Noob Question on this bass' knobs.

[-Kiedis-]

Hey guys I have my eye set on this, I have heard a few soundclips and demos here and there but I must ask what is a Pickup Switch Balancer and pan pot?

http://www.yamaha.com/guitars/produc...2&CTID=5067800


thanks

[tom once dead]

pickup balancer, is exactly that. Turn the knob one way it will be on just one pup, the other way will be the other, everywhere in between is a mixture of how much of each pickup is being used.

[Musky]

They're the same thing. Instead of having a switch to select front/back/both pickups, you have a pot that gradually blends from the front pickup to the back one. The middle position will give you both in equal amounts.

[carlos840]

I think there is still a small difference in the fact that a switch will give you 100% of one pickup or the other.
The knob on the other hand will usually give you more of one than the other but will never completely solo a pickup even if turned completely to one way!

[Jazz Ad]

Not this again. A balance knob can achieve the same settings as a switch or 2 volumes.

[St Drogo]

Originally Posted by carlos840

I think there is still a small difference in the fact that a switch will give you 100% of one pickup or the other.
The knob on the other hand will usually give you more of one than the other but will never completely solo a pickup even if turned completely to one way!

I thought that a blend/pan knob could give you 100% of one pu and 0% of the other when turned to the extreme. I might be wrong though. What do you base this on?

What is a problem though (for some), is that the pan knob will not allow you to have one pu set at 100% and then gradually mix the other pu in. Having two seperate volume controls will give you that option.

[Jazz Ad]

Bull bull bull. You guys need to stop propagating legends like this.
A pan knob allows exactly the same settings as 2 volumes. It is perfectly possible to have 100 % of one pickup and none or any ratio you want on the other.

[St Drogo]

Hey man, I'm not trying to propagate anything.

Seriously, how would that work? As I understand it, a panpot is in effect two volume pots controlled by one pot, right? so if you've got the knob all the way to the left, one pu would be at 0% and the other one at 100%. now, turning it to the right, it would gradually increase the volume of one, and decrease that of the other, until they both would be at 50% at the exact center point. The only way you could have 100% of one pu and any other percentage of the other with a panpot, would be if the center point of the knob would actually be set to be 100%/100%, leaving one pu at 100% and gradually decreasing the other one when turning the knob either way. I'm sure these pots exist, but I don't think they're standard on most lower to middle end basses. And even with that kind of panpot, you still would be limiting yourself in volume options, I mean, how would you have a 50%/50% setting? Or any setting with one of the pu's not at full volume?

I'm not trying to piss you off or anything, this is just how I understand panpots work. If I'm wrong, please, expliquez-vouz.

[carlos840]

Originally Posted by St Drogo

Hey man, I'm not trying to propagate anything.

Seriously, how would that work? As I understand it, a panpot is in effect two volume pots controlled by one pot, right? so if you've got the knob all the way to the left, one pu would be at 0% and the other one at 100%. now, turning it to the right, it would gradually increase the volume of one, and decrease that of the other, until they both would be at 50% at the exact center point. The only way you could have 100% of one pu and any other percentage of the other with a panpot, would be if the center point of the knob would actually be set to be 100%/100%, leaving one pu at 100% and gradually decreasing the other one when turning the knob either way. I'm sure these pots exist, but I don't think they're standard on most lower to middle end basses. And even with that kind of panpot, you still would be limiting yourself in volume options, I mean, how would you have a 50%/50% setting? Or any setting with one of the pu's not at full volume?

I'm not trying to piss you off or anything, this is just how I understand panpots work. If I'm wrong, please, expliquez-vouz.

I thought it was the opposite, i was always told that in the middle position you had full volume on both and that if you went to one extreme or the other you had 100% of the chosen one but still a certain % of the other one in the signal path...
Might be wrong though, no need to be arsey jazz add!

[Bocete]

Originally Posted by St Drogo

Hey man, I'm not trying to propagate anything.

Seriously, how would that work? As I understand it, a panpot is in effect two volume pots controlled by one pot, right? so if you've got the knob all the way to the left, one pu would be at 0% and the other one at 100%. now, turning it to the right, it would gradually increase the volume of one, and decrease that of the other, until they both would be at 50% at the exact center point. The only way you could have 100% of one pu and any other percentage of the other with a panpot, would be if the center point of the knob would actually be set to be 100%/100%, leaving one pu at 100% and gradually decreasing the other one when turning the knob either way. I'm sure these pots exist, but I don't think they're standard on most lower to middle end basses. And even with that kind of panpot, you still would be limiting yourself in volume options, I mean, how would you have a 50%/50% setting? Or any setting with one of the pu's not at full volume?

I'm not trying to piss you off or anything, this is just how I understand panpots work. If I'm wrong, please, expliquez-vouz.

With a balance knob like that you could get a 50%/50% by putting the balance in the center and lowering volume on the volume knob

[St Drogo]

Originally Posted by Bocete

With a balance knob like that you could get a 50%/50% by putting the balance in the center and lowering volume on the volume knob

I'm not sure if you meant this as a joke, but it's a good remark. I hadn't really thought of the interaction between the master volume and a blend. That does open up some more options, but still I'm wondering if you could get every setting that would be possible with a v/v/t setup.

By the way, I like a v/b/t setup more than v/v/t, because of practicality. I'm just interested in the differences here, and curious to see if there is any merit to what Jazz Ad is saying. I'm hoping he replies, because there might be some factors I haven't thought of.

[spade2you]

A local tried to convince me that a blend knob killed the tone. I like how even technology like a blend knob is "too modern".

[Bocete]

Originally Posted by St Drogo

I'm not sure if you meant this as a joke, but it's a good remark. I hadn't really thought of the interaction between the master volume and a blend. That does open up some more options, but still I'm wondering if you could get every setting that would be possible with a v/v/t setup.

By the way, I like a v/b/t setup more than v/v/t, because of practicality. I'm just interested in the differences here, and curious to see if there is any merit to what Jazz Ad is saying. I'm hoping he replies, because there might be some factors I haven't thought of.

Mathematically speaking, two volume knobs provide you with the same opportunities as a vol and a blend knob. Exactely the same, none better than the other. Vol+blend is more usable IMO.

Purists say that every knob hurts the sound. With vol+vol, you've got one knob for one pickup. With vol/blend, every pickup goes through two vol knobs (master vol and blend) so you lose sound quality, according to them. I disagree, but to each his own.

[St Drogo]

Originally Posted by Bocete

Purists say that every knob hurts the sound. With vol+vol, you've got one knob for one pickup. With vol/blend, every pickup goes through two vol knobs (master vol and blend) so you lose sound quality, according to them. I disagree, but to each his own.

Okay, but that is a whole other issue. What I'm on about is the mathematical possibilities you were referring to. Can you explain to me how a v/v setup does not provide you with more options than a v/b setup? You say they're exactly the same, but as I've tried to explain above, logical thinking leads me to believe they are not. If I'm wrong about this, I'd like to know why.

[Jazz Ad]

The topic has been explain dozens of time. It comes up pretty much every time somebody talks about balance pots. I have no desire to once again get into this senseless debate.

v+b does exactly the same as v+v, provided you use a 100/100 blend pot. Which is what was used in each and every balance equiped bass I ever played. You claim that a v/v provides more options, feel free to explain how. You're basically saying that a mixer faucer doesn't allow the same mixing of hot and cold water as a regular twin tap.

Sure, 50/50 blend pots exist and are desirable for other applications. You'd be dumb to use them in a bass because they don't achieve the desired effect.
The only possible objection to using a balance pot would be that there are always 2 pots in the way of the signal, instead of only one with volume. Even this makes little sense since we're dealing with passive, alternative currents that flow all around the circuit.

[St Drogo]

Well, let's look at it digitally, in increments. Say for argument's sake you have a v/v setup, but where both knobs have 100 notches, every percent of volume being a notch. This way, you'd have 100*100=10.000 volume options. A lot of these would be so close together it would be preposterous to insist on having these options, but the reasoning seems sound, right?

Now, if you have one knob that controls both volume pots (i.e. a blend pot), you'd have only one hundred notches, therefore, one hundred options for your volume. The addition of a master volume would not impact that, because it would increase and decrease the overall volume, not the relative volume pu to pu.

Please keep in mind I'm playing the devil's advocate here, I don't think a v/v setup is in practice any better than a v/b setup, maybe even worse because of ease of use. the extra volume options you'd get would be negligible.

To take your faucet analogy: I do think having a twin tap will grant you extra options in mixing hot and cold water over a mixing tap. In temperature however, the cold water and hot water will interact differently from two electrical signals in guitars. As I understand it, the signals from two pu's will blend like 1+1=2, whereas two waterstreams of different temperature will impact eachothers temperature, as in 1+1=1'.
(I'm not sure if i'm explaining myself intelligibly, I'll have to have some more thought on this, but I'm a bit pressed for time now)

Also, I wasn't aware most basses use 100/100 blends, I thought that would lead to combined volume issues when the pu's are wired in parallel.

[Bocete]

Originally Posted by St Drogo

Okay, but that is a whole other issue. What I'm on about is the mathematical possibilities you were referring to. Can you explain to me how a v/v setup does not provide you with more options than a v/b setup? You say they're exactly the same, but as I've tried to explain above, logical thinking leads me to believe they are not. If I'm wrong about this, I'd like to know why.

Bah

The best way to prove that the possibilities are the same is to find a bijection between the functions (vol, vol) -> (neck output, bridge output) and (vol, blend) -> (neck output, bridge output). I'll map both knob positions and pickup outputs as pairs of numbers between 0 and 1. I'll assume knobs drop volume in a linear fashion.

The first function is simple: f1(a, b) = (a, b).
The other is not as simple: f2(c, d) = (c*min(1, 2d), c*min(1, 2(1-d))).

You can define f2 in a cleaner way by splitting the domain into two areas, one where the b argument is less then 0.5, and the other otherwise where it's not.

f2(c, d) = {(2cd, c) where d < 0.5,
(c, 2c(1 - d)) otherwise.

I need to prove that for every a and b there is a single (c, d) pair that provides the same output. Then, prove that for every c and d there is a single (a, b) pair which gives the same output in their respective functions.

• First part: every (a, b) has a single (c, d) for which f1(a, b) = f2(c, d).
  
  First, if a > b (neck pickup louder):
  f2(c, d) = f1(a, b)
  <=> (c, 2c(1 - d)) = (a, b)
  <=> c = a, 2c(1 - d) = b
  <=> c = a, 2a(1 - d) = b
  <=> c = a, d = (2a-b)/2a. This division is safe as a cannot be 0 since it's strictly greater than b. Both c and d are, indeed, unique numbers between 0 and 1.
  
  Then, if a <= b (the same or bridge pickup louder):
  f2(c, d) = f1(a, b)
  <=> (2cd, c) = (a, b)
  <=> 2cd = a, c = b
  <=> 2bd = a, c = b
  <=> d = a/2b, c = b. This division is not safe, but if b = 0 then (c, d) = (1, 1).
  So, in this case as well, the (c, d) pair is defined and unique for every (a, b).
  
  So, for a given vol/vol position (a, b) where a > b (neck pickup is louder) there is a vol/blend position with the same output.
  
• Second part: every (c, d) has a unique (a, b) pair so that f2(c, d) = f1(a, b).
  
  If d < 0.5 (bridge pickup louder):
  f1(a, b) = f2(c, d)
  <=> (a, b) = (2cd, c)
  <=> a = 2cd, b = c. That's actually it. Both a and b are unique and between 0 and 1.
  
  If d >= 5 (center or neck pickup louoder):
  f1(a, b) = f2(c, d)
  <=> (a, b) = (c, 2c(1 - d))
  <=> a = c, b = 2c(1 - d). Again, both a and b end up unique and between 0 and 1.

So, that's it. Every sound you can get out of vol/vol you can get on vol/blend, and every sound you can get on vol/blend you can get on vol/vol. Therefore there is a bijection of functions f1 and f2. You can simply map one coordinate space to the other, and vice versa.

Proof enough?

[selowitch]

Bocete: You're too smart for me, man. I got a headache just from glancing at your post.

[Bocete]

Originally Posted by selowitch

Bocete: You're too smart for me, man. I got a headache just from glancing at your post.

It's highschool math, just lots of it. TLTR.

Let's play a game. You imagine a vol/vol position and I'll give you a vol/blend position with the exactely same sound. Then you imagine a vol/blend position and I'll give you a vol/vol position with the same sound, no matter which positions you imagine. Try playing with yourself (no pun intended ) and you'll see that you'll be able to respond every time.

Because of this, neither vol/vol or vol/blend is more powerful than the other.

[ImMoreBetter]

Originally Posted by St Drogo

Well, let's look at it digitally, in increments. Say for argument's sake you have a v/v setup, but where both knobs have 100 notches, every percent of volume being a notch. This way, you'd have 100*100=10.000 volume options. A lot of these would be so close together it would be preposterous to insist on having these options, but the reasoning seems sound, right?

Not necessarily. The proportion of pickup volume is what changes tone, not total volume.
If you have the pots at 30/30 or 50/50 or 70/70, it does not matter, it is still a 1:1 ratio, just at different volumes.
Likewise, 10/20, 20/40, 30/60, 40/80, and 50/100 are the same.
There is so much redundancy that you only get 100 genuine new tones with a v/v anyway.