Help with a unique 6 way switch split single coils

[davidskiwan]

Hey, first time posting but I need some help with how to wire up the switch for a baritone telecaster project I’m working on. I was inspired by the bipolar pickups and the tele pickups in this video (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DO8eqmx2b-Y) to do a build with split hum cancelling single coils.

I decided I wanted a 6 way switch so I could take advantage of the possible positions, but I don’t know a lot about electronics, I know the basic principles and how to do some soldering but not much more than that! Here’s an image that represents the scheme as I had planned. The bottom row shows the active pickups in green for each position number





I’m also open to suggestions for any different suggestions on what pickups are active in which position. To top it off, I’m going to use the G&L PTB control scheme using a concentric pot for bass and treble control, I had thought about having a different tone pot for the treble and bass side of each pickup but maybe that’s a bit overkill?

If somebody could draw over the image to connect the pickups to the correct switch positions I would really appreciate the help!

[ashcatlt]

I'm not confident that it can be done on just two poles, but we need to clarify a couple things just for completeness. I'm guessing the intention is for positions 1 and 6 to be series connections between the two halves of the pickup so that they act like normal whole pickups, and I suppose that makes most sense for 2 and 5 also, but you know what they say...butt(u)me. I guess whatever your intention for those, the opposite would be other possible tones, though honestly 2 half coils in parallel would probably pretty quiet and pretty bright and maybe not so much useful as novel.

Also, some of the odd combinations might be kind of interesting too though they wouldn't be as humcancelling. Having one set of like coils out of phase and then paired either with one or both of the other coils might be something also. If it was me, I'd probably end up with a more than one switch so that I could get ALL THE TONES, but it would be fiddly and I'd end up just using what you've got as position 3 the vast majority of the time.

[Yogi B]

Dec 9, 2020 15:31:23 GMT -5 davidskiwan said:

I decided I wanted a 6 way switch so I could take advantage of the possible positions

Unfortunately the six-way switch was designed as a bit of a one-trick pony, with the wiring scheme options limited pretty much to having the five regular Strat positions plus a single extra selection, one of: B + N, B × N, N × M, or B × M.

There are probably a handful of other niche uses, but in general the six-way lever switch isn't well suited for use in more complex wiring schemes, such as the one you're contemplating.

My suggestion would be to use a five-way switch (either: the 'regular' type, a superswitch/megaswitch, or a half-superswitch depending on what's necessary and what you have the cavity space for) in combination with an additional switch to extend the number of selections. This could be a push-pull (or push-push) pot, used for the volume, rather than an actual separate switch.

[davidskiwan]

Dec 9, 2020 18:08:09 GMT -5 ashcatlt said:

I'm not confident that it can be done on just two poles, but we need to clarify a couple things just for completeness. I'm guessing the intention is for positions 1 and 6 to be series connections between the two halves of the pickup so that they act like normal whole pickups, and I suppose that makes most sense for 2 and 5 also, but you know what they say...butt(u)me. I guess whatever your intention for those, the opposite would be other possible tones, though honestly 2 half coils in parallel would probably pretty quiet and pretty bright and maybe not so much useful as novel.

Also, some of the odd combinations might be kind of interesting too though they wouldn't be as humcancelling. Having one set of like coils out of phase and then paired either with one or both of the other coils might be something also. If it was me, I'd probably end up with a more than one switch so that I could get ALL THE TONES, but it would be fiddly and I'd end up just using what you've got as position 3 the vast majority of the time.

Yeah, you are correct! I did intend to run them in series for them to be hum-cancelling, I didn't really know what the parallel setting would produce but if you don't believe it to be useful I would be happy to drop it. The main reason I wanted to try this build was to see the tonal differences of having the trebble strings and the bass strings in different pickup locations, which I thought would be a nice feature for a baritone guitar. I would also like to be able to use standard pickup selection too, so the picture below shows the pickup selection that are the bare minimum to achieve this:



I am a big fan of having access to ALL THE TONES, I just don't have the understanding of how to achieve it! So if you have any suggestions involving push/pull pots that would be good, I don't really want to clog up the tele control plate with other switches and with the PTB circuit on a concentric pot I only have access to the volume for the push/pull.


From what you and Yogi B are saying it doesn't look like that can be achieved with a 6 Way lever, the superswitch looks like it will just about fit into the cavity, however I can't find dimensions for the megaswitch online but from the pictures I should think it will fit. I am happy to buy either of those if it helps achieve this build, just happy to hear your suggestions

[ashcatlt]

I’m not sure if there was some confusion with what I was saying about series vs parallel. In your original diagram, positions 1,2,5,6 probably want to be series combinations. That doesn’t really have anything to do with humcancelling. RWRP pairs cancel noise either way. The series connection will sound more or less like just a full normal single coil pickup. A parallel combination will be quieter and brighter, and in this case I think that would translate to “thin and weak”.

Your original position 4 is standard tele middle position (assuming the coils of each pickup are in series and then those are parallel to each other), and I think that’s a very important combination. I personally probably would use the series version (position 3) a lot more often, but that’s just my personal thing on how I play and how I generally use a baritone. My comment was more about having every conceivable combination available and then never actually using them in practice. I have an HHH guitar with series/parallel/split (and off) for each pickup, two switches for series/parallel combinations of pickups, and phase for the neck. I mostly just use the middle full humbucker except for super special effects. Like 89% percent of the time. The rest of the time is split pretty evenly among either neck and bridge humbuckers in parallel or neck and bridge split coils in series. Sometimes the bridge humbucker on its own. But again, that’s me. I’m weird. Other people like hate middle positions whether it’s the middle pickup on a Strat or the N+B on a tele or LP, they just never use them. For me, it’s really the only one that sounds right.

[Yogi B]

Dec 10, 2020 4:33:49 GMT -5 davidskiwan said:

The main reason I wanted to try this build was to see the tonal differences of having the treble strings and the bass strings in different pickup locations, which I thought would be a nice feature for a baritone guitar.

You've said baritone twice now, but it's still niggling at my mind: this type of split pickup design has an inherent problem with certain string bends due to the magnetic 'dead-zone' between the two halves of the pickups, or in the case where it's half the bridge & half the neck simply bending the string such that it doesn't pass over either of selected halves. There's a good chance being a baritone guitar, you mightn't be thinking about performing bends, but nothing's a certainly.

I would also like to be able to use standard pickup selection too, so the picture below shows the pickup selection that are the bare minimum to achieve this:

Adding to what ashcatlt was saying: it'd be a good idea to write out the way I'm interpreting that diagram:

1. Neck Bass × Neck Treble
2. Neck Bass × Bridge Treble
3. (Bridge Bass × Bridge Treble) + (Neck Bass × Neck Treble)
4. Bridge Bass × Neck Treble
5. Bridge Bass × Bridge Treble

(Where "×" means series and "+" means parallel.) That will be doable, but will requires a four-pole switch, so either the Superswitch or Megaswitch M.

From what you and Yogi B are saying it doesn't look like that can be achieved with a 6 Way lever, the superswitch looks like it will just about fit into the cavity, however I can't find dimensions for the megaswitch online but from the pictures I should think it will fit.

There's a few different versions, first the superswitch: The most common variant is that with wide wafer spacing and outwards facing terminals (dimensions), usually this is too wide to fit in a standard Telecaster control cavity; the next most common is a version with inwards facing terminals, some have the same wafer spacing so only save about 2mm versus the previous variant, whereas others also have slightly narrower wafer spacing (such as this from StewMac) which do fit in a Tele control cavity; finally ToneShapers do a really narrow spaced variant with flatter terminals.

The Megaswitch is narrower thanks to only consisting of a single PCB 'wafer', rather than the double wafers of the superswitches. There are multiple specialised Megaswitch 'circuits', but the one which is directly equivalent to the superswitch (and therefore most flexible) is the "M" variant. So if going this route that's the version you'll probably need, thus it's the version I'm assuming in the following descriptions. There's a choice of two manufacturers: Schaller (dimensions) who use a smaller curved PCB with 12 surface solder pads per side; alternatively the Eyb/Goeldo version which has similar dimensions except that it uses a larger rectangular PCB (48mm × 35mm, versus Schaller's 48mm × 30mm) so requires a comparably deeper cavity, and has only a single-layer PCB with 24 pads all on the same side, but two through-holes per pad (these holes are relatively small, accepting an absolute maximum of 18AWG, but that shouldn't be an issue if you're using sensible wire gauges).

As for which to choose, the first consideration is obviously the dimension requirements, next is probably what you're most comfortable soldering, and finally is probably that the Megaswitches have a slightly stronger clicky feel to their switching action which you may or may not like.

I am a big fan of having access to ALL THE TONES, I just don't have the understanding of how to achieve it! So if you have any suggestions involving push/pull pots that would be good, I don't really want to clog up the tele control plate with other switches and with the PTB circuit on a concentric pot I only have access to the volume for the push/pull.

I'll admit this is quite a bit trickier than I anticipated.

Currently what I'm thinking is with the push-pull down we have very close to the list above, and then when pulled we have this:

1. (Bridge Bass + Neck Bass) × Neck Treble
2. Neck Bass × (Bridge Treble + Neck Treble)
3. (Bridge Bass + Neck Bass) × (Bridge Treble + Neck Treble)
4. Bridge Bass × (Bridge Treble + Neck Treble)
5. (Bridge Bass + Neck Bass) × Bridge Treble

(These extra selections are all nominally hum-cancelling.)

However, the only way I can currently imagine this being possible with the available switching is if both of the position 3 selections were both the essentially series versions. In other words, in your 'normal' (push-pull down) position 3 the selection would be:

(Bridge Bass + Neck Bass) × (Bridge Treble + Neck Treble)

rather than:

(Bridge Bass × Bridge Treble) + (Neck Bass × Neck Treble)

Whilst these are technically different, in reality they should sound virtually identical.

---

I'm afraid I can't think of anything a little more imaginative that would be possible with only a DPDT push-pull, but perhaps the others will chip in with some cleverer ideas.

I'd also ask if you'd consider using a Fender S1 pot which has a 4PDT, thus could open up other possibilities, but they are quite expensive compared to a regular push-pull -- and without a potential wiring idea in mind, I'm not yet sure it'd be worthwhile.