linear taper v. audio taper pots?

[Scantron08]

Originally Posted by jefrs

Erm, what I said was linear is more gradual at the top end of the vol pot, and log is more gradual at the bottom end of it. Subtle distinction.

Yeah, it was hard to fit every voice neatly into either audio-is-more-gradual, or linear-is-more-gradual, but you did say, "On a linear pot the 50% position is 5. On a log pot the 50% position is near 8." Thus, since one's halfway point is actually halfway through the rotation, that makes it more gradual, overall. Thanks for sharing your other threads - btw, what's your source, are you a tech? You sound like a tech, i.e., way over my head here.

Originally Posted by Fenderfiend

...and what I said was prefaced by "I think..."

Yes, I thought it was obvious that all the "votes" were the opinions of the posters. However, in fairness to you, I did take into account that you were saying "I think" and indicating that you were repeating someone else's advice.

Sorry - I certainly wasn't trying to pit one fellow poster here against another, y'all. Just even more confused now than I was when this started because of all of the varying opinions, some of which are in direct contradiction with each other.

I guess asking what the normal Fender pot is really is only part of the equation, because that doesn't mean it's what works best for an individual. I will say, though, that I have always thought that the problem with Strat volume knobs is that they decrease in both gain and volume way too quickly when rolling off of ten, and I always thought I preferred the way it worked on my Les Paul and PRS and Rick. Does that mean I like linear better?

[Scantron08]

Originally Posted by Jethro

If I may add a question within this thread....

Which taper pot would be most suitable for volume swells, such as that of Jeff Beck or Roy Buchanen? After reading this I'm guessing possibly the linear???

I'd love to know the answer to this, too. Should it be its own thread, Jethro?

[Chris Winsemius]

Most of the time I'm using LIN for volume and LOG for tone (modern pots, CTS or ***). I really like the range it gives me so that's ok.

The best pots go to 11.....

[Jethro]

Originally Posted by Scantron08

I'd love to know the answer to this, too. Should it be its own thread, Jethro?

LOL....all I know after reading this thread is exactly what I knew previously....nothing

Nah, I'm just kidding around....I guess the more I go back and re-read this I can't help but think that the likes of Jeff and Roy probably used the audio taper pots, simply because they have more volume change with less adjustment....at least at the upper range. Does that make sense or am I possibly backwards?

[FatTeleTom]

To address one of the OP's question, yes the general preference for audio taper pots is largely because it matches more closely how our ears perceive volume difference. But the reason some people use linear pots is simply because linear works better with how they like to use the volume control.

I recall someone noting on a forum that linear pots tend to appeal more to players using clean or cleanish tones, as they appreciate the finer control over volume levels. Players using dirtier tones tend to prefer the audio taper pots because they tend to work better for "cleaning up" the sound (without a huge drop in volume) as you roll back the volume control.

I think it's pretty safe to say that audio taper volume pots are vastly more common, and more popular. But the only way to know what works best for you is to try it out yourself. However, I've also seen some good YouTube vidoes comparing pot tapers (and different brands of pots), and some time spent with those might help you make up your mind.

For what it's worth, I just replaced the stock linear pots in an Ibanez 335 copy with audio pots (and a treble bypass setup), and I much prefer the new taper. I find it easier to quickly jump from rhythm to lead volumes when playing clean, and prefer the way it cleans up a dirty tone more quickly.

[FatTeleTom]

Originally Posted by Jethro

simply because they have more volume change with less adjustment....at least at the upper range. Does that make sense or am I possibly backwards?

I think you're exactly right.

[flyingbanana]

I agree. With linear taper pots, most, if not all of the adjustment is between 10 and 5 on the knob. Below that, I usually notice no difference. This is why I prefer the audio taper pots, because the usability seems to be between 1 and 10...which is how I like it.

[Wally]

Real world....audio pots DO NOT yield a usable signal for teh full sweep of the pot. The usable range is from about 7 to 10. Below 7, the sonics are without presence. This is the reason why so many people use a treble bypass cap circuit on audio taper pots.....they want to have a wider sweep of that volume pot. IF what soem have said above were ture...taht audio pots have a wider sweep....then noone would be using treble bypass caps. Leo FEnder would never have put those .001mfd caps on the audio volume pots of those Teles, right? Some players like that wide sweep of usable settings. Players who do voluem sweels DO NOT like wide sweeps that linear taper pots and audio pots with treble bypass caps yield. They like the abrupt ramp up that occurs at 7 to 10 on that dial.
Gibson started using linear taper pots in the early '70's for the volume control...becasue they understood that some players like to run an amp hot and then control the situation with manipulation of the gutiar's volume pot. Linear taper does just this....it has an active and usable sweep that occurs down low on the dial....2-3...and is gradually variable up to 10. A treble bypass cap on an audio pot yields the same thing. The '50's wriring that Gibson used on LEs Pauls....and which folks here are calling the 'Fetzer/greeene mod' after all of these decades of it being a Gbison thing.....to achieve a wider sweep of the pot.
I have experienced these situations too many tiimes....put treble bypass caps on audio pots, used the Gibson '50's wiring on audio pots, and run linear pots for volume....to think that an audio pot by itself yields a wider sweep than does a linear pot...or that a linear pot's sweep ends at 5 on the way down.
IF you want to do volume swells wth your gutiar's volume pot, use an unbypassed audio pot. IF you want a wider sweep on the volume control with good presence, then use a linear pot, a treble bypass cap on an audio pot, or the Gibson '50's wiring on an audio pot. Gibson has been at this a long time.
They understand what auidio versus linear pots do, adn they undersstand what different wiring can do for an audio pot. Leo Fender understood what the reason was for installing that treble bypass cap on those 250K audio pots in those Teles.
AS for linear pots 'coing on' all at once at 2 or 3 and then not soudning any different form there on up to 10, I am going to suggest that any listener who hears things this way is not being very sensitive to the changes....adn those changes are there form 3 on up to 10. You might want to turn the amp up to fully appreciate these changes. I once read an article in Gutiar Player back in the '70's in which B.B.King(IIRC) gave advice on setting pu an amp. I subscribe to this philosophy. PUt the guitar controls on 10. Turn the amp up to the maximum volume setting that you will want to experience. Then, run thinds from the gutiar. With a linear pot or an audio pot that is wired for a wider sweep, one can experience a wide range of sonic control from the gutiar's volume pot.When you see a guitarist workign his volume pot across the full range of the sweep, you are watching someone who has the gutiar set-up for control across the sweep of that volume pot....however it was achieved. There are 3 ways to get to that tyep of set-up. Two of those methods utilize modified volume pot circutis and have been with us since the '50's. ONe of those ways has been in use since the early '70's...and uses a linear pot by itself. FWIW, I stock 500K linear pots for this reason......I like to make big humbucking pickups more usable. Linear pots do this without any wriing changes at all.
ONE advantage of using an audio pot with a treble bypass cap circuit is that one can tailor the capacitance and the resistance in that treble bypass cap circuit for the certain pickups and player. Different capacitance and resistance formulas work better with certain pickups/players.

[Scantron08]

Well, partially due to the lack of inventory at the store, I got 1 linear- and 2 audio-taper pots. My plan is to use the linear for the volume pot, and from what I gather here, I think I will be happy.

Having started out on a Strat, I never thought the volume knob sounded good anywhere but on 10 because of the extreme loss of tone and presence the second you roll it back any. When I began playing other makes of guitars (with HBs), I realized this does not have to be this way - you can have a usable volume control. Hopefully, I'll get the best of both worlds this way.

I'm still not sure why you wouldn't want the use of the full sweep on all your pots, though. If all of this is true, aren't audio-taper pots limiting the full usefullness of the knob, whether tone or volume?

[Wally]

Please let us know what you personal reactions are to the change to the linear pot on the voume, SCantron. Also, your experience with humbucking gutiars is realated to how those guitars' volume controls were designed ormodded, ime. That is, an audio taper pot on a humbcuker acts just like an audio pot on a single coil. IF it is an audio pot wired without a treble bypass circuit and with a tone circuit that is wired as a FEnder as opposed to the
'50's Gibson circuit----what some here are calling the FEttzer-green mod, then there is no presence from about 7 on down with humbuckers, either, ime.

[Scantron08]

As I understand it, though, linear tapers were common on LPs??? If so, I'd guess that means I prefer the way the LP reacts because I prefer linear taper pots.

I know on my PRS (which I sold several years ago), the volume knob was pretty much useful for its entire rotation. I've never been able to say that about my Strats. I'm guessing the PRS had linear pots.

[Wally]

Scantron, Gibson used 500K audio taper pots until sometime in the early '70's. They then changed to 300K linear taper pots for the volume controls. This is why Les Pauls....with the exception of the Reissues which use audio tapers.....have a wide usable sweep on the volume pot.
Your PRS had a treble bypass circuit on an audio taper pot that achieved that same kind of wide usable sweep.

[Scantron08]

Makes sense - my LP is a '76.

[FatTeleTom]

Originally Posted by Scantron08

Having started out on a Strat, I never thought the volume knob sounded good anywhere but on 10 because of the extreme loss of tone and presence the second you roll it back any.

It sounds like you definitely want a "treble bleed" or "volume kit" on your volume pot, regardless of the taper. A well-matched resistor+cap pair will eliminate the loss of high end as you reduce the volume.

The 680pF/220K in parallel combination (recommended by Acme Guitar Works) does nicely in my Fralin Vintage Hot-equipped strat-style guitar.

If you prefer to retain top end regardless of the volume setting (as I do), I think you'll find that the volume kit is much more important to achieving that than the taper of the pot.

Originally Posted by Scantron08

I'm still not sure why you wouldn't want the use of the full sweep on all your pots, though. If all of this is true, aren't audio-taper pots limiting the full usefullness of the knob, whether tone or volume?

Again, I think it's more an issue of how you use the volume control, and how many different variations in level you truly need or want. For a lot of players, the most important thing is to be able to quickly jump from a "rhythm" volume to a "lead" volume. They don't need 10 different volume levels. Other players work the volume control a little more to get different shadings, and thus may prefer a different taper. Neither is right or wrong, just different horses for different courses.

[dlhylton]

Linear potentiometers are not made for volume control because they don't mimic the logarithmic scale in how we (humans) sense sound. Log audio taper potentiometers allow for more gradual change in sound, and thus should be used in audio applications.

To learn more about this, check out:
http://www.learningaboutelectronics....potentiometers

[Wally]

Originally Posted by dlhylton

Linear potentiometers are not made for volume control because they don't mimic the logarithmic scale in how we (humans) sense sound. Log audio taper potentiometers allow for more gradual change in sound, and thus should be used in audio applications.

To learn more about this, check out:
http://www.learningaboutelectronics....potentiometers

ONCe again, the technical engineering aspects sometimes don't hold water when applied to how guitarists like to have things work. An audio taper pot in a guitar does not have a more gradual change in the volume. This is easily heard if one simply sits with a stock Fender guitar with an audio taper pot and conventional control circuit wiring. The presence of the signal is lost from 7 on down on the range. The treble falls out and the signal is of little use to most of us. That is why Fender used that .001mfd treble bypass cap starting in 1967...to give the player a wider sweep of usable volume levels. Many guitarists have been adding treble bypass circuits to audio taper pots for decades. Gibson went to a linear taper 300K pot for volume control in the early '70's. They still use this pot in modern tiems excpet in the Historic REissues, as far as I have experienced things. Rock guitarists learned that volume control with the right amp set-up would allow them to achieve a wider range of sonics simply by controlling their volume pot on the guitar....think clean to scream with only a turn of the volume control o n the guitar. With an unbypassed audio taper pot, this is not possible...the signal is lifeless below 7 or so on the dial. A treble bypass on an audio pot or a l inear taper pot or the Gibson wiring circuit from the '50's will yield a volume control with a wide sweep.....from 2 on up on the dial. I have never seen a stock PRS that doesn't have a treble bypass circuit on an audio taper pot.

Engineers can explain a lot, and the audio taper thing might very well apply to things other than guitar volume controls----as in amps, hi-fi's etc; but a simple audio taper pot in a guitar will limit the control that guitarist has over his sounds. Now, if a player wants to do volume swells with the guitar's volume pot, an unbypassed audio taper pot is the way to go...because the sound comes on all at once at 7....and that is what that type of playing demands.

[AJBaker]

I posted this on another thread. Mostly I've figured this out through experimentation, and some advice from Jefrs.

For a volume control you can use either, but for tone controls you should only use audio.
I think I've settled on audio for my tele and strat, but on my Gibson style guitars with two volumes I prefer linear.
On an Audio pot you have fairly fine control of the loudest part of the sweep. As You turn up from 0 to 5 it will seem to get loud suddenly, them more gradually from 5 to maximum. They're good if you don't do volume swells, and if you like playing between Half volume/near full volume to full volume. I like them on Gibson style setup because I can blend the two pickups better.

Audio pots sound more like the volume increasing steadily from 0 to 10, and are great for swells. As you turn up, each increment will sound a lot louder. As you turn from 0 to 5, it will seem to gradually get louder, and after that it will seem to get louder in a more sudden fashion. If you turn from 10 to 8, it will get a lot quieter, i.e just about half your volume.

In summary, with linear pots you are at half volume at 5, with audio pots you're at half volume at about 7 or 8.

[Hoopermazing]

I've just installed two different CTS audio taper 500kΩ pots in my main Tele (huge overwound single coils.) The original 250kΩ audio tapers had a smooth apparent sweep from 1 to 10. Both replacement pots have basically nothing until ¾ of the way around, then the volume increases rapidly in the last ¼ turn.

I'm going to mess around with resistors across the pot terminals (I read somewhere that affects the sweep.) If that doesn't work, then I'm going to give a linear taper pot a try (I'm itching to take it back apart and put a no-load tone pot in, so it's no big whup.)

From what I've seen in this thread, the linear taper pots might be more to my tastes. I have no use for a tenfold increase in apparent volume between 1 and 10.

[Hoopermazing]

Originally Posted by Scantron08

Makes sense - my LP is a '76.

Me too.

[Shepherd]

http://www.geofex.com/Article_Folder...s/potscret.htm