The Last Bass Outpost
Gear Discussion Forums => Gibson Basses => Topic started by: Basvarken on September 06, 2010, 01:21:36 PM
-
I stumbled upon this blog:
http://uniqueguitar.blogspot.com/2009/10/les-paul-recording-guitar.html (http://uniqueguitar.blogspot.com/2009/10/les-paul-recording-guitar.html)
where someone cites from a book or magazine:
"In 1971 Gibson introduced the Gibson Les Paul recording guitar. The guitar was designed to be much like Paul's specially designed personal guitar which was equipped with low impedance pickups.
The Les Paul Recording came with two slanted low impedance pickups with Gibson logo molded on covers. The guitar was equipped with integral transformers to make the output impedance compatible with normal high impedance amps or low impedance. In other words,with the transformer off for recording in a studio plugged directly into the board, the low-impedance mode gave much cleaner tracks and broader frequency bandwidth, that could be tweaked in the mix.
For live performances, the Les Paul Low-Hi Impedance Tonal Circuitry was switched to high impedance, allowing the guitar to be played directly through standard guitar amplifiers. The pickups were produced for Gibson by a company that eventually was known as EMG."
That last sentence struck me as kinda suprising.
In all those years where I've -unsuccesfully- tried to trace the origins of the Gibson Lo-Z, someone just claims they were made by EMG??
Really?
-
"EMG History
EMG, Inc. is the current legal name of the company with seat in Santa Rosa, California, started in 1976 manufacturing guitar pickups, which have always been called EMG pickups. "EMG" stands for "Electro-Magnetic Generator". The company was originally called "Dirtywork Studios"; this name was changed to "Overlend" in 1978, and then to the current name in 1983."
garnished from this website:
http://www.activemusician.com/EMG-History--t2i99
the truth might lie somewhere in between
-
From EMG's web site history it is possible. Someone needs to ask Rob Turner about it.
From http://www.emginc.com/pages/company
ROB TURNER: In 1974, I started EMG in the back of my parents' garage by building various electronic gadgets and repairing amplifiers. I had played around with pickups as early as 1969 but didn't get around to "business" until a few years later.
We got our first business license under the name of Dirtywork Studios in April 1976. In 1978, we changed the name to Overlend, because we were overextended on credit and it sounded nice. In 1983 we became EMG, Inc. (the big time) and haven't looked back. Through all the company name changes the pickups were always known as EMG Pickups. Not many people know why we called them "EMG", but we'll let you in on the secret now - EMG stands for Electro-Magnetic Generator!
-
Don't you think making pickups for the Gibson Les Paul Recording, Professional, Studio and Bass guitars can be considered "business"?
Mind you: that was 1969! So the years don't match by far.
-
IMO it's false. Rob Turner has given a number of interviews about the company's history, he was a high school kid experimenting with his bandmates' guitars back when the LP low impedance pickups appeared. He's quick to mention the Steinberger connection but has never mentioned a connection with the LP Recording etc. Somehow I doubt Norlin's designers would have contacted him.
-
My guess is there has been a misunderstanding or confusion at one point. The connection between Gibson low impedance pickups and EMG is that EMG's are indeed low impedance pickups using a built in preamp instead of transormer to achieve a proper signal for high impedance inputs.
-
EMG's aren't low impedance, they are normal high impedance pups, they just have their preamps built-in.
-
I always believed that they were low impedance too. You certainly don't hear much of a signal without the battery!!!
-
EMG's aren't low impedance, they are normal high impedance pups, they just have their preamps built-in.
Without the battery the perceived output of EMGs I've experienced is very low...are you saying if you could somehow remove the built in pre from the circuit you would get enough output (for our purposes 'impedence') as a passive pup? If not, how can it be a 'normal high impedence' pup? What is the threshold of low vs high impedence?
-
I was confused by the name Ron Turner - I thought it was Rick Turner, who did a lot of work early-'70s with Alembic, who pioneered low impedance pickups (although Ron Wickersham was doing the electronics), and who are now stationed in Santa Rosa. But ignore me, it's all coincidence...
-
Without the battery the perceived output of EMGs I've experienced is very low...are you saying if you could somehow remove the built in pre from the circuit you would get enough output (for our purposes 'impedence') as a passive pup? If not, how can it be a 'normal high impedence' pup? What is the threshold of low vs high impedence?
I don't think there's a "threshold" on high/low impedance, the "normal" thing is that high impedance pickups don't need "aids" like special transformers or preamps to be heard.
As for the EMGs, one guy on a pickup makers forum had disassembled (and destroyed ofcourse) one EMG and posted pickups. Just a normal pickup with a built-in preamp. I think its DC resistance was about 12k or something.
edit: found it. DC is about 4k for each coil. This is the thread about the disassembly
http://music-electronics-forum.com/t2145/
and this is a very interesting thread about gibson les paul lo-z pickups
http://music-electronics-forum.com/t3737/
-
Thanks E! Way over my head but now at least I have an idea what Lo Z really means!
-
No problem mate, most of this stuff is way over my head too! ;D
-
Guess it depends on your definition of low impedance.
At any rate, I still think it's very unlikely that Rob Turner of EMG had anything to do with the design or production of the LP Recording pickups.
-
I always thought it was something to do with dancing elves... ???
-
Really interesting read. Thanks
-
Very interesting. What I've always heard is EMG's were low impedance but appearently that were not facts, just an assumption. Though they are low impedance output right? Thanks for the enlightenment E.
-
Very interesting indeed.
When you google for low impedance bass pickups the name of Lancaster comes up too.
They seem to be real low impedance but are attached to a printboard with pre-amp and what have you...
I would love to find a pickup builder that can make exact copies of those Gibson Lo-Z pickups.
So far none of all the pickup builders that I've asked can do it.
They all use standard components. But the Gibson Lo-Z have extraordinarily big bobbins and very thick wire.
-
It would be more interesting if there were lo-z pups in more standard forms (guitar humbucker, soapbars, TB+ ) so they could be used in a variety of basses.
Those Lancaster pups are 100 ohms, I think Gibson lo-z are even lower, but I'm not so sure.
In this pickup makers forum there is a thread with some measurements on the Gibson lo-z pickup and some picks too.
edit: found the thread, they say the Gibson lo-z are 9,5 ohms only! Talkin about LOW impedance!
http://music-electronics-forum.com/t3737/#post29034
-
Very interesting. What I've always heard is EMG's were low impedance but appearently that were not facts, just an assumption. Though they are low impedance output right? Thanks for the enlightenment E.
If you are talking what gets to the pots, they are high impedance, otherwise an external 'transformer' would be necessary to get EMGs to work with a typical bass amp input stage. EMG preamps are tone circuits. Without the battery the pups around 4.5k ohms. This is not low impedance...it is around 500 to 1000 times the impedance of a Les Paul Lo Z pup if I'm reading the literature correctly.
-
It would be more interesting if there were lo-z pups in more standard forms (guitar humbucker, soapbars, TB+ ) so they could be used in a variety of basses.
I wouldn't mind that shape as long as the characteristics are identical.
-
Very interesting indeed.
When you google for low impedance bass pickups the name of Lancaster comes up too.
They seem to be real low impedance but are attached to a printboard with pre-amp and what have you...
I would love to find a pickup builder that can make exact copies of those Gibson Lo-Z pickups.
So far none of all the pickup builders that I've asked can do it.
They all use standard components. But the Gibson Lo-Z have extraordinarily big bobbins and very thick wire.
Maybe this will get you a little further, all you need is the thock wire then?
http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Gibson-NOS-Parts-LP-Recording-Bass-Pickup-Kit-/250693892904?pt=Guitar_Accessories&hash=item3a5e853b28
(http://i.ebayimg.com/14/!BitZUBwBmk~$(KGrHqYH-EQEt!7T87LIBLQVD2cZRw~~_35.JPG)
-
Yeah but they only have a few of them. Not enough to make a whole series of them.
-
It would be more interesting if there were lo-z pups in more standard forms (guitar humbucker, soapbars, TB+ ) so they could be used in a variety of basses.
http://music-electronics-forum.com/t3737/#post29034
Les Paul Signature pickups are low impedance, super humbuckers, both the guitar & the bass use the same pickup.
-
Les Paul Signature pickups are low impedance, super humbuckers, both the guitar & the bass use the same pickup.
Yes but they don't have the three coiltaps.
-
I wouldn't mind that shape as long as the characteristics are identical.
That's not possible. In this case, you have such thick wire that a conventional shape wouldn't hold near as much wire. And even if you could figure out a way around that, the coil shape affects the sound in any pickup.
Has anyone talked to David Schwab? From the music electronics forum thread linked earlier, he at least has some experience with the LP low-z pickups. Maybe he would be willing to try if there's interest.
-
I wonder if anybody has ever tried a low impedance mudbucker... :o A stacked humbucker with the same gage wire as the Les Paul Bass, only sideways. :-\ The mudbucker cover is big enough to cover a massive coil, and it can be made adaptable to go in any of the EB series basses.... It may not sound exactly the same, but it might be interesting! There may even be enough room for the coils to be positioned normaly, if the shape is slighly altered.
-
I wonder if anybody has ever tried a low impedance mudbucker... :o A stacked humbucker with the same gage wire as the Les Paul Bass, only sideways. :-\ The mudbucker cover is big enough to cover a massive coil, and it can be made adaptable to go in any of the EB series basses.... It may not sound exactly the same, but it might be interesting! There may even be enough room for the coils to be positioned normaly, if the shape is slighly altered.
I was thinking about the same thing! A lo-z sidewinder would be interesting, even if it would not be a mudbucker, it would probably sound very clean and kinda hi-fi-ish. A cleanbucker!
-
By the way, I sent EMG an email.
Here's their answer:
"Rob,
Sorry for the delay, I wanted to get with Rob Turner to verify.
The short version of what I got from him was "No." He had nothing to do with those pickups! He says that they were all Les Paul -- his design and concept, EMG was not involved in the production in any way."
-
Good work, Rob. Let's hope the misinformation on the other site doesn't spread.
-
Another victory of truth and scientific evidence!
-
If you are talking what gets to the pots, they are high impedance, otherwise an external 'transformer' would be necessary to get EMGs to work with a typical bass amp input stage. EMG preamps are tone circuits. Without the battery the pups around 4.5k ohms. This is not low impedance...it is around 500 to 1000 times the impedance of a Les Paul Lo Z pup if I'm reading the literature correctly.
But they do use pots matched for a low impedance signal. This quote is taken from this site: http://www.emginc.com/pages/whyemg (http://www.emginc.com/pages/whyemg)
#
Low Impedence Output
The low impedance output of the EMG internal preamp provides other great features. You can run a cable for up to 100 feet (30 meters) without losing high frequency response. You'll also be able to get the same tone with a wireless unit as you do with a cable. The tone of your instrument will remain consistent when you change the volume control as well. Not only can you plug directly into your favorite amp, you can go direct to tape preamp (especially for acoustic guitar recording) or direct to a mixing console input without a direct box. You can plug into any portable cassette recorder, or even your home stereo auxiliary input, and play your instrument with incredible results.
-
But they do use pots matched for a low impedance signal. This quote is taken from this site: http://www.emginc.com/pages/whyemg (http://www.emginc.com/pages/whyemg)
Thanks for the reference. I was wrong, by definition EMGs are low impedance. Maybe LP pups should be described as 'super low impedance'. Can someone explain what effect the different impedance values of LPs and EMGs have, if any?
-
My guess is the preamp in EMG's buffers the signal like most effects pedals do.
-
Someone just commented on Instagram on a picture of my Les Paul Triumph together with my Alembic Stanley Clarke that "Rick Turner designed the electronics in the Gibson before he worked at Alembic" - looks like an even more confused version of the Rob Turner/EMG story?
-
I still think it is most likely that Les Paul himself designed and developed the low impedance humbuckers of the Recording/Personal/Professional Les Paul Guitars and Basses.
When his entire collection of guitars, basses and amps were auctioned, a lot of very crude prototypes popped up in the catalogue. The low impedance pickups being cast in big oval lumps of epoxy sure matched the crude pickguards on the guitars and basses he used as a platform for his experiments.
The prototype that I own is exactly the same as the one he held in his collection.
By the way; that one has pickups that are not cast in epoxy, but held together with bits of cardboard ;-)
-
There was that 'prototype' Les Paul that was floating around, and misinterpreted and misreported by the press, that looked like it had homemade low-Z pickups installed. it was (probably) an early '50s Black Beauty that had been machined entirely through the top to reveal a set of weird DIY pickups:
(http://www.tomdoyleguitars.com/BLACK_BEAUTY/BlackBeauty-Guts1.jpg)
Looking at this, it is clear that Les didn't baby his instruments or ever really think about making his modifications pretty! Give him a 'burst 1958 Les Paul and he would have yanked out the PAFs, added some shonky home brew tremolo unit and probably fitted a connector for a gooseneck microphone somewhere. I've been watching old clips of Les Paul and Mary Ford, and it is interesting to see (apart from the passive sexism in pretty much ever clip) how whacked up his guitars are. You would think Gibson would require him to mime away on off-the-shelf guitars, not something he was clearly booglarising in his workshop.
I find Les Paul a fascinating mix of old-timey schtickmeister and absorbed electronics engineer. I do quite admire his iconoclastic approach. It is maybe worth remembering that he wasn't actually that happy with the design Gibson implemented, and liked the various iterations (including the bursts) even less! To him a Les Paul guitar should have had low-Z pickups, so those less loved '70s instruments were actually closer to his vision.
I thought EMG came to fame for basically making cheaper versions of Alembic designs?
-
Agree with Rob. Over the years Rick Turner has done many interviews and written articles about his early days. Has he ever once mentioned this? Not as far as I can remember. Never heard anyone else claim he did it either. He only worked for Gibson briefly and that was in the late 80s.
-
It is maybe worth remembering that he wasn't actually that happy with the design Gibson implemented, and liked the various iterations (including the bursts) even less! To him a Les Paul guitar should have had low-Z pickups, so those less loved '70s instruments were actually closer to his vision.
It's also worth remembering that Gibson tried to talk to him about his pickups while developing the Les Paul Model, but he would not reveal any secrets. Imagine the gold top or standard with LoZ pickups to begin with :)
-
I may have posted this a few years ago, Dave Rogers had one of Lester's pickups in a display at his store. Note the missing logo...........
(http://i999.photobucket.com/albums/af119/Grog_03/Dave-3_zps4996148a.jpg) (http://s999.photobucket.com/user/Grog_03/media/Dave-3_zps4996148a.jpg.html)
(http://i999.photobucket.com/albums/af119/Grog_03/Dave-2_zpsbdb86d04.jpg) (http://s999.photobucket.com/user/Grog_03/media/Dave-2_zpsbdb86d04.jpg.html)
I didn't see it when I was there around a month ago...........
-
Thanks everyone - I think the guy had spoken to Rick Turner and got confused about what Rick Turner was talking about - he probably doesn't know as much about the Recording Les Pauls as you guys - well, I'd be willing to bet NOBODY knows as much about them as you guys!
-
While looking for something else, I stumbled upon this in my book..... "The Modern Era of the Les Paul Legacy 1968-2009" by Robb Lawrence. This edition of the two book set has the best reference to Low Impedance Les Pauls of any book I'd come across.
(http://i999.photobucket.com/albums/af119/Grog_03/Low%20Imp%20Pickups_zpswddqjtba.jpg) (http://s999.photobucket.com/user/Grog_03/media/Low%20Imp%20Pickups_zpswddqjtba.jpg.html)
A few weeks ago, I emailed a contact that I had met on eBay many years ago. His mother had worked at the Kalamazoo factory. He seemed to know all of the retired people that worked there & who had what stashed away in their homes & garages. He was able to find just about anything I was looking for in oddball parts, including Low Impedance pickups. He move down south & no longer deals in guitar parts. I asked him if he had any idea if the Low Impedance Pickups were produce in Kalamazoo or if he might still know somebody that did know. He hasn't responded. If he does, I'll post his answer...........................