is that they changed their circuit reference numbering.
I will keep looking for more information, but if there is anyone out there who can quickly answer my query I would very much appreciate the help.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Jul 5, 2021 9:22:33 GMT -5
I appreciate all of your comments and insight.
For me, I do tend to like the crisp, thin tone of single coil pups and they sound lovely when the amp is breaking up the highs and giving that wet, glassy distortion. For metal, the higher output and crunch that the amp gives as a result is best with the series humbucker. I will also play clean with the humbuckers if I am in the mood for a more buttery tone.
Generally I love the variety and the control that I now have.
The middle ground of the parallel configuration is less important to me (and I do not miss it) since I get the same or more clarity from the single coil configuration and I do not have much of a noise problem in my studio.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Jun 12, 2021 9:59:50 GMT -5
My first home built guitar, I thought, had correctly-wired DiMarzio Dual Sound pickups. This would give me series-parallel on each pickup. Then recently I did some experiments and found that as a teen I wired the switches incorrectly and never knew it. The guitar sounded great, but it only had split coil (shorted second coil) and parallel. I *never* had the Super Distortion (series) sound for decades but I thought I did. Embarrassing.
I also noted that the two tones, split and parallel, were rather similar and with my error I concluded that series-parallel was of little difference.
So recently I decided to toss the tradition of leaving my first guitar unchanged, and I decided to wire it as series-single with the single coil being the outer ones - and not shorting the unused coils. (Not a difficult wiring arrangement so I will not bore readers with the schematic here).
Conclusion: Now that I have heard it all, I can say this
- The shorted vs open unused coil does make a slight different where the shorted version reduces treble very slightly. Barely noticeable. - The parallel sound was a middle ground, not as crisp as single coil but less noise due to humbucking. It was not a noisy guitar in the first place anyway and I cannot say I miss this option. - The series tone is powerful but darker as expected, and on clean playing it is not always my preference, however mixing the two pups together where one is series and the other is single gives a great balance and breadth of tone. I use that a lot. - Adding both together with the switches gives thinner tone for any pickup combinations. This might be more pronounced in my case because I use 47k isolation resistors in series with each pickup, and their on-off switches short them to ground instead of opening them. This is the unique aspect to my wiring compared to a Les Paul or Stratocaster and I like how it preserves the treble of each pickup.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on May 17, 2021 12:57:21 GMT -5
I get something like that on occasion on my AMPEG, and it is usually related to power line noise or motors switching. In your case it sounds a bit worse, but it still could be power line noise depending what your power utility is like in your location. Otherwise it could be the big electrolytic capacitors that need replacement (mine are old, but crazy expensive so unless I truly need them I will hold off).
If you cannot correlate it to temperature, or the capacitors, then I would at least try to determine if it was somehow related to external power supply noise. Some folks might suggest cleaning the tube contacts, which I have never done myself but might cause intermittents as well.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on May 13, 2021 12:09:03 GMT -5
Thanks for giving it some thought. Yes, I have begun that but the 6-position switch is really hard to see and I am hesitant to take it out in case it proves to be fragile. If I really want to get into it I can totally take the system apart and do a full Steve Austin ...
All of this came from the discovery, using a tuning fork, that the neck humbucker appears to have a nonworking bobbin (outermost). I have never messed with it myself, but the workmanship and condition of the wires near the switch is very poor so perhaps someone fiddled with it before I bought it (cannot imagine why).
Given the complexity, I might try non-invasive techniques at first and see where I get. So far I have traced the pups, where they have a junction point within the cavity to connect to the single cable that goes to the switch cavity, and I have observed the switch position relationship to grounding the connections. It will be a long road ....
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on May 3, 2021 20:48:06 GMT -5
I have a Framus Nashville, for many years now, and I never knew the 6-way switch settings for it until recently. The problem I have now is that I believe the outer neck pickup coil is non-functioning (tuning fork test shows no response from that side when the switch setting says it should be on). The wiring is hard to map at the 6-way switch since it is tight in there (and it looks like someone messed with it before I bought the guitar because the workmanship is poor).
Does anyone out there have the wiring diagram for the Nashville (same as the Jan Akkerman from what I understand) that they can post?
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Apr 22, 2021 10:15:40 GMT -5
Maybe the neck would need to be thinner, as I have seen with maple necks, to provide the flexibility needed.
Perhaps the most concerning aspect of oak is the open grain, which might not feel as smooth to your hand.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Apr 22, 2021 8:06:03 GMT -5
Human hearing is not a linear thing, of course. I have S-P switching on one of my pickups and it always surprises me how little the perceived volume actually changes between these selections.
You can hear it, but it is not a huge change despite the signal doubling.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Apr 17, 2021 12:35:33 GMT -5
I would not hesitate to snip and re-install the battery wires (just ensure you do not get them reversed). If the snipped ones are too short you can splice new wires there, or even buy another pigtailed battery connector.
Ensure that the new connections do not short to themselves or the chassis, and are not reversed. That all you need to do - and there is no safety concern (especially when the battery is not connected yet).
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Apr 13, 2021 12:21:50 GMT -5
My favorite: The Boss FRV-1. I'm a 'verb guy and this thing has the goods. I dunno if it's quite as good as the real deal '63 Fender tube reverb unit, but it's pretty goldang close to my ears. If I was a touring guy, I'd probably spring for the real springs, but for my purposes this is just fine- and at about 20% of the cost. But, frets, this discussion of fave-rave pedals should probably be in the Coffee Shop, people aren't likely to click on a thread titled "Very Simple OD circuit" to discuss favorite pedals. With your permisssion, I think we should move everything after Tragic's post to a new thread in the Coffee Shop. OK by you?EDIT: I moved this as discussed. Unfortunately, if I move just a post or posts and not an entire thread, and create a new thread, the new thread looks like I created it. But this was frets idea (and a good one, IMO), so I changed the title to give credit where due. Nice! I would like to try that one, as I have their '59 Bassman pedal, which is the only pedal I have tried that sounds good when backed off to a slightly distorting tone. Not great for metal but great for blues and other semi-cleans.
|
|
|
Post by blademaster2 on Apr 7, 2021 6:58:01 GMT -5
I have a guitar that had a deep gouge on the back of the neck, which was bothersome because I felt it all the time. I tried filling it as well as I could with similar wood glued in but that was not enough.
What I ended up doing was to add lacquer to the area with a Q-tip to eventually build up the height and the gaps around the glued in wood pieces. As the lacquer dried it would shrink and I would add more until it domed slightly. Then I left it to cure for literally a month or more before carefully wet-sanding it flat and polishing it.
The colour does not match terribly well because the new wood, although the same species - mahogany - did not match well (mahogany can vary greatly in colour). However it feels to the touch like there was never any gouge at all so the result was exactly what was needed.
In your case, perhaps a thin sliver of the same type of wood could be glued in and then filled in a similar manner? It would at least feel right under the fingers.
|
|