Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

[ArtieToo]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

Hey Artie - that's a really cool idea

A linear taper pot would work best there, and there's no reason you couldn't cut the carbon track inside the pot in the middle so that it would be "no load" at 5 on the dial instead of at one end or the other. I wonder if there's a way to get some kind of center detent?
chip

Hey, thats not a bad idea. If you cut the carbon track very carefully, and smoothly, you'ld end up with a "natural" detent, where the wiper "fell" into the groove. Hmmm . . .

[Fresh_Start]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

Hey Artie - that's a really cool idea

A linear taper pot would work best there, and there's no reason you couldn't cut the carbon track inside the pot in the middle so that it would be "no load" at 5 on the dial instead of at one end or the other. I wonder if there's a way to get some kind of center detent? Maybe you could use a "blender pot" to get to the same place - they sometimes have a center detent.

However, I tried a coil split by shorting the series connection (red/white) to the hot lead (black) and found that part of the first coil was still in the circuit. At least tapping it generated some sound although not anywhere near as much as the coil that was supposed to be on.

chip

[ArtieToo]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

Hey Kent; How well do you think something like this might work?
Its something I've wondered about.
Dial slowly from one coil, through full humbucker, to the other coil.

[Kent S.]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

Hi Kent -

the 100k pot worked best for a tapped single coil Quarter Pound pickup. That gave me the most useful range of control with the pot.

Haven't tried a "spin-a-split" yet, so I don't know what resistance would work best in that application. It may even depend on the output of the humbucker.

Chip

The one I did years ago on a friends (first time I ever did it circa 15 years or so) ... was on a PAF style HB in the bridge position of a H/S/S strat style guitar ... I used the 250k-A pot thats was in there, worked just fine. For a hotter pup though, and higher DCR/Z a 500k might do better. Never got around to playing with the tapers, or altering them on a customized basis though.

[yes-fan]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

dial-a-tap sounds like a number you would call to tap pickups....

[Farkus]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

I actually posted a question about this last week and had only one reply! It's pretty cool that it has been addressed already. I find that my J-Bass is a lot more versatile b/c I can 'blend' the pickups. It really makes a huge difference in tone, to my ears. I'm gonna try this with my Strat soon...PGn and FSb.

Farkus

[Stratsky]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

A "no load" pot is also a really good idea so that you don't get any bleed through when you want the full humbucker.

Chip

I'm using 500 K pots, but I like the idea of no load pots. I believe I will try this.

[Fresh_Start]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

Hi Kent -

the 100k pot worked best for a tapped single coil Quarter Pound pickup. That gave me the most useful range of control with the pot.

Haven't tried a "spin-a-split" yet, so I don't know what resistance would work best in that application. It may even depend on the output of the humbucker.

Chip

[SINGTONE]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

Yeah spin a split is Great!........If you want a no load you can also use a mini switch and preset the effect and toggle between full humbucker and preset split. That is cut the pot out of the circuit and leave it in full humbucker mode.

[Kent S.]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

what do u mean by dial-a-tap?

is it something like a PRS rotary switch? I'm trying to do that.

A rotary switch is not the same, that's representative of a switching system (which it is ). If you want a PRS rotary switch, then you'll have to get one from a PRS dealer, BTW ... their current system uses a small PCB in conjunction with it, unlike the old rotary switch, (factory moddified PSA-223, Beyschlab/Centralab) in which the wiring was done on the switch itself.
The varisplit, varitap, dial-a-tap,spin-a-split, or whatever you want to call it is generally very effective, and offers a nice range of tonal shadings; especially clean. I personally do not hold with the single coil idea (hum), but others do, and it really shines clean. I believe Chip had stated before that a 100k pot often works best, as far as the fade in fade out ,... the no load definitely becomes important there.

[Fresh_Start]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

One important thing is to use a 500k or 1meg pot so you don't load down the coil too much...

A "no load" pot is also a really good idea so that you don't get any bleed through when you want the full humbucker.

Chip

[GrooveHT]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

jazzy - by dial-a-tap, I mean the spin-a-split mod on the SD Tech Tips page...basically, you use a pot to incrimentally split a humbucker. So you can have one coil at 100% and one variable, from 0%-100%. It allows you a huge amount of variation in your tones, and its been recommended to me by several people.

BTR - thanks, my next question was going to be what value pot to use! Do you prefer the 500k or the 1 meg?

[BachToRock]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

One important thing is to use a 500k or 1meg pot so you don't load down the coil too much...

[jazzyjoepass]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

what do u mean by dial-a-tap?

is it something like a PRS rotary switch? I'm trying to do that.

[Stratsky]

Re: Dial-a-tap with Pearly Gates?

Hey folks, I was wondering if anyone used a dial-a-tap mod in conjunction with a pearly gates bridge. If so, how useful do you find it?

If your talking about the spin-a-split mod in SD's technical tips, I've done this with my big apple strat. As of now, I have it loaded with the following, PG bridge, fat 50 middle, and 59 neck. Both the PG and 59 have been wire to have spin-a-split so I don't have a tone control for either but since I never used them as tone controls I don't miss not having them. Also I have the switch wired like so:
1. bridge
2. bridge/middle
3. middle
4. neck/middle
5. neck
Extremely versatile especially in positions 2 and 4. The PG is a PG not a PG+. I saw so many posts here about how much better the PG was I bought one. To be honest I don't see alot of difference when played clean, but with some gain the PG really outshines the PG+. My 2 cents.