onelastgoodbye Posted December 30, 2006 Report Share Posted December 30, 2006 I can do an in-depth tutorial of coil winding (bobbin/no bobbin/cor/no core/blocked-up sides,...etc). It's what seems to scare people the most, so I guess it would come in handy. Maybe we could make a section with all the different (succesfull) driver designs to date, being : the single thin driver the dual rail the bilateral driver the dual rail-bilateral driver? the side driver? the hex designs? ansils piezo-driver? with a picture of each, and then a short description with the pro's and cons (which I'm guessing will mostly be "produce-ability" versus efficiency and emi rejection) We could do the same for the electronic circuits: the little gem the ruby the fetzer-ruby the champ? col's circuit zfrittz's circuit It's probably a good idea to have a short intro section as to what a driver is and how it works...the core, the coil, the magnet, and how the y affect each other. Plus maybe a concise report of the major hurdles to overcome in driver design...emi, crosstalk between pickup and driver, switching... I'd like too see these sections pinned and closed, so they don't get cluttered with questions and answers..the questions could be asked in their own, proper thread. oh, and pete should be a mod so he can update when needed btw my little driver rocks...cool to see al that power from such a small tidbit. It holds up pretty well in the mid-ish position too. I still need to build an acg-circuit, but all the stores are closed this time of year so I can't get the parts... 2 cents from a page 32 vet Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeUK Posted December 31, 2006 Report Share Posted December 31, 2006 OK Tim's just beaten me to it, but here's my pennyworth. Ive been browsing this thread for the last few months and agree with zfrittz's and Davids requests for some structure to make the sustainer info and development easier to navigate and understand. I'd suggest a structure along these lines. TITLE: DIY sustainer system - One Thread ro rule them all. quick simple description of what is being developed i.e. a DIY sustainer system with similar sonic capabilities to the Sustainiac, Fernandez sustainer systems. Using ONBOARD Battery driven DIY DRIVER, fetzer-ruby, cols , zfrittz's etc. AMP. (Ideally each word in CAPS should be a link to a simple description thread to help the complete novice understand the terminology being used) and what is NOT being developed but may be discussed +/or referenced i.e. Variax, Ebow, Hex/midi etc. an Index with simple descriptions.(again those in CAPs are links to seperate threads). i.e. DESIGN: i.e. new/changed driver, preamp/amp-components. shielding etc. being discussed/considered BUT not currently built or in development. IN DEVELOPMENT:different - drivers - neck position, middle position, bar type, pole type, shielding- foils, cans, reverse winding etc. Amps - different IC types, resistors. caps etc. with Materials, components, schematics and wiring design changes. Also the Dev results need tracking with description + sound clips. i.e. neck driver with bridge HB/single coil, Low, Mid + High vols with clean (no effects) + possibly with named effects.Ideally first a standard 'test' tune should be used by all with chords and single notes (we could make a simple one up), before allowing the individual to do tharownthang. It would be an overhead but a good idea, if results were copied by at least one other forum member using the same type of driver, amp etc and submitting at least the 'standard test' sound clips to ensure an idividuals type of guitar, amp or recording were not a factor in the results. PRODUCTION: This could just be a statement of the currently accepted working diy sustainer system(s) with known working driver(s), amps etc. with links to:- TUTORIALS: Drivers Construction Bar type, Pole type, shielding. Amps + schematics and wiring designs. Tim's comments and lists certainly nails these. Hopefully a structure along these lines would help all looking for sustainer enlightenment. Happy New Year to one and all Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truth_David Posted December 31, 2006 Report Share Posted December 31, 2006 OK Tim's just beaten me to it, but here's my pennyworth. Ive been browsing this thread for the last few months and agree with zfrittz's and Davids requests for some structure to make the sustainer info and development easier to navigate and understand. I'd suggest a structure along these lines. TITLE: DIY sustainer system - One Thread ro rule them all. quick simple description of what is being developed i.e. a DIY sustainer system with similar sonic capabilities to the Sustainiac, Fernandez sustainer systems. Using ONBOARD Battery driven DIY DRIVER, fetzer-ruby, cols , zfrittz's etc. AMP. (Ideally each word in CAPS should be a link to a simple description thread to help the complete novice understand the terminology being used) and what is NOT being developed but may be discussed +/or referenced i.e. Variax, Ebow, Hex/midi etc. an Index with simple descriptions.(again those in CAPs are links to seperate threads). i.e. DESIGN: i.e. new/changed driver, preamp/amp-components. shielding etc. being discussed/considered BUT not currently built or in development. IN DEVELOPMENT:different - drivers - neck position, middle position, bar type, pole type, shielding- foils, cans, reverse winding etc. Amps - different IC types, resistors. caps etc. with Materials, components, schematics and wiring design changes. Also the Dev results need tracking with description + sound clips. i.e. neck driver with bridge HB/single coil, Low, Mid + High vols with clean (no effects) + possibly with named effects.Ideally first a standard 'test' tune should be used by all with chords and single notes (we could make a simple one up), before allowing the individual to do tharownthang. It would be an overhead but a good idea, if results were copied by at least one other forum member using the same type of driver, amp etc and submitting at least the 'standard test' sound clips to ensure an idividuals type of guitar, amp or recording were not a factor in the results. PRODUCTION: This could just be a statement of the currently accepted working diy sustainer system(s) with known working driver(s), amps etc. with links to:- TUTORIALS: Drivers Construction Bar type, Pole type, shielding. Amps + schematics and wiring designs. Tim's comments and lists certainly nails these. Hopefully a structure along these lines would help all looking for sustainer enlightenment. Happy New Year to one and all Joe Thanks Tim and Joe, now we're getting somewhere....there's a lot there just in these two summaries that I had not come across, and problably never would have either. A few more such suggestions and we might be able to make a start...a good start to the New Year for 2007. You know I detest these java scripts. They just don't work for me! David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted December 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 31, 2006 You know there is another option and that is to take the entire sustainer project off site to it's own web address or forum... I did try to bring things to the tutorial section when practical working projects are possible. I think the thread could remain as is, but another thread that has the most important elements and developments be pinned to the top of the electronics section. If there are too many diverse threads they will not be seen. The sustainer project is still somewhat in development and I don't think that people have been too keen to do their own tutorials and such until they have been more proven... The "Make your own sustainer" tutorial was started by galaga mike before his work had been posted on the thread...he did contact me and I did ask that he make specific reference and link to the main thread lest his thin driver was seen to be his alone. As it turned out, his sustainer was not complete, never fully installed nor worked quite right...certainly not as well as mine that it was based on. This spured me into describing in more detail the original thin driver strat of mine. He did contribute the ROG fetzer/ruby circuit which became the default standard (though I have never built one myself). More recently, I posted my pictorial from photos salvaged from my photobucket account. This is a much better description of how the device was actually made and should have dispelled some of the mystery as far as driver construction... As I have lost the camera with the marriage, it may be hard to do good pics of my future work...we will have to see... The sustainer thread probably is some kind of record. It's sheer size means that it gets a very high google rating, hence it attracts a lot of interest from guests...more consice a thread may not be found...another reason for it's own thread. But it does have it's charms for all the chatter and has been very productive for those that have contributed. What ever we decide to do, it would require a lot of work...this has been a great start with all these suggestions, keep them up and, as it is now New Years down here...happy new year! ... pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted January 2, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 That's what you need to concentrate on - frequency, not phase. Unless the phase shift is almost exactly 180 degrees, the driver will "lock" phase with the string over a few cycles, just like a semiconductor PLL. Concentrate on making your driver circuit (and coil) more efficient - the rest will take care of itself. I have been looking at some of the early parts of this thread started on May 1st, 2004. The above post had a profound effect on me and the way I was thinking about the sustainer to that point. It made me realize my limitations in electronics design but my abilities in making and testing the devices themselves. If not for this, perhaps I would have got more bogged down in circuitry. I was quite amazed to find that before page six I had made and proposed the thin driver concept and pickup/driver combinations...even a mid-driver was a favoured option for me from the earliest stages. I am not sure how much of this ancient past is of interest to building sustainers of today...certainly I have fond memories of the discovery and experimenting process...but it is really a historical memoir now i guess. Anyway...just a few thoughts... pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onelastgoodbye Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 I have too agree with you here. There's lots of dead ends and misleading stuff in here, not to mention all the circle-thinking and repetitive ideas. Let's stick to some idiot-proof and uniform tutorials for now. Maybe a small knowledge database with links to the patents and external stuff so people can get brainstorming if they feel like it; but this main thread is like a big brainstorm in itself, so it'd be better to summarize it's (succesful) results rather than the whole thread. Sure things like the box were nice and all, but if it's of no use in the end, it's of no use right? It would be easier to take the topic to it's own site as there'd be more options for filling in the content, but there's this *special link* between PG and the sustainer thread, it would seem a bit wrong to take it off-site after all this time. Plus you'd have a hard time generating the same amount of traffic PG does with your own site. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted January 5, 2007 Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 Thought I'd better post - the thread is dropping close to the bottom of the first page on the electronics sub-forum... can't be havin' that news: I've made a couple of small changes to my setup. I altered mixed mode 1 so that it uses a high pass filter instead of an all-pass. This reduces the amplitude of lower frequencies and at the same time shifts their phase by up to 90º. This works better because it doesn't choke the low strings - they still don't sustain well, but at least they don't choke. I also tweaked the values for mixed mode 2... but thats really a 'to taste' kind of thing. I also moved from a 2 pole 5 position switch to a 3 pole 4 position. I found through playing that the 'off' position on the mode switch is redundant, and also makes the switch more complicated (and of course I don't have a 3 pole 5 way switch). Now its much easier to find a mode without looking. normal and full harmonic are at the opposite ends of the switch range, and mixed 1 & 2 are one step in from the ends... so I only ever need 2 movements to get to any mode... ram it to an 'end', then a single click (or not). One thing I've not tried yet that I plan to is a cap to roll off the high frequencies... I hope this might lower the harmonics from the full harmonic and mixed 2 modes as these are so piercing that they can be uncomfortable to listen to - definately not as useful as if they could be dropped an octave or so. tutorials: I'm not sure about this - I don't want to get into writing a full on 'how to build' for my setup, just a list of features/limitations, schematic, layout and parts required.... But where should this go ? A new thread in the electronics section? in the 'How to make a guitar sustainer' thread ? Or do we need a new 'Beta testers required' thread ? One with an overview of the current state of play and an appeal for people to try building one or other of the existing systems so they can be debugged on various guitar setups. At this point, there seem to be loads of sustainers out there - a few successful - but no two alike... not really an attractive situation for anyone new to the concept. Maybe I should build a little website just for my setup - linking back to the main thread... @zfrittz6: How are thing going? Do you still intend to post some more details and a few sound clips? I really want to see/hear your system - and I'm sure plenty of other folks here feel the same cheers Col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weezerboy Posted January 5, 2007 Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 i think it'd be great to see a wiki for this subject...my fingers are itching to make one of these, but the sheer volume of information makes it somewhat threatening Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spazzyone Posted January 5, 2007 Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 (edited) this was in this month's Guitarworld"confessions of a vintage gear spam colum its kinda neat so i looked it up on wikpedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guitorgan how does the fret switch work without afecting pickup noise/Emi? Edited January 5, 2007 by spazzyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted January 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 Hey...more posts...I was thinking the thread was starting to die... SHawn...the the guitorgan is simply a guitar that has switches in each fret that triggers an organ sound as on any little keyboard. Each fret is then a switch and works independantly of the strings. So...in a way it is a very early synth controler. As a result it can provide infinite sustain...but not of the strings but the keyed/fretted note.. So no EMI issues as it is not sustaining a string but simply switching the organ notes on and off with each fret switch. The number of switches and everything makes it a little complicated with a lot of wiring inside the neck to go wrong. Obviously it won't respond to vibrato or string bending either. The whole technology has really been replaced by guitar synth systems and I doubt you can by these things outside of the vintage market...I know they are pretty rare... OK...so, still thinking about how to improve the DIY Sustainer project to make it more clear. i think it'd be great to see a wiki for this subject...my fingers are itching to make one of these, but the sheer volume of information makes it somewhat threatening smile.gif I don't think that this is really a wikipedia topic as such and could run into problems if we were to commercialize it. I see that there is no page on sustainers in general though, so...who knows. This is not a place though to post "how to's" but a general explanation of how they work... So that won't help in this case. Now...a new thread is probably in order. As it would be more instructional it should probably be put into the tutorial section along with the other threads there. Unfortunately, it is likely to get lost in there. An off site page does not seem like such a bad idea (at least to me) with discussions held here and specific instruction and the like hosted elsewhere. It wouldn't get the traffic that we get at the moment, but at least it would be a place to point people to and have some control over it. It could be a valuable promotional tool if this was to become some kind of commercial proposition. But, it depends where we are at and how much interest there really is if it is worth the effort. The information is here but it does get buried I'll admit. That is the purpose of the sounds thread, the make your own sustainer tutorial and my pictorial...to give that specific information. Perhaps, we should continue in this vein. We could add to or make a driver tutorial, a circuitry and an installation tutorial. Or make a new more encompassing tutorial for all of the above. We could also have each person who feels they have something to contribute specifically, to create their own tutorial...like Col's circuit or Tim's Coil Jigamethingy for instance. The other thing to consider is where we are at and if people are wishing to continue with this work. Have we reached an end point. I am still not happy with my guitar's " off-pop" and can see possibilities for improvements and simplification to the original basic sustainer. Col seems to be pretty happy with his circuitry now and I intend to try it out for myself...how much the driver plays a role in this I am not sure, it may not be the kind of device people will wih to make for themselves and swap out the neck humbucker (if they have one) completely. CurtisA seemed to have very good performance from his sustainer modeled after mine, so perhaps that is sufficient. Anyway...people need to consider a lot is still a work in process. We have developed and built a few sustainers but not standardised it enough perhaps to say conclusively..."this is the way it is to be done". The principles are there and it is not that hard, so I am sorry if it seems threatening or the sheer size of the thread is off putting. Perhaps we need still further feedback as to what, other than this thread, people want...and how they would feel about this thread slipping away into an archive role. Anyway a few thoughts... pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted January 5, 2007 Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 i think it'd be great to see a wiki for this subject...my fingers are itching to make one of these, but the sheer volume of information makes it somewhat threatening smile.gif I don't think that this is really a wikipedia topic as such and could run into problems if we were to commercialize it. I see that there is no page on sustainers in general though, so...who knows. This is not a place though to post "how to's" but a general explanation of how they work... So that won't help in this case. Wikipedia is not the right place for this, but a diy sustainer wiki sounds like a very good idea. It would give us a structure where everyone can input thier own little piece of the sustainer puzzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted January 5, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 Wikipedia is not the right place for this, but a diy sustainer wiki sounds like a very good idea. It would give us a structure where everyone can input thier own little piece of the sustainer puzzle. So...there are web alternatives to wiki that will allow anything to be posted, or we could do a wiki type thing as a thread perhaps pinned to the electronics or tutorial section. Definitely it is something that each contributor to the puzzle post...I would also like to see more of peoples completed sussessful projects. Individual installs will become more important as the technology or "the project" becomes more standardized. This kind of consistancy will probably only happen with more people attempting this and the kinks of the system and it's application to various instruments is ironed out by numerous individuals. There are still a few obvious things that have not been tried but asked for...a humbucker/pickup driver for instance has been asked for. This will only really come about when someone really wants to build such a unit...I don't think that I am that guy! There are a few interesting applications for which the sustainer "market" has not filled...bass units and 7 strings for example. Col's use of a rotary control for multi modes is a very interesting development. One last thing...the word "sustainer" is trade marked so we should not really be refering to this device by that name and it would probably be a good idea if we could come up with another term for the device. I believe that we have significant differences in the approach and construction (the thin driver principle in particular) that sets it aside from what the commercial guys are doing...could be fun to think up another name (I have a neat commercial name, but not one that is a general descriptive term)... Anyway...this all just adds to the length of the thread...hahahaha... pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted January 6, 2007 Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 ... One last thing...the word "sustainer" is trade marked so we should not really be refering to this device by that name and it would probably be a good idea if we could come up with another term for the device. I believe that we have significant differences in the approach and construction (the thin driver principle in particular) that sets it aside from what the commercial guys are doing...could be fun to think up another name (I have a neat commercial name, but not one that is a general descriptive term)... hmm... energizer... sustainizer... auto-sustain... sustain maker... infinistainer... ultraUnStainRemover... mind you, it seems like a bad joke that the word 'sustainer' can be a protected trade mark ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted January 6, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 hmm... energizer... sustainizer... auto-sustain... sustain maker... infinistainer... ultraUnStainRemover... mind you, it seems like a bad joke that the word 'sustainer' can be a protected trade mark ? Feedbacker...Stringdriver...stringfeeder... OK...so, how about we host a poll in the put it to a vote section on the future direction of this thread...or another thread...or something...from the wider PG community... What would we ask...what are people seeking from it... pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unklmickey Posted January 6, 2007 Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 ...Feedbacker...Stringdriver...stringfeeder... PerpetualMotion......SustainSystem.....EnergyLoop..... ...OK...so, how about we host a poll in the put it to a vote section on the future direction of this thread...or another thread...or something...from the wider PG community... or you could just apply for a new Zip code? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted January 6, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 ...Feedbacker...Stringdriver...stringfeeder... PerpetualMotion......SustainSystem.....EnergyLoop..... I like EnergyLoop... Sustainerama...Reverse pickup...MagnaMotion...MagnaDrive...Backfeeder...Strings-a-live... ...OK...so, how about we host a poll in the put it to a vote section on the future direction of this thread...or another thread...or something...from the wider PG community... or you could just apply for a new Zip code? Yes...well the thread does seem to be taking up a lot of real estate thanks for the contribution Unk... pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerroc Posted January 6, 2007 Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 Hi everybody! I'm building an homemade guitar with 3 low impendance singlecoil pickups (6.4K) and I want to wire it with 3 on/off and in/off phase switches for every pickup (as shown at http://www.brianmaycentral.net/wiring.gif). Now, considering that I can run anything but the bridge pickup while the sustainer is on, I need to turn off neck and middle pickup switches and activate the sustainer circuit, that's right? Thanks a lot, Fab fabio@abcdrocks.it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted January 6, 2007 Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 Hi everybody! I'm building an homemade guitar with 3 low impendance singlecoil pickups (6.4K) and I want to wire it with 3 on/off and in/off phase switches for every pickup (as shown at http://www.brianmaycentral.net/wiring.gif). Now, considering that I can run anything but the bridge pickup while the sustainer is on, I need to turn off neck and middle pickup switches and activate the sustainer circuit, that's right? Thanks a lot, Fab fabio@abcdrocks.it According to Petes experience, you need to disconnect the unused pickups completely - i.e. disconnect positive and negative wires from both pickups. You probably want a seperate switch for the sustainer so that you can leave your other settings as they are, any time you switch the sustainer on, it automagically removes the neck and middle from the circuit and switches in the bridge and sustainer driver. Of course, this will be one helluva switching circuit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerroc Posted January 7, 2007 Report Share Posted January 7, 2007 Of course, this will be one helluva switching circuit .... ...can someone help me? As amatuer I'm pretty good in luthier work and in fundamental wiring and soldering works, but I'm not able to draw schematics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted January 7, 2007 Report Share Posted January 7, 2007 Of course, this will be one helluva switching circuit .... ...can someone help me? As amatuer I'm pretty good in luthier work and in fundamental wiring and soldering works, but I'm not able to draw schematics... I guess the biggest issue is that the Brian May switching is very comprehensive... on/off & inPhase/outOfPhase per pickup. Are you going the whole way and having the extra strat option of parallel ? If not, and it's just all in series, then it will be much easier: If they are connected in series, you can switch the neck and middle pickups out completely with 2 poles. You need 2 poles to connect the bridge pickup (it would be 1, except that the pickups on/off switch has to be bypassed... it could also be 1 if you leave one end of the bridge pup connected all the time, but this would alter the tone of combinations that don't use the bridge pup...) and 1 to connect the sustainer power circuit.... thats 5 poles which is a huge and difficult to get switch - could get a rotary to do that... but you may not like that, and it may require routing etc. So you are probably looking at a 6 pole 2 way rotary for on/off and a 3 pole 4 way for mode switching.... it really depends on how much space you have, if you can get the switches, if you are willing to put up with 2 rotary switches for sustainer on/off and mode... The only alternative I can think of right now is using electronics for your switching, but that of course complicates the already complicated circuitry.... I'll keep mulling this over... one day I plan to get some sort of 24'' scale 3 pickup on/off & Phase axe on the go - after I've built the ROG 'English Channel' and plugged my rangemaster clone into it cheers Col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psw Posted January 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2007 Welcome kerroc Glad my email was helpful and good to see you posting here... Now...before you get to carried away with the installation process, think about how you are actually going to make this and get it working...even on another guitar... It can be tested by holding the driver above the strings without very much modification to the guitar or any switching at all... As it happens, my Sustainer Strat has a custom wiring which has three phase switches as well as other mods... The switch I used to bypass other pickups and connect the bridge is this... When the sustainer is on, the selector and all pickups are disconnected completely. The bridge is then selected directly from it's connection to the circuit to the controls and the power turned on. When the sustainer is turned off, the guitar returns to what ever sound is selected by the other switches and opperates as normal and uses no power. The harmonic switch is simply a phase switch on the driver, reversing the magnet or the phase of the pickup has the same effect... Since this installation my bridge pickup phase switch was turned into a series/parallel switch for the stacked humbucker (not a useful feature however) as for three pickups, two will be enough to create all the phase sounds anyway. If the circuit is wired in after the phase switch, this switch can also work as the harmonic function...less switches and easier wiring...but there are practical playing problems there also... On my guitar, although the 4PDT is reasonable large underneath, it looks exactly the same as a mini toggle on top. So...the entire guitar's wiring is a little like this... I think this will give a clearer idea of what is involved...and yes it is a little complex and on my guitar there is a "pop" when you turn the thing off (otherwise silent) that I have not been able to cure. The other thing on my guitar to note is that all the signal wires are shielded cable and the driver leads are kept well away from everything, tightly twisted and fed through the rear tremolo cavity. The circuit fits in it's own cavity behind the jack socket with the battery. It is important to have easy access to the battery as this thing does tend to use a bit of power. With occassional use though, mine lasts weeks! You may wish to consider col's more complex preamp circuit, if you think this is likely, you may wish to plan your build to allow for the larger circuitry and the rotary control. How are you thinking of doing the driver? Mine is a single coil 3mm deep around a steel core (3mm) with 0.2mm wire and potted with glue. It is built on top of a strat type pickup but works just as well as a stand alone driver with a magnet beneath it. Col uses a dual coil design...thin like mine but two 4 ohm coils like a humbucker. Dual coil designs are to limit EMI and possible distortion in a similar way that humbuckers cancel out noise. There are a few other options but these have not been tested out, so I'd advise against it at this stage. The driver does need to be pretty close to the strings BTW...as close as possible...and you will want 10 guage strings...it will have trouble on very light high strings...not enough metal in them... My guitar was wired differently and I had to comprimise. My middle pickup is wired to it's own volume control but used to be more independant...when I put this switch in, I had to tie the two together, oh well. It could be worth col looking this over to see if he can see any problems with your guitar...it sounds very similar oddly enough. Anyway...lots to consider, but it can be done...just take one step at a time and check in with us with any questions. The more people who make these things, the more progress we all make and the easier it is for the next person. Once you have done this, you too will be answering questions and I will be a step closer to retiring... pete PS...thanks Col for replying to peoples posts. This week will be another move and there may be a while off line...this time for sure... p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikysk8 Posted January 7, 2007 Report Share Posted January 7, 2007 hi, i can't find the 0,2mm wire and for reach the 8ohm impedance i need a few turns and it isn't correct i have 0,1mm ; the question is: can i use a couple of 0,1 wire soldered in parallel connection? (for reach 8ohm with this configuration i can use the twice quantity of wire so i can wound the twice of turns) i hope you understand me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted January 7, 2007 Report Share Posted January 7, 2007 (edited) ...It could be worth col looking this over to see if he can see any problems with your guitar...it sounds very similar oddly enough. The real difference is that Kerroc is using the 'Brian May' switching circuit which connects the pickups in series instead of parallel (like a strat). This gives a unique set of sounds. Fortunately having the pickups wired in series makes it easier to switch two of them completely out of the circuit... So as long as he uses a rotary (to get enough switch poles) he can have his cake and eat it.... one switch that gives him either his original Brian May switching (exactly) or the driver circuit.... here is a quick edit of that brian may wiring diagram. I've added some of the switch poles that would be needed to switch to and from sustainer mode. The red switch poles are all part of the same switch, you would need another to connect and disconnect the sustainer battery. In the diagram, the switch is in the sustainer on position. I hope you can follow this, its not ideal combining schematic notation with wiring diagram, but it was quick and easy to do Edited January 7, 2007 by col Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rambler Posted January 7, 2007 Report Share Posted January 7, 2007 I'm building an homemade guitar with 3 low impendance singlecoil pickups (6.4K) and I want to wire it with 3 on/off and in/off phase switches for every pickup (as shown at http://www.brianmaycentral.net/wiring.gif). ...I've built 2 years ago a guitar (similar to kerroc intention's construction) with 4 low outout PUPs, wired this way http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r140/ra...pg?t=1168195082 How can I rewire it, inserting the sustainer, mantaining then a sustainer/pickup in the neck position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
col Posted January 7, 2007 Report Share Posted January 7, 2007 hi, i can't find the 0,2mm wire and for reach the 8ohm impedance i need a few turns and it isn't correct i have 0,1mm ; the question is: can i use a couple of 0,1 wire soldered in parallel connection? (for reach 8ohm with this configuration i can use the twice quantity of wire so i can wound the twice of turns) i hope you understand me (assuming the cross section of the wire is circular) area of circle is PI * radius * radius for ideal wire (.23 ?) thats 0.0415 for .1 wire its 0.0078 how many times does the thin wire fit into the thick wire ? 0.0415 / 0.0078 about 5.3 times... so you're going to need 5 parallel strands of 0.01 wire to get similar performance (I think?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts