Leaderboard

Do Les Pauls require long-legged pickups...

Yes, they are the typical Les Paul pickup rings.  I'm asking this for a friend who has a '78 Les Paul.  My LP copy already has good pickups in it.
 
''Long legs'', ''short legs''--WTF?? Never heard that terminology before. Would someone please educate me?
 
It's an option for the length of the mounting "legs" that the humbucker screws go through.

Mentioned in q28. of this FAQ page.

https://bareknucklepickups.co.uk/main/faq.php
 
A-ha, thanks...and, is a 'standard' humbucker,e.g. Gibson, Duncan, Dimarzio, et al considered long or short? Typical Gibson & Duncan pickups have all been fine in every guitar I've ever put 'em into...
 
Unfortunately I have not taken apart any vintage Gibsons, but apparently long legs were used on arch top type guitars by Gibson.

Nowadays short is the regular size as it were and more suitable for shallower guitars. I would tend to think that unless you know for sure long is needed to go for regular or short.
 
I had to make some room in a Mexican Floyd Strat for a Burstbucker. I don't remember which pickup it was though.
 
For a standard Les Paul, and most other carved-top guitars where the pickups are mounted by rings, either will work. Long legs are 'classic', but short legs allow you to raise the pickup higher more easily.

For most guitars with flat tops and the pickups mounted in a pickguard, use short legs. For direct-mount pickups, use long legs for carved tops with higher bridges, such as tune-o-matics and wraparounds, and short legs for flat tops with lower bridges.

It's generally best to go with short legs since they can be fit to any guitar, while long legs may not. There is never a time when you need long legs, unless you're trying to pass off a pickup as an authentic '50s unit.
 
Back
Top