|
Post by sumgai on Aug 22, 2019 22:15:13 GMT -5
grovesnor, HI! And to The NutzHouse! What everyone above has missed is the most obvious - you are NOT dealing with a blend pot - you are dealing with a two-volume, master tone setup. This has inherent pitfalls that were not pointed out in the PG article. (John's correct, they should be made to publicly wire up their own diagrams, in front of a house full of modders, before any publishing takes place.) In a two-volume layout, you have the problem that angeIsbunny states - when connected in normal fashion (like your circuit), turning down either control kills ALL output, not just the desired pickup(s). Here's a case where you'll have to strongly consider using either a "reverse wiring scheme" (see this link -> Modern And 50s Wiring for details), or move to a properly designed blend control. This isn't impossible by any means, I'm just saying that your source of inspiration is, sadly, not up to snuff. HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Aug 21, 2019 21:18:37 GMT -5
[/div]
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Aug 15, 2019 21:52:41 GMT -5
That's been re-tubed, guaranteed. For the reasons stated above. Everything else looks pretty clean too, so I wonder if someone hasn't "breathed upon" this baby, sometime in the not-too-distant past.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Aug 14, 2019 19:49:35 GMT -5
..... Also, on the last diagrams, the switches with 5 lugs shown are a bit of a puzzle. Better to show them with 6 lugs (if that is what they have, as dpdt), with appropriate wire between lugs. And there we have it, a potential problem in the running. John, I too was sorely tempted to holler "Bogus!", at first sight. Why didn't I? Well, you can take it as Gospel that I got burned too often and too thoroughly by angeIsbunny, calling out what I thought were ill-prepared shortcuts. And after being chastised, I realized that I was deeply misinterpreting 'bunny's drawings. So...... Applying that hindsight in foresight here, I took a second, closer look. Turns out that those aren't switches, they'are "black box" representations of the very first diagram. In that first diagram, the innards of the black box are clearly revealed, and appropriate labels are given for the external terminals. Now go back and trace each "multiple" diagram with the labels firmly in mind, and things start to gel. Quite nicely in fact. While this is what we Nutz might call unorthodox, it certainly is correct. And lamed is absolutely spot-on - we all tend to look at things slightly differently. If re-jiggering ChrisK's work helped him "get it", then who's to say no one else will be helped by this exposition. I'm glad for his contribution to the Lore, and I hope he lays more such on us Nutz. HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Aug 14, 2019 15:40:07 GMT -5
lamed,
No worries, I'm on board with everything you said.
First, you are correct in that people learn the same basic theories in many different ways. I'm not always correct, according to some folks, but in point of fact, I'm suffering from a classic education as an Electrical Engineer. Thankfully, I've managed to grow old enough to not really care anymore about how someone thinks about a given topic. I've learned that there can be more than one correct way to interpret things. (Which should be a required learning experience in college!!)
Chris and I had more than a few go-rounds, way back when, about things like that dot. Some of our exchanges were public, but most were private. Up until he passed away, about half of the PMs I received were from Chris. Sometimes he pulled me around to his way of thinking, sometimes not. This is one of those times that he did, but for obscure reasons.
You rightly pointed out that using DC polarity (+ and -) for an AC signal seems to be wrong. But what's really happening is that the symbols are meant to be taken as "a snapshot in time". At one instant, the signal on one end of the coil is, for example, positive with respect to the other end of that same coil. Additionally, when we speak of more than one coil in some combination, we like to refer to "polarity" as a method of describing a single instant in time for comparing two (or more) pickups. In this manner, we can assure that they are in phase or out of phase, as desired.
For the above reason, I prefer + and - as labels for pickup wires. A dot usually denotes +, but as ChrisK showed us, that's subject to some discussion. The best thing I can tell you right now is that you should search around The NutzHouse, looking for threads/topics about "reverse wiring a humbucker" (or "inverted wiring"). This should give you insight as to polarity, and also to magnetic direction.
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Aug 14, 2019 11:31:16 GMT -5
lamed, First, let me say that what you've done is more than just a re-working of Chris's diagrams - you've correctly re-interpreted Chris's statements into something more easily understood by the non-Engineer. (Well, probably more easily... we don't all think alike. ) For this, you get one of my rare, non-returnable and non-refundable Likes - here ya go: The only question I'd have is, why did you put up-pointing arrows beside all of the coils in your examples? The confusion here is almost obvious - you also used arrows of the same color and nearly the same length for the switch positions.... how's a reader supposed to tell the difference - or more to the point, how can he/she tell what your intentions are with those coil-arrows? Let me suggest that you simply drop them, as they don't really add anything to the drawing anyways. If you were thinking "magnetic direction (as in, North or Start, etc.), then simply use textual labels for such details. I think you'll find that to be as clear to the majority of readers, if not more so. (Further suggestion/request - don't use colors. This is supposed to be neutral, adaptable to any pickup from any company. So far, you've done a great job of that.) In closing, your reasoning for not posting to Modules first was courteous and polite, but it wasn't required. Most readers will see the "New" icon, and go to it no matter where it's posted... and participate therein, as they wish. To be sure, I'll move this entire thread to Modules in a few days, after others have had a chance to chip in. Again, good job. I'd lay decent money on a bet that ChrisK would approve. sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Aug 8, 2019 22:53:14 GMT -5
you are correct on the 6bq5 tubes. just calling em el84 because that's a common guitar tube (sorta like the eh 6ca7 tubes i bought for an el34 amp). let's just call it translating from organ to guitar lol Well, I guess that 'translation' isn't so tragic..... sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Aug 8, 2019 13:02:57 GMT -5
trag,
You found EL84s in there? Shoulda been 6BQ5s. Electrical specification differences between the two tube types isn't much, but Hammond wasn't in the habit of buying tubes from overseas manufacturers, back then - costs, and all that jizz-jazz, ya know.
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Aug 7, 2019 11:21:31 GMT -5
.... Neither of these places is, technically, in Woodstock, NY. But History (with a capital "H") has a way of making even inappropriate names stick . . . And not just names either - other facts also fall by the wayside way too often as History enters the fray, trying to cement memory in place for future generations. Doesn't always try hard enough, I say. The only person, living or dead, that is getting the last laugh is Georges Santyana. sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Aug 6, 2019 11:52:18 GMT -5
..... How do you do something that catches that spirit? Make it big, sprawling, unsophiticated, raw, and in the middle of nowhere? I'm gonna address that.... In something like 1990, I discovered a woman billed as a "futurist" named Faith Popcorn. She predicted so many things that became true over the years that she was considered a "woman of great power" in the business world. In the time of my reading, she predicted something she called "cocooning". That's where everyone would simply stay home, and deal with the world from their own personal cocoons. And this was several years before the advent of the Internet and the World Wide Wait. In juxtaposition, it was also about 20 years, or nearly a generation, after Woodstock. As the song went, "the times, they were a'changin'". Laden with no previously conceived notions, the Internet permitted/nearly demanded that one pay attention, and by doing so, it demanded that one should/must isolate themselves from the physical world. In most people's cases, that isolation was "as much as possible". Thus was Popcorn's prediction brought to fruition in the fullest measure. That "spirit" that was captured in 1969? It was during a counter-culture revolution, and could be expressed only in a physical sense, in a physical world. Nowadays? Not so much. People go online, and say the damnedest things to total strangers. Other people go online, and say whatever it takes to prove themselves "bigshots". And yet others go online in an attempt to defraud the 'danes... but that's a topic for another day. In the current world, if we wanted to make a big splash, physically, we don't need just money, we need Draw, with that capital letter. The Gorge at George, In eastern Washington state, is an example of how to do it right. Although I've never been to any events there, it's an incredible amphitheater, made by Gawd Hisownself for performing musicians. Crowds come from 4, 5 and even more states away, 'cause no matter who's playing, the sound is almost too good to be true. Smaller, non-World Class events is the way to go. There are usually 5 or 6 events during the good-weather months at the Gorge, and you can be damned sure that money is tumbling into the promoter's hands, each and every time. The big names in show business are there, but the events don't last more than one afternoon and evening - everybody goes home (or to a motel) after the last set of that evening. Or to put it in more specific terms.... trading/banking on an historical name like Woodstock wasn't in the cards, no matter how nostalgic we might get. Yes, we still have the spirit, albeit perhaps a bit tamped down by time, and yes the kids today have the spirit and the energy level we once had, but the dynamics have changed ever so much - as predicted 30 years ago by Popcorn. With even more disposable income than we could've dreamed of, there are ever so many more ways to spend it than waiting for a celebration of what was old even when most of their parents were not yet born. (!) But to put a bright light on the end of this missive.... Faith Popcorn has predicted (in the last two years) that we are about ready to come out of our cocoons, and start interacting personally again. I'm pretty sure she didn't mean with violence as incited recently, but that she meant interacting in a much more positive way. I'm hoping to be around long enough to see that prediction come true! sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Aug 6, 2019 11:22:59 GMT -5
Would that be "Yasgur's Farm", perchance? Max Yasgur owned the farmland where Woodstock 1 was held. The band Mountain (Leslie West) even wrote a tune about the place and event, on the 1970 album Climbing. sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 29, 2019 9:39:22 GMT -5
..... But anyone is welcome to help themselves to it. Well, alrighty then! (Staff goes into executive session.....)
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 27, 2019 21:12:27 GMT -5
That's guitarcircuits dot ws, not dot com. I have a feeling that it's a private enterprise, probably not subject to corporate whims. But I could be wrong and you could be correct, so why not mirror it (as in, back it up), just in case. But until it goes away for whatever reason, I don't want to post anything here from there... no need in taking chances with accusations of copyright infringement, and all that. sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 27, 2019 10:23:25 GMT -5
(If anyone has this image without the PhotoBucket watermark, please let me know, and I'll edit this post to update to the mark-less version.) It gets tricky but you can see the image without the watermark if you visit the photobug-it page. Then you can download it and upload it elsewhere. (Further exact instructions followed....) Thanks, reTrEaD, that worked a treat. I'll definitely keep that how-to in mind, I'm sure it'll become necessary more often as we linger in the shadow of PhotoFuggedaboutit for some time to come. sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 26, 2019 20:54:30 GMT -5
.... is there a way to get regular strat configuration and a configuration with BxM and MxN parallels using a super switch and..... I think we've gotten a mix-up here in your description. Generally speaking, in NutzHouse parlance, BxM denotes a series connection between the Bridge and Middle pickups. Whereas, if we want to spell out a parallel connection, we use B+ M, for the same two pups. Fortunately, your desired Truth Table sets everything pretty much straight.... given the question marks in three of the five positions. So the question is, do you have any preferences about those other three positions? With a SuperSwitch and an added DPDT or 4PDT, there are a lot of possibilities. For instance, the original circuit I designed for tacobobbo had N+B and NxB on the "Up" switch position (down being "normal selections"), and OoP variations thereof thrown in for good measure. The last one? N+M+B, which is one of my all-time favorites where lots of quack is needed. But here, before I go off the deep end, why don't you look over the Mike Richardson mod, and see what you think? (Lifted from one of the several threads on this Forum regarding this mod. And BONUS, Mike is also a member here! ) Do note that Mike did this before he became a member here, and he sort of made up his own convention for a series connection: -->. That's OK, we can live with it, 'cause we know what he meant. HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 24, 2019 21:51:25 GMT -5
ange, That is a rather clever solution, it even eliminates any hanging hot issues... for those that care about such things. The fact that it uses a less-expensive switch is just so much the better. Here, have an "ATTABOY" award!
richard, You now have two solutions, either of which should be easy to implement. Post back with your final results, please. (Or ask more questions, should you so desire.) sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 24, 2019 13:31:01 GMT -5
richard, First, Hi, and to The NutzHouse! I think this will do what you asked for: A couple of things to note: a) Notice that the "usual" layout of the three pickups in order has been disturbed - for purposes of clarity, the series pickup (in your case, the Mid pup) is shown at the bottom of the ladder. I could've rearranged it all, but the number of lines that cross over without actually connecting got to be pretty intense. I chose simplicity. b) Tone and Volume controls are bone-stock standard, they can be replaced as desired. c) Assembly drawings are not my thing. I tried that once, fortunately I didn't inhale. If my schematic makes no sense to you, then please ask for another member to render a "translation" for you. It will happen, if you ask. HTH sumgai p.s. Forgot to add: For those that have been here awhile and think this looks familiar, that's because it is! I did a much more complicated version, with series/parallel switching, for tacobobbo - way back in 2006!!
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 21, 2019 11:34:08 GMT -5
Daayyaamm son, you be firin' on all cylinders! Seriously, good work. Nice to see someone get a double-benefit out of his/her TV time. (i.e. input of Officer Training Materials, and a positive cash flow. Only thing better would be hot-and-cold running Bier Garten maidens!) Keep up the postings! sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 20, 2019 9:37:39 GMT -5
We're all aware, aren't we, that Gibson is once again attempting to build a better guitar by lawsuit instead of innovation? The following link may not be the best-written article on the brewing brouhaha, but it's a good start: Dean Guitars Countersues Gibson Guitars
Before anyone gets all lathered up, let me remind them/you that Gibson tried this somewhere around 15 years ago with PRS, and lost after nearly 10 years of court battle. If you don't already have some stock in Kleenix tissues, now's the time to buy, 'cause there's soon gonna be tears all around, mark my words.
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 19, 2019 22:32:07 GMT -5
.... Not too hard with a superswitch. That was the original point - from a logical standpoint, this is easy-peasy. However, due to Leo's stinginess in hogging out enough wood to easily fit a Superswitch (he didn't), the Yamaha unit was found to "fit the bill", and the T-riffic's wiring diagram was for that particular component. That's what swingy wants, a wiring diagram that deals with that specific part. However.....
swingarm, John's correct in that we can solve the logic portion of the puzzle in a heartbeat. But where you're used to thinking that a Yamaha switch is mandatory, that's no longer true. Oak/Grigsby (and clones thereof) makes a thinner version of the Superswitch that is designed to fit into a Tele's control compartment. Snug, to be sure, but no additional wood-hogging should be necessary. Check it out! HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 19, 2019 10:23:41 GMT -5
TDPRI might also be a possible resource. I took a quick look and found no actual diagrams that were claimed to be the T-riffic, though there is more than a fair amount of discussion, and lots of "side trips" to other designs. But like I said, a more in-depth search might find it.
sumgai
|
|
|
Load
Jul 15, 2019 10:49:08 GMT -5
Post by sumgai on Jul 15, 2019 10:49:08 GMT -5
As with any simulation models, the modeling part of it - correctly modeling the complex impedances of the system - is where the real challenge lies. True, that.
I recognize that not everyone thinks along the same lines when it comes to deriving a solution to a problem. I guess that devolves as much to one's education as much as one's experiences in the field. I can't say one way is "more" correct than another, but I'll bet dollars to donuts that if enough people participate in finding a solution, and do so as a group, then the final "answer" is probably going to be as close to correct as we can ask for.
That's all I have... for now.
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 11, 2019 0:49:28 GMT -5
peegee, Hi, and to The NutzHouse! I moved your post here, a more appropriate place for two of the three parts of your question. Other stuff will likely be discussed in more detail in yet another forum, but you seem capable of wandering around these halls without adult supervision, so I'll leave you to it. In short, this sub-Forum, and this thread, will likely kick off the discussion about pickups and controls. For discussions on necks (and bodies), you'd be well advised to start a separate thread in Lutherie & Repair. You wanna get some good tones with an all-around axe? Sounds to me like you're gonna be hunting down a Telecaster Deluxe (semi-hollowbody), and perhaps adding a few switches for things like phase reversal (soul) and coil cut (60s rock). You may end up changing out the Fender humbuckers for better ones in order to get that classic 70s sound, but that's a quite personal thing, so don't set too much stock by that remark. Please standby for a raft of other opinions, starting in 4..... 3.... 2... 1.. HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Load
Jul 9, 2019 1:05:04 GMT -5
Post by sumgai on Jul 9, 2019 1:05:04 GMT -5
I'm gonna get up on my pedestal here, and define Load. Stay with me, it's gonna be a bit bumpy, and I can't guarantee that you'll be a happy camper at the end, but here we go.
Load is best defined as one or more components that complete a circuit, but do not, in and of themselves, produce any current, voltage, or power (the combination of the two). That means, everything outside of the power source is part and parcel of the thing we call a "load" - they all have an effect on the source. And has been mentioned above, the source itself is never "perfect", so it also provides a load, to itself.*
That said, we often deal with a "raw" source as just that, and don't consider what's going on inside of it - we can't do anything about it, so why bother. But if one really needs to do such an analysis, one could look up both Nodal Analysis and Mesh Analysis.... and that's just for starters.
Like reTrEaD said, it's not just messy, it's VERY messy. Indeed.
HTH
sumgai
* Which explains, in simple terms, why batteries go dead, seemingly when they've done no work (never been hooked up to anything) - internal loading.
|
|
|
Load
Jul 9, 2019 0:30:10 GMT -5
Post by sumgai on Jul 9, 2019 0:30:10 GMT -5
The OP only asked to define "load" but since you're asking, yes, I already went down that path some while ago and constructed a spreadsheet for a 2 humbucker model with one voltage source per coil. Parallel humbucker I cheat (thevenin impedance) but single coil, humbucker and their series and parallel combinations are calculated with one voltage source per coil. Well, that gets my attention... for not what you might call the right reason.
Thevenin's Theorem deals with replacing a source with a voltage-producing 'black box', i.e. a constant voltage. But pickups, by their very nature (that being magnetic), are current devices, not voltage. True, you can't have one without the other, but when it comes to analyzing components, it helps to remember that capacitors pass AC voltage, and inductors tend to resist changes in current - not voltage. Thus, I suggest that you try using Norton's Theorem, that of replacing a current source with a black box designed for such analysis. Your 'cheating' should come closer to real-world results.
Or at least that's how we did it, back when I went to school (when dirt was still a novelty ).
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 8, 2019 11:15:12 GMT -5
lamed,
First, let me just say - job well done!
Next, as reTrEaD noted, adding the coils to the diagram made all the difference in the world. Had you done that in the first place, I would not have given you a thumbs-down in my previous post.
Which of course points out all too clearly my message to another poster - never take so many shortcuts that you obscure your intent. In the case of non-Electrical Engineers (most of the Nutz), that's particularly important. Expressed more succinctly, I'll go right to the guts of the matter - wire colors don't mean a thing in a diagram of any sort. Recall that on any given day, someone is gonna "borrow" your diagram, and no matter how many times you say "I used CompanyX's colors", that statement is gonna get lost in the translation. (Or as in my particular case, it will be ignored.) Always try to be complete, insofar as showing/describing your intentions. Others may not correctly interpret your assumptions.
And finally, lamed, you really need only a 7PDT switch. If you can locate one of those for sale, you should be aware that several of us Nutz in the USA will be only too happy to buy it and have it shipped to our home, and then forward it to you there in France. And I'm sure that we have a few British members that will do the same thing for you. (You did say "under 50 pounds", which I took to mean British pounds sterling.)
Just ask!
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 8, 2019 10:48:05 GMT -5
Daaayyyaaammmm, a new record for resurrecting old/near-dead threads - 13 years, minus a couple of months!
mwmoriarty,
Hi, and to The NutzHouse!
As you can see from the diagrams and descriptions above, a basic passive bass-cut/treble-cut circuit is actually best described as a bandpass filter. But the values you stated are pretty far out of line with the standard modus operandi, as espoused by many, many websites, besides ours. I wonder if you could please post a diagram of your particular circuit, I'm sure that others besides myself would like to see what you've got.
tth's reply to you is pretty much spot on - active filtering is dead-on trivial, whereas passive controls always induce a loss of perceived overall signal strength. However, I'll go so far as to admit that many, perhaps most, guitar players prefer to have their basic tone-shaping controls near to hand. In this manner, they can get their best tone without having to cart around other, external, devices. When the need for paucity arises.
But I'm not one to talk, I removed my factory pickups and controls entirely, and ran an after-market hex pickup through a gaggle of Roland boxes. You know, modelers and synthesizers, and stuff like that.
HTH
sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 6, 2019 10:10:55 GMT -5
lamed, I'm sorry to have to report that your latest diagram won't work, here's the first reason why: Both switches "up" (to the left, in the diagram): B -> nowhere R -> output W -> nowhere G -> ground Net results; nada going out. I stopped there, 'cause I knew you needed help in a more concrete way. So I searched around the basement archives and found this thread, which should help you out. Sadly, none of the particpants ever saw fit to draw a schematic, but I've got a feeling that you're about to correct that. Go here: SD Triple Shot Switch LogicHTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on Jul 5, 2019 12:16:33 GMT -5
lamed,
Hi, and to The NutzHouse!
When you started out, I thought you were intending a stereo rig, wherein the channels could feed separate amps/pedal boards/etc. Turns out you want a single channel output, but with two presets on the actual pickup selection(s), as well as the Volume/Tone controls. I'd call that something like your average Jazzmaster/Jaguar... on steroids!
reTrEaD has covered your only true error, that of one channel's controls affecting the other. His solution is non-intuitive, but it works with your current parts selection, so no added cost on your part. But your other question is about the space available for all these new switches. It is my understanding that Jazzmasters (as manufactured by Fender, not necessarily including clones thereof) have a rather large cavity under the pickguard. I really can't say just why Leo mandated such a large carve-out, but there it is. If you choose to go with a Squire of some sort, that may no longer be the case. Even so, from the idea behind the original, full-fledged Jazzmaster, you can be assured that hogging out some wood will not affect the body's stability or performance.
Just to give you a goal as to how to load your axe with controls, try to keep up with The OMGcaster:
HTH EDIT: I see that you've posted a corrected diagram. Insofar as I can see, it looks good to me. As an aside, you've also eliminated any chance of a 'hanging hot' issue. Let us know how it works out, with pictures and sound clips! sumgai
|
|
|
Load
Jul 1, 2019 13:49:54 GMT -5
Post by sumgai on Jul 1, 2019 13:49:54 GMT -5
.... Same goes for guitar pickups. Are you sure you wanna go down that path?
A battery transforms energy from a chemical reaction into an electrical action... it's all internal. A pickup tranforms a magnetic field into an electrical action, and thus it requires an outside stimulus - the string's vibrations. Those two different transformations are comparable only a rudimentaray way, but the way you espouse breaks down when the above points are considered. Reason being, a battery is DC, and a vibrating string is generating a frequency, which by definition (and after the transformation), is AC. Thus, reactance is going to play a rather noticible part in the equations governing load.
Which is why I didn't/don't want to get into it. This is one of thoses things that really require a large dose of advanced knowledge, far, far more than that needed by the average guitarist in order to mod their rigs. (Or even well-advanced pickers, to be sure.) You all can go at it, if it tickles your fancy, but I'd caution you to not be so surprised when your bench models break down in real life. (And come to that, when was the last time that any of you invested in some laboratory-grade test equipment, to check your final results? Still depending on your ears to see if there was an improvement? My my, tch, tch, tch. That won't win any Brownie points in my book.)
sumgai
|
|