Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PAF Mysteries and the Leesona 102

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • PAF Mysteries and the Leesona 102

    Okay guys. Here is the long winded manifesto. Feel free to savage me. I'm sure some of this some people already know but I think there is some good info here.

    To begin with I just want to state that this post is not an effort to pass judgment upon those that wish to hand wind in their quest for PAF tone. I myself used to offered a hand wound PAF clone. But over the last two years I have changed my approach in favor of machine winding via computer winding machine of my own design and now via my own Leesona 102 winding machine. I recently purchased one of the few complete and functional Leesona 102 winders left. Now having learned exactly what the Leesona 102 does it has clarified some of the mysteries of the PAF for me. I thought this would be of particular interest to pickup winders and vintage Gibson enthusiasts.

    So what is the Leesona 102?

    In the late 40's Gibson purchased two Leesona Model 102 coil winders to use for winding guitar pickups. These winders remained in use at Gibson until Gibson moved from Kalamazoo. It is widely accepted that the Leesona 102 winder was used in the manufacture of PAF pickups. It is also widely accepted that PAF's were exclusively machine wound. Here are some pics of mine fress of the truck.



    Why do PAF's vary so widely in resistance?

    The Leesona 102 is a 3 station winder. Each of these 3 stations have separate start levers. The manner in which it is usually run is for one station to be set up and started and then the operator moves on to the next station to set it up until all 3 stations are running. If the winding is timed as Gibson apparently did for most of the PAF era you end up with 3 bobbins with staggered turn counts for each run of the machine. Throw the wound bobbins in a box and it is anyone's guess what you end up with for resistance of the finished pickup. The Leesona 102 did in fact come with manual counters with auto shutoffs. However the gears that runs the counters are fiber gears and not very durable in a day to day use situation. I believe that by the time PAF's were being wound it is quite likely that all of the Leesona 102 counters had failed and Gibson had long since abandoned then and gone to the timing method of stopping the coil wind.

    What accounts for the widely varying winding patterns of PAF's?

    The Leesona 102 was never exclusively used for any one pickup model. Consequently it would require a set up change for each different model wound on it. And each time it was reset up to do a PAF the parameters of the winding pattern would have to be changed. Some of these adjustments are very crude on the Leesona 102 and operators would only be able to do a ballpark adjustment at best which would mean wide variations in winding pattern between set ups. I have retro fitted my own Leesona 102 with dial indicators in order to make set ups repeatable and to allow for accurate experimentation between them. But the original machine is not capable of having some of the parameters fine tuned beyond a trial and error set up without this retrofit. So good enough would be all that was aimed for by the operator resulting in widely varying winding patterns.

    What factors account for the erratic and sometimes hand wound character of PAF coils winding patterns?

    The above factors in user setup account for much of the variation. But another important factor is the tolerances inherent in the machine itself. The Leesona 102 is designed to do coils as large as 3". At 3" the tolerances of the cam and other mechanisms of the machine are negligible. But if you ratchet the traverse down to 1/4" for a PAF bobbin these same tolerances now become a very large percentage of the now very small 1/4" traverse of the wire guide. The result is a sometimes very non linear wire traverse when compared to a modern computer guided winding machine or even compared to the same machine at a 3" traverse.

    Why does the wire diameter vary with PAF pickups and why do the bobbins warp?

    The first simple answer concerning wire diameter is that the difference between maximum and minimum tolerances of 42AWG plain enamel magnet wire. But this is not the whole story. The Leesona 102 came with tensioners that were only designed to accommodate 40AWG magnet wire. This means that when you use the thinner 42AWG wire it is very easily is stretched. My Leesona 102 has the original functioning wire tensioners and I can attest that they are a pain to set up. The only other functional Leesona 102 I am aware of uses a whisker disk for tensioning and I completely understand why as it is a breeze to set up. But if you don't use the original tensioners this higher tension factor can be lost. The additional tension makes for a very tightly wound coil which encourages the warpage of the already soft butyrate bobbins.

    Other facts about the Leesona 102.

    The Leesona 102 came with a standard gear set from the factory that would give several very specific turn per layer numbers. This turn per layer count is independent of the traverse travel adjustment. So the same gear set would give the same turn per layer count for a 1/4" bobbin or a 3" bobbin. In my experience there is only one PAF turn per layer number and this is one that the Leesona 102 would do with the stock factory gear sets. I have heard of another turn per layer count for PAF's but cannot confirm this personally with my own PAF research. But interestingly enough this other turn per layer count does jibe with the factory gear sets of the Leesona 102. So perhaps the two Leesona 102 winders Gibson had were set to two different turn per layer counts. But this again is speculation on my part which I have not confirmed to my satisfaction.

    The Leesona 102 had one cam for all traverse sizes and turn per layer counts. The ingenious design of the Leesona 102 means that one cam covers the territory for all winding scenarios of the machine. Knowing this when I first got my Leesona 102 winder I feared that the cam might be significantly worn. But the Leesona 102 is a mammoth machine that is way over engineered for what it does. The cam itself sits in a pool of oil as do most of the other moving parts of the winder. This meant the cam and in fact every other important mechanism on my Leesona 102 showed wear that was nearly non existent.

    So what effect does all of this have on the tone of the PAF?

    Well that is a question for every maker to decide for themselves. But make no mistake all of these variable effect the final tone of a PAF style pickup. I'm in the process of quantifying all of this for myself. As a hand winder much of the things I learned from experiments with my computer controlled winder and my Leesona 102 were entirely contrary to what I learned hand winding. Machine winding has a different set of rules but ultimately results in a coil and tone that I feel cannot be gotten any other way other than machine winding. The PAF is a compilation of parts many of which have a direct effect on the final tone of the pickup. But perhaps the most abstract of these variables is the wind if the wire. Placing this abstract within the frame of the Leesona 102 has given the winding of a PAF a mental, visual and auditory clarity that I had been searching for.
    They don't make them like they used to... We do.
    www.throbak.com
    Vintage PAF Pickups Website

  • #2
    I'm curious as to how consistent the end product is when you conduct multiple runs of bobbins with the same setup/wind count. Also, do you find that the tension is relatively consistent from the start of the wind to the finish?

    Comment


    • #3
      So what you're saying is, Gibson made PAFs at random on tooling that wasn't suitable for the job, and we only like them now because the bad sounding ones got changed out by their owners over the years?

      Sounds like the same effect that makes us think vintage amps are better... all the vintage amps that sucked had plenty of time to end up as landfill.
      "Enzo, I see that you replied parasitic oscillations. Is that a hypothesis? Or is that your amazing metal band I should check out?"

      Comment


      • #4
        Hmmmm,

        So how many turns per layer does a Leesona 102 wind with the standard factory gears?

        Thanks,

        AC

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Ampclutz View Post
          Hmmmm,

          So how many turns per layer does a Leesona 102 wind with the standard factory gears?

          Thanks,

          AC

          HA, I don't think you are going to get the answer to that question. I've been wrong before but I don't think so this time.....

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Dave Kerr View Post
            I'm curious as to how consistent the end product is when you conduct multiple runs of bobbins with the same setup/wind count. Also, do you find that the tension is relatively consistent from the start of the wind to the finish?
            Yes once set up tension is consistent from the start to finish of the wind. But the tension on the magnet wire of the completed bobbin may vary due to how the traverse was set up. You may end up with loose winds on one end of the coils due to the coil shape collapsing on itself during winding. But this is not due to the set up of the tensioners.


            I'm not saying what the turn per layer possibilities are but there are several that the machine would do stock from the factory. If you research it a little you probably can come up with the numbers but knowing which number is the one for PAF's is key. It is a major operation to change the gear sets and I think it is likely that Gibson would have kept the machine set up for just one combination for this reason.
            They don't make them like they used to... We do.
            www.throbak.com
            Vintage PAF Pickups Website

            Comment


            • #7
              This is the Leesona 102 from the Gibson factory.

              Click image for larger version

Name:	sd leesona 102.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	65.5 KB
ID:	811164

              It's the one that Seymour bought from them. I understand he's a very amicable person and may well take your call if you have a question for him. I would at least email him as he has a lot of experience with this machine.
              sigpic Dyed in the wool

              Comment


              • #8
                Yes, Sam can agree, Seymour velly nice guy but also velly busy guy these days. He know plenty about Leesona machine and about PAF.

                Comment


                • #9
                  PAF

                  So what does SamLeeGuy know about PAF?
                  http://www.SDpickups.com
                  Stephens Design Pickups

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    .......

                    its interesting that some who have complete access to old PAFs and Gibson personnel and factory have gone the hand wound method, Tom Holmes being the most notable. I'm attaching a picture of his winding setup. Spence has alot of experience with PAFs and chose the hand wind, but then there's Duncan who bought their old winder. I think the difference between a hand wind and the way the old PAFs were wound is probably actually pretty close. Even on my machine I just don't let the thing run without interference, I often grab the wire and fill in spots or stop the traverse and let it fill in the ends etc. so it ain't nowhere near what a modern coil winder would do. A consistent hand guided wind would probably be very close to a Leesona's performance, plus it would give you more control over desired tones probably. So this Leesona stuff is very grey area, its not really a good machine product nor a very consistent wind.
                    http://www.SDpickups.com
                    Stephens Design Pickups

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      You know what really sucks is I had jobs with access to all the things necessary for building stuff before I got into all this nonsense.
                      Straight out of school i worked for an Aerospace co. that make syncros and resolvers and they had all the same equipment for winding their various transformers.
                      Like winders pictured above.
                      Okay, I'll go away now.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        ooops....

                        here's Holme's winder....
                        Attached Files
                        http://www.SDpickups.com
                        Stephens Design Pickups

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Possum View Post
                          its interesting that some who have complete access to old PAFs and Gibson personnel and factory have gone the hand wound method, Tom Holmes being the most notable. I'm attaching a picture of his winding setup. Spence has alot of experience with PAFs and chose the hand wind, but then there's Duncan who bought their old winder. I think the difference between a hand wind and the way the old PAFs were wound is probably actually pretty close. Even on my machine I just don't let the thing run without interference, I often grab the wire and fill in spots or stop the traverse and let it fill in the ends etc. so it ain't nowhere near what a modern coil winder would do. A consistent hand guided wind would probably be very close to a Leesona's performance, plus it would give you more control over desired tones probably. So this Leesona stuff is very grey area, its not really a good machine product nor a very consistent wind.
                          The Leesona 102 is actually very consistent but the problem is the complete lack of a scales or gauges for adjusting the traverse. That is why I retrofitted it with dial indicators so I can experiment with different set ups. With this retrofit my Leesona 102 is going to be way more consistent than a hand winder could ever hope to be. The traverse, turn per layer and rpm are mechanically locked which give it control and consistency unapproachable with hand winding.

                          There are a few advantages of using the Leesona 102 that you can't get with hand winding. One is you get a mechanically much more solid coil with the Leesona 102 and if the pickup remains unpotted I think this translates into a much more acoustic like response from a machine wound pickup since it is mechanically going to be more efficient at transmitting sound through the coil body. The other is you can't get the same repeatability in turns per layer even with the most solid hand guided wire. This means that you really can't accurately duplicate the kind of localized scatter that you get from one of these old machines by hand winding.

                          In a strange way the the repeatability of the inherent inconsistencies of the Leesona 102's traverse are it's biggest advantage. In this sense it is the perfect machine for winding pickups.

                          There is one simple thing that may have played a part in why Holmes and others hand wind. His experience is probably with large machines like the Leesona 102 and ones even larger. These machines are hard to come by used and are extremely expensive to buy new. Plus they are huge, heavy and not real practical for a home shop. Put all of that together and it just may have been out of reach for many that might have wanted them. It could be just a preference though. Or it could have been he considered it a good marketing move. When he started to hand wind there were far fewer people doing it. There is a very sort of romantic ideal that hand winding satisfies. You get a real sense of individual ownership from the finished product. Kind of the same feeling I used to get from doing my own photographic prints before digital came along. But I must admit I don't miss the darkroom time.
                          Last edited by JGundry; 11-14-2007, 06:29 AM.
                          They don't make them like they used to... We do.
                          www.throbak.com
                          Vintage PAF Pickups Website

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Spence View Post
                            This is the Leesona 102 from the Gibson factory.

                            [ATTACH]1180[/ATTACH]

                            It's the one that Seymour bought from them. I understand he's a very amicable person and may well take your call if you have a question for him. I would at least email him as he has a lot of experience with this machine.
                            Good suggestion. I actually thought about calling Seymour but I have gleaned so much from the DVD that shows his Leesona 102 running that I only have one unanswered question. I'm not real clear about how he mounts the bobbins to the winder because they appear to be held on by a press fit. But I have an alternative method this easy to do.

                            But as far as the modern auto stop counters I already have all of that worked out. The bass player in my band is an electrical engineer for a local manufacturer. He drew me up a schematic an a B.O.M. for modern auto stop counters.
                            Last edited by JGundry; 11-14-2007, 04:39 AM.
                            They don't make them like they used to... We do.
                            www.throbak.com
                            Vintage PAF Pickups Website

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Possum View Post
                              So what does SamLeeGuy know about PAF?
                              Sam knows that OK sauce, KP sauce, PAF sauce all velly tasty!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X