Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Is this '60/'61 Jazz Stack-Knob diagram correct?
- Thread starter Grissle
- Start date
Yes, I'm thinking they are too..... I have noticed that I have to use the volume knob a bit more on my amp (Hartke LH1000) with this set up but in all honesty it's not a hell of a lot and the trade is very, very nice vintage tone. Now, having said that, and me not being a tech guy at all, I can't say for sure if it's the new control plate set up or the new Aguilar pup's or a combination of both, but I can say for sure that there is a hell of a difference and the tone is truly vintage to my ears. Detailed Jazz bass tone with thickness and warmth that I have only ever heard on the old Fender Jazz basses. It's how I've always thought a Jazz bass was supposed to sound.
I've heard a lot of people playing their Jazz basses on YouTube and other places and they are so happy with their Jazz tone but for the most part I think they are confused.... To me there is what a vintage Jazz bass should sound like and then there's "slap bass tone". Most people can get good slap tone with a Jazz bass but that does not mean that is the "Jazz Bass tone" not in my head anyway.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
I was just checking out a '60 Jazz Bass on eBay, and I found this picture of its electronics. It seems the image the OP has is correct.
I was just checking out a '60 Jazz Bass on eBay, and I found this picture of its electronics. It seems the image the OP has is correct.
Great post, very interesting to see a real 60 / 61 set up.
Anyone know where we can get 250-250 stack pots ? RS maybe or... ?
I'd love to try this on my AV 62.
Anyone know where we can get 250-250 stack pots ? RS maybe or... ?
I'd love to try this on my AV 62.
Apparently you can convert a 500K pot to 250K simply by wiring a 500K resistor across the outer terminals. (That could prove handy, especially in this case...)
My J is sporting a stacked-knob plate, wired with resistors. (Slight variance - the pickup hot leads and the resistors are both wired to the wipers.) I'm having fun, trying this but I'm not sure I will stick with it forever.
There certainly is a whole lot of variability - I can hear changes across the entire sweep on all 4 knobs! If you like exploring infinite subtleties with your settings, this could really be for you!
As for me, I seem to be happier with fewer choices (provided the few available settings all kick butt). So I will probably wind up with some sort of switch/V/T setup. Before I do that, though, I might try this stack knob setup without the resistors (wired more like a reissue) just to see how that compares.
would it be possible to have the resistors on a switch to go between the circuit with resistors and the circuit without resistors? to do a quick A vs B
The resistors can be shorted with a DPST or DPDT switch, but keep in mind that the traditional VVTT setup with resistors is wired for the volume pots to vary the output impedance, rather than input impedance against the pickup coils. This means that you cannot solo a pickup with the resistors shorted, because rolling either volume down too far will drop the total output impedance until the jack is shorted out. You can, however, rewire the volume pots with the wiper terminals as inputs, so that the output impedance remains more-or-less constant throughout the rotation. The disadvantage will be the variable impedance load on the pickup coils, but it will be the same as in a standard VVT configuration.
Actually, with the volume control at 10, the difference in output is negligible. (See plots attached). With the volume control at 5, it does fall off somewhat, but note that the second plot is on a decibel scale, the third shows the 50% plot on a log scale, and it's still negligible. (BTW, I used a 470k resistor for my simulation to accentuate the effect. Sim circuit is in the 4th pic).
Attachments
I have wiring like the first pic in my JB. I've tried other later JB wirings, but that first sounds and feels best to me.
Slightly off topic (Moderator, pls relocate as appropriate) ...
Just got this new wiring finished on my JB, using stack knobs. Works great, for my tastes/needs anyway.
Just got this new wiring finished on my JB, using stack knobs. Works great, for my tastes/needs anyway.
Oh yeah, should elaborate:
I've used the series/parallel switching on guitars in the past ('Jimmy Page Wiring'), but the shortcoming was that when in series mode, turning the bridge pickup volume to zero killed the sound altogether. For this design, I put the volume and tone controls in front of the selector switch, which solves that problem, however, it does introduce a different design limitation: When in parallel mode, turning down either of the volume controls does cause the level to drop off more quickly than would otherwise be the case. When both are all the way up, the level is identical (at least according t my ears and simulator plots) to a standard wiring scheme with both pickups in parallel. So far, it really doesn't seem to be much of a limitation. My main objective is to have multiple settings available at the turn of a switch, without fussing with volumes and tone(s). I included the scoop control primarily because my bass has a side-mount jack, and the control plate I added had 4 holes. That said, I find that I like it a lot. Definitely makes it possible to dial in a pretty convincing acoustic bass tone, and of course, turning it all the way down takes it completely out of the circuit.
Next step will be adding a pair of Dimarzio dual coil pickups. I really don't mind the tone of the stock pickups, but I do most of my recording in the proximity of a computer, so single coils make it difficult to use pickups individually.
On page 2 of this:
https://p4.zdassets.com/hc/theme_assets/549136/200076499/019-0209C_SISD.pdf
The diagram doesn’t indicate that the black wire from the jack to the bridge pot common should continue to the neck pot common. Also doesn’t indicate the bridge wire being connected to ground. I would think there should be an additional wire from the common connection on the bridge pot to the common on the neck pot, as well as adding the bridge wire to one of those common connections, is there some reason not to?
https://p4.zdassets.com/hc/theme_assets/549136/200076499/019-0209C_SISD.pdf
The diagram doesn’t indicate that the black wire from the jack to the bridge pot common should continue to the neck pot common. Also doesn’t indicate the bridge wire being connected to ground. I would think there should be an additional wire from the common connection on the bridge pot to the common on the neck pot, as well as adding the bridge wire to one of those common connections, is there some reason not to?
I had two jazz basses wired like the OP's diagram. The practical results being that with both pickups full on, it sounded like it should, and the tone controls sounded more independent. If either pickup was solo'd, there was a noticeable drop in output and I felt that the bridge pickup lacked punch and clarity.
I removed the resistors and rewired it to the modern wiring. The punch and growl came back, but the Tone controls seem to mingle with either pickup now. Whatever.
Bobby Vega has mentioned in one of his BassPlayerLive talks that his Shark bass is rewired without the resistors, while he keeps another stack-knob jazz wired the original way. He says what I just did.
I removed the resistors and rewired it to the modern wiring. The punch and growl came back, but the Tone controls seem to mingle with either pickup now. Whatever.
Bobby Vega has mentioned in one of his BassPlayerLive talks that his Shark bass is rewired without the resistors, while he keeps another stack-knob jazz wired the original way. He says what I just did.
