|
|
Post by stevewf on Nov 6, 2024 23:02:55 GMT -5
Hi Nutz. On an impulse I snagged a Zexcoil noiseless Tele bridge coil and a Fender Reissue Widerange neck pickup. Now I wanna wire it up to be a hum-free Telecaster with these control settings: The usual: Master Vol, Master Tone, Three-way selector switch... but with an additional switch that gives serial/parallel and parallel/serial. Maybe this table will help explain:
| Switch Up | Switch Down | | 3-way pos#1 | Neck (series HB) | Neck (parallel HB)
in series with Bridge | | 3-way pos#2 | Neck (series HB)
in parallel with Bridge | Neck (parallel HB)
in series with Bridge
| | 3-way pos# | Bridge | Neck (parallel HB)
in series with Bridge |
In this way, when the switch is Up, the 3-way acts like a normal Telecaster 3-way, and the neck pickup is its usual Wide Range series humbucker self. But when the switch is down, the 3-way position doesn't matter, and we get the two pickups in series... but the neck pickup's coils get put in parallel with one another).
I found a way that has dead spots: when the switch is down and the 3-way is not in the neck position. It reminds me strongly of a similar problem with a Les Paul setup. There was a solution where the series switch overrode the pickup selector.
Anybody see a way with a std 3-way blade switch and maybe an S1 switch? It'd be great if the controls were Telecaster-stealthy.
Edit: Sorry, I can't seem to make the Tables thing work correctly here! |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Nov 7, 2024 12:50:14 GMT -5
At a glance, you'll need more than 2 poles to do this, so if keeping a stock Tele look is imporatant, you'd definitely need an S-1. Pretty sure an S-1 would do the trick but it'll be awhile before I can work up a diagram.
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Nov 7, 2024 13:30:44 GMT -5
Anybody see a way with a std 3-way blade switch and maybe an S1 switch? It'd be great if the controls were Telecaster-stealthy. I reckon you could use half of the S1 to do a local series on the HB when it's up and local parallel when it's down. The other half of the S1 would be wired with the 3-way to do a global series override. 3-way + Global Series switch the GuitarNutz (proper) wayEdit: Sorry, I can't seem to make the Tables thing work correctly here! Tables in posts are rather clumsy to finesse but if all you're after is a border around the cells, there's a checkbox for that in the dialogue box that pops up when you click the "table" button. There are some other formatting options that might be useful. If you go to your own profile and click the "Groups" tab, you can join the Format Tables group. This will enable a plugin that allows you some interactive formatting while creating a table. If you find that useful, remain in the group. If it's unhelpful, go back to the groups tab on your profile and leave the group. |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Nov 7, 2024 13:58:12 GMT -5
Thanks, newey and reTrEaD. Here's what I end up with when I use two poles for each ser/par relationship:  Sorry about the fuzzy quality of the thumbnail. It looks like postimg converts my upload to a lossy format for the thumbnail here. Clicking on it should open a somewhat sharper version; zooming from there finally makes it sharpest.
Also, this is an updated version from the original post, which had the South coil's leads backwards.The scheme has a dead spot when the switch is pressed and the 3-way is on "Bridge only." When I design it this way, it feels like I need one more pole to either go through the 3-way or bypass it. Even a little SPST added to the gang would do it.
Aside: it's the Bridge-Only position and not the Neck-only position because of the zexcoil's two-wire bridge pickup. Link to the mfr's page here, click the thumbnail of the underside of the pickup and see that the plate is grounded by a bare wire soldered to it; the other end of the wire is not visible externally, and the pickup is potted in its cover -- opening it voids any warranty. Mine's used anyway, so I don't know what the warranty status is, but surely it'll be zero if I attempt to separate the shielding from the coil lead. So instead I'll try to "float" the neck pickup. Already, I'm gonna try to hack it by undoing its serial link and making it a 4-coil pickup. I've never personally seen the underside of a Wide Range, but in photos it looks like it might be easier to do that with a Wide Range than doing it to a normal humbucker.
Back to this guitar: any clever folks see how to squeeze that function out of one Tele-compatible switch? Edit: Or I could settle for Bridge-Only instead of the dead spot. That's not a terrible fate. |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Nov 7, 2024 15:28:47 GMT -5
Sorry about the fuzzy quality of the thumbnail. It looks like postimg converts my upload to a lossy format for the thumbnail here. The image displayed isn't in a different format. The BBcode posimg is providing you has a style attribute within the img tag, that reduces the display size to half-width. style="max-width:50%; If you edit that post in BBCode mode rather than preview mode, you can change the 50% to 100%. The 4-way tele switch only has two poles, so that's not an option for this application. A Megaswitch M will fit a tele and has four poles. But it also has five throws so you'd need to figure out what to do with the extra position. Likewise, there is a "narrow" version of the Superswitch that should fit in a Tele. But again, you have four combinations in your list and would need to figure out what to place in the extra position. ssstonelover provided drawings of those switches, with dimensions, here: Oak Grigsby Super Switch models and their sizes |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Nov 7, 2024 17:41:23 GMT -5
Sorry about the fuzzy quality of the thumbnail. It looks like postimg converts my upload to a lossy format for the thumbnail here. The image displayed isn't in a different format. The BBcode posimg is providing you has a style attribute within the img tag, that reduces the display size to half-width. style="max-width:50%; If you edit that post in BBCode mode rather than preview mode, you can change the 50% to 100%. I edited it to 100%. Still looks fuzzy to me, though. OK, when I said one switch, I meant in addition to the 3-way. I was unclear. And I hacked together a 4-pole 3-way, but it's too wide to fit in a telecaster cavity. It's looking like "Bridge-only" in that position. Again, it's not settling for a horrible setup, IMO. I think I'd prefer it to a 5-way. Oh, and in the drawing, I have the 3-way's position numbers wrong in either the legend or the diagram. Oops again! |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Nov 7, 2024 20:14:56 GMT -5
It's looking like "Bridge-only" in that position. Again, it's not settling for a horrible setup, IMO. I think I'd prefer it to a 5-way. I don't think you're stuck with Bridge-only in that position. This should accomplish what you're after, although you should check for any errors I might have made.  |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Nov 7, 2024 23:42:58 GMT -5
reTrEaD, brilliant. Looks right to me... but then I want it to look right. Still, it's pretty simple and I think it works. How'd you think about it when you were adjusting the scheme? PS - Bravo once again on editing someone else's drawing and making it look "native".
|
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Nov 8, 2024 23:38:14 GMT -5
How'd you think about it when you were adjusting the scheme? I recognized immediately that S1d was in the wrong place. There's a dual task that part of the switch performs in the Global Series Override so that the position of the 3-way becomes irrelevant. NOTE: In your circuit, the Bridge pickup is the foundation pickup and the Neck pickup gets raised above it when series mode is engaged. In the drawing below, the Neck pickup is the foundation. But if you understand what's happening in the drawing below, you'll be able to transfer the concept to your circuit.  The "switch" in the upper-left of this drawing performs the same function as S1d in your circuit. The common of this switch MUST be connected to the lug of the selector switch that normally serves the "foundation" pickup. In the Normal position it feeds the (+) of the foundation pickup. In the Series position, it serves two important functions. It disconnects the (+) of foundation pickup AND it connects that side of the selector switch to the (+) of the "raised" pickup, thereby making the position of the selector switch irrelevant. The "switch" in the lower-right performs the same function as S1c in your circuit. In the Normal position, it connects the (-) of the raised pickup to ground. In the Series position, it connects the (-) of the raised pickup to the (+) of the foundation pickup. |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Nov 9, 2024 10:44:30 GMT -5
How'd you think about it when you were adjusting the scheme? [...]The "switch" in the upper-left of this drawing performs the same function as S1d in your circuit. The common of this switch MUST be connected to the lug of the selector switch that normally serves the "foundation" pickup. In the Normal position it feeds the (+) of the foundation pickup. In the Series position, it serves two important functions. It disconnects the (+) of foundation pickup AND it connects that side of the selector switch to the (+) of the "raised" pickup, thereby making the position of the selector switch irrelevant. The "switch" in the lower-right performs the same function as S1c in your circuit. In the Normal position, it connects the (-) of the raised pickup to ground. In the Series position, it connects the (-) of the raised pickup to the (+) of the foundation pickup. Thanks for bridging the gap in my understanding. I think that gap was about how a selector toggle switch (like in the drawings you just pasted here) relates to a selector blade switch (which is what I'm using for this circuit). The way I'm using the 3-way blade switch is, I think, the traditional way when controlling two pickups, i.e. one pole for each pickup; the three "position" lugs receive a pickup's signal, with the common providing the hot out. The set of three blade lugs can be compared with one of the toggle switch's input lugs. For translating the concept from toggle switch to blade switch: for the toggle, one pole of the s/p switch ties together the two input lugs; for the blade, one pole of the s/p switch ties together the two sets of input lugs. Thanks again, reTrEaD! |
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on Nov 9, 2024 23:14:52 GMT -5
The way I'm using the 3-way blade switch is, I think, the traditional way when controlling two pickups, i.e. one pole for each pickup; the three "position" lugs receive a pickup's signal, with the common providing the hot out. The set of three blade lugs can be compared with one of the toggle switch's input lugs. The way you have the switch wired is a bit different than the "traditional" way, if we consider telecaster wiring to be the tradition. They both achieve the same ultimate goal, but you have the commons of both halves of the switch tied together to provide the output and two throws from one half connected to bridge pickup and two throws from the other half connected to the neck pickup. Fender does the opposite. One common goes to the bridge pickup, the other common goes to the neck pickup. Two throws of one half of the switch, plus two throws from the other half of the switch, are all tied together to provide the output |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Nov 9, 2024 23:42:12 GMT -5
reTrEaD, you're on fire! Thanks yet more. Above, I had only just reconciled the blade-vs toggle in order to understand global series/parallel for my guitar. Would my switching scheme have been workable with the three-way wired traditionally, i.e. commons connected with pickup hots?
|
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Nov 10, 2024 0:11:00 GMT -5
reTrEaD, you're on fire! Thanks yet more. Above, I had only just reconciled the blade-vs toggle in order to understand global series/parallel for my guitar. Would my switching scheme have been workable with the three-way wired traditionally, i.e. commons connected with pickup hots? I think I can answer my own question with a "Yes" in this case. Each of the 3-way's poles has only one input, so the switch may be replaced by a mirror image. Any links between throw terminals will get mirrored along with their respective terminals. |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Nov 21, 2024 12:13:49 GMT -5
The guitar's been finished, yay, thanks goes to GN2.  It has a Zexcoil ZT51 in the bridge and a Fender WRHB in the neck position, so it's very quiet as far as hum is concerned. GN2 helped me design a complicated switching scheme using an S1 switch... a scheme that I then ditched. Sorry to cost GN2 some brain effort, but it did help me to see that the scheme would have required a lot of soldering of tiny bits of wire. Those tiny bits would have included soldering two wires into each of 6 of the holes of the S1; 22AWG wires x2 would not have fit into the holes. So instead it has a 4-way switch and a push-pull knob that delivers: | Knob Pushed | Knob Pulled | | 4-way #4 | Neck only | Neck only | | 4-way #3 | Bridge x Neck | Bridge x Neck OoP | | 4-way #2 | Bridge + Neck | Bridge + Neck OoP | | 4-way #1 | Bridge only | Bridge only |
The difference is that when the two pickups are in series, the neck now remains also internally in series (rather than switching to internal parallel). Brief testing so far, it sounds good, I'll have to put it though some pedals to see if all-in-series presents problems. Wouldn't want so much increase in output that it necessitates adjustment of pedals. So far, I'm happy with a noiseless Tele! Here are the schematic and wiring diagram, in case of interest:   The astute may notice that I had to swap the leads of the WRHB for phasing; somehow I'd gotten it backwards when I unstacked it for the previous scheme (and then re-stacked it, externally, for the current scheme). In any case, another thanks to GN2! |
|
|
|
Post by stevewf on Nov 21, 2024 12:30:58 GMT -5
BTW, there were some surprises along the way:
Pickguard. In the two Glarry electric guitars I've gotten, the pickguards are not standard Fender shape. Well, Musiclily's take on "standard" anyway. So I had to make a new one, or rather, adapt a new one.
- Mounting holes don't agree, so I filled the holes in the body with dowels and re-drilled per the new pickguard.
- F-hole gets covered by a standard Tele pickguard, so I had to trim the upper edge. Unfortunately, this left exposed one of the old holes in the body (near the neck, bass side), which I sloppily painted with home-blended enamel.
- Neck slot had to be widened.
Body routes in 3 spots. The WRHB didnt' fit in the cavity. I had to widen the cavity there by about 4mm. Also, the Zexcoil didn't fit into its cavity; again, I had to widen it. The latter surprised me, and I still have to figure out if the Glarry pickup is narrower than std or the Zexcoil is wider than std (or both). The 4-way was shorting out in the shallow control cavity. Rather than route, I bent the terminals and insulated with tape.
Fretboard radius vs Zexcoil radius. The pickup is meant to be a vintage-sounding one, and it has the corresponding tight radius whereas the fretboard appears to be Glarry's one-size-fits-all, with a wider radius. As a result, the middle strings are closer to the pickup, resulting in an imbalance. I chose to back the bass side down and rising the treble side in order to keep that G-string from taking over.
Wide WideRange. As I've seen in the Squier CV Starcaster, the neck pickup's pole pieces are much wider than the string spread, so the two E strings are not over their polepieces. If you want to use WRHB in the neck, be prepared for this. Maybe unrelated, but the following also occurs: when I strike the high E downward with force, it can sometimes bind in the threads of its polepiece and stick there. Striking again releases it, but that' very annoying. Maybe I have to lower the magnet, or shave off the top threads?
|
|
