-
I've got an L5 "copy" by Lyle, 70's ish, laminated body with 24.75 neck, and old jazzer Will Bledsoe replaced the original g-awful pups with a pair of DiMarzio's in the 80's. (I worked for Will in his Village Music shop in Salem OR in 75.)
Will's pro days were back in the 50's and his jazz boxes I think were mostly an L5 though he'd played the Super 400 a lot also. He chose the DiMarzio's as the closest thing at the time to his 50's Gibsons.
I like the pups, but the pots Will put in have been cleaned a couple times and are getting raspy in spots, so it's time for maybe new ones from StewMac. I've thought over the years of moving the pots/caps more towards the sound I like.
I rarely use bridge pup, rarely have neck tone pot above 6. And on most amps I have the treble way rolled off. So this is what I'm thinking:
500k volume pots with .001 MFD cap across in/out for a "treble bleed" control as I'm often at low volume playing mostly at home or in a smallish room. I like the sound to stay the same no matter the volume and currently dropped volume is a slightly darker tone.
250k tone pots with .047 MFD cap. Then maybe I won't need to have both the tone pot and amp so treble-damped.
The switch is a 3-way toggle that does isolate each pickup at the side settings. So I think I'll just continue using it.
Thought I might as well post here about it afore pulling the trigger. No huge hurry. Here's the pups, I don't know what particular models they are:
Stumbling fingers still need love ...Last edited by R Neil; 01-09-2017 at 04:38 AM.
-
01-09-2017 03:08 AM
-
That neck pickup looks like a Gibson T-top to me, mid 60-s to early 70's patent sticker version.
I'd leave the volume control at 500k and play with the value of the tone control only.
-
Just to get a bit geeky re the treble bleed, can I suggest considering a 0.001 MFD cap in parallel with something like a 120K to 150K resistor? I have this on all my guitars - the resistor does alter the pot taper a bit, but if used with a log/audio-taper 500K pot, I find it gives a volume with nice, useful control over it's full turning range. Also, there was some research done by the boffins on the GuitarNutz 2 forum, and the conclusion is basically that this type of parallel cap/resistor treble bleed gives the most consistent tone as you turn the volume down - my own experience does bear this out, FWIW.
The GuitarNutz 2 thread is here, in case you want to trawl through it: A better treble bleed circuit | GuitarNutz 2
Re tone control cap value, do remember that going to a higher cap value does not strictly alter the amount of roll-off, but rather it does lower the frequency point above which roll-off starts to happen. So a higher value cap pot turned back just a bit does not sound quite the same as a lower value cap pot turned down further. Personally, with humbucker equipped guitars, I've found I like the more subtle effect of a 0.01 MFD cap - even this value seems to give more than enough treble cut, and seems better for not giving a muddy tone, but it is a personal thing and of course YMMV as they say.
Just some thoughts of mine you may or may not find helpful anyhow, cheers
-
All personal preferences. The good thing about an archtop (vs ES335) is that if you don't like it, it is pretty easy to get the pots out and change things.
For jazz guitars, both knobs are 'tone' controls and both alter the volume. I'm used to it that way, so no treble bleed circuit. My semi-hollow and many solidbody guitars I do use a treble bleed circuit. Also, taper I choose depending on if I play clean. Linear taper for 'clean' and audio for distortion. Why? If you use audio taper on clean amp settings, going from 10 to 8 is almost the total spectrum of volume. Too touchy. Likewise, if you use linear on distorted settings, you can turn it almost all the way off and nothing seems to happen.
Best solution is many guitars, each with different setups...
-
This just in from DiMarzio Tech support ...
"The pickup with the slotted polepieces is probably a Gibson humbucker. It is definitely not one of ours. The pickup with the DiMarzio is probably a Super Distortion from the mid 1980s. The metal cover is not ours, and was not factory-installed."
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
We've established the bridge pup is a DiMarzio DP100. I've a query into Gibson for the neck pup.
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
From the links I've found, especially one to guitarhq.com and a page there on Gibson pickups, I think your comment about the early T-top is likely. Mine has a chrome cover, and from the comments of the DiMarzio Tech that they didn't ship with covers, I'll bet Will put the two matching chrome covers on to "pair" the pup's appearance.
Originally Posted by old tube
A little extra solder was used to attach both pups, not unusual for Will who liked things "solid".
And from the info that these were awful close to the previous PAF pups, that would be something Will would have preferred. The DiMarzio I knew was new from his stock. Didn't remember the neck was different.
But from the sound description of the early T-top and DiMarzio DP100, that would be just what Will would have chosen.
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
Fascinating and thanks ... going to think about this. That bleed circuit sounds good. Originally Posted by Meggy
Just to get a bit geeky re the treble bleed, can I suggest considering a 0.001 MFD cap in parallel with something like a 120K to 150K resistor? I have this on all my guitars - the resistor does alter the pot taper a bit, but if used with a log/audio-taper 500K pot, I find it gives a volume with nice, useful control over it's full turning range. Also, there was some research done by the boffins on the GuitarNutz 2 forum, and the conclusion is basically that this type of parallel cap/resistor treble bleed gives the most consistent tone as you turn the volume down - my own experience does bear this out, FWIW.
The GuitarNutz 2 thread is here, in case you want to trawl through it: A better treble bleed circuit | GuitarNutz 2
Re tone control cap value, do remember that going to a higher cap value does not strictly alter the amount of roll-off, but rather it does lower the frequency point above which roll-off starts to happen. So a higher value cap pot turned back just a bit does not sound quite the same as a lower value cap pot turned down further. Personally, with humbucker equipped guitars, I've found I like the more subtle effect of a 0.01 MFD cap - even this value seems to give more than enough treble cut, and seems better for not giving a muddy tone, but it is a personal thing and of course YMMV as they say.
Just some thoughts of mine you may or may not find helpful anyhow, cheers
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
From the guitarnuts links it looks like a treble bleed parallel with 150k resistor and 1nF capacitor is about as good as it gets.
And yes, the higher cap value lowers the "pass" of the circuit. But how much do I really want to change that?
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
I can only speak for myself, but I find if you use a log/audio taper 500K pot for volume with the parallel type treble bleed, the end result is nice and use-able. I play gigs, and am often making small adjustments to the volume, and find it easy to control. Without the parallel treble bleed, perhaps one would be better with a linear taper pot, as icr says. But my experience leads me to say give it a try - 500K log/audio taper pot, parallel 1nF cap and 150K resistor - I have a hunch you'll like it. And after all, a fairly inexpensive thing to experiment with. Originally Posted by R Neil
Also, just to add, but definitely use a log/audio taper pot for the tone control.
-
i wouldn't advise a treble bleed circuit. It thins the tone out as you turn down the treble. It's not a free ride.
-
Pup makers are a very good resource for wiring diagrams.
-
Gibson response says the sticker is from the late PAF styles but could have been moved. True, though unlikely. So I'll go ahead and measure it while doing the new wiring harness along with removing the cover to see the wires and bobbins.
So I still assume the neck is late PAF/early T-top Gibson and bridge is established as a DP100 Super Distortion DiMarzio. Still thinking of the treble bleed as suggested above.
But ... caps and tone pot. I had one source suggest I would be happiest with a 10 or 20 nf cap with a 250k tone pot, and maybe go linear on the pot. A very ... unique ... suggestion.
And I've had suggestions for both 20/22nf and 47nf with a 500k tone pot.
Fascinating and in years back I'd have ordered all parts and spent a fun day swapping and testing.
Now ... just want something that might be a bit better and install the damn things. Getting old here!
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
Pretty nice if you've got a genuine Gibson PAF there - might easily be worth more than the rest of the guitar I'd have thought.
As to the tone pot, I have tried linear in the past - when I first started tinkering with guitar electronics, I remember reading some advice that said "log/audio pots for volume, linear for tone". That was bad advice anyhow - I found a linear tone pot seems to do very little until one turns down to about 4 or 5, and then all the change happens nearly at once, and it's very hard to control. Log/audio seems the only way to go to me.
Re tone pot value, I guess that's more of a personal preference thing, but I've generally preferred 500K, as it's just a little brighter at 10, and I reason I can always turn the pot down a little if desired anyway.
As I've already said, I prefer a log/audio taper for volume too, used with the parallel resistor/cap type of treble bleed, but I do know some prefer a linear taper volume - maybe that's better if not using a treble bleed, but I know I personally like to have the treble bleed there.
-
Like the thread from guitarnuts on treble bleed design. Thanks ... Originally Posted by Meggy
Pretty nice if you've got a genuine Gibson PAF there - might easily be worth more than the rest of the guitar I'd have thought.
As to the tone pot, I have tried linear in the past - when I first started tinkering with guitar electronics, I remember reading some advice that said "log/audio pots for volume, linear for tone". That was bad advice anyhow - I found a linear tone pot seems to do very little until one turns down to about 4 or 5, and then all the change happens nearly at once, and it's very hard to control. Log/audio seems the only way to go to me.
Re tone pot value, I guess that's more of a personal preference thing, but I've generally preferred 500K, as it's just a little brighter at 10, and I reason I can always turn the pot down a little if desired anyway.
As I've already said, I prefer a log/audio taper for volume too, used with the parallel resistor/cap type of treble bleed, but I do know some prefer a linear taper volume - maybe that's better if not using a treble bleed, but I know I personally like to have the treble bleed there.
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
The treble bleed with volume cut can be modifed a lot by judicious use of capacitor and resistor values. I've never noticed any thin tone at low volumes on my guitars, and I install a treble bleed circuit on all of them. Or at least, all except my Benedetto. It apparently already has one, or at least the tone doesn't vary much with volume changes. I'd really like to see a Benedetto schematic.
-
Glad if that was useful, and I hope you can the guitar working nicely, and how you like things, without too much trouble. Originally Posted by R Neil
-
Ordering parts tonight.
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
Had it all apart today to redo the wiring harness, and with a Dremel cut-off disc finally got through all the solder holding the neck pup cover in place. And answered the question is it a T-top or not ... yup. Originally Posted by Meggy
I can only speak for myself, but I find if you use a log/audio taper 500K pot for volume with the parallel type treble bleed, the end result is nice and use-able. I play gigs, and am often making small adjustments to the volume, and find it easy to control. Without the parallel treble bleed, perhaps one would be better with a linear taper pot, as icr says. But my experience leads me to say give it a try - 500K log/audio taper pot, parallel 1nF cap and 150K resistor - I have a hunch you'll like it. And after all, a fairly inexpensive thing to experiment with.
Also, just to add, but definitely use a log/audio taper pot for the tone control.
Had to take a break, hoping when I get home tonight to get the fully assembled harness back in and see what sounds like.
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
Any luck getting the harness sorted and installed? Hoping the job goes smoothly and leads to a good result.
-
What fun. Trying to work fast is pretty silly at times. Got the harness in place, put a string on and did a quick check with an amp ...great sound from bridge pup, nothing from neck. Pulled the neck pots out through the f-hole, couldn't see a thing. Even testing the pot poles through switch to jack there was good connection. Originally Posted by Meggy
Any luck getting the harness sorted and installed? Hoping the job goes smoothly and leads to a good result.
Finally realized what a simple stupid miss I'd made ... forgot to solder the neck pup ground to the volume pot. Right. Stupid Wiring Fails 101. Sheesh.
After laughing sheepishly for a while, a minute of soldering and back in it went. Everything working I put the new strings on and sat down to play. And then realized the neck pup was backwards, pole pieces towards the bridge.
Further sheepish self deprecated humor and then loosening the strings so I could pull the strings off the tail piece and turn that pup around. That was about 11:30pm, so I just made sure it was working and quit for the night.
This morning I set pup and pole piece height for the new strings and wiring ... and what a delight! The bridge tone is still brighter but very usable now. I can have the tone rolled back to a very nice contrast with the neck pup, yet still have enough warmth to the tone to be enjoyable.
There's that new-string brightness to the attack that will fade over tie of course but love the controls and what they do.
I used the V-treb volume pots adapter from Guitar Electronics.com and it does a good job of keeping tone relatively consistent with volume changes.
So ... quite pleased.
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
Well ... sounds very nice amped, but listening to the acoustic sound, I've got a wire rattling inside. That will take some messing to nail down and stop.
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
First time out with the new harness. VERY pleased. Originally Posted by R Neil
Went with a "modern" connection for the two volume/tone sets, with guitar electronics v-trebs variable treble bleeds on the volumes. Setting them up, the neck pup is set about a third "up" from darkest setting, so it needed some ... and the bridge is near to the darkest setting so it only needed a bit, but both pups now have a pretty consistent tone in usable volumes.
500k neck tone with .022 orange cap for the early-70's T-top (with patent sticker not stamped) that measures 7.8 k-ohm.
250k bridge tone with .047 orange cap on the DiMarzio DP100.
And the DiMarzio now is actually "usable" ... a fair amount brighter but dialed back on tone, can be a be nice contrast without going honk.
I can use the volume on each single pup setting to lift or drop output without needing to readjust tone. None of the scritchiness of the old pots. Sweet tones. Variable tones.
Quite pleased. Now to get it out for a refretting.
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
-
Great to hear - you've done your research, decided what would be a good way to go for your needs, and the results would seem to demonstrate that it is well worth thinking about this stuff and getting things just so. I had to smile at your previous description of various silly errors while trying to get the job finished late in the day, only because I've been through similar experiences myself, and also had to make that "this isn't going to happen today, come back fresh tomorrow" decision. It always seems easier in the morning! Nice job anyhow.
-
Long hours on one project: maybe not the brightest thing to try in one straight go!
Now ... I'll get that out for the refretting, and build an open back cab for the 15" Eminence driver I've got. Thinking my OLD Ampeg tube head through that would be tasty.
I think that will do for this spring ...
Stumbling fingers still need love ...
Reply With Quote
Moffa Mithra
Today, 08:31 AM in For Sale