Clapton 335 paf magnet 2 or 5?

[natelc1979]

Just wondering what you guys think his original 335 paf magnets were. I’ve read 64 paf’s were short mags, but there’s so much information that’s not consistent. Just wondering your guys thoughts. Thanks guys!!

 

[beaubrummels]

By 1964, I believe it should have been short bar A5s in his ES-335.

 

[Blille]

The 64 RI has AIII mags and they seem to have been thoughtful about it.

Of course, it's next to impossible to find genuine '50s PAFs (even for Gibson). Instead, the 1964 ES-335 sports a pair of unpotted Custombucker humbuckers. Boasting Alnico III magnets, Gibson's Custombuckers are one of the most historically accurate PAF copies ever.

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/de...custom-1964-es-335-reissue-vos-sixties-cherry

 

[jeremy]

gibson is full of shit much of the time. the '64 is almost definitely a short a5

 

[eclecticsynergy]

Yah, by '64 they all had short A5 bars. These were no longer PAFs but 'patent number' sticker pickups, also known as 'pre-T-tops.'
At that point turn counters had been added to the winding machines.
The coils in that period were quite uniform, without the random variations that made PAFs so inconsistent.

 

[Blille]

gibson is full of shit much of the time. the '64 is almost definitely a short a5

Lol

Imagine paying $6k and getting the pickups wrong

 

[Guest]

jeremy I agree. My Epiphone 59 LP came stock with 500k CTS pots and Gibson Custombuckers. Hated them. The tone sounded vintage but muddy and a bit lifeless. I instantly replaced those pots with PRS treble bleeders and Bareknuckle Peacemaker pickups. Now the guitar sounds amazing!

 

[freefrog]

Just wondering what you guys think his original 335 paf magnets were. I’ve read 64 paf’s were short mags, but there’s so much information that’s not consistent. Just wondering your guys thoughts. Thanks guys!!

My humble thought is that vintage RC magnets were noticeably variable if not partly random anyway, bluring the line between alloys...

Hence the endless discussions between boutique winders about AlNi(Co): although some of them paid for lab analysis of vintage alloys, they often hesitate about old magnets, asking themselves if it's A2, UOA5, A3 or something else (!)...

Modern mags seem much more consistent and performant, at least when they are sintered. Something random remains in RC mags because of how they're made (in a process reminding bakery more than metallurgy to me). But contemporary A2 or A5 have not necessarily much in common with the "same" alloys in the past AFAIK - and I've never tested / inspected personally a vintage mag without finding something strange in it. YMMV.

If I wanted to end on something provocative, I'd say that compounding / molding / cooling / charging operations and even lenght of magnets might matter as much if not more than the alloy supposedly used to make them (knowing that some vintage "short" mags have apparently been analyzed as being... A2. LOL).

FWIW: 2 worthless cents of geeky rambling.