POLL: The most accurate PAF replica...

[Churchhill]

I wanted a little hotter ( overwound ? ) P.A.F., so I went w/ the MC-102Bs .... I had the Neck pickup reversed so I could get the Peter Green out of phase middle sound. It's cool ..., but it's also a one-trick pony and I'm starting to think I should've just left it stock ....

Anyway, he's a shot of the guitar ....

That's a beautiful guitar! I looked at the MC-102Bs, but wondered if they might be a little too hot for me. I'm basing that on the other PAF-like pickups that I have and like, and to my surprise, I found they were all below 8k. Granted 9.1k isn't that much more, so... I have a sneaking suspicion that I will end up with more than one set of Throbaks. SMH...

I'm guessing that they're not too hot in your experience. Sounds like you really enjoy them!

 

[Churchhill]

I know. Just riding your case because... well... there you are, and you’re good-natured enough that I figured you wouldn’t bite back too hard.

Otherwise, my post still stands. If I could have back just half of all the hours I’ve spent researching things beyond the point of usability, chasing opinions and reviews and blurbs...

LOL! It's all good!! And yeah, I know the feeling... many many hours lost over the years, but it's kinda fun still and there are probably much worse things to obsess over.

I can only imagine the flames if I would've posted about getting those Gibson pickups in any other forum, but so far, they are sounding really good. Still want to try them through many more amps, but they're really doing it for me. And my Throbaks should be here by Friday.

I really have learned a lot from this thread, including a new desire to try some of these German P90s (Amber, Haeussel, Kloppmann) and I do want to try something by Vineham. This thread turned out to be so much more than I'd expected, all thanks to you and everyone who's contributed here. I'll continue to post until I get everything installed, hopefully including some clips, too.

 

[David McCarroll]

I have a/b tested quite a few in vintage Gibsons against real Paf . The first thing to say is real Paf vary a lot so it comes down to what you like.
The most accurate appearance is easy; it is the Throbak and for me I liked it the best too . It is as good as the better originals. The most overrated in that list would be the Ron Ellis IMO . Not to say that they are not good, they are but not better than quite a few of the others.
Best value and easy to get versions I would say are SD Seths and Antiquities, Both way better than most so called boutique versions.
A quick gratuitous Paf pic;
View attachment 140697

Sort of agreeing with both of your choices here - I have two Historic Makeover rebuilt Les Pauls and both have HM's slightly tweaked Throbaks - they sound really, really good... oddly moreso in the Gold Top than the 'Burst, but I'll be a tonewood tragic for a moment and put that down to the plain maple top under the gold finish being a bit harder and more resonant than the figured maple of the 'Burst. I also have a 61 LP/SG that I bought as a wreck and at the time was wary of sinking big money into what might have turned out to be heritage cherry coloured firewood, so I splurged on a set of Antiquities - they are REALLY GOOD - like so good that I am tempted to replace the Throbaks in one of the Les Pauls with them - not bad for about a third of the price.

 

[Andy Eagle]

Sort of agreeing with both of your choices here - I have two Historic Makeover rebuilt Les Pauls and both have HM's slightly tweaked Throbaks - they sound really, really good... oddly moreso in the Gold Top than the 'Burst, but I'll be a tonewood tragic for a moment and put that down to the plain maple top under the gold finish being a bit harder and more resonant than the figured maple of the 'Burst. I also have a 61 LP/SG that I bought as a wreck and at the time was wary of sinking big money into what might have turned out to be heritage cherry coloured firewood, so I splurged on a set of Antiquities - they are REALLY GOOD - like so good that I am tempted to replace the Throbaks in one of the Les Pauls with them - not bad for about a third of the price.

The Throbak has the authentic sound and the totally accurate look but you pay for that . The trouble is I can spot the Duncan cover from the other side of the room on a vintage guitar.

 

[Dave Merrill]

The Throbak has the authentic sound and the totally accurate look but you pay for that . The trouble is I can spot the Duncan cover from the other side of the room on a vintage guitar.

And what? Instant nausea?

 

[Andy Eagle]

And what? Instant nausea?

Spontaneously obviously .

 

[SpudMan]

My search continues: Does anybody know anything about the following pickup manufacturers: Pete A. Flynn, or Curtis Novak? The Flynn pickups look good at first glance, and the Curtis Novak, well I don't know, they are in a Kurt Wilson Custom guitar I saw online.

 

[Budda]

My search continues: Does anybody know anything about the following pickup manufacturers: Pete A. Flynn, or Curtis Novak? The Flynn pickups look good at first glance, and the Curtis Novak, well I don't know, they are in a Kurt Wilson Custom guitar I saw online.

My limited knowledge of Novak is popular jazzmaster replacements at some point. No personal experience though.

 

[Churchhill]

My search continues: Does anybody know anything about the following pickup manufacturers: Pete A. Flynn, or Curtis Novak? The Flynn pickups look good at first glance, and the Curtis Novak, well I don't know, they are in a Kurt Wilson Custom guitar I saw online.

I've heard of Pete A Flynn (P.A.F.... SMH), but have never heard or see of them outside their website. I agree, at first glance, they seem interesting, but no personal experience.

Novak I've been hearing about for the long time, his entire range of Fender pickups is supposed to be good, especially the Jazzmaster @Budda referred to. Definitely someone I'd consider if I was in that market, but I haven't heard anything about his humbuckers. No personal experience with these, either, outside of hearing them in person in someone's Jazzmaster awhile back. Sounded really good.

Still waiting on the Throbaks, should be soon. I did get to play a new Gibson '61 SG with '61 Burstbuckers. AFAIK, these are just like the Burstbucker 1 (8k, unbalanced coils) just with A5 instead of A2. They were actually pretty nice, not as sharp as a lot of A5 PAFs can be. I'm wondering if they're using a short of long magnet. I did like them better than the Burstbucker 1/2 pair I played a week or so ago.

FWIW, the SG seemed as good quality as the LPS. No noticeable flaws, light, resonant, sounded really nicely balanced acoustically with a good woody character. Neck seemed like it had bigger shoulders than my 2000 SG Standard, but pretty close. The only thing I can say about either of those two production guitars is that I wish the necks had softer shoulders or was more C shaped than D, but that's just a personal preference for somewhat thinner necks. Anyway, while it might not be the last 10% of quality compared to the CS Historics, it was still a great guitar.

Edit: correction, "not as sharp as a lot of A5 PAFs;" other typos

 

[SpudMan]

I've heard of Pete A Flynn (P.A.F.... SMH), but have never heard or see of them outside their website. I agree, at first glance, they seem interesting, but no personal experience.

Novak I've been hearing about for the long time, his entire range of Fender pickups is supposed to be good, especially the Jazzmaster @Budda referred to. Definitely someone I'd consider if I was in that market, but I haven't heard anything about his humbuckers. No personal experience with these, either, outside of hearing them in person in someone's Jazzmaster awhile back. Sounded really good.

Still waiting on the Throbaks, should be soon. I did get to play a new Gibson '61 SG with '61 Burstbuckers. AFAIK, these are just like the Burstbucker 1 (8k, unbalanced coils) just with A5 instead of A2. They were actually pretty nice, not as sharp as a lot of A4 PAFs can be. I'm wondering if they're using a short of long magnet. I did like them better than the Burstbucker 1/2 pair I played a week or so ago.

FWIW, the SG seem as good quality as the LPS. No noticeable flaws, light, resonance, sounded really nicely balanced acoustically with a good woody character. Neck seemed like it had bigger shoulders than my 2000 SG Standard, but pretty close. The only things I can say about either of those two production guitars is that I wish the neck had softer shoulders or was more C shaped than D, but that's just a personal preference for somewhat thinner necks. Anyway, while it might not be the last 10% of quality compared to the CS Historics, it was still a great guitar.

Yesterday I made an excursion to a new shop I had never been to before. I was really, really pleasantly surprised. A small shop compared to Guitar Center, etc., but owned by a husband and wife, and clearly an honest labor of love. They have been in business a really long time and treated me really well.
Regarding the LP Standards that I had a negative reaction to at Guitar Center when I went there during the pandemic, I was actually surprised that they looked good actually. They didn't have a new RI of any year, but had a used 2003 57 RI, but it had Burstbuckers, not Custombuckers. So I didn't get the opportunity to compare the BB 1 and 2's on the 2003 57 RI, or the new 50's Standard to the Custombuckers. I couldn't tell a difference really between the BB's on either of the guitars mentioned here. I almost walked out with a Boubon Burst 50's Standard with the thought that I could play it for a while and ultimately replace the pickups. But I am still thinking the other differences might make the RI's "better". They have this guitar on order. Looks similar to the 57 RI. They are going to call me when it gets in, likely in a couple of weeks, and I will go back to play it. Not sure if my ears will be able to tell the difference or not, regarding the wood, but at least I can see if the Custombuckers are noticeably better to me. In the end it is deciding if my money is best spent on a 50's Standard with the thought of replacing pickups sometime in the near to mid term future, or whether the one below would be a longer term keeper in terms of the stock components.

1957 Les Paul Goldtop Ultra Light Aged, Double Gold​

Any way, I was definitely happy with the shop and they also said they will let me know when used guitars come in that might interest me, like a Firebird maybe.

 

[Budda]

@SpudMan that is an R7, light aged at murphy lab.

 

[Churchhill]

Yesterday I made an excursion to a new shop I had never been to before. I was really, really pleasantly surprised. A small shop compared to Guitar Center, etc., but owned by a husband and wife, and clearly an honest labor of love. They have been in business a really long time and treated me really well.
Regarding the LP Standards that I had a negative reaction to at Guitar Center when I went there during the pandemic, I was actually surprised that they looked good actually. They didn't have a new RI of any year, but had a used 2003 57 RI, but it had Burstbuckers, not Custombuckers. So I didn't get the opportunity to compare the BB 1 and 2's on the 2003 57 RI, or the new 50's Standard to the Custombuckers. I couldn't tell a difference really between the BB's on either of the guitars mentioned here. I almost walked out with a Boubon Burst 50's Standard with the thought that I could play it for a while and ultimately replace the pickups. But I am still thinking the other differences might make the RI's "better". They have this guitar on order. Looks similar to the 57 RI. They are going to call me when it gets in, likely in a couple of weeks, and I will go back to play it. Not sure if my ears will be able to tell the difference or not, regarding the wood, but at least I can see if the Custombuckers are noticeably better to me. In the end it is deciding if my money is best spent on a 50's Standard with the thought of replacing pickups sometime in the near to mid term future, or whether the one below would be a longer term keeper in terms of the stock components.

1957 Les Paul Goldtop Ultra Light Aged, Double Gold​

Any way, I was definitely happy with the shop and they also said they will let me know when used guitars come in that might interest me, like a Firebird maybe.

That sounds like a great shop! Not sure if they're better or worse, but the Custombuckers do sound different than the Burstbuckers. Based on my recent experiences with production Gibsons, they're making some great sounding guitars these days, so you may or may not be able to hear much difference in the wood. However, with my R0, the difference is in feel, too, the way it vibrates in my hands is different. Again, not necessarily better or worse, and maybe not related to the wood at all, but noticeable to me.

What did you think of the 2003 R7 vs the new '50s Standard with regard to feel in the hand and unplugged sound?

 

[SpudMan]

That sounds like a great shop! Not sure if they're better or worse, but the Custombuckers do sound different than the Burstbuckers. Based on my recent experiences with production Gibsons, they're making some great sounding guitars these days, so you may or may not be able to hear much difference in the wood. However, with my R0, the difference is in feel, too, the way it vibrates in my hands is different. Again, not necessarily better or worse, and maybe not related to the wood at all, but noticeable to me.

What did you think of the 2003 R7 vs the new '50s Standard with regard to feel in the hand and unplugged sound?

Regarding the 2003 R7 vs. the new 50's Standard, clearly to me the 2003 felt better, resonated better, and definitely looked better. But again, I couldn't tell the difference when amplified.
I did a comparison in specs from the Gibson website as follows: (1) 50's Standard, (2) new R7, the one listing for $4,999, and (3) the 1957 LP Goltop Ultra Light Aged. The last two seem identical with the exception of the light aging, as Budda said above. But when comparing other specs from body specs, to hardware, to electronics, it seems clear that there is a lot of value added in the reiisues. Is it worth almost double the price, probably not in terms of a pure dollar comparison. But for me, this is a big purchase, and it really has to count for me. So, given the intangibles like the specs, I lean towards it is worth paying more for the reissues. But again, for me this is a big purchase, and it is quite possible that whichever I would choose, I might want to upgrade pickups sometime in the future. And for the 50's Standard, the wiring harness would likely need to be replaced/upgraded if I bought it and changed pickups at a later date.
But I was at least happy that the new 50's Standard's didn't look like junk to me, like the ones at Guitar Center did during the pandemic. I am thinking that I likely was just too traumitized at that time to make a clear headed evaluation.

 

[Budda]

@SpudMan

03: different glue, different rosewood supply (madagascar iirc? Generally lighter in appearance), burstbucker, fret size, older historics had way bigger necks, pretty sure fret size changed.

The 2019+ carried over the true historic upgrades and are closer to vintage spec. This also means the necks are slimmer and generally more comfortable for more people. Of course with dealer runs/made2measure you can get any neck on any historic year. For this reason I find it a very hard pill to swallow when a pre-2019 is listed for 2019+ spec prices.

The above is not to say pre 2019 historics are bad at all (ive owned two and played a couple more) but if you want accuracy (the goal of the custom shop) you want current.

 

[SpudMan]

@SpudMan

03: different glue, different rosewood supply (madagascar iirc? Generally lighter in appearance), burstbucker, fret size, older historics had way bigger necks, pretty sure fret size changed.

The 2019+ carried over the true historic upgrades and are closer to vintage spec. This also means the necks are slimmer and generally more comfortable for more people. Of course with dealer runs/made2measure you can get any neck on any historic year. For this reason I find it a very hard pill to swallow when a pre-2019 is listed for 2019+ spec prices.

The above is not to say pre 2019 historics are bad at all (ive owned two and played a couple more) but if you want accuracy (the goal of the custom shop) you want current.

Makes sense. The 2003 was nice looking compared to the new 50's Standards, but I didn't feel it warranted the significant additional cost. I am going to go in to play the new lightly aged R7 when it comes in. My gut tells me it won't be value to me above the new R7 that lists for $500 less, but .... I will tell the shop that and see if they can cut me a deal which narrows the price difference. If they can't do that, and I would fully understand if they can't, I will ask them to let me know when the non Murphy Agefd R7 comes in.

 

[Churchhill]

Regarding the 2003 R7 vs. the new 50's Standard, clearly to me the 2003 felt better, resonated better, and definitely looked better. But again, I couldn't tell the difference when amplified.
I did a comparison in specs from the Gibson website as follows: (1) 50's Standard, (2) new R7, the one listing for $4,999, and (3) the 1957 LP Goltop Ultra Light Aged. The last two seem identical with the exception of the light aging, as Budda said above. But when comparing other specs from body specs, to hardware, to electronics, it seems clear that there is a lot of value added in the reiisues. Is it worth almost double the price, probably not in terms of a pure dollar comparison. But for me, this is a big purchase, and it really has to count for me. So, given the intangibles like the specs, I lean towards it is worth paying more for the reissues. But again, for me this is a big purchase, and it is quite possible that whichever I would choose, I might want to upgrade pickups sometime in the future. And for the 50's Standard, the wiring harness would likely need to be replaced/upgraded if I bought it and changed pickups at a later date.
But I was at least happy that the new 50's Standard's didn't look like junk to me, like the ones at Guitar Center did during the pandemic. I am thinking that I likely was just too traumitized at that time to make a clear headed evaluation.

I take the specs Gibson publishes with a grain of salt. They seem to use pretty broad terms to describe neck shape, hardware, etc., and although they're not inaccurate, they're not too specific, either.

For what it was, I didn't think the '50s Standard wiring harness looked too bad. The pots and switch seemed to be decent quality. These aren't the circuit board Gibsons, everything's mounted to a shielding plate and wired directly. The tone caps looked like the old PS series Orange Drops, but the markings were different, and I didn't get a good look at them, so I can't be sure. They were wired to the input of the volume, so modern style.

In 2003 on the Reissues, Gibson were using the Bumblebee "replicas" (or whatever they called them at the time) which weren't really Bumblebee replicas at all, other than visually. They've recently (guessing 2019) switched to actual replicas that are constructed like the old ones, paper in oil. The 2003 harness wasn't really much better than the current '50s Standard and the pots may have been the 300k versions back then, too, but mine are long gone and I don't remember.

Personally, I'm a big fan of RS Guitarworks pots and their wiring kits and harnesses. While maybe not vintage accurate, I really like the taper of their pots and they use good quality components. Great people to deal with, too.

For me, when I'm picking out a guitar, how it sounds unplugged and how it feels are much more important than what it sounds like plugged in. One thing about PAFs or any unpotted pickup is they act like microphones in addition to transducing the vibration of the string. While they can squeal in front of a loud monitor, just like any other microphone, they are picking up a whole other aspect of how the guitar sounds, too, that potted pickups just can't do.

 

[Churchhill]

@SpudMan

03: different glue, different rosewood supply (madagascar iirc? Generally lighter in appearance), burstbucker, fret size, older historics had way bigger necks, pretty sure fret size changed.

The 2019+ carried over the true historic upgrades and are closer to vintage spec. This also means the necks are slimmer and generally more comfortable for more people. Of course with dealer runs/made2measure you can get any neck on any historic year. For this reason I find it a very hard pill to swallow when a pre-2019 is listed for 2019+ spec prices.

The above is not to say pre 2019 historics are bad at all (ive owned two and played a couple more) but if you want accuracy (the goal of the custom shop) you want current.

Yep, pretty sure fret size changed, too, especially on the R7 and R8, probably the R4 and R6, too. And those necks used to really be baseball bats.

I agree completely. The pre-Historic-Spec reissues are great guitars, and for the people to whom such things matter, the Historic-Spec was a step up, and the 2019+ changes were another. And yeah, the prices should reflect this, IMHO.

From the few that I've played, it seems to me that the shoulders of the neck are what's changed the most. The center is still decently thick, but it's more of a rounded C or almost a very soft V than the earlier necks that thought were more D shaped.

 

[DeeSquared]

I’ve been closely following your discussion about the new 50s Standards vs the 57 Reissues. I would really like in the not too distant future treat myself to a gold top and am looking forward to seeing what conclusion you come to. I don’t mean to hijack the thread, but have either of you considered or tried out a Heritage either the standard or the custom core line?

 

[Churchhill]

I’ve been closely following your discussion about the new 50s Standards vs the 57 Reissues. I would really like in the not too distant future treat myself to a gold top and am looking forward to seeing what conclusion you come to. I don’t mean to hijack the thread, but have either of you considered or tried out a Heritage either the standard or the custom core line?

I have not tried a Heritage, but I've always been interested in them. I've heard many great things about them, just haven't ever been around many, have only seen a handful in stores over the years. Given how long they've been around, that might speak well of them because it may be that the people who do have them hang onto them.

I'd be interested in hearing any opinions on them from anyone that has one.

Saw this awhile back and thought it was interesting...

 

[SpudMan]

I take the specs Gibson publishes with a grain of salt. They seem to use pretty broad terms to describe neck shape, hardware, etc., and although they're not inaccurate, they're not too specific, either.

For what it was, I didn't think the '50s Standard wiring harness looked too bad. The pots and switch seemed to be decent quality. These aren't the circuit board Gibsons, everything's mounted to a shielding plate and wired directly. The tone caps looked like the old PS series Orange Drops, but the markings were different, and I didn't get a good look at them, so I can't be sure. They were wired to the input of the volume, so modern style.

In 2003 on the Reissues, Gibson were using the Bumblebee "replicas" (or whatever they called them at the time) which weren't really Bumblebee replicas at all, other than visually. They've recently (guessing 2019) switched to actual replicas that are constructed like the old ones, paper in oil. The 2003 harness wasn't really much better than the current '50s Standard and the pots may have been the 300k versions back then, too, but mine are long gone and I don't remember.

Personally, I'm a big fan of RS Guitarworks pots and their wiring kits and harnesses. While maybe not vintage accurate, I really like the taper of their pots and they use good quality components. Great people to deal with, too.

For me, when I'm picking out a guitar, how it sounds unplugged and how it feels are much more important than what it sounds like plugged in. One thing about PAFs or any unpotted pickup is they act like microphones in addition to transducing the vibration of the string. While they can squeal in front of a loud monitor, just like any other microphone, they are picking up a whole other aspect of how the guitar sounds, too, that potted pickups just can't do.

Great, and very helpful info as usual. I hadn't heard of RS Guitarworks but if I do a build I would definitely look at them. i "could" do the wiring myself, but I am just not great at soldering. So I prefer not to do all of that from scratch if an alternative exists.
I hadn't thought about the unplugged comparison before. I will definitely pay more attention to that when I go back.
As to the 2003 reissue, even I could tell it wasn't anything "special" like I was expecting. Like I said above, it didn't seem any better than the new 50's Standard.