Les Paul Recording ~ ~ ~ fascinating . . .

Handsome_Chris

randomhandclaps said:

johnnyurq said:

http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i474/johnnyurq/Gibson%20LPR/PageyWhiteLPR_zpsbdd0700c.jpg

Just for clarification - that guy who looks like an extra from an 80's Starship video used to be in the rock goliath that was Led Zeppelin.  Who'd have thunk it?

Have you got any other contemporary quips about Magnum PI, Miami Vice, or The A-Team - you crazy fool?  :P

ChrisMusic

Skipped said:

Forum members who are old enough will remember that that Ibanez produced a very nice copy of both the Recording and Professional models. I found these much more appealing than the (early) attempts to copy GTs and Customs.

Thanks for the Ibanez information @Skipped, I didn't even realise there were copies, I assumed that the appeal of the Gibsons was too limited for the Japanese to bother.  Beautiful wood grain on that one.

When were they made, roughly from and to, do you know?

edit: I wonder what other copies are out there?

ChrisMusic

monquixote said:

How hard would it be to make some Low Impedance pickups?Is it something that you could commission a custom winder like Ash to do?

---------------------------------------------

ICBM said:
If he could get the spec for the magnets, wire gauge and number of turns, certainly - the technology is exactly the same as for a high-impedance pickup. The slight difficulty is that Gibson resin-potted the originals, so dismantling a dead one to measure it might be tricky.
Getting an audio transformer made to the right spec shouldn't be too hard either - although it's unlikely to be an off-the-shelf item.
Just more difficult than recreating 'standard' electrics.

johnnyurq said:

I am happy to measure any of the components characteristics if anyone wishes, however I will not be taking the resin off.
Somewhere I have a list of parts I sourced in the event any went belly up, thankfully never needed.
The circuit diagrams I have do mention values of most things so I will get a better look at that.

It is interesting that you all seem to wonder about recreating these pickups, or at least understanding them better.

Maybe it is time to invite a bit of wisdom on the pickup side of things.     @TheGuitarWeasel @Van_Hayden

Another question is why were the pickups so big?  They are also much wider than the string width, I presume to ensure there is no fall off in field strength at the peripheries?

Contrary to a lot of opinions, I actually find the pickups quite elegant and purposeful looking.

ChrisMusic

ICBM said:   What I find frustrating about the Recording is that if they'd made it *look* right, it might have had a chance of being successful - but I suspect most players couldn't get past the appearance.

Re-imagine it this way:

Standard-size maple-cap body like a proper Les Paul.

Low impedance pickups which look like standard humbuckers. (Easy, the rectangular Signature ones aren't too far off.)

Rear-routed control cavity like a proper Les Paul.

Four knobs and the switch arranged like a proper Les Paul.

Mini-switches just above the knobs like a Les Paul Artist.

Jacks on the side like a proper Les Paul.

Functionality - exactly the same as a LPR. Appearance - (almost) exactly the same as a conventional Les Paul.

Like that, I think it could have been a great commercial success.

Come to think of it... why don't they do that now?

Good call @ICBM.

With push / push switches and mini switches it would be easy to visually streamline the visuals,  not sure about the pickups, apart from a fondness of that very distinctive big oval sardine can, there may be practical reasons why that style of pickup needs the size.  If you substitute these you loose a lot of the USP* of the personal and recording models.

Oh, and I quite like the body shape on these, subtle changes but distinctive again.  Just take another look at @Fretwired s picture of Jan Akkerman and his converted LP Personal (back on Page 1, or the video above).

(*USP = Unique Selling Proposition - what makes it different from the competition.)

ChrisMusic

dogload said:   I like these. I missed out on an Epiphone model that they had at Nicks in Wetherby a few years back (for substantially less than the Gibson equivalent they had in at the time!).

I believe Peerless are making their own-branded version of these (presumably they made the Epiphones). 

My mate has a Jack Casady bass which he rates very highly. 

Hey @dogload, I assume that is the same Epiphone model that Paul McCartney's bass player was using on Jools last week?

Looks really good.

OilCityPickups

The traditional Les Paul recording pickups have a very wide frequency range with a very even frequency response. This gives a clean, almost hifi tone that allows maximum 'clean sound onto tape' which was what interested Les. He then used his technical wizardry with double tracking etc etc to shape that sound for his own style.
What gives a hi impedance pickup like a PAF for example it's characteristic tone are the very frequency spikes and peaks that Les wanted eliminated in the 'recording'. Most listeners find low 'Z' pickups used without extra effects to be polite and ... well frankly, boring.
I'm aware that there are designs where low Z pickups can create drive and excitement  ... but mostly they are an evolutionary blind ally. ICBM will disagree ... but I've never heard a low Z guitar that I liked.

dogload

@ChrisMusic 

He was playing a Jack Casady bass. Lovely things. My mate loves his (it's black though, not gold!). There are more and more 'names' using them, I seem to remember Adam Clayton out of U2 with one sometime.

Evilmags

Aren't active pickups low impedence? 

OilCityPickups

Evilmags said:

Aren't active pickups low impedence? 

Indeed some are ... if you are into power stations to drive monster gain ... EMG territory ... then active pickups are great. Also for bass, where maximum low frequency response is needed clean ... before adding anything.
My own preferences run towards pickups with a character that are musical in their own right ... rather than just being able to light up your Christmas tree in an emergency

ICBM

TheGuitarWeasel;73847" said:

The traditional Les Paul recording pickups have a very wide frequency range with a very even frequency response. This gives a clean, almost hifi tone that allows maximum 'clean sound onto tape' which was what interested Les. He then used his technical wizardry with double tracking etc etc to shape that sound for his own style.

What gives a hi impedance pickup like a PAF for example it's characteristic tone are the very frequency spikes and peaks that Les wanted eliminated in the 'recording'. Most listeners find low 'Z' pickups used without extra effects to be polite and ... well frankly, boring.

I'm aware that there are designs where low Z pickups can create drive and excitement  ... but mostly they are an evolutionary blind ally. ICBM will disagree ... but I've never heard a low Z guitar that I liked.

I think the key is not to consider the pickups as the complete system on their own - the impedance transformer is what gives the guitars their versatility. I do actually like the DI'd low-impedance sound as well, but it's certainly very hi-fi, unrock'n'roll and almost acoustic-sounding... which I like for what it is. It doesn't sound right for rock sounds though, no matter how much gain you put on.

The transformer makes it so - the high-impedance output has every bit as much character and excitement as a normal high-impedance guitar.

The pickups definitely don't have to be big either - the Les Paul Signature ones are rectangular and midway between a minihumbucker and a full-size humbucker. I'm not sure why the oval ones are that big.