Les Paul Jimmy Page wiring with 42 sounds

[Borsanova]

Hello again,

The people from the old Ampage forum already know this thread about my improvements for the famous Jimmy Page wiring.
I'll post some of the more interesting parts of the old discussion later, to illustrate the advantages.
For now there is just the most important news: I've finally come up with a drawing!

So here it is:

[Borsanova]

Link to the old thread

The attachment works and looks good. I think it's right, but maybe someone can check it.
If you have any questions, post them and I'll try to answer them. But I look around maybe once a week. So please be patient.
As regards the old thread with the explanations, it's really huge and I'd like to edit the more interesting parts. But that will take some time. In the meantime, if you just can't wait to get more information, here is the link to the old forum on Firebottle.com:

http://www.firebottle.com/fireforum/...um=gt&enter=go

Regards,

Peter

[Richard]

Thanks for waiting until I was done with my SG &*%%#!!
Pretty cool, actually. I currently have a series/parallel switch, taps for each of the pickups and a tone switch. The tone switch switches in a cap to preserve high end when I back off the volume or grounds it like a tone knob on 0. I was hoping that the "dark" setting would roll off the highs as I roll back the volume, but it pretty consistent at all levels. I'll have to check your scheme out, I can probably make some improvements in mine.

[Borsanova]

Thanks for waiting until I was done with my SG &*%%#!!
Pretty cool, actually. I currently have a series/parallel switch, taps for each of the pickups and a tone switch. The tone switch switches in a cap to preserve high end when I back off the volume or grounds it like a tone knob on 0. I was hoping that the "dark" setting would roll off the highs as I roll back the volume, but it pretty consistent at all levels. I'll have to check your scheme out, I can probably make some improvements in mine.

Thanks for your comment. I'm sorry that my post came late for your mod. I guess we all have to make our experiences and it is a good idea not to start with your main axe. I did my first mod on my red Ibanez 345 and started regretting my errors after learning all about the benefits of my Les Paul JP 20-Dual. I took me over a year and another mod (on my DeArmond T-400), before realizing that I had in fact 42 different sounds at hand, some of which completely unknown to the guitar world.
Now I'm seriously considering rewiring my 345 (which has the serial wiring with the neck first and the bridge in second position), but unfortunately working inside a semi-acoustic is actually one of the hardest jobs you can imagine.

In the following I've posted a few arguments why my design is so much better than Jimmy original:

Here is my improved version of Jimmy Page's Les Paul. I call it the Les Paul Twenty-Dual.

It has 22 different sounds, one more than Jimmy's, since it includes also a dual sound for the bridge pickup (in my case a Duncan JB) with parallel wiring for both coils instead of serial.

Moreover I eliminated the muted positions on Gibson's reissue and I moved the push/pull controls to a more rational configuration (Jimmy's original has the coil tap switches on the volume controls). On my guitar they are moved to the tone pots while the switches on the volume pots control serial and out-of-phase switching:

Here is what the four push-pull pots do:

The bridge volume control switches both pickups in serial mode, but only when the bridge pickup is selected. With the pickup selector in the middle or on the neck you only hear the neck pu.

The neck volume control switches the neck pu out of phase. It only works with both pickups selected, that is with the pickup selector in the middle position or, when serial mode is selected, with the pickup selector in the bridge position.

The bridge tone control switches the bridge pickup from serial humbucker to parallel (Dual sound).

The neck tone control switches the neck pickup to single coil and, when the bridge tone control is pulled, it also switches the bridge pickup to single coil.


Why I recombined the push/pull pots?

I think my configuration is much more rational, because it puts each switch exactly where you would search and eventually miss it on a standard guitar. Here are my arguments for each new combination.

Tone controls and coil tap:
Usually guitarists use their tone controls to muffle their sound and that's what they do best. But almost as often you touch the same controls hoping to find some space for brightening your sound. How many times have you been frustrated, finding that the tone control was already at ten? On my Les Paul you have the solution immediately at hands: just pull your switch for dual sound or coil tap and the sound will become brighter.

Bridge volume and serial:
Serial wiring of two pickups brings the highest volume and distortion. Usually you need it when you're playing solo, that is you're already playing your bridge pickup and often you need more volume to come up against the other instruments. When you reach down to the volume knob and find you're already at ten, a little pull can now provide the ultimate boost you were looking for.

Neck volume and out-of-phase:
The out-of-phase switch should in any case be combined with a volume control, because only the latter permit to control the equilibrium between the two signals. By differentiating the volume of each pickup you can mix the signals and control how much of the lower frequencies will be cancelled. Often you will find that you pull your out-of-phase switch and that your sounds becomes much thinner than you expected. In this case you got your fingers already where it counts. Simply reduce your neck volume from ten to eight and you'll hear how your sound becomes thicker again.

Reassuming in the simplest manner, my guitar has one push/pull switch that makes the sound fatter (the bridge volume) and three push/pull switches that make it thinner. This makes it really easy to handle and if you remember these main rules it is almost impossible to get lost between the switching possibilities (which is not so improbable on many modded Stratocasters or on a Brian May Red Special).


How I got to my Twenty-Dual wiring?

I had already designed my 21 mode wiring scheme, when I decided to try and change the bridge pickup mod from single coil to parallel (Dual sound). It is not too difficult and when I finished it, I started to study hum-cancelling effects of the combined modes. So I realized that it wasn't very smart to combine a parallel humbucker with a single coil, since this would never be hum-cancelling. Then my eyes fell on the neck tone pot which had still an unused pole and I thought I could use this to switch the bridge pickup to single coil when combined with the neck single coil. That's it.

Now I got 16 two-pickup combinations (like Jimmy's), and six one-pickup modes (one more than Jimmy):

neck humbucker
neck adjustable coil
neck stud coil
bridge adjustable coil
bridge parallel coils (dual sound)
bridge humbucker

The pickup wirings in combination are always:

parallel in phase
parallel out of phase
serial in phase
serial out of phase

all four with four pickup combinations:

both humbuckers
neck single coil and bridge humbucker
neck humbucker and bridge dual (or parallel) coils
both single coils

If you do it right, three of these combinations will always be hum-cancelling and only the second one is not. That makes up for a total of 15 hum-cancelling sounds and only 7 that aren't, a much better ratio than on Jimmy's guitar which has only 10 hum-cancelling sounds.

[Steve A.]

Borsanova:

Reconfiguring the treble coil-cut switch is a great idea, since the stock design uses only half of the switch.

As for putting the coil cut switches on the tone controls, that is how it was done with the Schector Superock harness (which also doesn't have the mute position, which I consider to be a design flaw in the Gibson):


http://www.blueguitar.org/new/schem/...ck_harness.pdf

Perhaps on the historians here can fill us in as to what came first: the JP Gibson or the Schector Superock?

Steve Ahola

[Borsanova]

As for putting the coil cut switches on the tone controls, that is how it was done with the Schector Superock harness.

Steve Ahola

Thanks Steve, that is a very interesting wiring. As regards the switches' positions, it is quite similar (only the functions on the two volume controls are inverted). One major downfall of the Schector design (besides missing dual sound) is the fact that they hooked up in series first the neck and then the bridge pickup. This makes you lose what I consider the most usefull feature in my design. I called it the 1 1/2 humbucker (I'm really not pleased with this denomination, maybe someone can suggest a better name?), that is the possibility to activate a tone control between the two pickups to coil tap the trebles part of the neck pickup and, due to this, play bass frequencies with double humbucker and the trebles with the bridge pickup alone. It's like one of those old split pickup designs from Burns (allowing to play the upper strings on one circuit and the lower on another), but better and it get's you the original Slash sounds even on a small Fender amp. Btw, how does "broadbucker" sound to your ears as a new name for this configuration? I've described the effect at the very end of the old thread, but it was so long that probably noone ever arrived at reading it; one of these days I'll go and copy it here. I wouldn't wanna do without that feature anymore, but it could be easily corrected in the Schector design (simply think "bridge/lead" everytime the Schector instructions read "neck/rhythm" and vice versa!).

However what I liked most in the Schector wiring was the idea how they bypassed the pickup selector when in serial mode. Studying the situation on my guitar, I first thought it was impossible to implement this feature, but then I've realized that the functions of the left side of my serial switch can easily be transferred to the right side without any loss, thus liberating the necessary space for a bypass. Maybe tomorrow I'll try to correct my schematic in order to implement this feature.
I'm still a bit in doubt, whether this design is better than mine. Actually when I'm in serial mode I almost never use the pickup selector and thus I think I'll come to the conclusion that it's useful. Especially since the bypass allows to decide in advance your pickup choice for when you're returning to parallel mode. Moreover it allows to directly switch from parallel out of phase to serial out of phase. Well, the more I think of it, the more I'm convinced, since I can see only advantages! Thanks again for that great inspiration!

[Borsanova]

I've redesigned my schematic and here it comes. In the process I've also cleaned up and rationalized my drawing, so don't panic if it presents several changes. Everything is still the same except for the pickup selector bypass in serial mode.
Now I can't wait to implement the new feature on my guitar.

Here's the new configuration of the controls:

BV : Pulling out the bridge volume control puts both pickups in serial mode and bypasses the selector switch. Thus both pickups will be in series with the selector switch in any position. In this position the bridge volume and tone control work regularly as master controls, while the neck tone control works like a treble booster, brightening up and broadening the sound.

NV : The neck volume pot switch puts the neck pickup out of phase. The effect is audible when both pickups are selected, that is in serial mode or, when the guitar is in parallel mode, with the pickup selector in the middle position. Morevover, when the neck pickup is in single coil mode, this switch selects which coil will be on (pushed=adjustable coil, pulled=stud coil).

BT : Pulling the bridge tone pot switches the bridge pickup from serial humbucker to parallel (dual sound) or, when the neck tone control is pulled too, to single coil.

NV : The neck tone pot switches the neck pickup to single coil and, when the bridge tone control is pulled, it also switches the bridge pickup to single coil.

Btw. I've just noticed that this thread has already got 18 five star ratings. Thanks everybody for voting!

[Borsanova]

Done

I have just finished the necessary changes on my guitar to implement the serial bypass and everything works as it should. I tried it out and, though I still have to get used to it, it's already a big improvement to switching flexibility.

[Borsanova]

Here are my last upgrades to the Les Paul Jimmy Page design. Take notice that I have introduced several improvements and that there are now two different versions of this guitar with differing use of the volume and tone controls in series mode.

[Guitarpicker7]

seeking 12/6 string version - help!

Great work, however, I own a double neck 12/6, similar to Jimmy's,
and was wondering if I would just need to ... double your drawing and wire it to the toggle for choosing upper or lower necks (or mid for both)? Mine needs new pots too, so would appreciate your suggestion. Thanks for any tips on this matter.

[Baxthorpe]

Well ... my memory says that before either the Jimmy Page LP or the Schecter SuperRock, there was the Yamaha SG2000 around 1978 ... and the souped up version they made for Mr Santana, which was only available as a very Limited Edition. As far as I am aware, the Yamaha SG range were the first guitars marketed with pp pots.

[Guitarpicker7]

Need drawing for 12/6 string version

Here are my last upgrades to the Les Paul Jimmy Page design. Take notice that I have introduced several improvements and that there are now two different versions of this guitar with differing use of the volume and tone controls in series mode.

Could someone please make a drawing how this would be for the 12/6 string model??? THank you. I'd appreciate it. TG

[guitarboyled]

Did anyone else try this wiring?

[Telecasterking]

Borsanova:

Reconfiguring the treble coil-cut switch is a great idea, since the stock design uses only half of the switch.

As for putting the coil cut switches on the tone controls, that is how it was done with the Schector Superock harness (which also doesn't have the mute position, which I consider to be a design flaw in the Gibson):


http://www.blueguitar.org/new/schem/...ck_harness.pdf

Perhaps on the historians here can fill us in as to what came first: the JP Gibson or the Schector Superock?

Steve Ahola

Excuse my ignorance, I'm a newbie, but what do you mean by 'the mute positon'?

[scottyf73]

wiring of 4 push pull's

Howdy,
i have struck onto this thread after trying to wire up the jimmy page style wiring on my black 82 LP Custom clone by greco.

i too found the problem of the one mute position with the diagram on the seym dunc web site. i think it was when the serial p/p (Rhythm - tone) was engaged and the selector sw was in the bridge or middle position.

anyhow, i started over and have used the schecter superrock thing as drawn by steve A. thanks for the available use of such.

however i cant get the coil cut on the rhythm tone and in fact as soon as i engage the p/p the rhythm humbucker becomes mute. i have tried both wiring setups for this p/p pot but neither seem to work. it may well be my wiring so i will go back & re-look at it now to confirm i have wired it correctly as per the diagram.

has anybody else struck this problem with super-rock harness?

also, i have used 2 x 500k vol's & 2 x 250k tones.
would this present any problems with the performance of the humbuckers.

so the other option which i will attempt is the 22 sounds version as listed here. cheers & thanks for this thread. it is very useful & thanks for sharing the knowledge. will let you know how i go...