1. Win a Broadcaster or one of 3 Teles! The annual Supporting Member Giveaway is on. To enter Click Here. To see all the prizes and full details Click Here. To view the thread about the giveaway Click Here.

.1uf Capacitor or Not?

Discussion in 'Tele-Technical' started by PJ55, Jul 30, 2014.

  1. PJ55

    PJ55 Poster Extraordinaire Silver Supporter

    Posts:
    5,568
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    OK....thanks to everyone for assisting on this question. But, if I stay with one cap, what value other than .047uf will brighten things up just a tad?
     
  2. GCKelloch

    GCKelloch Tele-Afflicted

    Posts:
    1,240
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Location:
    MA USA
    Well, anything smaller might equal a tad to you. TS Tel PUP's are supposedly N-3.3H/B-4H. I'd try 10-15nF for the classic 600-800Hz horn bop peak. The peak will be ~1kHz or so with both PUP's in parallel. Can't say what you'll prefer until you try it. Cap values sum when wired in parallel. You could start with a 10nF and wrap over a 5nF to get 15nF, or try something in between. Caps are super cheap at BYOC.com.
     
  3. PJ55

    PJ55 Poster Extraordinaire Silver Supporter

    Posts:
    5,568
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    Thanks for the assist. All the Telescasters I've either built or rewired used the. 047 mf cap without issue. For one I added a treble bleed circuit. But this current project that has one old and one new Texas Special pickup is a little dark sounding. Just no bite - or not enough. So I appreciate the guidance - cap values is something I admit to being new with. Thanks again!
     
  4. sjtalon

    sjtalon Doctor of Teleocity Ad Free Member

    Posts:
    10,900
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Location:
    Upper Peninsula of Michigan
    Just remember the cap (or pot really) doesn't really do jack anyway when the pot is at 10 anyway.


    I call the cap a tool the tone pot uses in it job. The higher the value, the faster/darker things will get as you turn the pot from about 6-0.
    It's a player preference thing, do you want a subtle tone change ? I don't use the tone much so like .022 in most everything. Nice thru the sweep.

    Even had a .015µF in a Tele once and that worked real sweet.

    If you want it more aggressive....then .047 or even as high as .1 µF.

    If you are unhappy with the darkness overall, I would throw a 375K or 500K audio vol. pot in there for kicks. That would brighten things up.

    Loads (no pun intended :p) more effect than messing with caps.
     
  5. Wally

    Wally Telefied Ad Free Member

    Posts:
    38,176
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2003
    Location:
    Lubbock, TX
    sjtalon, I have made the observation here on TDPRI before that this wiring circuit that takes the tone cap to the output lug of the volume pot is a Gibson circuit from the '50's.....but this is the TDPRi and folks just don't seem to want to acknowledge anything 'Gibson'! LOL So...with that in mind, I consider you a brave man to suggest using even more of a Gibson approach to this Fender wiring circuit.....A .022mfd tone cap in a single coil Fender???? Oh...the humanity!!!
     
  6. GCKelloch

    GCKelloch Tele-Afflicted

    Posts:
    1,240
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Location:
    MA USA
    As mentioned by the sjtalon, the tone knob cap value makes no difference when the knob is above ~5. You could try swapping out a pot for a higher value. The problem is: the combined internal PUP and guitar cable capacitance may cause the resulting peak with the knobs maxed to be in the middle of the critical hearing range ~3kHz. It tends to sound edgy or piercing, particularly on the bridge PUP. I find it best to configure it so the bridge PUP response is flat and rolls off between 4-5kHz, allowing for good articulation without harshness. That can be achieved with your TS set, 250k pots, and a 100-200pF cable before the first preamp.


    There are several inexpensive low C cables available. A Planet Waves Cable Station package is a good investment. It's ~19pF per foot – the same value as Wilde BL-150 and George L cable. The plugs might be ~20pF each as well. In any case, you'll want a low C cable if you decide to swap to a 500k volume or tone pot.

    It's unfortunate that most pickups average ~100pF or so internal C. That makes getting a smooth extended high end in the 4-5kHz presence range more difficult in this case. The Texas Special PUP thing is based on a mistaken notion that SRV used higher than standard inductance PUP's, which was not the case. Unless you opt for an onboard preamp, you're going to have to settle for either a slightly darker sounding guitar, or a slightly edgy/piercing one if you swap to a higher value pot. The lower the external C, the less edgy it would be in that case.
     
  7. Mimmo_CVC

    Mimmo_CVC TDPRI Member

    Posts:
    86
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    Location:
    Italy
    Hi Wileyone
    I really seek for a setup for a blues machine... So let me ask a question: have you tried this circuit adding the fezz mod? What happens?
    I have a CV vintage blonde pine body, stock PUps, 250 pots, 0.5 pio cap + fezz parka, cloth wires, and I am very happy about the tone (except for the volume workin just 8 to 10...Help needed...)
    I was planning to install a micro switch for the fezz mod, but now a switch for the 0.1 cap could be a new option....
     
  8. Peter Rabbit

    Peter Rabbit Tele-Holic

    Age:
    70
    Posts:
    897
    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    ...bump
     
  9. waparker4

    waparker4 Doctor of Teleocity Ad Free Member

    Posts:
    18,996
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2011
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    I really don't see how the 0.1 cap does anything. A cap that size passes basically the whole audio spectrum through. I have never understood that Roy Buchanan wiring (except that it's all hype). A cap in series like that should cut out bass (if it were smaller)

    Volume turns down too fast? Use a linear taper volume pot.
     
  10. Wally

    Wally Telefied Ad Free Member

    Posts:
    38,176
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2003
    Location:
    Lubbock, TX
    waparker, could this .1mfd inline for the in put to the volume pot be some simple mod back in the day to take that .1mfd cap from ground on the volume pot to the input lug--from a different point on the switch than the diagram above, right?--- and thereby do away with that pre-set bassy neck pickup AND also provide for each pickup alone or both together? In other words regarding the .1mfd cap, is it possible that someone just moved it's contact from ground to the input back in the day without understanding that it isn't needed in that part of the circuit in that manner?

    Mimmo, +1 with waparker on the linear taper pot. The 'Fezz mod' has l ong been known as the Gbison '50's wiring...first seen on the Les Paul Standards circa '57-'58. It has some effect on that atpering on the voume pot, but I find a l inear taper pot more effective. Or...one can use a treble bleed circuit across the input and ouput of the voume pot. Fender started using a .001mfd cap there in 1967...check the old circuti diagrams...you'll see it. A .001mfd cap in paralllel with a 150K ohm resistor there is a starting piont from which I like to tune a treeble bypass circuit to the pickup. For Fender single coils, II fins a larger cap and a smaller resistance works....trial and error until you find what you like. The larger the value of the cap the mlower the frequencies that the cap passes. there is apoint where the mids get affected and not just the highs. I like to tune that circuit. differetn pickups and different tastes will establish those specs...through trial and error. for one Strat's pickups, it took me 3 tries to tune it in...with the owner in attendance. The .001mfd/150K ohm bypass was too thin . The next set brought in a bit of the mid thing I was looking to maintain as the volume was decreased. The third bypass hit it....the whole signal maintained integrity and presence through the sweep, which was from about 2 through 10. A linear pot is simpler, but the tuend treble bypass is a finer adjustment, ime. The '50's Gibson circuit is the least eeffective.
    Note: Fender started using that treble bypass cap in 1967. Gibson went from 500K audio pots---that yield that limited sweep you are experiencing, Mimmo---to a 300K linear pot in the early '70's.....about the time that some players were getting into higher gain and manipulation from clean to dirty with the guitar's volume pot.
     
  11. Mimmo_CVC

    Mimmo_CVC TDPRI Member

    Posts:
    86
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    Location:
    Italy
    Thanks Wally! Just a doubt: I have always read not to use treble bleed in conjunction with the Fezz Mod. Or did you mean switch from one solution (fezz) to the other (treble bleed)?
    Thanks again
     
  12. Wally

    Wally Telefied Ad Free Member

    Posts:
    38,176
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2003
    Location:
    Lubbock, TX
    Mimmo. the '50's Gibson circuit---what you and others on the TDPRI are calling the Fezz mod---was the first attempt of which I am aware to try to widen the sweep of an audio taper pot.....some 57 years ago. The treble bleed introduced by Fender in '67 was the next approach. The linear taper pot instead of the auido taper pot begun in the early '70's was the 3rd method tried. I prefer either the treble bypass or the linear taper pot to the '50's Gibson circuit...and each should be used by itself...not in conjunction with either of the other two.
     
  13. BMor

    BMor Tele-Meister

    Posts:
    413
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2014
    Location:
    Mexico City
    I can't imagine playing with a 0.1 cap... 0.047 is all muddy, unusable. 0.022 is bassy, yet unusable.
    I use a 0.015 and if rolled down completely, the tone gets muddy a little bit, "low-midranged".

    I would recommend using anything below 0.010uf and experiment with values, maybe 0.003-0.005 is the best.
     
  14. waparker4

    waparker4 Doctor of Teleocity Ad Free Member

    Posts:
    18,996
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2011
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    Well the thing is the 0.1 cap is not being used as the tone cap. 0.047 is. The 0.1 cap isn't really doing anything

    IMO
     
  15. Weeman333

    Weeman333 TDPRI Member

    Age:
    30
    Posts:
    22
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2017
    Location:
    Tn
    This is the best explanation I've ever heard
     
IMPORTANT: Treat everyone here with respect, no matter how difficult!
No sex, drug, political, religion or hate discussion permitted here.