|
Post by sumgai on Oct 25, 2019 11:17:15 GMT -5
OK, that settles it, reTrEaD has the better eye. aufr, I always prefer to use whatever parts are already on hand (scattered across the work bench, or stored in a "junk" box, etc.) instead of driving off to a store, or waiting on mail order. It's true that 0.022 doubled is 0.044, and that's way too close to 0.047 for anyone to quibble over, component value tolerances notwithstanding. So yeah, fire up the soldering iron and have at it! As to log vs. linear, that's an argument I stay away from, so use what you wish, and change as you need. HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 24, 2019 16:02:10 GMT -5
I thought he was using two 22nF caps in the treble cut and the box for the treble bleed was in close proximity. In any case, an ambiguity like that is not so good. So I considered that, reTrEaD, and I said to myself "why would he put two caps in parallel, that will just increase the effective cap value, when he could've just installed a 0.047 cap in the first place". Hence my deduction, and thus we see how that ambiguity can lead to different possibilities.
Let's hope that aufr chimes back in with a correction. But once this issue is resolved, his drawing will work as desired.
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 24, 2019 12:13:07 GMT -5
aufr, Your latest looks almost good. The only problem left is the so-called treble-bleed circuit. In your image, I see two leads from a block labeled T.B. going to the Vol pot, and a third lead out the other side of that block goes through a .0022 cap to ground (on the back of the Treble pot). I'm sure you know that a T.B. circuit uses, and needs, only two leads, and those go across the "hot" and wiper terminals of the Vol pot - neither go to ground. So what's that cap doing in there? A note on your image.... Other members, please take note that this manner of making and submitting a drawing is very acceptable to us Nutz. JohnH has done this a lot over the years, because it's quick and easy for both the poster and the reader(s) of that post. Just a word to the wise. sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 23, 2019 11:23:06 GMT -5
(The following bit has been left in for continuity beyond this post, but the problem I presented has been corrected, so no point in leaving my original dissertation intact.) .... Mama mia, that'sa gonna be messy! sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 22, 2019 0:07:59 GMT -5
frets, I am doing a guitar and want to do a bright switch. I’ve seen a few schematics on the internet but I want to know the best resistor value or cap resistor combination that will really brighten and be a true treble enhancer. There are only three ways to make this happen:
a) Install a "strangle" cap, ala the Fender Jaguar. This simply curtails the bass and low-mids range of frequencies, so the resulting tone sounds "brighter". It is, by comparison to the fullbodied tone, but I wouldn't call it a screamer of a mod. The chief benefit here is that you can use this "feature" when the volume is turned down below max, and it will still cut some amount of bass frequencies.
b) Bypass all other loading components. Other pickups, pots, and even resistors and caps can all cause loss of high frequencies. If your rig as a coil or two, outside of the pickup coils, those are in the same boat - they are loading the signal, and thus reducing the highs. This bypass option gives you full volume, and the most full tone possible, but it means that you can't use it a (desired) lower volume level - it's all or nuttin', baby!
c) Go active. Install a battery and a genuine treble boosting amplifier, and be done with it. Obvious drawbacks here are the necessity of using a battery, and having a spare on hand at all times. Like a), this will allow you to degrade the bass frequencies at a lower overall volume level. It's not for the faint of heart, to be sure. but once you have a battery in your axe, you can do all kinds of things.* Trade-offs aboond.
d) Combine any two, or even all three. No, seriously, you probably don't need to combine them all, but if you don't want to use a bypass switch of some kind (to remove as much loading as possible), then an onboard amp might be worthy of consideration. And if you've gone that far, then a strangle switch is also pretty much moot as well. So it's a), b), a) and b) combined, or c) - those are the two main paths you can take to achieve your goal.
Oh, and I need to mention.... if you remove the load with a bypass switch, then you've also just constructed a so-called Blower switch, aka a Blaster switch. That's where you get the maximum volume that the pickups can give out, and it's kinda handy for those who need to go back and forth for volume levels (lead versus rhythm, etc.). Gettting a full tone is a benefit for those folks, but for you.....
As an afterthought, this is not a "fourth" option, but if you are truly tired of a muddy tone, then you might consider changing your cable to a better one. And I don't mean anything made by Monster, either, I mean a George L, or something similar. Ask JohnH about his previous testing of low-capacitance cables. **
HTH
sumgai
* We Nutz had a discussion several years ago about repurposing used cell-phone batteries into one's kit. These can be recharged to a sufficient level long after they don't work so hot in a cell phone. The Search function (in the menu above) should prove productive.
** And here I usually insert a plug for an RF cable. That's shorthand for using a Radio to get your signal out, and into the amp/pedals/etc. Here you are guaranteed to get a full tone, with no loss of high frequencies at all. But it's not cheap, and its still got a battery thing going on.... a single-purpose battery you can't adapt to power other onboard toys. Probably limited to the big boys who need that kind of thing on stage, most nights of the week. But I'd be remiss if I didn't mention it.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 19, 2019 23:38:18 GMT -5
frets,
I’m lost. The learning curve for reading this circuit in electrical engineering form is proving difficult. Above my pay grade. You obtain this level of knowledge one of two ways - either by paying BigBux to a college/university for a classic education, or you soak it up by the process of 'osmosis'. The latter takes a little longer, but doesn't cost nearly so much! The take-away is if you stick around, and/or if you visit other similar forums, you'll soon find yourself going "uh huh", "yeah I get that", and "aHA" much more often that your current number of such utterances per visit. Trust me on this, The NutzHouse is full of members who aren't Engineering school graduates. HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 19, 2019 23:17:40 GMT -5
turns out language is only a useful tool for communicating if we're all using agreed upon forms. when we're all doing our own thing, i might as well be asking my cats how i should wire my guitars Said cats probably being smarter than the rest of us, by virtue of not offering to help in the first place!
Other than that, I agree that Boolean symbology wasn't well thought out. After all, and I had this fight with my college professors, the first thing we learn when doing arithmetic in elementary school, is "1 and 1 is 2", then we learn that this is written as "1 + 1 = 2". From there on out, no teacher in the school system says "but the plus sign really means something else, we just hijacked it for school purposes".
ange, know that quite a few other members here feel the same way as you - Boolean should've won the symbology war when it comes to combining pickups. Sadly, non-collegiate folks were the first to start writing down combos for others to read, and the rest, as they say, is History.
tl;dr:
We spend the first 12 years of schooling learning that the plus sign means "and", then we spend the next four years in college math classes learning that it means "or". It's no wonder that the parts of society that love numbers are so schizophrenic.
But who am I to pee in someone's Cheerios?
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 15, 2019 11:16:00 GMT -5
'right,
Some time ago PhotoForgetAboutIt took a dump on those very people who made it big and famous, sorry to say. In a nutshell (and not of the Nutz kind), they wanted money from everybody, period. Some of our images stored there belong to members no longer present and accounted for, or in a few cases, they've passed away. Kinda hard to get money out of someone who's never received notice of that desire, eh?
So when Pb hosed every forum in the land, we fired up our own guns, and made a script that recovered from Pb's error in judgment. But we knew at the time that it was temporary, and now the Piper has come calling at the gates. I'm not sure how we'll recover from this one, and we may not recover more than a fraction of what we'd like, but rest assured, we're not giving up until the fat lady has sung, gone home, showered, and put her feet up with a large bowl of Haagen-Dazs.
Stay tuned!
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 14, 2019 20:13:46 GMT -5
trag,
I see what you did there!
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 14, 2019 12:59:29 GMT -5
'right,
Your thinking is right on target - 'modules' is indeed the name of the game. I now have confidence that you'll get your desired results, knowing that you need only think in terms of 'switching logic' and 'modules'.
BTW, many of the parts and pieces you need have already been devised and tested. Look in our Modules section for good starting points. A few other threads have also built modules, but they were never moved/copied over to the proper Modules thread(s). Still, for your purposes I'm sure that this link will suffice.
Design Modules
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 12, 2019 12:57:51 GMT -5
Need to plan out how the switches should interact. For example, if the 5way is at a notch position creating a parallel setting, and you pull the series switches what should happen? which switch wins? 1. The main selector is a standard 3T found on a Strat and it will accept the switch parameters before it. Stop right there! You can't do that, and the reason for that is likely the root cause of why you can't figure out everything you want.
When John asked you "which switch wins", that was a trick question. The clue was "notch position creating a parallel setting". From that, it should become a llight-bulb moment that you will never have series if the 3T is last in line (before the pots and jack).
Long story short, ditch the 3T, step up to the counter, and give the nice man as much money as he wants for a true half-Superswitch at the least. With a full SuperSwitch (4P5T) you have a whole world of possibilities, and everything I just said becomes null and void.
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 12, 2019 12:13:54 GMT -5
Ian, .... Oh, i don't think i can bypass the onboard preamp but if anyone thinks i can, let me know.
Well, yes you could do so, at some expense of time and effort - but that would only defeat the purpose of having the preamp in the guitar in the first place. Since we know that string signal is getting out, we know that the internal mic setup works as needed, and ditto for the internal cabling.
If the tropics can upset electronic items, then it may be a moisture/humidity thing, but if that were the case, the rig shouldn't work with a regular amplifier. Or wait..... when using this amp (and not a mixer), do you have to turn it up more than usual, to get the desired volume level?
No, that's not definitive, at least not for me. Tell me, when you say "his guitar", is he also using a CT-4B2 preamp? If not, then your information just quoted in not a valid test. All it proved was that the mixer worked for his guitar, as currently setup.
As you probably know, but I'm gonna cover as many bases as I can thing of, is the mixer's channel input-load switch set correctly? By this I mean that there is always a switch to select between Lo and Hi input values. This might be labeled as Sensitivity, or Lo Gain/Hi Gain, or Active/Passive, you get the idea. Sometimes these switches are almost hidden, other times they are too out-in-the-open, and can be hit by a passing finger without realizing it.
And you can go to other mixers, but did you check for that switch setting, as you tried your axe?
I see that you have asked this question on other forums, and have gotten less than helpful answers. ("Gee, maybe your preamp needs a preamp." Winner right there... not.) I also find that almost nothing about problems with these units shows up in search engines, compared to other guitars/preamps. But there are several of these things for sale on eBay, allegedly by Authorized Dealers. One such claims 227 sales, which leads me to believe that the CT-4B2 doesn't have a sterling lifespan. It would be an interesting factoid to learn if he sells mostly to users in tropical zones.
Can't think of anything else, sorry.
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 12, 2019 11:38:40 GMT -5
'right,
Your readings are correct in that pound for pound, plywood is always stronger than unalderated wood. This is due to the layers of alternating 90° grain construction, for sure.
But how are guitar makers gonna charge a premium for a guitar made out of stuff that Joe SixString can buy at the local BigBox lumber yard?
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 11, 2019 18:35:35 GMT -5
The battery was about the only thing not yet mentioned, before I got to it.
When something has worked as advertised over a long period of time, and 'suddenly stops working like that', the above steps are a good start in troubleshooting. The only thing I'd change is the order of those steps. The cord is first, only because it's easy to access, and known good ones for comparison are likely to hand. And they're cheap to replace, if needed. Next would be all the rest of the stuff above, again because they don't require going under the hood, so to speak. (Note that all those tests above are simply expansions of "known good part".) But once the hood is open....
A DC power source running at 75% of expected output can cause crazy symptoms, depending on the applied load. Low impedance vs. high impedance can be just the thing to cause a 'trigger point' of failure vs. correct operation. A battery that's allowed to sit for a short time can recoup some of its energy, causing a lot of head-banging against the wall. (And no, I wouldn't put it past some manufacturer to sense the load, and switch the circuit's operating voltage to accomodate that load, in an attempt to keep the overall output signal at the same strength regardless of what the pre-amp is connected to. Sounds harebrained, I know, but we've seen worse, haven't we.)
Best to start with a known good, fresh battery.
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 11, 2019 18:18:25 GMT -5
frets, Yer welcome! sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 11, 2019 12:08:43 GMT -5
pop, Hi, and to The NutzHouse! When's the last time you changed the pre-amp's battery? sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 11, 2019 11:49:33 GMT -5
I've never personally heard of a Yamaha axe suffering a broken neck pocket joint, particularly for being "too thin", but then again, I've never heard of such for any guitar, either. (OK, if one mistreats the kit in an exaggeratedly violent manner.....)
The 50% ratio is not really so much for strength as it also relates to the vibration transfer, which translates to what we perceive as sustain. A certain amount of wood is necessary to effect this quality of tone - too little a "base" for that transfer, and sustain will suffer. Perhaps not easily demonstrated - after all, wood differs in every respect, even if it comes from the same tree when making two otherwise identical guitars - but it can be shown with in-depth analysis tools.
Can we hear such? I'd hazard a guess that yes, we could.... given that all other conditions are optimal for such a test. Would we care if there was a tiny difference in sustain, or even in tone? That would be up to the listener, not me.
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 11, 2019 1:00:40 GMT -5
frets,
Here's what happened above. John's formulas are correct. At first glance, one compared to the other looks like a proof that R = 1/frequency, but that's not the case, for various reasons. What I did a few postings ago was to get all mathematical, and then stop short of finishing how John's formula is correct. I deleted that text, because there was no reason for it. John observed the K.I.S.S. principle, and I did not. Consider me properly scolded.
Now, leaving my mis-statements alone, let's plug your values into the correct formula. R = 1/(2Pi*frequency*C) gives us 6.28 * 800 * 0.000000022 (0.022uF), which yields 9047.5 Ohms. A 10KOhm resistor should do the trick. If not, if more accuracy is required, then two or more resistors may be lashed together in series and/or parallel as needed. Sorry if I put you through a rough time, mea culpa.
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 10, 2019 20:51:40 GMT -5
(Text deleted due to explanations below. Post not deleted to provide continuity for the following responses.)
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 9, 2019 14:30:22 GMT -5
Just used it a moment ago, in another answer to someone..... Here ya go: John's Guitar FreakHTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 9, 2019 14:28:24 GMT -5
'right,
Q1. The rough answer is, it depends on the body's wood type. But for starters, the average guitar body uses about 1/2 of the total thickness for the pocket backing the neck. That can go up or down by several percentage points, but not by double-digits. A harder (and heavier) wood could stand the strain with less wood but then the trade-off would be an increase in your Blue Cross premiums, because you keep complaining of shoulder pains/injuries? Stick with 45-50% of the total depth, OK?
Q2. Don't bother. If you're worried about structural integrity, use metal inserts and machine screws instead. See here for starters: guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/5863/installation-neck-inserts-machine-screws
Q3. Not that I personally know of. But if you're willing to look at a singular example of using a Strat, go here: till.com/articles/PickupResponse/index.html
After that, check out the spreadsheet by our very own Premier Mastermind, JohnH - John's Guitar Freak! Ask questions there, or back here, it's all good!
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 7, 2019 12:01:50 GMT -5
..... This seems to indicate tones become brighter as the pots move closer in value. Sorry but no. The total resistance between the two pots is the deciding factor here, vis-a-vis the brightness of the overall tone. Consider: a 1M and a 500K tone pot together will yield a 333K total resistance, a far cry from 125K combination (2ea 250K), yet they are even more disparate than your example. (Not by ratio, but by absolute resistance.) On to that of which newey speaks.... Abbreviated ideas are fine, but when it comes to any discipline that requires multi-paragraphs of words to describe something, it is decidedly better to use diagrams.... full diagrams where any questions have arisen. In this case, while some of us can puzzle out your intent, others cannot easily do so. Please try to be more "inclusive" in your future diagrams, OK? And here I'm pointing specifically to your switching logic, the rest of the circuit (actual pickups, control pots, output jack) can all be safely assumed, as they will not affect how you attain your desired combinations. One final note: in your "Truth Tables" shown above (and misquoted by newey in one instance), you have the OoP combs on Positions 2, 3, and 4. Coincidentally, you also have the Mid pup in each of those three combos. It therefore makes sense that we only put the Mid out of phase for those combos, and not mess around with the other two pups. The resulting overall tonality will be exactly the same as if we had left the Mid alone, and reverse-phased either B or N, as needed. Let's keep things simple, shall we? HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 6, 2019 23:11:13 GMT -5
'right,
As before, your first option isn't viable because it ties two pickups together forever at a single tie-point (a switch terminal). The second drawing is done the exact same way as Fender does it, along with most modders. The third is almost the same thing as the first one, excepting that you broke the link between the Mid and Bridge at position 2. Now they are no longer tied together for all time, but like Diagram 1, your desired combinations aren't gonna show up as you planned.
As per Mike Richardson and his famous mods, you're gonna need a 4PDT switch for this, along with a standard Superswitch. That will require the least amount of parts to buy, and still get the job done. The preferred switch is known as the Fender part they call the S-1 (or S1) - that's a push-push 4PDT jobbie, and if you're desiring a 'stealth' appearance, that's the one for you. Available on eBay and other sources, if you're on friendly terms with Google, Bing, etc. Outside of that 'stealth' thing, you can also find toggle switches (I mean, the kind you usually find on most guitars. These are usually known as mini-toggle switches in the standard catalogs.) that do the same switching, probably for less money. And if you already have an 'extra' hole in your scratchplate.
Or you can wait a few moments, and see if angeIsbunny comes up with a diagram that solves your puzzle.
BTW, to all,
In doing some research for this answer, I've discovered that seemingly all of our stored images of the Mike Richardson mod(s) have gone gunnysack. PhotoBucket (or as stated more often in recent times - PhotoForgetAboutIt) now displays a fuzzy image that isn't readable, with a watermark proclaiming how PB is so neat. Riiiiiiiiigggghhht.
Anyone having copies of these diagrams stored on your personal computers, please PM any Staff member with your potential contributions - PLEASE! If you have knowledge of them being stored elsewhere on the web, in an eminently readable manner, let us know about that too, if you please. Thank you.
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 6, 2019 11:34:07 GMT -5
yldouright, Hi, and to The NutzHouse!
The rest of the gang; Why haven't any of you pointed out that tying the Bridge and Neck together (both the hot and ground leads) at the phase switch means that whenever he selects Bridge or Neck, he will get both pups sounding out, regardless of any other switching options or selector switch position? He has stated that wants to select individual pups on occasion, yes? Someone better give him a complete schematic or layout drawing soon, or he's gonna be wasting a whole lot of solder..... I'm looking at you, angeIsBunny. sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Oct 1, 2019 22:37:05 GMT -5
..... attempting to construct the sides/bracing with no nails or screws, just dowels and glue You better have more than a few good clamps, and I'd strongly suggest that you use glue with long set and cure times. The reasons cab builders use screws are twofold:
a) It helps to keep things lined up correctly and sealed tightly; and b) Once the box is screwed together, it can be set aside to let the glue cure without fear of something going 'bump' in the night. To assure the same results with clamps requires one to ignore his wallet as it shrieks with agony upon investing in the necessary number of clamps. Moreover, when the box is sitting on the bench waiting for the clue to cure, the clamps tend to reach out and snag your clothing as you pass within three feet of the things. Ask me how I know.
True story: I once had a friend who built bird houses, usually a dozen at a time. He owned over 300 wood working clamps of various sizes. His motto: You can never have too many clamps!
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 21, 2019 10:52:49 GMT -5
.... (yes i am aware that I'm making this as difficult as possible for myself lol) In true Nutz-worthy fashion - great job!
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 19, 2019 10:57:46 GMT -5
ramon,
First, Hi, and to The NutzHouse!
Next, your most recent post above states that you were asking the wrong question in your Original Post. We're good with that, things change all the time here! But I want to be clear here: you say that you want to duplicate the Strat Elite, but with a Superswitch instead of a hybrid, is that correct? Well, without mention of the Fender S-1 switch, we have to ask the nitty-gritty question... what parts of the Strat Elite do you want, and what are you willing to give up? Without that S-1 switch, we won't be getting very close to the Strat Elite's capabilities. HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 19, 2019 1:35:21 GMT -5
..... Ive seen reference to double-super-switches with 8 poles, with which the parallel issues could be fixed. My gut feeling tells me that if you have to use a switch like this or non-standard pots, we're going in the wrong direction. I've gotta stop you right there, Chris. It's become quite apparent that you're not familiar with this dictum: The First Law of GNutz2: "Leave no lug unsoldered."© (copyright The Beta Particle Bombarder, 2010)
IOW, the more lugs, the more Nutz-worthy!! You may now resume your current idea, already in progress.
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 18, 2019 21:29:43 GMT -5
My name isn't "Lord", but I'll try to help... what is your request, my son?
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Sept 18, 2019 11:03:15 GMT -5
frets, So show us a diagram of your final build - inquiring minds wanna know! Otherwise, good job. sumgai
|
|