Going to stereo output while keeping mono capability, any ideas?

[monkeyland]

Just because something can be done doesn’t mean that it should. There’s a reason that very few instruments come riddled with a million phase switches and coil taps and tachometers and whatever else like those BC Riches from the 70s. Most of those options are not useful.

Of course anyone can do whatever they want to their own instrument but it will most likely be an excercise in futility.

 

[Killed_by_Death]

I'll add that I saw a Ric-O-Sound demo from Anderton's & they bunked it up really well by using only one pickup & using a mono foot-switch for routing the signal to two amps.
Since each amp had a different sound, they believed they were indeed using the dual-output scheme, but all they needed to do was adjust one of the volume knobs & they'd have realized their error.

If you're doing this for different sounds from each amp, you can get that by simply splitting your mono signal with a Radial Engineering BigShot AB-Y:

Link Removed

If your whole thing is wanting to control the volume of each half from the bass then that wouldn't work, but you might not like the noise that's induced when you play around with the volume of each half.

 

[Clark W]

I'll add that I saw a Ric-O-Sound demo from Anderton's & they bunked it up really well by using only one pickup & using a mono foot-switch for routing the signal to two amps.
Since each amp had a different sound, they believed they were indeed using the dual-output scheme, but all they needed to do was adjust one of the volume knobs & they'd have realized their error.

If you're doing this for different sounds from each amp, you can get that by simply splitting your mono signal with a Radial Engineering BigShot AB-Y:

Link Removed

If your whole thing is wanting to control the volume of each half from the bass then that wouldn't work, but you might not like the noise that's induced when you play around with the volume of each half.

That would most likely satisfy my lust for running two amps. Curious though, with no lights, how do you know if you're running the A/B toggle on A or B? I'm sure you would know by the sound, but outside of that or looking back at the amps? It would stay on "Both" for me most of the time anyway.

 

[Killed_by_Death]

The new version has lights, but I prefer the older, smaller version:

It does require 9 Volts DC, but that's exclusively for lighting it up.

 

[Honkey tonk]

 

[Honkey tonk]

View attachment 3426882

Kinda think the Idea of splitting the "P" is having the ability to make the lows lower and the highs higher
Or maybe the lows higher and the highs lower .that's not even talking about running effects .It's most likely not for everyone

 

[Clark W]

The new version has lights, but I prefer the older, smaller version:

It does require 9 Volts DC, but that's exclusively for lighting it up.

So the non lighted version requires no power? I would forego lights for being able to run powerless. Heck if RadioShack was still around I'd go buy the parts and build it myself.

 

[40Hz]

The Yamaha Sheehan model is more complicated with stereo mode splitting the pickups between the outputs and they use a high cut switch for the front pup as well. Kind of scared to see the schematic for that.

Back in 2010, TB member @Timm popped his open and drew up a schematic. Post with schematic can be found here.

It’s actually a very simple circuit. Coming up with your own wiring scheme shouldn’t be much of a challenge with a circuit as basic as that. A schematic (unlike a wiring diagram) makes it all perfectly clear since it shows the circuit’s design. Which is the one best reason for learning how to read basic schematic diagrams. It isn’t hard.

Wiring diagrams are often confusing and only show one (of several) ways a circuit’s functional design could be implemented. An accurate schematic is your best friend.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

As far as complicating things, tell that to Yamaha and Billy Sheehan

As far as ugly and not very functional? I don't think it's ugly at all. But hey, that's my take on it. And I don't see how the location would be easy to brush the forward knobs. I'm not strumming across the strings like it's a guitar. I use my fingers, mostly over, and sometimes slightly forward of the pups on this bass. And the rare times I do use a pick I'm back closer to the bridge.

But...

You do bring up a very good point about the pickups and E&A vs the D&G strings.

You also bring up a very good point about the stereo jack. Split the signal at the jack, and then use a single trs to dual ts cable to get the signals to two different amps. I really like the idea of keeping it down to one output jack.

So leave the bass as is, change the output to a stereo one, use the trs to ts cable to get two signals from the bass, and you would have what I basically have done experimenting with a Source Audio pedal that has two outputs. One source into the pedal and two going out to seperate amps. Just do it at the output jack of the bass instead. There's no splitting the pups, no need for anymore controls or switches.

Very simple, very cheap, very easy to do, but effective, and it wouldn't make the bass "ugly" .

Sheehan does something different that makes much more sense.

 

[Honkey tonk]

Billy Sheehan explains the benefits of having a bass with 2 outputs | eBass

 

[Honkey tonk]

 

[Honkey tonk]

My next project is having two of these pickups connected to a belt .
With two amps it should have a pretty strong leslie effect and hopefully a chorus kinda sound ?
By moving the dial it changes volume , polarity and tone between Alinico 5 and alinico 2 magnets

 

[craigie]

You can also use a boss LS-2 to split a signal. It’s also very useful because you can combine them back together. So one channel as an uneffected clean bass and another as distortion for example. Works great.

 

[Axstar]

So the non lighted version requires no power? I would forego lights for being able to run powerless. Heck if RadioShack was still around I'd go buy the parts and build it myself.

I would go down the powered route. A simple passive splitter box will introduce ground hum when two amps are connected. You might be able to mitigate this with fixed resistors, but that might dull the tone. Something powered that contains buffers might be the better option.

 

[jamro217]

I'd go the cheap route. Two pickups, stacked knobs, a stereo jack and an on/off SPST toggle. Wire it up normally until you get to the jack. Run the neck pickup to the hot lug on the jack that works when the stereo cable is inserted all the way in like a mono cable is, wire the bridge pickup to the other hot lug (the one that engages halfway out), then wire the toggle in line between the hot lugs of the jack for the bridge pickup. When the toggle is in the off position, the signal won't work for the bridge pickup in mono. This is stereo.

 

[Honkey tonk]

Billy Sheehan explains the benefits of having a bass with 2 outputs | eBass

8 min 40 sec. Into the video Billy shows how he eliminated the noise from using two amps

 

[Honkey tonk]

To eleminate possible issues I guess you Could use a couple cheap 1 to 1 transformers inside the guitar itself ( kind of How a ribbon Mic is wired )
Could also try running a balanced cable, although most amps don't have balanced inputs .

 

[lz4005]

Back in 2010, TB member @Timm popped his open and drew up a schematic. Post with schematic can be found here.

View attachment 3426912

It’s actually a very simple circuit. Coming up with your own wiring scheme shouldn’t be much of a challenge with a circuit as basic as that. A schematic (unlike a wiring diagram) makes it all perfectly clear since it shows the circuit’s design. Which is the one best reason for learning how to read basic schematic diagrams. It isn’t hard.

Wiring diagrams are often confusing and only show one (of several) ways a circuit’s functional design could be implemented. An accurate schematic is your best friend.

I have an 80's Carvin bass that is factory wired the same way, minus the filter on the front pickup. It's a pretty elegant solution to a problem that doesn't exist for most people.

The more useful version is to do the same thing with the pickups on a doubleneck, so you can easily play it through one amp or two.

 

[40Hz]

I have an 80's Carvin bass that is factory wired the same way, minus the filter on the front pickup. It's a pretty elegant solution to a problem that doesn't exist for most people.

The more useful version is to do the same thing with the pickups on a doubleneck, so you can easily play it through one amp or two.

I’ve discovered there’s a lot of complicated passive wiring schemes that do less than you’d hope. I’m continually amazed how something as simple and elegant as the Gibson SB-300 or the Victory Standard’s wiring can provide such a surprising range of usable bass tones. Interesting pickups plus some rounds combined with decent technique into a capable amp gets you there better and more easily than crazy passive wiring tonestacks will in my experience having wired many of them.

 

[Honkey tonk]

Sure 57 is maybe 1to5

Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed