Telecaster 4-Way Switching Preferences

BillDL

I decided to upgrade the electrics of a good quality Telecaster copy seeing as I had gone to the lengths of doing a bit of fret work and swapped the bridge from the chrome round barrel saddles type for one with compensated brass barrel saddles.  While was at it I decided to swap the control plate around so that the volume and tone controls are at the front and the 3-Way selector switch is at the rear.

I didn't like the layout, so I've decided to change it back to the traditional switch positioning but I have a 4-way Oak Grigsby switch that's been lying around for quite a while and I've decided to use it to get the "both pickups in series" combination as well as the three standard options.  I've been trying to decide which position to have the "both in series" additional option and I'm curious to know what position has worked out best for anybody else here that has their Tele type guitar wired for this on a 4-Way switch.

It seems to be more logical to have (1) bridge only, (2) both in normal parallel, (3) new both in series, (4) neck only, so that both the "middle" positions are next to each other in the middle so to speak.  What I wonder about this is whether flicking from normal middle position to the neck pickup through through the new higher output switching option might cause a very brief spike in the output.  Perhaps it would be better just having the new "both in series" switch position right at the front in position 4 as an entirely separate "boost" type of option.

Just in case anybody is wondering whether I know of the potential issues with a 4-Way open wafer switch in a lower priced Tele copy, yes I do.  It came with an enclosed blade switch that is shallower in profile than the Oak Grigsby type.  I have already deepened the control cavity rout to accommodate the deeper switch, and I have taken care of the other issue whereby the greater arc of the lever on a 4-way switch is wider than that of a 3-way and the slot in the control plate usually isn't long enough. I've also modified the wiring on the neck pickup to create the separate ground for the cover alone.  It's all ready to solder them all together.

What are your preferences for the lever position for this additional "both pickups in series" option?

springhead

BillDL said:

It seems to be more logical to have (1) bridge only, (2) both in normal parallel, (3) new both in series, (4) neck only, so that both the "middle" positions are next to each other in the middle so to speak. 

Yep, that's what I do.  Keeps Bridge only and Neck only as they were and hence quick/easy to flick between them.  I sometimes play rhythm on the neck (mini humbucker/Firebird on mine) and then can just pull back one click to get the louder, slightly brighter series sound. 

I didn't try it any other way, I just decided that's what I wanted and I wired it that way.  I'm sure there'll be others who like it arranged differently or tell you not to bother with series.  I say go for it, I like both series and parallel for different uses.

BillDL

Thanks @springhead

I've never had the extra switching option on a tele format guitar, and to be honest I mostly play a 5-way strat format using the "in between" settings a lot, so I haven't been sure what switch position the additional option would feel the most natural.  Yeah, I know, I can always wire it one way and change it if I am not happy, but I dislike de-soldering and re-soldering.

ICBM

I’m not really a fan of the 4-way, but if pushed I prefer to have the series option at the *bridge* end - the opposite from how Fender do it - and also to lift the ground on the bridge pickup not the neck - it’s easier to run a separate bridge ground wire than a separate neck cover wire. (And necessary anyway with modern no-baseplate bridge pickups.)

Funkfingers

BillDL said:

It seems to be more logical to have (1) bridge only, (2) both in normal parallel, (3) new both in series, (4) neck only, so that both the "middle" positions are next to each other in the middle so to speak.

What is logical or instinctive depends on what you are used to. 

Anyone habituated to neck/both/bridge switching is probably best advised to keep the individual pickups at the ends of the lever travel.

Somebody habituated to early Fifties wiring might prefer to have 1) bridge only, 2) both in parallel, 3) neck only, 4) both in series. 

I have tried both the Freeway 3B3 and the Schaller Megaswitch M. The former presents the traditional three sounds as one "bank" on a three-way lever and the three other coil permutations on the second "bank". The Schaller five-way foregoes the Series, Out-Of-Phase option in the interests of easier use. The neck/both/bridge sounds are where you expect them to be. The series, in phase and parallel, out of phase lurk in between.

ICBM

Funkfingers said:

What is logical or instinctive depends on what you are used to. 

Anyone habituated to neck/both/bridge switching is probably best advised to keep the individual pickups at the ends of the lever travel.

Somebody habituated to early Fifties wiring might prefer to have 1) bridge only, 2) both in parallel, 3) neck only, 4) both in series.

For me it's "whack switch fully back for solo" - so having the series (loudest, fullest) setting at the bridge end is more logical to me than having it at the neck (cleaner, sweeter) end. It does mean that 'bridge' is no longer at the bridge end though, so I could also probably work with neck/parallel/series/bridge.

In the end I found that I didn't like the 4-way switch though - it's neither a 3-way or a 5-way, and the middle positions just confused me. I'd rather have a 3-way and the series option on a push-push tone control, if I want it at all. I actually just put it back to a 3-way and never missed the series sound.

Funkfingers

ICBM said:

I found that I didn't like the 4-way switch

Me neither. Partly because I expect certain sounds to be in the familiar positions on the switch. Mainly because I dislike the feel of the roller 'n' ridges notch mechanism compared to a traditional sprung CRL switch.

ICBM said:

I actually just put it back to a 3-way and never missed the series sound.

The series, in phase sound is a way of creating a vaguely "Gibson" tone from the two stock single coils, without having to cut up the guitar body to accommodate a humbucker or a P90. To my ears, it sounds more P90 than humbucker. 

The usefulness of this sound depends on how many other guitars you own and how many/few you want to carry to gigs. 

Similarly, the parallel, out of phase sound (with capacitor) can provide a usable approximation of the Stratocaster "in between" sound. It is fine for strummy rhythm playing in a band mix. If in doubt, smother it in chorus, flanger, phaser or Uni-Vibe modulation.

Dave_Mc

Funkfingers said:

The series, in phase sound is a way of creating a vaguely "Gibson" tone from the two stock single coils, without having to cut up the guitar body to accommodate a humbucker or a P90. To my ears, it sounds more P90 than humbucker GENUINELY HORRIFYING. 

FTFY 

(Admittedly- I've never tried it on a Tele, I've only tried it on a Strat and a Tele with a Strat neck pickup. But I can't imagine the much darker Tele neck pickup is going to improve things much!)

BillDL

Some interesting observations gentlemen, thank you.  I am leaning a bit towards having the extra series setting in position 1 right back against the volume knob where it is out of the way.  That does make a bit more sense the way I tend to play.  I will no doubt end up going through a few permutations if my first shot doesn't feel right.

I have to admit that with my limited mental capacity for electronic circuits I'm a bit puzzled about where @ICBM suggests creating the new separate ground from the bridge pickup instead of the neck.  I understand the concept of creating a new and separate ground wire because the original wire connecting the pickup output wire to the neck pickup's cover will now need be used for the different purpose of being the negative of the positive and negative leads, or coil start and end as I think of them.

When you refer to "baseplate" on the bridge pickup do you mean the copper plate?  All the tele type guitars I've worked on have had a copper plate.  Are there some that only have a fibre baseplate?  I hadn't thought about that aspect, because I see that the copper baseplate is connected to the ground wire of the pickup coil in much the same way as it is joined to the chrome cover of the neck pickup and needs to be separated there.

Does that mean that I need to separate the connection and create new ground wires from BOTH the pickups?

This is something I haven't seen mentioned in circuit diagrams.

The copper baseplate is going to already be grounded by the height adjustment screws through the holes in the bridge and there is a separate bridge ground wire pinned down under the bridge against the body.

Not sure what to do here.

ICBM

Dave_Mc said:

Funkfingers said:

The series, in phase sound is a way of creating a vaguely "Gibson" tone from the two stock single coils, without having to cut up the guitar body to accommodate a humbucker or a P90. To my ears, it sounds more P90 than humbucker GENUINELY HORRIFYING. 

FTFY 

(Admittedly- I've never tried it on a Tele, I've only tried it on a Strat and a Tele with a Strat neck pickup. But I can't imagine the much darker Tele neck pickup is going to improve things much!)

It very much depends on the pickups and even the individual guitar. A friend of mine has a Baja Tele which has the series option as stock. Unusually - uniquely, of the four or five I've played - the guitar is not heavy, and doesn't sound slightly dead... and interestingly, even with the stock pickups the series sound was less horrible than on the other ones. We've put some Fender CS '64 pickups in it now, and the series sound is genuinely good.

FWIW, this guitar also comes stock with the S1 switch in the volume control, giving 'half out of phase' for the neck pickup (and also bass cut when in the neck-only position), which did what these usually do... gave some not very useful extra sounds and then went noisy and unreliable. Although just for once, it didn't actually break. Since he never used that sound, I've replaced it with a standard pot.

Dave_Mc

ICBM said:

Dave_Mc said:

Funkfingers said:

The series, in phase sound is a way of creating a vaguely "Gibson" tone from the two stock single coils, without having to cut up the guitar body to accommodate a humbucker or a P90. To my ears, it sounds more P90 than humbucker GENUINELY HORRIFYING. 

FTFY 

(Admittedly- I've never tried it on a Tele, I've only tried it on a Strat and a Tele with a Strat neck pickup. But I can't imagine the much darker Tele neck pickup is going to improve things much!)

It very much depends on the pickups and even the individual guitar. A friend of mine has a Baja Tele which has the series option as stock. Unusually - uniquely, of the four or five I've played - the guitar is not heavy, and doesn't sound slightly dead... and interestingly, even with the stock pickups the series sound was less horrible than on the other ones. We've put some Fender CS '64 pickups in it now, and the series sound is genuinely good.

FWIW, this guitar also comes stock with the S1 switch in the volume control, giving 'half out of phase' for the neck pickup (and also bass cut when in the neck-only position), which did what these usually do... gave some not very useful extra sounds and then went noisy and unreliable. Although just for once, it didn't actually break. Since he never used that sound, I've replaced it with a standard pot.

Ah I guess so. I've tried it on maybe 4-5 guitars now (and on at least two of the guitars with a couple of different sets of pickups), including ones with really nice handwound pickups which sounded great at more normal settings, and the series settings didn't really sound any good on any of them! Extra output, sure, but just horribly muddy and basically unusable. But I guess it's possible I just didn't try it with pickups (they were all pretty much vintage output I think) or a guitar where it worked...

LOL about the S1 switch not breaking (as I've said before, mine did!).

EDIT: That's interesting what you said about the Baja Tele- I remember they were all the rage on the internet maybe 10-ish years ago (?). I eventually got round to trying one around then, and couldn't see what the fuss was! I can't remember anything specific, I just remember thinking it was massively overrated.

SteveRobinson

Back in the day I used to fit loads of 4-way switches in Telecasters. Nowadays I mostly take them out.

Funkfingers

Dave_Mc said: 

the series settings didn't really sound any good on any of them! Extra output, sure, but just horribly muddy and basically unusable.

I probably ought to clarify that I almost always play Telecaster-type guitars through valve overdrive. Things only clean up when I either play gently or roll down the guitar's volume pot a bit. 

•

IMO, the fuss over the Fender Classic Player Baja Telecaster (and its two Stratocaster siblings) was about the neck profile, flatter fingerboard radius and larger fret wire. That combination of vintage cosmetics and modern playability was normally the preserve of the Custom Shop … with prices to match.

Unfortunately, the yummy neck was almost invariably screwed on to a body of very little resonance … and weighty with it! 

I owned an almost new Baja Telecaster for a few months before selling it on.  

BillDL

SteveRobinson said:

Back in the day I used to fit loads of 4-way switches in Telecasters. Nowadays I mostly take them out.

I'm interested in this Steve.  Were these jobs done at the customers' requests when the switching was otherwise working OK, or have the customers just opted to revert to a 3-way while the guitar has been in for problems with the switching.  What was the general consensus from the customers that wanted to revert from 4-way to 3-way again?  Muddiness?  Setting not used enough to justify its existence?

ICBM

Funkfingers said:

Unfortunately, the yummy neck was almost invariably screwed on to a body of very little resonance … and weighty with it! 

That's been my experience as well, before my friend's one.

BillDL said:

What was the general consensus from the customers that wanted to revert from 4-way to 3-way again?  Muddiness?  Setting not used enough to justify its existence?

There is a particularly annoying problem with the 4-way compared to the 3... the 3 is a make-before-break switch - which is why the exact same switch gave the in-between sounds on a Strat, before 'proper' 5-way switches were introduced which have the extra mechanical detents but are electrically identical - whereas the 4-way is break-before-make. This means that switching is often noisier with the 4-way, giving pops or clicks moving between the positions (especially the series one) and if you're unlucky it's just possible to lodge the switch between settings, giving silence.

BillDL

Thank you @ICBM ;; I can honestly say that I have never really thought about the make-before-break and break-before-make aspect, and it makes a lot of sense.  I don't know why I never really thought about it because, while lengthening the slot in the metal control plate to allow for the full arc of the switch lever to click fully into the outside contacts, I was staring right at them through a magnifying glass watching them making-before-breaking and trying to ensure that positions 1 and 4 broke completely.

Sorry to be a pest, but I'm not sure if you saw my additional question earlier in response to your comments about the bridge pickup baseplate.  If you can spare the time, would it be possible to quickly expand on that for this electronics numpty?

https://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/comment/3332220/#Comment_3332220

Dave_Mc

Funkfingers said:

Dave_Mc said: 

the series settings didn't really sound any good on any of them! Extra output, sure, but just horribly muddy and basically unusable.

I probably ought to clarify that I almost always play Telecaster-type guitars through valve overdrive. Things only clean up when I either play gently or roll down the guitar's volume pot a bit. 

•

IMO, the fuss over the Fender Classic Player Baja Telecaster (and its two Stratocaster siblings) was about the neck profile, flatter fingerboard radius and larger fret wire. That combination of vintage cosmetics and modern playability was normally the preserve of the Custom Shop … with prices to match.

Unfortunately, the yummy neck was almost invariably screwed on to a body of very little resonance … and weighty with it! 

I owned an almost new Baja Telecaster for a few months before selling it on.  

Yeah. I play both clean and distorted, and the series tone wasn't really doing anything for me for anything I'd play! It just seemed to add mud and girth (in a bad way). It sounded "bigger", but just in a way that made it less controllable (i.e. not tight enough). Using the bridge pickup alone sounded better for distortion to my ears, the extra output of the series setting wasn't really helping much.

As I said, I can't really remember much about the Baja (as it was so long ago), but I just remember thinking it was overrated. 

ICBM

BillDL said:

Sorry to be a pest, but I'm not sure if you saw my additional question earlier in response to your comments about the bridge pickup baseplate.  If you can spare the time, would it be possible to quickly expand on that for this electronics numpty?

Sorry, I missed that bit.

Yes, the baseplate is the copper (plated) thing on the bottom of the pickup, which is grounded and on vintage Teles provides the slightly occasionally unreliable ground connection to the bridge via the height screws.

Many modern Tele pickups don’t have this, and the ground to the bridge is done very simply with a separate wire trapped under it against the body. In this case, there is no need to do anything to the bridge pickup to lift the ground in the series setting.

If the pickup does have a baseplate, you need to do the same mod as to the neck pickup in the ‘normal’ 4-way scheme, cutting the link wire to the baseplate and adding the direct ground wire to the bridge. You only need to do it to one pickup whichever option you choose. Personally, I prefer the belt-and-braces method of a separate bridge ground wire anyway, as rust can get in under the height screw heads - especially with relic’ing, or genuine age! - and make the ground connection unreliable, so for me it makes sense to kill two birds with one stone and make that the ‘upper’ pickup in the series position as well.

BillDL

Thank you for that full explanation @ICBM. ; Most of my tinkering in the past has been on SSS, HH, and permutations thereof.  I haven't messed on Tele types before other than to do bog standard wiring.

axisus

I remember trying a 4 way some years ago. I found the extra sound uninspiring and went back to 3 way. Not for me.

BillDL

I'm getting a strong feeling that this particular "mod" on a Telecaster is underwhelming to most, and a redundant nuisance to others, and is nowhere near as useful as a mod like the Strat one where you can get a pseudo Tele sound by selecting only bridge and neck together.  I'm beginning to rethink this one.  What I'll probably do is leave the better pickups unmolested for standard switching my good "Tele" and use the reasonably good quality pickups that came out it to mod my other less-good "Tele" that could do with something just a bit extra.  Thank you for all your observations and suggestions gents.