Going Loopy (even more so) 2P7T Lever

[Deleted]

So what could you do with a 2P6T/2P7T lever switch in a Startocaster body

Not sure how to word it, 2P6T+6 / 2P7T+7, so Two IO for each Stage and one Common

3 Holes one Lever if you need to add a extra control or Switch must be within the space of what a Strat could hold.

2P6T/2P7T
each pole has 2 lots of inputs A1+A2+XCommon... B1+B2+XCommon... G1+G2+XCommon.. and A3+A4+YCommon ... G3+G4+YCommon
If you go WILD and want more Poles will need to explain Reason (see if its possible!)

[Deleted]

The only thing i've come up with was 3P6T and a 2P2T to give



Think it should give N, N+M, M, M+B, B, B+N and then with 2P2T switch becomes NxMxB, NxB, NxM , MxB, KILL, N+M+B

[Yogi B]

Jul 12, 2021 2:59:12 GMT -5 @angellahash said:

Not sure how to word it, 2P6T+6 / 2P7T+7, so Two IO for each Stage and one Common

So a 4P6T (or 4P7T) switch where there are two pairs of commons which are permanently joined (similar to the freeway-ultra 6-way toggle switch), like this?

Jul 12, 2021 12:53:54 GMT -5 @angellahash said:

Think it should give N, N+M, M, M+B, B, B+N and then with 2P2T switch becomes NxMxB, NxB, NxM , MxB, KILL, N+M+B

Are all those selections supposed to be in phase? (Because they can't be if bridge and middle are permanently linked.)

Also which column is supposed to represent the common terminals? If they're "common" then they'll always be connected to the same thing, but you don't have a single column which is like that, so I'm confused .

[Deleted]

Jul 12, 2021 22:43:14 GMT -5 Yogi B said:

Jul 12, 2021 2:59:12 GMT -5 @angellahash said:

Not sure how to word it, 2P6T+6 / 2P7T+7, so Two IO for each Stage and one Common

So a 4P6T (or 4P7T) switch where there are two pairs of commons which are permanently joined (similar to the freeway-ultra 6-way toggle switch), like this?

Jul 12, 2021 12:53:54 GMT -5 @angellahash said:

Think it should give N, N+M, M, M+B, B, B+N and then with 2P2T switch becomes NxMxB, NxB, NxM , MxB, KILL, N+M+B

Are all those selections supposed to be in phase? (Because they can't be if bridge and middle are permanently linked.)

Also which column is supposed to represent the common terminals? If they're "common" then they'll always be connected to the same thing, but you don't have a single column which is like that, so I'm confused .

Broke the common track
So the drawing is correct (at the momnent for the 2P6T+6 because two tags plus a common for each point) Go wild break rules (this is just two pole, i think possible to do four, but the tags needed is too much so if recycle tags could do it maybe). With the common as long as you dont break it in to small parts its ok. Because im down to nm at that small level and the angles are harder.

And no not in phase.
Figured could put a phase switch around middle/bridge.






X would be n, Y is M and Z is where m+B linked. This was designed to be 3P6T+? working with a 2P2T switch, or a 2P6T+? working with a 3P2T switch

The 2P7T+7 (as its dual banked) is basic, i can make it 4 Pole, but i cant put so many Input/Output as takes a lot of space (as shown in the video)
But like the one above what is a Kinda freaky 3Pole rules can be broken if need and possible.

[Yogi B]

Jul 12, 2021 23:37:28 GMT -5 @angellahash said:

The 2P7T+7 (as its dual banked) is basic, i can make it 4 Pole, but i cant put so many Input/Output as takes a lot of space

Maybe you could do what Eyb did with the earlier versions of the megaswitch (and what Schaller still do) and use surface mount pads rather than through-hole, i.e.:

Thereby essentially doubling the space for pads (as you can have them overlap on opposite sides of the board).

Another strategy might be to zig-zag two rows of through-hole pads on each edge. I don't know what tolerances you're working with, but with a clearance of 6mils between traces/pads I often use pads with 76mils width (40mils hole) at a 0.1in pitch which leaves exactly enough space to run a 12mil trace through the gap between pads (accounting for the clearance).

One thing that probably would be useful is a 4P5T switch where one pole was cut down to only 4 pads (B+, M+, N+ & output) and performed the regular strat switching (or had N+B in the middle). This kinda thing comes up fairly often, however with a regular superswitch/megaswitch it requires sacrificing two poles, limiting the switch's capability for extra functions. So, even if the other three poles of the modified switch were just a regular 3P5T it'd still be a win.

[Deleted]

I'll look about doing that Yogi.. keep my mind doing some thing and away from the site for a bit

I was after a switch that can be robust and cheaper
why i pushed it up to 7, i dont think i can go any more than that.
So i figured i could do more Poles

I'll look at doing a 4P3T and 4P5T (two sides of the same cog)

And the PAD than a Hole would mean i could Double the amount of I/O with one on one side and one on the other.

ANYWAY i'll get this two switches 2P7T and 2P6T sealed up and sent to the USA for someone to play with (and maybe break)

So Far