Schematics Vs. Wiring Diagrams

[Mike Richardson]

I think I'm getting the hang of the Word Draw stuff. I'll try and tackle the TinyCad next. Assuming I get the Strat setup from GN1 in a presentable form, would you guys rather have it in a schematic form, or as a wiring diagram? For what it may be worth, I have several similar designs for 2HB guitars that may be of interest. First things first, however. Let me know your preferences. Thanks!

[UnklMickey]

Mike,

i think that's a matter of personal preference.

i personally prefer schematics.

for me, it's much easier to analyze the connectivity, when switches look like little levers, etc.

rather than boxes with circles.

but i think is speak for all the other members who do prefer schematics, when i say,

your audience will be larger if you do pictorials instead.

they're easier for someone who doesn't thoroughly understand them, to still be able to build from.

i think anyone who can read a schematic, can work his (or her) way through a pictorial.

but, the reverse is not necessarily true.


unk

[sumgai]

Mike,

Schematics show connections, and wiring diagrams show wire runs.

For me, I'd just as soon run the wires the say I want to run them, and not have to modify a diagram. A schematic lets me know that "The first and second terminals of this side of the switch connect to the third terminal of the other side, and then that runs over to the pot.....". With this information, I have the option of where to put the jumpers, and which end of the jumper(s) will run to the pot.

With a wiring diagram, I don't have any options, unless I "re-work" the diagram to suit my needs. At that point, I might as well have had the schematic in the first place.

Another point: wiring diagrams are assembly instructions. While some people need that (they haven't yet learned how to how to translate a schematic to real world components), it tends to reduce the "need" to understand what one is doing. Don't anyone get me wrong here, I fully concur with the overarching "mission statement" that this forum is for everyone, no matter what their level of electrical/electronic knowledge. But it's tough to help someone up to the next higher level of learning if the tools presented to them don't 'challenge' them to understand at least some of the rudimentary stuff.

I'm not saying anything here, I'm just saying, you know. Perhaps it's just best to let each designer present in his own favorite method, and hopefully the exposure to that wide variety of input will truly give the forum members a boost up as they climb the learning curve.

Summary of my wish: Schematics - preferred, wiring diagrams - acceptable. (Hope that made sense.


And good luck with TinyCAD. But if John's work is any indication of what Word can do, you can't go wrong with that method either. ;D


sumgai

[UnklMickey]

"I'm not saying anything here, I'm just saying, you know. "


LMAO

[ChrisK]

I prefer schematics (my first language) because they're the model. However, explaining schematics is a (real) challenge often.

I usually (of late) have been drawing schematics as close to realizable wiring as possible since I have little patience (for even my own many shortcomings). The extra effort up front eliminates much repetitive labor after-wards.

I generally WON'T do a pure wiring diagram. That's the derivative function of a schematic design, and the starting basis ("+C") is lost for most.

[Mike Richardson]

Thanks for your opinions. I don't have a problem with either, personally. I sometimes draw wiring diagrams "incorrectly" anyway, since I know where I want the wires to go, and the exact point-to-point order is sometimes less important than the fact that "all of those points must be connected". I won't do that HERE, though.

[Mike Richardson]

Lesson #1: Hit "Save As" after everything you do. Lesson #2: Start by making things big enough to begin with. It's easier to connect everything that way. Lesson #3: Doing this in pencil was easy. Doing it in color looks like clown vomit.

[JohnH]

For me. i cant think through a design without a schematic, wiring diagrams are just too tangled. especially for some of our designs. But to do a clean build, the discipline of thinking through and drawing the wiring before hacking with a soldering iron helps to achieve a clean result.

Hence, I always want a schematic and i usually want a wiring diagram. I would normally do the wiring layout myself, since it will vary according to the specifics of what I am doing, but I know there are many others who more schematically challenged, and I wouldnt want them to miss out on the benefit of our designs.

John

[Mike Richardson]

Well, I'll step up the pace regarding TinyCad.

[jhng]

I always end up converting wiring diagrams into schematics in order to understand them. So if it's one or t'other definitely schematics for preference.

Hastings

[Runewalker]

chikn said:

..... would you guys rather have it in a schematic form, or as a wiring diagram?

There are at least 2 distinct audiences here:

1. Those that understand this stuff and who design, analyze and assess through the language of schematics, and

2. those who don't know the theory or language and want to participate is design concepts or executing builds and need road-maps to do so. They have not yet joined the SSL club (schematics as a second language).

It is pretty clear from the comments here that wiring diagrams are execution layouts and not diagnostic tools. But there are not many voices in this thread from the SSL group, and they will not be able to translate the schemas into layouts. I suspect that the schema readers are in the tails of the bell curve, as they will no doubt assure us (and out of kindness we won't ask which tail), but that the middle part of the bell holds the SSL group (or as JH gently describes them, "schematically challenged").

Wiring diagrams value to the SSL group is not so much the wire routing but the point to point designations. Execution will invariably find its own variants in routing.

So the answer about which form is preferred is .......

Both ---- to capture the widest audience.

Perhaps on an initial proposed design the schematic is best, but after the design is vetted via community feedback, the last stage is the layout.

[monradon]

On something brand new I like both

[wolf]

Well I suppose I should cast my vote. I'd rather follow a wiring diagram than a schematic, even though I don't have a problem reading schematics.
As far as posting both? Sometimes I do that. Go to this page:
www.1728.com/guitar2.htm
Scroll down about halfway and then you'll see a schematic (with a wiring diagram a little further down). If I were building this project, I'd definitely follow the wiring diagram.
Sometimes schematics get confusing even to those that are very knowledgeable about them. I guess the best example would be the drawing of a volume or tone "pot" in a schematic.
How many times have people asked questions such as:
"Is the top part of the "pot" in the schematic the right hand side or the left hand?" OR
"When I'm building this, is the schematic based on a front view or a rear view of the "pot"?"
Well you get the idea.

[Mike Richardson]

Well, I messed with TinyCad enough that I think I have the schematic of the Strat diagram done correctly. How do I post it? I left out the cap values, since everyone probably has their own favorites.

[UnklMickey]

hi Mike,

a free photobucket account is the usual way most of use do it.

you'll need to export your drawing as a gif or jpg. (gif seems to work better)

then upload it to your photobucket account.

copy the image tag that will show beneath the image.

then paste the tag into your GN2 post.


if the image is more than 960 pixels wide, it can't be viewed all at once on some screens, like the laptop i'm using. so be kind, and keep the images reasonably sized.



unk

[Mike Richardson]

TinyCad seems to use .dsn files only. Is there a way to convert them so that Photobucket can accept them?

[JohnH]

A simple way that I use is to do a screen capture. Get the image on your screen at a suitable size for posting, press 'Print Screen' (3rd from left on keyboard top row - on my PC)

Now open a graphics program. I like Irfan view, but it could be Paint also. Then crop to suit and save as a .gif file for posting

With 'Paint' cropping seems to involve copying the area you want, then pasting into a second file in Paint

cheers

John

[Mike Richardson]

Can I just mail it in?

[UnklMickey]

sure Mike, we accept e-mails here!

LMAO



seriously, Mike, i know you can export as an image file,

but i don't remember if thats as a .gif, or if it's some other format.



unk

[UnklMickey]

Mike,

i am soooooooooooooo sorry!

i used the phrase "image tag", and that's probably what led to your confusion.

copy the "image string" (in the bottom of the three boxes below the image) and paste that into your post.


unk

[Mike Richardson]

[ChrisK]

Mike,

Not sure exactly what this posted schematic is, too faint fer the fat old guy's eyes.

I used yer schema in an aftermarket Strat copy a while back, I'd CAD'd up a schematic and a sche'wiring diagram at the time.

It's yer original design, with a tone pot directly across each of the bridge and neck pickups. These are PP pots, so the respective pickup is also phase reversed by the same control. Having the tone pots directly across the individual pickups has normal effect in parallel, but in series, the allow you to tone bypass the affected pickup(s) while letting the high frequency components of the others in the chain easily bypass them. Dialing more tone cut on one pickup actually brightens the others.

The discovery of your design curtailed my SSS all-mode design effort until sumgai started his recent "Strat Side Slapping" thread. I'm (one of) the guy(s) exhalting you, and I'm far from easily impressed by most things encountered.

[Mike Richardson]

That's pretty impressive. I have a somewhat expanded version with a rotary switch in place of one tone pot. It does the two original "modes" plus the series one with the neck out of phase. There's a guy in Florida who is selling the original version online. I think it's called HAS Sound or something like that. I wish he wouldn't do it, but I guess it's to be expected.

[ChrisK]

The thing that I like about your original design is its pure logical mode symmetry. Ok, one mode is B*M*N while the other is B+M+N (oh wait, symmetry).

With the PP pots for bridge and neck tone/phase, symmetry is further preserved.

NO MANUAL REQUIRED, no memory required.


Mark all implementation works (schematics, layouts, etc.) w/ a copyright symbol. You don't need to register it (recommended for really good implementations, tho) and proven infringments bear a $10,000 fine PER INSTANCE.

I put a competitor out of business 20 years ago because he copied my copyrighted PCB layout verbatum, and he didn't have the $4 million for the number (400 to 500) of infringement instances. It was only a $20 product.........

[Mike Richardson]

I don't suppose the copyright is retroactive. The design was already a couple of years old when it was originally posted.

[sumgai]

Mike,

Since 1976, all copyrights worldwide have been "good" at the moment of inception. The rub of course, is in the ability to provide proof of what you were doing at that particular moment in time. If you do intend to stick up for your rights though, then you'll find that the web is full of sites that will give you good info on this topic.

One thing you have to remember is that you are considering engaging a fellow in a fight meant to prevent him from putting money in his pocket. That means that he will get a weasel lawyer first thing off the bat, and from there on, things will only go downhill, fast. I don't envy you at this stage of the game, but I do think you should at least investigate all your options before making up your mind.

And become buddies with at least a couple of lawyers, soon. Golfing buddies would be ideal! ;D


sumgai

[Mike Richardson]

Well, I can at least show that it's been on GN1 for a good while now. I don't know about any legal action. At the risk of sounding like some sort of self-styled martyr, I sent the diagram to GN1 so people could use it to get new sounds relatively easily. Yes, it's a pain to wire up, but ease of operation is what I was aiming for.

[jhng]

sumgai said:

a weasel lawyer

Definitely worth talking to one, though. I don't know much about US copyright law but you might be able to get your hands on some of his profits...

Hastings

[fobits]

Oh, what the heck. If everybody else is posting their drawing of a Mike Richardson mod, then I may as well too. This is my rendering of the one Mike posted, not the more complicated one posted by ChrisK.

QUERY - the title of this thread doesn't say much about the current contents. Is there a procedure for renaming threads or moving the most relevant posts to a new one?

[Mike Richardson]

Yours is a lot closer to being planar than the one I was doing with Word. Not to mention "plainer".