|
|
Post by vegetablejoe on Feb 19, 2009 5:29:20 GMT -5
Hi.
I am fond of rewiring and using the second tone knob on my strat to blend in the neck pickup when I'm using position 1 and 2 on my 5-way switch. (The 2nd tone knob adjusts tone for all 3 pups.)
I've been DIY'ing my own no-load pot (as illustrated on another website). However the pot didn't last too longand got stuck in one position.
No-load pots are not locally available, and I'm hesitant to order from the U.S. as overseas postage will cost too much for such a small item.
So I'm thinking I could probably rig up a 500K push-pull pot to use as a blender. Pull up on the pot to switch on the neck pickup, and then use the sweep of the knob to increase the amount of signal blended in from min to max.
Is this possible? Could someone possibly draw me a diagram on how to wire the pot as needed? I'm sorry, I don't know how to read electrical schematics.
Many thanks in advance.
Jaime
|
|
|
|
Post by flateric on Feb 19, 2009 8:33:50 GMT -5
So I'm thinking I could probably rig up a 500K push-pull pot to use as a blender. Pull up on the pot to switch on the neck pickup, and then use the sweep of the knob to increase the amount of signal blended in from min to max. What sweep with the knob have when not pulled up? You can't make it sweep 2 ranges independantly, it will be a tone pot physically joined to a dpdt switch. I can't see how this can be used as a blend. but maybe I don't fully grasp your meaning, of how you wish to achieve this. |
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Feb 19, 2009 9:21:21 GMT -5
So I'm thinking I could probably rig up a 500K push-pull pot to use as a blender. Pull up on the pot to switch on the neck pickup, and then use the sweep of the knob to increase the amount of signal blended in from min to max. That would be a cool mod, if it worked. As I understand push-pull pots the switch portion of the device is independent of the tone or volume function. It would work for a neck on, but the sweep of the pot is still dedicated to the tone or volume function. There may be a way around this, or another switch that would allow you to do this. My concern would be that if blend pots aren't available in your area the device that will do what you want will be equally as un-available. I've been wrong here before, so stick around and see who else drops in. Happy Trails Cynical One |
|
|
|
Post by flateric on Feb 19, 2009 11:19:37 GMT -5
You can easily route the output wire from the pot to the push-pull switch before it goes off to the rest of the wiring. That way it sort of acts as a kill switch, but the way I see it, you'll havbe the ability to turn it off anyway when the pot sweep is at zero so the push-pull bit then becomes superfluous.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisK on Feb 19, 2009 13:51:29 GMT -5
No.  Well, yeah ;D I'll rephrase this for what I think that you mean and for what I actually do, I have used the neck tone pot as two things; from "8" down to "0" it's a neck tone control and from "8" up to "10" it's a neck blend-in function. The blending in is somewhat abrupt in that it occurs over only a two number range (on a Strat knob). When the bridge, bridge + middle, and middle pickups are selected, this blending occurs. The tone control applicable to these pickups ( bridge or middle) controls the tone when the neck is being blended in. Of course, when the neck pickup is directly selected, the blending is moot. There can be many variations on this concept. I cover some of them (and related things) in my post on The FREE Neck On Switch. The unused terminals on both tone pots are just begging to be used. The one on the neck tone can go to the output, where the neck is blended in to any selected pickup combinations, or it can go to the bridge pickup (or whatever) where it is blended into the bridge when the bridge is selected OR the bridge is blended into the neck when the neck is selected. Conversely, the bridge tone control can be the one blending, or both. I find blending in the bridge to be more interesting since it generally senses more harmonics than the neck pickup. When one looks at it from the perspective of a tone control, blending the bridge in at the clockwise end of the neck tone control rotation just adds more brightness (harmonics). But, whatever. Regarding blending and right-handed audio pots (you know, the ones that are available), the taper is backwards for effective blending; one gets maximum blend-in at "0" and maximum blend-out at "10". This is bass ackward. Now, regarding a push pull pot. I have done a wiring design that I have not published (since I find it to be somewhat pedestrian, and my bro'in-law won't decide if he likes it) that uses a push pull pot for the neck tone control. When the neck knob is down, it's a neck tone control and the bridge (or middle) tone control is a tone control. When the neck knob is up, it's a master tone control and the bridge (or middle) tone control is a blend control that blends the neck and bridge together. Yep, this means that whichever pickup is switch selected, the other is blended in. Now, before you recall my statement aboot the ackward bass, please note that I use a pan pot (the pot erroneously called a blend pot by virtually every parts supplier that belongs to the vast legion that cannot differentiate a burro from a burrow) since it has both (gasp  ) tapers within. The right-hand taper is selected when it's a'tone controllin' and the left-hand taper is selected when it's a'blendin'. Hot dang! Magic Technology. Now (it is one of my favorite words), since there is interest beyond the familial decision challenged, I'm interested in finding out just what you and other's want, and I'll help toward a design that encompasses things. |
|
|
|
Post by vegetablejoe on Feb 19, 2009 19:03:56 GMT -5
Thank you kindly for all your responses. I apologize. It seems I made a mistake in my initial post, which caused some confusion. My first tone knob controls tone on all 3 pickups. That leaves the second tone knob free to use as just a blender. The sweep of the 'blend' knob need not do anything when the push-pull is in the off/down position. I would like that, when I pull up on the knob, this engages the neck pickup. I fully understand that max blend in would be "0" on the knob, and min. blend (or supposedly none) would be at the "10". This is what I'm used to with the DIY blend from the other website (am I allowed to mention it's name here?). Either my wiring or the design was defective as I could hear some neck pup still coming through even on the minimum position on the DIY blend pot. Thats is why I had wanted to try an honest-to-goodness no-load pot - and hopefully actually switch off neck signal at the 10 position. In any case, I need to get back to re-reading and absorbing all you've told me, as I seem to be over my head with some of your replies.  Many thanks again. Jaime |
|
|
|
Post by vegetablejoe on Feb 19, 2009 19:10:31 GMT -5
ChrisK,
Thanks for the link. Those are some cool options. Will study them and see what I can use.
|
|
|
|
Post by pete12345 on Feb 20, 2009 4:14:27 GMT -5
Sounds like a cool idea- you can pre-select the amount of blend-in with the knob pushed down, then pull it up to switch to blend mode. I think you want something like this strat blender wiring. To use this with your neck-on idea, you need to wire one of the blender's connections through the pull-pull switch of the pot, rather than directly to the main switch. Incidentally, if in the 'neck' or 'neck and middle' positions, the blender will have the same effect but acting on the bridge pickup |
|
|
|
Post by ChrisK on Feb 20, 2009 21:07:19 GMT -5
Only if you agree to mention our name when you're "over there".   ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by vegetablejoe on Feb 20, 2009 22:37:58 GMT -5
pete,
thanks for the link on the blender wiring. I see it requires a real CTS blend pot, which I don't have access to here. I need to order up a bunch of these fancy pots and switches the next time my brother comes back to visit.
If I ever get my hands on one of those, I will certainly give it a try. But for now, I'll still have to work with what I've got - the 500k push-pull pot, or diy another pot.
ChrisK,
lol. I don't post much on any of the forums i browse through... just my nature. Thanks again for the link to the options. I hope to get something hooked up over the weekend.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisK on Feb 20, 2009 23:59:10 GMT -5
Irrelevant. A pot is a pot is a pot. This is a right-hand audio taper pot. They all have three terminals. There's nothing magic about a CTS pot (except to those afflicted with "vintage" ears (and wallets)). I hope that the 500k push-pull pot that you have is an audio taper one. If it is linear taper, the blending will be very abrupt. Referencing the drawing that pete linked to, for the pot on the right that blends the neck and middle pickup together, you will need to use the switch to interrupt either one of the two red wires going to that pot. This is how a push pull pot works. Wire the pot section just like the pot in pete's linked link. |
|
|
|
Post by vegetablejoe on Mar 15, 2009 22:30:03 GMT -5
I finally got around to doing this over the weekend! Actually completed two pickguard assemblies, since it was very simple - thanks specially to the strat blender wiring link provided by pete12345 and the info from ChrisK.
Didn't really need an expensive push-pull pot at all, and just used a regular 250K audio taper pot. (In hindsight, maybe I should have used a 500K pot for finer blending?) I found an old pickguard which had an extra hole punched for a toggle switch and routed the blender wiring through that switch.
While it doesn't look cool with an additional switch above the five-way sw, it is quite easy to grab or push the toggle switch with my pinky finger. Which leaves my picking fingers free to hover above the strings.
Leaving the blender knob "pre-selected" at the half-way mark gives a predictably slight difference in blended tone between pos. 1 vs. pos. 5 on the 5-way sw.
I've been using a blend knob for the longest time, except that I'd been needing a switch or no-load pot to kill the neck pup's signal. This one works quite well and was easy to wire up.
Thanks again y'all!
Jaime
|
|
|
|
Post by newey on Mar 15, 2009 22:59:37 GMT -5
Glad the mod worked out for you, Jaime! Ah, but now it looks modded, which is cool in its own way. Do they say "y'all" in Manila? What you mean is "all y'all"! |
|
|
|
Post by ChrisK on Mar 18, 2009 20:11:38 GMT -5
Au contraire, Pierre. The blending would have been worser(er) (abrupt'er) with a 500K pot.
Plural is.
Well, at least it's not New Joisey where dey say youses guys.
(?Youse guyses?)
|
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Mar 18, 2009 21:28:54 GMT -5
Well, at least it's not New Joisey where dey say youses guys. (?Youse guyses?) Or that area of PA where they say "yins". Shudder. |
|
|
|
Post by ChrisK on Mar 18, 2009 21:56:38 GMT -5
Actually, it's "uns" from the German "Gott mit uns" or "God with us". When someone says "how are youns" they are asking "how are we" even though they mean "how are you (all)". This is most often the greeting of choice used by a waitress.
It's one of those words that we've inherited from the Pennsylvania "Dutch" (actually the Pennsylvania Deutsch - German).
Now, it's the plural form that gets interesting. You hear yinzes, younses, all youns, etc. (It's actually, uh, uns.)
|
|
) tapers within. The right-hand taper is selected when it's a'tone controllin' and the left-hand taper is selected when it's a'blendin'.
;D ;D
