Really easy HSS Wiring question

[Jack_TriPpEr]

Are you sure? The middle hot isn't connected to D-5, so in P-5, with D-5 only connected to D-COM there's not path from the middle pickup to B or C?



Agreed, but if RF is getting in, it's getting in. We're talking maybe an extra inch and a half of wire here.

[/QUOTEQUOTE=Jack_TriPpEr;n6098837]

There is a typo in your note in the upper right corner. It talks about a jumper from C4 to D4 and D5, but it means to say jump C4 to B4 and B5.

I'm sure about the first part regarding the Middle pickup being active in Position 5 given the current design.

Regarding the current Bridge tone pot wiring: i've read where one guy who has much more experience in trying to eliminate RF interface than me, that anywhere where is more than 1 inch of unshielded wire is a spot where RF could become a problem. Agreed i can't guarantee it will be a problem in this case because i think that is dependent on how well shielded the guitar is already and the wiring in the building(s) where the guitar will be used mostly. But, i'm just pointing out good practice about minimizing unshielded cable runs.

[Jack_TriPpEr]

Hmmm... i drop my certainty on the Middle pickup behavior down to "pretty sure" for now. When i grt home i'll sketch out the eletrical flow from all the active grounds to hot on paper and doublecheck.

[ThreeChordWonder]

How about this version?

I think I've ironed out all the shorts.

The bridge tone now works only in P-1. The neck/ middle tone takes over in all other positions.

[Jack_TriPpEr]

How about this version?

I think I've ironed out all the shorts.

The bridge tone now works only in P-1. The neck/ middle tone takes over in all other positions.

This latest design seems to resolve the earlier problem of the Middle pickup being active in Position 5. Nice work.

But i also believe the new design for Position 2 causes none of the Bridge pup's signal to run through the active tone pot - only the Middle pickup's trebel frequencies get cut by the active tone pot (neck/middle) in Position 2.

[ThreeChordWonder]

^As I said, the bridge tone only works in P-1, in all other positions the other tone pot takes over.

In P-2 the bridge and middle are connected to the neck/mid tone:

Bridge Hot >> C-2 >> C-COM >> D-COM >> D-2/3/4 >> B-2/3/4 >> B-COM >> Tone Pot

Mid Hot >> D-2/3/4 >> B-2/3/4 >> B-COM.

If you want the Bridge Tone to work in both "Bridge on" positions, connect the bridge tone across C-1or C-2, which are linked so it doesn't matter which.

By extension, if that works, you could connect the mid/neck tone to C-4/5 and D-2/3/4 and do away with Bank B entirely. I'll have to look at that later today.

[ThreeChordWonder]

PS regular tone pots are just rudimentary low pass filters anyway, dumping more or less treble to ground, so they only ever bleed off treble.

[Jack_TriPpEr]

^As I said, the bridge tone only works in P-1, in all other positions the other tone pot takes over.

In P-2 the bridge and middle are connected to the neck/mid tone:

Bridge Hot >> C-2 >> C-COM >> D-COM >> D-2/3/4 >> B-2/3/4 >> B-COM >> Tone Pot

Mid Hot >> D-2/3/4 >> B-2/3/4 >> B-COM.

If you want the Bridge Tone to work in both "Bridge on" positions, connect the bridge tone across C-1or C-2, which are linked so it doesn't matter which.

By extension, if that works, you could connect the mid/neck tone to C-4/5 and D-2/3/4 and do away with Bank B entirely. I'll have to look at that later today.

My earlier comment didn't say anything about the Bridge tone pot.

What i said was that in Position 2 of your new scheme, the Bridge pup seemed to be disconnected from the tone pot. I believed it to be disconnected because the scheme required two signals to run in opposite directions concurrently on the same wire (starting at the jumper from C Common to D Common), and I did not think that was possible. However the link below states that it is possible. I don't have an electrical engineering degree so exotic scenarios like that throw me off sometimes.

https://electronics.stackexchange.co...ions-on-the-sa


Anyways, i now retract my earlier concern about Position 2.

[ThreeChordWonder]

I have got halfway through figuring out a schematic where both tones are active in P-2, but they always end up being cross-linked. That is, I can't confine the bridge tone to just the bridge, and the mid tone to just the mid. P-3 is fine because the bridge is disconnected, P-4 and P-5 are fine because they're sharing a tone pot anyway (and the bridge is disconnected).

It may be that with the limitations of the superswitch having the bridge tone active in P-1 only and the neck/mid tone taking over for P-2 onwards is as good as you're going to get. Either that or I should stick to building oil platforms.

I'll keep thinking on it though.

BtW - My dugrea is in mekanikewal injunearring (Brunel, London, 84-88). Back in 1988 of course, everything ran on steam...

[Jack_TriPpEr]

I have got halfway through figuring out a schematic where both tones are active in P-2, but they always end up being cross-linked.

It may be that with the limitations of the superswitch having the bridge tone active in P-1 only and the neck/mid tone taking over for P-2 onwards is as good as you're going to get.

I'll keep thinking on it though.

My dugrea is in mekanikewal injunearring tho... (Brunel, BEng (Hons), London, 84-88). Back in 1988 of course, everything ran on steam...

Your reply seems to indicate that you still think that I was saying the design should have both tone pots active in Position 2, even though I tried explaining in my last reply that that is not what I was trying to convey. And on top of it, in my opinion, having more than 1 tone pot active at the same time is undesirable. But i imagine based on how the last couple replies have gone, a misunderstanding will remain. Oh well.

[ThreeChordWonder]

Well, you started it...

[Jack_TriPpEr]

Well, you started it...

Yep, my prediction was correct. Now if only I could figure out how to make money based on my predictions...

[ThreeChordWonder]

One final thing that occurs to me, given 1 tone pot controls four positions anyway, I'd just to wire it as a master tone, then use the third pot as a neck blender, either just for P-5 (giving the OP the mighty double humbucker experience) or even P-4 and P-5.

[IMENATOR]

Short answer: It is not, but you can easily do the super famous Strat mod to move the tone knob from middle to bridge. OR you can just keep a single master tone knob and use the 3rd knob position for something else like a kill switch or whatever you want as long there is room in the cavity.

[Jack_TriPpEr]

BTW, here is that diagram I mentioned I had seen previously, that uses a superswitch to allow the Bridge to have its own Tone Control and without requiring Position 2 to be doubleloaded with tone pots. This design also has a nice added feature where it forces the bridge humbucker to sed the 500K Master Volume as 250K when the Bridge pickup gets coilsplit in Position 2.

https://www.guitar-mod.com/strat.html