Any experience with Jim Wagner pickups?

I recently stumbled upon two very early sets of Wagner pickups which are both hand wound. I heard he now winds by machine and I would think tone wise that really shouldn't make any difference?

Anyway, the two sets I have are the Fillmores and the Darkburst. The Fillmores are now installed in one of my LP's. However, the guitar is not with me and should arrive later this week. My Luthier who worked on the guitar installed the Fillmores over the Darkburst claiming the maple top on the LP should balance out the fatter sound of the slightly over wound Fillmores. He said after the install that the guitar sounded incredible and there is no need to even try the Darkburst set.

He compared the tone closely to his '99 R7 with has his own hand wound A4(B) A5(N) set. He noted the Fillmores did have about a 5% more increase in the mids but that was IHO a good thing. His R7, which I have played and very much liked, is a shop favorite and sort of a standard others are judged by. Needless to say that comment has me dying to try my guitar!

I'd like to hear from others on their experiences with Jim's pickups. It would be great if someone has experience with both of the sets that I have. Also, has anyone tried the Darkburst set in a non-maple capped Gibson such as an SG?

I did a few searches and it seems the Crossroad set is/was very popular. However much of the info is quite dated which leads me to believe these are definitely not the flavor of the month. Thanks.

I bought my 01 R9 used, and the previous owner installed a set of WCR's pickups. Mine came with a Darkburst neck and a Godwood bridge. Honestly, after hearing all the different pickup flavor of the month demos, I have never been tempted to replace them. I can dial in any classic Les Paul tone that I have in my head. The guitar has been taken to countless open jams, and people always commment on how good the tone is.

I'm not a fan... I have a set of Fillmores installed now because the EQ is spot on and I use it for comparison... but as far as PAFness I find them rather lame. To my ear they lack the overtones, depth, articulation and responsiveness that some other PAF clones have in spades. The Fillmores should not be overwound... they originally came from a '57 Goldtop and they should be underwound if anything. The Betts Set is probably closer to how the Fillmores should sound then the Fillmores. The Darkbursts should be hot, but not to the degree that Jim winds them. I had a set for about a month and they are one of the very few that I've actually gotten rid of (most will stay on the shelf).

I know a lot of folks really like Jim's pups, and in the end its all subjective... but they just don't do it for me. :jim

Love my Fillmores. Prefer them covered.
Currently residing in an R9 and will probably stay there. They do benefit from 500K++ pots IME.

duaneflowers said:

I'm not a fan... I have a set of Fillmores installed now because the EQ is spot on and I use it for comparison... but as far as PAFness I find them rather lame. To my ear they lack the overtones, depth, articulation and responsiveness that some other PAF clones have in spades. The Fillmores should not be overwound... they originally came from a '57 Goldtop and they should be underwound if anything. The Betts Set is probably closer to how the Fillmores should sound then the Fillmores. The Darkbursts should be hot, but not to the degree that Jim winds them. I had a set for about a month and they are one of the very few that I've actually gotten rid of (most will stay on the shelf).

I know a lot of folks really like Jim's pups, and in the end its all subjective... but they just don't do it for me. :jim

Click to expand...

Cool and I appreciate your honestly. I also agree that overtones, depth, articulation and responsiveness are nice attributes to have in a PAF clone.

But what I find interesting is how many folks really don't care for the other qualities of a PAF such as sterility for lack of a better word. There's something in the clarity and treble response of a PAF that to my ears comes across as less organic and slightly sterile sounding. Especially chords under gain. I think back in the day this was overlooked partly because of cranked tube amps bringing forth the goods. Could the term "lame" you used be referring to what I'm speaking about here?

Now admittedly I have not tried all of the boutique clones out there. I have tried some of the usual suspects such as the ThroBack SLE 101, Lollar Imperial, SD Antiquity, Gibson Custombucker and the ones I'm currently getting from a small scale boutique builder. All those mentioned to my ears all possessed that unique sterile like treble response and clarity.

It guess it comes down to as players what we like. That goes for sound and feel which is rarely spoken about. One would have to admit if all the builders wound the same thing it would be boring and no room in the market place for them all to survive, hence why different flavors of one idea appear.

Ever notice a PAF doesn't "bark" or "bite" like a T-Top? But still many compare those two even though their construction and tone are worlds apart.

alnico59 said:

Cool and I appreciate your honestly. I also agree that overtones, depth, articulation and responsiveness are nice attributes to have in a PAF clone.

But what I find interesting is how many folks really don't care for the other qualities of a PAF such as sterility for lack of a better word. There's something in the clarity and treble response of a PAF that to my ears comes across as less organic and slightly sterile sounding. Especially chords under gain. I think back in the day this was overlooked partly because of cranked tube amps bringing forth the goods. Could the term "lame" you used be referring to what I'm speaking about here?

Now admittedly I have not tried all of the boutique clones out there. I have tried some of the usual suspects such as the ThroBack SLE 101, Lollar Imperial, SD Antiquity, Gibson Custombucker and the ones I'm currently getting from a small scale boutique builder. All those mentioned to my ears all possessed that unique sterile like treble response and clarity.

It guess it comes down to as players what we like. That goes for sound and feel which is rarely spoken about. One would have to admit if all the builders wound the same thing it would be boring and no room in the market place for them all to survive, hence why different flavors of one idea appear.

Ever notice a PAF doesn't "bark" or "bite" like a T-Top? But still many compare those two even though their construction and tone are worlds apart.

Probably the only pickup claiming to be a PAF that I tried and did not sound anything like a PAF is the Gibson '57 Classic. IMHO, that pickup does not have the clarity or that unique treble to be considered a PAF. However the fact that the '57 Classic is so loved by many leads to me to believe why there may be some truth to that saying... Everyone wants a PAF until they get one! Dare I say most want a more user friendly pickup and a PAF doesn't really fit that bill.

Anyway, I guess I won't know if Jim's pickups will be a fit for me until I try them out for myself in a few days. But I'm still excited to have the chance. I will respond back here with my honest evaluation after the honeymoon phase is over. Thanks!​

Click to expand...

It's all subjective and there really is no accounting for who likes what and why. That slightly sterile sounding clarity and treble response you speak of is one of the things that makes a PAF a PAF and too few pups have it, IMHO. I think its a result of the old wire as only more recent ones wound with vintage wire seem to manifest that particular brand of 'sterility', but only when they are not dialed in correctly. When someone like Joe B or the good Rev. pulls out an original burst to play there is none of that 'sterility' to be found because it is dialed in right... at which point there are very few guitars that can compare and very few tones as sweet. So what you speak of really nails it... but I believe it is by design and not a fault. Folks that don't like it just don't like original PAFs... and there's nothing wrong with that... but they shouldn't be compared to real PAFs, because they lack the very qualities which make them so desirable. Time and again I've seen folks poo poo a pair of PAF pups because of the very qualities they were designed to emulate. Not all humbuckers need to be PAF clones which do tend to be rather unforgiving as opposed to humbuckers with some gain built in. I have found Wagner's pups to be EQ'd perfectly, but to my ear they lack the qualities of a real PAF (most likely because Jim is more interested in the EQ then that authenticity). OTOH, the Wizz, Rewind, Ox4, Sheptone, Bare Knuckle, etc. ones start with all the properties of a real PAF and then try to EQ them as close as possible to the set they are emulating without losing that PAFness. So Jim's are kind of reverse engineered to get the results he is after. Ron Ellis kind of does it that way too with amazing results, and again there is nothing wrong with it, just a different way of playing connect the dots.

You're right about Gibson's '57 Classics... those, as with most Gibson offerings follow the premise that the only thing consistent with Gibson's is their inconsistency. Early '57 Classics were actually consistently quite nice... but when they changed the specs they roont 'em.

Looking forward to your review of the Wagners... I've heard the early sets were much better than the later ones but I've never had the opportunity to compare them.

duaneflowers said:

It's all subjective and there really is no accounting for who likes what and why. That slightly sterile sounding clarity and treble response you speak of is one of the things that makes a PAF a PAF and too few pups have it, IMHO. I think its a result of the old wire as only more recent ones wound with vintage wire seem to manifest that particular brand of 'sterility', but only when they are not dialed in correctly. When someone like Joe B or the good Rev. pulls out an original burst to play there is none of that 'sterility' to be found because it is dialed in right... at which point there are very few guitars that can compare and very few tones as sweet. So what you speak of really nails it... but I believe it is by design and not a fault. Folks that don't like it just don't like original PAFs... and there's nothing wrong with that... but they shouldn't be compared to real PAFs, because they lack the very qualities which make them so desirable. Time and again I've seen folks poo poo a pair of PAF pups because of the very qualities they were designed to emulate. Not all humbuckers need to be PAF clones which do tend to be rather unforgiving as opposed to humbuckers with some gain built in. I have found Wagner's pups to be EQ'd perfectly, but to my ear they lack the qualities of a real PAF (most likely because Jim is more interested in the EQ then that authenticity). OTOH, the Wizz, Rewind, Ox4, Sheptone, Bare Knuckle, etc. ones start with all the properties of a real PAF and then try to EQ them as close as possible to the set they are emulating without losing that PAFness. So Jim's are kind of reverse engineered to get the results he is after. Ron Ellis kind of does it that way too with amazing results, and again there is nothing wrong with it, just a different way of playing connect the dots.

You're right about Gibson's '57 Classics... those, as with most Gibson offerings follow the premise that the only thing consistent with Gibson's is their inconsistency. Early '57 Classics were actually consistently quite nice... but when they changed the specs they roont 'em.

Looking forward to your review of the Wagners... I've heard the early sets were much better than the later ones but I've never had the opportunity to compare them.

Click to expand...

Cool and I'm glad you have the ears to pick up on that sterile quality of a PAF or an accurate clone and realize that's how it should sound. .

You're right in that it's unique to the design. As far as Joe B and Gibbons.. they play loud! Ain't nobody telling those guys to turn down. I've noticed on my end that as the amp volume goes up that characteristic starts to mesh with the pushed power tubes into a cool unmistakable tone with less sterility but still the trademark qualities that only a PAF possesses.

Like many in this game I'm able to immediately identify a real PAF on the old recordings. If I hear a demo of a clone I can quickly tell what the winder was going for, a true quirky PAF tone or a user friendlier substitute.

The guy who's winding for me now told me the tone he wanted to capture was Bloomfield's. So he has me hook line and sinker! His design is on the bright side and yes sterile with a hint of microphonics but that's the sound I really want to hear. He mainly winds around an A5 and if requested an A4 in the bridge.

Thanks for responding!

I have been extremely satisfied with a Godwood/Darkburst combo in my 76 Custom.
I was not trying to go for any particular tone from any particular famous player.
I just wanted a set of pickups that worked well with that particular guitar.
Of all the various pickups that have been it that guitar, GW/DB set have worked best for me.
Every piece of wood is different, every style of playing is different, every rig is different.
YMMV

I've got three sets of real PAF's, pared down from about 15 or more I've bought over the years. They aren't all magical.

I've got 5-6 sets of Jim Wagner pickups, ranging from the Darkburst, Betset, Godwood, and the G90 single coils. They're as close as anything I've tried to a real PAF for a dozen years now.

Yes, I do have other pickup makers in my demo guitars, but in my personal guitars it's either Jim Wagner, Peter Florence, or real PAF's.

When I get another guitar suitable for it, I'll try the Duncan Joe B pickup set I've had sitting here in it's numbered box for the last 2-3 years.

I've heard plenty of other PAF type pickups from other builders, some are ok. None are like real PAF's or the Wagner pickups to my ears. And no, I don't get free pickups from JW, I always send him payments just like anyone else.

ScumbackSpeakers said:

I've got three sets of real PAF's, pared down from about 15 or more I've bought over the years. They aren't all magical.

I've got 5-6 sets of Jim Wagner pickups, ranging from the Darkburst, Betset, Godwood, and the G90 single coils. They're as close as anything I've tried to a real PAF for a dozen years now.

Yes, I do have other pickup makers in my demo guitars, but in my personal guitars it's either Jim Wagner, Peter Florence, or real PAF's.

When I get another guitar suitable for it, I'll try the Duncan Joe B pickup set I've had sitting here in it's numbered box for the last 2-3 years.

I've heard plenty of other PAF type pickups from other builders, some are ok. None are like real PAF's or the Wagner pickups to my ears. And no, I don't get free pickups from JW, I always send him payments just like anyone else.

Click to expand...

The varied opinions are interesting for sure.

I should have the guitar with the Fillmore set in hand tomorrow evening. Don't have any recipient guitars for the Darkburst set right now. The promising thing on my side is the Luthier who winds my current PAF replicas that are currently in two of my other LP's is the same guy who installed the Fillmores. He said they sound very close to his winds. At least in that particular guitar which is all that matters to me right now. If that's what showing up tomorrow I think I'm gonna be smiling.

Jim's pickups are excellent and certainly do not lack harmonicly complex harmonics or shifting midrange complexity or articulation. Mine are very dynamic and nuanced, responding to my pick and fingers various techniques instantly. Straight into amp for me please. Mine very closely duplicated a favorite old set of PAFs with a throaty sound missing in most clones. I've used mine for almost 20[?] yrs and have not needed to change a thing.

Big Al said:

Jim's pickups are excellent and certainly do not lack harmonicly complex harmonics or shifting midrange complexity or articulation. Mine are very dynamic and nuanced, responding to my pick and fingers various techniques instantly. Straight into amp for me please. Mine very closely duplicated a favorite old set of PAFs with a throaty sound missing in most clones. I've used mine for almost 20[?] yrs and have not needed to change a thing.

Click to expand...

And there ya have it... :salude

The key with Jim's pickups is to ignore the impedance numbers and go with your ear. I know you can say that about a lot of pickups, but his were where I really learned that lesson. Throw them out the window. A 13.5k Fillmore isn't going to hit your front-end as hard as it sounds. Little more midrange than some vintagey pickups, but certainly not at the expense of clarity... and Jim's a good dude on top of it all.

Nick

Big Al said:

Jim's pickups are excellent and certainly do not lack harmonicly complex harmonics or shifting midrange complexity or articulation. Mine are very dynamic and nuanced, responding to my pick and fingers various techniques instantly. Straight into amp for me please. Mine very closely duplicated a favorite old set of PAFs with a throaty sound missing in most clones. I've used mine for almost 20[?] yrs and have not needed to change a thing.

Click to expand...

Which set did you get?

The '91 '59 RI flame top with the Fillmore set installed arrived today. FedEx came late so I was only able to play it for two hours at a generous bedroom volume. My neighbors are cool but I don't abuse their coolness.

I played it through my modified Marshall JCM 900 running KT77's through a JCM 800 4x12 cab with a mix of greenbacks and the original UK GT75's. I also played it through my Blackstar HT1R. I played it against my '14 R8 with the Big Mike's Custom A5 set and my '10 Traditional Plus with the same set but with an over wound bridge pickup due to the non vintage pickup spacing.

I thought the '59 RI matched up better with the Traditional as they are both are wound with 9.5 gauge strings and are closer in design and weight. So my comparison is between those two guitars. Btw the Traditional has an ABR-1, lightweight aluminum TP and has been rewired from the switch to the control cavity with vintage braid. Both guitars have the same NOS Russian PIO .022 caps. The '59 RI has Dimarzio vintage low torque 500k pots while the Traditional has CTS 500k pots. Both wired up 50's. The RI also has a LT aluminum TP. The '59 RI weighs 9 lbs 4 oz. The Traditional weighs 9 lbs 9 oz.

Through the Marshall I was able to hear the differences between the two guitars more clearly. My Luthier was correct, these Fillmores in this guitar are a home run! The balance (I like to switch between the neck and bridge pickups a lot) has a nice smooth, natural transition. The middle position has that hollow tone. The slightly added midrange is a welcoming addition. Yeah, they don't have that Tele on steroids thing going on. But I already have that with the other two guitars. However, the clarity is definitely there, especially in the neck position. I already know they are never, ever coming out!

A direct comparison to the Big Mike's set would be...the Fillmore set has a tad less clarity and slightly less presence but more mids as mentioned. Also slightly warmer and more organic. The Big Mike's set really hits you with their stinging treble which behaves more like a true PAF so they have less bite than the Fillmores. I think the PAF guys know what I'm saying here. To my ears and my right hand bite and treble are not the same thing. I always found the treble on a good PAF replica to be less sharp.

I like all three sets and don't feel they are worlds apart in how they respond to my playing. They both inspire me to the point I don't want to put the guitars down. Now I have to try that Darkburst set. The thing is I'm not disturbing any of these guitars. I always wanted an SG so maybe...

Classic said:

Which set did you get?

Click to expand...

I believe it was a set of Epiphone pups with Wagner stickers on them... just to see if our beloved Aluwishus could tell the difference... he couldn't... :spabout

**UPDATE** It's a secret though... so don't tell him... as we all know he's a bit of a sensitive guy... :rofl

duaneflowers said:

I believe it was a set of Epiphone pups with Wagner stickers on them... just to see if our beloved Aluwishus could tell the difference... he couldn't... :spabout

**UPDATE** It's a secret though... so don't tell him... as we all know he's a bit of a sensitive guy... :rofl

Click to expand...

How are you privey to my top secret special sauce recipies? Not just Epi's but early issue Indonesian wound with correct genuine imitation metal parts. You ain't supposed to tell!!!!


I've had them along time. They are not overwound like some. I can't remember which, but not Goodwoods or Darkburst. Plain base with sharpie JW initials, not PE wire it is bright color. Crossroads? Filmores?

They are not PAF clones. They hit a particular tone spot that works very, very well straight into an angry amp, maybe a wah wah. For me they are ideal for how I approach hot Blues Rock/Boogie/SRV Roadhouse headsweatin' eyes closed, stand back jack I'm on fire and faces will melt gig tone!

This particular neck pickup is hands down THE VERY BEST I HAVE EVER HEARD!!!! Including PAF's and all the many Custom Shop, rare and may excellent pups in my stash. That one pickup, for me, is the perfect neck humbucker. Big, bold SRV Tone on steroids. No Tube Screamer needed. HUGE singing single coil tone. Never wooly or shrill. My ideal of the perfect all around do it all neck pickup. Fluke? I dunno, I'll die owning this pair.

i don't post very often, but had to step out of the shadows to testify for Jim!

For a good ten years I changed pickups more often than a lot of guys restring!

I stopped when I got my first set of WCR's.


My "number one" is a Tobacco burst R9 and IIRC it has a Crossroads neck and Darkburst (or Fillmore?) bridge. I have never taken them back out in 10 or 15 years or so.
Does it sound like a PAF?
No idea, never played one. But it helps me dial in classic Les Paul tones from delicate and beautiful clean
to an organic grainy snarl and all the woman tines etc in between.

Now I own a Moore Green set, (in my brand new 335) and I think a Betts Set (in my SG) and another set like my Les Paul that makes my
cheapo wanna be Korona epiphone Flying V a formidable slide guitar!

I don't recall what they all are because I bought them a long time ago. And never heard one and thought, "Oh i don't like that one".

I do not shop for, study up on, or even wonder about other pick ups, and won't.

Rabid fan? YES I AM.

But, as i say, I was listening for certain organic qualities and these hit the spot. I couldn't say they were "PAF" qualities
because the artists I love...from Dickey to Duane to Billy to Kossoff to Green to Clapton, never sounded that specifically
"the same" to me to make me feel like their PAF's all sounded spot on the same.

alnico59 said:

Ever notice a PAF doesn't "bark" or "bite" like a T-Top? But still many compare those two even though their construction and tone are worlds apart. [/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

Click to expand...

Sometimes I think the sound that 90% of players think is the PAF sound is really the T-Top sound. Present company excluded, of course.