John Cassady wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2024 8:59 am
I contacted the seller, who replied "So basically in the world of electronics there’s no difference.
.003uf and .1uf are the same rating the as .33uf and .1uf
Manufacturers use alternative specs."
He seems to know what his doing and he has excellent reviews, but I don't know what to think about that capacitors thing
His statement "in the world of electronics" is not correct. ".003uf and .1uf are the same rating the as .33uf and .1uf" doesn't even really make logical sense as a sentence. Unless he misunderstood the question and is using "rating" in some other way (eg voltage rating).
But without wishing to make assumptions or sound unkind, making guitar harnesses is not necessarily an electronic endeavour. It
can be - some people doing it may have electronics training. But it doesn't have to be more than a
craft. And obviously you're mostly just following a known wiring diagram (or in this case
not following it
).
The only way in which he might be somewhat correct regarding cap values
for some players is that the cap in a (lead or rhythm) tone circuit does not really kick in until the second half of the pot's range. The low pass rolloff in the first half of its range is really due to the pot. So for most players who don't spend much time in that lower half, they would rarely hear much difference between common cap values.
https://guitarnuts2.proboards.com/threa ... capacitors
But use of 0.33 uF in the strangle switch rather than the 0.0033 uF that has been used for 60 years would almost certainly be heard. Whether you might prefer it that way would be subjective.
So in short, if his "Fender Jaguar 62 Wiring Harness - Pro Wired USA Vintage Spec" jaguar circuit is indeed wired with the cap values he quotes, then it's not really a 1962 jaguar circuit (see Fender's 1962 wiring diagram above), which is unchanged since then.
"I just knew I wanted to make a sound that was the complete opposite of a Les Paul, and that’s pretty much a Jaguar." Rowland S. Howard.
)
