bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 18, 2010 6:43:08 GMT -5
Hello out there. New to the forums, but I'm looking at starting a new project and was wondering if anyone had any experience with humbucker-p90-humbucker wiring. Would this be just like any other HSH setup? Any diagrams/advice? Many thanks in advance.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 18, 2010 9:47:05 GMT -5
bigcookie-
Hello and Welcome to G-Nutz2!
The wiring will be like any HSH set-up, provided that the HBs are both 4-wire-plus-shield types and that the P-90 is a 2-wire-plus-shield type. Some "vintage" styles of HBs and of P-90s use the shield as one of the signal conductors (i.e., they are "one-wire-plus-shield"). These types can limit some of your wiring options.
Advice and diagrams we've got a-plenty. What we need is more info about what you want the guitar to do; otherwise, folks here will be throwing out all kinds of ideas which may not meet with any interest on your part.
Is this HSH guitar going to be a Strat-type, or something else? Will you want to retain a somewhat "stock" look, or are extra switches or knobs OK? What type of music do you play?
With 5 coils to work with, there are many options, so some direction is needed. Offhand, there are 2 HSH schemes- general ideas, subject to numerous variations on these themes- which I personally find interesting, although I've never built one.
First, there is the Ibanez (and others) style of what I call "progressive coil switching". This uses a 5-way lever switch to give the coils in sequence from neck to bridge:
5) Neck full HB 4) Neck S coil + mid P-90 3) P-90 4) P-90 + Bridge N coil 5) Bridge full HB
That's the basic scheme, numerous variations thereof are possible.
The second basic scheme involves wiring the 2 HBs as if it were a 2 HB guitar, and then using separate switching to add the P-90 to the mix- what we here call a "mid off" scheme. Again, numerous variations are possible. The "mid-off" types of schemes are generally a bit more "switchy" but can provide more options, while the "progressive" style may be more stage-friendly.
These are just two examples, many other schemes are available.
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 18, 2010 10:12:34 GMT -5
Thanks for the reply - plenty of food for thought! Let me try and answer your qs:
Yes, I'm looking at 4-wire-plus-shield HBs and a 2-wire-plus-shield p-90.
I'm actually thinking of getting a Jetson-style res-o-glas body from guitarkitsusa and a neck from Eastwood, but I don't want to overdo it with the knobs (1 vol & 1 or 2 tones a la strat is fine), and unlike the Eastwood reissues, any knobs (except the 5-way) will be down by the input jack, where they belong!
I play mainly blues/rock, some punky stuff, too.
I was thinking of the standard HSH use of the 5-way: 1) Neck HB 2) Neck HB & mid p-90 3) P-90 & bridge HB 4) Bridge HB
I don't know if splitting the coils of the HBs makes sense, as I can't imagine what the split coils will sound like with the p-90 and I'm not big on the straight up strat single-coil sound, hence the idea of using the p-90 in the first place. Everything's very theoretical right now though, so I'm open to suggestions.
PS What kind of pots am I looking at for this? 2x or 3x 500k I guess?
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 18, 2010 11:54:37 GMT -5
...I'm actually thinking of getting a Jetson-style res-o-glas body... Man, now there's a throwback... I had no idea anyone was making those again. They sort of put a pin in the whole tonewood debate... I remember the Airline models being very bright guitars. And you had virtually the entire guitar body to put things...including a clean pair of socks... I put a Bigsby on an Airline once. I remember beefing up the center and bridge supports to accommodate the additional stress. That also had the effect of taking some of the "neck heaviness" out of the body. I see they mention putting foam in the bodies now. We toyed with that a bit too. It does take some of the...whanky (for lack of a better word) tone out of it. Granted, amps, pickups and electronics are better now, but you might want to consider an extra set of volume and tone controls for the bridge. It can get "newey" bright without them...and it's not like you don't have the room. And I know I flog this one to death, but the Free Woman Tone mod would be very beneficial to you on this res-o-glas guitar body. Keep us posted on this build. I would be very interested to see how it turns out in the end. Happy Trails Cynical One
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 19, 2010 2:22:46 GMT -5
Thanks for the input, cynical. In an effort to tame that brightness, maybe it'd be best to go with individual tone knobs for each pup, but do really think it's necessary to install individual volumes instead of just one master? I guess there's enough space on that body for 6 knobs instead of 4, but I don't want things to get goofy-looking, if you get my drift.
In any case, I think I'd still like to keep the 5-way switch standard: 1) Neck HB 2) Neck HB & mid p-90 4) P-90 4) P-90 & bridge HB 5) Bridge HB
The Free Woman Tone mod sounds cool, but I'm really a novice with wiring, so maybe some other time. Once I figure out the electronics side, I'll start ordering parts and I will keep you posted on the build.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 19, 2010 9:36:16 GMT -5
If that's the case, then a regular Strat 5-way switch will do, and you can use a regular Strat wiring diagram. If you are not splitting the coils of the HBs, then their 2 coils get wired together, and the 2 ouput wires get treated just like a SC as far as wiring them to the switch.
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 19, 2010 11:22:23 GMT -5
...do really think it's necessary to install individual volumes instead of just one master?... Well that's one of those "what's the best cigar" questions... (ChrisK would say Cohiba Robusto and I would say Royal Jamaican Churchill) It's really a matter of opinion, more then gospel. My personal preference is more volume control versus tone control. I use both, but I use the volume controls much like a blender depending on the tone I'm looking for. This is why I really love the Free Woman tone mod as it gives me more flexibility from one master tone knob. My goal in a design is centered around playing the instrument, not the controls... Having said that, if it were me, and I wanted to keep the controls to a minimum, I'd probably go with a volume control for the two humbuckers and a volume control for the P-90 and one master tone with the Free Woman Tone mod...but that's just me. Or, you could go with one V & T for the two humbuckers and one V & T for the P-90. This would allow you more flexibility to tame the tone, if necessary, and eliminate the Free Woman Tone mod. ChrisK helped me out tremendously with a very similar design for a bass, but could be easily modified for a guitar. This has a volume for each pickup with a master tone. This eliminates much of the switching as the volume controls allow you to slant the neck and bridge pickup mix accordingly. It's dirt simple to use and allows almost infinite flexibility to control the tone. Thanks again, Chris. This is very doable. One other thing I would suggest is either a neck-on or bridge-on to give you both humbuckers sans the P-90. This is really a dog simple mod to pull off. For the few bucks you'll drop on the switch and extra caps the payback is well worth it. One thing I would suggest, if you haven't been there already, is a trip to Wolf's Page. He lays a lot of this out with very good illustrations to help the novice along. It helped me quite a bit starting out and I still use it as a ready reference...not that I'm an expert at this by any means... Another suggestion is to peruse the Design Modules and General Guitar Schematics sections on the board. Not all will apply, but they can help give you some insight into how the magic happens. If you find something in there you don't quite understand there are a multitude of very knowledgeable and talented people here that can help you understand and incorporate these elements in your design if you so desire. I guess my point is this, spend the extra time examining your options, make a few drawings and send them up. As a wise man once said "Experiment...it's only low voltage" Happy Trails Cynical One
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 20, 2010 5:51:02 GMT -5
Boy, you guys know so much about this stuff that my head's spinning! Thanks for the suggestions. I'm trying to incorporate all of these good ideas you're sending my way, but it's a bit overwhelming. Anyway, based on what you've been saying I've got another approach which I'd like to run by you. Here goes: I'd scrap the 5-way switch and replace with 3 on/off toggles, 1 per pup. This would give me all the combinations of the 5-way, plus a few more. I'd finish up with 3 vols (1 per pup) and 1 master tone. I'm not sure if this is genius or lunacy. Would it be super hard to pull off? What's my shopping list going to look like? I'm also trying to figure out what brand of pups to go with - obviously SD would be cool, but they ain't cheap. I've read mixed reviews on many other brands. Any additional input would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 20, 2010 6:41:07 GMT -5
Individual on/off switches gives you 2 more combos- N+Br and N+M+Br. Not a bad idea, the only downside is that, in live situations, you do have the possibility of turning the guitar off entirely by accident. Some folks like the ability to have an "all-off" option, however, as it can be used like a stand-by setting, to keep a spare guitar plugged in onstage and ready to go.
If you don't ordinarily play out, or if you're unconcerned about turning it off, I'd say go for it. Over time and playing, you'd probably learn to avoid turning it off inadvertently anyway.
The master tone with 3 volumes is a bit more problematic. In any setting with more than one pickup engaged, 2 (or 3) Vols will be linked in parallel via the tone control, meaning that turning one down turns down the whole shebang.
If there were only 2 vols, the problem can be solved by using a dual-gang pot for the master tone. A dual gang pot has 2 pots on one shaft, so each pickup is wired to its own pot- it's wired just like an LP with 2 tones, except they're controlled by one shaft/knob.
But that's for 2 Vols- no one makes a triple-gang pot as far as I know, at least not in a size or resistance suitable for guitar use.
Some folks do the 3 volume thing and just eliminate a tone control entirely, using their amp or pedals to affect tone. Another option is to use concentric pots for each pickup, giving individual tone and vols for each pickup.
As per your plan, subject to changes as above, you'll need 3 switches. SPDT On/Off switches will work OK, but DPDT On/On switches allow the unused pickups to be shunted, which may be a bit quieter than just disconnecting them.
You'll also need 4 potentiomenters, either 250KΩ or 500KΩ, or some combination of the 2 values. Tonally, you might find that 500K for the HBs is preferable, an 250K for the P-90, but that's more a matter of taste than anything.
As far as pickups, I use GFS pickups, as do others here, and they seem to garner good reviews for the price. Of course, you can find all sorts of opinions on pickups, it's a subjective thing and everyone has their likes and dislikes.
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 20, 2010 7:17:03 GMT -5
Thanks, newey. So yeah, I think the 3 toggle option is for me.
Based on what you've said, I'm a little apprehensive about the knobs, though. You think the 2 vol & 1 dual gang pot master tone is the way to go, or can you think of a more elegant solution? Cynical suggested one V & T for the two humbuckers and one V & T for the P-90. Is that a smarter move?
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 20, 2010 7:56:42 GMT -5
There really is no Holy Grail option for what you set up. This is your design and what you should be asking is "What works for the BigCookie?"
Asking an open ended question around here is an invitation to a running dialogue. Not that that's bad...but it does run out the time before something gets put on paper...
Ask yourself a few things. What did I like about certain guitars? What did I dislike about certain guitars? What features or functions did I wish I had on other guitars? What features make no sense to my playing or musical style?
This is your design. I prefer functionality and ease of use. There are people here that put more controls on a guitar then you'll find in most fighter planes...
Do you need 93 tones? Do you want an array of knobs and switches, or is simplicity your preference?
I throw this out there now, as this is really where we should have been directing you from the beginning... We have you racing down the track...but forgot to saddle your horse...
In regards to pickups. This is deep water we're in now, and is also another "What's your favorite cigar" question.
I have been impressed with SD, DiMarzio, Kent Armstrong and Rio Grande. There are folks here who swear by GFS or DragonFire. Whatever works for you is cool.
What I do is make a short list of the pickups I'd like to use in a design and start haunting eBay...and be patient. Like most auctions, people will pay more for an item then it's worth just to win the auction. So be it...let the suckers clear themselves out... I just hide in the bushes and wait for my shot.
Actual Examples:
Rio Grande Halfbreed RWRP SC - $25.09 ($66.95 new) SD SSL-1 - $28.01 ($62.95 new) DiMarzio Virtual PAF - $31.05 (Discontinued, but replacement $69.00) DiMarzio YJM - $32.51 (Discontinued, but replacement $60.00) Kent Armstrong Closed Rails - $19.07. ($65.00 new) (Prices include shipping - new prices are best on-line deal)
Basically, by losing 8 out of 10 auctions I was able to purchase 2 pickups for essentially the retail cost of one. My theory is why pay $30.00 for a $30.00 pickup when I can get a $60.00-$70.00+ pickup for $30.00. (Or less...) Does it take a while? Yes. Did I get burned. No. Everything listed tested and works just fine.
Guess now is a good time to ask what style of music you play?
Happy Trails
Cynical One
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 20, 2010 8:45:27 GMT -5
Thanks. Yes, I suppose a few too many open-ended qs have poured from my fingers in the last couple of days. Let me get a bit more specific.
No, I don't need 93 tones in a guitar - I can generally squeeze a few sounds that I like out of anything with enough patience and tweaking. I play mainly blues/rock stuff from Freddie King to the Black Keys and all points in between, with the occasional surf, rockabilly, punk or even world music touch thrown into the bargain. My favorite axes in my collection right now are an LP classic and a Mosrite clone from Hallmark, both great instruments, but very different.
To me, having more pick-up combo options is more appealing than a ton of vols & tones - I'd really like to draw the line at four knobs, and I think 2 & 2 would suit me just fine.
This project is going to be my intro to building guitars, which is one of the reasons why the res-o-glas kit is so appealing to me - no worries about finishing and a really transparent experience as you can get right into that body up to your elbows. I'm not super picky, but I don't want to waste my time or make this a hassle when it's supposed to be fun. As long as the thing plays, sounds and looks okay, I'm sure I'll be happy with the result.
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 20, 2010 11:02:41 GMT -5
…and who does, really?...
Well, if you’re happy with a Les Paul, then the two volumes and two tones are in the ballpark.
Sounds like from the music you’re playing you’d be happier with lower output pickups. Something the marketing weasels like to call vintage. Basically, it’s going to be a cleaner tone as the output will not be as prone to drive your amp into fits of distortion without some effort on your part. You can still slap a pedal in the chain and scare the neighbor’s cat senseless when the mood strikes you.
This is where you’d probably like to begin your research. Start looking at the different pickup manufacturer’s websites and get a feel for what they offer. Find the specs on your P-90 and work the neck and bridge off those specs.
You might want to dig a bit deeper into the series/parallel, coil split and phase options. There are a few sound samples here on the site, and links to others off the forum that might give you some insight into their worth to your playing style.
Another useful thing to look at right now is the budget for the project. To me, the neck is the most crucial part of the build, because if the neck is bad all the electronics and gee-whiz stuff in the world is not going to make it fun to play. You seem to have the neck and body already figured out. Now it’s just time to start detailing all the nickel and dime…and dollars and more dollars stuff…
A lot of “keeping the build fun” is eliminating as many gotchas as you can before you start. A final schematic/build diagram, layout of pickups, bridge type and location, electronics spec and layout, tuners, nut, strings….etc ad nauseum…will help keep you on track and allow you to walk away for a time, if necessary, and not encounter the infamous “WTF was I doing here” moments…
Now is the time to examine everything. Eliminate what doesn’t interest you and start visualizing what you want to achieve. As your component selection narrows, you’ll find the guitar begins to design itself based on what you want it to do.
I understand that starting out with a project like this can be daunting. Many of the things that have been tossed out to you seem like Greek. A lot of it still looks like Greek to me, too. Nevertheless, after a while things like “The Free Woman Tone”, “Treble Bleeds”, “Coil Splits” and “Universal Phase Switch” will begin to make sense and their value to a design justify learning more about them. You might want to stay away from the ChrisK drawings starting out…they can make string theory and quantum physics look simple…
The one thing I’ve noticed about this board is that the better question you ask, the better answer you receive. Take a stab at a diagram. If it has issues, someone will point it out and help you to make it right. Have a clear vision and your design will stay on track.
The veil will lift…it gets easier…
Happy Trails
Cynical One
|
|
|
Post by thetragichero on Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
To me, the neck is the most crucial part of the build, because if the neck is bad all the electronics and gee-whiz stuff in the world is not going to make it fun to play. i'd like to second this. on the tele i've got in the works, i spent almost as much on the neck as in all of the other parts combined (besides the callaham bridge... those are pricey! and no, i didn't go for any of the 'cryo-treated' jacks and pots and crap. all my electrons line up perfectly fine for me, thankyouverymuch)
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 20, 2010 17:32:27 GMT -5
OK, things are starting to make more sense to me, and I think I may even get this thing right one day, especially with the assistance of the kind folks on this forum - very helpful stuff.
My final dumb question of the day, this time on the subject of the pup switches, newey wrote:
SPDT On/Off switches will work OK, but DPDT On/On switches allow the unused pickups to be shunted, which may be a bit quieter than just disconnecting them.
I'm a little confused. What's the difference between shunting pups and tapping coils? DPDTs are 3 position switches (on/off/on), right? Is this also an opportunity for tapping the humbuckers? Forgive my ignorance if I'm totally off the mark, or give me a thumbs-up if I'm getting somewhere. Either way, I'll learn somethin'! Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 20, 2010 22:33:10 GMT -5
Some are, some aren't. Double-Pole, Double Throw switches come in several different flavors, On-On, On-Off, On-Off-On, On-On-On, and several others.
Cyn1 already linked you to Wolf's page, which contains a good explanation of switch types. Better, at any rate, than I could explain here.
"Shunting" a pickup, also called "shorting", is a different subject than coil splits. Although, coil splits on a HB are often achieved by shunting one coil of the two, leaving the other coil active.
I'm talking about shorting unused pickups to ground rather than simply disconnecting the hot line, in terms of wiring your on-off switches for each pickup. This may (and I emphasize may) make a difference in noise- or not, it's an open question whether it really makes a difference.
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 21, 2010 4:31:25 GMT -5
Thanks. Personally, I'm for simplicity. I'll be more than satisfied with on-off switches for starters. I know folks keep suggesting that I put in a coil tap, but I just don't think I'll use it that much.
I'd like to do (or better yet, find ;D) a diagram for this thing. I figure after going through the DPDTs the HBs will both run through 1 vol & 1 tone, and the P-90 will have its own vol & tone.
I'm hopefully going to order the body & neck before New Year's. I'm also looking at GFS pups - their Dream 90 HB sized-P-90 should look nice sandwiched between a pair of Fat Pats.
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 21, 2010 11:12:32 GMT -5
First off, I'm no expert on the GFS line. I don't own any and have never played them.
I do wonder whether the Fat Pat with your P-90 is the best combination. I say this as the Fat Pat pickup appears to be a high output PAF and may very well eclipse your P-90 when combined with either neck, bridge or both.
I noticed that GFS also has a Classic II Alnico 2 Vintage wound and a Vintage 59 Classic Alnico V humbucker that might work and play well with your P-90.
As I said previously, I'm no GFS devotee, so others please feel free to chime in if I'm all wet on this.
HTC1
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 21, 2010 11:42:15 GMT -5
Yes, you're probably right on those HBs. The 59s seem a better fit for the P-90. Incidentally, what do folks normally put in the middle position, a 'neck' or 'bridge' pup? From what I've seen, it looks like a 2nd neck pup.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 21, 2010 13:10:03 GMT -5
Usually, yes. It has only been relatively recently that anyone made a "matched set" of pups, usually just meaning the bridge is a bit hotter so as to compensate for the lower output at the Bridge position (because the pup is closer to the end of the string).
On vintage Strats, all 3 pickups were identical and no one seemed to mind.
BTW, I mis-spoke early on the type of switches needed. A pup can be disconnected using a simple SPST switch (2 lugs only, so On/Off). It can be grounded using a SPDT (3 lugs, On/On). You don't need 2 poles to do it.
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 21, 2010 14:15:03 GMT -5
Yeah, that's what I thought about the bridge pup - interesting factoid about the vintage Strat pups. Also thanks for clearing up the SPST vs. DPDT thing. You know, you guys make think about stuff, which could be a plus or a minus. I'm now toying with the idea of splitting the HB coils with a push-pull switch. The possibilities are endless! In any case, the neck has been ordered but I've got to wait for the res-o-glas people to finish their end-of-year inventory before I can order the body, tailpiece and pup rings. I'd sure like to get the wiring diagram together soon so I can order the necessary components. I may try this on my own, but I'm about 99% sure I'll screw it up . Don't suppose anyone has a little time, patience and goodwill to spare for a 33-year-old wiring virgin?
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 21, 2010 16:09:06 GMT -5
Now, that's the spirit. First stop I would suggest is at Guitar Electronics and their list of switch mods. It gives a brief description of what the mod is and a link through to a modular diagram. We also have a pool of resources here, but this place will give you the component part right on the page to build up a parts order. Sure, you could go to Digi-Key and probably save a few coins and get better stuff, but this can go a long way in going from "What about this..." into a tangible reality. Series and parallel are very useful options as well...but I digress... The best advice I can offer is to muddle through all the available options, check out our Sound Samples or Guitars sections to see if someone posted a sound sample of the option you are considering and see if it's a module you want to incorporate. Sometimes you can find comparative examples on youtube, but that can be a coin toss. Once you have your design criteria in place take a shot at drawing it up. MS Paint, MS Word, Gimp or any app that allows you to make boxes and lines can be used to put a simple diagram together. Check your wiring colors for the correct phasing and put it up. As long as you make an honest effort folks here will keep you out of the shark tank. So, first order of business is to decide on what you want in your design. Determine the correct wiring colors on the pickups and start laying it out. This will all seem like Greek starting out, but after a few tries it does begin to make sense. ChrisK was a big proponent of the module form of design in that the whole is just an assemblage of its parts. You work out the modules, keep the signal chain intact and a complex system can be broken down to smaller very understandable pieces. Of course, he never made it easy, but he always stayed with you until you understood it. So, take your best shot and feel free to ask as many questions as necessary. Happy Trails Cynical One
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 21, 2010 16:35:59 GMT -5
Boy, if only my boss was as encouraging as you guys...
Hope I don't make you regret this. Here come 2 more quick ones.
1. If I'm using a push/pull as a coil tap, is that going to be the vol or tone pot, or could it be either one?
2. Is the 'tapped' coil the one omitted or included?
Just FYI, I think I'm going back to the 1 vol & 1 tone per pup plan, 6 knobs total. I think I can squeeze 'em in, especially if they're small enough.
I see a heckuva lot of wires and solder in my future. This is going to be awesome.
|
|
|
Post by cynical1 on Dec 21, 2010 16:40:08 GMT -5
Boy, if only my boss was as encouraging as you guys... Hey, your boss is paying you... We're just going to bill you later... Leaving work shortly and have horses to feed when I get there, so let me catch up with you later...or more then likely someone else will be dropping by first. HTC1
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 21, 2010 19:42:03 GMT -5
Yes. ;D ;D But seriously, the P/P and the pot are separate components, they're just attached like conjoined twins. You can wire the coil split in whatever position is most convenient to you; the pot is wired separately from the switch. Your problem here is, first of all, terminology. "Tap" is a misnomer, even though you'll hear or read many folks talking about a "coil tap". What you are going to do is, technically, a "coil split", sometimes called a "coil shunt". You're starting with 2 coils, and disconnecting or grounding out one of the two, so only 1 is operating. Generally, a coil is said to be "split off" from the HB, meaning that coil remains operational. Alternatively, the other coil can be said to be "shunted", or off. "Tap" is misleading because a thing called a "coil tap" does exist, but it's something else entirely. A "Tapped" coil has a center connection allowing one to "tap into" only one-half of the coil windings, so that only a part of the coil is being used. Often, transformer coils are tapped. While tapped coils don't come up much in guitars, if I recall there have been tapped coils used in guitar pickups in the past. So talking of "tapped coils" risks confusion. How do I know this? Because I got the same correction about 2 years ago when I wrote "coil tap" herein. As far as a diagram, I'm with Cyn1, try your hand. It's always better to draw it up yourself, you'll have a deeper understanding of the design than if you merely "paint by numbers". Over the years, I've posted a great number of wrong diagrams here that needed several revisions after my mistakes were pointed out by others. Your first diagram will probably contain an error or 2 as well. But don't worry about that, the exercise is worth it.
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 22, 2010 14:52:59 GMT -5
Thanks for the clarifications. I'm now at work on draft 1 of the wiring diagram and came up with another question or 2.
What order should the wires run in; Pup-SPST-vol-tone-output jack or pup-vol-tone-SPST-output jack?
And since each pup now has its own SPST, vol & tone, where do I join 'em all up before connecting to the jack?
I'm also reading up on the GFS pups. Many good things out there. What's the deal with their wire coding? Is it the same as SD?
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 22, 2010 18:58:53 GMT -5
The second one listed is how it's usually done, if each pup is getting its own controls. I'm not really sure why the first option is not generally done, but I'm thinking that having the pots after the switch leaves the resistance load of those pots still in circuit even when the pickup in question is off? Not sure on that. Whether tone comes before volume- now we've entered the Great LP Debate, on '50's LP wiring versus modern. JohnH's post in this section details the differences. Basically, you'll have a "hot" connection coming from each switch, and all 3 do meet at the jack hot. There are various ways of doing this, but you can simply wire all three to the jack. The ground wires just go to whatever is serving as your grounding point. Do I understand you to mean you have decided to go with simply disconnecting the pickups using SPST on/off switches? EDIT:Just so we're clear, here's what I mean:
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 23, 2010 1:56:39 GMT -5
OK, I get the pup-vol-tone-SPST-output jack order. It'll mean a little more back and forth with the wiring, but it's my project and I'll wire if I want to.
As for the "the Great LP Debate," I went ahead and read the thread you sent, but as a rookie, I'm all too happy to leave that to someone else. In other words, I'm planning on sticking with vol-tone.
Yes, that's the plan. Thanks for the diagrams - the first one is for me. Unless there's a really convincing reason to go with SPDTs over SPSTs, I don't see the value in a third toggle position when I just need two.
I'm feeling much better now that I'm firmly set on the individual vol, tone and SPST per pup. It'll make the wiring work more consistent and controlling each pup's sound will be easier for me to keep track of.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Dec 23, 2010 6:39:29 GMT -5
Both switches in my diagram have only 2 positions. One is a SPST On/Off switch, meaning 2 lugs, since in the "off" position there is no connection made inside the switch. The other is a SPDT ("on/on"-3 lugs). The center lug is common, and connects to either end, as shown by the arrows.
Either way will work fine. There may (and again I emphasize may) be more noise if the pickup is not shunted; no guarantee that it would be noisier, just a possibility. In practice, you may notice no difference between the 2 methods.
If noise increases when one of the pickups is switched off, as compared to all 3 being on, then you'll know that you should have shunted the pups.
I'm not suggesting one method over the other, I'd say the odds are you wouldn't notice any difference between the 2. I just want you to understand the choices you are making.
|
|
bigcookie
Rookie Solder Flinger
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
|
Post by bigcookie on Dec 23, 2010 13:43:49 GMT -5
Yup, totally missed that one. Please forgive my ignorance. If I'm already doing this, I may as well eliminate risks of hum or other problems where I can. I'll go with SPDTs - found some already for an okay price. Diagram draft 1 is more than half done. I'll post it when I'm finished.
|
|