Little '59 + Twang King + Superswitch + push-pull pot?

[paulfury]

Hi all,
I'm a long-time lurker, first time poster.
I'm fixing up a Tele-style guitar (Pacifica 302s) and am swapping out the pickups.
I'm after a diagram and wondered if anyone had anything similar - I've been looking around but haven't found anything.
SOOOO I have a Seymour Duncan Little '59 bridge and Dimarzio Twang King Neck pickup

What I'm after is the following (using a Superswitch):

1) Little '59 series, in phase (normal humbucker)
2) Little '59 split, half out of phase parallel with the neck (ala the Jerry Donahue thing, using whichever coil of the Little '59 is noisecancelling with the neck when the phase is flipped)
3) Little '59 split, in phase parallel with the neck (so "normal" Tele middle, using whichever coil of the Little '59 is noisecancelling with the neck)
4) Little '59 normal humbucking, in parallel with the neck
5) Neck only

THEN I want to be able to use a push-pull to change the Little '59 from series humbucker to parallel humbucker in positions 1 and 4 ONLY with the other positions unchanged.

Anyone got anything? I've been searching the usual places but haven't found anything quite like this so far.

Thanks to all for any suggestions!

Cheers all

Paul

[thetragichero]

my first thought is start with the series/parallel switch and move downstream from there.
coil cuts would either be shorting a coil to ground or to 'hot.' until we know which is which, we won't know where to go from there

also to the nutzhouse, yadda yadda yadda
you'll get a warmer introduction from some of the other guys

[paulfury]

Hi,

Thanks - that makes sense!

I already have the Little '59 in the guitar with a "normal" 3 way switch but a pus-pull for series-parallel as per the usual Duncan diagrams that works.

I'll get the Twang King in and try to identify which coils I need.

Cheers!

Paul

[thetragichero]

methinks we should be able to get away with using only two poles of that switch
once you figure out which coil cancels hum with the neck, let's both take a stab at it and see where we end up
melikes puzzles

[reTrEaD]

Apr 9, 2018 8:26:37 GMT -5 paulfury said:

THEN I want to be able to use a push-pull to change the Little '59 from series humbucker to parallel humbucker in positions 1 and 4 ONLY with the other positions unchanged.

I reckon you'll run short on poles in the superswitch to be able to confine the S/P change to those positions without affecting the other selections which include (a) coil(s) from the bridge. Big gold star for anyone who can crack that nut.

[paulfury]

Thanks guys. I did wonder about the other positions and unwanted combinations.
I'll try and get some info in the next few days after fitting the twang king/trying out the combos.

[JohnH]

Good puzzle.

I dont know if its possible, but an avenue of investigation could go:

Neck has a full-time ground

Bridge coils are not grounded

1 superswitch pole is grounded, used for taking a selected bridge coil to ground

2 poles select coils to go to hot

S/P switch on push pull

The last remaining superswitch pole has the job of breaking the humbucker parallel connections in the settings where they are not wanted???

Dunno but maybe?! Expect a bit of hot-hanging too.

[Yogi B]

Apr 9, 2018 17:10:14 GMT -5 JohnH said:

I don't know if it's possible, but an avenue of investigation could go...

Expect a bit of hot-hanging too.

That's the way I've been looking at it, and should be workable -- the hanging coil appearing in one of the two bridge-split positions, (either position 2 or 3), depending on which side the connection is broken.

[paulfury]

Am I correct in assuming that I'd need to break the ground connection to the Twang King cover and ground it separately?
Had to do this on a somewhat similar setup using two singles for the half out of phase position....
Just quickly checked them for magnetic orientation and I think I'm OK - the TK is south up I think and the Little '59 is the opposite.
Thanks all for your thoughts here - I promise it's appreciated!
Cheers all
Paul

[Yogi B]

Apr 9, 2018 18:41:06 GMT -5 paulfury said:

Am I correct in assuming that I'd need to break the ground connection to the Twang King cover and ground it separately?
Had to do this on a somewhat similar setup using two singles for the half out of phase position....

Normally you would, yes, however not in this case. The plan is to invert the phase of whichever Little '59 coil used instead, thereby taking advantage of the fact it already has a separate ground.

Just quickly checked them for magnetic orientation and I think I'm OK - the TK is south up I think and the Little '59 is the opposite.

The Little '59 has two coils, (opposite to each other, unless somethings gone seriously awry) -- true that means one of them must be opposite to the Twang King, but not both.

[paulfury]

Hiya,
Thanks - I get that the coils in the little 59 (or any humbucker) are wound in opposite directions.
Is polarity not a factor for when the little 59 is split and paired with the neck single, fir him cancelling also?
My understanding is at the 'a little knowledge is a dangerous thing' level so I'm fully prepared to be completely wrong ;-)
Thanks all,
Cheers
Paul

[reTrEaD]

paulfury here's a thread which addresses your question about winding direction, polarity, and hum-cancelling:

How to explain Hum-cancelling

[newey]

paulfury-

Hello and Welcome to G-Nutz2!

Looks like others have already set you off down the right path here. The only thing I would add is that you should be aware of potential fitment issues trying to shoehorn a Superswitch into a Tele cavity. Typically, some woodworking is required to the side of the cavity.

Now, you said this isn't a real Tele, so perhaps yours is more commodious than an actual Fender Tele. But check it.

If you have not already purchased the Superswitch, there is a special "narrow Superswitch" available that solves the problem.

If you do have to do some woodworking, you will be carving out a sort-of "cave" into the side of the cavity, below the surface, so that you don't mess up the mounting of the control plate. A Mototool is the thing to use for this, pretty tough to get in there with hand tools.

[Yogi B]

Apr 10, 2018 5:51:53 GMT -5 newey said:

Now, you said this isn't a real Tele, so perhaps yours is more commodious than an actual Fender Tele.

There's commodious, and then there's "can see daylight though it".

[paulfury]

Hiya,
Having read the stuff about him cancelling it looks like I am on the right track anyway. Some interesting stuff.
Re:space, I have a narrow superswitch in my Tokai tele. I installed a full size one into an identical Pacifica for a friend without space issues so I'm thinking I'm OK for space....
Cheers all,
Paul

[thetragichero]

Apr 10, 2018 5:51:53 GMT -5 newey said:

perhaps yours is more commodious than an actual Fender Tele

[paulfury]

Mmmm, luxurious!

[newey]

A Toilecaster?

[sumgai]

No, but it's inlaid with Mother Of Toilet Seat, you can bet on that!

[Yogi B]

(Edited 2024-02-08) Excluding any Including errors, this is the general idea:

SPOILER: Click to show

(Updated version.)

[paulfury]

Thanks Yogi! I'll get this hooked up as soon as I can.
A couple of questions - any reason to not use a 250k volume pot? Also, the 10n cap for the HoOP - I've seen this in conjunction with a (6k2?) resistor - is this not required here?
Seriously, thank you all for helping me - I seriously appreciate it, and don't take it for granted.
I'll do my best to report back on how it all comes together....
Cheers all
Paul

[thetragichero]

between a humbucker and a tele neck pickup, of imagine 250k would be too muddy
i have a SS tele (with a series option) that i think has 1M volume pot in it. the ability for that extra brightness is a nice option

[Yogi B]

Apr 11, 2018 16:33:17 GMT -5 paulfury said:

Also, the 10n cap for the HoOP - I've seen this in conjunction with a (6k2?) resistor - is this not required here?

I've seen both a single resistor in series with the neck pickup, as well as two resistors -- one in series with each pickup. Well it's down to preference, their purpose is to subdue the resonant peak(s) in the mids caused by the addition of the cap.

I've updated the previous diagram to include the resistors, (as well as having roTatED the bridge pickup).

Try it with or without one or both resistors and let your ears decide.

[reTrEaD]

Apr 12, 2018 0:04:22 GMT -5 Yogi B said:

(as well as having roTatED the bridge pickup)

icwutudidthar

[paulfury]

Hi all,
Just a quick one to apologise for the slow reply - been mad busy with work.
Parts are en route so I'll wire it up in the next few days, all being well. 
Thanks for the help everyone - hopefully i'll get it verified ASAP.
Cheers all,
Paul
 

[reTrEaD]

No worries, Paul. Work carefully rather than rushing. If/when you have time to report on the results, that will be fine no matter how long it takes.

[paulfury]

Hi all - reviving my own zombie thread here!
Got halfway through wiring this back in 2018 then it had be packed away, was busy with family stuff.
Anyway, I finally finished it - and it NEARLY works, but the HoOP tone is EXTREMELY quiet. I have another tele with singles so I know there's a bit of loss to be expected but it's almost off.
I've checked with a meter and the cap and resistors are the right values.
Can't see any obvious dry joints or shorts.
Does anyone have any ideas what I could look for/try? It took an age to shoehorn in so I'm a but reluctant to just rip it out and start over.
I appreciate this is an insanely old followup to my original query!
Thanks all,
Cheers,
Paul

[Yogi B]

Feb 7, 2024 12:25:51 GMT -5 paulfury said:

Anyway, I finally finished it - and it NEARLY works, but the HoOP tone is EXTREMELY quiet.

That's my fault. In my diagram the bridge isn't selected in position 2 so it's the neck (+ HOoP cap & resistor) in parallel with just the other 6k2 resistor more or less killing the signal.

I can't remember what was going through my head approaching 6-years ago, but I do have a text version of the circuit which does (correctly) place the red wire on terminal 2 of the upper right pole of the Superswitch rather than the green wire I drew. However, in that version I don't refer to the colours, instead I wrote "Bs+" — which I must've mistook as being the same as the adjacent "Bs−". Then, evidently, I didn't do a thorough job checking the actual diagram. Below is an updated diagram which should rectify the issue: