Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

1974 Les Paul Standard stop bar/tailpiece


wiltel24

Recommended Posts

I don't know what they used then but it should be easy to find out. Knocking with the fingernails on them, those made of zinc sound bright and chimey, the aluminum made rather dull.

 

In case of having removed it, you may read its weight. The aluminum tailpieces of my guitars are 30...32 grams (1.06...1.13 oz), the zinc tailpieces 83...85 grams (2.93...3.00 oz), the only TonePros locking tailpiece of mine made of zinc 75 grams (2.65 oz). I don't know if they ever used brass for stock tailpieces, but they should be around 100 grams (3.53 oz).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what they used then but it should be easy to find out. Knocking with the fingernails on them, those made of zinc sound bright and chimey, the aluminum made rather dull.

 

In case of having removed it, you may read its weight. The aluminum tailpieces of my guitars are 30...32 grams (1.06...1.13 oz), the zinc tailpieces 83...85 grams (2.93...3.00 oz), the only TonePros locking tailpiece of mine made of zinc 75 grams (2.65 oz). I don't know if they ever used brass for stock tailpieces, but they should be around 100 grams (3.53 oz).

 

Thanks for the tips. Pretty sure it's aluminum by the sound you described. Adding to my confusion however is a rep at Gibson says they used zinc back then, but other knowledgeable guys who own the same model say it's aluminum too. Guess best thing is to weigh it at some point to be sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't a magnet also tell you?

 

Isnt the aluminum one going to not attract to a magnet?

Aluminum, zinc and brass (alloyed from copper and zinc) are non-ferromagnetic, and so a magnet won't help. It will be attracted by the nickel plating only which is about the same on all tailpieces, regardless if left alone or coated with chrome or gold.

 

Besides iron, cobalt, nickel and gadolinium, only Heusler alloys are ferromagnetic. All effects caused by magnets and non-ferromagnetic conductors depend on motion and so are electrodynamic, e. g. the voltage induced in a copper coil by a ferromagnetic string vibrating in a ferromagnetic field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just remembered having left out something. [blush] This wouldn't have happened to Mr Spock I think...

 

I forgot to mention chromium dioxide aka chromium(IV)-oxide as highly-coercive ferromagnetic substance, known from magnetic tapes, especially of Compact Cassettes. It is a black, sparkling material and was introduced by BASF in the late 1960s. Due to its tendency to disproportionate into chromium(III)-oxide and the highly aggressive chromium(VI)-oxide, it must be stabilized for technical use with inhibitors. It is still applied today for magnetic code card coatings.

 

In combination with the Dolby B noise reduction system, it allowed the Compact Cassette for going HiFi then. These tapes are referred to IEC II and required higher erasing currents, stronger pre-magnetizing and different playback equalization. Perhaps you still remember the 120 µs setting for IEC I aka iron(III)-oxide and 70 µs setting for IEC II, the rare IEC III and the IEC IV cassette tape types.

 

Later, Japanese companies created IEC II tapes using mixed oxides of alloys such as the TDK Super Avilyn. They sounded a bit boomy and lacked a bit of the improved treble response and maximum output level of genuine chromium(IV)-oxide tapes. However, IEC II cassettes were never that popular in the USA despite of being widely spread in Europe.

 

OK, this is a bit out of topic but I felt a bit bad for having forgotten mentioning it. [rolleyes]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just remembered having left out something. [blush] This wouldn't have happened to Mr Spock I think...

 

I forgot to mention chromium dioxide aka chromium(IV)-oxide as highly-coercitive ferromagnetic substance, known from magnetic tapes, especially of Compact Cassettes. It is a black, sparkling material and was introduced by BASF in the late 1960s. Due to its tendency to disproportionate into chromium(III)-oxide and the highly aggressive chromium(VI)-oxide, it must be stabilized for technical use with inhibitors. It is still applied today for magnetic code card coatings.

 

In combination with the Dolby B noise reduction system, it allowed the Compact Cassette for going HiFi then. These tapes are referred to IEC II and required higher erasing currents, stronger pre-magnetizing and different playback equalization. Perhaps you still remember the 120 µs setting for IEC I aka iron(III)-oxide and 70 µs setting for IEC II, the rare IEC III and the IEC IV cassette tape types.

 

Later, Japanese companies created IEC II tapes using mixed oxides of alloys such as the TDK Super Avilyn. They sounded a bit boomy and lacked a bit of the improved treble response and maximum output level of genuine chromium(IV)-oxide tapes. However, IEC II cassettes were never that popular in the USA despite of being widely spread in Europe.

 

OK, this is a bit out of topic but I felt a bit bad for having forgotten mentioning it. [rolleyes]

 

 

Dammit Jim, I'm a guitar player, not a metallurgist. (sorry, couldn't resist)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...