I went to a jam last night and my '64 EB-0 with the single Dimarzio played great! In the next few weeks I should have a mudbucker to fill the hole below the neck. The result will be two pickups, each with four leads....and some interesting wiring possibilities.
Right now it has a volume pot and the other pot was removed and replaced by a toggle switch. That switch seems to select between two different settings on the Dimarzio Model One pickup which is in it. There are four leads from the Dimarzio, and I'm guessing it's currently wired with the "Dual Sound" series/parallel option as seen at: http://www.dimarzio.com//media/diagrams/4Conductor.pdf
I'm confident that some of you Evil Genius Gibson Fans (EGGF) will have ideas on how I can/should wire the pair of pickups....so I'm soliciting your ideas, and even beyond that, your wiring diagrams if I can get you so involved that you are become a big enough sucker helper that you feel like making one.
Here are the ground rules I'm trying to stick with...and a picture to help:
(http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j306/apowell1/Electric%20Basses/Gibson%20EB-0%201964/P7260001.jpg)
1) There is one pot and one toggle switch; I'd like to avoid making another hole in the bass. I can live with either a volume pot or tone pot - but can live without one of the two. I'm thinking that replacing the toggle switch with a rotary pot may be the trick, based on the criteria below.
2) I figure that I need the following options on the switch:
- Neck pickup only
- Bridge pickup only
- A combination of Neck & Bridge pickups (what idea to you have?)
- A different combination of Neck & bridge pickups (what other idea to you have?)
And the floor is open for ideas, discussion, snappy patter, fart jokes and the other common discourse found here.
Will a rotary switch fit in there...?
I'm still tempted to dump it back to one pot on mine that I'm playing with...
well, if it were mine.................i'd do a conversion to an EB3 with the present plans for pups. it would make it mandatory for more holes but i think it would work nicely with a 4 position varitone. wiring the varitone would be interesting...either classical EB3 wiring or a new combo of in phase/out of phase/split coil with say a 6 position switch.
pay no attention to my rantings ... i am insane!
Hmmmm, I was thinking 2 volume, 2 tone with a push/pul pot on each volume for wiring differences. Then I saw your no hole thing and I'm thinking stacked volume/tone for each pickup but you have no coil splitting. ??? ??? But the stacked knob doesn't llok quite right on a Gibson.....
SniperDog idea has much merit and it would be in fitting for this bass and you could have all of you combinations.
What about put in the mudbucker at the neck, add a tone pot an play the Hell out of it ;)
Well, if you have a great plan maybe I'll add one hole....?
If you add one hole why make it even and add two? You would have volume and tone for each pickup and one pot for each pair could be push/pull to allow for the coil split. I just think a toggle switch on these just doesn't look - IMO. I still would be tempted to go for two more pots and the rotary switch - it would look right and you have more options than you would ever use.
Quote from: Lightyear on August 02, 2010, 07:32:48 PM
If you add one hole why make it even and add two? You would have volume and tone for each pickup and one pot for each pair could be push/pull to allow for the coil split. I just think a toggle switch on these just doesn't look - IMO. I still would be tempted to go for two more pots and the rotary switch - it would look right and you have more options than you would ever use.
I'm not sure there's room for four pots plus a rotary switch. The toggle could easily come out, and I suppose there's room to add one pot besides that. The push-pull sounds interesting since it could provide switching options without adding pots.
(http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j306/apowell1/Electric%20Basses/Gibson%20EB-0%201964/P6200429.jpg)
Quote from: Pilgrim on August 02, 2010, 07:38:00 PM
I'm not sure there's room for four pots plus a rotary switch. The toggle could easily come out, and I suppose there's room to add one pot besides that. The push-pull sounds interesting since it could provide switching options without adding pots.
(http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j306/apowell1/Electric%20Basses/Gibson%20EB-0%201964/P6200429.jpg)
HAVE ROUTER WILL TRAVEL! Um, I'll need a plane ticket though.....
Forgot about the cavity thing - still I think it's worth it to route it to a standard size.
Dr. Aquafresh is pretty close isn't he? He does Evil Genius work and I'm sure that proper libation will secure his services ;)
You're just way limited with the standard control cavity - you could move the input jack to the edge and and add a toggle switch in the one of the three existing holes but I think it would stick out.
If there is enough depth on the cavity, put two push-pull pots for volumes. Each one could be used to split each pickup or connect its coils in parallel. Brilliant or what? :P
Quote from: exiledarchangel on August 03, 2010, 01:25:31 AM
If there is enough depth on the cavity, put two push-pull pots for volumes. Each one could be used to split each pickup or connect its coils in parallel. Brilliant or what? :P
That's more like it!
The push-pull with the switch would do for a variety of options and there would be room for a rotary with a whole bunch more... That mostly applies to what I used to wire up the PC...
(http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu280/kjrstewart/Peter%20Cook%20Custom/PC2010.jpg)
The mini switch on mine is just a straight out for pup splitting on my XLR... It wouldn't take much to figure which coil is which for the MB1 and just wire the Mud straight, considering the fun I'm having balancing the pup outputs on mine (what is the ohmage value of the seperate coils on the MB1) you could have one as a blend and the other as an overall, or a tone - there would still be room in that cavity to creep in a mini on/on/on as a pup selector if you so wished... lots of choices... 8) ;)
I vote vol/vol with the Dimarzio wired fullbore. You lose the coil splitting ability but I bet you can get lots of cool sound just by blending the two pups.
Hey, one thing that just occurred to me as an option if I don't want another hole in the wood...use the existing holes for pots, and see if I could mount a switch (linear or rotary) on the plastic cover on the
back side of the bass. If there were room for the body of the switch between the pots, that would avoid creating more holes in wood...and plastic covers are easy to replace if needed. It wouldn't be as easy to access as a switch on the front side, but that seems OK to me.
Quote from: godofthunder on August 03, 2010, 11:03:10 AM
I vote vol/vol with the Dimarzio wired fullbore. You lose the coil splitting ability but I bet you can get lots of cool sound just by blending the two pups.
That seems likely to me, too. I've gotta think a mudbucker and that model one together will sound like thunder.
I had my MB1 in the PC and played around with switching - I don't remember it producing much of a variety of sounds that I liked other than in humbucking - I agree with my Butchering Bro re running full-bore - the only reason I got shot of it was the microphonic issues which I just could not cure...
The PC's all mahogany, remember...
I have been thinking the damage is done to that bass whats one more little hole for the coil splitter ? It's not like you can ever really put that bass back to stock. I it were mine I would do vol/vol with the coil splitter.
I have an idea that might work...and it's kind of a "first step" approach...essentially follows this comment:
Quote from: godofthunder on August 03, 2010, 11:03:10 AM
I vote vol/vol with the Dimarzio wired fullbore. You lose the coil splitting ability but I bet you can get lots of cool sound just by blending the two pups.
...What do you think of installing two pots, each with a push-pull switch, each pickup full output? I could then switch each pickup on/off. The push-pull would allow traditional style EB knobs.
...Or I could do a stack-knob setup for vol/tone on each, with the ability to use the vol function to turn each pickup up or down. This would necessitate a non-EB style set of knobs...but this appeals to me the most of the two options.
What do I lose? the ability to split the coils, but I have all the ability to balance the two pickups and vary tone.
And no new holes.
If the result isn't satisfactory, I could do further mods....including such an idea as a slider switch on the back cover to do coil switching.
Quote from: Pilgrim on August 06, 2010, 11:37:16 AM
I have an idea that might work...and it's kind of a "first step" approach...essentially follows this comment:
...What do you think of installing two pots, each with a push-pull switch, each pickup full output? I could then switch each pickup on/off. The push-pull would allow traditional style EB knobs.
...Or I could do a stack-knob setup for vol/tone on each, with the ability to use the vol function to turn each pickup up or down. This would necessitate a non-EB style set of knobs...but this appeals to me the most of the two options.
What do I lose? the ability to split the coils, but I have all the ability to balance the two pickups and vary tone.
And no new holes.
If the result isn't satisfactory, I could do further mods....including such an idea as a slider switch on the back cover to do coil switching.
If you use 2 vol pots only you don't need push/pull pots.
OR
You could use 2 pots: 1 blend that would give both or either pup and 1 for either tone or master volume.
Quote from: dadagoboi on August 08, 2010, 09:43:13 AM
If you use 2 vol pots only you don't need push/pull pots.
OR
You could use 2 pots: 1 blend that would give both or either pup and 1 for either tone or master volume.
Point #1: D'OH! I just had the Homer Simpson moment. Of COURSE if I use Vol/Vol I don't need switches. So much for missing the glaringly obvious.
Point #2: Also well said, and fairly obvious.
I imagine if I used vol with push/pull pots that I could use the Vol side for gain and the push/pull for single/double coil on each pickup. That might cover the options pretty well. I'm not quite sure how deep a cavity is needed for the push/pull extension n the switch, but I'm guessing the EB-0 will work. So far I haven't found any sites with depth dimensions on the electronics that go inside the cavity.
I've got a p/p used on my EMG's that needs 1" minimum.
Thanks. I'll check it out! We have a local GC and that's something they just might carry, too.
You might check out this guy's Ebay store. I've been very satisfied with everything I've bought from him. One shipping charge for 1 item or 100. Lots of useful luthier parts. Stack pots and knobs also. Quick shipping.
http://cgi.ebay.com/B500k-PUSH-PULL-GUITAR-CONTROL-POT-POTENTIOMETER-/190367126708?pt=Guitar_Accessories
Quote from: dadagoboi on August 08, 2010, 02:12:07 PM
You might check out this guy's Ebay store. I've been very satisfied with everything I've bought from him. One shipping charge for 1 item or 100. Lots of useful luthier parts. Stack pots and knobs also. Quick shipping.
http://cgi.ebay.com/B500k-PUSH-PULL-GUITAR-CONTROL-POT-POTENTIOMETER-/190367126708?pt=Guitar_Accessories
Thanks! Two pots ordered. I read up on the 250 / 500 decision and was reminded that the 250K pots tend to roll off the highs a bit. With a mudbucker and Model One on that bass, I don't think I need/want to roll off highs at all, so I went for two at 500K. I'll use the Vol side to balance the pickups and the push/pull to select single/double coil. I already have Labella Deep Talkin' flats on the EB-0, so I have a sound I like and I'm not convinced I will need any tone control.
Quote from: Pilgrim on August 09, 2010, 08:55:15 AM
Thanks! Two pots ordered. I read up on the 250 / 500 decision and was reminded that the 250K pots tend to roll off the highs a bit. With a mudbucker and Model One on that bass, I don't think I need/want to roll off highs at all, so I went for two at 500K. I'll use the Vol side to balance the pickups and the push/pull to select single/double coil. I already have Labella Deep Talkin' flats on the EB-0, so I have a sound I like and I'm not convinced I will need any tone control.
Sounds like you will have lots of options w/o the need for a tone control. Looking forward to hearing how it turns out.
Quote from: Pilgrim on August 08, 2010, 09:55:34 AM
I'm not quite sure how deep a cavity is needed for the push/pull extension n the switch, but I'm guessing the EB-0 will work.
I used them when I rewired my former '69 EB-0:
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k125/0chromium0/forums/eb0/mod/DSCF0038.jpg)
They sorta kinda fit. I had to deepen the cavity slightly on the inside (under that brass insert), and they still pushed against the cover just a tad, when it was installed.
Its close... but you should be able to shoehorn them in there one way or another.
OK...the mudbucker is here and in the cavity, but there's a problem - the cover (very nice chrome one with the Gibson script) sits higher then the base of the fretboard! As a result, the strings hit the pickup cover. To move the strings high enough so that they don't hit the cover would result in extremely and unacceptably high action.
The cover has edges nearly 1/4" high (the bent edges from the cover top to the bass)....is is acceptable to consider grinding down the edges of the cover so it doesn't sit up so high? If not, how does one cope with this?
It's something I haven't run into before...
Grind, Baby, Grind!
The later-60s muds used a taller cover. Sounds like that's what you have there.
My EB-2D is about the same vintage as your bass, and the cover on that one is very shallow by comparison.
Grinding sounds like a good plan - let the sparks fly!
OOOOooooooo - kay.
Going to see ZZ Top tonight, this weekend will mount that cover to a wood block for security, then grind the edges down. I'll use the sanding disc on my Shopsmith! (In the center of the machine...)
(http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j306/apowell1/Epi%20Neck%20Repair/PC280074.jpg)