EB1 capacitor

Started by 4stringer77, February 09, 2013, 10:52:31 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

4stringer77

Quote from: Grog on February 10, 2013, 01:24:28 PM
Does it matter which way they are wired? which one is correct???

The caps look like they're wired the same to me. What do you think is different?
Contrary to what James Bond says, a good Gibson should be stirred, not shaken.

clankenstein

does a cap in parallel with the pickup do anything useful for your tone?
Louder bass!.

Dave W

Quote from: Grog on February 10, 2013, 05:18:59 PM
I never did see what he sold it for. I think he was asking $1350.00 for the one I have now, it was a consignment from a gal whose husband had passed away if I recall correctly.
Nate has a 1965 EB-2 for sale for $3,000.00......................ouch!! I paid $230.00 for my '67 used in 1974! Must be getting old!!

I think he had it listed at about the same price as the one you traded for. No idea what it finally sold for.

Psycho Bass Guy

Quote from: Grog on February 10, 2013, 01:24:28 PM
Does it matter which way they are wired? which one is correct???

In terms of capacitance, "correct" is in the ear of the beholder. Changing the capacitance value will change the corner frequency of the passive filter formed by the cap to ground. The larger the capacitance value, the more bassy the tone knob acts. In terms of polarity, if it's hooked up wrong, you won't get any sound, so that's an easy check.

Psycho Bass Guy

Quote from: chordzilla on February 10, 2013, 09:24:05 PM
does a cap in parallel with the pickup do anything useful for your tone?

A cap in parallel will still filter highs, but not in a useful (IOW, not much at all) way and will mess with the taper of the volume pot.

uwe

Quote from: 4stringer77 on February 10, 2013, 07:40:50 PM
The caps look like they're wired the same to me. What do you think is different?

I don't see a dif either and mi RI is wired that way too, the cap looks bownish faded as in Grog's pic, yours, Ari, looks indeed newer and highly likely that it is, but if something old doesn't work anymore then it needs to be replaced, right? That is taking care of your instrument. I never gave a rat's ass even on my most prized vintage instruments whether the caps and pots are still original. I prefer a scratch-free new pot to a scratchy original one.
We've taken too much for granted ... and all the time it had grown ...
From techno seeds we first planted ... evolved a mind of its own ...

uwe

#21
Quote from: westen on February 10, 2013, 10:01:33 AM
That's a very colorful way to put it:  subwoof Godzillas.  LOL.  Speaking of which, I saw "Godzilla" for the first time on cable recently.  Great acting.  The (real) French actors on there were very good at making French sound authentic.  Also, Godzilla's acting was pretty touching.  

You saw the Emmerich remake, right?  :mrgreen: Horrible, I read your irony. My countryman is responsible for some really crap films though his most recent one about Shakespeare is a most welcome departure from the catastrophy/sci fi//monster fodder he has churned out and well worth a view even you think Emmerich is horrible otherwise (like I do).



The only thing good about Emmerich's Godzilla was the animation of the monster itself (the old Japanese Godzilla was always a bit like an extra from the mupper show), all slithery and fast (the hobby zoologist in me says that it was perhaps a bit too amphibian for a reptile, amphibians and reptiles aren't that close at all, reptilians and birds are much closer), but it had no heart and failed to engender any empathy for the ravaged nature/creature, something the old Japanese Godzilla as an allegory for Hirshima/Nagasaki and man's destruction of earth always did. Even the Alien monster has at least motherly love for its breed. Emmerich totally failed to get that. Goes to show that not all gay men automatically have empathy. And Jean Reno, much as I like the guy, must have been counting the money all the way to the bank while he was "acting" in this piece of junk. I had high hopes for this movie when it came out that it would at least be a decent B-movie like Independence Day, but it failed abysmally to even be a tolerable B-movie.

There is one more exception in his regularly less than passable oeuvre and that is the 13th Floor which flopped in 1999 but wasn't a bad movie at all and in its logic certainly superior to the muddled Inception I had to wade through a year ago.

We've taken too much for granted ... and all the time it had grown ...
From techno seeds we first planted ... evolved a mind of its own ...

4stringer77

Quote from: the mojo hobo on February 10, 2013, 10:29:37 AM
It makes sense that they would sound similar as they have similar pickups and wiring.

I have a book of schematics for Gibson basses from the Seventies. It would appear that these EB1s are wired the same as the EBOs with a .033 and .01 cap. The schematic for the EB1 shows a .02 and .01 cap. The .01 cap in both cases is wired in parallel to the pickup and only shows up on these two basses.

You mean your EB1 schematic has an .02 cap in place of the .033?
Contrary to what James Bond says, a good Gibson should be stirred, not shaken.

uwe

#23
There must have been a change in actual production then. It is highly unlikely that all three of our EB-1s had the original cap replaced by the same 033 cap. My bass certainly looks totally unhampered with. Not that I would know what the difference between the two caps would actually be soundwise.
We've taken too much for granted ... and all the time it had grown ...
From techno seeds we first planted ... evolved a mind of its own ...

Dave W

The EB-1 schematic on Gibson's site also has an .02 instead of an .033. It says it's a 9/5/75 redrawing, which was well after the model was discontinued. I agree with Uwe, no way three of them would all have had a factory .020 then later replaced with an .033. Either there was a production change or there never was a production version with the .02.

http://images.gibson.com/Lifestyle/Support/Files/Schematics/EB1.PDF

westen44

Quote from: uwe on February 11, 2013, 08:19:58 AM
You saw the Emmerich remake, right?  :mrgreen: Horrible, I read your irony. My countryman is responsible for some really crap films though his most recent one about Shakespeare is a most welcome departure from the catastrophy/sci fi//monster fodder he has churned out and well worth a view even you think Emmerich is horrible otherwise (like I do).



The only thing good about Emmerich's Godzilla was the animation of the monster itself (the old Japanese Godzilla was always a bit like an extra from the mupper show), all slithery and fast (the hobby zoologist in me says that it was perhaps a bit too amphibian for a reptile, amphibians and reptiles aren't that close at all, reptilians and birds are much closer), but it had no heart and failed to engender any empathy for the ravaged nature/creature, something the old Japanese Godzilla as an allegory for Hirshima/Nagasaki and man's destruction of earth always did. Even the Alien monster has at least motherly love for its breed. Emmerich totally failed to get that. Goes to show that not all gay men automatically have empathy. And Jean Reno, much as I like the guy, must have been counting the money all the way to the bank while he was "acting" in this piece of junk. I had high hopes for this movie when it came out that it would at least be a decent B-movie like Independence Day, but it failed abysmally to even be a tolerable B-movie.

There is one more exception in his regularly less than passable oeuvre and that is the 13th Floor which flopped in 1999 but wasn't a bad movie at all and in its logic certainly superior to the muddled Inception I had to wade through a year ago.



I'm talking about the Emmerich movie which I only saw last year on cable.  I did consider watching when it came to the theaters, but didn't.  I had a childhood friend (who later became a successful nature and wildlife artist) who got me kind of interested in that genre.  I was always more interested in sci-fi and he was more interested in horror.  So, it's possible I might actually like "The 13th Floor."  I did notice the animation in Godzilla was very good, though.   I have to agree on that.  Of course, I was also hoping for a lot more in the movie. 
It's not those who write the laws that have the greatest impact on society.  It's those who write the songs.

--Blaise Pascal

the mojo hobo

I suspect the original EB1 had the .02 cap but when reissued they just used the same parts as they used on the EB0.

My book of schematics are all dated early to mid Seventies, and only one of the redraws has the original date and that is from '66 for the EB2-D. They are copies of these:

http://www.gibson.com/Files/schematics/EB1.PDF
http://www.gibson.com/Files/schematics/EB0.PDF

the mojo hobo

Also, on the picture that the pot values are visible it shows both pots are 500k, conforming to the EB-0 schematic

Highlander

Quote from: westen on February 11, 2013, 10:22:48 AM
... So, it's possible I might actually like "The 13th Floor."  

Well worth a visit - I've had a DVD of this one for years now - some clever twists...
The random mind of a Silver Surfer...
If research was easy, it wouldn't need doing...
Staring at that event horizon is a dirty job, but someone has to do it; something's going to come back out of it one day...

westen44

Quote from: HERBIE on February 11, 2013, 04:45:05 PM
Well worth a visit - I've had a DVD of this one for years now - some clever twists...

I'd definitely be curious to see it. 
It's not those who write the laws that have the greatest impact on society.  It's those who write the songs.

--Blaise Pascal