Control placement

[Funkfingers]

A couple of recent threads in this room set me thinking about control knob placement.

Some of my personal preferences have been informed by using the same ol' Leo Fender designs, year in, year out. Some of my preferences are, I hope, based on logic.

On Stingray bass guitars, the sequence of control pots runs; Volume, Top, Middle, Bottom.

If I added an SD/Basslines three-band EQ to a Stingray with the jack socket on the control plate, I would instinctively position the knobs, Volume, Middle EQ, Stacked EQ. The top section of the stacked knob would control the Top EQ. The bottom section of the stacked knob would control the Bottom EQ. In simplistic terms, the physical position of each control knob is the same as the function that it performs.

Am I alone in considering this to be the best way to organise SD/Basslines EQ systems? Am I just a lazy thinker? Your opinions, please.

 

[threechordcharlie]

Re: Control placement

I prefer a seperate volume and tone for each pup and that"s it. But I think that your setup would be easist to work with if I were to go that route.

 

[One Bad Monkey]

Re: Control placement

That is how I've set up all my basses that have SD preamps in it. I've seen a couple people run it vol-stacked knob-mid and if that works for them, great. But I prefer your suggested setup.

 

[Redbowties88]

Re: Control placement

I prefer the classic 2 pup 2 volume 2 tone layout.

My biggest gripe with stat type guitars is that the volume knob is too close to the bridge. I often turn it down with my pinky by mistake. I know it's my problem and not the guitars but I still don't like it.

 

[Adieu]

Re: Control placement

A couple of recent threads in this room set me thinking about control knob placement.

Some of my personal preferences have been informed by using the same ol' Leo Fender designs, year in, year out. Some of my preferences are, I hope, based on logic.

On Stingray bass guitars, the sequence of control pots runs; Volume, Top, Middle, Bottom.

If I added an SD/Basslines three-band EQ to a Stingray with the jack socket on the control plate, I would instinctively position the knobs, Volume, Middle EQ, Stacked EQ. The top section of the stacked knob would control the Top EQ. The bottom section of the stacked knob would control the Bottom EQ. In simplistic terms, the physical position of each control knob is the same as the function that it performs.

Am I alone in considering this to be the best way to organise SD/Basslines EQ systems? Am I just a lazy thinker? Your opinions, please.

Basslines Actives/Blackouts have no outboard multiband EQ adjustment stock, and are offerred with some ridiculous 2-band active system at a premium of, what was it, 45 to 60 bucks i think?

However, IMO (experience with three diff sets), you really have precious little use for an active/active system with SDs. Which likely run into a better parametric or multiband EQ the moment it hits your amp anyway....stick to a basic 25k "passive" tone rolloff (for actives), they got another preamp inside anyway

Preamps of the controllable PCB in cavity variety are just a fragile onboard pedal cleanboost/overdrive gimmick, that clutters up your space, tends to get messed up easy, is a pain to service, and has to be re-bought for each bass you own.

...AND theyre usually just $150-200 control pots for a **$0.20** TL062 opamp and resistors, caps, and lone transistor or two modifying the way these adjust the opamps behaviour. That all copypasted from EBMM, which totally ripped it off the tone stack of an old amp (a sunn was it? or so I kept hearing). I know Ibanez Varimid = my Carvin bass combo controls, plain and simple (except 150 bucks gets you another 150 watts, a compressor, a noise gate, speaker outs, and an onboard 115 with the carvin)

 

[Adieu]

Re: Control placement

I prefer the classic 2 pup 2 volume 2 tone layout.

My biggest gripe with stat type guitars is that the volume knob is too close to the bridge. I often turn it down with my pinky by mistake. I know it's my problem and not the guitars but I still don't like it.

It IS the guitars problem, its a design propagated and popularized by EVH using that very pinky - but on purpose - for volume control acrobatics midnote

 

[Funkfingers]

Re: Control placement

The two-band Blackouts For Bass EQ is actually my favourite. With the mini switch set to the lower "traditional" frequency band, the control operates exactly where I like it most. I hardly ever use the bass half of the system. I would be pleased if they made a midrange-only version.

My favourite SD bass EQ of all is the system built into the old Active EQ series pickups - the ones with the little white switches in one corner of the plastic casing.

 

[BlueTalon]

Re: Control placement

In simplistic terms, the physical position of each control knob is the same as the function that it performs.

I think this basic concept is a good one, but your particular layout doesn't seem very intuitive to me, as someone who doesn't use on-board pre-amps. Perhaps if I had more exposure and experience, it would seem more natural to me.


My dabbling into custom control arrangements resulted in a set-up where the physical location matches the function -- Concentric V/T controls for individual neck, middle, bridge pickups, and a master V/T control. The knob to the side is a Turnstyle switch, located in the circuit between the individual controls and master controls.

 

[Adieu]

Re: Control placement

My favourite SD bass EQ of all is the system built into the old Active EQ series pickups - the ones with the little white switches in one corner of the plastic casing.

Good stuff, but hard to flick mid toggle without moving the outer ones.... Find myself adjusting them in three moves:
1) all together in one direction
2) mid and uppermost together in the other, if going for scooped/midhump
3) uppermost alone, if needed, with fingernail

Otherwise, moving them seems to always mess em up. Alas, not exactly an on the fly thing, only in pauses or between songs