• THIS IS THE 25th ANNIVERSARY YEAR FOR THE LES PAUL FORUM! PLEASE CELEBRATE WITH US AND SUPPORT US WITH A DONATION TO KEEP US GOING! We've made a large financial investment to convert the Les Paul Forum to this new XenForo platform, and recently moved to a new hosting platform. We also 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!
  • WE HAVE MOVED THE LES PAUL FORUM TO A NEW HOSTING PROVIDER! Let us know how it is going! Many thanks, Mike Slubowski, Admin
  • Please support our Les Paul Forum Sponsors with your business - Gary's Classic Guitars, Wildwood Guitars, Chicago Music Exchange, Reverb.com, Throbak.com and True Vintage Guitar. From personal experience doing business with all of them, they are first class organizations. Thank you!

Pots are different length!!

Edward

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2006
Messages
1,259
Sorry, but I just had to post this as I never knew. I had always thought that LPs had long-shaft pots. But as I was measuring my LPC bridge pup pots' values and suddenly it dawned on me that these are short shafts, and the neck pup pots are the regular long shafts! Never knew this!! Every LP and Studio I've owned in the past, including my current 05 Standard, has long shafts (but I've never owned a CS or pre-90 guitar). Is this normal SOP for Gibby's CS Lesters? Darn good thing I discovered this as I was just going to order up some pots and was going to click long shaft.

Edward
 

reswot

Active member
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Messages
3,295
Every Historic that I've come across has had short-shafts all the way around.
 

Triplet

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2006
Messages
1,676
If you go to a store like RS, they will give specs for particular models so you will choose the right length.
 

zombiwoof

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
3,565
Did you buy the guitar new, or was it owned by someone before you?. Possibly two of the pots were changed out by a previous owner.

Al
 

Edward

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2006
Messages
1,259
Did you buy the guitar new, or was it owned by someone before you?. Possibly two of the pots were changed out by a previous owner.

Al

Hi Al,

I bought this 05 LPC used. But the pots are clearly marked "Gibson" and nothing looks molested.

Edward
 

zombiwoof

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
3,565
It could have come with 300k linear pots for the volumes, and the previous owner changed them out for new (in this case aftermarket Gibson) audio 500k's. Many people do this, and it would explain why two of them have different shaft lengths. I'm not sure if your guitar should have come with short or long shaft pots, is it a Historic LPC?. I've never heard anyone say their Gibson had stock pots of two different shaft lengths stock before. But anything is possible!. What did they measure?.

Al
 

Mars Hall

Active member
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
1,829
If short shafts work in any Les Paul, why would they install the long shafts? Is the construction of the body and top different somehow to require the long shafts on those guitars? I've never owned a Lester that had long shafts, could some one post some pics.
 

reswot

Active member
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Messages
3,295
The routing of the control cavity is such that short shafts are too short (especially with the sardine can or metal plate) for many USA production guitars. It's a different cut than is in Historics or the old ones.
 

Don

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
5,733
If you remove the control plate in a production Les Paul you can often fit short shaft pots in a couple of locations, but not all.

Does the guitar in question have a control plate? Is it supposed to have a control plate?
 

Edward

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2006
Messages
1,259
OK, so I'm not the only one who has never seen this ;)

It's a LesPaul Custom, year 2005 so it's from the CustomShop folks (dunno if that makes any diff, but maybe the pre-CS LPCs were different?).

It all does indeed look stock (to me) in there, no grounding plate as in my current Standard or of LPs/Studios of past. I suppose someone "could" have replaced them with factory Gibby pots, but sure as heck would seem like lots of trouble since all other pots are ubiquitous and cheap.

I hadn't bothered taking out the neck pots (since I'm looking at modding only the bridge tone), but I think reswot is 100% correct that short shafts wouldn't fit in there ...given the carve it kind of looks to me like you have to have long shafts for the neck controls. And certainly must have long ones if there's a grounding plate.

Sorry if I sound like an ignoramous, but never having owned a Custom or Historic before (only the regular production varieties :) ), this all looked new to me. No "problem" of course ...only glad I discovered it before I ordered, and just figured I'd share my own discovery here :D

Edward
 

zombiwoof

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
3,565
You said you were measuring them, what did they measure?. If the bridge (short shaft) pots are 500k's, it could indeed be what I said, they were previously 300k's and the previous owner replaced them with the short shaft 500k's. I don't think it's odd at all that he would have replaced them with the same type of Gibson pots that were in there, except he bought short shaft instead of long shaft. Maybe he didn't realize that the stock pots were long shaft, or maybe he had the short shaft pots on hand, and found they would fit. He might have wanted the new pots to match the Gibson tone pots, thus he used replacement Gibson pots. Makes sense to me.

Al
 

Edward

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2006
Messages
1,259
Hi Al,

When I had measured the bridge tone pot it was about 410K ohms, so whether the factory was shooting for 300k or 500k, they split it right down the middle :D

I didn't get around to measuring the bridge's vol pot yet because frankly, I got sidetracked when I discovered what I discovered ...and so I just changed the caps and went to 50s wiring config like I had planned. I will eventually measure out that vol pot, though, as I am ordering one push/pull pot for the tone position (I'll be trying parallel/series on a 498T I just found used), and will get a 500K for the volume if it isn't that value already. Thanks for the thoughts and feedback!

Edward
 

zombiwoof

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
3,565
Hi Al,

When I had measured the bridge tone pot it was about 410K ohms, so whether the factory was shooting for 300k or 500k, they split it right down the middle :D

I didn't get around to measuring the bridge's vol pot yet because frankly, I got sidetracked when I discovered what I discovered ...and so I just changed the caps and went to 50s wiring config like I had planned. I will eventually measure out that vol pot, though, as I am ordering one push/pull pot for the tone position (I'll be trying parallel/series on a 498T I just found used), and will get a 500K for the volume if it isn't that value already. Thanks for the thoughts and feedback!

Edward

If it measured 410k, that is most likely a 500k pot that measures low. They probably have a +/- 20% tolerance and that is within the 20% for a 500k. That also leads me to believe I was right about them being replaced, as you probably had 300k linear volume pots in there to begin with. I know someone else had the same mix of short and long shaft pots in their guitar, but it might be the same story with that one. Either that or Gibson is putting two different shaft length pots in those guitars, which I find hard to believe. Oh well, you've got it sorted out anyway, but it is definitely interesting. Good luck with your LP!.

Al
 

Edward

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2006
Messages
1,259
Hi Al,

You may be right about the PO replacing them, who knows. But if the guit came stock with linear pots and these were replaced with "500k" audio taper, then wouldn't the long-shaft ones for the neck controls also be the same? So here's my point: all four pots "sound" and behave to me like audio taper pots. Drastic difference in first 1/4 turn, then less difference, thereafter. I wonder if Gibson has a method to their madness, or just had a few shorties laying around ...lol!

All just points for discussion, of course, as I just got a 500K volume (that measured 510K ohms :) ) and a 500k push/pull (that measured 420K, so I'll use this as the tone pot), and these will then serve as my bridge controls as soon as the pup I bought gets to me. Sidenote: very curious what a 498 wired in parallel-coil config will sound like ...looking forward to it!! Thanks for all the feedback ...it's always enlightening hanging out here! :)

Edward
 

zombiwoof

Active member
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
3,565
Hi Al,

You may be right about the PO replacing them, who knows. But if the guit came stock with linear pots and these were replaced with "500k" audio taper, then wouldn't the long-shaft ones for the neck controls also be the same? So here's my point: all four pots "sound" and behave to me like audio taper pots. Drastic difference in first 1/4 turn, then less difference, thereafter. I wonder if Gibson has a method to their madness, or just had a few shorties laying around ...lol!

All just points for discussion, of course, as I just got a 500K volume (that measured 510K ohms :) ) and a 500k push/pull (that measured 420K, so I'll use this as the tone pot), and these will then serve as my bridge controls as soon as the pup I bought gets to me. Sidenote: very curious what a 498 wired in parallel-coil config will sound like ...looking forward to it!! Thanks for all the feedback ...it's always enlightening hanging out here! :)

Edward

The tone pots in production Gibsons are audio. They only put the linears in for volume.

Al
 
Top