Gibson Patent Pickups

[Spook410]

I know what a PAF is. Sort of. I know what a Gibson T Top humbucker is. They sound great in my 75'ish Les Paul. Not sure what to make of a Gibson Patent Pickup. It has a 'Pat No 2 737 842' stamped on the back. Several sources say these were after stickers and before T Tops. Some sources indicate these are more or less the same as a PAF in construction. Thing is.. they aren't all that expensive used (about $200) unlike sticker pickups which can get very pricey.

So.. what's up with these? The last guitar I purchased, a 1989 Gibson L5 is where I found them. So.. a pickup swap by a previous owner? Haven't had the guitar long enough to form an opinion on the sound of these vs a modern 57 humbucker. These do seem a bit brighter. Not sure what to make of sometimes conflicting information online. Any experience with these?

[Gitfiddler]

During the 80's (1980 - 1984) Gibson used that Patent Number on its pickups as well as metal parts (bridge, tailpiece, etc.). The pickup designer was Tim Shaw, so they're often referred to by that name. I may be wrong but I've read that they were the humbucker of choice from 1980 - 1987. Gibson must have had a bunch of the Shaw paf's lying around, because they've been installed in later guitars through 1990.

Here's a link to a 2009 conversation on the 'My Les Paul' forum where Tim Shaw himself responded:

Straight from Tim Shaw's mouth... | My Les Paul Forum

Also, we've discussed this here... :-)

1990 Gibson ES-175 Pickup Identification

[Spook410]

During the 80's (1980 - 1984) Gibson used...

Oh. So these are likely Tim Shaw humbuckers and were, in fact, stock on this guitar. Thanks Gitfiddler.

[Cunamara]

Gibson pickups are saddled with an amazing amount of mumbo-jumbo about what is or isn't a PAF, what is or isn't a good or bad year/model pickup, etc. If it sounds good, it is good. These were factory produced pickups, being wound on imprecise machines by factory workers, using the materials that were available at the factory on any given day pulled out randomly of a bin of similar items. Magnet strength, composition, number of turns of wire, etc., varied. Not every 1957 PAF is a great pickup, although the automatic assumption is that it is. We can be pretty sure that they don't sound like they did in 1957, with changes in magnetic field, aging wire insulation, etc. Not every Norlin era is a bad pickup but there is an automatic assumption there as well; but there are some spectacularly good guitar and pickups made in that era. But the 1957 PAF will cost you 10 times as much.

The Shaw pickups have a good reputation, although the same caveats would apply. If they sound good to you, they are good. That's the bottom line.

[ThatRhythmMan]

Oh. So these are likely Tim Shaw humbuckers and were, in fact, stock on this guitar. Thanks Gitfiddler.

They don’t appear to be Tim Shaw humbuckers. Shaws normally have brass bobbin mounting screws. This baseplate with the large screws says likely early 1990s to me, maybe 490 series. I’m not 100% about that, but not Shaws. Have you taken resistance readings?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[John A.]

Gibson pickups are saddled with an amazing amount of mumbo-jumbo about what is or isn't a PAF, what is or isn't a good or bad year/model pickup, etc. If it sounds good, it is good. These were factory produced pickups, being wound on imprecise machines by factory workers, using the materials that were available at the factory on any given day pulled out randomly of a bin of similar items. Magnet strength, composition, number of turns of wire, etc., varied. Not every 1957 PAF is a great pickup, although the automatic assumption is that it is. We can be pretty sure that they don't sound like they did in 1957, with changes in magnetic field, aging wire insulation, etc. Not every Norlin era is a bad pickup but there is an automatic assumption there as well; but there are some spectacularly good guitar and pickups made in that era. But the 1957 PAF will cost you 10 times as much.

The Shaw pickups have a good reputation, although the same caveats would apply. If they sound good to you, they are good. That's the bottom line.

Even more bizarre than PAF mumbo-jumbo is the way "bad" pickups become "good" pickups over time. The entire pickup industry that was born in the 70s (especially Duncan and Dimarzio) was built on the premise that post-PAF pickups sucked and Gibson had lost the art of pickup making once the patent was issued and Gibson standardized production. Then all the PAF-era guitars got snapped up by collectors, and guitars with early "Patent "Number" pickups retroactively gained mojo. Then all of those got snapped up and T-Tops became the next holy grail. Then Shaw Buckers. The next thing will be collectors obsessing over early '57 Classics and how the ones made after [some random Gibson event] are bogus.

[Stringswinger]

T-tops can have a patent sticker or have the patent number stamped on the back plate. It is said that the earlier ones with the sticker sound better, but having owned guitars with both, I don't believe that. Somehow, in the world of guitars, older is better.

[John A.]

T-tops can have a patent sticker or have the patent number stamped on the back plate. It is said that the earlier ones with the sticker sound better, but having owned guitars with both, I don't believe that. Somehow, in the world of guitars, older is better.

All I know is that a friend of mine has a late 70's LP custom that he bought new and has kept stock. I've heard and played this guitar countless times over more than 40 years, and it has always sounded and played great, though it does weigh more than a Greyhound bus. According to the arbiters of good/bad/old/new, this guitar has gone from sucking and having the suckiest pickups to being a vintage gem with highly desirable pickups. I chalk it up to VDD (volute derangement disorder).

[Spook410]

Will get around to measuring the resistance at some point. My first thought was whether or not the pickups were stock in a 1989 L5. Thinking they are. It's also interesting that Gibson pickups are a bit of a swamp. Not a surprise. They were running a manufacturing business over decades. And while I am interested in the providence of the pickups, I'm mainly focused on what they sound like.

As for how they sound, in particular in comparison to a 95 L5 studio and early 2000's ES175.. they do seem bright. Didn't care for the sound with TI .012 round wounds with an unwound G. On the other hand.. not sure I like the sound of TI unwound G sets on anything. So.. going to a heavier set of Newtone archtop strings. If that doesn't work out, flats. If that doesn't work, well.. I do own a pretty good soldering iron.