Who likes actual PAFs?

[zizyphus]

There is so much hype in the guitar world about vintage specs, about whether or not something is true to the original 50s specs, about how true to the original PAF a given aftermarket humbucker really is, etc. etc.

Just based on the marketing material, you would think that guitar players are truly PAF-obsessed.

But are we? Are you?

There are tons of humbuckers that are not wound to sound anything like Mr. Lover's originals, or else Seymour wouldn't be in business.

I love my classic rock as much as the next guy, buuuuut when I've heard sound samples of actual PAFs as compared to a quality aftermarket pup, I definitely favor the new stuff. As much as there is a whole bunch of lore about how "they got it right the first time," that's mostly nonsense IMO, and I bet the guitar legends of old would have sounded even better if they had today's pups (or pedals, amps, etc....)

How about you gents?

 

[freefrog]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

As much as there is a whole bunch of lore about how "they got it right the first time," that's mostly nonsense IMO, and I bet the guitar legends of old would have sounded even better if they had today's pups (or pedals, amps, etc....)

How about you gents?

They didn't get it right the first time: real P.A.F.'s have several potential or obvious flaws, like the tendency of butyrate bobbins to bend under the pressure of wire (that's why Seymour designed a specifically shaped structure with "redans" for his first SH1's featuring butyrate bobbins).

The thing is simply that these crude and imperfect transducers quickly made with cheap materials are a tonal reference because they came first.

They are not "better" nor worse than modern pickups but there's an unmistakable flavor or yesteryear's in their sound, that's all.

Reason why I instantly feel "at home" when I play a vintage pickup: that's the tone that I've heard on the radio when I was a kid.

Personally I appreciate this familiarity for what it is, even though I use other pickups which are way more "advanced" technically.

FWIW (my wortlhless opinion).

 

[jeremy]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

ive played a handful of guitars with real paf pups, 1960 and earlier. most of those guitars sounded great! sometimes one pup would sound way better than the other. ive heard paf pups in more modern guitars and most sounded great too. i like pafs but im sure as hell not spending stupid money on a real one. a duncan antiquity, 59, seth lover, or pearly gates will do just fine for me.

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

I've always found the hype around PAFs to be a unique sort of hype in that it is entirely based around a handful of people that loudly repeat their opinions across the internet to justify spending over a hundred times market price for a spool of wire.

The vast majority of the guitar world knows that only a small handful of PAFs could be described as phenomenal by modern standards. Everyone who is selling one wants you to think they're selling one of the good ones (they're not) and everyone who is selling you a replica wants you to think it's based off of the best PAF ever made (again, they're not).

"PAFs are overrated" is one of those open secrets nobody says out loud so that Johnny "$3K for a set of old copper" doesn't feel bad about his purchase.

But I will admit, there is a nice feeling about playing PAFs in an actual 50s guitar. Even if you get unlucky with the particular pickups or guitar, it feels really cool to play a "museum-grade" instrument.

Edit: That last paragraph brought me to a little tangent: if you ever get in the position to, try to arrange a tour of one of the Smithsonian's warehouses where they keep the cool stuff that they either aren't allowed to display or isn't cool enough to display. It took a lot of time and work to make it happen, but I've gotten to play some cool historic guitars that way. One of the original PRS McCarty prototypes for example.

 

[zizyphus]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

But I will admit, there is a nice feeling about playing PAFs in an actual 50s guitar. Even if you get unlucky with the particular pickups or guitar, it feels really cool to play a "museum-grade" instrument.

I definitely get that – it's the guitar player's version of visiting the Coliseum or the Great Wall of China. Its interesting because of the history.

On the other hand – and it seems like you agree with me here – the idea of "mojo" is nonsensical. Mojo does not exist. If instead of using the word "mojo," guitar players were forced to say "mystical fairy dust," I think we'd quickly realize that this is magical thinking

Edit: That last paragraph brought me to a little tangent: if you ever get in the position to, try to arrange a tour of one of the Smithsonian's warehouses where they keep the cool stuff that they either aren't allowed to display or isn't cool enough to display. It took a lot of time and work to make it happen, but I've gotten to play some cool historic guitars that way. One of the original PRS McCarty prototypes for example.

Ummmm, COOL

How did you make that happen?

 

[Chistopher]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

Ummmm, COOL

How did you make that happen?

My nephew did a research project regarding dugout canoe construction for his senior research project and he set up an interview with Douglas Herman of the National Museum of the American Indian. I wasn't there, but the two of them arranged to see some replicas of dugout canoes, which for some reason were in the American History Museum, which also has a whole bunch of cool guitar stuff. I tagged along and our guide had nowhere to be afterwards, so we looked at some other stuff. The guitars were actually his suggestion, as he was a big guitar guy.

It's probably the sort of thing that you just need to call reasonably enough ahead I would think and have some sort of research "excuse" behind it.

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

I don’t care how the pickups are constructed. I care what they sound like. I only pay attention to construction, wire and magnets if it gives me some control or ability to get to the sound I’m after.

 

[Masta' C]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

I like the idea of vintage stuff, probably because of the unrealistic way it is romanticized and marketed in the guitar world, but I'm strongly of the "vintage correct isn't always best" camp.

There's no single/true "PAF" and many of the pickups designed since do an excellent job of recreating the best qualities of those pickups with exceptional consistency

 

[Demanic]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

I'm probably one of the few who doesn't like PAF sounding pickups. I don't really like vintage strat pickups either. Though I do understand how they contributed to the sound of the era that they were used in.
I particularly appreciate the role that they played in creating a market for aftermarket pickups.

Sent from my Alcatel_5044C using Tapatalk

 

[Gtrjunior]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

I'm probably one of the few who doesn't like PAF sounding pickups. I don't really like vintage strat pickups either. Though I do understand how they contributed to the sound of the era that they were used in.
I particularly appreciate the role that they played in creating a market for aftermarket pickups.

Sent from my Alcatel_5044C using Tapatalk

I’m with you here. I typically like hot pickups and I like how they compress my distorted tone.

 

[FuseG4]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

I like paf-alikes cuz I mostly play vintagey singles and am used to a certain treble response and paf-alikes don't knock off too much high end and I don't have to dial things in much different when I switch to a bucker guitar.
So I guess I'll say I like paf tones from modern construction methods cuz that's what keeps them in a price range I can afford! Lol

 

[LLL]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

A quality PAF-style pickup (not talking about the originals) like say, a set of Seth Lovers - has an awesome, clear, chimey tone that you can goose with a stomp well.

But they're unforgiving with your playing because they are clear and relatively uncompressed.

 

[LLL]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

Speaking of mojo - if you take the nickel cover off a PAF, the mojo escapes.

It's sealed in there for a reason.

:13:

 

[zizyphus]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

I particularly appreciate the role that they played in creating a market for aftermarket pickups.

Agreed!

 

[AlexR]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

Not many have actually played real PAF's.
Not many have actually had that much experience with real PAF's - save for playing one or 2 in guitars they've tried. So the experience people tend to relate is pretty incomplete at best.

The conclusions tend to be either poor, or repeating someone else's 3rd hand experience.
The only people I trust to relate accurate stories are the top-end PAF replica winders - who have heard the pickups both in the host guitars, but also had multiple of the pickups in other chassis. So they can objectively see how the pickups respond in many scenarios.

The results there are:
There are variations, but a distinct tonal ballpark.
There is also a repeatable/consistent wind observed within a finished coil, but with a lot of scope. So the combination possibilities are almost limitless.
The PAF's are quite fickle......so there are very few to zero 'bad' pickups, just poor guitar/pickup combinations.


Most of the modern pickups people call PAF copies (and reference as their PAF experience) are merely generic low output pickups. Certainly balanced coils fall under this category, and most of the pickups that spec generic modern wire and magnets are too. But they will give the majority of the experience without the expense of custom making all of the components to match vintage spec. But the key to replicating a spot on PAF tone is doing just that.....wind, wire, bobbin, small parts, etc etc. If you don't go the whole hog you won't get the final outcome.

As an example I own 2 sets of pickups by a respected PAF clone winder. He does dot every I, and despite that the 2 sets are nominally identical save for 1 set being wound with a spool of vintage wire. Until I plugged the vintage wire set in, I wouldn't have expected this aspect to have made such a difference......but it does.

They also resemble the sort of tonal nuances that I hear when I play the 3 sets of actual 50's p90's I own.......as that is the closest to a PAF I have come to.

 

[Mincer]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

I generally like PAF winds in the neck especially, but I am not picky. Vintage as a word doesn't mean much to me. It doesn't matter if the construction is the same if the tone and touch-sensitivity is the same. There are many roads to the sound I want.

 

[Aceman]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

Case in point. T-Tops are now "Vintage" - Blech!

 

[Aceman]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

4 points for me...

1. I know the variability factor is high and winds and mags varied fairly wildly.
2. I am a price-performer guy. At some point nothing is worth it.
3. I generally prefer a harder rocking sound
4. They can be recreated today by all sorts of people to all sorts of slightly tweaked or preferred tones. Just like TS9 clones that are alll better than the originals.

 

[Nsatke81]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

I’d take a filtertrons over Pafs every day. Pafs are just to clunky sounding for me. I love the modern stuff too, though.

 

[eclecticsynergy]

Re: Who likes actual PAFs?

I like modern PAF types. Since I have plenty of gain on tap when I want it, a fairly light wind has definite advantages.
They are touch-responsive, clean up nicely and generally tend to have a nice open top end.

As for the real vintage ones, some are hotter, some are weaker, some are rich, some are thin & kinda scratchy. No two are really alike.

I think a part of the mystique around the originals is that most players' experience of them has been in nice vintage guitars.