Working blend pot with series/parallel switch?

[vin97]

Hey I know this is like multiple years later but it seems this thread has been active on and off for about three so I figured what’s one more? If you’re still active, I wanted to point out that at full on or full off that series resistance doesn’t actually make a difference (at full on the series resistance is 0, and at full off the pickup gets shorted out anyway), but I agree there is a pretty obvious difference in all of the in-between area. What I wanted to ask you is 1) how do you think this would affect tone (it obviously will but I honestly have no clue what the result would actually look like) and 2) do you think it maybe affects taper also, and if so, in what ways? Also, I wanted to thank you for poking holes in this even a year after the matter, I wasn’t very experienced then and still ain’t for the most part

Just scroll up a bit.
In short, I think it would affect both tone and taper. This wouldn't be a big problem by itself but I suspect it would do so in an assymetric way. So different taper and tone depending on which side of the blend you are on.
I would avoid this.
Just go for 4PDT. With B250K-Push/Pull-4PDT pots being avaiable from MEC (as master volume), I see no reason to go for the 3PDT scheme.

 

[fig]

Hey I know this is like multiple years later...

How many of the ideas in the thread have you tried already during these multiple years? I'm sure folk would like to know which ones work and which ones don't.

If you haven't tried any yet, I'd say order the parts you need and start experimenting. You can quickly tack-solder components together for functional tests. Or you can breadboard these ideas. Your choice.

I found a long time ago that theorizing over what might, or might not, happen can stop you from discovering something good. Much wasted time. Sometimes the theories are right, sometimes they're wrong. Never know until the theories are tested.

For what it's worth, I do separate switches, not switchable push/pulls. If a switch goes bad, just change only the switch, instead of the entire push/pull pot. I like ease and I like switches LOL. But, yeah, if there's no more room, you're gonna be committed to a switchable push-pull pot.

 

[AndyPanda]

This old thread came back to life and a lot of the early posts in this thread just looked convoluted and over complicated. I only skimmed over the posts so maybe something like this has already been suggested. I just drew this up pretty quickly and don't see why you can't do this with a simple 3PDT toggle and simple layout.

I haven't tried it and I haven't spent much time looking for goofs -- so there is probably something I got wrong ... and I'll wake up in the morning slapping my forehead DOH! Why did I post that picture last night I'll have to order a 3PDT toggle and test it out.

I laid it out in a way that makes sense to my sleepy brain tonight with blue for the - side of the pickups and red for the + side and for the signal heading to the tone control (and to master volume if you are using a blender instead of VVT)

 

[Max3000]

How many of the ideas in the thread have you tried already during these multiple years? I'm sure folk would like to know which ones work and which ones don't.

If you haven't tried any yet, I'd say order the parts you need and start experimenting. You can quickly tack-solder components together for functional tests. Or you can breadboard these ideas. Your choice.

I found a long time ago that theorizing over what might, or might not, happen can stop you from discovering something good. Much wasted time. Sometimes the theories are right, sometimes they're wrong. Never know until the theories are tested.

For what it's worth, I do separate switches, not switchable push/pulls. If a switch goes bad, just change only the switch, instead of the entire push/pull pot. I like ease and I like switches LOL. But, yeah, if there's no more room, you're gonna be committed to a switchable push-pull pot.

i haven’t tried any yet. I do agree that it’s very easy to over-theorize to the point of inaction. The problem is up until pretty recently I’ve been pretty broke/overworked, which meant all I could do was theorize for a long time. Anyway, you’re absolutely right, I can just test all of these issues out instead of ruminating ad nauseam about em. Thanks

 

[Max3000]

This old thread came back to life and a lot of the early posts in this thread just looked convoluted and over complicated. I only skimmed over the posts so maybe something like this has already been suggested. I just drew this up pretty quickly and don't see why you can't do this with a simple 3PDT toggle and simple layout.

I haven't tried it and I haven't spent much time looking for goofs -- so there is probably something I got wrong ... and I'll wake up in the morning slapping my forehead DOH! Why did I post that picture last night I'll have to order a 3PDT toggle and test it out.

I laid it out in a way that makes sense to my sleepy brain tonight with blue for the - side of the pickups and red for the + side and for the signal heading to the tone control (and to master volume if you are using a blender instead of VVT)
View attachment 4548772

I’m not so sure about the volume setup in parallel mode. It seems to put the pickup in parallel with one side of the pot, then put both that side of the pot and the pickup in series with the other side. Tbf tho I’m also sleepy lol.

I have a 3PDT schematic somewhere in this thread (probably one of those convoluted ones you mentioned, sorry) that uses the no-load blend pot setup in parallel, and then in series treats each half of the blend pot kind of like a regular volume control. I believe this series setup is what vin97 took issue with

 

[AndyPanda]

Here I drew the effective circuit without the switches and without the sections of wire that go nowhere when the switch removes them from the circuit. Maybe this will help you visualize what my layout does and how both parallel and series have the same effective circuit as a std parallel wiring or series wiring:

 

[Max3000]

Here I drew the effective circuit without the switches and without the sections of wire that go nowhere when the switch removes them from the circuit. Maybe this will help you visualize what my layout does and how both parallel and series have the same effective circuit as a std parallel wiring or series wiring:
View attachment 4548799

I think in parallel the middle and right lugs need to have their connections switched for it to be like the “standard” wiring. At least AFAIK

 

[fig]

I laid it out in a way that makes sense to my sleepy brain tonight...

That's the same circuit (minus the tone pots) and switch logic I used in post #57. Great sleepy minds think alike, or something like that LOL.

Since post 57, I've tested it and it works. I used two volume pots, instead of a blend pot (I don't like 'em). But since a blend pot is essentially two modified volume pots, a blend will work fine. Just the same as keeping one vol pot maxxed while adjusting the opposite volume pot.

For what it's worth, I tested with two tone pots also, shown in post 57. In series, the tone's sounds are isolated and separate, like a Danelectro series circuit. In parallel, and only when both volumes are maxxed, the two tone pots interact, which is the issue of any passive parallel config that uses a tone pot for each pickup. Two isolation resistors, or dialing one volume back a little, would cure that (to a degree).

 

[Max3000]

That's the same circuit (minus the tone pots) and switch logic I used in post #57. Great sleepy minds think alike, or something like that LOL.

Since post 57, I've tested it and it works. I used two volume pots, instead of a blend pot (I don't like 'em). But since a blend pot is essentially two modified volume pots, a blend will work fine. Just the same as keeping one vol pot maxxed while adjusting the opposite volume pot.

For what it's worth, I tested with two tone pots also, shown in post 57. In series, the tone's sounds are isolated and separate, like a Danelectro series circuit. In parallel, and only when both volumes are maxxed, the two tone pots interact, which is the issue of any passive parallel config that uses a tone pot for each pickup. Two isolation resistors, or dialing one volume back a little, would cure that (to a degree).

Hmm, did you notice any difference in taper from the standard parallel volume wiring, since it’s wired slightly differently? If not then that’s a pretty simple/elegant way to get the two-lug volume setup in series with something still familiar in parallel

 

[fig]

Hmm, did you notice any difference in taper from the standard parallel volume wiring, since it’s wired slightly differently?

I didn't pay attention to tapering issues when I did that. Just wanted to see, in a broad way, that the volumes worked in both modes, as well as the two tone controls. Nothing jumped out at me as, "Oh, this sucks." LOL

 

[fig]

...notice any difference in taper from the standard parallel volume wiring, since it’s wired slightly differently?

Me again...

This part of your question just fully registered with me. Older, slower...gimme a break, man LOL.

When switched to parallel, it's no different than any other passive parallel circuit out there. Taper won't change.

AndyPanda's diagram shows it's the same as countless other parallel pickups.:

I agree it's simple and elegant. The switchology entirely separates the series and parallel into two, fully independent, circuits.

 

[Max3000]

Me again...

This part of your question just fully registered with me. Older, slower...gimme a break, man LOL.

When switched to parallel, it's no different than any other passive parallel circuit out there. Taper won't change.

AndyPanda's diagram shows it's the same as countless other parallel pickups.:
View attachment 4549153

I agree it's simple and elegant. The switchology entirely separates the series and parallel into two, fully independent, circuits.

Wait a sec, I just realized the disconnect. I’m used to guitar wirings, where the middle and rightmost lugs would have swapped connections. Bass wiring, especially J Bass wiring, looks more like AndyPanda’s diagram. I think this wiring in a guitar successfully decouples the two volume controls but at the expense of a lot of treble (which is less of a concern in bass guitars).

Yeah ok, this is a cool implementation

 

[AndyPanda]

Wait a sec, I just realized the disconnect. I’m used to guitar wirings, where the middle and rightmost lugs would have swapped connections. Bass wiring, especially J Bass wiring, looks more like AndyPanda’s diagram. I think this wiring in a guitar successfully decouples the two volume controls but at the expense of a lot of treble (which is less of a concern in bass guitars).

Yeah ok, this is a cool implementation

It's not a guitar vs bass thing. If you have a single pickup then you can swap the lugs (I usually wire a P bass so the wiper shorts the output instead of shorting the pickup to ground) .. but with two pickups and two volume pots in parallel you can't have the output on the wiper unless you put in some resistors ... otherwise you short the output completely when you turn either volume all the way off. That's why Jazz Bass wiring uses the wiper to the pickups -- so the resistance of the pots isolates things so one volume set to zero doesn't shut both pickups off.

 

[AndyPanda]

Since post 57, I've tested it and it works. I used two volume pots, instead of a blend pot (I don't like 'em).

I also prefer two volume pots. I have had my JB wired with the stock 250K Audio taper pots but in series and it's much smoother blending than any blend pot I've tried.

I've really enjoyed the Jazz Bass in series only but I just barely started to try and learn to slap and so I wired it back to parallel as I think it works better (more scooped) for slap that way. But then when this thread got activated again, it got me thinking about ordering up a 3PDT mini toggle and have both available.

 

[Max3000]

It's not a guitar vs bass thing. If you have a single pickup then you can swap the lugs .. but with two pickups and two volume pots in parallel you can't have the output on the wiper unless you put a resistor in there or you short the output completely for both pickups when you turn either volume all the way off. That's why Jazz Bass wiring uses the wiper to the pickups -- so the resistance of the pots isolates things so one volume set to zero doesn't shut both pickups off.

Good point. If you use the ungrounded blend method (which would essentially be switching the center and right lug connections and disconnecting the left one), then I think you get around this issue. But of course then you probably get a super bright signal from your pickups without knocking back the tone a bit

 

[Max3000]

@fig since you’ve tried this out before, can I ask if there’s any difference in the series mode between wiring the volume pot as a variable resistor in parallel with the pickup (as in the diagram) vs. as a voltage divider like in this:

(I think this is actually one of your diagrams as well)

 

[AndyPanda]

@fig since you’ve tried this out before, can I ask if there’s any difference in the series mode between wiring the volume pot as a variable resistor in parallel with the pickup (as in the diagram) vs. as a voltage divider like in this:

In your diagram, when you have either pot turned down (whether all th way down or just partially) you have added a resistor (a portion of the pot) in series with the audio circuit --- that is not something I would want. In my series circuit the two pickups are directly connected in series without any resistor stuck between them.

Would you want to take a 250kohm resistor and splice it in series with your hot signal going to the output jack? That is essentially what you have in your diagram and it doesn't give you any advantage at all so why muddy it up that way?

 

[Max3000]

In your diagram, when you have either pot turned down (whether all th way down or just partially) you have added a resistor (a portion of the pot) in series with the audio circuit --- that is not something I would want. In my series circuit the two pickups are directly connected in series without any resistor stuck between them.

Would you want to take a 250kohm resistor and splice it in series with your hot signal going to the output jack? That is essentially what you have in your diagram and it doesn't give you any advantage at all so why muddy it up that way?

I guess the main reason someone would want to do this is because this is how volume controls are often wired (eg. in a P Bass), although I suppose a two-pickups-in-series situation is quite different from a P Bass. Actually, I think this is how Danelectros are wired too (two pickups in series with this volume setup), though I’ve never played one. But yeah I guess the main reason I would want to do this is cause it’s been done before, which leads me to believe there must be some advantage to it, although I could be mistaken

 

[fig]

@fig since you’ve tried this out before, can I ask if there’s any difference in the series mode between wiring the volume pot as a variable resistor in parallel with the pickup (as in the diagram) vs. as a voltage divider like in this:

I don't know first-hand the differences between the Dano and the one me and AndyPanda referenced. Only heard the Dano on Youtube vids. Both methods control individual series pickup volumes, and that's good enough for me LOL.

Both are easy builds. Which one is better is up to the player.

The Dano circuit's been around for decades and very well liked. Some folk in here, and in the wild, have put them in Fenders and other non-Dano basses and like the results.

The series circuit me and AndyPanda refer to (I call it "Shunt method") works fine, too. A few folk in here use that standalone series circuit and like it. I learned about it in the forum.

For what it's worth, I didn't permanently install the series/parallel circuit I drew up. Tested it just to see if my idea actually worked. Separate volume and tone controls for each pickup, switchable between series and parallel. It worked, I was happy, took it apart. Made some schematics and diagrams in case I change my mind LOL.

 

[Max3000]

I don't know first-hand the differences between the Dano and the one me and AndyPanda referenced. Only heard the Dano on Youtube vids. Both methods control individual series pickup volumes, and that's good enough for me LOL.

Both are easy builds. Which one is better is up to the player.

The Dano circuit's been around for decades and very well liked. Some folk in here, and in the wild, have put them in Fenders and other non-Dano basses and like the results.

The series circuit me and AndyPanda refer to (I call it "Shunt method") works fine, too. A few folk in here use that standalone series circuit and like it. I learned about it in the forum.

For what it's worth, I didn't permanently install the series/parallel circuit I drew up. Tested it just to see if my idea actually worked. Separate volume and tone controls for each pickup, switchable between series and parallel. It worked, I was happy, took it apart. Made some schematics and diagrams in case I change my mind LOL.

hmm, I guess I could just test em both out with a 4pdt switch. Worst case I only end up needing 3 of the 4 poles