Adding a passive tone control to a bass with active 2-band preamp? *resolved*

[Nickweissmusic]

Ok I read that the control pots are 500kohms? Does that sound about right? If so, then finding one should be fairly simple

Every active system is different so no way to tell if that "sounds about right," but if you know that's what the mfr used or you measured near that value and you know it works properly, yes, 500 kOhms is very common, and it's easy to find a concentric pots in that value.

 

[BFISHER1970]

Your red line in the original diagram line6man posted would be redundant as there was already a wire from vol 2 out to the switch. In your sketch you omitted that wire that was i the original.
Yours looks correct now.

 

[Joeykun]

Done!
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[organworthyplayer337]

Your red line in the original diagram line6man posted would be redundant as there was already a wire from vol 2 out to the switch. In your sketch you omitted that wire that was i the original.
Yours looks correct now.

I got confused thinking his sketch redirected that wire to the input of the tone pot therefore there wasn't one going out from it so I added one in red.

my fault!

 

[fermata]

Maybe I missed a similar post while scanning this thread, but the reason the tone pot only has one wire going to it is that it's in parallel with the circuit. It's easy to assume components in a circuit have to have wires coming and going from them, but (usually) that would be series wiring (or a redundant wire in parallel wiring, in the case of your earlier question). If you wire a tone control in series, you get a bass cut instead of a treble cut (the capacitor behaves differently). So one wire coming from the second volume pot is all that's needed to put the tone control in parallel with the circuit. It might look like it's just floating out in space, but it'll do exactly what you want it to do.

 

[organworthyplayer337]

Maybe I missed a similar post while scanning this thread, but the reason the tone pot only has one wire going to it is that it's in parallel with the circuit. It's easy to assume components in a circuit have to have wires coming and going from them, but (usually) that would be series wiring (or a redundant wire in parallel wiring, in the case of your earlier question). If you wire a tone control in series, you get a bass cut instead of a treble cut (the capacitor behaves differently). So one wire coming from the second volume pot is all that's needed to put the tone control in parallel with the circuit. It might look like it's just floating out in space, but it'll do exactly what you want it to do.

So there shouldn't be an extra wire from the tone to the switch?

As seen in this diagram, the wire is thick and black;
#1

Or should it look like this?
#2

I want a treble cut from the capacitor not a bass cut

Thanks!


***edit
After reading your post a couple times I think I understand. It should be #2 because I want it wired in parallel, not Series. Wiring it with the extra wire would result in bass cut(?)

 

[BFISHER1970]

Respectfully, I really would suggest you take it to someone that understands what they are looking at.
If you are wanting to learn maybe they could explain to you what is happening with the circuit.
If you are just wanting a correct diagram and don't need to understand then #1 is correct.

 

[fermata]

Go with @line6man's drawing earlier in this thread (post #12). Your first drawing above (post #46) will work, too (it's functionally the same as line6man's drawing) but it's easier just to leave everything wired as is in the basic, unmodified diagram you first posted (post #1), and add the tone pot like line6man showed--no unsoldering/resoldering to worry about; you just add one wire to the existing circuit.

Your second drawing above won't work at all, because you've cut out the whole active circuit, which means your volume controls (and hence your pickups) don't connect to the output jack.

 

[organworthyplayer337]

Respectfully, I really would suggest you take it to someone that understands what they are looking at.
If you are wanting to learn maybe they could explain to you what is happening with the circuit.
If you are just wanting a correct diagram and don't need to understand then #1 is correct.

Unfortunately, I don't have that resource (as I'm currently looking for tech to actually execute this for me) that's why I'm on here

#1 is what I was initially asking with the diagram with the red wire. I think people just got confused with the wiring diagram underneath it. I knew it had to be connected to the switch regardless. Fermata's post confused me a little bit. I'll leave the whole series/parallel thing for me to learn later on


I think I'll let this rest now. I'm 95% sure #1 is correct. If not; I'll sue all of you guys!

Thanks again everyone

 

[fermata]

I'm 95% sure #1 is correct.

It is correct and will work just fine, but the line6man diagram accomplishes the same thing with less soldering (i.e. fewer chances to mess up).

 

[CrashClint]

Nothing special, just transfer the wires to the corresponding post on the stack pot.

Also would wiring the stacked pots be as simple as wiring them the same way as they were but just on top of each other (with the stacked pot)? Or is there another step involved?