Evil genius input solicited

Pilgrim · August 02, 2010, 01:56:25 PM

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:

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.

Highlander · August 02, 2010, 05:45:56 PM

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...

sniper · August 02, 2010, 05:48:53 PM

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!

Lightyear · August 02, 2010, 07:09:38 PM

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

Pilgrim · August 02, 2010, 07:20:44 PM

Well, if you have a great plan maybe I'll add one hole....?

Lightyear · 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.

Pilgrim · August 02, 2010, 07:38:00 PM

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.

Lightyear · August 02, 2010, 07:53:46 PM

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.

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.

exiledarchangel · 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?

Pilgrim · August 03, 2010, 08:05:30 AM

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?

That's more like it!

Highlander · August 03, 2010, 09:51:55 AM

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...

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...

godofthunder · 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.

Pilgrim · August 03, 2010, 11:10:42 AM

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.

Highlander · August 03, 2010, 11:15:11 AM

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...

godofthunder · August 03, 2010, 11:16:20 AM

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.