Parralell / split question

Hank 55

New member
Hi folks. Just curious. Is parralell switching a good alternative to coil splitting for a hot bridge humbucker in an HSS style strat? Also wondering how this applies to a minibucker (sceamin' deamon or a JB jr) in the neck.
 
Re: Parralell / split question

I think the single coil sized humbuckers always sound better in parallel than split. For full size humbucker, I prefer split.
 
Re: Parralell / split question

Thanks bro. Appreciate the advise. I'm running a 5 way with 1 vol/1 tone. Would I use 500k for the pots?
 
Re: Parralell / split question

I think the single coil sized humbuckers always sound better in parallel than split. For full size humbucker, I prefer split.
I can't speak to all small humbuckers, but I'll pile on with this piece of anecdata:

For a while my Strat just had a neck single-coil and a bridge Hot Rails, with no middle pickup. At first, because it was easiest, I had the single-coil and the two coils of the Hot Rails wired up to the 5-way switch just like three single-coils would have been, so I had

1 neck
2 neck + north blade (parallel, obviously)
3 north blade
4 north blade + south blade in parallel
5 south blade

Later I changed the wiring so it was in series, but that original 4th position both-coils-in-parallel always sounded better to me than either coil by itself or with the coils in series.
 
Re: Parralell / split question

I generally like the tone of parallel much better than split.

Just for your info...the "Jr" humbuckers which are single-coil sized are not "mini humbuckers" at all. True minis are totally different animals.
 
Re: Parralell / split question

Rob option. Partial split is my favorite. Because it's not so low in volume and it sounds single coily but with some skank from the partial coil.
 
Re: Parralell / split question

Rob option. Partial split is my favorite. Because it's not so low in volume and it sounds single coily but with some skank from the partial coil.

Amen to that, but most production model 'buckers don't give you that option. Do you know a technique for doing it as a mod in a reasonably straightforward manner?
 
Re: Parralell / split question

Amen to that, but most production model 'buckers don't give you that option. Do you know a technique for doing it as a mod in a reasonably straightforward manner?

Huh. All you do is wire a resistor between the series connection and ground. 4k is single coiley, 6k is fat, and 10k is about half split.
 
Re: Parralell / split question

Huh. All you do is wire a resistor between the series connection and ground. 4k is single coiley, 6k is fat, and 10k is about half split.

Wow... I feel like an idiot. That's so simple and obvious...

Between your words of wisdom and my copious quarantine time, I'm about to bust out my soldering iron and rewire all my toys. Thanks!
 
Re: Parralell / split question

I refuse to live with hum. I would go parallel.

Now here is the deal: When you split the coil, you cut the inductance by one half. When you put it in parallel, you cut it down to only 1/4.

So, if the pickup is high output with lots of windings and high resistance (and therefore high inductance), parallel works very well. The single-coil sized humbuckers that are wired in parallel - the duckbuckers and vintage rails - sound better up close to the strings.
 
Re: Parralell / split question

Or you could do the "Spin-a-split" mod. Dial in just as much of one coil as you like, you're not bound by the value of any resister.
 
Re: Parralell / split question

Here is info about the Spin-a-split mod. It certainly attempts to solve the issues some have with straight splitting.
 
Re: Parralell / split question

Wow, thanks for the spin-a-split info, guys.

You'd still want to use a logarithmic-taper pot for this, right? Because it's basically just a volume control for one of the coils?
 
Re: Parralell / split question

Wow, thanks for the spin-a-split info, guys.

You'd still want to use a logarithmic-taper pot for this, right? Because it's basically just a volume control for one of the coils?
Frankly, to me it doesn't matter. The Sweet spot for spin a split falls in a very small range, so I usually dial it in and leave it there. One thing to note is my spinach splits are by passable and often I will measure the spin a split value and replace the spin a split with a resistor bundle of the same value and switch it in and out.

And yes between the noise reduction and tone, we do a lot more parallels and partials than we do full splits.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk
 
Re: Parralell / split question

Wow, thanks for the spin-a-split info, guys.

You'd still want to use a logarithmic-taper pot for this, right? Because it's basically just a volume control for one of the coils?

Splits appear to react to the absolute amount of resistance rather than the proportion of the sweep like a volume. 10k will split it the same amount regardless of what the value is at full. For this reason, you have to use a small value pot to get any kind of taper. I've tried everything and found that a 50k no loaded pot works best.
 
Last edited:
Re: Parralell / split question

Splits appear to react to the absolute amount of resistance rather than the proportion of the sweep like a volume. 10k will split it the same amount regardless of what the value is at full. For this reason, you have to use a small value pot to get any kind of taper. I've tried everything and found that a 50k no loaded pot works best.

Also, heed the "no load" part

I did a spin-a-split mod on some of my humbuckers without a low-resistance pot (probably around the 50k that Clint suggested), and it sounded MUDDY as all hell because of all the treble that grounded out
 
Re: Parralell / split question

Yeah if you don't no load it, the humbucker will never be full series. You'll lose the gainy sound of the full hum in series because it will always be partially split.
 
Back
Top