Information about this 1950's Gibson doubleneck Console

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 22 Jan 2010 1:05 pm

With the steel bar just lying on the strings at the first fret (With NO PRESURE), all strings should make contact with the bar, if some strings don't make contact with the bar then (the gauges being correct and increasing linearly from the first string, with no re-entrant notes) the nut is incorrect and couldn't possibly have left the factory in that un-aligned state.
If there are slots in the nut then you should file the ones that are out of alignment and correct them.

The bridge is level and so should be the depth of the slots at the nut.
You say the strings form an arch like a bridge, (near the nut presumably) well, If the strings you are using get thicker in a linear fashion, then the nut MUST be incorrect if you have to press more than a nominal amount.

John Billings · Post by **John Billings** » 22 Jan 2010 1:10 pm

I agree with Basil. It's a very cool guitar. Get that nut fixed! That's why pedal steels use gauged rollers. So that the tops of the strings are level. All on one plane. You won't be hurting the guitar's value by making it playable, with such a small amount of what is basically just "set-up" work.

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 22 Jan 2010 1:31 pm

Thanks guys!

I agree with both of you entirely. the nut is wrong, it's why I was going to have a new one made. I think for value they recommend keeping it the same, but since you guys are the ones who play them and would probably want it in the future..... maybe I should listen!

I am considering trying to trade it for a pedal. That was good info about the bridge, thank you. I go back and forth. I will probably see how much it will cost to get it ready to play and decide. I am running out of extra guitar money!

This is what Gruhn's guitar techs said

As far as the nut, the metal ones often have little more than a very small notch – even if it doesn’t I would leave it as-is as long as the string spacing works.

John Billings · Post by **John Billings** » 22 Jan 2010 1:43 pm

"As far as the nut, the metal ones often have little more than a very small notch – even if it doesn’t I would leave it as-is as long as the string spacing works."

Probably not a steel player!

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 22 Jan 2010 1:54 pm

Obviously some of the "Notches" are more than small, so I'd suggest just filing down the small ones to match. No Need to have a new nut made..

Paul DiMaggio · Post by **Paul DiMaggio** » 22 Jan 2010 3:48 pm

A cheap way to file the notches is with a set of oxy-acetylene torch tip cleaners.Around here they are about $5 CAD.I don't know what the nut is made of, [and I have no intention of reigniting the metal discussion]but I have used tip cleaners successfully on aluminum,stainless and mild steel nuts.

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 22 Jan 2010 9:51 pm

Hmm, I have some of those cleaners, good to know. I will let a pro set it up though, can't mess up such a gem.

This is the best shot I can get of the metal tonight. Look at my reflection in all of the metal pieces and compare to see if you think it looks like the same. See how shiny it is on the two covers and how dull it is on the pickup?

Heh, this isn't my pickup at all.
http://cgi.ebay.com/1950%27s-GIBSON-CON ... 32005r8981

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 24 Jan 2010 8:57 pm

So three questions;

1. Does anyone care the bridge is 1mm in the paint on the front side? I've heard this is common and I've heard this is strange. I'd like to hear the people who see these things opinions. Every repairman seems to agree it's not a big deal. That's really the only problem with her. Gruhn still valued her at $1200 or so with that. Everything else is me worrying too much. If I wasn't worried about this, I would be more prone to play what is an otherwise great shape guitar.

2. If I tried to trade/sell her think I could get $1200 for it or is it one of those where it's really only worth $600, $1200 is inflated. (I did see one on ebay go for $1100 in what looked like worse shape, I don't like ripping people off though. http://cgi.ebay.com.sg/ws/eBayISAPI.dll ... 0395513202)

3. are 60's fender pedals a decent replacement, or am I stupid.

I found a guy in town Gruhn recommended who worked for them to do the work, though I'm kind of leaning to trade her and let whoever do what they want, if anyone would want it.

50 year old guitars are kind of scary.

John Billings · Post by **John Billings** » 24 Jan 2010 9:09 pm

"50 year old guitars are kind of scary."

No, 50 year old guitars are wonderful. Consider yourself very lucky to have one. Fix her up. and play the heck outa her1

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 24 Jan 2010 9:19 pm

John Billings wrote:
No, 50 year old guitars are wonderful.

That too! I don't even look at new ones. I am very lucky. For less price you can have these treasures.

I think I like the guitar too much. Does that make sense at all? I play the Rick. I stare at the Gibson! I don't want to mess her up. I got to get over it.

Still, are 60's fender pedals any good? I've been wanting one whether I keep this or not.

Edit: Didn't want to bump this. The guitar is going to a guy who Gruhn suggested to be set up, tommorrow. I'm going to play it a few times, see if I can deal with giving it up before I do anything.

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 27 Jan 2010 5:17 pm

Big day today as to the guitar. Was pretty exciting.

I took her to Ben Burgett, formerly employed by Gruhn Guitar for 12 years and Taylor. He currently works fro Rumbleseat in Ithaca, who has real 1959 PAF Les Pauls. He was a wealth of information. The guitar is in excellent shape according to him, he said whoever owned it never molested it, so much so all setup etc will cost me a whole $45.

First;

THE PICKUP IS NOT NICKLE!!!
He was of the opinion it was brushed aluminum or stainless steel. It also has brass screws which I think changed to something else later. This oddly backs up everything I said. It appears to be from about 1956. Which would make it a patent applied for humbucking pickup, but as Basil points out, the market does not refer to it as that, so yeah, wrap your noggin around that. More later on dating.

Two, it has a bumblebee capacitor, which I was told was worth $100 on it's own.

Three, the pots date to late 1956! Ben was pretty sure it was a 1957 guitar, which considering photos I've seen makes sense, they added some lettering to the top of it. He is going to do what he can to further date it. I will update this as I can. The knobs are not original. EVERYTHING else is. He went over the paint with a blacklight even.

Four, the bridge is perfect, it's totally normal and happens he said, it's only into the paint a tiny little bit. I need to stop worrying so much, it's bad trait in me. I totally devalued my guitar talking to everyone, it's probably worth more then Gruhn's estimate by a tad. Ben is going to provide me with some sort of letter of it being in good shape etc.

5. The pickup screw is fine, the bobbin shrunk over the years, again, totally normal.

I'm happy.

Picture time. I will post serials etc when I get the guitar back if you guys want. I'm a little less interested in selling this now.

You can see the bridge for yourselves, it's really not bad.

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 27 Jan 2010 5:42 pm

irrelevant (Apparently)

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 27 Jan 2010 7:38 pm

Absolutely! The nut is being properly setup, so I will not be able to get better pictures of it as it was. This is the best one I have.

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 27 Jan 2010 8:26 pm

irrelevant (Apparently)

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 27 Jan 2010 8:33 pm

Geez Basil! You sir, really are one full of surprises. I'm going to have to learn you are not a guy to tangle with.

MULTIFLUX-The most revolutionary pickup ever devised. It contains FOUR coils forming a STEREO unit within a standard case, all four ends of the coils being brought out to provide the maximum combinations. Two of these pickups when linked with the complex switching will give up to TWENTY-SIX different tones in Stereo, Mono, Anti-phase or QUADRAPHONIC. Such a range of effects is of infinite benefit for studio work where tonal changes can be made without changing over instruments. The number of combinations can be limited by individual requirements to avoid over-complication.

Can you get me one of these?

I'm going to start reading up on what you posted. I am totally mixing up my info!

Thank you for this. I mean it. It is fun figuring out what happened here. This guitar just gets better and better. I forgot to mention one pot dated 1954.

So what do we do next to try to figure this out? Ben seemed quite certain it was not nickle on the pickups. I believe him, obviously.

The bottom plates seemed to be standard, but the top.....
If you are ever near me I will bring it by. Otherwise I think I will be emailing Lollar, and Seymore Duncan? Any other ideas?

I also need to re-ask at this point, Basil, as our local metalurgical expert, what do you think they are made of?

SWD: When were the first humbuckers used commercially? Early 1957 or 1967
Seth Lover: I suppose 56-57, right along in there. I know when the patent was applied for, and there was no activity from CMI as to wanting it put on until some trade show came along where some competitor had a humbucking pickup. And the story came back, why don’t we have something like that and I said “well you’ve got it hanging in there on the wall, all you have to do is figure out how you want to make the cover. So that brought it to a head and we went into production.

SWD: What is the material and purpose of the bottom plate?
Seth Lover: The bottom plate is a non-magnetic material so that you did not detract from the magnet. You wanted the magnet to go through the pole pieces and the pole screw to the strings. That’s the path you wanted the magnetism to follow. That’s why on most of those you’ll find brass screws in the bottom. I didn’t want to detract any from the magnet into those brass screws.

SWD: Some pickup manufacturers use steel screw to secure the bobbins to the bottom plate.
Seth Lover: If they are willing to accept that loss, well fine. When I designed it, I wanted brass in there. I didn’t want to take away any of the magnetic strength in a useless point.

SWD: You like using Nickel Silver for the bottom plate and cover.
Seth Lover: Yes.

SWD: The legs on the bottom plate are L’ shaped.
Seth Lover: You had to have room for a spring so if you are going to adjust up and down--you couldn’t have it come just straight out, there wasn’t room enough for a spring to get any appreciable adjustment up and down. So I brought the legs down so I could get a long enough spring there-- so I could adjust up and down.

SWD: Did the cover that was nickel silver have a plating?
Seth Lover: I think it was nickel silver plating and they started using gold plating--If they don’t plate too heavily, that’s fine. Chances are they are not going to plate to heavily at the cost of gold today.

SWD: How thick should the cover be so it works properly?
Seth Lover: I just selected a size that was easily drawable. In other works that they could handle easily, drawing without tearing. I would’ve like to have kept it as thin as possible. If you get it too thin you get to many rejects when you’re drawing it. It tears easily.

SWD: Does the cover have good shielding properties?
Seth Lover: It is good for electrostatic shielding. Removing the cover leaves a hole for electrostatic coupling.

SWD: Where all the parts manufactured outside or in house?
Seth Lover: No, a guy by the name of Watkins, as I recall, Watkins machine shop I think made a lot of the pickup parts. He was out of Kalamazoo and made most of the parts like the bottom plate. I think the covers were made by some place down in Ohio, as I recall. HPI made the bobbins but Watkins made the unit base and pole pieces.

SWD: The Thunderbird Bass pickup was out in 1963. The bobbin was routed down the center and a bar magnet was inserted. Where did the bobbin come from.
Seth Lover: We made steel guitar pickups that were humbucking too. There were some steel guitar pickups and I don’t know if they made thousands, maybe several hundred or something like that. The Thunderbird bas probably used the left over bobbins they had. They were modified steel guitar bobbins and used for the bass pickups. If you see the bobbins you can notice the adjustable pole recess molded into the bobbin.

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 27 Jan 2010 9:17 pm

I can't find any Humbucker from this period not called a PAF. This kind of confuses me. I'm looking.

From Gibson themselves http://www.gibson.com/en-us/Lifestyle/F ... Humbucker/

Another significant feature of Lover’s design was the non-magnetic metal cover for the pickup, which helped eliminate electrostatic interference. Lover experimented with a stainless steel cover, but the material was too difficult to work with. He soon found that nickel silver was a much better alternative.

Vintage Gibson Humbucker info.

http://musicalilluminism.wordpress.com/ ... ckup-tech/

1956 – 1957 (“PAF”): Long (2.5”) Alnico 2, 3, 4 and 5 magnets used randomly, brushed stainless steel cover, *no* PAF sticker, automatic traverse wound with manual-stop (until bobbin was “full”), #42 plain enamel wire (purple), individual coil ohm differences, black leads on coils, ohms vary from low 7k to high 9k, black PAF-style bobbins (“square in circle” with holes). PAFs first installed on Gibson lap-steels in ‘56 and then guitars in ‘57.

1956-1957: Original PAF. Long magnet, *no* PAF sticker, purple bobbin wire, black leads on both coils, brushed stainless steel covers, phillips screws on base, ohms can run from 7k to high 9k ohms, black bobbins PAF style bobbins ("circle in a square"), "L" shaped tool marks on feet. PAFs were first installed on lapsteels in 1956. The long magnet dimensions are 2.5" long, .5" wide, .125" thick.

1957-1960: Original PAF. Long magnet, "Patent Applied For" (PAF) sticker, purple bobbin wire, black leads on both coils, nickel covers, phillips screws on base, ohms can run from low 7k to high 9k ohms, black bobbins PAF style bobbins ("circle in a square") until 1959 cream colored pickup bobbins are often seen, 'L' shaped toolmarks on feet.

1961-1962: last PAF pickups. Short magnet (starting July 1961), PAF sticker, purple wire, black leads on both coils, nickel covers, phillips screws on base, both bobbins are black again, PAF style bobbins ("circle in a square"), "L" toolmarks on feet. The short magnet dimensions are 2.25" long, .5" wide, .125" thick.

There are some basic facts that should be known about these first-generation humbucking pickups. First PAF pickups came about in 1956 on Gibson steel guitar models, and on 1957 on many Gibson spanish guitar models..when installed in lapsteels, to fit the pickup in the cavaity properly the polepiece ends had to be trimmed......Seth/Gibson filed their patent for the pickup design on June 22, 1955. Gibson added the new pickups to steel guitars in 1956, and in 1957 on electric solid-body and arch-top guitars including the Les Paul Model. During late 1957, a small black decal with gold lettering was added to the underside of the pickup that read, "PATENT APPLIED FOR" (hence the PAF abbreviation).......

Did I post this crap already?
Edit: yes I did, but I'm leaving it, seems relevant, sorry! I'm going to bed. Good sign it's time.

http://home.provide.net/~cfh/paf.html

Early P.A.F. pickups as used on the 1956 lapsteels and 1957 Les Paul Standard had brushed stainless steel pickup covers (brushed to make them look nickel plated). This quickly changed to brass covers with a nickel plating. If the cover was gold, the brass was first nickel plated and then gold plated. Early PAFs also have four brass bobbin attachment screws, instead of steel screws. Also the early PAFs with stainless covers often did *not* have a PAF decal on the bottom (so some 1957 Gibson guitars will have unlabeled PAF pickups with brushed stainless covers).

(I should mention while your family may have quite the background in metal science, mine is full of researchers!)

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 27 Jan 2010 9:46 pm

Ok sorry for the triple post, I didn't want this very simple thing lost in all that junk.

Basil, are you saying they could not have used stainless at all? Because that is obviously not true. They did in 1956 and 1957.

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 28 Jan 2010 3:32 am

irrelevant (Apparently)

John Billings · Post by **John Billings** » 28 Jan 2010 4:46 am

Ah so,,,, Paktong Metal!

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 28 Jan 2010 6:24 am

I'm aware this guitar isn't worth much. I would be surprised if I could sell it for $800. There is no market for these guitars. One of you would have picked it up as cheap as I bought it for, it was on ebay for a few months. Book value and real value are very different as I'm sure you know. I'm not trying to jack up the value of it. I'm trying to establish a provenance for the guitar as well as provide anyone who manages to find one of these guitars some knowledge as there does not seem to be much out there. Everyone who has seen it thinks the pickups are something besides Nickle. I would like to know what it actually is.

I agree this guitars only value is as a historical piece, and its not that good for that. It has value to me though as a collector.

I know it is not a PAF 4-8-4. I would really like to see a picture of an eight string one one though. Those had a selector switch for different tones.

You can doubt the authenticity of what I posted if you like, though that makes very little sense as it comes from multiple sources including Gibson. The trimed pole pieces were on the six string Gibson Ultratone I am pretty sure. I am hoping you can find some better information. That's what the whole point of this thread was.

As to the pole pieces being trimmed, its a well known fact and they do stick out the bottom actually. Look at my picture above.

Old 04-03-2009, 08:43 AM
Exluthier

Re: Who / How to Authenticate Real PAF's
I have one that came out of pedal steel. The pole pieces are trimmed. Does anyone know if that is supposed to effect the tone in anyway? I'm just curious, it sounds amazing, it is by far my favorite pickup.

Why don't you send the photos and info to an expert you know? I'm sure you know someone. I sent it to Jason Lollar. Duncan doesn't take emails

basilh · Post by **basilh** » 28 Jan 2010 4:20 pm

irrelevant (Apparently)

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 28 Jan 2010 5:46 pm

I want to be clear. I know the guitar market calls the 6 string humbucker from 1957-1960 that came in Les Pauls and a few others, PAF pickups. There is no value to any other "PAF pickup". In fact, my pickup regardless is not an attribute to my guitar, as no one but me has played it apparently, and it just isn't a known and desirable pickup. I realize no amount of talking on my part will convince players this is a valuable pickup. In fact, everyone I talk to laughs and says steel guitars are dead, try a new instrument.

I can't find a single reference to a humbucker made by Gibson between 1956-1960 or so that is not referred to as a PAF pickup in literature used to date Gibson pickups.

If you can, I'll send you $100 American.

It's been established my pickup is not the PAF 4-8-4, but there are a number of other PAF pickups, like the PAF mini humbucker for example. Or maybe it's not a PAF, but what is it called if it is a 57 stainless steel covered humbucker?

WHAT is my pickup? It is not Nickle.

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 28 Jan 2010 6:05 pm

I just got a response from Jason Lollar. I will leave it here unless someone else shows interest. It doesn't help a bit! Or maybe I don't understand it.

Here is my letter and his. I provided lots of photos.

Hi,

Sorry to bother you. I can't find anyone who knows anything about my pickups, and I am getting lots of bad info.

I have a 1957 (roughly, dated by pots and serial) Gibson C-530 double neck 8 string steel guitar. It has two pickups that seem to be not made of nickle. They are brushed metal on the top.

Can you provide me with any info about these? No expert I have met seems to believe (sigh unseen) that they could be stainless. However, anyone who sees the guitar knows they aren't nickle. I had a gentleman examine it who worked for Gruhns yesterday, all he could say was he didn't think they were nickle at all. I've been looking at info, everyone who I talk to on the web insists this is not a PAF pickup, though it sure seems like a stainless patent applied for humbucker. I know it's not a 4-8-4.......

thanks for your time

I haven’t seen covers like that but lets say it is stainless- as long as its the normal stainless where a magnet wont stick to it you could make a cover out of that for about any design- if its magnetic stainless it would work only if the poles were exposed like yours but it wouldn’t sound all that great. If you put a thin piece of sheet steel over the top of your pickup- between it and the string- it would kill almost all of the signal- try it.

Fender and Gibson made 7 and 8 string versions of almost all of their pickups- I know that.

Jason Lollar

John Billings · Post by **John Billings** » 29 Jan 2010 1:29 pm

So,,, is this steel guitar pickup a PAF? Or not?
Guitar serial number is 7 7164. An Electroharp.

Nicholai Steindler · Post by **Nicholai Steindler** » 29 Jan 2010 3:31 pm

If I say no will you sell it to me?

(You lucky son of a.....

)

That appears to be a REAL PAF from 1957. One the "guitar market" calls a PAF. To be sure you would probably want to look at the back side and spend some time reading the PAF identification link I posted and maybe date your pots. If you happen to remove it mind telling me if the adjustable poles have been trimmed on the back? It would be the screws, they should be sticking out the back a bit.

http://home.provide.net/~cfh/paf.html

The production numbers run in a consecutive order and, aside from a few oddities in the change over years
(1961-1962), it is fairly accurate to use them when identifying solid body instruments produced between
1953 and 1961. Examples of this system:
4 2205 = 1954 614562 = 1956

http://www.gibson.com/Files/downloads/b ... UMBERS.pdf