the Fly Clone Project

Totally understand. Happy to be 2nd in line

Don't sell this.
Unless you are retiring. Way to much work went into it.
AND its a beautiful swiss army knife of a sort.

jb63 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 01, 2024 10:21 am Don't sell this.
Unless you are retiring. Way to much work went into it.
AND its a beautiful swiss army knife of a sort.

Thanks for saying so. I'm not retiring - Just hoping to declutter a bit before relocating in a few months. I'm not a collector or someone who otherwise fetishizes guitars, so much as I incidentally accumulate too many of them in the course of endeavoring to find something that improves upon whatever my #1 at the time is. And so, any time I relocate, I'm confronted with feeling like a guitar packrat who needs to lighten the load.

The only reason I bought four Flys between 2016-'21 was because I intended to cycle through modding each of them until I had decided which was my favorite, then sell two of the others while keeping one as a backup. Because I never counted on obtaining a Belew model, the Flys I had been gradually modifying into facsimiles of the Belew are now redundant to it. I could have continued on with those projects - but I prefer to free myself up for more ambitious ones. And because I still need to wrap up a more ambitious Fly project to do with my '97 Deluxe (which I never made a thread for), I knew that the '96 Deluxe, '97 Classic, and '11 Supreme had to be the ones to go.

The amount of work I've put into this particular guitar is actually typical of me; with all of my guitars being ongoing projects/swiss army knives. A consequence of this practice is that I often have to reassure buyers that their fears to do with cheating me out of something inferred to be of great sentimental value are unfounded - I'm but a hopeless tinkerer.

Before you sell this, I'd love to see the wiring, at least archived here. This fly really fits a lot of my own idiosyncrasies, and I've been heavily inspired by it over the course of my own project.

I think I echo your sentiment with the tinkering: it just doesn't become my guitar until I've monkeyed with it and brought it all into "gus-spec."

I'd also be curious as to what you found was your optimal control scheme and some thoughts on why

Augustonian wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2024 10:01 am This fly really fits a lot of my own idiosyncrasies, and I've been heavily inspired by it over the course of my own project.

Thanks for the compliments. As always, I look forward to seeing more of your own project(s).

Augustonian wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2024 10:01 am I think I eacho your sentiment with the tinkering: it just doesn't become my guitar until I've monkeyed with it and brought it all into "gus-spec."

I'd also be curious as to what you found was your optimal control scheme and some thoughts on why

In this case, I've been deliberately working within the constraints of the factory pot and switch holes on the face of the guitar. That may change between now and whatever the "final" revision I arrive at ends up being - Every guitar is a work in progress until I no longer have it. For me, "optimal" is seeing how much ground I can get an intuitive control layout to cover without becoming crowded. The "Mojo MIDI" Fly layout is an example of what I try to avoid:


Even if I didn't happen to own a '97 Deluxe with the above control scheme, I only had to look at it for the first time, back in the '00s, to recognize that the above configuration was arrived at with zero implementation considerations: It sacrifices the stereo output at the 1/4" jack, and feels crowded under the fingers as a consequence of delegating singular functions to cheap/fragile components and including an LED bulb on the face of the guitar for no reason beyond achieving Jetsons aesthetics. The factory merely threw everything included in the Roland GK3 Internal kit onto a stock Mojo.

Whereas the Graph Tech-era Fly, below, shows obvious revision to this control scheme:
At the moment, my "ideal" scheme would include the Belew switching tone pot; so the Sustainiac functions could be consolidated to a single control - Alas, constructing one is currently a backburner project for me. Again: We'll see if I get to a Rev 3 with the Supreme. It would entail replacing the Hexpander board with an RMC PolyDrive. I haven’t decided whether I would have the PolyDrive rout the buffered mag/piezo signals to a single volume pot or have a concentric piezo/hex pot (which would necessitate again relocating the preamp power switch - perhaps back to a SPST in the rear cover; as I did in the first scheme). I would also like to incorporate a Sustainiac preamp bypass switch for the bridge pickup; because I’ve found I prefer to have a passive signal path as an option for the 1/4”-out; with all other “colored”/active-buffered options routed through the 13 pin-out.

Augustonian wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2024 10:01 am I'd love to see the wiring, at least archived here

Sure. Being as the more in-depth Sustainiac stuff has a dedicated thread, here are some crude MS Paint illustrations of the first revision with the dual gang pot, and the current one:


Rev 1:

After deciding I'd prefer to have independent volume controls for the mag and hex circuits (so their relative levels and parallel signal routing could be controlled at the guitar; rather than being strictly patch-dependent) - and could stand to part with the harmonic "mix" sustainer mode -, I arrived at Rev 2:
I have the mag vol output labeled “hexpander input” because the 1/4” jack being in parallel with the hex preamp is secondary to the signal path every other component is there for. I'm currently rewiring the guitar with standard DPDT push-pulls and a different bridge pickup. It's functionally the same as the 4PDT switching pots; which I only used for the sake of evaluating their "roadworthiness" in subsequent projects (wherein I want series/parallel switching for two humbuckers controllable with one switching pot). So that's why I didn't bother drawing the S-1 PCB switching connections.

mmmguitar wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2024 5:01 pm my "ideal" scheme would include the Belew switching tone pot; so the Sustainiac functions could be consolidated to a single control - Alas, constructing one is currently a backburner project for me.

Well, the cheap version would be to get a dual gang push pull, tear it apart, scratch off the channel near a lug, and use that lug and the center as your "switch." You don't get the satisfying click, but it would do the job! I could provide further details if needed.

Augustonian wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2024 7:52 pm Well, the cheap version would be to get a dual gang push pull, tear it apart, scratch off the channel near a lug, and use that lug and the center as your "switch." You don't get the satisfying click, but it would do the job! I could provide further details if needed.

Thanks - That’s almost exactly what I would have attempted, prior to having Dennis fill in the gaps in my conjecture and scoring a Belew of my own. You’re probably right on the money in suggesting I just try the “cheap” version, rather than continue to procrastinate on kitbashing a pair of different pots together with a fabricated chassis.

Not to put you off kitbashing, but it likely will be good enough, or just bad enough to get your gears turning.

All that being said, I'm curious how the pots are fused in the Belew, and if it is applicable to more available parts. Mostly, I'm curious how the push pull still functions; I didn't think those Tocos push-pull options, unless the alpha pot is a push-push? I did try to find a detent I could throw into one of my push pulls but it didn't seem very viable.

Augustonian wrote: ↑Sun Jan 28, 2024 11:03 pm I'm curious how the pots are fused in the Belew [...] I didn't think those Tocos had enough rod to push.

I don’t know how Axel achieved his prototype, but Dennis confirmed that he machined a longer shaft rod to bridge the Tocos switching pot and the DPDT portion of an alpha push-pull. A machined brass frame holds each pot portion in place. I also haven’t yet bothered tracking down one of the Tocos pots to compare the detent - According to Dennis, it’s a center detent switching pot, with the detent relocated to the end of the travel and the standard no-load mod of scraping the end of the carbon track; so that the only difference between 9 and 10 in the travel is the switch being open or closed.

In my “cheap” version ambition, the thought was that I would build up a ridge of CA or epoxy as a detent, then see how durable it ended up being.

From the data sheets, it seems like the pots can come with rotary on/off switch already installed: https://tocos.com/uploads/media/product ... 7c0dd4.pdf

The ones on the listing you provided and the picture look a lot like those. The white piece seems to indicate it at least. Without more docs on the wiring (very time consuming) it's probably hard to copy directly. In my spare time I may get a few from Tocos and see what can be done with them. Some of them even come with push-pull as well.

I was thinking I may add some kapton onto a wafer and see how that feels.

Bump. A poster who saw my listing inquired as to the final control layout for the guitar - So here it is (click to enlarge):


Not shown is the Graph Tech Hexpander board; which was wired in a manner typical of what's detailed on Graph Tech's diagram page, with the exception of the black, white, and red wires for their B250k pot module being switched over to a push-pull pot acting as the Sustainiac preamp on/off switch necessary in typical 13 pin applications. The outputted signal from the mag volume pot is soldered to the "tip" lug of the 1/4" jack and jumped to the pin-7/"mag-in" wiring harness for the Hexpander. As detailed in previous posts, the setup allows for leaving a 1/4" or 13 pin plug inserted into the guitar without the Sustainiac preamp battery being drained; provided the synth volume pot is in the "up" position when not in use.

I did end up experimenting with using the other SPST of the Hexpander volume pot for a Sustainiac preamp bypass; and found no perceptible difference in the bridge pickup timbre when swapping between passive and "in parallel with active" circuits. Because any unnecessary length of bridge pickup signal wire makes the Sustainiac circuitry increasingly susceptible to crosstalk, I won't encourage anyone else to try it - It was purely to satisfy my own curiosity.

My next Fly project will be a progression from what I had settled on doing with the layout constraints of the Supreme. Because I'm still settling in after relocating to a different time zone, it may be some time before I complete/post about that project.