The RGX-312 46 tone project

[yldouright]

Thanks for the clarification newey. It confirmed what I suspected was meant by the term and having someone else corroborate is always helpful. When I stated "usual duty", I should have clarified that to mean having only the usual number of output poles. I believe there are BN and BMN options for the P3 position with the standard 5 way switch and yes, standard does NOT mean the half superswitch which was apparently standard in the higher end Yamaha strats.

JohnH
The advice to get a few Superswitches is solid but I'm exploring the possibilities with standard 3 pole switches. If we fail to come up with a solution with common parts we can always order the more exotic ones but I'm not ready to give in just yet.

@angeisbunny presented an innovative surgery on a standard 5-way that was truly inspired. I'm currently trying to map out some variations with it.

To recap my aim, it is the best result for the least effort. The best result is defined as the greatest span of tone with effort described as the fewest possible mods. Assuming an H-S-S guitar excluding individual coil selection in the HB, we have 69 combinations with three DPDT PPs one DPDT On-On-On mini toggle and one On-Off-On mini toggle. There are 57 combinations with two DPDT PPs and two DPDT mini toggles and 51 combinations with three DPDT PPs and a DPDT On-On-On mini toggle. The first of the three above add the N in and out of phase to the B whether in position 1 or 2 on the selector. I don't know how this can be achieved by layout but I know it works in logic. I will be presenting the logic tables for these schemes in a later post. You guys can help by pointing me to solutions past that have used a standard 5 way and I will focus some questions to @angeisbunny to better understand what he has already provided me.

[newey]

I believe there are BN and BMN options for the P3 position with the standard 5 way switch and yes, standard does NOT mean the half superswitch

This is where we keep going off the rails. With the std. Strat 2P3T 5-position switch, there are NOT B+N (i.e., parallel combo) or B+M+N options at position 3, unless you are willing to sacrifice the B + M and N + M at positions 2 and 4. This is because the 5-way switch has only 3 throws- positions 2 and 4 are not independently wire-able. In position 2, you will always get the parallel combination of whatever you wire to lugs 1 and 3, and likewise position 4 is a combo of 3 and 5.

(Note that I am using "+" for parallel, "x" for series, as is the usual convention around here, and also labeling the 5-way with the bridge position as #1, neck as #5- which is the way Fender has usually designated the positions. There's no rules on these things, but it is easier to discuss if we all use the same lingo.)

If you want to have N + B and N + M + B on the standard 5-way, the usual route to getting those extra sounds is to add a "neck on" (or, conversely, a "bridge on" switch, that is to say, a separate switch to turn either the neck or the bridge pup on in conjunction with whatever is selected on the 5-way, which is wired in the usual way. Thus, for example, a "neck on" switch turns the neck pickup on at position 1 of the 5-way, giving N + B, and gives N + M + B at position 2(the B + M setting). But all of your other proposed switches are fully utilized, so a "neck on" switch means adding another switch or repurposing one of your existing ones.

[thetragichero]

Oct 18, 2019 8:48:51 GMT -5 yldouright said:

To recap my aim, it is the best result for the least effort.

for what it's worth, this is usually achieved by having proper tools/materials at your disposal
i once spent a very frustrating hour trying to attach the power wire of my truck's amplifier to the positive battery terminal. everything i looked up, including forum posts from others who had been in the same exact situation, stated that i needed to purchase an extender in order to have enough room to connect everything. in my infinite stubbornness i was convinced that if i *just*pushed*hard*enough* i could make up for the 1 or 2 mm of thread that i needed. after inventing several new conjugations of the F wire i drove to my local big box auto parts supplier. not wanting to listen to experience and buy a SIX DOLLAR part resulted in an afternoon of misery

[JohnH]

Standard 5-way switches

I see it like this:

With a separate phase switch if wanted, and the use of a dpdt on-on-on for the humbucker, you can think of all of the other switching after those as dealing with three simple pickups, in similar ways to any SSS Strat scheme. Hence you can look at any previous SSS schemes to see what is possible.

GN2 has been running here for nearly 15 years, and its predecessor GN, was several years before that. Almpst everyone who has designed wiring schemes has worked out at least one scheme for a Strat. Some have used 5-way super-switches, some have used toggle switches and some have used standard 5-ways.

We have probably explored all of the basic possible ways of using a standard 5-way, with other switches, to get further tones.  Personally, I enjoyed this a an interesting puzzle for quite a few years, until I stopped, having arrived at what I reckoned was the best that I could think of.  Of course, there may be other variants we don't know of, but we have given this particular puzzle a good thrashing over time. 

The following links are to all the three-pickup schemes that I can find on GN2, that use a standard 5-way. Some of them already have HSS and phase options included, but if not, they could have.  Apologies to anyone who has a scheme and I missed it. The criteria for this list was:

1. standard 5-way

2. some series options created

3. threads with images intact (sadly, I had to exclude a few schemes that have blurred photockucket images, but Im fairly certain that there are others that cover a similar approach)

SSS with Series/Parallel, bypass, & 6-cap switch: - ssstonelover
guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/8543/sss-series-parallel-bypass-switch
This one uses a fairly common approach of adding a neck-on switch and a series/parallel switch to give a fuller range of tones. Also, a 6-cap rotary on the tone which could be optional.


Strat SSM3 – JohnH
guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/7117/strat-ssm3-series-parallel-switch
This is the best simplest design that Ive come up with, using a standard 5-way switch

Zero bux series addition to SSS Strat - reTrEaD
guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/8007/zero-bux-series-addition-strat

Several series additions using standard parts

The Strat lovers Strat – John Atcheley
guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/3130/strat-lovers-wiring-diagram
A classic design from before GN2, with series and phase additions

Strat SSM and SSM2 - JohnH
guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/6758/strat-ssm-simple-series-single
guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/6873/strat-ssm2-hss-sounds-dpdt
Simple designs for HSS, adding series sounds using one of the pots

SSS schematics from Stratalk
guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/7254/sss-schematics-strat-talk
Simple sss designs with series blending


Strat SN - for SSS (based on Chrisk's 'S-None') - ChrisK
guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/7301/strat-sn-sss-based-chrisks
A very simple idea from ChrisK, GN2 master

Strat with two volume controls SSS, HSS and HHH - JohnH
guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/3157/strat-volume-controls-sss-hss
Does what it says.

Ozboomers ‘simple mods’ - several threads
See schematics section but note photobucket images not visible at this time.

Stratocaster Dual-sound - JohnH
guitarnuts2.proboards.com/thread/3156/stratocaster-dual-sound-sss-hss
Standard switch and 4-pole toggle to change to blended series sounds. SSS and HSS versions, plus phase
variants

Id predict that the chances of finding anything significantly different in this small area of wiring design are very low (which I'll leave as a challenge to others to prove me wrong)

[yldouright]

newey

This is where we keep going off the rails. With the std. Strat 2P3T 5-position switch, there are NOT B+N (i.e., parallel combo) or B+M+N options at position 3, unless you are willing to sacrifice the B + M and N + M at positions 2 and 4.

OMG, it finally sunk in. The standard 3P 5-way is make before break, I should have realized it couldn't possibly do what I wanted. I also understand why @angeisbunny needed to cut the track on the selector in his solution. I'm so embarassed. I've changed my selector numbering to match the convention used here but I like my symbols U=serial, II=parallel and Ø=reverse phase too much to give them up just yet. It may be arrogant to think so but I think some of you might adopt their use instead of + and x.

JohnH
Okay, you gave me lots of studying to do, I'll post again when I have a better handle of what I'm talking about. If we intend to use the standard strat 5-way selector, the only way to get BMN and BN is to use an "add N" module. Is it possible to add the neck pickup either in or out of phase to whatever is being output? In the up position, this toggle will add N, in the down position it will add N out of phase and falling out of the circuit on the middle. Here is the table for the DPDT On-Off-On mini toggle used as this module. I imagine it can also function as a momentary switch or volume tremelo when using the neck but my imagination has shown little to do with reality so far. Chime in:

B    M    N    S   DPDTnØ   Result
S              P5    0      B
     S         P3    0      M
          S    P1    0      N
S    S         P4    0      BIIM
S         S    P5    1      BIIN
S         S    P5   -1      BIINØ
S    S    S    P4    1      BIIMIIN
S    S    S    P4   -1      BIIMIINØ
     S    S    P2    0      NIIM
     S    S    P2   -1      NØIIM

thetragichero
I'm guess I'm being the poster child for penny wise and pound foolish. Anecdote noted and accepted but I'm not giving up yet. Things are overlooked all the time and unless you look at them again every once in awhile, they stay overlooked .

[JohnH]

Oct 19, 2019 14:50:31 GMT -5 yldouright said:

....but I like my symbols U=serial, II=parallel and Ø=reverse phase too much to give them up just yet. It may be arrogant to think so but I think some of you might adopt their use instead of + and x.

Let's just address that one. You are correct. If you want to have a conversation with people in France you don't talk to them in Swahili! (nor suggest that they learn it). We would politely ask that you adopt our established terminology if you want us to understand your intent.

[yldouright]

JohnH = set in his ways

Can we keep the "Ø"? It's so much more elegant than OOP and arguably far more communicative.

[JohnH]

Here are examples of how we do it, when listing out combinations:

B + N parallel
B x N series (or B * N)
B x (-N) series, neck out of phase
B + (N x M) neck and middle in series, all in parallel with bridge
etc....

Oop, sometimes is used in descriptions as a shorthand for 'out-of-phase', though not used in a table of combos.

[Deleted]

a trick i made for a bass guitar, is when the POT wasnt active.
Example in a Start a Tone pot on the Neck and one on the Bridge say...
well when its MB B then Neck Tone pot isnt do any thing, so i turn the Dual Pot (2nd Wafer) in to a 1P6T also got a 1P4T (X,XY,YZ,Z)
maybe a nice cheat to bring in all this COMBOs


i did Boolean at college, so N+B is N or B to me M.B is M and B 

but it does take longer if got to decode someones text

i know i use Out of Phase bit one +N=N and -N=n mainly because i keep forgetting to put + and -

big problem is when it comes to talk about a humbuckers North and South Poles HN Hn HS Hs ... mm 

and this is ME just Tossing some Ideas around 

DONT LIKE IT .. but if any one can run with it go a head.

[thetragichero]

turns out language is only a useful tool for communicating if we're all using agreed upon forms. when we're all doing our own thing, i might as well be asking my cats how i should wire my guitars

[sumgai]

Oct 19, 2019 17:30:02 GMT -5 thetragichero said:

turns out language is only a useful tool for communicating if we're all using agreed upon forms. when we're all doing our own thing, i might as well be asking my cats how i should wire my guitars

Said cats probably being smarter than the rest of us, by virtue of not offering to help in the first place!

Other than that, I agree that Boolean symbology wasn't well thought out.  After all, and I had this fight with my college professors, the first thing we learn when doing arithmetic in elementary school, is "1 and 1 is 2", then we learn that this is written as "1 + 1 = 2".  From there on out, no teacher in the school system says "but the plus sign really means something else, we just hijacked it for school purposes".

ange, know that quite a few other members here feel the same way as you - Boolean should've won the symbology war when it comes to combining pickups. Sadly, non-collegiate folks were the first to start writing down combos for others to read, and the rest, as they say, is History.

tl;dr:

We spend the first 12 years of schooling learning that the plus sign means "and", then we spend the next four years in college math classes learning that it means "or".  It's no wonder that the parts of society that love numbers are so schizophrenic.  

But who am I to pee in someone's Cheerios?

sumgai

[reTrEaD]

Oct 19, 2019 15:32:08 GMT -5 yldouright said:

Can we keep the "Ø"? It's so much more elegant than OOP and arguably far more communicative.

As JohnH mentioned, OoP is used in verbal descriptions but not in a 'truth table' for the various switch positions.

NØ isn't a terrible way to express -N, but you'll find that will confuse the guitar wiring community (not just on GN2 but across the internet). If you insist on using non-standard designations like that, I would strongly recommend you indicate what that means in every post where it appears.

Or you could simply adopt the conventions that have become accepted standards over time.

---

Worth mentioning ...

Some non-standard notations are more easily recognized than others. If we take one of the examples John provided:

B x (-N)

could also be written as:

B x N

while the meaning of that is more likely to be understood than:

B x NØ

a note in the legend of the drawing indicating that overline indicates Out-of-Phase is still pretty much mandatory.

---

Also worth mentioning ..

In the rare few cases where Fender has pickups in series, such as:
American Deluxe Stratocaster® (Upgrade 2004)

They use a non-standard notation:

+ = Series Connection
/ = Parallel Connection

but those are clearly noted at the bottom of the drawing.

[newey]

The problem I see with using the null symbol for OOP is that it reads as "off" to many, me included.

A single switch to turn the neck "on" and phase it is certainly possible; you would (I think) use a DPDT On-Off-On to do this.

[yldouright]

newey

The problem I see with using the null symbol for OOP is that it reads as "off" to many, me included.

Yes I see that but the Ø symbol has a strong relationship with electrical phase angle which can convey concepts like partial phase shifts when caps are used to create the shift (ex: BNØ75°). The symbols currently in use have arguably more of the same kind of interpretive subjectivity. The ones I've put forward have a strong visual relationship to what is happening electrically. They lack the long and respected history of what is currently in use but in all other ways I consider them superior. It might be asking a lot of the board constituents to consider adopting their use so I'll be using both the board's accepted symbols and the ones below in my future posts to compare them. As suggested by reTrEaD , here is the legend:

descriptor                 use
II=parallel                 BIIN
U=serial                    B UN
Ø=out of phase              BNØ
H=humbucker                 H-S
S=single coil               S-S
nH=n humbucker selected    nH-S
sH=s humbucker selected    sH-S

Series parallel connections can be described as B UM IIN. If no symbol is used, it should denote the default use and that default should be described in a legend or note at the end of the post.

@angeisbunny
I will be providing a logic table of what I hope the layout you posted above does but I suspect I'll be wrong. As JohnH pointed out long ago, the 46 combination goal is ambitious for me at this stage of my understanding. I was impressed with his 5+5 circuit linked above but it required a Superswitch. I have a nice 80's era plywood Lyra S-S-S with a standard selector that I want to experiment on. No push pull pots, one DPDT On-Off-On switch and here is what I'd like to end up with:

Selector     B   M   N        switch position      result                                5-way      up   middle    down
P1                   S             0                 N                                      P1      hum     N       off
P1                                -1                off
P1                   S             1              mains hum
P2               S   S             0                NIIM                                    P2      N+M    N+M    (-N)+M 
P2               S   S            -1               NØIIM
P2               S   S             1                NIIM
P3               S                 0                  M                                     P3      M+N     M      M+(-N)
P3               S   S            -1                MIINØ
P3               S   S             1                MIIN
P4               S   S             0                BIIM                                    P4     B+M+N   B+M     B+M+(-N)
P4           S   S   S            -1               BIIMIINØ
P4           S   S   S             1               BIIMIIN
P5           S                     0                  B                                     P5      B+N     B       B+(-N)
P5           S       S            -1                BIINØ
P5           S       S             1                BIIN

Looks like 10 total distinct combinations for one DPDT On-Off-On mini toggle and possibly two weird effects (one on off staccato function and one mains hum). I looked at this to see if there were a way to make a serial connection with the other vacant poles and couldn't see one. Ideally, the "N" switch module will work with any standard 5 way selector with one side introducing N in phase and the other side reversing the phase. The middle position removes the circuit. It occurred to me that we could free N from the 5 way selector completely and possibly introduce a serial connection or two with that additional open pole on the 5-way but I haven't really explored that to come up with anything. So now you know the wiring proposed for my unsuspecting plywood victim, how do I make it happen?

[reTrEaD]

Oct 21, 2019 13:59:01 GMT -5 yldouright said:

The symbols currently in use have arguably more of the same kind of interpretive subjectivity. The ones I've put forward have a strong visual relationship to what is happening electrically.

I disagree. The notation you've been suggesting may have some relationship to what's happening electrically within your own way of thinking, but universally it's highly flawed and vastly inferior 'visually'.

The conventional notation uses capital letters to indicate which pickups (or coils) are in use and mathematical symbols to indicate how those pickups are connected. At a glance, it's vary obvious which parts of the notation string refers to the pickup (or coil) and which parts indicate the method of connection.

The same can not be said for your choice of notation. I don't know what it is about U that you personally find to intuitively suggest a series connection but I assure you it doesn't trigger my synapses in any way.

I can almost see where II might suggest parallel to you (because // is often used as shorthand for parallel), but the alphabetic look is still problematic when we juxtapose that to the capital letters being used for the pickup.

When I said this:

Oct 20, 2019 1:01:57 GMT -5 reTrEaD said:

NØ isn't a terrible way to express -N, but you'll find that will confuse the guitar wiring community (not just on GN2 but across the internet). If you insist on using non-standard designations like that, I would strongly recommend you indicate what that means in every post where it appears.

Apparently you saw that as a broad license of sorts. I apologize for that. I was referring specifically to the Ø for out of phase.

In my opinion, you should bin the rest of your notation. It creates more clutter than clarity.

Oct 21, 2019 13:59:01 GMT -5 yldouright said:

Series parallel connections can be described as B UM IIN

Without parentheses, brackets or braces to indicate grouping, that notation string is ambiguous. It would be the same as writing:

B x M + N

This might mean:
B x (M +N)

Or it might mean:
(B x M) + N

Those are two very different things.

Oct 21, 2019 13:59:01 GMT -5 yldouright said:

So now you know the wiring proposed for my unsuspecting plywood victim, how do I make it happen?

The onus is on you to provide a drawing. Then others can vet the drawing.

[JohnH]

That is most certainly the most confusing table I have ever seen, and I don't wish to understand it.

If you would like responses to it, please simplify it. It would appear that the second half of every third line may contain information that you would like us to comment on!

[yldouright]

We are describing circuits for electric guitars. The II parallel designation should invoke the image of two coils in parallel, the upper case "U" should likewise invoke a sense of continuity with two coils. It is intuitive to me and I'm disappointed that it isn't for others. With this further explanation, do you still find the designations as undecipherable? Okay, I got the hint, you want diagrams. I'm not very proficient in Paint but I'll try to put something together. I was hoping my logic tables had a predecessor to reference.

[reTrEaD]

Oct 21, 2019 16:44:01 GMT -5 yldouright said:

We are describing circuits for electric guitars. The II parallel designation should invoke the image of two coils in parallel, the upper case "U" should likewise invoke a sense of continuity with two coils.

Aside from the visual similarity to the capital letters used to represent the pickups, I can see the desire for II, although // would be vastly superior.

Regarding U, that's bad on several letters. The only 'visual' that evokes for me would be two coils connected in series but out-of-phase. N would be better (but that's used to indicate Neck pickup) or Z. But again we're using alphabetic characters for uses where they should be avoided.

: or ¦ might possibly be used if one had an aversion to the conventional notation. But I don't see the conventional notation as being terribly broken so I don't feel it needs to be fixed.

Oct 21, 2019 16:44:01 GMT -5 yldouright said:

It is intuitive to me and I'm disappointed that it isn't for others. With this further explanation, do you still find the designations as undecipherable?

Undecipherable is probably too strong a word. Highly lacking in clarity seems about right. But I can only speak for myself, not for others.

Oct 21, 2019 16:44:01 GMT -5 yldouright said:

I'm not very proficient in Paint but I'll try to put something together.

Excellent.

[thetragichero]

one thing I've learned after many attempts at *cute* designs with 87 combinations is that it can be really hard to go from one good sound to another good sound. at the end of the day intuitive and (dare i say) simple wins out for me
my #1 strat is a standard switch (after a few shows where i switched to a parallel setting in the middle of a heavy riff i switched over to some 3-way switches which you have to set with intent to get the 2 and 4 positions, but a 5-way would work), master volume, "master" tone (tied to selector), switch that overrides selector to put bridge and middle in series and a "series" tone pot, and a jaguar-style strangle switch (I've found the ptb more difficult too use). not sure if i even drew up a diagram or if i just got the iron cranking and let the solder flow

i prefer pencil and paper for my diagrams. much easier for me to draw without cussing at the computer