Hi there,
I recently sold a Suhr Classic but loved the treble bleed it I’d as standard and wanted to replicate that circuit in other guitars. I contacted Suhr (whose customer service is amazing by the way) and they provided me with the following wiring diagram:
https://m.box.com/shared_item/https%3A%2F%2Fsuhr.app.box.com%2Fs%2Fr6blfr2e1pvd5ljzb5mxujperz9d703sI passed this to my man who does my mods and he completed them as per the diagram, however it doesn’t sound right to me at all.
I have a PRS S2 Singlecut with a SD 59 in the bridge and a Jazz in the neck. The problem is that as I turn the volume pot down with gain on (I play mostly rock) it doesn’t get cleaner like my other guitars, instead it stays almost as gainy until about 1 or 2 on the pot, but loses some high and low frequencies instead. For reference on my other guitars with treble bleed mod on the settings I use it would get edge of breakup clean at about 5 on the pot, but this just seems to get darker, not cleaner.
If my description has made any sense, has anyone an idea of what might be wrong here?
Thanks for any help. I’m scratching my head.
Comments
That said, treble bleed circuits are super dependent on the rest of your rig. The pickups, the buffer they're running into - even the length of the cable all have an effect on the taper and brightness of the roll off. It's not a one-size-fits-all circuit unfortunately so might be worth trying different cap/resistor values until you find one you like.
If people continue to make this error, I shall need heart surgery!
Personally I'd just ditch the resistor, start with a 330pf cap and adjust to taste from there.
No it's just technically the wrong term for it. It's technically a treble pass, not a treble bleed. The problem is (much like vibrato bridges are almost always called tremolo) the name has kind of stuck by now, so using the name most people use makes more sense (to me) because it makes it easier to google etc..
I mean, chemistry still persists in using incorrect, obsolete terminology even though it's technically "wrong" now, and if it's good enough for something as useful, important and potentially really dangerous (not to mention mind-numbingly boring) as chemistry, it's good enough for guitar electronics...
Regarding your original question, I agree with @Modulus_Amps - it sounds like it hasn't been done right. From your description it actually sounds like you don't have a treble bleed at all. Maybe it's not corrected correctly.
The correct cap value is 680pF, which could also be labeled as 681 (6, 8, followed by one zero). If he's used a 682, 683 or 680nF (also often labelled .68uF) then that would do what you're getting.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/nl3omsqe1ahjmzb/AAAWCehyALxek48gl1tEUbQ8a?dl=0
On both volume pots, the pickup is connected to the middle (rotor) terminal and the switch to the end (top of track) terminal. Swap these on both volume pots and it should work OK.
I expected it to be a single volume control like the Suhr diagram, I didn’t realise it was two-volume or I would have suspected it as the third possibility .
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
Apart from where it's unavoidable like you said, it's just horrible.
Essentially, it's using the pot the wrong way round so that instead of dividing the signal voltage, it lowers the load resistance on the pickup (which is why it sounds middy and strangled) and adds a series resistance between the pickup and the amp to reduce the volume. With no treble-pass, this 'sort of' works, but with one, and especially with a resistor as well, too much signal gets past for it to make much difference to what reaches the amp.
The *only* reason for wiring the controls backwards like that is so that you can turn one right down to off without muting the other pickup - but if you have a switch, why would you ever need to do that? It's only necessary when there isn't one.
Rickenbacker also do it that way, and this thread has been a useful reminder that I need to rewire my bass! Since one of the other big problems is that when you turn the volumes down to mute the output, you get hum... which I noticed (again) at band practice this week.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
No.
There’s no specific to PRS shaft size, they’re standard US 1/4”. The only difference might be the taper.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein