hi ! three volume controls , three on/off/on switc

[keef]

hi ! please , i have a specific question about a special wiring i'd like to do , and i'd like to get if possible a wiring diagram for this ... it is for a strat , with three jeff beck noiseless pickups , and i have three pots of 500 k , and three on/off/on switchs ... i'd like to have three volume controls : one for each pickup , i'd like to have an "off" possibility with the switchs for each pickup ( so i could do a controled tremolo ) , and with the other switch positions ( 3x2) i'd like to have : serial or parrallel , or if it's not possible : On , for the pickup alone , or any other nice idea ? i'd like also to have this classic assembly : neck alone , neck +middle ,neck + bridge , neck+ middle + bridge ,middle alone , bridge + middle , bridge alone . ( it would be done with the switchs , like on or off , directly for each pickup i think ) please can you help me doing a nice diagram with this ? should i change the pots ? please answer me , thank you ,
Best,
adrien

[JohnH]

keef, welcome to GN2

What you request is a big ask, and with three volume controls and series/parallel wiring and individual switching, it pushes the boundaries of what has been shown to work. I suggest you have a look through the schematics section of this board to see if anything may work for you.

The nearest I have is the ToneMonster2, which has almost the switch functions you want, with a master volume and a blender to mix bridge with neck/middle

guitarnuts2.proboards45.com/index.cgi?board=schem&action=display&thread=1130243150

Also see these by Chris K

guitarnuts2.proboards45.com/index.cgi?board=schem&action=display&thread=1153502513
guitarnuts2.proboards45.com/index.cgi?board=schem&action=display&thread=1138841439

and by Borsanova

guitarnuts2.proboards45.com/index.cgi?board=wiring&action=display&thread=1132534684

And this site by Wolf, which has excellent basics and some more good designs

www.1728.com/guitar.htm

cheers

John

[keef]

Really , thank you John for your answer , i appreciate that you tryed to help me . I'm gonna check the links you send to me , thank you again , and happy new year ! i'll reply again if it becomes too difficult , but i'll try to understand how a pick up work in a wiring with these links , so that i'll can elaborate any wiring .
Best,
Adrien

[semisolid]

Hi there.

This is a Design that uses on-off-on switches to get parallel and series sounds. With 3 mini switches side by side on your guitar, you have swift access to the 15 sounds it offers. There is a system to how the switches works, so it shouldn't be to hard to learn how to use it either. Fore more sounds you can add a phase switch or half-series switch.

It has not been proof read or built, so don't try it out before someone with more knowledge about electronics have had a look at it.

There is one switch to each pup. Neck switch, middle switch and bridge switch. Neck and middle is 2 pole, and the bridge switch is 3 pole. Here is a schematic that shows the signal flow.



And a drawing that shows how to connect coils, pots and switches.



If you look at the switches in this drawings, you will see the black lines that indicates how the switches is set.

This is how the switching is supposed to work.

-Switch in center position is off.

-Switch set to to parallel (center lug is connected to the lug below on the drawing) is on parallel.

-Switch set to series (center lug connected to the lug above on the drawings) and the next switch set to off, is those two in series. Neck is firs, then middle and bridge. If Bridge is set to series, the next switch/pup is neck.

When two pup's is in series you can add the third pup in parallel.

You can also have neck series mid + bridge series mid, (N and M set to series and bridge to off), or mid series bridge + neck series bridge (M and B set to series and N off).

When two pups is in series both vol is active.

Here is a schema that shows all the sounds, and how to flip the switches to get them. All other switch combinations gives copies of one of this sounds.



If I were to do this mod on my guitar, I would lose the individual volumes and have a master vol and tone.


Semisolid

[sumgai]

ss,

Nice artwork, easy on the eyes, and easy to understand.

Ummm, is now a good time for you? If not, I could come back and pee in your Cheerios some other time, if you wish.

Problem: Selecting neck in series and middle in parallel, the neck's negative lead is also sent to the jack's hot lead - the neck is shorted. Worse, depending on how the volume controls are set, the other two pups might also go the way of the dodo bird.

Problem: Neck and bridge in parllel, middle in series, everything can be found in the dumper.

Problem: Middle off, bridge in series, the bridge hot will be hanging.

These are the first three things I found at a glance. I'm sure that there are others, but I'm equally sure that as you correct them, any other errors will become evident, and that you'll fix them at the same time.

Back to the CAD machine! ;D


sumgai

[semisolid]

Sumgai

If you use the 15 switch positions shown in my schema you will get all 15 sounds without shunting coils or coils hanging from hot. If you do it your way you will have shunted coils and coils hanging from hot.

It seems like I have not succeeded in explaining how to use this design. If you want two coils in series you must set the first to series and the next to off. (Neck is first, then middle, then bridge and then comes neck again.)

Example:
You want neck and middle in series, you set neck to series and middle to off.

Middle off, bridge set to series will give neck and bridge in series as long as neck is set to off as it is supposed to when you switch bridge to series. ( Bridge set to series will only give you neck and bridge in series. If you want middle and bridge in series you set middle to series and bridge to off.)

Yes, when coils are in series and one vol pot is not set to 10 it will reduce the volume of those pups. I would not use separate volumes. I mentioned that in my post.

I have a similar setup in my strat, plus a phase switch for the neck coil, giving 27 sounds, and have no problem selecting the combos I want. (I made that before I knew coils hanging from hot was a bad thing, so unfortunately I do have coils hanging.)

None of what you said was new to me. Yes it is possible to shunt coils and leave them hanging, but if you do the switching right you will not have any of that. If you have other switches with more poles you can avoid it, but it will be more expensive and more complicated to set up.

But thanks for the comment on the artwork. (Unless it was irony. I'm not any good with that.)


Semisolid.

[UnklMickey]

semisolid said:

...It seems like I have not succeeded in explaining how to use this design. If you want two coils in series you must set the first to series and the next to off. ...

hi Semisolid,

IMHO shunted coils, and unused coils hanging from hot should be avoided when possible.

but ANY combination of switch selections that leads to no sound is worse.

given the choice i'd put up with shunted or hanging coils, way before having dead spots in the switching.

having a simple and intuitive pattern to the switch logic is also quite desirable.

if you can rework your design to improve in those areas, it will be time well spent.


cheers,

unk

[JohnH]

My question would be whether it is possible to find a three-pole on-off-on switch for the bridge (I have not come across one)?

But seriously don't stop, we always need more fresh wiring ideas, and this could lead to a good design

John

[sumgai]

ss,

Yes, you're correct, your design allows one to set the switches a certain way (the semisolid-approved method), and all will be well. But what happens when, in the heat of the moment, a player doesn't (or more likely, he can't) remember what to do to get the next desired combination?

Answer: he goes for the gusto! And WHAM, he dies a horrible death, right on stage, in front of hundreds of adoring fans..... well, death by embarrassment anyways.

The point is, if a certain combination can be accessed, it will be accessed, if not now, then sometime down the road. unklmickey is trying to point out that the best switching methods don't yield undesirable results. I'm trying to say that the best methods don't allow a player to screw himself at any time, not just on stage.

Might I suggest that you search these forums for posts by 'jhng'? He's come up with some similar diagrams, you might get some useful information out of those threads.

These forums have been around for nearly two years now, and the ol' dump is liberally littered with exactly what you've done here, first iterations. Even I've done this, and not just once, either. Don't worry grasshopper, you'll eventually snatch the pebble from our collective hand! ;D

Good luck!


sumgai

[semisolid]

Hi folks.

It took me some time to decipher your first post in this tread sumgai. I was actually not aware of the dead position when N and B is set to parallel, and M to series, and didn't catch it in your post either. (In my defense; it was 03.00 in the morning when I saw it and wrote my reply.)

I do agree that a dead spot in the switching is a bit risky. I can live with the all center all off pos, but others should be avoided. You can loose it if you swap one of the switches with a 2p on-on-on, and you gain a couple of sounds as well. But The switch logic gets even more complicated. But I personally find that when you learn how to use it, it's fast and simple to use.

Ever since I saw this design on the original guitar nuts page , I have been on a quest to do the same with parallel and series in stead of in and out of phase. This was one attempt to solve it.

I know someone has done it on these pages with 3 4p5t switches. He had in and out of phase as well. But 3 switches with 5 positions isn't exactly quick and nimble to use, and you can't use minis. At least I have never come across 4p3t minis. (But 3pdt on-off-on I found here John. Just scroll down a bit. www.mpja.com/viewallnopict.asp?dept=289&main=117

This is another attempt. Unto yesterday I taught it was perfect. It's rather complex to solder with a lot of wires, and rather expensive. You need 3 4p on-on-on switches (that Will be 59.85 American dollars pleas), and they are not minis either.

But it is very intuitive to use. Center is off. set to parallel (switched up on the schematic) is on parallel. one set to series (switched down on the schematic) is on. Alone if the others is set to off, or in parallel if they are set to parallel. But when two or three are set to series they are on in series. Complexed under the pickguard, but weary easy over.

The schematics locks like this. All switches is set to off to show What goes where when they are in middle pos.



Here are one of my favorite sounds; N>B+M.



What I discovered yesterday was that if B is set to series it will be on, but N and M will be hanging from hot in their negative wire. M set to series will leave N hanging.



Now please tell me there is a better, easier an cheaper way to do it. It would make me happy.


Semisolid.

[JohnH]

semisolid said:

Now please tell me there is a better, easier an cheaper way to do it. It would make me happy.


Semisolid.

We aim to please and happiness is our prime directive.

This mod by Dan Armstrong is so clever that it is annoying!

users.adelphia.net/~cygnusx_1/armstrong_jpeg.html

But those 4PDT on-on-on's are also a neat device that have great potential, even though expensive. Thanks for the link to the 3 pole on-off-ons.

John

[semisolid]

My pleasure John.

The Armstrong mod is clever, and with no dead spots. But you can't get two coils in series plus the third in parallel. You can only get two in parallel, then in series with the third. If I'm not mistaken it's (N+M)>B.

One sound I use every time I play is N>B+M. N+M>B is also often in use so my quest goes on.


Semisolid.

[Happyguy]

I use Dan's mod everyday, you can get the combo you want by hitting une or two swittches, but you are right about the series and parallel mixes. They don't exist in this mod, only the one mentionned exists. Add phasing by the way of 2 push pulls, and that is the perfect mod in my opinion.

[ChrisK]

That Dan Armstrong design is what originally led me to come up with the basis of these a few years ago:


guitarnuts2.proboards45.com/index.cgi?board=schem&action=display&thread=1153502513

guitarnuts2.proboards45.com/index.cgi?board=schem&action=display&thread=1138841439

I chose to make my design symmetrical by using two ON-ON-ON switches and one 3PDT (yes they exist, check digikey.com), and with a drive switch (topology mod) to realize all but M*(B+N) or M+B*N.

I didn't include individual volumes since it gets really convoluted. Using individual volumes requires additional switch poles. Look at this post to see what I do regarding series shunting volume control vs parallel;
guitarnuts2.proboards45.com/index.cgi?board=schem&action=display&thread=1145315219


!Full circle is!

[sumgai]

ss,

More problems, friend. But nothing you can't get past, I'm sure.

According to your description, setting any one pup to series will turn it on. However, looking at your accompanying drawings, I have to ask:

If you select Bridge for series and either Middle or Neck are off, where does the B+ get a connection to the output jack?

If you select Middle for series and Neck is off, where does the M+ get a connection to the output jack?

Likewise, if you select Middle for series and Bridge is off, where does the M- get a connection to ground?

In short, if you want Middle in series with either Neck or Bridge, you can't have it. The best you can get with Middle in series is: all three in series, or either Bridge or Neck in series and the other in parallel.

You are correctly selecting the B+ destination (or off), so why bother switching the B- from ground to ground? You can just hook B- to ground permanently, no ill effects will ensue.

Looking below the Neck pup, there are four switch sections going to output: two for Neck, and one each for the others. Those others are superflous, and can be eliminated. (Why triplicate the lower Neck switch pole?)

I was actually not aware of the dead position when N and B is set to parallel, and M to series, and didn't catch it in your post either.

You've fixed this in your latest release, but for the record, selecting Neck for series and Middle for parallel put the N- directly to the output jack, thus rendering the Neck pup null and void.

I know someone has done it on these pages with 3 4p5t switches. He had in and out of phase as well. But 3 switches with 5 positions isn't exactly quick and nimble to use, and you can't use minis.

I'm sure by now you've guessed who that was. ;D The idea there was not so much quick and nimble as all-encompassing with the fewest number of switches. And for a fat-fingered slob like me, the superswitch is just as nimble, given a bit of room on the TonePlastic. A mini-switch under my hands acts like a flea - it jumps out of sight as soon as I try to hit it!

Sorry if I rained on your parade, but you are getting closer! And as you are doing here, it took me several iterations (not to mention beaucoup help!) to get mine right , so take heart.


sumgai

[JohnH]

Sumgai, ..Hmmm..its early in the morning here, and my coffee has not engaged, but I'm not seeing most of those issues that you note.

These 4-pole on-on-on switches are odd things, four poles with two connected to upper lugs and two connected to lower lugs in the centre position. I agree that one bridge pole could be deleted. One other more minor thing to consider is that the all-off position is open-circuit. A short-circuited all-off setting is a quieter kill-switch setting.

cheers

John

[semisolid]

I'll try to explain Sumgai.

Follow the thin red line to See the signal flow.

B only to series:


N>M:


N set to series, M to parallel:



But you saved me a pole on one switch. It could be set up like this:


The poles in the red frame connects to hot when a coil is set to series. You need one pole on each switch/coil for it to work. The poles in the blue frame decides if the signal shall bypass the coil, or include it in a series chain. If the N coil does both with one pole, it will be hanging from hot all the time. All the poles in the frames is needed to make this work.

To have a closed circuit when all set to off, I do believe you need all switches to open the circuit when set to on, in the same way you need all switches to connect to hot when set to series.

I will have a look at the designs from all of you to see if I will find what I need to end my quest. Unless someone hands me the answer. maybe not so fulfilling as coming up with the solution my self, but a relief it would be.


Semisolid.

[sumgai]

ss,

Before I go any further, let me be sure I am clear on one thing:

You state that all switches are 4P3T, the center throw being off.... is that right?

To me, it appears that you've drawn all three switches as being in either parallel or series, none of them are in off, am I correct? Because if I'm not correct, then I need to see at least one switch drawn in the off position, please.

At this point, all I see is the hot line from the Middle and Bridge pickups (in the blue box) going nowhere if the Neck switch is set to what I think is the off position. Let's clarify that one first, then get back to analysing the circuitry.

BTW, the redline idea is good, I've done that too.


sumgai

[semisolid]

Hi Sumgai

I'm sorry if I have been a Little unclear on that part. I said You need 3 4p on-on-on switches. In the middle position 2 poles goes up, and the other 2 goes down. Switched up all 4 connects up and, switched down all 4 connects down. The switch it self looks like this:

www.guitarelectronics.com/product/SWT36

If you have a look on the first post with that schematic, you will see that the first one shows all switches set to off, to show what goes where when in the middle pos.


semisolid

[UnklMickey]

hi Semisolid,

i'd like to make a suggestion, that will minimize confusion with your drawings.

when drawing XPDT on-on-on switches, draw them as 3 postition switches.

then draw a jumper representing the internal connection between the upper (or lower, as the case may be) throw and the middle throw.

obviously, you have no external access to the middle throw in the real world.

but drawing it that was IS an accurate representation of how the switch functions.

and that will rid you of the need for "verbal" expanations.


cheers,

unk

[semisolid]

Like this then? All switches is set to off.



semisolid

[UnklMickey]

not exactly.

the representation of the switches is close, but it shows the center position of ALL sections having the same connection as in the position drawn.

there are 2 sections on each switch were the center position has the same connection as drawn.

and 2 sections that have the opposite connection.


cheers,

unk


PS,

i guess it's about time i got off my butt and posted the "Brian May (plus)" drawing i had John proofread for me.

series/off/parallel for each pickup, and separate phase switches for each.

and yes, although the switches are expensive, it does work, no dead-spots, no coils hanging from hot, no shunted coils.

[sumgai]

ss,

I liked unk's suggestion, and I think it helped immensely to add those lines to your drawing. Unfortunately, a "small" detail is that you show two switch sections up, and the other two down, and claim this is the off position. But aren't these supposed to be 4P3T switches? unk said you have no external access to the internal wiring, and that's correct, but you do have a throw where the switch handle can rest, right? So if you're gonna state that "all switches are off", then shouldn't you show them that way, with the blade in the center/off position? (Which is the 'half-on' position, right?)

Not picking on you here, I'm just trying to learn a new method of illustrating switching diagrams. In my world (the old one, the one that was fading out before you were born), we never had such problems. In my faulty memory, I seem to recall that we simply laid out wires and switch connections on the paper, and everyone understood what we meant. Where did it go so wrong? ;D

OK, let me take another gander at your diagram. I'm gonna have to take an Excedrin to keep from getting a headache over "half in parallel, half in series". Ugh!


sumgai

[sumgai]

unk,

What do you think of this idea? The switches that you described above are actually centered in a half-one-way, half-the-other-way condition, right? So why don't we call them 'half-throw' switches? Seems pretty descriptive to me. Can you see it: xP1/2T on your spec sheet!

Better than half-assed, anyways. ;D


sumgai

[semisolid]

I had a look at Hastings (Jhng) design, the "pinch and twist" LP. I have copied his way of drawing schematics sins I find them very logical to draw and read. As far as I understand this is how he draws the on-on-on switch, and it is how I will do it in the future.



Just for the record; I never said they were three trows. I said three positions. They have only two throws on each pole, but three positions on the toggle.



But there is no need for any of us to spend more time on this schematic sins Unk have shown us all how to do it in his "Bryan May +" mod. Great one Unk. Finally I will have peace. One thing; it would be helpful to see where the poles on the 4P on-on-on goes when in middle position.

EDIT

But if the "Brian may +" schematic is series dominant, that means I can't get my favorites N>B+M, and N+M>B. Oh well. My quest goes on. Does anybody have a schematic that will do parallel, series and mixed with 3 three position switches? A mod on the "Brian May +" mod, or my mod in this post maybe? Or a original design?


Semisolid

[UnklMickey]

semisolid said:

...But if the "Brian may +" schematic is series dominant, that means I can't get my favorites N>B+M, and N+M>B. ...

the term "Series Dominant" could also have been stated as "Parallel First".
(i know this seems confusing, but stay with me a while here.)

you can get combos like N>(B+M) ....... but not (N>B)+M.

and when you starting from N>(B+M):

if you switch the M off you get N>B

OR if you switch the B off you get N>M

clear as mud?



i'll be editing that thread numerous times over the next couple of weeks adding info about it.

but i wanted to at least get it started, as it seems like we are about to go through another cycle of interest, for multiple pickup / individual switching.

BTW, unlike the work i did with 4P5T switches for each coil, the BMx can't be made to work in parallel dominant (series first) mode.

the poles left over, used to do the "housekeeping" are wrong in the center position for the necessary tasks.

so, something like: (N>B)+M will simply not be possible.

[UnklMickey]

sumgai said:

unk,

What do you think of this idea? The switches that you described above are actually centered in a half-one-way, half-the-other-way condition, right? So why don't we call them 'half-throw' switches? Seems pretty descriptive to me. Can you see it: xP1/2T on your spec sheet!

Better than half-assed, anyways. ;D


sumgai

Chris and i had a discussion a while back about how a pole is fairly well defined, but what a throw is, is a bit less so.

i think he suggested "on-staggered-on" or something similar for the designation.

there seems to be no end to the possible ways of describing these things. but, i don't think anyone has really come up with a singular best way yet.

oh, wait! i've got it! XP2½T ...................... yeah right, like that won't confuse the $h!+ out of everyone.

[sumgai]

unk,

What I wanna know is, who came up with this bogus design in the first place!!!!!

If you're gonna have an off, make it off. If you're gonna have both sides on, make 'em both on, and be done with it!

Tarnation, some people will do anything to get out of doing real work!


sumgai

[UnklMickey]

sumgai said:

unk,

What I wanna know is, who came up with this bogus design in the first place!!!!!

If you're gonna have an off, make it off. If you're gonna have both sides on, make 'em both on, and be done with it!

Tarnation, some people will do anything to get out of doing real work!


sumgai

hey Sumgai,

just to make sure you're not accidentally ruffling anyones feathers, when you said BOGUS, you were referring to the SWITCH, not any one's wiring. right?



at first i thought these switches were kinda lame.

but, now that i've wrestled with them on a few designs, i actually LIKE them.

given enough poles, you can do a few things with them, that you just can't do with any other switches.

(but too many times, there are not quite enough poles.)


cheers,

unk

[semisolid]

couldn't be clearer Unk.

Especially (N+B)>M is a good sound that use a lot.

the poles left over, used to do the "housekeeping" are wrong in the center position for the necessary tasks.

Ben there, done that. Done that for hours and hours.


Semisolid