rosspix
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
|
Post by rosspix on May 13, 2008 11:11:56 GMT -5
I've just noticed the Free Neck On Switch schematic and think it could be the answer to my prayers... I'll be using the S-None (Megaswitch "S" version) on my latest project but wanted to have a neck-on option, too. Electrickery isn't really my strong point (although my soldering's pretty good) - can anyone see any reason why I couldn't combine both schematics? Cheers, Ross.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisK on May 13, 2008 16:08:46 GMT -5
I can't.
But then, what do I know about these two designs.
(Sorry sumgai, one design and one module.)
BTW, I did just that in my bro' in law's Strat with a Rio Grande Dual Calibrated Strat set (he has this disturbing fascination with the middle only position, so N+B and M*(N+B) were switchingly out of the question.....).
|
|
rosspix
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
|
Post by rosspix on May 14, 2008 7:41:29 GMT -5
Thanks Chris - guess I'll do what your sig says...
:-)
|
|
|
Post by ChrisK on May 14, 2008 11:22:15 GMT -5
The neck will be blended in, but since the tone pot is at the CW end of its travel, the blending will occur for the most part between "8.5" and "10", which is why I call it a "switch". If one can get a different taper for the tone pot, better blending can occur. For instance, The A2 or A3 taper is what's commonly encountered in guitar audio taper pots. The resistance change near 90% to 100% is quite abrupt. If one could get the B4 taper, giving up some resolution at the full tone cut end (the tone cut will be somewhat more abrupt), one gains a degree of blending at the top end between "6" and "10" (symmetry is). Quite frankly, the rotational effect of the B4 taper isn't unlike the effective taper when one uses a 500K tone pot instead of a 250K one in a like to like comparison.
|
|
|
Post by D2o on May 14, 2008 11:29:25 GMT -5
ChrisK,
When you say
It leads me to conclude that, generally, one might be just as well off to always use 500k B taper pots (instead of 250k A, at least) and just roll off the tone a bit to get back to about where the 250k A would be.
In other words, it would increase the tone options of the given pot, making it a simple and rewarding mod - or am I misinterpreting?
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on May 14, 2008 12:53:06 GMT -5
DD, I can't believe you did that! ;D
|
|
|
Post by D2o on May 14, 2008 13:00:47 GMT -5
DD, I can't believe you did that! ;D Thanks! Just some guy I know is all - the filename of the avatar is "mentor". I'm glad you like it
|
|
|
Post by ChrisK on May 14, 2008 19:04:31 GMT -5
No. the B taper generally available is the B0 linear taper. It will be even further away from the equal ratio effected by a true logarithmic pot (which the audio A tapers are not exactly). The A tapers are essentially a piecewise approximation of a log taper, comprised of a low end progressive curve joined to a linear curve for the upper half of the rotation. While linear is linear, the log-like taper at the lower half is closer to the ear's response. Audio Taper Pots - Not Really I generally use 500 K audio pots, even with single coils, since at about "7" to "8" they are already are down to 250K. In a broad sense, the response is not unlike the TBX pot with no detent. And they go to "12"! (Or at least 10/7 or 10/8.) Yep, with the A tapers. Now, there are some seriously demented folk that think that a B taper is acceptable for tone circuits, but we tend to ignore them.
|
|
|
Post by D2o on May 15, 2008 9:14:18 GMT -5
Thanks, Chris Having read your previous post again, I see that you were clear that it was a 500k A that you were comparing. I admit that I had not thought of being able to go one better than Nigel Tufnel!
|
|
|
Post by ChrisK on May 15, 2008 16:21:21 GMT -5
This is way better.
|
|