Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

[Ridgeback]

Greetings everyone. Long time lingerer but first time poster.

I've got a Tele I call Slim. It's a Keith Richards Micawber tribute PartsCaster. I have a SD Antiquity HB 7.8k in the neck and a Don Mare 0038 10k in the bridge and for wiring I have an Emerson Broadcaster / Blend circuit installed (see wiring diagram). I love the sounds I'm getting from positions 1 (blend) and 2 (neck only) and never really use the pos. 3 (bass) position. But when you switch from position 2 to position 1 there is a drop in volume. It's not "horrible" but noticeable and it would be cool to be able to balance it better.

Right now I have the HB height lowered just about as far as it will go and the bridge height about as far up as I dare. I experimented with changing resistor values where the 15K resistor sits to see if that would help. Changing it seemed to mainly effect (affect?) the quality / sound of the blend knob but not the over all balance between pos 1 and 2. Interestingly, I found that a 10K is actually what sounds best there IMO and since then, in an effort to research what others have come up with for a solution, I discovered that CreamTone offers a pre-made "Brown Sugar" harness and it appears to also use a 10K there. Otherwise this and his circuit look very very similar.

Anyway, hopefully without effecting position 1, is there a way to reduce the output of the 2nd HB-only position to help balance things out? Perhaps this is impossible as when you reduce the output of the HB in position 2 it will naturally reduce it in position 1 as well?

Thanks,
Scott

p.s. I realize that this guy should only have 5 strings and saddles in order to be a *true Micawber but my other guitar is in service right now so I had to throw the extra string back on for a little while.

 

[jeremy]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

if you never use the bass position, why do you have that wiring? i find the neck/both/bridge setup much more useful.

in general matching full size buckers in the neck with tele bridge pups is tricky. the tele pups are usually bright and the neck is usually much darker. donzos 0038 is a great pup but its bright, 10k worth of #43 with a3 magnets can be a great sound but its not very fat. on the other hand, the antiquity bucker is very warm. typically i find its as much a tonal thing as output. a tone control on the bridge pup is very useful

 

[Ridgeback]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

if you never use the bass position, why do you have that wiring? i find the neck/both/bridge setup much more useful.

in general matching full size buckers in the neck with tele bridge pups is tricky. the tele pups are usually bright and the neck is usually much darker. donzos 0038 is a great pup but its bright, 10k worth of #43 with a3 magnets can be a great sound but its not very fat. on the other hand, the antiquity bucker is very warm. typically i find its as much a tonal thing as output. a tone control on the bridge pup is very useful

Hi Jeremy,
Thanks for your reply. There's speculation that Micawber employs the Broadcaster circuit thus the main reason for my trying that direction for this build. Don and I spoke about this build and determined that the 0038 would be a good match with the antiquity over all.

Interesting you say that the 0038 is bright / not fat because my experience is pretty much the opposite, at least with *this arrangement. I find it still has presence but is less twangy/trebly and has more mid-push.

In any case, if further balancing isn't possible, perhaps with *this guitar I set it in blend mode with the blend set to about 75% and forget it. That setting is pretty sweet...

 

[Buddy_Arry]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

in general matching full size buckers in the neck with tele bridge pups is tricky

I second that. I'm not too familiar with the wiring you have right now, but even with a standard neck/both/bridge situation you generally need a bright neck bucker and a pretty warm, fat and loud bridge pickup. On one of my students' guitar the only way I could sort of make it work was by using a .047 cap wired in series with the neck bucker hot wire, to filter out some low end -De-mud mod- and bypassing the tone pot altogether for the neck pickup. You might want to try 300k pots too, they're going to be slightly brighter but still fine for a hot tele lead pickup. But at the end of the day... it's still not going to be 100% balanced really (imho).

btw, I've used an Antiquity neck for years on a Tele-Gib with 500k pots and always found it very warm, can't imagine how dark it must sound with stock 250k pots :O

 

[Ridgeback]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

Hey Buddy, thanks for your response. I hear you guys and I know it's an age-old issue. I feel like I have about as warm/fat/loud sweet over-wound "broadcaster" sounding bridge I could find in the 0038. It's all that (to me) despite Jeremy's experience with it. I debated putting in the "bright" SD Jazz model but again, it was Don who suggested the antiquity paired with the 0038. In fact, he has a Tele with the 0038/Antiquity installed. His is wired differently however. I find the antiquity in the neck with the 250k pots indeed to be on the warmer side but they are still sweet. 300K pots would indeed bring the presence up on both for sure and definitely something for me to consider! It would not address the output discrepancy though?

 

[AlexR]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

I am surprised that you have the volume issues. I have found that you can get away with quite close K readings with 2 humbuckers and still balance - as long as you have height adjustment to lay with. And I also have a tele with a mini at about 7k which works.
I am wondering if the 10k bridge is not wound with thinner wire, so its really more like 8k when compared with the neck humbucker at 7.8 when the 2 wire sizes are equalised.

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

It may not be as "historically accurate" as you would like, but I found the most versatile Micawber type wiring to be as follows:

Neck humbucker
Neck Split
Bridge with split neck being blended in parallel

It's a much more flexible wiring with all the tones you could possibly want from a Tele without being too difficult to set up to match output and tone. And if you don't use the bass preset neck humbucker, why have it clogging up your switch?

 

[Ridgeback]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

Alex, the vol. issue is not massive but there. Just seeing if there's a tweak option I wasn't aware of. You might be right about the thinner wire. Not sure. Maybe I should have gone with the 11.5K 0038??

 

[Ridgeback]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

Hey Christopher, that would be a nice compromise. Do you have a wiring diagram to link to?

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

Hey Christopher, that would be a nice compromise. Do you have a wiring diagram to link to?

Not at the moment, but me or another member could easily make you one. I have quite a bit on my plate right now at work, but if as soon as I get some spare time I will make you one.

 

[freefrog]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

Personally, I'd simply use a volume pot for the bridge PU and a second volume control for the neck one (possibly fitted with a treble bleed cap), plus a "normally" wired switch. YMMV.

 

[hamerfan]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

Here you see a commented schematic by Joe Gore.

http://tonefiend.com/pickups/a-new-look-at-an-old-wiring-schemeand-another-cheap-guitar-makeover/

 

[Zombiwoof]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

What is the function of the resistor in the OP's wiring?.
Al
Never mind!. I see the answer in the article on Broadcaster Blend wiring that was linked to. Should have read that first.

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

It reduces the volume of the bassy position. It cleans it up a bit.

 

[Zombiwoof]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

It reduces the volume of the bassy position. It cleans it up a bit.

Thanks, as I added to my post, I found the answer in the linked article on Broadcaster Blend wiring.
Al

 

[Ridgeback]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

Not at the moment, but me or another member could easily make you one. I have quite a bit on my plate right now at work, but if as soon as I get some spare time I will make you one.

Thanks Christoper! No rush...

 

[jeremy]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

the 0038 is alnico 3 with #43 wire unless donzo has changed his recipe. its a great pup and fatter than a twangy 6k a5 pups for sure. fat for a vintage tele type pup but that doesnt make it fat in the over all scheme of things. you could swap an a3 or a4 magent into the antiquity which would give it a bit less bottom but similar tonality or a flatter eq response with more high end. youd want to adjust the neck pup height if you swapped in an a4

 

[Ridgeback]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

Here you see a commented schematic by Joe Gore.

http://tonefiend.com/pickups/a-new-look-at-an-old-wiring-schemeand-another-cheap-guitar-makeover/

Thanks hamerfan! This article nicely addresses the questions here about why you'd "waste" position 3 for the blender option. I would love position 3 if I was a jazz player. It would be perfect for that but I'm not so I don't use it.

Unless I missed something, the author doesn't cover the volume drop when you use a HB in the neck position as he's using all single coils. But love the article for the overall blender discussion.

 

[Zombiwoof]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

Doesn't Micawber have a lap steel pickup for the bridge?. Is that considerably hotter than the Tele pickups being discussed here?.
Al

 

[Ridgeback]

Re: Micawber wiring--balancing HB to Bridge output

Doesn't Micawber have a lap steel pickup for the bridge?. Is that considerably hotter than the Tele pickups being discussed here?.
Al

I guess only Johnny Starbuck and/or Pierre De Beauport know for sure?

From Guitar World:
"The bridge pickup has been up to debate. For years it was believed that Richards used an original Broadcaster bridge pickup, an exceedingly rare single-coil of which few were made. Others have suggested it’s a lap-steel pickup (the fact that the pickup is held on by just two screws seems to support this), though some former Fender employees who apparently worked with the guitar say it’s actually an early Telecaster bridge pickup that is wound extra hot.

The guitar’s wiring is the real question. Richards almost always has the pickup selector in the bridge position (position 1), but the humbucker’s tone seems to be evident, which suggests something has been altered in its electronics. In their standard configuration, Telecasters are wired with the master volume closest to the pickup selector; the second knob is the tone control. But some have suggested that Richards has the guitar wired in Fender’s early Broadcaster/Nocaster/Telecaster configuration, which includes a master volume and a blend control. If so, in position 1 the bridge pickup would be active, and the blend control would allow him to dial in the amount of the humbucker neck pickup he desires. Position 2 would be neck pickup only, with the blend deactivated, and position 3 would activate the neck pickup and a tone capacitor that would reduce treble response for a dark tone."


In any case I think the 0038 is Don's "Keefer" pickup modeled after an overwound '50/'51 bridge. Isn't an authentic Champion Lap-Steel more around the 6.5-7K range?

Having said that, and I'm sure Jeremy knows 100x more than I do on this, but I'm coming to understand the "K#" range of a pup doesn't necessarily tell the whole story. The type wire used / turns / etc. plays a role in actual output. In other words, a 7K pup with thicker gauge wire might have more actual output than a 10K pup with thinner? Jeremy?