|
Post by roadtonever on Jul 30, 2011 14:48:57 GMT -5
I'm sure someone has drawn this and I can't seem to come up with the right search terms today. I'm looking for a 2-pickup master vol-tone scheme with a series setting on the pickup selector that has the tone control connected to one pickup instead of both.
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on Jul 30, 2011 15:49:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by roadtonever on Jul 30, 2011 18:40:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jul 30, 2011 22:12:55 GMT -5
RTN- Check your link above, it's GeFooey.
|
|
|
Post by roadtonever on Jul 31, 2011 10:46:20 GMT -5
The link was meant to go to amsith's Pezzcaster: I suspects jumper going between the BxN(*) and BxN poles are involved but I'm in way over my head. EDIT: I should mention my destination for such a setting is a 3p4t rotary guitarnuts2.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=schem&action=display&thread=5821I'm not very clever with switches so I'm struggling with trying to understand the modular concept behind asmith's BxN(*). For parallel combos selective un-mastering seems simple like JohnH mentions, just add the tone pot to the corresponding terminal on a second pole and commons to out blah blah blah
|
|
|
Post by newey on Jul 31, 2011 20:35:28 GMT -5
OK, just so I'm clear, your goal here is that the tone control operates only on the neck pickup in position 4, which is B * N? Position 3, it's series with a master tone?
I think you've got it there as is.
Well, this scheme uses all the poles of a 4P5T Superswitch; the 4th pole switches the tone control. Given that you want this in series, I can't see how to do it with just a 3P rotary switch. You'd need 4 poles.
|
|
|
Post by roadtonever on Jul 31, 2011 23:50:07 GMT -5
Compared to my current rotary scheme I want the tone control to operate only on the bridge pickup in position #3, as master on #1-2 &4. The four pole requirement would still stand?
|
|
|
Post by newey on Aug 1, 2011 5:53:41 GMT -5
OK, I see where you're headed here. I think a 3rd pole should do it in that case, although I haven't worked it out exactly in my mind yet.
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Aug 1, 2011 11:25:43 GMT -5
It can be done with just 3 poles. How you do it depends on where the Bridge pickup ends up in the series stack - top or bottom.
In the scheme to which JohnH has linked the bridge is on the "bottom" of the stack - permanently connected to ground.
In this case you'll connect the grounded end of the tone pot (through the cap or whatever) to ground, and the other lug to the common of your 3rd pole.
Connect the "hot output" wire going from the rest of the switch to the volume pot to positions 1, 2, and 4.
Connect the "top" of the bridge pickup (the common of the right hand side of the switch shown) to position 3.
It's important to note that in that scheme the commons are the end ones offset inward: The top lug on the right side and the bottom lug on the left.
It's also important to note that this tone control will affect both pickups to an extent. You'll get that broadbucker thing where the highs from the bridge are shunted out and the highs from the neck bypass the the extra inductance of the bridge pickup. It will likely get noticeably brighter as you turn the Tone down.
|
|
|
Post by asmith on Aug 1, 2011 12:58:10 GMT -5
That Seymour Duncan diagram has a na-hasty hang from hot.
However, after a lot of screwing up Post-It notes in the office, Ash's method seems to me the only way you can do it with three poles.
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Aug 1, 2011 13:13:08 GMT -5
See that empty lug on the right hand side? Connect it to the left side common (the bottom of the neck pickup) and the "hanging hot" issue is solve.
I credit sumgai with that fix.
|
|
|
Post by asmith on Aug 1, 2011 14:44:59 GMT -5
I expected to look again at that Seymour Duncan image and feel utterly ashamed - but I still don't get it. Now I expect I'm being as thick as two short planks. So I would wire it up like this: But I don't see how in Position #1, Bridge Only, that the Neck + gets grounded, or connected to Neck -. I guess if one connected the empty lug on the left to Right-most Common (Bridge +), it would short the Neck Pickup. Is that what you mean? But you'd still have that shorted pickup outputting to hot - something still debated as possibly 'bad.'However, the last thing I want to do is fire up that old worn-out topic. I simply want to clear this up for myself.
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Aug 1, 2011 15:31:23 GMT -5
Yeah, sorry. Actually you can connect left side top lug either to right side common or right side lug 1 or hot output or neck hot or whatever's most convenient. See (also) here
|
|
|
Post by roadtonever on Aug 1, 2011 17:57:34 GMT -5
Thank you switchmeisters especially ashcatlt for the clear and concise explanation. I'm thrilled I won't need to source an exotic or expensive part! That said I'm surprised I've not seen more schemes which include a "variable broadbucker" considering how useless the tone control is in vanilla series. But I'm probably biased and I haven't seen all the schemes out there. I realize extra poles aren't free for that matter.
All of this reminds of a Zappa quote: "If we can't be free at least we can be cheap."
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Aug 1, 2011 18:17:22 GMT -5
I like having all the broadbucker sounds, though they are generally pretty much special case type things. I find that I tend to prefer with the tone control across the neck turned down. The more "nasal" sound from the bridge seems to go better with the series lows. Maybe it's just me, but I am curious exactly why you chose to put it across the bridge instead.
|
|
|
Post by roadtonever on Aug 1, 2011 20:02:46 GMT -5
I agree it's not the most all-round type of sounds. I really like it though, it resembles a J-bass/P-Bass hybrid to me. I've only played with these combos on bass so far but I'll likely get to experiment with them on guitar soon as I'm getting close to being content with my bass scheme.
I guess my preference on the tone control over the bridge pickup has to do with my aversion to the bridge pickups output in the higher mid-range which the tone cap ducks nicely and conveniently matches my favored tone cap value preference for other settings. My trials with the cap over the neck pickup didn't leave me satisfied as I found it either overly honky or too much ugly high-mids were shining through. That said I prefer a more polished sound and I understand why some might prefer the sound of it the other way, while "quirky" one thing going for it is that I will cut through better than "my" way.
|
|
|
Post by roadtonever on Aug 3, 2011 21:17:51 GMT -5
In this case you'll connect the grounded end of the tone pot (through the cap or whatever) to ground, and the other lug to the common of your 3rd pole. Connect the "hot output" wire going from the rest of the switch to the volume pot to positions 1, 2, and 4. Connect the "top" of the bridge pickup (the common of the right hand side of the switch shown) to position 3. It's important to note that in that scheme the commons are the end ones offset inward: The top lug on the right side and the bottom lug on the left. Did I do this right?
|
|
|
Post by newey on Aug 3, 2011 22:10:50 GMT -5
I don't think that's what you want.
At position 4, your neck + connects to bridge +, and bridge - is grounded, so the hot line is grounded through the bridge pickup's coil- I'm not sure what if anything that would do, but I don't think it's what you want at that position.
Also, the resistor on the neck + pole, between positions 1 and 2, doesn't seem to be doing anything since the 2 positions are shorted together via the red wire.
There may be more issues, I stopped there.
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Aug 3, 2011 22:20:04 GMT -5
I'm afraid this (to me right now at least) bears no resemblance to either the SD diagram or my description. If I'm reading it correctly you've got the top pole doing nothing. The Neck + is connected directly to hot output and every position lug. And what's the deal with the resistors? That one on the top pole is shorted to itself (or parallel to a 0Ω resistor - x||0=0). Looking at the switch in the SD the lugs - from top to bottom are as follows: Left Side - 1234C Right Side - C1234 Edit - ninja'd again! I'm currently trying to turn two boat anchors into barely functional media machines so I don't have a working platform to draw it for you. Start with the SD thing. Add the jumper we talked about to "fix" the hanging hot. Then add the third pole and T control as I described. Then explain to us what the R's are all about and we'll figure out where they go.
|
|
|
Post by roadtonever on Aug 4, 2011 0:37:45 GMT -5
Hope this one is'nt as error ridden as the last. I didn't draw the the hanging ground fix as I've not yet considered the the rotary I'm using and which option is neatest so I added an annotation for now. The two Rs are intended to be connected in series with each pickup when the parallel combo is selected. They sweeten the parallel combo and make the tone control response closer to either pickup alone or kill the tone depending on how you look at it. EDIT: I understand that it's not for everyone so I'll to draw a mechanical diagram for the most common(?) Alpha rotary part without the Rs after I get an OK on my last drawing or subsequent revision.
|
|
|
Post by asmith on Aug 4, 2011 3:44:10 GMT -5
Interesting to note you have your pickups reversed in your diagram. The negatives are positives and vice versa. It doesn't actually make a difference to the sound though. Deliberate? Otherwise, you're missing that all-important connection from Top-Tier "1" to Middle-Tier "2." And because selection "4" is your series selection, not "3," you need to swap Bottom-Tier "3" & "4." I've drawn up a diagram, but I think you're doing really well on this for someone who " doesn't read schematics." If you do give up, just say and I'll post it, or someone'll beat me to it with their own, etc. Best of luck.
|
|
|
Post by roadtonever on Aug 4, 2011 4:48:35 GMT -5
Interesting to note you have your pickups reversed in your diagram. The negatives are positives and vice versa. It doesn't actually make a difference to the sound though. Deliberate? Not deliberate. Interesting to know that it sounds the same. Functionally identical also? Would it affect grounding? Otherwise, you're missing that all-important connection from Top-Tier "1" to Middle-Tier "2." And because selection "4" is your series selection, not "3," you need to swap Bottom-Tier "3" & "4." I carried out your second corection saving the hanging hot for the mechanical drawing I'll do. In that line of thought should I assume either one of the red wire terminals could could be chosen to connect to the volume pot? I've drawn up a diagram, but I think you're doing really well on this for someone who " doesn't read schematics." If you do give up, just say and I'll post it, or someone'll beat me to it with their own, etc. Best of luck. Thank you for the kind offer, your assistance is most helpful!
|
|
|
Post by asmith on Aug 4, 2011 5:05:05 GMT -5
Not deliberate. Interesting to know that it sounds the same. Functionally identical also? Would it affect grounding? Functionally identical yes, and affect grounding no. I carried out your second corection saving the hanging hot for the mechanical drawing I'll do. In that line of thought should I assume either one of the red wire terminals could could be chosen to connect to the volume pot? If you mean "See all those red wires? As long as I've got all the switch terminals connected, can I connect any of them to the volume pot?" then yes. Otherwise I'm not sure what you mean.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Aug 4, 2011 5:21:02 GMT -5
RTN-
I think you're moving backwards, not forwards, here. I see more problems with this one than the first one.
At pos. 3, the neck - is grounded, as is the bridge -, but neither + is connected to anything, so no output.
There also appears to be no output at position 4, which should, I believe, be "neck only" since position 1 is "bridge only".
|
|
|
Post by roadtonever on Aug 4, 2011 5:41:21 GMT -5
My goal silently shifted from #3 series #4 neck to #3 neck #4 series. It grew on me so I didn't fight it but this wasn't clearly stated. Sorry about the confusion.
|
|
|
Post by asmith on Aug 4, 2011 5:55:27 GMT -5
At pos. 3, the neck - is grounded, as is the bridge -, but neither + is connected to anything, so no output. Whatchu talkin' bout, Newey? ;D The N+ is constantly connected to Output through lugs 1 & 2 of the Middle Tier. If you want N*B on position "3" instead of "4," just swap the connections for 3 and 4 around on each tier of the rotary switch. Job's a good'un.
|
|
|
Post by roadtonever on Aug 4, 2011 8:19:07 GMT -5
Hopefully both are free from error. I took a good long though about which of the layout would be preferable. I see an advantage with 4-way Tele layout having the most characteristic and loud sounds are at either end. The other way has the advantage of a, to me, mopre gradual shift in tonality from one end to the other. Still undecided.
|
|
|
Post by asmith on Aug 4, 2011 9:08:49 GMT -5
Looks good to me, except for your "To fix hanging hot" wire instruction. If you connect Middle 2 to Top C, in Position "2" your Neck Pickup will be shorted. That "fixing" wire should be from Top 1 to Middle C, Middle 1 or Middle 2. Nothing else. Interestingly, if you want to include a resistor in series with the Bridge Pickup for the parallel setting, you can do a little jiggery pokery with the wires like so: The "hanging from hot" fix wire can only go in a further limited number of places now, so I included it. Also, I'm not familiar with adding resistors to parallel settings. However, if you need one in series with the Neck Pickup as well as the Bridge, replace that wire link between Top Tier lugs 2 and 3 with a resistor. It shouldn't matter electronically if the resistor is "in front of" or "behind" the pickup - in this case it's "behind," between the pickup and ground.
|
|
|
Post by ashcatlt on Aug 4, 2011 9:19:16 GMT -5
The confusion with that bottom pole was my fault, I think. I was going by his stated desire for series at three and forgot that's not how the SD diagram does it.
|
|
|
Post by newey on Aug 4, 2011 17:56:36 GMT -5
Yeah, sorry, I missed that. At any rate, the latest diagram by asmith looks good to go, pending decisions on the resistors as noted.
|
|