double Cream 59 paf

[kevinT]

I've probably got it 90-95% in what I did and I'm not telling how :-) Its super important to identify every single component in those things, alloy, magnets, wire, every tiny thing, then you're on the right track....

Dave

Your clips sound pretty damn good!!! IMHO you definetly got a genuine PAF tone going on.

Is that you playing in your sound clips? If it is, you got some nice chops too.

Totally cranking out the blues!!!

[J S Moore]

Keep in mind that Duane Allman, Billy Gibbons and Eddie Van Halen could've made any pickup sound good. It's just by happenstance that they all played PAFs...which I'm sure didn't hurt the lore at all.

Stan

Actually the majority of Les Paul players of the time talk of how they actually sought out those guitars because of the sound, which is a far cry from happenstance.

[David Schwab]

EVERY magnet is over 100 gauss!!!! Those Annis things are useless , totally and completely useless. Amen. If I remember right they use a spacer arm so that they only measure gauss far enough away to hit in those low readings, so you're not even actually directly measuring whats coming from the magnet.

Ha! I looked them up because I saw Seymour using one. They are a little too low tech for me... but then so is sticking my magnets on the front of my fridge! I'm going to have to get one of those new-fangled gauss meters one of these days.

PAF tone, to me I always identify what I based mine on, Duane Allman, Duane Duane, Jimmy, Clapton Bluesbreakers. All very similar, its so now I hear something on the radio and my ears wake me up if I hear that tone, its identifiable, I don't know anyone who has nailed it 100%.

Even Clapton with Cream... like on SWLABR. That's a great tone. They probably weren't using PAF's either, but that is the Gibson tone in my book. Boy I miss my Les Paul...

Reminds me of the time I replaced the stock pickups on a bolt on PRS for a customer with Duncan Alnico II's. It went from a totally toneless beast to an instant Mic Ronson tone. It just had that Gibsony vibe.

I've probably got it 90-95% in what I did and I'm not telling how :-) Its super important to identify every single component in those things, alloy, magnets, wire, every tiny thing, then you're on the right track.

Yeah, your clips sound great.

Alot of these ebay winders think all you do is mismatch the coils and you got a PAF, yeah sure....

Which is funny considering PAF's really didn't have mismatched coils... not by any significant amount anyway. Now all of a sudden that's a thing to do.

[Spence]

Right everyone, abandon that idea then. Mis-matched coils must be myth.
Meanwhile, I shall continue mis-matching mine because I know better.

[David Schwab]

Right everyone, abandon that idea then. Mis-matched coils must be myth.
Meanwhile, I shall continue mis-matching mine because I know better.

I didn't say don't mismatch coils, I just said mismatching coils because that's true to PAF spec is a fallacy. Gibson didn't intentionally mismatch coils. A lot of humbucking pickups even have both coils wound simultaneously (a Bill Lawrence innovation, TV Jones does it too).

So if someone is going to make a reproduction of a PAF pickup, and as I always say, "which PAF?", mismatching coils might reproduce one particular pickup. Get your hands on a dozen of them and they will all be different. Some might have mismatched coils. Most will be matched pretty close, because that was the intention. If you find a good sounding pickup, and can nail down all the minutiae, than that's a good thing.

But technically what are you doing by mismatching coils? Or even better, what is the disadvantage of matched coils? The two coils in a Gibson style humbucker, even with exact number of turns is already mismatched because of the difference in pole pieces. Therefore, are you mismatching to lessen the difference in induction, or are you mismatching to lessen the small wave length (high frequency) cancelation? Or, are you just trying to make each coil have a different voicing, like DiMarzio does?

So by saying you know better, who are you referring to? Gibson? Seth Lover? They didn't mismatch coils. If it works for your pickup design, that's cool. But there's more pickups out there with matched coils, because that's how humbuckers were designed to work.

(the smily face let's you know I'm not arguing with anyone... I'm asking questions)

[kevinT]

A lot of humbucking pickups even have both coils wound simultaneously (a Bill Lawrence innovation, TV Jones does it too).

To maximize effeciency/production of a specific pickup design, they could be winding multiple bobbins of the same type with the same formula (e.g., winding 2 slug bobbins with the same program/winding pattern at the same time). I hope that made sense

For example, the tooling for my winder is set up to wind 3 of the same kind of bobbins simultaneously. I would wind 3 slug bobbins with a certain formula, and then i would switch my tooling and then load 3 polepiece bobbins into the tooling and wind 3 polepiece bobbins with a different formula.

Most likely because of the different size holes in the bobbins they may have two sets of tooling for each type of bobbin. This way, you can differ your formula on each bobbin using this method and increase production.... where as you would be limited to the same winding pattern on each of the bobbins of the same pickup...which is ok if that is what you wanted in your design.

I could be wrong (which is often the case ) and they could wind the slug and screw bobbins simultaneously.

I only wind one bobbin of each type right now because demand doesn't warrant multiple winds. Hopefully one day, i can bump it up

[David Schwab]

That makes perfect sense, and is the efficient way to do it. I just started doing CW/CCW coils, so I do all in one direction first.

In the case of Lawrence and Jones, they have symmetrical bobbins.
Lawrence's old dual blade humbuckers had matching bobbins of course, and TV Jones pickups have two screw coils.. no slugs.

Lawrence said he did it to perfectly match the both coils. This was to maximize noise cancelation.

You know there was an article once in Guitar Player, I think by Jeff "skunk" Baxter (of the Doobie Brother's) giving instructions on how to make your hunbuckers sound better. The idea was to find the coil with more windings, and unwind it to exactly match the DC resistance of the other (lesser) coil. This he said would make the pickups sound better, and he did this to all his guitars.

So tastes and trends change on things all the time. In his case better sounding might have been quieter.

I know Bartolini mismatches his coils to get more top end. Tuck Andress (Tuck & Patti) asked for a matched humbucker because it as quieter.

EMG either wind each coil differently, or unbalance them electronically. They discontinued the EMG-58 because it hummed a little. That was a nice sounding pickup.

[NightWinder]

I got that skunk baxter artical from a magazine.

[Spence]

That makes perfect sense, and is the efficient way to do it. I just started doing CW/CCW coils, so I do all in one direction first.

In the case of Lawrence and Jones, they have symmetrical bobbins.
Lawrence's old dual blade humbuckers had matching bobbins of course, and TV Jones pickups have two screw coils.. no slugs.

Lawrence said he did it to perfectly match the both coils. This was to maximize noise cancelation.

You know there was an article once in Guitar Player, I think by Jeff "skunk" Baxter (of the Doobie Brother's) giving instructions on how to make your hunbuckers sound better. The idea was to find the coil with more windings, and unwind it to exactly match the DC resistance of the other (lesser) coil. This he said would make the pickups sound better, and he did this to all his guitars.

So tastes and trends change on things all the time. In his case better sounding might have been quieter.

I know Bartolini mismatches his coils to get more top end. Tuck Andress (Tuck & Patti) asked for a matched humbucker because it as quieter.

EMG either wind each coil differently, or unbalance them electronically. They discontinued the EMG-58 because it hummed a little. That was a nice sounding pickup.

Look out, here come the noise Police again.

So did his humbuckers sound better? When you screw with things you're not accustomed to it can be hard to admit you made things worse.

In any case, you can have a whole 1 K difference between coils before the noise police rush in and start fisting you. Gibson's humbuckers were never wildy mismatched.

Now, having been a bass player for many years ( as well as a guitarist ), I'm happy to say that I've firmly left that world of sterility behind me. Most bass players I come accross never change their pickups or even consider it and they almost always have a mental blank when it comes a guitarist's quest for tonal nirvana. Different breed that's all.

[David Schwab]

Look out, here come the noise Police again.

Noise is not music. It doesn't make you sound or play better, unless someone has some illusions that they sound like their favorite old records with noisy pickups. I think by 2007 we should know how to make quiet pickups!

So did his humbuckers sound better? When you screw with things you're not accustomed to it can be hard to admit you made things worse.

Who's humbuckers? Bill Lawrence? I think Bill is more "accustomed" to designing pickups than anyone on this forum. His name appears on a whole bunch of Gibson patents. How many bass players love Thunderbird pickups? I have a pair of his old strat size humbuckers ... they sound great and don't hum! People seem to like his Fender SCN Noiseless pickups. His full size humbuckers are on the bright side, but that's the tone he's going for. Dimebag liked them.

Gibson's humbuckers were never wildy mismatched.

That's what I said. My point was that people make mismatched pickups and claim they are PAF's, but that was never a part of PAF pickups... not intentionally anyway.

Now, having been a bass player for many years ( as well as a guitarist ), I'm happy to say that I've firmly left that world of sterility behind me.

Which world is that? How do you have a sterile pickup? If you have a good sounding instrument, and the pickup reproduces the tone of that instrument, that's all you need. You can't listen to Stanley Clarke or Jeff Berlin and call that tone sterile!

I've been playing bass 39 years, and guitar a little longer. I already know what tone I'm looking for on bass, and I haven't found it in stock pickups so far.

People seem to equate "clean" with sterile, yet a strat or tele pickup is about as clean as you can get. A lot of bass players these days think they are going for a "vintage" tone, which to them means distorted. Not too many bass players used a distorted tone intentionally back then (The great Jack Bruce and Tim Bogert notwithstanding), but we were stuck with sucky bass amps instead. This is why DI was invented!

The real reason so many bass players love mushy distorted tube amps is because it covers up their sloppy playing. Unfortunately, there are a lot of just passable bass players out there.

Most bass players I come accross never change their pickups or even consider it and they almost always have a mental blank when it comes a guitarist's quest for tonal nirvana. Different breed that's all.

"Tonal nirvana" is in the ear of the beholder. Most of the bass players I come across already have Bartolini or EMG pickups in their basses... why would they want to change them? There's been a big after market in replacement bass pickups ever since DiMarzio came out with the Model P in the 70's. If bass players were so happy with the stock Fender pickups, they sure didn't act like it. Everywhere you looked were P basses with cream colored pickups! I even had one in my '72 4001 bass.

I guess you think a Jazz Bass with stock pickups is all that? Not bad for a rather narrow tonal range. I think they are pretty boring myself. I hate that narrow neck. Give me a P-bass neck any day.

Bass players these days are more interested in "modern" high tech instruments and amps, while guitar players want "vintage" style instruments, and the same tone that has been used for the past 40 years! It's not a bad tone, but you will be hard pressed to get most guitar players to use something that isn't a Strat, Tele, or Les Paul derivative. It's a product of the music played, which was invented with those tones, and it just keeps going around.

As an example what instrument are you playing in your user picture?

[Spence]

Sorry. Can't agree with any of that. All the Bill Lawrence pickups I have owned were poor. I don't like his designs. How many people exactly are using thunderbird pickups?
Noise isn't music but then neither is reverb. Is it about time we moved on? Why is it do you think that vinyl refuses to die even though industry tried to kill it dead? The same applies to guitar designs and tones. You might want to kill it off but there's a whole load of people out there who will tell you exactly where to go.
So I'm playing a fender Strat in my little pic. So what. truth is I'm not a huge fan of playing a Strat. I also have a selection of other well known guitars. But then as I have owned over 50 different guitars and basses I feel I'm well qualified to decide not to buy some stupid design based on a coffe table that has no beneficial qualities. I got fed up with Fender and Gibson wannabees, tried some exotic brands and even el cheapo 60's Japanese stuff. No good . Although I appreciate a wood grain or two, I prefer my guitars to look like guitars rather than a piece of furniture.
As for your Bartolini pickups, I would agree they are nice on a bass. Their guitar humbuckers suck big time.
The last recording I made on bass was done in 1992. The enginner insisted I DI instead of using my Hughes & Kettner Valve preamp and poweramp through two 10" and an 18" Eminence. Totally screwed the sound I was after. Too clinical and no warmth. What a bloody waste. Turned me right off bass and studio engineers.

[David Schwab]

Sorry. Can't agree with any of that. All the Bill Lawrence pickups I have owned were poor. I don't like his designs. How many people exactly are using thunderbird pickups?

Pick up a copy of Bass Player. Apparently Thunderbirds are real popular basses these days. I never cared for them myself, mostly because they neck dive. Entwistle liked the pickups. He used them in all his "Fenderbirds".

Noise isn't music but then neither is reverb.

Reverb is a continuation of the sound of the guitar, hum is not. If you prefer hum, don't plug your guitar in, just use some unshielded wire. Noise has no pitch, right? That's why they call it "interference"... it is interfering with the sound.

Why is it do you think that vinyl refuses to die even though industry tried to kill it dead?

Beats the hell out of me. I've A/B'd some of my vinyl with the CD's and the CD's sound better to me. The vinyl is mushy sounding.. no punch. People say it's warm, but it's really soft and muffled. It does not sound like the source material. People buy expensive sound systems and then play vinyl on them. Might as well save the money and play CD's on cheap systems!

And actually MP3's have taken over music sales... vinyl, CD, or otherwise.

The same applies to guitar designs and tones. You might want to kill it off but there's a whole load of people out there who will tell you exactly where to go.

Really? I haven't seen anyone trying too many new guitar designs. Only basses. I'm not trying to kill anything off, I'm just making better basses.

Although I appreciate a wood grain or two, I prefer my guitars to look like guitars rather than a piece of furniture.

So wood grain means it looks like furniture? What about a flame top Les Paul or a nice Martin? Sorry, but an Alembic does not look like a chair.

I like paint too... most of my other basses are black.

As for your Bartolini pickups, I would agree they are nice on a bass. Their guitar humbuckers suck big time.

Depends on what music you are playing. They sound great for jazz. Listen to Tuck Andres. He gets a great tone... warm and clear. But generally bass players prefer more accurate pickups. Guitar players want the sounds they grew up hearing.

The last recording I made on bass was done in 1992. The enginner insisted I DI instead of using my Hughes & Kettner Valve preamp and poweramp through two 10" and an 18" Eminence. Totally screwed the sound I was after. Too clinical and no warmth. What a bloody waste. Turned me right off bass and studio engineers.

Well that was a stupid engineer. I recorded just last week. You couldn't tell I'm not using an amp. Real fat and punchy.

Go put on Sgt. Pepper and tell me the bass is clinical and lacks warmth. That was all DI.

[RickyD]

This is a great thread. There's a lot of hard won knowledge flying around here.

I remember the 70's stuff as the low grade look-alike new crap that started everybody hunting for the 60's stuff. Guess it's all "vintage" now.

[Ruel]

This is a great thread. There's a lot of hard won knowledge flying around here.

I remember the 70's stuff as the low grade look-alike new crap that started everybody hunting for the 60's stuff. Guess it's all "vintage" now.

Yup! Totally enjoyed the interaction between David and Spence (in addition to the contributions of the other members). Learned a lot too. Kinda reminds me somewhat of a Celtic and Hawks ballgame in the '80s. Larry Bird and Dominique Wilkins trading and making shot after shot. Their teammates and the whole crowd watching and waiting who will miss first.

[Spence]

Now then, I do know a little bit about Mr. Entwistle and his Fenderbird hybrids. A great bass player I know was a personal friend of the late great Who bass player and is dedicated to the cause of recreating the Fenderbird. Any idea who will be doing the pickups???

Have a look at these links :

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fu...ogID=134946343

and

http://www.whosnextband.co.uk/index.php?id=craigbio

Oh and yes I'm enjoying the exchanges too.