Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

[thegummy]

I've read quite a few people speak highly of the Jimmie Vaughan Strat wiring where the bridge and neck pickups have a tone pot each and the middle pickup isn't connected to a tone pot.

What would the advantages of this setup be over using a No-Load tone pot rather than leaving the middle open?

For example, having a tone control on just position 1 (bridge) and the other tone pot a No-Load controlling the other positions (2-5). Are there any advantages the Jimmie Vaughan wiring would have over this setup?

 

[gregory]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

You'll need a super switch if you want to switch from one tone control to the other when swithing from position 1 to position 2.

 

[thegummy]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

You'll need a super switch if you want to switch from one tone control to the other when swithing from position 1 to position 2.

Sure, so one advantage would be that a normal tone pot and normal 5-way switch are a bit cheaper than a No-Load and a Superswitch.

Any advantages apart from cost?

 

[gregory]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

You haven't made it clear which pot is no-load, nor what you hope to accomplish.

 

[Hank-]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

The advantage would be for those without a no load pot with them, to be able to get a brighter quack in 2 & 4 and they dont use 3 position alone often but dwell on the 1,2, 4 & 5 positions most., no new parts needed either. You can always convert a regular pot to No Load pot by cutting the track at the edge but its a permanent mod to the pot.

Eric Johnson strat had/has the middle pickup without a tone control either if I remember right.

 

[gregory]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

I say name it EJ Wiring, then.

 

[thegummy]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

You haven't made it clear which pot is no-load, nor what you hope to accomplish.

I only mentioned in the post that the tone control on everything but the bridge would be No-Load because the key to the JV wiring is having the middle pickup without a tone pot.

The bridge could No-Load or not, let's just say that when comparing the two, it's the same in both setups.

As far as what I hope to accomplish, it's just to see what practical advantages the JV wiring could have over the other wiring aside from the parts being slightly cheaper.

What I'd imagine would be the appealing features of the JV wiring would be:

Wide-open middle pickup - that would be possible with the No-Load.

Positions 2 & 4 never having 2 tone pots active at once - taken care of by super switch with the No-Load giving option of one or zero tone pots active on these settings.

Trying to think of what the JV could offer that the other couldn't could be quickly switching between tone-rolled neck pickup and wide-open middle pickup. I wonder if that's something people actually do in practice with the JV wiring? Or is there any other advantage?

 

[gregory]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

I see a wide open middle as a detriment, personally.

...and yes, I've used the EJ wiring scheme. Hank already alluded to what prompted me to do that. I would also add that I don't enjoy reaching for the tone control every time I go between bridge only and bridge+middle on a Strat with a bright bridge pickup.

 

[thegummy]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

I see a wide open middle as a detriment, personally.

...and yes, I've used the EJ wiring scheme. Hank already alluded to what prompted me to do that. I would also add that I don't enjoy reaching for the tone control every time I go between bridge only and bridge+middle on a Strat with a bright bridge pickup.

Wide open middle isn't something I'd particularly see as a great advantage either personally; it is something I've heard people state is an advantage to the JV/EJ wiring though. Having a No-Load on it, as opposed to no tone pot, would allow that option but give other options for the middle.

Your second point is exactly why I like the bridge to have a separate tone pot to position 2 as I'm likely to roll some tone off the bridge but not as likely to roll any off position 2.

I suppose when I think about your question of what I want to accomplish, it's just to have the setup that suits me best and the fact that many people have the JV/EJ wiring (and praise it) makes me wonder if there's any advantages I'm overlooking (and could possibly benefit from) as to me it seems the other wiring I suggested would give all the advantages of the JV/EJ but with improvements.

 

[Hank-]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

I had to look up the wiring images. Nothing special going on, not even a super switch....:sleeping:

 

[PFDarkside]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

I like the EJ wiring.

I use all 5 positions, I like having no tone on the middle, it's a nice bright tone that's not too grating. I also like how it makes N/M brighter. I need a tone on the bridge, usually down a touch. I agree if you want the brightest B/M you need to roll the tone back up, but oh well. I use a wide range of tone on N and N/M.

Superswitch + Bridge Tone + No-Load Tone on 2-5 sounds cool if that's what you want. (I'd still need to roll the tone up when going from N to B/M).

 

[thegummy]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

(I'd still need to roll the tone up when going from N to B/M).

Do you mean if you were playing the neck pickup with the tone rolled down?

If the guitar fairy could change over your guitar to have the other wiring at no cost/time away from guitar - would you do that or would you keep the EJ wiring?

 

[PFDarkside]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

Tough choice.... I'd probably try it. Technically I'd have all the same tones available, plus a few more. (mid with tone and no load on neck)

 

[gregory]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

You can run into trouble when your weakest pickup is your middle or you use the same pickup for the neck and the middle, which is the case for many players. If you're using a standard 5-way and the middle has no tone control and your rig is set so it isn't too grating, you may easily find that your neck pickup is too dark.

I'm cool with the a vintage middle pickup that has no pot, but I still want it to sound like it's connected to a 250k volume and 250k tone on 10. At the same time, I also want my neck pickup to give the same amount of chime when its tone is on 10 as well (different voicing due to the position not withstanding). A 5WSS can be used to add an internal RC load for position 3 in order to achieve this or any other loading specific to any position.

 

[AlexR]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

I tend just to add a wire so the n & m have the same pot.
I also run 2 caps for strats a lot of the time. Gives flexibility to run different values for one. And then the tone controls are not connected the way they are with the single cap.

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

The advantage would be for those without a no load pot with them, to be able to get a brighter quack in 2 & 4 and they dont use 3 position alone often but dwell on the 1,2, 4 & 5 positions most., no new parts needed either. You can always convert a regular pot to No Load pot by cutting the track at the edge but its a permanent mod to the pot.

Eric Johnson strat had/has the middle pickup without a tone control either if I remember right.

If the neck or bridge pickup has a tone control, that tone control is “automatically” added to the middle pickup when it is combined with the neck or bridge pickup.

Used by itself, the middle pickup would have no tone control.

 

[Hank-]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

^Lew, in the 2 & 4 spots, the middle would only see a load from the volume but the neck & bridge would be loaded by the volume & their tone pots. Sure turning down the tone control way down would make the sound dull in 2 & 4 spots but at half way up & beyond its brighter than when if the middle had a dedicated/shared tone control increasing the load on it?

 

[gregory]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

For a standard 5-way and no tone in position 3?

In positions 2 or 4, the middle is loaded by ("sees") one pickup (an inductor), one volume control (a resistor) and one tone control (a resistor in series with a capacitor). Likewise, the bridge or neck pickup "sees" the same thing: one pickup (the middle, this time), a volume control and a tone control.

If position 3 uses the same tone control as position 1 (bridge-only position) then neck + middle will be loaded by two tone pots in position 4, making the combination darker than it would be if there was only one tone pot. The bridge + middle will only have one tone pot, the bridge alone will have that same single tone pot, as will the middle alone.

When you combine two pickups in parallel you get a high-pass response, so you get a sense of increased brightness. A second tone control will provide additional reduction even when on 10, unless it's no-load.

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

Nope. If the tone control is connected to the bridge pickup and the middle pickup has no tone control, when you combine the two pickups the bridge pickup tone control comes right along for the ride and offers a path to ground for the treble frequencies of both pickups.

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Jimmie Vaughan Wiring advantages vs. No-Load?

Nope. If the tone control is connected to the bridge pickup and the middle pickup has no tone control, when you combine the two pickups the bridge pickup tone control comes right along for the ride and offers a path to ground for the treble frequencies of both pickups.

On my Tele I have the tone control connected only to the bridge pickup. That way the neck pickup is slightly brighter and clearer when used all by itself.

But when both pickups are combined the tone control removes the treble from both pickups when it’s turned all the way down.