|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Aug 30, 2024 23:44:26 GMT -5
Why and how:I wanted to create a simple SSS modification using a 4P5T (Superswitch or Megaswitch-M) and no other switches, that would have more than two hum-canceling selections. I began with two commons connected to the input of the volume pot, to facilitate two parallel paths. The tails (-) of the Neck and Bridge pickups would each be connected to a common, allowing either to be connected to ground, or to another pickup, creating a series link. With this, I would be able to have Neck in series with middle for the #5 selection and Bridge in series with Middle in for the #1 selection. Together with the traditional #4 and #2 selections, this would result in four hum-canceling selections. But I wanted more from the #5 and #1 selections. If I attached a pot from series link to ground, I could gradually fade from a hum-canceling series pair, to just the Neck single in position #5 and just the Bridge single in position #1. Or better yet, if I used a rather large capacitor (I reckon a 100nF might be appropriate) in series with the pot, I could strip the HF content from the middle pickup, have something that sounded similar a Neck single or a Bridge single, albeit with more LF content. Hum-canceling at lower frequencies (50Hz/60Hz mains) should be pretty good, but the buzzy noise from florescent lights etc, would only be somewhat reduced. Alas, I had already used all four poles of the 4P5T, so I'd need to change the structure a bit. I repurposed one of the commons connected to the input of the volume control, and attached it the head (+) of the Middle pickup. I could now connect the head of the Middle pickup to hot when needed, or to the fader when the Middle pickup was in series with the Neck or Bridge. Now ... what to do with position #3? 1 - I could have just the middle pickup as a single. (No hum-canceling) 2 - I could place either the Neck (or Bridge) in series with the Middle and shunt the HF content of the Neck (or Bridge) with a cap from hot to series link. 3 - I could have the Middle pickup in parallel with the series combination of Neck and Bridge, (should be fairly effective hum-canceling). So below I have three versions: 
It's sort of a big ask to expect someone to vet all three versions, but if anyone is so inclined, I would appreciate it.Further refinements:I considered trying to be even more frugal with my use of poles. Since the Middle pickup appears in all 5 selections, its head could be permanently wired to hot and the tail connected to one common. The Bridge and Middle would have their tails connected to ground and each would have its head connected to a common. This would only require 3 poles. However, the fader and cap would span between hot and series link. Version 2a would have the Neck (or Bridge) HF shunt cap connected between series link and ground. Version 3 would not be possible with only 3 poles. But Middle in series with a parallel combination of Neck and Bridge would be possible. All three pickups in parallel would also be possible. Thoughts and opinions? Which combinations seem the most interesting?
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Aug 31, 2024 10:55:22 GMT -5
After considerable thought, this might a more interesting version. Needs vetting, though.  |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Aug 31, 2024 22:26:34 GMT -5
Nice! I'm only cracking into tracing the drawings position-by-position (I have a hand-drawing method that is semi-tedious but pretty thorough, I think). So far, I can verify Version 1, Position#1 (I did say I was just cracking into it  ). When there are innovative designs like this, it takes me longer to wrap my head around it. I'm guessing you're planning on using a 250K log, no-load pot for the broadbucker control? That's part of my hangup - I see that pot as a variable resistor, so it colors my view of the schematic. But if imagine that you're using a no-load pot, then I can more easily visualize the result tables you've included. In this case, what I mean by no-load is a pot that has a normal pot's function until it's in full CW position, where the wiper will have zero continuity with the CCW lug. Per my personal taste, I figure a NL pot will work best, and A250K at that. I think the odds are low that I would trap any problem from retread's work, but I'll keep cracking away, in case nobody beats me to the vetting. |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Sept 1, 2024 10:14:17 GMT -5
I went through the rest of the drawings in the same manner.
I might have found trouble with Version 4:
Position#2: Meant to be Bridge + Middle, but the Middle coil isn't fed its Gnd; rather, it gets shorted on the hot side of the Bridge coil.
Position#4: Meant to be Neck + Middle, but (like Pos#2) the Middle isn't grounded, rather, it's shorted on the hot side.
The rest of the drawings checked out per the tables.
Caveat: I did the checking at around bedtime last night. I'm error-prone at normal times of day, so there's an even greater risk that I flubbed late at night.
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 1, 2024 12:19:39 GMT -5
I went through the rest of the drawings in the same manner. I might have found trouble with Version 4:Position#2: Meant to be Bridge + Middle, but the Middle coil isn't fed its Gnd; rather, it gets shorted on the hot side of the Bridge coil. Position#4: Meant to be Neck + Middle, but (like Pos#2) the Middle isn't grounded, rather, it's shorted on the hot side. The rest of the drawings checked out per the tables. Caveat: I did the checking at around bedtime last night. I'm error-prone at normal times of day, so there's an even greater risk that I flubbed late at night. You did. I edited that drawing. Thanks a bunch. Two likes for that. I'm guessing you're planning on using a 250K log, no-load pot for the broadbucker control? Actually just planning to repurpose the stock pot. But a no-load would be an upgrade. |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Sept 1, 2024 18:00:26 GMT -5
Ok, so onto:
If you can get Version 4 working per the table (and I'd be interested in seeing the edited drawing), then I like that one the most because of the unusual Position#3 combo.
Especially if you're not opposed to adding a spdt switch that either uses the broadbucker cap or bypasses it. That would give the option to turn the "spin-a-broadbucker" pot into a "spin-a-split" pot. Then you could have all the standard strat coil combos available (when the pot is turned CCW) in addition to the special combos. But that addition would require either a new hole in the pickguard for a toggle, or replacing one of the pots with a push-pull (or push-push).
|
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Sept 1, 2024 19:24:02 GMT -5
Or -flash thought- instead of going for spin-a-split, instead swap the capacitor to the other serial coil. It'd need a DPDT, of course. Version 4 - BB swap | Position | CW | CCW, Switch Down | CCW, Switch Up | | 1 | Neck x Middle | Neck x (Middle + Cap) | (Neck + Cap) x Middle | | 2 | Neck + Middle |
| | | 3 | Middle x (Neck + Bridge) | Middle x (Neck + Bridge + Cap) | (Middle + Cap) x (Neck + Bridge) | | 4 | Bridge + Middle |
| | | 5 | Bridge x Middle | Bridge x (Middle + Cap) | (Bridge + Cap) x Middle |
Think that moving the cap around like that would make a significant sonic difference? |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 1, 2024 22:00:54 GMT -5
Ok, so onto: If you can get Version 4 working per the table (and I'd be interested in seeing the edited drawing), then I like that one the most because of the unusual Position#3 combo. Especially if you're not opposed to adding a spdt switch that either uses the broadbucker cap or bypasses it. That would give the option to turn the "spin-a-broadbucker" pot into a "spin-a-split" pot. Then you could have all the standard strat coil combos available (when the pot is turned CCW) in addition to the special combos. But that addition would require either a new hole in the pickguard for a toggle, or replacing one of the pots with a push-pull (or push-push). I had already added Version 4a that features all the standard strat combos by omitting the cap. I you aren't seeing that, you'll need to press ctrl + F5 while viewing this page so your browser will reload the new image from the source rather than from your browser's cache. Or -flash thought- instead of going for spin-a-split, instead swap the capacitor to the other serial coil. It'd need a DPDT, of course. Version 4 - BB swap | Position | CW | CCW, Switch Down | CCW, Switch Up | | 1 | Neck x Middle | Neck x (Middle + Cap) | (Neck + Cap) x Middle | | 2 | Neck + Middle |
| | | 3 | Middle x (Neck + Bridge) | Middle x (Neck + Bridge + Cap) | (Middle + Cap) x (Neck + Bridge) | | 4 | Bridge + Middle |
| | | 5 | Bridge x Middle | Bridge x (Middle + Cap) | (Bridge + Cap) x Middle |
Think that moving the cap around like that would make a significant sonic difference? While that would be possible, I don't think the "Switch Up" selections of positions 1 & 3 would be all that interesting. They'd both sound similar to what was already in position 3 with the Switch Down. A slightly thicker (and somewhat hum-canceling) Middle single. However the new selection at position 3 with the Switch Up might be rather attractive. That would result in a slightly thicker (and somewhat hum-canceling) Neck + Bridge. And Neck + Bridge isn't available on a standard strat, although many folk modify to get that. To affect only position 3 would only require a SPDT to accomplish: The #3 lug of the bottom-most section of the superswitch connects to the common of the SPDT. One throw of the SPDT connects to ground, the other throw connects to hot. Having (Middle + Cap) x (Neck + Bridge) in position 3 rather than the somewhat noise canceling middle is a trade I'd probably make on a permanent basis, in a Version 5 with no added switches.  |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Sept 1, 2024 23:49:48 GMT -5
I had already added Version 4a that features all the standard strat combos by omitting the cap. I you aren't seeing that, you'll need to press ctrl + F5 while viewing this page so your browser will reload the new image from the source rather than from your browser's cache. Yes. I had to refresh while forcing an update of cached files. BTW, with the Safari browser, it's Cmd+Opt+R. I'll have to remember this for handling post edits. If I were a push-pull pot salesman, I'd try to sell you on switching between V4 and V4b. (Would that make me a pushy salesman?) Because then you could have both Middle (alone) as well as Middle x (Neck + Bridge + Cap). That means replacing one of the pots with a push-pull, of course. And since a pot's getting replaced, it's tempting to get in there and mod it so it's a no-load pot, in order to get "true" single coil selections. (Would that make me a pot salesman?) |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 2, 2024 14:05:15 GMT -5
I had already added Version 4a that features all the standard strat combos by omitting the cap. I you aren't seeing that, you'll need to press ctrl + F5 while viewing this page so your browser will reload the new image from the source rather than from your browser's cache. Yes. I had to refresh while forcing an update of cached files. BTW, with the Safari browser, it's Cmd+Opt+R. I'll have to remember this for handling post edits. If I were a push-pull pot salesman, I'd try to sell you on switching between V4 and V4b. (Would that make me a pushy salesman?) Because then you could have both Middle (alone) as well as Middle x (Neck + Bridge + Cap). That means replacing one of the pots with a push-pull, of course. And since a pot's getting replaced, it's tempting to get in there and mod it so it's a no-load pot, in order to get "true" single coil selections. (Would that make me a pot salesman?) Having a switch to shunt the capacitor in V4 (or V5) would be quite useful, even if only for evaluation purpose. That way with the control fully CCW, an a/b test of the "hum-reducing single" vs the true single coil could be performed with a simple push or pull, in positions 1, 3, and 5. |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Sept 2, 2024 14:55:47 GMT -5
I used a rather large capacitor (I reckon a 100nF might be appropriate) in series with the pot, I could strip the HF content from the middle pickup, have something that sounded similar a Neck single or a Bridge single, albeit with more LF content. Hum-canceling at lower frequencies (50Hz/60Hz mains) should be pretty good Hey reTrEaD, would you mind walking me through how you arrived at 100nF? The goal, I think, is to pass to ground the higher frequencies while insulating the lower frequencies from ground. Specifically, we're interested in strongly blocking 60Hz frequency (and 50Hz to go with it). So can you show us learners how you figured out that 100nF is a good value? Maybe I can use the answer to reduce the hum that I experience in my setup. (I'll have to look in the records as to what cap I'm using with what pickups/pots - but I gotta run right now!) Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Sept 2, 2024 17:13:03 GMT -5
So can you show us learners how you figured out that 100nF is a good value? I used the SWAG method. A 100nF cap has an X c of roughly 26.5 kOhms @ 60Hz and 1.6 kOhms @ 1kHz. I'm hoping that will be a decent compromise of providing a low resistance path for higher frequencies (harmonics) without adversely affecting hum-cancelation at 50 or 60 Hz. Actual experimentation with different value caps would be appropriate but the object here is to make the capacitor value large enough so that we achieve a sound that's similar to a single coil but not so large that we don't get a reasonable amount of hum-canceling. We will definitely get better (tonal) results with a larger cap like 1000nF (2.6 kOhms @ 60Hz and 160 Ohms @ 1kHz), but we will get more hum. Would the hum still be canceled enough to make the trade-off worthwhile? I dunno. Maybe. |
|
).