|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 13, 2021 20:05:20 GMT -5
Dear GuitarNuts, I am back in a long time with an idea. I really want to build a Telecaster one day. Broadcaster inspired, and one thing with these old guitars as we all know, is that the bridge position had instead of a tone knob, a blender knob-- it blended the neck in parallel with it. Really cool stuff. Now about the pickups I'm going to hopefully be using, it's very important too. The neck pickup is tapped: the low wind is typical tele neck goodness, and the full thing is a fat telecaster neck. The bridge pickup has three taps. Yeah. First tap is nice low wind twangy stuff. Middle tap is thicker broadcaster bridge pickup territory. Last (full) tap: Midrange absurdity. So tele neck pickup: I'll call them low and fat respectively. Bridge pickup taps: Bakersfield, Broadcaster and Monster respectively. Ok so the stuff I need/want to have is: a three way switch, two potentiometers (two knobs), a neck only position, a position where the neck and bridge are in-between, a bridge only position, some way to control all of these taps, a tone knob, a master volume and a pot for blending in the neck pickup... So yeah I thought this would be impossible without an onslaught of switches and knobs. But I think I got it now, I just need you guys to tell me if it's possible or not, and answer a few questions. Thank you so much in advance! Wiring Functions:Position 3 (pointing to headstock):Neck pickup only, fat. 1st knob: Master Volume. 2nd knob: Tone knob. Position 2 (middle): Neck low and bridge Bakersfield in parallel, fully. 1st knob: Master Volume. 2nd knob: - Push pull DOWN: it's just a normal tone knob.
- Push pull UP: it's now a blend (volume) knob for the neck pickup. Knob all the way up (at 10): Bakersfield all by himself. Roll to the left (towards 0) and you get the neck pickup coming in.
Position 1 (pointing to bridge):
Bridge pickup only, Broadcaster. 1st knob: - Push pull DOWN (Like it was all this time) Master Volume.
- Push pull UP: it now engages the Monster.
2nd knob:- Push pull DOWN: it's just a normal tone knob.
- Push pull UP: it's now a blend (volume) knob for the neck pickup. Knob all the way up (at 10): Broadcaster (or Monster if 1st knob is pulled up) only. Roll to the left (towards 0) and you get the neck pickup coming in.
And there you go. I like how the middle position would be the lowest taps with the lowest resistance together, this ensures that it's nice and jangly, which I love. I also get all tap options except for neck low by himself, but I really don't need that at all. And if one chooses not to mess around with the pots (pulling them and stuff), they got a normal Tele configuration!
Now: is this possible?
I think for that 2nd knob, it changing it's role from a tone knob to a blender, it would require something like this: reverb.com/ca/item/14587203-genuine-bourns-dual-gang-push-pull-pot-with-dpdt-miniswitch-6mm-solid-shaft-250k
Possible Problems I see: Biggest one is the push pull knobs being pulled up when they aren't in the "correct" switch position. Ex: on position 3, neck only, and one decides to pull up the 1st knob. Will the Monster suddenly come on or something like that? Or, what about pulling the 1st knob in the middle position will turn the Bakersfield into the Monster and neck in parallel, not the biggest deal, but not needed. That's all I can think of for now. I don't need tips on how to wire it-- I mean yeah I do, I'm a wiring amateur-- but I'll ask for help with that if I need it in the future, when I actually build this. By all means though if you guys want to tell me how to wire it (diagrams for example), go right ahead, but I feel like I'm asking for too much now. Right now I'm just seeing what parts to purchase and if this could actually be a thing. Thanks for all the help, you are all awesome people! |
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Sept 14, 2021 1:39:01 GMT -5
Interesting idea. That shouldn't be necessary, you've specified that the neck pickup should be fully blended at 0 which is the 'correct' end for smooth blending with the taper of a log pot. So a single gang can be use for both the tone & blend options Those specific things shouldn't represent problems, however my concern would be pulling the 2nd (tone/blend) knob in position 1 (sorry) position 3, it may be difficult to prevent the tone knob becoming a blend as in the other two positions. So, I think you'll need a double wafer Tele switch (4P3T) e.g. this by Goeldo.
I have a few more thoughts: Firstly in position one, with the neck blend you don't specify which mode of the neck you're blending, either of 'low' or 'fat' would be possible. However a third option (because toggling the bridge pickup should only take half the volume p/p) should also be possible: blend the 'low' neck with the 'Broadcaster' bridge and when the volume is pulled blend the 'fat' neck with the 'monster' bridge — would that be of interest? Secondly pickups: do you have a source for more info — if they are a standard product — or are they / will they be a custom job? I'm asking because I'm curious about the taps, there's a right way and a wrong way to wire them. Ideally the pickups would come with a separate shield/chassis ground wire for greater flexibility; this can be added after the fact, but it's less work if it's present from the start. Finally, relating to Broadcaster/Nocaster wiring & the tone/blend knob wiring: originally in the neck + cap, and bridge + neck blend positions there was a 15k resistor in series with the neck pickup. For the blend position this meant you'd get less neck at full blend (15k represents around the last 40% turn of the pot), my guess is this was to better balance pickup volume and whilst you could include something similar (say a 25k trimpot), but I don't know that I'd bother with it for this purpose. Where it potentially gets a little more interesting is in the original neck + cap setting, in this case the additional resistor reduced the treble response below what it would've been with just the cap — likewise in your version this would affect the response of the tone control. What I'm thinking is, if possible and desired, in the neck only position pulling the tone knob could introduce this extra resistor to give just a little more variation and broadcaster-ish-ness. |
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 14, 2021 7:21:27 GMT -5
Thank you so much Yogi for sharing your wisdom once again with me! That shouldn't be necessary, you've specified that the neck pickup should be fully blended at 0 which is the 'correct' end for smooth blending with the taper of a log pot. So a single gang can be use for both the tone & blend options But wouldn't I need a dual gang pot? Because the second knob has TWO roles, it's like two knobs in one, but instead of being like a concentric pot where you have a knob on top of a knob, here you have one knob that you could change it's function by pulling it. This is what I had in mind for the second knob. It pulled down, it's a normal tone knob for all three positions, pulled up, it's a blend knob for the bridge pickup in Positions 1 (bridge only) and 2 (Bakersfield and Low Neck in parallel, but when I pull up on the knob, it's only the Bakersfield, and when I roll down to zero the neck (low) comes in). Please educate me because I know very little about potentiometers! All I know is that I'd like a stock look, so a three way switch, and 2 knobs would be ideal! Those specific things shouldn't represent problems, however my concern would be pulling the 2nd (tone/blend) knob in position 1, it may be difficult to prevent the tone knob becoming a blend as in the other two positions. So, I think you'll need a double wafer Tele switch (4P3T) e.g. this by Goeldo. I'm afraid I don't understand completely, I'm sorry  In position 1, Broadcaster bridge is the only guy there. 2nd knob is a tone knob, like usual, until it's pulled up, now it's a neck blender, just like it is for position 2. I'd like it to do the same thing in position 2. Maybe Position 3 is the problem? Yeah pulling up on the second knob on the neck pickup only shouldn't do anything-- so I need the double wafer switch to fix this? Also does that switch have only 3 positions? Firstly in position one, with the neck blend you don't specify which mode of the neck you're blending, either of 'low' or 'fat' would be possible. However a third option (because toggling the bridge pickup should only take half the volume p/p) should also be possible: blend the 'low' neck with the 'Broadcaster' bridge and when the volume is pulled blend the 'fat' neck with the 'monster' bridge — would that be of interest? Shucks it's true! Yes I'm always blending low neck. BUT YES THIS IS BETTER: Blending the low neck with Broadcaster, and then 1st knob is pulled up and it initiates Monster and you can blend the fat neck-- this would be cool if this could be done, even cooler if it can be in series, but I believe that would just screw everything else over (because other than the monster, I'd like the bridge pickup to be blended in parallel with the neck low pickup). Secondly pickups: do you have a source for more info — if they are a standard product — or are they / will they be a custom job? I'm asking because I'm curious about the taps, there's a right way and a wrong way to wire them. Ideally the pickups would come with a separate shield/chassis ground wire for greater flexibility; this can be added after the fact, but it's less work if it's present from the start. Thanks for asking! I think I'll be using Cavalier Pickups! His stuff is great and he's the nicest guy! Willing to talk to you always. www.cavalierpickups.comFor both his bridge and neck pickups he offers taps! Finally, relating to Broadcaster/Nocaster wiring & the tone/blend knob wiring: originally in the neck + cap, and bridge + neck blend positions there was a 15k resistor in series with the neck pickup. For the blend position this meant you'd get less neck at full blend (15k represents around the last 40% turn of the pot), my guess is this was to better balance pickup volume and whilst you could include something similar (say a 25k trimpot), but I don't know that I'd bother with it for this purpose. Where it potentially gets a little more interesting is in the original neck + cap setting, in this case the additional resistor reduced the treble response below what it would've been with just the cap — likewise in your version this would affect the response of the tone control. What I'm thinking is, if possible and desired, in the neck only position pulling the tone knob could introduce this extra resistor to give just a little more variation and broadcaster-ish-ness. Cool idea! So on position 3, pulling up the volume knob would do nothing right? But then pulling on the 2nd knob (last knob), it engages the resistor? Thanks for adding on with your cool ideas! |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Sept 14, 2021 9:57:19 GMT -5
DireStrat- Yogi B already has you on the right track here, so I won't address everything. But the need for a 2-wafer Tele switch is dictated by your desire to have differing coil taps selected in different switch positions. And, yes, the switch only has 3 positions. |
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 14, 2021 16:30:43 GMT -5
Ohhh! Thank you, I understand. Yeah there's a lot of stuff going on, I need that double wafer switch! Thank you so much guys!
Also where do you buy a 3 way 4 pole switch?
|
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 14, 2021 16:37:49 GMT -5
Also, about the neck pickup only position, if somehow we can change the role of the second knob's push pull (usually turns the tone knob into a blend, which would be useless on a neck only position) into a push pull taking out the capacitor out of the system, I think I'd like this more than the resistor idea. The resistor is pretty cool, because it pays respect to the original design, but I think pulling up to take out the "tone knob (capacitor)" it makes the "Fat" neck a bit brighter, oh and when on position 1, with the knob pulled up and rolled down a bit so I can have a bit of neck and bridge together, if I want to do some neck stuff, I can quickly switch over to position 3 and the tone won't be muddy (because the second knob is still a tone knob on position 3 even if it's pulled up), it would be brighter regardless of how rolled off the second knob is. I think that adds a bit more useful ness. I just can't see how this second knob will have three roles in one! Tone knob, blend for the neck to come in, and capacitor removal (No load). I am sure you guys know how lol
|
|
|
|
Post by gckelloch on Sept 14, 2021 21:36:34 GMT -5
This is interesting, if not a bit complex. It might be worth simplifying by using relatively high inductance Tele pickups in the 3~5H range, preferably wound with thin wire for stronger note fundamentals, and wiring at least one of the P/P knobs with a Wilde "Q-filter"(maybe wired as an L-filter) to reduce the inductance as needed. You could even configure it as a Q-filter only in the Bridge pickup if you don't want any bass loss when it's turned down. You could then get hum-canceling pickups if you want. Zexcoil and Wilde make the best in my book, the Zexcoil "Z-Core" series edging out Wilde for efficiency and individual string timbre for not much more money.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Sept 14, 2021 22:26:03 GMT -5
But wouldn't I need a dual gang pot? Because the second knob has TWO roles, it's like two knobs in one, but instead of being like a concentric pot where you have a knob on top of a knob, here you have one knob that you could change it's function by pulling it. This is what I had in mind for the second knob. It pulled down, it's a normal tone knob for all three positions, pulled up, it's a blend knob for the bridge pickup in Positions 1 (bridge only) and 2 (Bakersfield and Low Neck in parallel, but when I pull up on the knob, it's only the Bakersfield, and when I roll down to zero the neck (low) comes in). Please educate me because I know very little about potentiometers! All I know is that I'd like a stock look, so a three way switch, and 2 knobs would be ideal! I apologise if I'm misinterpreting your understanding, but you wouldn't be the first to think what I think you're thinking... I think you're presuming that for a dual-gang push-pull only a single gang of the pot is adjusted at once (one gang when pushed, the other when pulled) and thus the push-pull could independently 'remember' the position of each gang. This is not the case. And, although perhaps mechanically possible, I doubt a pot that could achieve such would ever be made cheaply or robust enough to make a viable product, when in most cases it would be in competition with a system that digitally measures the position of the pot and switch then uses that information to control relays/switching ICs/digital pots. In fact, the two parts of a push-pull (the switch and the potentiometer) are mechanically separate — no matter whether pushed or pulled, the rotation of the shaft always adjusts both gangs of a dual gang pot in sync. This means the only way to get independent control of each function is to separate them, for example, in the bridge position turning the tone/blend pot to halfway: pushed, you'd have the tone rolled off halfway & the neck disconnected; pulled, you'd have the tone disconnected and the neck blended in halfway. Sorry, I did mean position 3 — I got the ordering muddled. I'm not certain yet, and it depends how this design evolves, but yes I do believe a double wafer (or similar, see below) switch will be necessary. I should also point out that there is also a different form of a 4P3T that you may find, it has all four poles on a single wafer, both versions preform electrically equivalent. Note, also, that the single wafer version is less likely to have fitment issues regarding the extra width required by the double wafer version. I think I'll be using Cavalier Pickups! His stuff is great and he's the nicest guy! Willing to talk to you always. www.cavalierpickups.comFor both his bridge and neck pickups he offers taps! And, on all relevant pickups the baseplate/cover grounds are separated. Even though not vintage correct, I do wish this would become a standard option for tele pickups (and P90s) of every manufacturer, just as 4 conductor wiring has become for humbuckers.
I'll leave it there for now, the first of the above points is quite a spanner to throw in the works if you've been thinking differently until now. I will mention that there are concentric push-pull pots which whilst significantly more expensive than regular push-pulls, will probably better fit your use case. (And at least as it stands you'd only need one for the tone/blend, the volume can still be a regular push-pull.) |
|
|
|
Post by gckelloch on Sept 14, 2021 23:04:45 GMT -5
Also consider what you are plugging into. The ability to at least control the signal level, if not also impedance, b4 the first gain stage frees up your pickup choice not to require a certain output at the expense of tone and note timbre. FI, while the field strength AlNiCo V poles increases output, it also pulls hard enough on the strings at typical distances to cause strong harmonic modulations and an increase in odd harmonics depending on the location along the string. Some modern AlNiCo II (used by venders like Wilde and DiMarzio) has ~2x the permeability of V, but ~0.6x the field strength. The higher permeability II poles draw the flux lines from the strings down more through the coil without increasing string pull or odd harmonics, so the output and note fundamentals are stronger without the harmonic abnormalities. All things being equal, pickups with this AlNiCo II will sound warmer and less shrill, so a brighter guitar wood combination can be used without necessarily sounding harsh. Whatever you choose, I'd make sure to at least get a pair that will balance well when combined.
|
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 15, 2021 23:02:44 GMT -5
But wouldn't I need a dual gang pot? Because the second knob has TWO roles, it's like two knobs in one, but instead of being like a concentric pot where you have a knob on top of a knob, here you have one knob that you could change it's function by pulling it. This is what I had in mind for the second knob. It pulled down, it's a normal tone knob for all three positions, pulled up, it's a blend knob for the bridge pickup in Positions 1 (bridge only) and 2 (Bakersfield and Low Neck in parallel, but when I pull up on the knob, it's only the Bakersfield, and when I roll down to zero the neck (low) comes in). Please educate me because I know very little about potentiometers! All I know is that I'd like a stock look, so a three way switch, and 2 knobs would be ideal! I apologise if I'm misinterpreting your understanding, but you wouldn't be the first to think what I think you're thinking... I think you're presuming that for a dual-gang push-pull only a single gang of the pot is adjusted at once (one gang when pushed, the other when pulled) and thus the push-pull could independently 'remember' the position of each gang. This is not the case. And, although perhaps mechanically possible, I doubt a pot that could achieve such would ever be made cheaply or robust enough to make a viable product, when in most cases it would be in competition with a system that digitally measures the position of the pot and switch then uses that information to control relays/switching ICs/digital pots. In fact, the two parts of a push-pull (the switch and the potentiometer) are mechanically separate — no matter whether pushed or pulled, the rotation of the shaft always adjusts both gangs of a dual gang pot in sync. This means the only way to get independent control of each function is to separate them, for example, in the bridge position turning the tone/blend pot to halfway: pushed, you'd have the tone rolled off halfway & the neck disconnected; pulled, you'd have the tone disconnected and the neck blended in halfway.The part that I highlighted is exactly what I had in mind! Yes what you said makes sense-- if I roll the tone knob down 50%, and then I change its function (presumably with its push pull switch) to a neck blend, well the neck will be 50% blended in. That is fine! I like that a lot. It's like having "two" tone knobs in one, one blends in the capacitor, the other blends in the neck pickup-- "fattens" up the bridge pickup, this is what I had in mind for the very beginning. So I'm glad this can be done. My only question is: how can I make ONE potentiometer have two roles? I thought I would need a dual gang push pull: when this one pot is pushed down, the 3 terminals with the capacitor connected to it is in the signal. Then when I pull up, the other tree terminals that are connected to the neck pickup get connected instead. Maybe there's a way to do this with a normal push pull-- one pot that can have two functions, and yes I am aware that the wiper is the same for both "functions". Thanks! Note, also, that the single wafer version is less likely to have fitment issues regarding the extra width required by the double wafer version. Thanks for the EBAY switch! This 3 way 4 pole Tele switch is quite exclusive it seems-- the EBAY one is the only that I can find that's in stock and at a reasonable price. Would this Tele Super Switch fit my need, because if so, I'll buy it right away before it goes outta stock! And, on all relevant pickups the baseplate/cover grounds are separated. Even though not vintage correct, I do wish this would become a standard option for tele pickups (and P90s) of every manufacturer, just as 4 conductor wiring has become for humbuckers. I can always ask the winder to not ground the baseplate and cover, if he doesn't do it. To be clear-- are you talking about the piece of metal wire that connects to one of the eyelets of the pickup to the baseplate? That's not what I need right, I would need a wire attached from the baseplate that's not connected to anything else on the other end, right? Ok I'll go over the switching possibilities now: Position 3: Selects neck pickup, fat, only. 2 knobs. 1st knob: - Pushed down: moving the wiper adjusts master volume. - Pushed up: does nothing, right? Because this on position 1 would engage "the Monster". 2nd knob: - Pushed down: moving the wiper adjusts how much capacitor is in the signal (typical tone knob) - Pushed up: I initially said this would do nothing, on other positions this would be a neck blend (wherever the wiper's position is, is how much neck pickup is blended in), and a neck blend on a neck only position really makes no sense obviously so hopefully it doesn't do this-- tele super switch should solve this. You said we can give this a function when pulling up, that's only reserved for Position 3: a resistor is engaged, changing the tone knob response. I have another idea: what if pulling up the second knob just disengages the tone capacitor in position 3 only. So pulling up the second knob and moving the wiper won't do anything, and I'll have a neck position immediately with no tone cap connected, I like that! Position 2: Selects neck pickup, low, and bridge pickup, Bakersfield, both 100% in parallel with each other (typical middle position of Tele). 2 knobs. 1st knob: - Pushed down: moving the wiper adjusts master volume. - Pushed up: it would be nice if pushed up 2nd knob on the 2nd position did nothing, had no function, but if engaging the Monster in position 2 with this pulling up of the knob is unavoidable, I guess it's not the biggest issue obviously! 2nd knob: - Pushed down: tone knob. - Pushed up: if the wiper is at 10, Bakersfield, should be all by himself, no neck in parallel anymore (unlike when the 2nd knob was pushed down). Rolling the wiper down to the left (to 0) would blend the neck low in parallel. I like this because I get to hear the lowest tap by itself if, and only if, the wiper is at 10 (I understand that it won't be truly by itself if the pot is not no load, but I don't really care). Position 1: Selects bridge pickup, Broadcaster, by himself. 2 knobs. 1st knob: - Pushed down: master volume - Pushed up: Engages THE MONSTER! 2nd knob: - Pushed down: tone knob like before (again if I kept the wiper at 85% in position 3, it would be like this in position 1 too, and if I pulled up, the neck would be 85% blended in, because the amount of resistance doesn't change unless wiper is adjusted) - Pushed up: neck blender for neck low and bridge Broadcaster in parallel. ***If the Monster is engaged (knob 1 is pulled up) and 2nd knob is pushed up so that 2nd knob acts as neck blender, it blends the neck fat instead of neck low in parallel! Thanks Yogi! Instead of fat and Monster blending together in parallel, can they somehow blend in series together? if this messes up anything else (stuff that was said above), never mind, because it's not that necessary! Phew I think that's it. When it sits in your head, it's not that complicated. It makes sense. I'm sure the wiring will be complicated however... |
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 15, 2021 23:10:16 GMT -5
Also consider what you are plugging into. The ability to at least control the signal level, if not also impedance, b4 the first gain stage frees up your pickup choice not to require a certain output at the expense of tone and note timbre. FI, while the field strength AlNiCo V poles increases output, it also pulls hard enough on the strings at typical distances to cause strong harmonic modulations and an increase in odd harmonics depending on the location along the string. Some modern AlNiCo II (used by venders like Wilde and DiMarzio) has ~2x the permeability of V, but ~0.6x the field strength. The higher permeability II poles draw the flux lines from the strings down more through the coil without increasing string pull or odd harmonics, so the output and note fundamentals are stronger without the harmonic abnormalities. All things being equal, pickups with this AlNiCo II will sound warmer and less shrill, so a brighter guitar wood combination can be used without necessarily sounding harsh. Whatever you choose, I'd make sure to at least get a pair that will balance well when combined. Thanks for the tips!! I think because the pickups are high output, lots of resistance, they shouldn't be harsh. They will be powerful. The only instance where it could be potentially bright and harsh is position 2, when the 2nd knob is at 10 and pulled up. Because this is the bridge pickup, A5, with the least amount of coil wrap-- least resistance. That means the capacitance is lower so its resonant frequency should be a "brighter" one. But I don't care. I always have the option of blending in the neck to mellow it out. Also, if I'm looking for a very bright harsh tone, hey, I got 2nd position 2nd knob at 10 pulled up to get it! PS: I love zexcoils, definitely will get a juicybucker for my Strat one day! |
|
|
|
Post by gckelloch on Sept 16, 2021 0:00:01 GMT -5
Also consider what you are plugging into. The ability to at least control the signal level, if not also impedance, b4 the first gain stage frees up your pickup choice not to require a certain output at the expense of tone and note timbre. FI, while the field strength AlNiCo V poles increases output, it also pulls hard enough on the strings at typical distances to cause strong harmonic modulations and an increase in odd harmonics depending on the location along the string. Some modern AlNiCo II (used by venders like Wilde and DiMarzio) has ~2x the permeability of V, but ~0.6x the field strength. The higher permeability II poles draw the flux lines from the strings down more through the coil without increasing string pull or odd harmonics, so the output and note fundamentals are stronger without the harmonic abnormalities. All things being equal, pickups with this AlNiCo II will sound warmer and less shrill, so a brighter guitar wood combination can be used without necessarily sounding harsh. Whatever you choose, I'd make sure to at least get a pair that will balance well when combined. Thanks for the tips!! I think because the pickups are high output, lots of resistance, they shouldn't be harsh. They will be powerful. The only instance where it could be potentially bright and harsh is position 2, when the 2nd knob is at 10 and pulled up. Because this is the bridge pickup, A5, with the least amount of coil wrap-- least resistance. That means the capacitance is lower so its resonant frequency should be a "brighter" one. But I don't care. I always have the option of blending in the neck to mellow it out. Also, if I'm looking for a very bright harsh tone, hey, I got 2nd position 2nd knob at 10 pulled up to get it! PS: I love zexcoils, definitely will get a juicybucker for my Strat one day! The Zexcoil 'Z-Core' series are Fender inductance level in the 2~4H range. Not sure what you mean by "Because this is the bridge pickup, A5,..." Which pickup are you referring to? Also, you do know that the DCR measurement only shows how much of a given wire gauge is in a coil? Inductance and capacitance is what matters regarding where the resonance freq will be. The neck pickup could actually be lower inductance than the bridge, but have a higher DCR reading if it has thinner wire. I'm actually advocating not getting something with AlNiCO V poles because of the excess string pull and unnatural sounding harmonics. If output isn't a concern, would a set of Cavalier pickups with AIII poles be out of the question? AIII also has ~2x the permeability of V, but ~1/2 the field strength. It will be "warmer" and with more natural/unaffected harmonics. There should also be more of an output increase between tap settings because the flux lines from the string are pulled more down through the coils. Those same flux lines might not even pass through the bottom portion of the coil with A5 poles, so there may only be a tonal change when the higher tap winds are used without an accompanying output increase. Can you just boost the signal b4 any gain stages for the punch and sustain you want? |
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 16, 2021 13:40:28 GMT -5
The Zexcoil 'Z-Core' series are Fender inductance level in the 2~4H range. Not sure what you mean by "Because this is the bridge pickup, A5,..." Which pickup are you referring to? Also, you do know that the DCR measurement only shows how much of a given wire gauge is in a coil? Inductance and capacitance is what matters regarding where the resonance freq will be. The neck pickup could actually be lower inductance than the bridge, but have a higher DCR reading if it has thinner wire. I'm actually advocating not getting something with AlNiCO V poles because of the excess string pull and unnatural sounding harmonics. If output isn't a concern, would a set of Cavalier pickups with AIII poles be out of the question? AIII also has ~2x the permeability of V, but ~1/2 the field strength. It will be "warmer" and with more natural/unaffected harmonics. There should also be more of an output increase between tap settings because the flux lines from the string are pulled more down through the coils. Those same flux lines might not even pass through the bottom portion of the coil with A5 poles, so there may only be a tonal change when the higher tap winds are used without an accompanying output increase. Can you just boost the signal b4 any gain stages for the punch and sustain you want? So there's three taps right: Bakersfield: has the lowest amount of winds on it, so it should be brighter: less inductance and capacitance. Broadcaster: Which really should be called "the Nashville" because that's what it's called on Cavalier pickup's site. Around 8.3 kohms. Should be thicker. Monster: Which is called the Humongous Lion on the site. Should be around 14 kohms lol. Anyways: basically the taps are combining three bridge pickups in one. I really love how they sound individually in demos, yes I know they will probably sound a bit different in taps, but I don't care as long as there's a specific "role" for each tap: one is Roy Nichols like twangyness very bright and scooped a bit, and if you hear the Bakersfield on demos, yeah it got that vibe. One is thicker twang: Nashville. And one is midrange almost Humbucker: Humongous. And about this whole AlNiCo 5 thing... last time I checked AlNiCo 5's were the most popular magnets. They do their job, and in the demos they sound great. I want a tone reminiscent of Vince Gill or Brent Mason where the fundamental is emphasized-- a raunchy thick growl sound, and AlNiCo 5 helps do this I heard as it increases output and fundamental note sound. But yes there are two concerns: 1. First two taps will have barely any difference. Bakersfield and Nashville. 2. AlNiCo 5's will be too harsh or whatever. Well I may have thought of a solution if Rob from Cavalier Pickups is able to do this: replace the top 3 A5 magnets for the high strings for AlNiCo 3's. And for the lowest tap, just put less coil windings on there so it's brighter and less output, and a touch more for the Nashville so it's thicker-- this way these two taps will be better differentiated from each other. The AlNiCo 3's for the top three high strings should sweeten them up (got that harmonically rich thing that the A3's offer) and the 5's in the low strings should ensure a strong powerful punchy low end that I love a lot. Thanks for your input, now I have a better idea thanks to you! |
|
|
|
Post by gckelloch on Sept 16, 2021 16:20:14 GMT -5
The Zexcoil 'Z-Core' series are Fender inductance level in the 2~4H range. Not sure what you mean by "Because this is the bridge pickup, A5,..." Which pickup are you referring to? Also, you do know that the DCR measurement only shows how much of a given wire gauge is in a coil? Inductance and capacitance is what matters regarding where the resonance freq will be. The neck pickup could actually be lower inductance than the bridge, but have a higher DCR reading if it has thinner wire. I'm actually advocating not getting something with AlNiCO V poles because of the excess string pull and unnatural sounding harmonics. If output isn't a concern, would a set of Cavalier pickups with AIII poles be out of the question? AIII also has ~2x the permeability of V, but ~1/2 the field strength. It will be "warmer" and with more natural/unaffected harmonics. There should also be more of an output increase between tap settings because the flux lines from the string are pulled more down through the coils. Those same flux lines might not even pass through the bottom portion of the coil with A5 poles, so there may only be a tonal change when the higher tap winds are used without an accompanying output increase. Can you just boost the signal b4 any gain stages for the punch and sustain you want? So there's three taps right: Bakersfield: has the lowest amount of winds on it, so it should be brighter: less inductance and capacitance. Broadcaster: Which really should be called "the Nashville" because that's what it's called on Cavalier pickup's site. Around 8.3 kohms. Should be thicker. Monster: Which is called the Humongous Lion on the site. Should be around 14 kohms lol. Anyways: basically the taps are combining three bridge pickups in one. I really love how they sound individually in demos, yes I know they will probably sound a bit different in taps, but I don't care as long as there's a specific "role" for each tap: one is Roy Nichols like twangyness very bright and scooped a bit, and if you hear the Bakersfield on demos, yeah it got that vibe. One is thicker twang: Nashville. And one is midrange almost Humbucker: Humongous. And about this whole AlNiCo 5 thing... last time I checked AlNiCo 5's were the most popular magnets. They do their job, and in the demos they sound great. I want a tone reminiscent of Vince Gill or Brent Mason where the fundamental is emphasized-- a raunchy thick growl sound, and AlNiCo 5 helps do this I heard as it increases output and fundamental note sound. But yes there are two concerns: 1. First two taps will have barely any difference. Bakersfield and Nashville. 2. AlNiCo 5's will be too harsh or whatever. Well I may have thought of a solution if Rob from Cavalier Pickups is able to do this: replace the top 3 A5 magnets for the high strings for AlNiCo 3's. And for the lowest tap, just put less coil windings on there so it's brighter and less output, and a touch more for the Nashville so it's thicker-- this way these two taps will be better differentiated from each other. The AlNiCo 3's for the top three high strings should sweeten them up (got that harmonically rich thing that the A3's offer) and the 5's in the low strings should ensure a strong powerful punchy low end that I love a lot. Thanks for your input, now I have a better idea thanks to you! A3 in the top 3 strings is a good idea. You can raise that side of the coil closer to the strings for stronger fundamentals without the thin harshness of A5. Thinner wire coils increase fundamentals if more of the coil is closer to the strings, but most winders just use the same bobbin height so the total coil is thinner but not any closer to the strings. While A5 may have stronger output than A3 at the same string distance, at least for some of the harmonics that are pulled hard on, I don't think it actually creates a stronger fundamental to upper harmonic ratio. I think higher permeability poles do, but I'm not sure. A Steel base plate will pull the flux lines more down into the coil, so that should do it. I'd at least get a Steel baseplate for the bridge. The neck pos already has strong enough fundamentals, so you may not want a Steel plate there. I think the confusion is that A5 pulls on the string in a way that mainly emphasizes some of the lower odd harmonics, but not the fundamental. That can add a certain meatiness to the note timbre, and won't sound harsh if said harmonics are below ~2kHz, if you don't mind the intermodulations. That's a good reason to use modern A2 or A3 on the top 3 strings. A4 poles would offer the best of all worlds for all strings, but I have only found it available from a UK company called Alegree. Maybe Rob would be willing to order some from there if you pay the difference? |
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 16, 2021 18:25:39 GMT -5
A3 in the top 3 strings is a good idea. Perfect! Yeah because I like the things you said about these magnets, sweeter tone that captures more of the "harmonically rich" vibe is a good idea for the higher strings. You can raise that side of the coil closer to the strings for stronger fundamentals without the thin harshness of A5. Exactly! That can add a certain meatiness to the note timbre, and won't sound harsh if said harmonics are below ~2kHz, if you don't mind the intermodulations. Ohh! Ok that makes sense now. So for AlNiCo 5's they add meatiness to the note timbre, but only the lower frequency strings, like low E to D. A "tight" bass is what I'm after, and this seems like it. So for the higher frequency strings, AlNiCo 5's are harsh generally for that. This is starting to make sense to me, because before I was surprised at your response concerning A5's, since they are used so commonly with single coil pickups! I think the tone we're after in our heads are aged A5 mags, which according to John Suhr and Michael Landau, sound different than modern A5's. But hey, I bet you there are many guitars out there with A5's that sound great-- a guitar is a whole system after all. But if I'm assembling a guitar from scratch, yeah, it's important to know these things! A3's in the upper strings, great idea! Thank you so much for imparting you wisdom upon me, truly, you know so much about magnets and such... |
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 16, 2021 18:28:23 GMT -5
Alright pickups are sorted out, now the circuitry... oh boy. Those whom are willing to help me on this conundrum, read (my) post #9-- it's where my mind is at for the wiring (latest idea). Thank you all. Love this place, you make dreams come true for real. I can make this into a reality because of you all.
|
|
|
|
Post by gckelloch on Sept 17, 2021 5:31:44 GMT -5
Sorry to harp on it, but there’s one more option for string tone to consider (other than gauge and wrap alloys). If Rob won’t do it or doesn’t recommend mixing AlNiCo V and III for some reason, you could just go with III and use a compensated Steel saddle for the low strings and Brass for the middles and/or just highs. Steel will give the low strings a bit more definition. Philadelphia Luthiers sells those and compensated Aluminum saddles cheap.
It might also be worth trying the new Sfarzo Touchtones strings. They have tight Ni/Fe alloy wraps and are cryo-treated and brought back to room temp slowly so they don’t become brittle like the old DM “Blue Steel” strings were. The process apparently aligns the grain and smooths the surface so they are stronger with better definition and sustain, and a slick feel. The wrap alloy also resists corrosion, so they should be worth the extra few dollars. Reviewers rave about them. Sfarzo has always been ahead of the curve in wrap alloy development, and they use a thin rounded-hex core for increased flexibility. I got a few sets from Gimmesomestrings.com, but am waiting for some old strings to wear out before trying them. You’d need to buy three sets to get free shipping, but it might be worth it if they have the gauge you like.
So, I won’t derail this thread further. Love to hear a demo when the guitar is done.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Sept 17, 2021 10:16:24 GMT -5
My only question is: how can I make ONE potentiometer have two roles? I thought I would need a dual gang push pull: when this one pot is pushed down, the 3 terminals with the capacitor connected to it is in the signal. Then when I pull up, the other tree terminals that are connected to the neck pickup get connected instead. Maybe there's a way to do this with a normal push pull-- one pot that can have two functions, and yes I am aware that the wiper is the same for both "functions". Thanks! Both a (typical) tone control and a (parallel) blend control only use a pot as a rheostat (variable resistance) using only two of the three terminals — what's more is that it's the same two terminals. And as you point out one of those terminals (the wiper, but being just a variable resistor it could be either) is connected to the same place (the input of the volume pot) for both. Therefore this leaves only one terminal that needs to be switched: in one setting this terminal connects to the tone cap, the other side of which is grounded; in the other setting the terminal is connected to the 'hot' of the pickup to be blended (which itself is selected via a pole of the 3-way switch). By the time of this reply it looks like they're already gone (unless you did get one). In the UK CHGuitars ( ebay) have at least a couple, as do Blackdog Music ( ebay) although the ebay listing shows both single & double switch variations so I don't actually know which they stock. And from China, there's presently four listings on AliExpress. Something that's more obvious with the images showing the Strat tip is the length of the lever on the single wafer version, which looks to be designed for installation through a wooden top rather than control plate, but at least too long could be made shorter if necessary. Ultimately it would be preferable, yes. It'll only be something that becomes needed if we can have the pickups in series, or if trying to wire the coil taps such that the unused windings aren't hanging from hot. It appears that Cavalier Pickups supply an entirely separate terminal washer to ground the bridge via direct contact & the baseplate via the mounting screws. It's also noted on the site that the neck cover has independent grounding. In the positions 1 & 2 pulling the tone knob to swap to blending also disengages the tone cap, so if anything this just makes position 3 more in keeping with the other two positions. That could be tricky, not only in terms of wiring, but to have the parallel & series blends work in the same direction the pot controlling the series blend would either need to be reverse log or linear — therefore, not only requiring a dual gang pot such as that you linked earlier but also requiring that the pot be disassembled in order to exchange one of the wafers for the appropriate taper. The juxtaposition of the two above ideas makes me realise another possibility, where it could actually make some sense. It seems like a long shot, but if we can get the series blending to work then perhaps we could have series blending between neck low & fat in position 3 as a way to get low alone. (Probably requiring both knobs to be pulled). Alright pickups are sorted out, now the circuitry... oh boy. Below is what I have drawn up at the moment, there's no series blending & the unused portions of the tapped pickups are hanging from hot — but note that currently there's only three of the four poles of the 3-way switch in use. |
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 17, 2021 21:40:44 GMT -5
Dear Yogi B, I just want to thank you for sharing your expansive wisdom with some random guy like myself! Thank you is not enough, and I know these days, the "thank you's" and other formalities as such are thrown around so often, yet I really do mean I can't thank you enough. You made that beautiful circuit drawing when I did not even ask, you answered all my questions... just wow. that's all I gotta say. Both a (typical) tone control and a (parallel) blend control only use a pot as a rheostat (variable resistance) using only two of the three terminals — what's more is that it's the same two terminals. And as you point out one of those terminals (the wiper, but being just a variable resistor it could be either) is connected to the same place (the input of the volume pot) for both. Therefore this leaves only one terminal that needs to be switched: in one setting this terminal connects to the tone cap, the other side of which is grounded; in the other setting the terminal is connected to the 'hot' of the pickup to be blended (which itself is selected via a pole of the 3-way switch). OH! Alright!! So a tone knob can be "turned" into a blender via push pull-- doesn't need to be dual gang. Your explanation makes perfect sense. So know about soldering this, I know this is getting ahead, I don't even have the parts, but I need to visualize this properly. The three "lugs" will have a tone capacitor wired up as usual to it. Then to the "push pull lugs" they will have the hot of the neck pickup soldered there. So when I pull up on the second knob (typically the tone knob) the tone cap is disengaged (perfect) and the neck pickup blending function is ready to be used. By the time of this reply it looks like they're already gone (unless you did get one). Yup... *sigh* n the UK CHGuitars ( ebay) have at least a couple, as do Blackdog Music ( ebay) although the ebay listing shows both single & double switch variations so I don't actually know which they stock. I found only these two that call themselves "super switches". They also seem to have more terminals than a standard tele switch, so I'm guessing these are it. The latter even claims it's an Oak Grigsby switch! Alright then. Unfortunately, and the Oak Grigsby especially, the switch lever seems to be pretty darn long. Like you said, maybe they are made for going through wood, not a control plate. Maybe I should wait for others on here to see if they know of any 3 way superswitches. if trying to wire the coil taps such that the unused windings aren't hanging from hot. Sorry Yogi B, what do you mean by hanging from hot? Is this an issue, and if so, how does one fix it? Thanks! In the positions 1 & 2 pulling the tone knob to swap to blending also disengages the tone cap, so if anything this just makes position 3 more in keeping with the other two positions. Exactly! So on position 3, pulling on the 2nd knob, the cap will be disengaged, but will turning the knob whilst it's pulled up do anything? It shouldn't right? Because that is a good thing obviously. What about 1st knob (master volume) pulled up? It should only do something on position 1 (engage the monster). However, of course, twisting the knob should always adjust master volume, regardless of switch position and push pull position. That could be tricky, not only in terms of wiring, but to have the parallel & series blends work in the same direction the pot controlling the series blend would either need to be reverse log or linear — therefore, not only requiring a dual gang pot such as that you linked earlier but also requiring that the pot be disassembled in order to exchange one of the wafers for the appropriate taper. Yeah... So no series then! Honestly those fat pups in series is probably over kill anyways. Plus, usually the classic Humbucker guitars have their middle switch position as two humbuckers in parallel. Not in series. Not saying a fat telecaster neck and a drunken-with-midrange broadcaster bridge pickup are like humbuckers, but it's something to consider. But yeah, thanks again Yogi for recommending that: neck "low" in parallel which each bridge tap except for The Monster, where that gets blended with the fat neck pickup. Below is what I have drawn up at the moment, there's no series blending & the unused portions of the tapped pickups are hanging from hot — but note that currently there's only three of the four poles of the 3-way switch in use. MY GOD. This is beautiful. You actually did it. I don't understand these types of circuit diagrams so much yet, but I'm currently taking an Electricity and Magnetism course, so I believe that will change soon... Anyways talking about E&M, you have really bolstered my love and passion in this subject. If one day I have a fraction of the electrical prowess you possess, I will be a very happy man. Just realizing this telecaster project can make an interesting independent study project... school project getting handled and an excuse for a new guitar? Sounds like a win win to me  |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Sept 18, 2021 8:20:21 GMT -5
Sorry Yogi B, what do you mean by hanging from hot? Is this an issue, and if so, how does one fix it? Thanks! As used around here, "hanging from hot" (or sometimes, "hanging from the hot") means a pickup that is connected at the "hot" end to the output jack, but disconnected at the ground end. This is a theoretical issue, one that we try to avoid where possible, but some wiring schemes wouldn't be possible without it (or would be possible, but only with more switch poles to disconnect the "hot" connection). In theory, the hanging coil, with the long wire of the pickup windings attached to the output, could introduce some noise into the circuit. The circuit will still work as advertised, but might (again, in theory) be noisier. The fix, as above, is more switch poles, but that isn't always possible. Hard to tell about the first one you linked to, but the second link seems to be a 4P3T which is what you want. |
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 18, 2021 9:48:30 GMT -5
As used around here, "hanging from hot" (or sometimes, "hanging from the hot") means a pickup that is connected at the "hot" end to the output jack, but disconnected at the ground end. This is a theoretical issue, one that we try to avoid where possible, but some wiring schemes wouldn't be possible without it (or would be possible, but only with more switch poles to disconnect the "hot" connection). In theory, the hanging coil, with the long wire of the pickup windings attached to the output, could introduce some noise into the circuit. The circuit will still work as advertised, but might (again, in theory) be noisier. The fix, as above, is more switch poles, but that isn't always possible. Thanks for clearing that up! I hope this can be fixed. the unused portions of the tapped pickups are hanging from hot — but note that currently there's only three of the four poles of the 3-way switch in use. Good news from Yogi, there's still one pole available from the 4P3T switch, so maybe we can use that pole to ground the hanging coils? Hard to tell about the first one you linked to, but the second link seems to be a 4P3T which is what you want. Thanks! It's a bit strange, the lever shaft looks pretty long in the picture, but then the diagram says it's 0.625", which is the "normal" Fender length... www.ebay.com/itm/391628525147?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20180105095853%26meid%3D1a1559894ae94cc1a002f6f8fbd3c050%26pid%3D100903%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D10%26sd%3D391628525147%26itm%3D391628525147%26pmt%3D1%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2510209&_trksid=p2510209.c100903.m5276 And this one offers 3 way 4 pole, but some pictures seem to have the "long" length, while some of them have the perfect one. Weird. |
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Sept 18, 2021 15:14:48 GMT -5
I just want to thank you for sharing your expansive wisdom with some random guy like myself! Thank you is not enough, and I know these days, the "thank you's" and other formalities as such are thrown around so often, yet I really do mean I can't thank you enough. You made that beautiful circuit drawing when I did not even ask, you answered all my questions... just wow. that's all I gotta say. You're welcome! The truth is that I already had most of that drawn up so as to better visualize what was going on and to better guide my previous answers as what I thought would be possible. Almost. The three lugs of the potentiometer are wired as follows: - 3, the terminal which reads (almost) zero resistance to the wiper when the knob (when viewed from above) is turned clockwise:
is unused & unconnected - 2, the wiper terminal:
is wired to the volume pot input, as in conventional tone wiring - 1, the terminal which reads (almost) zero resistance to the wiper when the knob (when viewed from above) is turned contraclockwise:
is to be soldered to one of the middle (common) terminals of the push-pull. This is connected to the terminal beneath it when the shaft is pushed in, so this lower terminal is where you'll connect one end of the the tone cap (the other end of the cap to ground, as typical). The upper terminal is the one connected to the common when pulled, so from there is where you'll link to the neck pickup (though in the previous diagram, this was done via one pole of the 3-way switch which determined whether the full output or the tap was connected).
As said before, since 3 is unconnected 1 & 2 could be connected the opposite way around and there'd be no effect on the circuit. (Some claim that this reversed wiring could potentially be less noisy, claiming that the unused lug 3 also acts like an antenna similar to a coil hanging from hot. Theoretically plausible, however this terminal should be inside a shielded cavity, unlike the pickups in a large number of guitars, and it has a much much smaller surface area than a pickup coil.) You could ask the seller if/when they expect that part to be restocked. And from China, there's presently four listings on AliExpress. Sorry, when I posted that link it was giving me precisely the four relevant listings in total, not 144 which it gives now. The four were, the two you posted: And these two: But much of a muchness, really. The latter even claims it's an Oak Grigsby switch! Well it is, at the very least, Oak Grigsby style.Looking on Electroswitch's website the only 3 position 4 pole switch listed has a lever length of 0.75″. It's a bit strange, the lever shaft looks pretty long in the picture, but then the diagram says it's 0.625", which is the "normal" Fender length... And this one offers 3 way 4 pole, but some pictures seem to have the "long" length, while some of them have the perfect one. Weird. I'd put the diagram's discrepancy down to a copy/paste error from a more normal switch with the standard shorter stepped shaft, rather than the longer straight shaft. Or perhaps it was from a previous revision, but I've never seen evidence of the single wafer variety with a shorter shaft. Another thing I've just thought to look at is the notch spacing, typically this is 30° on tele switches (and in Electroswitch's table I liked above) whereas to fit all the terminals this has been reduced by 20% on the single wafer switch to only 24°. (This would imply that the actual Oak Grigsby switch does have two wafers if the table is correct.) Probably, I have a vague memory of either a slimmer double wafer switch (or perhaps a Megaswitch?). I'll search. |
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 18, 2021 16:21:33 GMT -5
Almost. The three lugs of the potentiometer are wired as follows: - 3, the terminal which reads (almost) zero resistance to the wiper when the knob (when viewed from above) is turned clockwise:
is unused & unconnected - 2, the wiper terminal:
is wired to the volume pot input, as in conventional tone wiring - 1, the terminal which reads (almost) zero resistance to the wiper when the knob (when viewed from above) is turned contraclockwise:
is to be soldered to one of the middle (common) terminals of the push-pull. This is connected to the terminal beneath it when the shaft is pushed in, so this lower terminal is where you'll connect one end of the the tone cap (the other end of the cap to ground, as typical). The upper terminal is the one connected to the common when pulled, so from there is where you'll link to the neck pickup (though in the previous diagram, this was done via one pole of the 3-way switch which determined whether the full output or the tap was connected).
Thank you! This makes a lot of sense. Thanks for explaining this to me clearly. As said before, since 3 is unconnected 1 & 2 could be connected the opposite way around and there'd be no effect on the circuit. (Some claim that this reversed wiring could potentially be less noisy, claiming that the unused lug 3 also acts like an antenna similar to a coil hanging from hot. Theoretically plausible, however this terminal should be inside a shielded cavity, unlike the pickups in a large number of guitars, and it has a much much smaller surface area than a pickup coil.) Interesting! So the coils hanging out like you and newey were talking about is not an issue. But to be safe, I should reverse the connection of 1 & 2? You could ask the seller if/when they expect that part to be restocked. I don't know if there's a point now, thanks to your Alibaba links! Sorry, when I posted that link it was giving me precisely the four relevant listings in total, not 144 which it gives now. The four were, the two you posted: And these two: But much of a muchness, really.Yeah they all look the same. And they all look like they have the same issue: 0.75" long levers! If not 0.75, just too long. It should be around 0.625" correct? Too bad the electroswitch table says it's longer than usual... I actually have no idea what I'm going to do about this switch... Probably, I have a vague memory of either a slimmer double wafer switch (or perhaps a Megaswitch?). I'll search. This will help if you can find one! Thanks so much... don't understand why these switches are so elusive.... Also, Yogi, pulling up the master volume knob should only have an effect on position 1 where it engages the monster, any no where else right? And pulling up the second knob on the neck pickup position where it removes the capacitor, should work fine you said, but will turning (twisting) that pulled up 2nd knob do anything? No right? |
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Sept 19, 2021 7:00:18 GMT -5
As said before, since 3 is unconnected 1 & 2 could be connected the opposite way around and there'd be no effect on the circuit. (Some claim that this reversed wiring could potentially be less noisy, claiming that the unused lug 3 also acts like an antenna similar to a coil hanging from hot. Theoretically plausible, however this terminal should be inside a shielded cavity, unlike the pickups in a large number of guitars, and it has a much much smaller surface area than a pickup coil.) Interesting! So the coils hanging out like you and newey were talking about is not an issue. But to be safe, I should reverse the connection of 1 & 2? No, I'm saying the opposite. Of the two things, a hanging coil is more likely to cause noise than a floating potentiometer lug. Which reminds me, I forgot to post my updated diagram which eliminates the hanging from hot issues: If you're talking about the excess length, hacksaw and/or file the end off to make it shorter? I think I was thinking of this which was apparently used on Fernandes Guitars, but I have no clue as to where one would acquire one, or within which model of guitar it was originally used. But speaking of Megaswitches, because they're only screwed together rather than riveted, if you had a Megaswitch M and a Megaswitch T (3-way version of the S+T) and were to swap the PCBs then you should end up with the 4P3T switch you require (Megaswitch M PCB with the 3-way switching mechanism) and a Megaswitch S (the S+T PCB with 5-way switching mechanism). It would involve buying two switches, but the resulting spare Megaswitch S could be used in a future (simpler) project or sold on. Correct. |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Sept 19, 2021 7:46:47 GMT -5
Over on TDPRI, where they are about all things Tele, I found an old thread by member Newtwanger who suggested modifying a regular Superswitch by limiting the travel of the lever to positions 2-3-4
Doesn't sound like anyone over there actually tried it, but an idea, anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 19, 2021 14:57:02 GMT -5
Which reminds me, I forgot to post my updated diagram which eliminates the hanging from hot issues: Wow Yogi thanks! Looks great, really cool to see how everything works together. I'm looking at some parts and going "oh I see, that's where the push pull is, and that's how it works" and etc. Hopefully in the class I'm taking I'll fully understand how to properly read circuit diagrams so I can wire up the electronics correctly. If you're talking about the excess length, hacksaw and/or file the end off to make it shorter? That is an option too for the Alibaba switch, the only thing I'm worried about there is if the switch cap will still fit after hacking away at the top portion of the lever. I contacted the EBAY seller, because from the picture, it actually looks like it has a shorter lever shaft. But speaking of Megaswitches, because they're only screwed together rather than riveted, if you had a Megaswitch M and a Megaswitch T (3-way version of the S+T) and were to swap the PCBs then you should end up with the 4P3T switch you require (Megaswitch M PCB with the 3-way switching mechanism) and a Megaswitch S (the S+T PCB with 5-way switching mechanism). It would involve buying two switches, but the resulting spare Megaswitch S could be used in a future (simpler) project or sold on. Woah, this is really interesting! It's a little expensive, but yeah I can always sell it. But I think I may have found a solution: www.rockinger.com/en/parts/electric-parts-knobs/switches/940/double-wafer-3-way-switchWould this work? Yeah right! It's the Göldo one you mentioned right at the beginning! Would this switch produce any problems? No, right, even though it's thicker than a normal switch? Perfect! Then we're done with the circuitry this is it! I was in the car today and I thought about something else to add, but again, if it's too complicated never mind, because what we got here is great already. Position 1, Volume Knob pulled up, so the Monster is engaged. Second knob is also pulled, so neck pickup (fat this time, fat only blends with monster, the rest of the bridge taps blends with "low") blends in parallel. But now not only in parallel but out of phase. Would this be hard to pull off? I imagine leads would have to be reversed somehow, and without the addition of another push pull, how could they be reversed... Unless the volume pot when pulled up also reverses the bridge (or neck) leads. So when monster/or neck for that matter by itself, it's normal, but when the neck comes in parallel, and out of phase. Thanks again Newey and Yogi B, especially for the brand new circuit diagram! |
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 19, 2021 14:59:09 GMT -5
Over on TDPRI, where they are about all things Tele, I found an old thread by member Newtwanger who suggested modifying a regular Superswitch by limiting the travel of the lever to positions 2-3-4 Doesn't sound like anyone over there actually tried it, but an idea, anyway. Cool idea! Sometimes we gotta get creative to find a solution. Thanks for going deep into TDPRI just to send it to me... I really appreciate it  . I think buying the Alibaba switch is a more viable option for me, as it is already three way and four poles, it just needs a shorter lever shaft, and as Yogi B says that can probably be hacked away (with the risk of the switch cap not fitting on though...) Luckily I found the Goldo being sold on this German site! |
|
|
|
Post by newey on Sept 19, 2021 21:34:13 GMT -5
as Yogi B says that can probably be hacked away (with the risk of the switch cap not fitting on though...) I suspect it wouldn't be any big deal to grind a notch at the end of the lever to fit a switch cap (after shortening it if necessary) using a Dremel Mototool or such, or a grinding wheel. Cover the switch itself with thick layers of masking tape in case you slip a time or two, and to keep metal dust out of the switch innards. |
|
|
|
Post by thedirestrat on Sept 19, 2021 21:43:56 GMT -5
Good idea! Well now I have a few options. Buying the Alibaba one and probably needing to shorten the lever, waiting for the EBAY guy to tell me how long his switch's lever shaft is, doing the Megaswitch thing, or buying the Goldo switch if it fits my needs (sure it will, and even though it's thicker, it should still fit in a Vintage Tele electronics cavity right?), however it comes out to around 60 dollars with the shipping and all that...
|
|
|
|
Post by Yogi B on Sept 22, 2021 15:07:35 GMT -5
... or buying the Goldo switch if it fits my needs (sure it will, and even though it's thicker, it should still fit in a Vintage Tele electronics cavity right?) I can't say for certain, without knowing the exact dimensions, but it's unlikely to. The narrowness of Tele cavities are a primary driver of slimmer 5-way superswitch versions to exist and the Goeldo 3-way doesn't look slimmed down in any way. It might just fit if the contacts on the outer wafer are carefully bent flat (and covered with insulation tape to prevent being shorted by the cavity shielding, if appropriate). Years ago I think I remember someone offering custom control plates with slightly off-centre switch cut-outs, so the wider switches could be used more easily, but I think that market has mostly dried up thanks to slimmer 5-way superswitches becoming available. Also relooking at the images of the Goeldo switch, I noticed that even their 3-way's lever shaft is a little longer compared with their other switches: | 3-way SuperSwitch | 5-way Superswitch |
|---|
 |  |
|
|
In position 1, Broadcaster bridge is the only guy there. 2nd knob is a tone knob, like usual, until it's pulled up, now it's a neck blender, just like it is for position 2. I'd like it to do the same thing in position 2. Maybe Position 3 is the problem? Yeah pulling up on the second knob on the neck pickup only shouldn't do anything-- so I need the double wafer switch to fix this? Also does that switch have only 3 positions?
. I think buying the Alibaba switch is a more viable option for me, as it is already three way and four poles, it just needs a shorter lever shaft, and as Yogi B says that can probably be hacked away (with the risk of the switch cap not fitting on though...) Luckily I found the Goldo being sold on this German site!