3 pup LP wiring help

Discussion in 'Luthier's Guitar & Bass Technical Discussion' started by Onioner, Jan 24, 2012.

  1. Onioner

    Onioner Member

    Messages:
    2,863
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2011
    Location:
    SF bay area
    So, I'm stuck. I'm trying to wire a three pup LP so that the neck and bridge share a volume and tone, and the middle has it's own volume and tone, and both volumes are push/pulls to remove those pups from the circuit entirely, the goal being having every combination of pickups available. As I have it, it's kinda sorta working, but there's still bleed through when either volume is pulled. I'd expect that if both push/pulls were up, there would be no signal at all, which is not the case. I'm not sure if the problem is in my schematic (which, granted, I put together myself), or my execution ('cause, granted, my skills are still pretty mediocre). If anyone could be of any assistance, I'd appreciate it.

    First, this is my diagram. Obviously, not the prettiest thing you've ever seen, but I think it's readable.

    [​IMG]

    Secondly, there's this, which may be ill advised. I'm using a washer to join all the grounds before they go to the output jack. Seemed to make sense to me, but perhaps it was a dumb idea.

    [​IMG]

    And here are some shots of the push/pulls. Note that the neck/bridge input comes from the 3-way, while the middle pickup comes directly from the pup. Neck and bridge are alumitone HBs (w/ their own funky wiring), and the middle is a GFS Mean 90.

    Middle:
    [​IMG]

    Neck/Bridge
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    If any other pics would be helpful, or if drawing that diagram differently would help, I'd be glad to oblidge. I'm at the point that all I can do is random experimentation, which is pretty frustrating, and wastes a lot of time. Any input is appreciated.
     
  2. djd100

    djd100 Member

    Messages:
    2,930
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Sounds to me you're making it too hard.

    Just wire the neck and bridge as you would in a 2 PUP LP (pups to controls to switch to out, and then have the middle go to the other controls and out.

    You can then select combination without the need for any push/pull switches etc.
     
  3. walterw

    walterw Gold Supporting Member

    Messages:
    35,315
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    no, because then turning the middle down would kill everything.

    you could reverse the in and out of the volumes, sending the signal into the center lugs and sending the clockwise lugs to the output, but this so-called "independent wiring" has tonal drawbacks.

    here's a cool variation that i came up with (is it conceited when i start quoting myself from other posts?):

     
  4. Onioner

    Onioner Member

    Messages:
    2,863
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2011
    Location:
    SF bay area
    That's an interesting approach. I considered a six way switch as well. In both, you just have to give up an option or two. I was kinda hoping to not do that, since I have a middle that's so drastically different, but it does seem like N+M is not gonna be useful. That said, all three has some pretty good tones.

    And independent wiring... yeah, not goin' down that road.
     
  5. walterw

    walterw Gold Supporting Member

    Messages:
    35,315
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    if you gotta have the "all three" setting, then a 3-way rotary (choosing between N, N+M, M to go the the neck volume pot) would do the trick.
     
  6. djd100

    djd100 Member

    Messages:
    2,930
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    I was assuming using "independent" wiring, though I've never personally done it and wasn't aware that there was audible leakage etc?

     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice