|
Post by simes on May 22, 2012 7:41:36 GMT -5
Hello.
I’m sure this must have been covered before, if only in fragments of various threads, but …
Consider, if you will, a conventional HH set-up connected to a 3-way toggle switch. I can use a push-pull pot to split both PU’s in order to select only the outer coils, thus giving a Tele-like arrangement. That much I can grasp.
Alternatively, I could wire the push-pull to select only the inner coils … right?
Now, if I have one push-pull selecting outer coils, and I wire a second push-pull to select inner coils, is there a way for the latter to override the former if both are pulled? Or would I have to live with it as a kill switch?
Taking it even further, if I wanted to use a third and a fourth push-pull to give local series/parallel for each PU, I’m guessing this “mode” wouldn’t be compatible with the split mode.
This is intended as a test bed for trying out several PU’s, and isn’t intended to be particularly stageworthy.
Cheers,
Simes
|
|
|
Post by JohnH on May 22, 2012 8:36:32 GMT -5
I think that what you ask is quite possible, or close to it. Two switches can be used to give either coil,or both in series or parallel,for one pup. So 4 such switches will do both pups.
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on May 22, 2012 8:37:16 GMT -5
Taking it even further, if I wanted to use a third and a fourth push-pull to give local series/parallel for each PU, I�m guessing this �mode� wouldn�t be compatible with the split mode. I think you can get everything you're after with just two push/pulls. Normal (local series) Inner coils - pp#1 pulled Outer coils - pp#2 pulled Local parallel - both pps pulled.
|
|
|
Post by sumgai on May 22, 2012 9:44:58 GMT -5
simes, Or you can eliminate all the push-pull mumbo-jumbo and just go straight for a Tele-Baja Special switch. That's a 4throw version of a standard 2P3T Tele switch. It'll give you series, parallel, or each coil alone. One for each pup, and one to cover selecting the pickup combos, and you're good to go. HTH sumgai
|
|
|
Post by simes on May 22, 2012 11:00:52 GMT -5
I'm afraid I'm limited to the existing Gibson-type toggle switch, as the guitar's owner is happy to use it as a guinea pig, but would draw the line at making new holes. So we've got the toggle and 4 pots.
I sense that I'm on the verge of a eureka moment, though ... or perhaps that's just wishful thinking.
|
|
|
Post by JFrankParnell on May 22, 2012 13:02:05 GMT -5
I'm not sure if this switch applies to the selection you want, but it does keep the stock appearance: www.stewmac.com/shop/Electronics,_pickups/Components:_Switches_and_knobs/Free-Way_Pickup_Switch.html The other guys will have to weigh in on whether it has sufficient poles, etc.
|
|
|
Post by newey on May 22, 2012 16:13:36 GMT -5
Well, there is this option: SD Triple Shotwhich is just a variation on the "binary tree" switching that we have often discussed in the past. What you want is essentially a "meta" binary tree.
|
|
|
Post by simes on May 24, 2012 1:40:31 GMT -5
I think you can get everything you're after with just two push/pulls. Normal (local series) Inner coils - pp#1 pulled Outer coils - pp#2 pulled Local parallel - both pps pulled. OK, I think I've got this sorted out. Each push-pull works on one coil of each PU, and when combined give local parallel, right?
|
|
|
Post by newey on May 24, 2012 5:57:05 GMT -5
Not exactly. The two switches are wired together in a single module, so each p/p doesn't just work on one coil. As I said, it's a vriation on what we've called Binary tree switching. The difference is, instead of having just one of the two pickups "on" with one switch up and the other down, you want coil cuts in those switch positions. Now, pÉƎᴚ⊥Çá´š says it can be done, and I accept that, but I haven't worked out exactly how that works yet, at least not in my head. Haven't tried to put pen to paper on it yet. Perhaps pÉƎᴚ⊥Çá´š will be good enough to favor us with a diagram?
|
|
|
Post by simes on May 24, 2012 7:30:48 GMT -5
I had envisioned something much simpler, in which one PP cuts the inner coils to leave the outer coils active, the other PP does the opposite, and by happy coincidence both give local parallel when pulled together. I did a sketch and it looks like it should work, but no doubt I'm overlooking something essential.
|
|
|
Post by simes on May 24, 2012 11:44:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by newey on May 24, 2012 19:39:21 GMT -5
simes-
I'm not following your diagram. Are the wires labelled as "to Vol 1" and "to Vol 2" connected in some fashion to the S coil of each pickup? If so, to what are they connected?
|
|
|
Post by simes on May 25, 2012 1:22:27 GMT -5
Sorry about the amateurish drawing. I cooked it up in 5 minutes on Word.
Yes, the "to vol." wires are connected to the hot ends of the S coils.
|
|
|
Post by newey on May 25, 2012 5:36:19 GMT -5
OK, well let's pull it up so all can see it: I haven't vetted it yet, but if the S coils are permanently connected at the hot ends, at the very least you'll have some "hanging from hot" issues- which may be acceptable if that's the only way to get this done. Just be aware that these may contribute to noise.
|
|
|
Post by newey on May 25, 2012 6:06:56 GMT -5
After a look, I think you've got it! However, with both "one up, one down" positions, one or the other S coil is hanging from hot.
I don't think there's a way around that without more switch poles.
Also be aware that you will need to install the HBs such that both screw coils are nearest to the neck (or to the bridge, your choice) so that choosing inner or outer pairs gives you a N + S for hum cancelling.
Often, you'll see guitars with one HB flipped so that the screws are towards the neck on the neck pup, but towards the bridge on the bridge pup. That will give you two N, or two S, coils- not what you want.
|
|
|
Post by simes on May 25, 2012 6:19:24 GMT -5
Thanks for checking, Newey. Indeed, I was expecting the "hanging from hot" rebuke . Regarding screw coils, visually that's not an issue in this particular case, as they are rails, but it will come into play when testing other models.
|
|
|
Post by newey on May 25, 2012 7:52:29 GMT -5
Not a "rebuke" at all, just an observation. Whether the hanging coils actually will generate noise is something often debated here- theoretically they should, but it may not be a noticeable difference. Or, it may be a problem only in certain environments that are particularly "noisy" electrically, but unnoticeable elsewhere.
Where we often leave this is with the proviso that they are to be avoided where possible- but here, it's not possible with this scheme.
Note that on ChrisK's version of the binary tree, he shows it using SPDT switches, which leaves hanging coils, as well as a DPDT version which does not. However, in his scheme, only one coil is being cut in the "one up, one down" position; he then uses the extra pole to solve the hanging from hot issue.
You can't do so because your scheme cuts two coils simultaneously in the "one up, one down" position, so you've used both poles to do that. At least, I don't think it's possible to eliminate the hanging coils here.
This is an interesting scheme, and if we could get a clearer diagram of it (hint, hint!) I'd add it to the binary tree post in the Schematics section. As it is, it's a bit confusing because of the S coils "hot" connections and the dual ground wires on the S coils- at first glance one assumes the two wires from the S coils represent "hot" and "not" instead of both being "not hots" which connect to the switches.
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on May 25, 2012 8:31:05 GMT -5
I'm not sure if this switch applies to the selection you want, but it does keep the stock appearance: www.stewmac.com/shop/Electronics,_pickups/Components:_Switches_and_knobs/Free-Way_Pickup_Switch.html The other guys will have to weigh in on whether it has sufficient poles, etc. I read about those when they first came out. Looked great on the surface, but on closer inspection they seem like typical overhyped stewmac crap. The docs are sketchy, but from what I can surmise, the switches are really sort of limited in what they can accomplish. Also the feedback on the stewmac site suggests they aren't all that sturdy. Perhaps pÉƎᴚ⊥Çá´š will be good enough to favor us with a diagram? Sorry it took so long for me to get back to this. What I was thinking was very close to what simes posted. Yes, it has coils hanging from hot. I'm sure JohnH has that sorted with his 4 switch arrangement. And his concept can have one HB full while the other is split. But when using only two switches, compromises must be made. This doesn't solve the hanging from hot issue, but it doesn't shunt coils and uses one N and one S when split. Since this only requires 2 push-pull and there are 4 pots, a third PP could be used to accomplish system series. If you look at most of JohnH's that have 2 HBs and a Gibson 3way, you can see how he does this.
|
|
|
Post by simes on May 25, 2012 17:03:59 GMT -5
That's certainly more elegant than mine.
One thing that's confusing me, though ... Why have you reversed the coils (in comparison to my drawing) of the PU shown on the right? Wouldn't this give N+N and S+S on the split selections?
|
|
|
Post by reTrEaD on May 25, 2012 20:42:05 GMT -5
You are absolutely right. I didn't notice that the labeling (S1 and S2) is different on the left and right half of the drawing. My bad.
|
|