Is this schematic functional?

[orpheo]

Or is it a dud? I tried it but it doesn't appear to be working as it should. As soon as 2 pickups are together, the bridge volume becomes inoperable and the phase setting isn't as pronounced as I wish it were.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

 

[Artie]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

It looks to me like it should work. It is hard to follow though. I'd go over your wiring with a fine tooth comb, and make sure everything is in its proper place.

 

[DavidRavenMoon]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Did you check how your switch works? The terminals aren’t always the same on every brand of switch.

I haven’t looked through the diagram


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Position 4 doesn't look like it gets out of phase to me - only in series like position 2. Also, when the pickups are in series, it appears so are the volumes, so there's cumilative loading of resistance there, i think. The way to test is turn each individually then turn both together and hear how it sounds. Each should work, but both at the same time should get noticeably dark.

 

[idsnowdog]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

A 4-way is much simpler and you can wire the 4-way so the OOP and series are the two center positions if you like. Breja Toneworks shows how on youtube.

 

[Artie]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Position 4 doesn't look like it gets out of phase to me - only in series like position 2.

Nope. It's definitely OOP. I just double checked it. But it is difficult to trace through.

Also, when the pickups are in series, it appears so are the volumes, so there's cumilative loading of resistance there, i think.

Yup. In series or parallel, both volumes remain in the path. Not ideal, but it should function.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Did you check how your switch works? The terminals aren’t always the same on every brand of switch.

I haven’t looked through the diagram


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yeah, I have a Schaller Megaswitch M and I translated it to work with that switch. I even used an Oak switch to try this out, same tonal results.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Nope. It's definitely OOP. I just double checked it. But it is difficult to trace through.



Yup. In series or parallel, both volumes remain in the path. Not ideal, but it should function.

Allright, thanks. So, if I understand you correctly, if I turn down the neck volume or bridge volume in position 4, I should be able to cut the signal like normal? For some reason, I still don't get that thin, honkky out of phase tone I want.

I'll try this again on a new model soon. I have contemplated a 4 way, but what I want is:

* individual volume/tone pots per humbucker
* blade switch to select the pickups
* coilsplits
* out of phase
* series (both humbuckers in series, because the both in series split out of phase sounds GREAT: tried it with a slightly different wiring on another guitar and I wanted that tone again, but with individual volumes).

If someone can make me that, thanks!

 

[Clint 55]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

 

[Artie]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Allright, thanks. So, if I understand you correctly, if I turn down the neck volume or bridge volume in position 4, I should be able to cut the signal like normal? For some reason, I still don't get that thin, honkky out of phase tone I want.

I'll try this again on a new model soon. I have contemplated a 4 way, but what I want is:

* individual volume/tone pots per humbucker
* blade switch to select the pickups
* coilsplits
* out of phase
* series (both humbuckers in series, because the both in series split out of phase sounds GREAT: tried it with a slightly different wiring on another guitar and I wanted that tone again, but with individual volumes).

If someone can make me that, thanks!

Let me chew on this, after I get some java in me. It's the dual vol/tone that makes it tricky.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Let me chew on this, after I get some java in me. It's the dual vol/tone that makes it tricky.

Unfortunately, I agree. I would preferably use a 4 way blade (bridge, parallel both, series both, neck) and a push pull pot for phase and a push pull pot for split. Would love to see how you design this

 

[Artie]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Unfortunately, I agree. I would preferably use a 4 way blade (bridge, parallel both, series both, neck) and a push pull pot for phase and a push pull pot for split. Would love to see how you design this

I'll draw you up both. One way that does what you showed first, but redone in a way that I think makes more sense. Also, (and I hate to cost you money), but it will be with a standard Superswitch. Even I have a hard time translating those Megaswitches to other than their stock configuration. (But I will look at the Megaswitch to see if I can adapt it.)

Then two, I'll do the 4-way, with pp's.

On a sidenote, could we maybe double up on this thread, and continue our PM discussion here, since I can't post a pic in a PM? I figure it shouldn't hurt since you're the OP.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

I'll draw you up both. One way that does what you showed first, but redone in a way that I think makes more sense. Also, (and I hate to cost you money), but it will be with a standard Superswitch. Even I have a hard time translating those Megaswitches to other than their stock configuration. (But I will look at the Megaswitch to see if I can adapt it.)

Then two, I'll do the 4-way, with pp's.

On a sidenote, could we maybe double up on this thread, and continue our PM discussion here, since I can't post a pic in a PM? I figure it shouldn't hurt since you're the OP.

sure, drop all you like here!

I can translate the Super to a Mega in a pinch, no worries. I kinda 'have' to use the Schaller mega; i have still 20 laying around and I have a super tiny switch cavity.

 

[Artie]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

I can translate the Super to a Mega in a pinch, no worries. I kinda 'have' to use the Schaller mega; i have still 20 laying around and I have a super tiny switch cavity.

I get it. I'll do it with the Mega. Just remind me which version it is.

As for my PM, picture this:



The wiring would look like this:



The guitar is just an example. Basically, the semi-hollow "look", with no controls, for a super clean look. If it was a quasi-semi-hollow, as you were talking about, that would be cool. All my electronics would be external.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

that's the translation for the switch!

Yeah that's very doable. It can be a full hollowbody or with a block in the middle. It's just that the body is carved out instead of bent sides.

 

[Artie]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Cool. I'll draw it up with that. Hopefully, before the day is over.

As for the guitar, I don't even care if it's an arched top. It could also be flat top and back. Unless that would totally kill its acoustic properties. But I'd be using it electric exclusively.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Cool. I'll draw it up with that. Hopefully, before the day is over.

As for the guitar, I don't even care if it's an arched top. It could also be flat top and back. Unless that would totally kill its acoustic properties. But I'd be using it electric exclusively.

carved is often just for looks and I personally enjoy doing it. Chambering+F-holes would be the easiest, fastest and thus, cheapest option.

 

[Artie]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Sweet. I'll PM you for a couple other questions.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Is this schematic functional?

Artie, did you manage to make the schematics?