Phostenix Comments

[gn2staff]

Foreword Phostenix' Guitar Wiring Diagram Library Modified TBX Tone Control 5-Way SHOop 5-Way SSOop Strat-O-Teles The Splender Strats Strat-X Strat-X2 Strat-X2 Plus Strat-X3 Teles 2 Pickup Teles 3 Pickup Teles Esquire Teles HH Guitars HSS Guitars HSH Guitars HHH Guitars Custom Wiring Setups Recent Additions Other Guitar Wiring Sites Comments Thread

Comments/Errata If you haven't done so already, we welcome you to explore the pages of our archive of the pages from the Phostenix Wiring Diagrams site. We highly recommend starting with the Foreword (the top button in the Navigation Menu). If you discovered any errata, reply to this thread to inform the staff of any broken/missing images, or any content on the original site we missed. Please note: We have no control over the content on the original site and any errors there are beyond our jurisdiction. But if we missed any original content in our recreation of those pages, we need to know about it. The Guitarnuts2 Staff

[thetragichero]

wooohooo first comment!
great job fellas!

[solderburn]

WOW!! This is massive!

Amazing work here. Enough to keep someone busy for a lifetime. 

Big thanks to the kind folks that used their time and knowledge to make all of this possible, crillev1, JohnH, reTrEaD, you guys are truly awesome. So inspiring.  The layout is superbly user-friendly, and the diagrams are done very well, so easy to read, even for beginners like me.

[JohnH]

I enjoyed the opportunity to work with these pages, and to appreciate more the full range of the designs.

Many of them form into groups, each based around a key switching idea, and then developed with many possible variations, such as different tone pot options, or TBX, or different types of switch to get the equivalent result. Hence a builder can find the one tbat has a desired combination of features and parts, and Phostenix' diagram is all there fully rendered in detail, ready to wire up.

My favorites of the simpler designs include several on the 'Strats' page, using a standard 5-way and a switch to put two pickups in series, while keeping most other settings intact.

For the more complex ones, the Strat-X series has a lot to offer. I think I like the 'Original Strat X ' the best.

But my No.1 fav from the Phostenix archive is his take on what to do with a TBX pot. I'd already posted about this before. He took a rather complicated and quirky control, tested and reverse engineered it in great detail, and came up with a much more useful treble-cut / no-load / bass-cut control, with the same unit! I'd totally build that into one of my guitars.

[Deleted]

The TBX looks on par with G&L version .. G&L using 2n2F and C1M with this one is 1nF with A1M


I know the bass tones dont really kick in till 250K-1M way and that 1nF and 2n2F are both used

Might have a play around with own idea of TBX thinking about it

[thetragichero]

got a strat project that's been apart for a year or two that I'm finally working on
going to try the 9-way strat with on/on/on toggle

[nikola]

thank you very much very useful information

[thetragichero]

welcome to the forum Nikola! there's a lot of stuff here, all in one place :-)

[aleg]

I have just registered just to say THANK YOU!! Greetings from Spain!!!I hope that you are all ok guys!!

[thetragichero]

welcome to the nuthouse aleg! there's a ton of information all over the forum but now importantly kind folks that are willing to answer questions. enjoy your stay

[diego_cl]

What a great repository, THANKS A LOT !!!


I was looking for ages for something like this:

Strat with In-Series & 500K Volume Option with Treble Bleed
This setup uses a push-push (or push-pull) pot to change the standard Strat wiring so that position 1 becomes the Middle & Bridge in series and Position 5 becomes the Neck & Middle in series. Positions 2, 3 & 4 become just the Middle pickup.

When the push-push pot is down, Tone pot 1 is active and the 500K Volume pot has a 470K ohm resistor in parallel with it. When the push-push pot is up, Tone pot 2 is active and the 500K Volume pot doesn't have the 470K resistor in parallel with it.


Push-Push Down - Tone 1 - 250K Volume (Normal Strat):



1. Bridge

2. Middle & Bridge (Parallel)

3. Middle

4. Middle & Neck (Parallel)

5. Neck



Push-Push Up - Tone 2 - 500K Volume:



1. Middle & Bridge in Series

2. Middle

3. Middle

4. Middle

5. Neck & Middle in Series



But I don't get it... why is the polarity of the single coils so awkward ??
Or it's a mistake from the drawing??
What happens if I use this wiring with a typical S-S-S set (RWRP on middle) ??

[newey]

diego_cl:

Hello and Welcome to G-Nutz2!

But I don't get it... why is the polarity of the single coils so awkward ??
Or it's a mistake from the drawing??

Not sure I know what you mean by "the polarity is so awkward". The diagram looks fine to me. Using a RWRP mid pickup will mean that positions 2 and 4 on the 5-way switch will be hum-cancelling, just as they are on a regular Strat, with the push/push down ("normal Strat mode"). With the push/push "up" (series mode), the series combinations will likewise be hum-cancelling. If you don't use a RWRP middle pickup, then it will be like a 50's Strat, with no hum-cancellation at all. So, a RWRP middle pickup would make a lot of sense, at least IMHO.

[diego_cl]

Oct 31, 2020 7:31:12 GMT -5 newey said:

diego_cl:

Hello and Welcome to G-Nutz2!

Not sure I know what you mean by "the polarity is so awkward". The diagram looks fine to me. Using a RWRP mid pickup will mean that positions 2 and 4 on the 5-way switch will be hum-cancelling, just as they are on a regular Strat, with the push/push down ("normal Strat mode"). With the push/push "up" (series mode), the series combinations will likewise be hum-cancelling. If you don't use a RWRP middle pickup, then it will be like a 50's Strat, with no hum-cancellation at all. So, a RWRP middle pickup would make a lot of sense, at least IMHO.

Thanks for your help!

What worries me is that the picture shows the bridge and middle pickups with the same... I don't know how to call it... "polarity"?... While the neck pickup is different.
I find that awkward, because most SSS configurations have the bridge and neck pickups winded in the same direction and with magnets installed on the same orientation.



I want to apply this wiring to a strat I'm building with "normal" pickups (RWRP on the middle), but I don't know if it would work fine or if it will have out of phase issues...
Pitifully I've not been able to understand electronics.

[newey]

Oct 31, 2020 14:11:49 GMT -5 diego_cl said:

I don't know how to call it... "polarity"?.

Magnets have "polarity" (meaning they have North and South poles); AC circuits (like pickups) have "phase". Note that all the black wires on the diagram are labelled as "-"; the "+" wires are shown as a different color on the middle pickup, presumably to show that it is RWRP. The fact that the positions of the + and - labels are swapped at the pickup ends is, I think, just an oversight; the labeling itself is consistent. In other words, if you rotated the neck pickup 180°, then the pluses and minus would all line up, but the wiring wouldn't have changed a bit.

Assuming your wire colors are the same as these, you shouldn't have any out-of-phase issues with using the diagram. If your wire colors are different, then some translation will be needed, but that will nave nothing to do with the diagram itself.

I'm building with "normal" pickups (RWRP on the middle)

Well, only "normal" since the early 1970's. You'll find those vintage "cork-sniffer" types who will swear that a true vintage Strat sound requires having a non-RWRP middle pickup. Of course, on the early Strats, only one pickup was operative at a time, so there was no issue with hum-cancellation between two pickups, before folks started modifying their 3-way switches.

[JohnH]

The diagram looks OK to me. It is based on a middle RWRP and the black wires are the ones that would all go to ground in standard wiring. The position of them as drawn at the pickup is not really significant.

[diego_cl]

Thanks to both of you!! I will sleep peacefully tonight 

I already built a Warmoth partscaster with a fat-o-caster switch that I really like but the in-series wiring is too muddy for rhythm guitar.
I originally put on it a set of custom shop 69 pickups, but I didn't like the 1 and 4 positions, because the bridge was too weak for dirt and the middle + neck position made almost no tone difference.
I've swapped bridge and middle pickups for some cheap Donlis alnico 5 pups with RWRP and now I like it a lot more... and if I want it to sound weaker like before I can always turn down the volume pot.

Now I'm finishing building another strat and I want to make something similar, but I want to fix the in-series muddiness...

I'm not sure if 250k pots and a TBX tone control would be a better option for playing power chords with bridge+middle wired in series.
I think I will try the 500k pots instead... I suppose that's more like a propper humbucker.

[txspecial81strat]

Hey guys, Question regarding the modified TBX tone control.  If we didnt have conductive paint. would we cut some copper foil tape and over the same area of the strip? I know its not ideal, but would it work? Technichally it it conductive, correct?

[JohnH]

A copper strip sounds like it should work, but Id be very careful not to create any bump in the road that could snag the wiper. Phostenix states that all he was trying to do was to reduce a 1k section of the track down nearer to zero. But he also says it works fine to leave it, and an extra 1K in your circuit is very unlikely to be audible.

[davidofchatham]

I've been poking around more in the wiring diagrams, mainly to learn what the possibilities are, but also to start trying to understand what's going on. I've realized that Tele wiring is closer to my guitar than standard LP wiring is, and ones with three-way toggles seem identical. Anyway, what does the push-pull volume do in the "2 Humbucker Tele with a 3-Way Toggle and Modified TBX Tone Control" diagrams, if anything?

(This is from the 2 Pickup Teles page.)

[newey]

It splits both HBs to single coil. Assuming Seymour Duncan pickups are used (as shown in the diagram), both HBs are split to the North coil. This will not be hum-cancelling when the toggle switch is set to the center position (i.e., both HBs). However, this could be easily rewired so as to select the South coil from one of the two, so as to have hum-cancellation when both pickups are in single coil mode.

[davidofchatham]

Sept 30, 2021 11:20:18 GMT -5 newey said:

It splits both HBs to single coil. Assuming Seymour Duncan pickups are used (as shown in the diagram), both HBs are split to the North coil. This will not be hum-cancelling when the toggle switch is set to the center position (i.e., both HBs). However, this could be easily rewired so as to select the South coil from one of the two, so as to have hum-cancellation when both pickups are in single coil mode.

Thanks for the explanation, newey!

Would it be appropriate to update the description for those diagrams? This is all they say about the controls:

3-Way Switching:

1. Bridge
2. Neck & Bridge
3. Neck

[newey]

We could certainly add "with coil split switch". I think Phostenix figured it was obvious, but not everyone is "initiated" so to speak.

[reTrEaD]

Sept 30, 2021 15:47:00 GMT -5 davidofchatham said:

Would it be appropriate to update the description for those diagrams?

In principle, I (personally) am basically opposed to making any changes that deviate from the original content unless specifically directed to do so by the original author. Else our presentation of his work loses integrity and authenticity.

I believe it's fair game to take any of his work as a starting point for separate discussion, though.

[Yogi B]

Oct 4, 2021 11:42:42 GMT -5 reTrEaD said:

In principle, I (personally) am basically opposed to making any changes that deviate from the original content unless specifically directed to do so by the original author. Else our presentation of his work loses integrity and authenticity.

Well there are already a couple of inline insertions on that very page:

Mar 8, 2020 13:50:55 GMT -5 gn2staff said:

(found here - i498.photobucket.com/albums/rr343/bsnyder45036/JD_Omniac.jpg - GN2 note: link not available)
...
Here's a link to the Stewart-MacDonald switch: (Note fromGN2 - the switch referred to is not a standard toggle and appears to be not currently available from StewMac)

So adding another similarly styled text note wouldn't be breaking new ground. It's not like we're supplanting one of the original diagrams with a subjectively 'improved' version, or trying to pass off some new variation as a Phostenix original.

---

Though this does bring up a discussion that we should've had last year: what happens in the case where one of the diagrams contains an error?

May 27, 2020 5:35:13 GMT -5 Yogi B said:

[In relation to: Strat-X2 with a Modified TBX Tone Control and Blend Pot, from the Strat-X page]

Addendum: Nobody's yet mentioned position 3 of the lower left superswitch pole (connecting neck ground to the brown wire), is it correct? As I see it, with the S1 in 'series mode', this connection would add the middle pickup in parallel with the bridge giving N x (B + M), not N x B. The terminal should be left open instead.

Sure, the purpose of this thread is partly for errata, but this isn't a physical book: we don't have to wait for a reprint before we can make an edit; additionally this thread isn't as obvious as an actual errata insert ("Errata" is only mentioned atop this page, not in the navigation menu or thread title). People's first instinct isn't necessarily to go looking elsewhere — plus, even if that were the case, it's difficult to cross reference from this thread to an exact diagram (maybe we should add anchor tags to the diagram titles as per the original site?).

Else our presentation of his work loses integrity and authenticity.

(At the time of writing) the original site (sans images) is still up (and also preserved on the Wayback Machine), thus comparison with either can be used to judge the authenticity of the textual content, if so desired. And what of our integrity? Failing to insert (in an appropriate manner) a correction or clarification is to the benefit of no-one. It would only further the frustration of anyone who found out that a wiring scheme worked differently to their expectations to then discover that the issue was discussed but not brought to their attention in the obvious place.

---

Also, regarding those previously added insertions, I checked my original backup of Phostenix's site to see how wide I'd cast the net, and thus if I happened to have that missing Photobucket image. I do (JD_Omniac.jpg), if you'd like to add that to your Phostenix Cloudinary library (so the images are all located together).

Additionally the StewMac switch link does have an entry on the Wayback Machine — though for anyone unsure that could be more hindrance than help, due to StewMac's photos showing the incorrect switch (import versions of the regular SG toggle switch, rather than the full DPDT ON/ON/ON).

The pertinent information is also still available 'live' on the StewMac site, but again confuses matters with the link to the wrong (metric with standard functionality) switch in the "Related items" section.

The correct switch is difficult to find, the only switch I found for "SG Custom toggle switch" was the same function as that for the 3-pickup LP custom switch, i.e. one terminal short of the full DPDT ON/ON/ON.

Searching for "Switchcraft DPDT" largely returns the "double neck" toggle switch, which I'll also stress is NOT the required switch.

Short of just recommending any actual DPDT ON/ON/ON toggle, this Electroswitch version (after removing the preinstalled jumper that converts it to SP3T operation) is probably the least unfamiliar you'll get, due to its compatibility with Switchcraft's toggle tips. It's also much more Tele cavity friendly than the large right-angle switches.

[JohnH]

i don't see any problem with having a few short, clearly identified 'Note from GN2' 's, if it's to correct or clarify something. Generally though, we should leave the main content as it is and not extend or change unless it's as a separate posting in the comments or elsewhere.

[newey]

I'm with Yogi B in that, if there is an error found, it should be corrected right where the diagram is shown.D of C's original question wasn't concerning an error, just a more accurate desription, which is much less of an issue. Titles of things are generally somewhat truncated anyway.

[reTrEaD]

Oct 9, 2021 16:27:36 GMT -5 Yogi B said:

And what of our integrity? Failing to insert (in an appropriate manner) a correction or clarification is to the benefit of no-one. It would only further the frustration of anyone who found out that a wiring scheme worked differently to their expectations to then discover that the issue was discussed but not brought to their attention in the obvious place.

In my opinion, our integrity remains intact until such point as we begin making 'corrections' based on our interpretations and/or own opinions of the validity of his work. After that, there's the implication that the entire body of work has been vetted by us, which is a significant task.

And where do we draw the line?

For instance, in my opinion the section entitled 'No Load Tone Pot Used As A No Load Volume' found about 4/5 of the way down the page: Custom Wiring Setups is indeed no-load when the control is at maximum but acts as a massive tone-suck long before it ever begins to act as a volume control.

Were we given the right to editorialize on his work within the work itself? Or should our rehosting simply be treated as a mirror?

[Yogi B]

Oct 11, 2021 0:48:48 GMT -5 reTrEaD said:

Oct 9, 2021 16:27:36 GMT -5 Yogi B said:

And what of our integrity? Failing to insert (in an appropriate manner) a correction or clarification is to the benefit of no-one. It would only further the frustration of anyone who found out that a wiring scheme worked differently to their expectations to then discover that the issue was discussed but not brought to their attention in the obvious place.

In my opinion, our integrity remains intact until such point as we begin making 'corrections' based on our interpretations and/or own opinions of the validity of his work.

I meant more in as our integrity as a source of dependable wiring advice — not knowingly propagating unhelpful information.

After that, there's the implication that the entire body of work has been vetted by us, which is a significant task.

Maybe that's the root of my concern, that implication is already somewhat present. In either case adding an explicit note to the foreword would cure that. (Plus a more explicit mention that errata is located within this thread.)

And where do we draw the line?

No deletions, no replacements, no inserted diagrams — any textual additions to be clearly marked, objective, and kept concise (I would say no longer than a single sentence, but maybe that's just encouragement to dodge full stops), anything that warrants more in depth discussion be linked to separate thread.

For instance, in my opinion the section entitled 'No Load Tone Pot Used As A No Load Volume' found about 4/5 of the way down the page: Custom Wiring Setups is indeed no-load when the control is at maximum but acts as a massive tone-suck long before it ever begins to act as a volume control.

It's less of a tone-suck than a 'backwards' (independent style wired) global volume control, though admittedly it'll have an even worse taper.

And really it is the only way to achieve a volume-ish control given the standard no-load pots, it would be fine for: people who basically use the volume as an on/off switch; shunting one or more pickups that are part of a larger series combination; or to experimentally determine how much loading someone prefers for a particular set of pickups.[/DevilsAdvocate]

All in all, a good candidate for a note explaining that, although useful in some contexts, in general it does not make a good replacement for a typical volume control.

Or, if not adding our own explanation, then perhaps adding Phostenix's own words from this Strat-Talk post / this TDPRI thread.

Were we given the right to editorialize on his work within the work itself? Or should our rehosting simply be treated as a mirror?

Editorials by definition are voicings of opinion, something that by itself shouldn't justify an insertion and something we should avoid in any that are warranted for other reasons.

That being said, you do have a point.

If not inline, then perhaps being more structured in our approach to errata would ease my concerns: approved corrections being indexed/summarised in the OP of this thread, grouped & sorted by page of the original diagram, and linked directly back to that source (again requiring anchor tags be added to the diagrams).

[newey]

Oct 13, 2021 6:20:16 GMT -5 Yogi B said:

No deletions, no replacements, no inserted diagrams — any textual additions to be clearly marked, objective, and kept concise (I would say no longer than a single sentence, but maybe that's just encouragement to dodge full stops), anything that warrants more in depth discussion be linked to separate thread.

This is pretty much what I envision, we're sort of balancing two goals here- accuracy versus maintaining the originality of the archive. I think we can straddle that line.

[donbazarov]

Hello! I tried to transpose Nash-X diagram from Strat-X2 section to match Schaller Megaswitch M. Can anyone please doublecheck the diagram? I get that black cables from pups are ground and grey/yellow are hot, what worries me is that on this diagram hot from neck goes on volume pot and ground goes to switches. Is that correct?

I previously gave my strat to guitar tech with similar diagram and it didn't work as supposed, some positions were out of phase, some were too quiet, some duplicated others. Good chance that technician just messed up, but I want to make sure diagram is correct so I'll take it to another tech or do all by myself (so I'll have no-one else to blame lol).

Thanks in advance!