• Guys, we've spent considerable money converting the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and we have ongoing monthly operating expenses. THE "DONATIONS" TAB IS NOW WORKING, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY DONATIONS YOU CAN MAKE TO KEEP THE LES PAUL FORUM GOING! Thank you!

Tim Shaw? The missing pups

cherrick

Les Paul Froum Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2002
Messages
5,730
OK, Here (http://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=131530) is a thread about an '81 on the bay with Tim Shaw pups.

I have an '80. I took out the stock humbucker pups, put them in a box, installed Fralins, and put the box somewhere and I can't remember where.

Were the original pups Tim Shaw pups? How can you tell? If they were, did they have much value?

I thought there was pretty much nothing of vintage value about my '80, so I change pretty much everything, installing along with the Fralins a Bigsby B7 and an RS upgrade wiring kit. RS Kluson+Tonepro tuners are next.

I'm just curious about the original pups, in case I ever find them again.
 

Les45

New member
Joined
Nov 13, 2001
Messages
954
I have an '80 Heritage Standard with the Shaws. I think the pups sound great. I assume that's what Gibson was using during that time, but maybe the Shaw's were just installed in the Heritage series. Mike Slub could probably give a more definitive answer.
 

kink56

Les Paul Froum Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
7,672
The Standards COULD have Shaws. But USUALLY did not. If a Standard had Shaws, they USUALLY put a sticker on each PUP ring advertising the fact that it is loaded with "Pat Appl For" PUPs. Shaws are found in Heritage 80s/Elites, 30th Anniversary GT, 83-87 Prehistorics, Guitar Trader Reissues (well most dealer reissues from the 80s until 87), Standard 82s and Standard 83s, Spotlight Specials, 80s Customs, ES-335 Reissues from 83. It is not easy telling them from regular Humbuckers just by looking (unless they have a sticker, some did, or the right ink codes, which some did not) The backing plates have the pat no stamped, but so did the late T-Tops, the Velvet Brick, Dirty Fingers, and The Original Humbucker--which most Standards had in the 80s, which is just like the Gibson USA 490 that came right after it in 1990. The Shaws have rough cast magnets, which are USUALLY larger than the other HBs of the era, and 42awg poly wire. They were superceded by the Bill Lawrence HB-L and HB-R circuit board PUPS in 88 in the Pre-Historics, these were refered to as PAF reissues as well, and then the 57 Classic showed up in 1990.

They started with inked dates on the back (like late 70s T-Tops) until mid 80, and then they went to a ink code, the second set of numbers was the date like 781 for July 1981. The first set of codes I cannot figure out, and PUPs other than Shaws had them too, but the ones that I KNOW are Shaws for sure have 372 (neck) and 373 (bridge) and 137 (neck) 138 (bridge) followed by the date code. Some Gibsons equipped with Shaws will have a little black sticker on the PUP rings that read Pat Appl For. And some will have a Silver sticker on the back of the PUP that reads the same. Like this one, won by one of our forum members:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Gibson-Pickup-p...ryZ41429QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
 
Last edited:

kink56

Les Paul Froum Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
7,672
I have seen them sell for up t0 $500 a set. But they will bring $100 a piece all day long. Nothing outrageous! I have two sets, and I have had up to 10 sets loose at one time. I am keeping mine for future purchases, because SO MANY people took them out, and put in aftermarker PUPs, and sometimes I find a 80s LP I want with SD in them and I want to put THE BEST PUP since 1960, back in those LPs. Hint: they work BETTER with the 300K pots that were used in the 80s. Whenever I upgraded my LPs that had Shaws to 500K pots, orange drop caps, etc, and they became too tinny sounding in the bridge and lost its charm in the neck! That will teach me to do arbitrary upgrades!!!
 

kink56

Les Paul Froum Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
7,672
BTW the link I offered, and you refered to, probably does NOT have Shaws in it, but regular 490s, with 43awg wire and short magnets like the ones used in T-Tops. I just bought a 85 PreHistoric with SDs in it, and I will put one of my Shaws in it, and sell the Antiquities, I have never cared for the Antiquities. I have a question about them, have they changed through the years? I understand that they are more uniform and less "hand wound" these days, just an aged set of Seth Lovers now.........is this true?
 

kink56

Les Paul Froum Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
7,672
Yes it would be GREAT for Mike Slub to verify what I THINK I know about these PUPs. And for someone to decode the first three numbers on the ink stamp (137 138 etc) the ODD number is for the neck and the even for the bridge. But I have seen all sorts of numbers, and sometimes on PUPs I KNEW were not Shaws, but Velvet Bricks or Original HB (490s) As I have stated so far I can only vouch for 137/138 and 372/373 to be Shaws. If ANYONE knows about these codes, it would be wonderful, because many PUPs from mid 80 until 85 had them, I have not seen these codes on 86 or 87 Shaws or other PUPs. Please remember, just because there are ink codes, does NOT mean they are Shaws! I seem to remember one of my Spotlights having the stickers on the PUP rings and the codes were in the 100s, like 101 and 102 or 151 and 152, so I know there are other codes that were Shaws too!
 

kink56

Les Paul Froum Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
7,672
The very earliest Shaw had textured bobbins, probably made by Scaller, with no holes visible from the top at all. I guess these were bought by Gibson, until Shaw re-developed the PAF style bobbins.
 

Sunburst79

New member
Joined
Oct 28, 2002
Messages
1,190
They were also in the Heritage series korina Flying Vee's and Explorers. Great pickups.
 

Stevedenver

Active member
Joined
Jul 17, 2001
Messages
2,565
i strongly dis agree abut the 300 k pot being a better companion to shaws, and, of note, some pots of the era were as low a 100k-big muddy

ive got shaws in my 83 lp ss and did the rs mod -the guitar went from very boomy and middy-especially in the neck to having a much wider tone pallette, with significant cut if you want it

-nothing wrong with keeping the tone pots about '6'- nothing tinny whatsoever imo-in fact shaws seem to have a bit more punch and bottom than other gibson pups of the era
 

Litcrit

New member
Joined
May 9, 2002
Messages
5,990
i strongly dis agree abut the 300 k pot being a better companion to shaws, and, of note, some pots of the era were as low a 100k-big muddy

ive got shaws in my 83 lp ss and did the rs mod -the guitar went from very boomy and middy-especially in the neck to having a much wider tone pallette, with significant cut if you want it

-nothing wrong with keeping the tone pots about '6'- nothing tinny whatsoever imo-in fact shaws seem to have a bit more punch and bottom than other gibson pups of the era

Yep! My 1983 dot reissue has Shaws and it's muddy-sounding to my ears. I used to blame the pups, but now I blame the pots...300K.
 

andreja marovic

New member
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
2,688
The Standards COULD have Shaws. But USUALLY did not. If a Standard had Shaws, they USUALLY put a sticker on each PUP ring advertising the fact that it is loaded with "Pat Appl For" PUPs. Shaws are found in Heritage 80s/Elites, 30th Anniversary GT, 83-87 Prehistorics, Guitar Trader Reissues (well most dealer reissues from the 80s until 87), Standard 82s and Standard 83s, Spotlight Specials, 80s Customs, ES-335 Reissues from 83. It is not easy telling them from regular Humbuckers just by looking (unless they have a sticker, some did, or the right ink codes, which some did not) The backing plates have the pat no stamped, but so did the late T-Tops, the Velvet Brick, Dirty Fingers, and The Original Humbucker--which most Standards had in the 80s, which is just like the Gibson USA 490 that came right after it in 1990. The Shaws have rough cast magnets, which are USUALLY larger than the other HBs of the era, and 42awg poly wire. They were superceded by the Bill Lawrence HB-L and HB-R circuit board PUPS in 88 in the Pre-Historics, these were refered to as PAF reissues as well, and then the 57 Classic showed up in 1990.

They started with inked dates on the back (like late 70s T-Tops) until mid 80, and then they went to a ink code, the second set of numbers was the date like 781 for July 1981. The first set of codes I cannot figure out, and PUPs other than Shaws had them too, but the ones that I KNOW are Shaws for sure have 372 (neck) and 373 (bridge) and 137 (neck) 138 (bridge) followed by the date code. Some Gibsons equipped with Shaws will have a little black sticker on the PUP rings that read Pat Appl For. And some will have a Silver sticker on the back of the PUP that reads the same. Like this one, won by one of our forum members:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Gibson-Pickup-p...ryZ41429QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
:headbange
Kink56,
Hallo there:salude
I own a Heritage Elite since the 80's.Love the guitar.
The PU's are freat.Reading your post and looking at the pics on eBay I found something STRANGE:
double white Shaws...with double wow of adjusting screws...
Have anyone seen those?
Please have a look and gime your comment::ganz

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...loc=closed_view_item&refwidgettype=osi_widget
:2zone

:bigal
 

kink56

Les Paul Froum Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
7,672
Everybody thinks just because there are ink codes, then they are Shaws!! These are Dirty Fingers Ceramic Magnets. But Yes there have been double white Shaws. But never double pole pieces. And Shaws do not get above around 7.5K
 

BillyBling

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2003
Messages
4,027
andreja marovic, the pickups in the link you posted are Dirty Fingers. Notice that it has adjustable pole pieces on both bobbins. Thats usually the tell tale sign.

bb
 

andreja marovic

New member
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
2,688
andreja marovic, the pickups in the link you posted are Dirty Fingers. Notice that it has adjustable pole pieces on both bobbins. Thats usually the tell tale sign.

bb

Yes,
I know, those are not Shaws...many PU's used in mid 80's were not Shaws, as far as I can tell for sure only on Heritage serie LP Gibson used Shaws.
:2zone
 

rays44

Active member
Joined
Jul 24, 2001
Messages
2,911
BTW the link I offered, and you refered to, probably does NOT have Shaws in it, but regular 490s, with 43awg wire and short magnets like the ones used in T-Tops. I just bought a 85 PreHistoric with SDs in it, and I will put one of my Shaws in it, and sell the Antiquities, I have never cared for the Antiquities. I have a question about them, have they changed through the years? I understand that they are more uniform and less "hand wound" these days, just an aged set of Seth Lovers now.........is this true?

Always a matter of opinion, but in the right guitar, I've never heard a better, more authentic sounding PAF style p/u than the Antiquities. They are made the way they always were, with slight varaitions in wind and gauss to mimic the originals.
 

Hamerfan

Active member
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
791
Hey Kink 56 sent me an email about Shaws.
I have one Shaw (138) and i think you are right about boomyness but that makes this pup so outstanding - a very low resonant frequency. The trick about the shaw are - thats my opininion - that Shaw used a poly with a thinner insulation and wound it very tight.

I own a set of Ants (7.4/8.4) too. They are a great wind, but this degaussed A2 make them weak and a little thin. Great in a strong LP with lots of sustain, but it lacks in thinner sounding ones and in ES guitars.
My set now has a degaussed A5 in the neck and fully charged A2 in the bridge.
 

andreja marovic

New member
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
2,688
Hey Kink 56 sent me an email about Shaws.
I have one Shaw (138) and i think you are right about boomyness but that makes this pup so outstanding - a very low resonant frequency. The trick about the shaw are - thats my opininion - that Shaw used a poly with a thinner insulation and wound it very tight.

I own a set of Ants (7.4/8.4) too. They are a great wind, but this degaussed A2 make them weak and a little thin. Great in a strong LP with lots of sustain, but it lacks in thinner sounding ones and in ES guitars.
My set now has a degaussed A5 in the neck and fully charged A2 in the bridge.

Sorry fore my ignorance, but can you explain in english what's all this about?
Wahat is degauss? magnet not fully charged?
what's the effect of such deal?

Thanks for sharing:2zone
 

rick57

Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Messages
40
I'm glad I caught this thread. I was going through some old parts stashed away for many years and came across the p/u's from my Heritage 80 which was stolen 20 twenty something years ago. I remember replacing the originals with possibly Duncan 59's. So I thought let's have some fun, I take out the Antiquities from my 68' LP ( which I think are fairly close to the real deal) and I'm blown away at how good these sound! The Ants sound a bit mellower and slightly mushy on the low end. The Shaw's are more articulate with great bite, clean up nice and sound closer to a true PAF. I have to agree with the comments on Harmony Central about these p/u's. The ones I have are 137 & 138, one is double white & the other zebra. Do most of you agree?
 

kink56

Les Paul Froum Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
7,672
I'm glad I caught this thread. I was going through some old parts stashed away for many years and came across the p/u's from my Heritage 80 which was stolen 20 twenty something years ago. I remember replacing the originals with possibly Duncan 59's. So I thought let's have some fun, I take out the Antiquities from my 68' LP ( which I think are fairly close to the real deal) and I'm blown away at how good these sound! The Ants sound a bit mellower and slightly mushy on the low end. The Shaw's are more articulate with great bite, clean up nice and sound closer to a true PAF. I have to agree with the comments on Harmony Central about these p/u's. The ones I have are 137 & 138, one is double white & the other zebra. Do most of you agree?

Hell yeah!!!!! I agree COMPLETELY.
 
Top