"4 Caster" Wiring

[newey]

Well, earlier in the year I started planning for a 4- pickup Strat. Currently, I'm refinishing an old Strat body reclaimed from a punker who had spray-painted it and wrapped it in Duct Tape . Much sanding to be done yet as I go through lots of abrasives trying to get the remaining tape residue and finish off this thing.

But meanwhile, I'm starting to think about a wiring scheme. The idea here is that the 4 pickups are actually 2 matched pairs of SCs, pup 1 (neck)mates with 3, 2 mates with 4. After indiviual Vol controls, the 2 pairs are then switched together, thus allowing combos of all 4 pickups. A master tone completes the package.

VERY Preliminarily, here's what I've worked out. But with my admittedly limited skills at this sort of thing, can some one tell me if I'm off track here?

What I have so far. I may want to add a phase switch on 1 and 3. (would this go "upstream" of the Vol pot, or not?)

[newey]

And, upon further review .. . it occurs to me that I may have oversimplified this, in an effort to oversimplify it. As is, unused coils will be hanging from hot, correct?

And since noise reduction is the order of the day here, can that be eliminated with these switches, or would SW 1 and SW 2 need to be replaced w/ DPDTs so the other pole could be used for grounding unused pups? How would that get wired up?

BTW, if anyone has better suggestions on a 4-pup scheme as a whole, I'm open-minded on this.

TIA-

[gumbo]

HH Strat??

;D


....just kidding....

[newey]

Gumbo-

HH Strat??

All kidding aside-

Essentially, yes, but with widely-spaced coils of two different flavors. Preliminarily, I'm thinking Tex-Mex for 1 & 3, Vintage alnicos for 2 & 4.

Hopefully, the result is a "HH Strat" without the mud.

[cynical1]

May 4, 2008 9:22:57 GMT -5 newey said:

Much sanding to be done yet as I go through lots of abrasives trying to get the remaining tape residue and finish off this thing.

Don't adjust your browser...dropping slightly off topic...

newey -

As far as the duct tape residue - try mineral spirits. If the mineral spirits don't work try lacquer thinner or nail polish remover (which is basically the same thing). Soften up the tape with the solvent, then gently scrape it off with a single edge razor blade. Once most of it is gone soak a shop rag in your solvent and rub the last of it off.

Trying to sand that stuff off will just generate heat and spread it out like asphalt...

WD-40 works pretty good on tape residue, but if you have bare wood then DON'T use the WD-40.

If your finish is poly or epoxy, then you can scuff it up good with a 60 grit sandpaper and use Klean-Strip® KS-3 Premium Stripper. Forget the 15 minute soak time...more like 90-120 minutes. You'll have to do multiple coats to get it all off, but sanding the entire body will take just about as long and your fingers will thank you. Don't forget the After Wash with an abrasive pad after each application of the stripper.

Now returning you to the wiring portion of this progam...

Happy Trails

Cynical1

[ashcatlt]

There's nothing hanging from hot. What you've got there is something like LP wiring x 3.

I'm thinkng the wire coming from SW3 to Mas. T should connect to the middle lug of that there pot. You could jumper the two lugs which don't have the cap, which accomplishes the same thing.

As you've got it shown now, N+B and MA+MB will not be humcancelling. I'd probably prefer to have the N RWRP with the B (or vice versa ).

When you speak of this phase switch, you want to switch the phase of both pickups at once? That's going to require a little fancy footwork, because you actually need to flip polarity on both pickups without invalidating the selection at SW1. It's a little too early for me to draw something like that right now.

Have you considered something like the Tele 4-way mod (which includes both pickups in parallel) for each pair. Maybe even for all three of the switches! The standard mod leaves one of the coils hanging from hot, but this would be partially isolated by SW3. At least, when that set is switched out, there won't be anything hanging.

Terribly sorry, sumgai, I know that link freaks you out. I seem to remember you posting a version of the 4-way thing that avoids the hanging hot altogether. Now where was that....?

[ChrisK]

What has led you to considering such combinations of pickups?

You have two wiiiiiiiidly spaced humbuckers that are possible. In fact, these are so far apart that one would actually consider them to be two separate single coils (as they really are anyway).


Now, considering the Possible Coil Combinations of 4 coils, what are you trying to do?

There are some simplistic (as in binary + series) methods like Binary Tree Switching that require a license and six fingers, and possibly an owner's manual or software engineering degree to operate.

There are some other schemes that roll thru combinations in a logical (switching, not necessarily sounding) manner like The PRS RotoBucker and The RotoBucker (which is for 6 coils, but can easily be downsized for four).


Here's one that I designed a while back, The BuckerBlender, and have the unfinished alder Tele rear rout body, 1 7/8" neck, pickups (JB and Jazz), bridge, and oh yeah, everything but the initiative to build. It does a lot with four coils as two humbuckers, and is probably illegal.

[newey]

Many good suggestions, guys! Much pondering ahead!
Ash:

What you've got there is something like LP wiring x 3.

Yes. The goal was simplicity, I'm not shooting for all possible combos of 4 pups. No series options, for example. I want it to sound mostly Strat-like.

As you've got it shown now, N+B and MA+MB will not be humcancelling. I'd probably prefer to have the N RWRP with the B (or vice versa

Yeah, I'm still debating which should be RW/RP.

And Chris-

Now, considering the Possible Coil Combinations of 4 coils, what are you trying to do?

What I'm trying to do is:

With SW3 "up" (as per diagram), SW 1 gives coils 1/1+3/3.
With SW3 "down", SW 2 gives coils 2/2+4/4
With SW 3 in the middle, SW 1 and SW 2 in middle, all 4 activated.
With SW 3 in the middle, SW 1 up and SW 2 up, gives coils 1 + 2
With SW 3 in the middle, SW 1 up and SW 2 down, gives 1 + 4
With SW 3 in the middle, SW 1 up and SW 2 Middle, gives 1+ 2 + 4, etc.

This should give all possible parallel combos of 4 pickups with no dead spots.

And Cyn-

As far as the duct tape residue - try mineral spirits. If the mineral spirits don't work try lacquer thinner or nail polish remover

I did use a razor knife to get most of it off before sanding, couldn't use solvents in the garage since it sits under the rest of the house, and the smell permeates. Too cold until recently to do it outside, so I've been sanding, mostly got it off now. 40 grit rules!

And Chris, if the Buckerblender

is probably illegal.

Then just keep flying under the radar.

[sumgai]

May 4, 2008 12:19:46 GMT -5 ashcatlt said:

...........
Terribly sorry, sumgai, I know that link freaks you out.

No problem, the Ginko Biloba is still working, so I remember this one, and that I figured it out last time. It's really just a very bass-ackwardly drawn rendition of a normal layout, sans my "hanging-hot" eliminator, of course.

To add that, do this; locate the pickup whose signal output lead is connected directly to Hot side of the volume control. That same pickup will have its signal return line connected to the common pole of one side of the selector switch. Two of the terminals on this pole will go to ground, and one of them will go to the other pole, thus allowing the series connection. That leaves one open terminal - wire that to the same Hot side of the volume control.

What you've just done is short the pickup when "the other pickup only" is selected, thus rendering the coil's 'antennability' null and void.

This works no matter which position one chooses for "the other pickup only", although it's usually one of the ends, as in: N, N+B, N*B, B - there will be only the one terminal that is open or empty, prior to this modification.

HTH


sumgai

[sumgai]

newey,

Interesting idea.

I see a redundancy between the two volume controls and SW3 - they do the same job. I'd try to use a True Blend pot for both jobs, thus raising the User-Friendly index a trifle.

Just a suggestion..........


sumgai

[newey]

A good suggestion, Sumgai! I'll definitely incorporate that, it will simplify the switching and save one hole in the pickguard.

Now I need to find two mint-green Strat knobs that say "Blend" on 'em.

[ChrisK]

This should give all possible parallel combos of 4 pickups

I will designate the pickups as 1 thru 4. I (and logic) don't care about the actual grouping order.

Parallel Combinations

(1 of 4)
1. 1
2. 2
3. 3
4. 4

(2 of 4)
5. 1,2
6. 1,3
7. 1,4
8. 2,3
9. 2,4
10. 3,4

(3 of 4)
11. 1,2,3
12. 1,2,4
13. 1,3,4
14. 2,3,4

(4 of 4)
15. 1,2,3,4


With three LP style switches (for switching logic, the blend pot is the same as an LP switch), one gets this:

3^¹ + 3^² + 3^¹ = 15

Switch A
1. 1
2. 1,2
3. 2

Switch B
1. 3
2. 3,4
3. 4

Switch C
1. A
2. A,B
3. B


A (3^¹)
1
1,2
2

A,B (3^²)
1,3
1,2,3
2,3

1,3,4
1,2,3,4
2,3,4

1,4
1,2,4
2,4

B (3^¹)
3
3,4
4


Your design does indeed realize all parallel combinations of 4 coils.

Now I need to find two mint-green Strat knobs that say "Blend" on 'em.

Uh, no, just one.

If you want to use a blend pot in lieu of the two volume pots, make sure that you actually use a Blend Pot.

And while a blend pot does do the same thing (eventually) as having both SW3 and the two volumes, it doesn't do it as well. Having a volume pot for each GROUP (as in tonal theme) is a good thing since one can switch between the groups merely by one actuation while preserving the volume setting for each group.

After all, the early Gibson's didn't have a selector switch, just volume pots. You don't see that as a popular option today. The LP had two voices; bridge and neck each with their own tone and volume. The middle position was just, well, the middle position.

If you want to reverse phase, for all combinations of phase you will need three DPDT switches (nPU-1). I would suggest that you consider the half out of phase (a 0.01 uF series cap) for parallel phasing since full PooP uh, well, sucks.

[newey]

Thanks Chris-

I would suggest that you consider the half out of phase (a 0.01 uF series cap) for parallel phasing since full PooP uh, well, sucks.

So, you're saying that SooP is better than PooP? ;D Don't know how I could disagree with that . . .

Seriously, the ooP was just a thought, maybe an idea that should be relegated to the ashcan here. I wanted to lay down a simple design first, then see what additions might be made thereto. Another thought I had was to make SW3 a more capable switch such that it gave SW 1/SW 1 + SW 2/SW 1 * SW 2/SW 2, thus adding the ability to have one parallel pair in series with the other pair. But that means a bigger switch like a lever switch, I've never seen a DP4T toggle.

Design-wise, I liked the idea of just the 3 strat knobs and 3 toggles in a row, neat and clean and avoids space problems in the cavity.

And I did reread the Blend pot post after Sumgai suggested using them. Is there a source other than Fender for these? I was checking the web and all the ones I saw look suspiciously like the photo of the "pan pot" in the post Chris wrote.

[ChrisK]

I get mine from Fender. I usually buy them in quantities of 10.

I have both 250K and 500K units. Strangely, they look just like the pics in the Blend Pot post. They have solid shafts.

If you are going to use three LP lever switch and three pots, I'd suggest either the two volumes and a master tone, or a master volume, master tone, and a blend.

While a DP4T toggle switch would be convoluted (a Hurst shifter, if you will), they do coincidently make 3P4T rotary switches. Gee, they're aboot the size of a pot. Hmmm, for a series/parallel/A/B switch with no dangling participles, one could use a three pole switch. With the three pole switch, one could reverse the phase of an entire group. With a 4P6T switch, one could get A/B/A+B/A*B/A-B/A*-B, all in the space of a pot.

If one didn't like the StewMac switch size, one could get a Grayhill unit from www.digikey.com




I pass by Akron weekly, I can be bribed.

[newey]

I pass by Akron weekly, I can be bribed.

Bribery implies a quid pro quo. Over the months of your thoughtful replies to my normally inane queries, you have already pro-vided the "quo", so now it's up to me to pony up some "quid" and buy you a pint or two.

And. despite this discussion of "quid" and "pints", it will not be warm, unless you do so desire it.

[wolf]

Chris K mentioned

There are some simplistic (as in binary + series) methods like Binary Tree Switching that require a license and six fingers, and possibly an owner's manual or software engineering degree to operate.

That is quite a versatile switching arrangement - if you don't mind having seven switches on your guitar (or six if you don't want the phase switch). It's funny that Chris K, and several other Guitar Nuts discovered this wiring independently. I call mine Super Seven Switching and I think it is such a good switching arrangement that I have 6 of my guitars wired this way (and I'm working on a seventh).

I know in that Binary Tree Switching discussion someone mentioned if anyone built it. Am I the only one that has? (Oh yeah, it is a real pain to wire - but well worth it).

[ChrisK]

It's funny that Chris K, and several other Guitar Nuts discovered this wiring independently. I call mine Super Seven Switching....

They say that great minds think alike,

I say that they just think..................



The beauty of the binary "+" switching scheme isn't the binary part (obvious is), but the "+" reuse of the "useless" state of "both off".

(Since yer both just hangin' aboot and not doin' anything when yer "off", go get in series.)


(And no more "silent solo's".)

[ChrisK]

Bribery implies a quid pro quo.

Soooo, If'n I give a politician a bribe (here's a quid Sid, gimme some quo bro') and they DON'T deliver (horse heads and mattresses to be resolved later), it's NOT an illegal bribe but just a premature "campaign contribution"?

Have you ever considered becoming a lawyer?


;D ;D




(p.s. re: heads n' mats - I was born in y'town, I know what a y'town "starter" is.)

[newey]

Have you ever considered becoming a lawyer?

No, there was no consideration involved in the decision. I was 22 at the time.

a premature "campaign contribution"?

There is no such "premature". Give early and give often.

And:

heads n' mats - I was born in y'town, I know what a y'town "starter" is.

You lost me there. But I was a Chicago transplant here- 25 years ago, but a transplant nonetheless.

Anyway, more to the supposed point of the thread, version 2.0 is in the (re)drawing stage. Thanks for the suggestions and help.

[ChrisK]

....early and....often.

But I was a Chicago transplant.

Oh, you mean like the way that they vote in Chicago!

heads n' mats - I was born in y'town, I know what a y'town "starter" is.

Youngstown, Ohio


Starter - a device used to initiate the operation of something else.

[1] Often used in the context of an engine component.

[2] It can also be used in conjunction with the circuitry of said engine component to start one's journey into the afterlife.

Remote starter - a device used to safely discern the existence of the above [2]. It's also darn convenient in the winter.

[newey]

Remote starter -

It's also darn convenient in the winter.

When it's installed properly and works. The pimply kid who installs car stereos at your local Big Box retailer is not your best choice for this job.

I have a friend who's a top-notch auto mechanic. He makes a tidy living off of poorly-installed (and wired) remote starters. These usually arrive on a tow truck's hook in mid-January, with the owners as involuntary pedestrians.

My philosophy is, if you don't like the winter, move to Florida. But leave your job here, we need it.

[newey]

Anyway, back to the topic here. This is version 2.0, as Sumgai suggested, replacing the third switch with a blend pot:



First of all, have I got this right?

Second, the more I look at it, I'm not sure if I don't like the first version better.

ChrisK was suggesting keeping the switch, and having Master Vol, Master Tone and Blend, but I can't fathom how that would go. How do I avoid having half of the blend pot dead when the switch is set to the opposite pair of pickups?

[wolf]

Newey,
If nothing else I figured I'd redraw some of your diagram.


The wires to the blend pot looked a bit confusing so I cleaned it up (and I hope I wired it correctly).

[sumgai]

wolf,

You didn't catch newey's mistake....... it's not a blend pot if both "Hot" leads are on the physically same side of the wiper. (Ditto for both ground leads.)

~!~!~!~!~!~!~

newey,

Aside from the above, the blend pot is the switch, only it's got a lot of variation between "all this" or "all that". And the switch is the blend pot, although the variabilty is severely limited. I suggested a blender because it gives you a wide amount of control over your tone. The switch is easier to use, and allows you to "hit" the same tone every time you need it. Your call.


HTH






sumgai

[newey]

Doh!



Corrected is. Thanks Wolf and Sumgai.

This is still a work in progress, not sure which way to go with it yet. I'm thinking version 3.0 will substitute a 5-way superswitch for SW3 in the original diagram, so as to give:

Position--------- Selects
5------------------SW 1
4------------------SW 1 + SW 2
3------------------SW 1 * SW 2
2----------------SW 1 * SW 2 OoP
1------------------SW 2

[sumgai]

newey,

You know, putting SW1 and SW2 on push-pull pots, and inserting a 5-way selector switch like you just described, that'd make a perfectly good stealth guitar! However, I think that you'll need a superswitch (4P5T) in order to realize the OoP combo.

Plus, you'll need to consider keeping the blender pot out of the circuit for at least the 1 & 5 positions, or else you're liable to suddenly find yourself with a fatally toneless axe in your hands! In fact, let me go a step further........

Where a blender is used by itself to select pickups, you'd naturally want to be able to rotate the knob and go from full output of one pup and 0 output of the other pup, over to the reverse condition when the knob is rotated against the other stop. But in a circuit such as you contemplate, that "full on/full off" condition can be obtained with a switch, and much more quickly. So, in order to reduce the likelyhood of duplicate sounds, you can install a resistor between the "signal return" terminal of each pot, and it's respective pickup lead. What value? I'd start with about half of the pot's value. But since they don't make an easily obtainable 125KΩ resistor, a 100KΩ unit will work fine, for an initial starting point. That way the pot can never fully turn off either pickup, yet you still have a large variability in terms of tone. ;D

This will have the added benefit of avoiding "dead spots" on your selector switch, should you choose positions 1 or 5, and the blender is rotated in the "wrong" direction.

Your correction above is.

HTH





sumgai

[newey]

Sumgai, thanks-

putting SW1 and SW2 on push-pull pots,

These are "center on" style toggles, is there such in a push-pull? (wouldn't it be a "push-pull-pull"?)

that'd make a perfectly good stealth guitar!

Not sure how stealthy it would be with 4 pickups staring out . . .

However, a 4P5T (the superswitch) will allow you to get past that little "gotcha"

Hmmmm . . . I assume this would mean wiring the blender off of the switch such that the blend pot was bypassed in positions 1 and 5?. This would mean that the blend pot would only be operational when in a combo mode of SW 1 and SW 2?

Would the Shaller Megaswitch offer the same functionality? Not sure exactly if/how that differs from the superswitch.

[newey]

And I think you added to your post as I was posting mine, since you essentially answered the question I hadn't asked yet!

EDIT Another thought. The OoP option here involves putting 2 parallel pairs of pickups in series, OoP with the other pair. Is this going to sound like the desirable series OoP or more like parallel OoP? Or is it sort of halfway in between?

May not be worth doing if it doesn't give a series OoP sound, as Chris pointed out earlier . . .

[wolf]

Well, I figured I had to update the circuit:

Of course the way newey and sumgai are throwing ideas back and forth, the final circuit might involve anti-lock brakes and NATO missile guidance systems. ;D

sumgai I'll admit that I didn't catch the error in newey's drawing. One reason is that I was only redrawing it and not really editing it. The other reason is that (as most of you know), my major area of interest in guitar rewiring is switches. I rarely consider doing anything different with volume, tone, blend pots.

[newey]

Wolf- Thanks for the housekeeping on the drawing. My next iteration will be more "switchy", and so probably more to your liking!