1959 Les Paul Build

[preeb]

Originally Posted by MRJ.

Not trying to change the subject, but what size did you make the side dots on the neck? I've been trying to find out the correct size and haven't had any luck.

3/32" dia X 1/16" long

[preeb]

Originally Posted by dynamohum

I'm sure they would, though I'm not motivated enough to find out .

I see that RS Guitarworks are launching a new tailpiece on the 1st of April. Apparently it will be machined instead of cast aluminium (is that going to be "vintage correct" ??? ).

.

Just looking at the photo... the shape is far from being historically accurate.

[preeb]

I'd like to add a small bit of info. I previously made a joke about the 4 serials and that Gibson never planned on making more than 10000 instruments a year... this is, of course, not true. That was sadly the case in the late 50's when production numbers fell... but they did pass the 10000 count in previous years.
The gap between the first and the 3rd serial positions has been reserved for the higher numbers.

[dynamohum]

I was thinking that's why they left the gap in the second position. So they limited themselves to a max of 99,999 guitars per year . It's a shame they never achieved that figure - it may have made the '59ers more affordable, but then we'd have lost the "mystique"...;).

[Dalton]

http://www.druckeronkel.de/index.php?id=469

This technique could be an option, too. Using this procedure just the colour is applied not a foil.

[Mister B]

Originals have no copper under the nickel. from my experience it's normally found on cheaper parts and they are impossible to age correctly since the Nickel is too thin and the copper shows its red color first and dark green later...

Copper is commonly used as a base for either chrome or nickel plating. It can disguise minor imperfections in the surface finish of the metal part, it's another cost cutting measure.

[Possum]

Someone sent me a link to this thread and pointed me to the PAF bobbins bought in the photos. Unfortunately those aren't PAF correct. They are the same thing you can buy from StewMac and AllParts; yes they are the only ones made with the circle/square but even that is wrong as that feature is not tight up against the core like a real PAF bobbin. The core dimension and height are also wrong, so yes you can get a real nice tone out of them but they are not PAF coil geometry once you wind them and won't really nail a true PAF coil. Almost every small pickup maker uses those bobins.

You can see in the photos the bobbin coil winding area is taller than a real PAF. Coil height and bobbin core are responsible for what kind of tone you get out of the coil. Also, PAF's were machine wound to one specific turns per layer recipe that never varied. Hand winding won't duplicate that and how the coil was wound is a big part of the tone as well. The project looks awesome, wish I had time and the skills to pull that off and you're doing a great job.

[The Truth]

Hey Possum, welcome to this great forum
your knowledge is welcomed here

[preeb]

Originally Posted by Possum

Someone sent me a link to this thread and pointed me to the PAF bobbins bought in the photos. Unfortunately those aren't PAF correct. They are the same thing you can buy from StewMac and AllParts; yes they are the only ones made with the circle/square but even that is wrong as that feature is not tight up against the core like a real PAF bobbin. The core dimension and height are also wrong, so yes you can get a real nice tone out of them but they are not PAF coil geometry once you wind them and won't really nail a true PAF coil. Almost every small pickup maker uses those bobins.

You can see in the photos the bobbin coil winding area is taller than a real PAF. Coil height and bobbin core are responsible for what kind of tone you get out of the coil. Also, PAF's were machine wound to one specific turns per layer recipe that never varied. Hand winding won't duplicate that and how the coil was wound is a big part of the tone as well. The project looks awesome, wish I had time and the skills to pull that off and you're doing a great job.

Hello Possom and welcome to the Forum. Thank you for your post and kind words! You actually got me worried for a second... but I'm glad you did.
I just compared the bobbins with the original PAF and found out the space is identical.

Here's a couple of side shots of the PAF against the bobbin





Those bobbins are nothing like the Stewmac and Allparts. I do agree that they are not 100% and even stated so a few posts up but the size is correct. I'll be making 100% correct bobbin duplications in the future but just for the looks...

I rarely respond to posts like this because I don't see the point in starting online wars over nothing (and yes... PAF pu's are nothing to me when it comes to real life human relations) but I'm really surprised of the level of confidence you put into the inaccurate information you just posted. It definitely sounds like you have a lot of knowledge on the PAF subject and I respect that but please show a little respect to the time and effort I've been putting into learning the original PAF set I'm trying to duplicate. Actually the bobbin is just a small part of the equation... I had the more important stuff made very accurately as well. The proto pu sounds almost identical to my PAFs (I say almost... because once I got it to sound the same I changed the specs a little to get a better sound to suit my own taste). I'll post it all when we get to the PU building stage soon enough(-;

One thing I have to say... I tried a few bobbins during the last few months and found that the inner space and "coil geometry" is not a major sound factor at all... it only affects the eq very slightly (I could hardly hear it) but there are much bigger factors like metal parts composition, magnet, coil tension etc.... I also don't believe in the machine VS hand winding pattern when it comes to experienced hand winders...
I've heard horrible PAF's and PAF replicas made with "the correct machine" ... NO SUCH THING AS "THE" PAF TONE!!! and I think I can easily lay an even and tight layers by hand.... I had a lot of practice lately (-;

I hope you are not offended in any way from my reply and Please Please stay with us as I highly respect your knowledge and enthusiasm... just try not to kick my b_lls too hard next time... do it gently please.

[Possum]

Truth!!!! I didn't know you were into teles??? I actually know a fair amount about early tele pickups and have a friend's real "nocaster" pickup here on loan. I learned a ton of information from that little beauty and how to recreate it.

[preeb]

BTW...I can see why you thought it's wrongly spaced... here's a photo of the bobbin attached to the PAF poles. I think there's an optical illusion when looking at the bobbin naked... it does look taller when it's actually identical.




Also, regarding what you said about the circle and square wholes...
The mentioned bobbins are definitely not the only ones having the square in a circle hole... most of them do today... but I meant the "other" circle... that little tooling mark on the other end... (-;
See here compared to the PAF



The square in a circle whole is identical too... at least to my eyes it is.

[Possum]

yeah I'm NOT into forum fights, so no worries there. The photo was misleading which easily happens with optics etc. they do look like the standard fare. Its still hard to judge by the new photos, you need a set of calipers, every dimension counts. Did you have these made? I'm not clear about where these came from? The box looks like Montreaux's shipping box.

I do have to disagree with you though on coil geometry and bobbin specs. I've put 8 years into learning virtually everything about PAFs on a very deep level. I have 3 years of lab work done on the metals alone and had a magnetics metallurgist alloys specialist help me with his company's high tech gear and tutoring in experiments and learning metallurgy of ferrous metals, a subject way deeper than my brain is capable of. I had collected PAF parts, early P90 parts, early patent parts and early TTop and late TTop parts, all which were vaporized and destroyed in analysis and microphotography, with full interpretation from him.

The coil geometry, no, won't make a huge noticeable difference, but then again it does if you've been listening as long as I have side by side with the PAF's I own and ones I've had on loan and others I played. There are four main variations of bobbin specs and each one contributes very critically to the big picture. One version doesnt make very good neck pickups, and the StewMac/Allparts types make bad neck pickups compared the right version PAF bobbin set. The bridge is less critical. Anyway, I don't want to be on a soap box here, just really dropping by for a bit. The other thing is that there IS a "PAF tone" that all variations of them share, or I wouldn't be interested in them at all. Impossible to describe but you know it when you play them and I can usually tell by listening when real ones are played without a ton of distortion in a vintage style like my fav's, Bloomfield, Green, Allman, Kossoff, some Page etc. As far as the pickups go its all in the alloys, and every tiny small measurement plays a part in each physical part size. I just got results of lab analyses of about 14 examples of vintage plain enamel magnet wire samples last week, and that stuff has never really been made again since probably the mid-70's. There are some materials that can't be exactly matched so one can get real darn close but never 100%. I could go on and on but I'm not here to sell anything. Bottom line is copy EVERY THING, as close as possible and thats what I'm doing. I have about 25,000 PAF spec pole screws, you can't buy these from anyone and I about had to sell my kidneys to get them made. Send me your address and I'll donate some screws to your project, they alone will make a difference too.....

[heinzlorenzo]

Originally Posted by ievans

I'm not trying to disparage your efforts, understand.

Back in the '50s, there were only a few type foundries in the US that would have supplied type for numbering stamps. It was a simpler world back then, when it came to fonts and font variations.

I'm not a font expert, by any means, but it seems to me unlikely that Gibson was using something custom or non-standard when it came to numbering stamps. So the mystery, to me, is what version of Roman, from what foundry, did they use? Find that, and you've found the exact "vintage-correct" stamp.

Don't forget to let us know when you've found it.

[dynamohum]

Possom - interesting stuff. I love the sound of the players mentioned too. Are you selling these PAF's that you're making? I presume it's more than a personal quest for anyone to have 25K pole screws . I'd be interested in hearing demos (side by side with an original that's known to have the "PAF tone" would be even better).

[Possum]

This is something I know a little bit about, I was a graphic designer for 33 years, Shrapnel Records and EMG were my two biggest clients. I was a designer before computers came around, back in those days all typesetting was done with film masters. In Gibson days fonts were all done on letterpress and existed as metal slugs with each letter on a slug. Something used for numbering a stamping machine is not a font you'll probably ever find in a book anywhere, as those were specialty companies, not font companies that made the stamps. The numbers WOULD have been based on fonts common at the time though, so the trick would be to find old type books with common fonts in use in the 50's. I have some stashed around, I could look for but still they just probably picked from manufacturer numbering sample sizes that fit their purposes and those numbers could have been hand lettered at the company making the stamps. All fonts back then were done by hand lettering and reduced and etched into lead type, well in this case steel...

[Sterling Sound]

Originally Posted by Possum

I've put 8 years into learning virtually everything about PAFs on a very deep level. I have 3 years of lab work done on the metals alone and had a magnetics metallurgist alloys specialist help me with his company's high tech gear and tutoring in experiments and learning metallurgy of ferrous metals, a subject way deeper than my brain is capable of.

Possum I have no reason to doubt your expertise on pickup winding which is evidenced in your own product and pickup winding discussions online. However this is an open forum and Preeb shares way more than most do and does put his reputation on the line with his builds. If want to contribute, please share what you want us to know, but let's not keep pointing to the bag of "unobtainium" you keep holding so close to your chest.

[preeb]

Hey guys... All is OK. I expect everybody to try and point out flaws in what I'm doing. It's like having a much bigger CPU trying to solve complicated problems.
Possum's posts are super valuable and I'm very happy to have him point out everything he finds fit. The bobbin spacing issue is an optical illusion and I can only blame myself for not getting a better camera... I would have pointed out the same thing if I saw this in another build. I'd much rather have you criticize me than take what I do for granted... I do my very best to get it all perfect but I also make mistakes... all the time... I make lots of wrong assumptions and fix things as I go.

[dynamohum]

Ah, so Possum is Stephen of Stephen's Design. I thought I'd seen that handle before. We're honoured to have you on board Mr. Stephen! I've always enjoyed your posts and debates on the electronics forum, and you don't need to respond to my question about original "PAFs" compared to your own as you have a link to a youtube vid doing exactly that .



They sound good, though out of my price range. I make do with Bare Knuckle PU's in most of my guitars. They recently rewound an old gibson PU for me and reversed the "greeny" mod that the previous owner had done. Sounds like new (or rather sounds like 'old' :)).

What's the impedance for your vintage PAF? I see on your site that you do the Peter Green PU at around 8.6K, but I didn't see any specs for the vintage PAF you do.

[WickedGTR]

I guess if we're talking about the minutiae of differences between guitars and pickups, that video demonstrates it pretty well.

I know people can get a little 'overwound' discussing pickups. I first posted on a guitar forum years ago when someone told me a of a debate on which pickups were needed to 'nail' the sound on a particular recording I did. People were surprised (dismayed?) that I used the stock pickups on ordinary production unmodified guitar.

Straying back to the topic, I'm looking forward to seeing how the build progresses. Thanks again Gil fo your generosity in sharing the info on this thread. I'll never build a guitar, (I just try to play and record them) but it's fun to watch the process.

Thanks again-

Jw.

[preeb]

Just listened very carefully to the youtube video. I can hardly hear the pu clean tone through the amp with all that fresh strings acoustic "zing" coming through the condenser. The guy also plays "super heavy right hand"... hardly any dynamics to be compared.
It gets better with the OD but then I notice a big tone depth difference between the two guitars (original is creamier). Is it just me?
Is there another demo for your pu's possum?
Something with a real life normal amp? I don't even need the comparison to a burst.
I'll try to find something on youtube...