Yes, I'm new to all of this wiring stuff and indeed this forum but without asking I will never know.
A couple of days ago the selector switch in my Fat Strat broke. Being the person I am I took it all apart and decided I would rewire it to suit my needs a little more. While I have lots of experience with a soldering iron, I know little about guitar wiring (I did have a quick gander at the sticky at the top of this page, very helpful).
Christomephisto's diagram involves 4 coils, whereas you have only 3, so some major adaptation will need to be done. The diagram he linked to also uses a 3-position Gibson-style toggle, so the switch wiring will also be different.
Essentially, as I read your request, you want to have the N*M (series "widely spaced HB") and B*M (another widely spaced HB, series-connected). You didn't specify how you wanted the 2 "HB"s connected together, CM assumed in parallel and I assume likewise.
So, on a three way Tele switch, you want to get:
1) B*M 2) (B*M)+(M*N) 3) M*N
I think this is doable but I don't have a diagram in mind. I'll let someone with a bit more moxy advise you on how to do this. I'm thinking you would need to use the second pole of the 3-way switch to switch the mid between the Br and N.
Post by ChristoMephisto on Jun 23, 2009 16:20:41 GMT -5
Newey, where did that link bring you? Its for a two s/c Tele with a 3-way blade switch, standard vol/tone pots.
Thought the Fat Strat was a SSH config , I'm more of a Tele/LP player. Thought dsgtrain was going to wire the s/cs up in series making it a spaced humbucker, cause he wanted a two humbucker config. Though I do like the B>M and M>N options for a three s/c
Also, another quick question whilst I'm at it. Is it OK to use the foil backing where the pots and switch are located to ground out the pots rather than create a ground loop (which I'm told is bad)?
The foil shield is a shield and not a signal conductor. Connecting the pot backshells together with a soldered jumper wire creates a reliable signal path that happens to be in local parallel with the shield (which is not/nor should be used as, a signal conductor).
This is not a ground loop since there is no signal flowing in the shield.
Fender has chosen to connect the pot backshells together with soldered jumper wires in virtually every Strat of recent design. They make many guitars every year and this represents a significant cost saving opportunity, but they continue to do this because they feel that it's important.
I call that a clue.....
The shield on a Strat pickguard is a tenuous layer of thin aluminum foil, I'm not sure that I'd count on it even as a shield.
The Tele brass control plate, now that's a flat bus bar!
I can't say as I recall having read JohnH's opinion on the 2V 1T thing, so I'll patiently wait.
In the meantime, I noticed that both of the links you've posted there, dsg, have both volumes wired with the input (pickup) on the CW lug, and the wiper going to the output (switch, in this case).
This is the best idea for circuits that have potential for high current output because it avoids shorting (and, usually, burning) out the output. This is not a concern in a guitar circuit since the pickups aren't going to generate enough current.
It is, though, a good idea in a Master Volume guitar because it shorts the input to the amplifier. This keeps the guitar cable from becoming a big old antenna.
Some folks find that this wiring is not ideal for guitars with multiple volumes dedicated to different pickups (or sub-circuits) for the exact same reason. Think of what will happen when the switch is in the middle position (both "pickups" selected). Turning either of the V pots all the way down will short the switch, and result in no output from either pickup.
I think the rough consensus around here is that this is a non-issue, since if one wanted exactly one pickup, one could use the switch. Thought I'd mention it anyway. If you find this to be a problem, just swap the wires on those pots between the CW and the Center (wiper) lugs.
Post by ChristoMephisto on Jun 24, 2009 16:03:06 GMT -5
Seems to work on a Jazz Bass, or a LP with independent volume control where both pups are wired to the center lug and out the end lug, and both wired '50's style' to the tone pot and to the output jack
I'm well aware that the volume volume tone configuration is used many places.
I don't want my post to be construed that there is something wrong with doing this, but only that there are tonal interactions between the volume and tone controls.
In a configuration where the tone is directly connected across a pickup, that tone circuit (usually a series RC network) is driven by the pickup's full output capability. The volume control is downstream (between the pickup||tone circuit and the output) and hence varies the output level from that combination, who's intrinsic tonal characteristics stay intact. Varying the volume pot does result in a varying output impedance for that combination in driving the cable capacitance and amp input impedance.
When the tone is decoupled from the pickup drive by the effective impedance of the volume pot, the frequency response changes to some degree. Simulations would have to be run to graphically show the effect.
Yes, I think there are issues with the usual ways of having one tone and two volumes. The way it is done is to put the single tone pot after the two volumes and switching. At full volume, its fine, but at reduced volume, the tone control cannot act directly with the pickups, but instead only via the higher impedance of a turned-down volume pot. The result is that the tone pot cuts much deeper into the mids and lower frequencies - as described in my post on 50's wiring that Chris linked to: guitarnuts2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=wiring&action=display&thread=1885
That being said, some basses, flying V and parts of the LP fraternity wire this way, to their loss IMO. Its OK, but just be aware that there could be trade-offs in how consistently the tone control works.