If you buy any Gibson, the pickups suck ass. Their pickups are so terrible that they changed the pots in their guitars to 300K to hide the awful treble frequencies their pickups make. I changed the pots in my Les Paul to 500K, and use a Seymour Duncan '59 in the bridge and Jazz in the neck - it's the slide guitar on Church of Xotic Dance.
Scott, with all due respect, this is a little silly.
I've owned a 2008 gibson 335 with classic 57's, and now have a 1993 ES335 orville by gibson with classic 57's, and previously had a 2006 les paul studio with burstbuckers. Currently I have a Navigator with Duncan Antiquities and Morse with Thornbuckers.
It's fairly clear to me why you recommend the thornbuckers - they are the closes to a single coil humbucker I've heard. They're very very bright.
At any rate, I would never say that the classic 57's suck - they have a sweeter more midrangy profile than the thorns for sure...maybe I know dick for tone (but you used my amp and loved it ), and maybe you don't dig gibson's pickups, but to say point blank they all suck is a little silly.
You know anyone active on the interwebs who knows a lot about PAF's? That's a huge can of worms.....
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. There's a reason Gibson changed from 500K pots to 350. A humbucking with a 350k pot is just plain wrong, because the pot is limiting the frequencies which are supposed to come out of the pickup, and in Gibson's case the frequencies are so harsh and terrible, it was cheaper to change to 350k pots than to make a decent pickup.
The Thornbucker isn't a "single coil" humbucker, it's the closest thing you can buy to a Seth Lover PAF, and another close one is a Seymour Duncan '59. If those pickups sound bright to you, then I think you've been listening to overwound pickups, because the Thornbucker and '59 are definitely not bright. That's what all humbucking pickups used to sound like - when you listen to Led Zeppelin, that's the pickup you're hearing.
If you have 350k pots in your Les Paul, you're not even hearing your pickups in the first place. Theres a high and low pass filter on them, resulting in a serious loss of bass and top end (the good kind). If you change the pots to 500k, you'll hear what they really sound like, and I'd be willing to bet you won't like it. Put in some great pickups and I think you'll be as pleasantly surprised as I was at how much better the guitar sounds. I've switched out pots and pickups on two Les Pauls (80's and 90's) - I don't think it's a coincidence that I had the same great results with two guitars.
I should add that I use the tone controls on the guitar - any pickup would be too bright for me with the tone all the way up, which is how a lot of rock players do it. A good pickup with the tone on 10 is just bright, but a bad pickup with the tone on 10 is harsh and screechy. That's what Gibson pickups sound like to me.
Joined: 14 Feb 2017 Posts: 133 Location: Thessaloniki, Greece
Posted: Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:15 am Post subject:
Hi Scott, just wanted to ask.. As I am sure you have an ability of understanding guitar sounds more than anyone else willing to share...
Is it true that Page in the first album mostly used a Tele? For example the chromatic riff between the verses in Dazed and Confused... If that is a tele, to my ears it is the bassiest tele I have ever heard.. Sometimes it also sounds like a deep bass horn or a sax.. Don't know how to describe it and I also think it resembles some of the sounds you get too. For example in Sphinx solo album version, the first time the E chord appears.. That inversion you play sounds very Page-like soundwise to me.. Don't know, just wondering
Hi Scott, just wanted to ask.. As I am sure you have an ability of understanding guitar sounds more than anyone else willing to share...
Is it true that Page in the first album mostly used a Tele? For example the chromatic riff between the verses in Dazed and Confused... If that is a tele, to my ears it is the bassiest tele I have ever heard.. Sometimes it also sounds like a deep bass horn or a sax.. Don't know how to describe it and I also think it resembles some of the sounds you get too. For example in Sphinx solo album version, the first time the E chord appears.. That inversion you play sounds very Page-like soundwise to me.. Don't know, just wondering
"It’s hard for people to believe, but I just used my Fender Telecaster for the entire album, except for one track. Somebody was trying to sell me a Gibson Flying V at the time. I don’t what made them think I could afford it, because I clearly couldn’t, but I asked them if I could just try it out. I brought it into Olympic and used it on “You Shook Me.” With those big humbuckers, it was so powerful you can hear it breaking up the amp in the middle of the song. I could’ve tidied it up, but I really liked hearing the amp really struggle to get the sound out. It’s really fighting through the electronics to get out of that speaker. I’m not sure what happened to the guitar. It might’ve found its way to Keith Richards or something, but I really don’t know."
Same for stairway to heaven solo.
Scott Henderson wrote:
Dizzy, my 90's Les Paul is also chambered - it's the only way Gibson can make a light guitar. I have some rich friends (apparently) who've brought over 60's Les Pauls - they're much much lighter than any Les Paul at a music store, even the chambered ones, and they definitely sound better than mine... but not $30,000 better! I've also heard quite a few late 70's and 80's Les Pauls, which are extremely heavy - so heavy that there's very little sustain. In my opinion, the chambered ones sound better than those.
Page's Les Paul was ~9.5 pounds (pretty heavy). Peter Green's LP was around 9, and in fact he didn't want it back from Gary Moore because he complained it was too heavy. Gibson's remake of the Beck oxblood LP was 9 pounds, four ounces. Les Paul's are simply not night guitars.
Quote:
There's a reason Gibson changed from 500K pots to 350. A humbucking with a 350k pot is just plain wrong, because the pot is limiting the frequencies which are supposed to come out of the pickup, and in Gibson's case the frequencies are so harsh and terrible, it was cheaper to change to 350k pots than to make a decent pickup.
So the pickups in my Navigator 380LTD (which is a more accurate vintage Les Paul than anything Gibson is making aside from their customer shop R series), I'm pretty sure comes loaded with 500k CTS pots. I could be wrong, but I saw a listing for a 280 that has them loaded.
A key difference that's not been discussed here are the magnets. The antiquities use a an A2 Alnico whereas the Thornbuckers use A4 and A5 for the neck and bridge respectively. Those have a much different (and higher) profile. I'm told Clapton late 60's is an A5, which I may want to swap out of the 57's.
Now, as far as Gibson pickups are concerned, I've heard a lot of mixed things about the Burstbuckers, which I never had a problem with. I'm also pretty sure a tech swapped in 500k pots when I was using it as he complained about their stock pots.
This is what Johnny A. uses for instance (stock AFAIK), who gets some nice tones.
I should point out that my Thornbuckers are uncovered, but Pete's comment on that was that the difference was, "Very little, I can't even remember what the differences were.but they were very slight with the nickel covers, as opposed to chrome covers, etc which affect the tone more."
So in my case, we're talking about A2 Alnicos versus A5, which have a significantly different profile.
You might not like that mildness with more mids, but to flat out say, "ALL GIBSON PICKUPS SUCK ASS," strikes me, again, as quite silly.
I'm certainly open to hearing an explanation/education of why they suck ass and what I'm hearing from, but I don't know what that would be? The thornbuckers are more aggressive (and I also have them raised higher for more legato....)
I disagree with Pete - the first Thornbuckers I got from Suhr were uncovered and extremely bright. I swapped them out for covered ones and it made a huge difference. Those kind of pickups are supposed to be covered, it's part of their tone.
Burstbuckers were stock in my 90's Les Paul. I bought it because it was light (I didn't know it was chambered). I'm not very familiar with Bonamassa or Johnny A, but that guitar sounded really small compared to all my other guitars. When I found out the wrong pots were in the guitar, I changed them to 500k - the guitar sounded much bigger, but the BB's were fizzy and harsh sounding. I don't know which pickups were in the 80's Les Paul but they sucked too. You're right though, I haven't heard every Gibson pickup so I shouldn't say they all suck, but someone who knows more about pickups than either one of us told me that when a company changes their pots from 500 to 350, they've definitely got something to hide. Judging from the bad experience I had with my Les Pauls, I couldn't agree more. Again, 350k is wrong for humbuckers - and Gibson's been doing that since 1976. They can consult all the pickup experts they want, but no one will really hear their humbucking pickups with the wrong pot in the guitar.
If you're saying that your pickups sound mild with more mids, that's exactly what a 350k pot does - it filters out the bass and treble. Allan Holdsworth used 250k pots with a humbucker and I tried it too, on a couple TT albums. Smooth tone, but very small sounding with no bass whatsoever. Allan made up for that by using a Nuemann 87 mic which is mostly used for vocals, but he was great with EQ's and made it work.
BTW, I've been to Norm's Guitars and Guitar Center Vintage many times. I've played featherweight Les Pauls from the 60's - couldn't believe how light they were. These days you'd never find one that light unless it's chambered.
Thanasis, I just used strats on Sphinx, but my Les Paul is on that album a lot. It's mainly used for background parts and layering, because it sounds so different than a strat. I'm probably going to use it as the main guitar on a few songs next time.
I'm not sure I understand the point of your post. I'm aware that magnets affect the tone of pickups. My point is that those differences can't be heard as precisely if the wrong pots are in the guitar.
The strat I used on Dog Party and Tore Down House was a cheap 90's re-issue - bought it for 800 bucks, and that's what it sounded like. For Dog Party I put Lindy Fralin Woodstocks in it, and Suhr V60-LPs for Tore Down House. I couldn't have done those albums with the pickups that came in the guitar.
People like Seymour Duncan and John Suhr have done so well because they make more musical sounding pickups than the ones which come stock in Gibsons and Fenders. That's a no-brainer to me, but I realize that it's just my opinion and it's all subjective.
My point was the differences between the pickups in question - Classic 57s, Antiquities and Thornbuckers (and prolly the 59, I haven't heard it) - can largely be attributed to the magnets. I'm not even disagreeing with your assessment.
I would disagree that classic 57s "suck ass," as I've compared them to Thornbuckers, Antiquities and when I had it in, a Suhr SSV+.
I also have an Eric Johnson strat and have compared the sounds of those pickups to FL in the middle and neck positions. Are the FL nice pickups? Yes.
Do the EJ pickups "Suck ass"? No. Do Gibson and Fender make pickups that suck ass? Probably. Does every single one of them suck ass? Either I have no idea what I'm talking about, my ears are broken, or the answer is "no."
Here's another PAF shootout featuring the ass-sucking classic 57's and a bunch of boutiques, including Fralins. There are countless more.
In your 80's LP, you may have had some bunk Tim Shaw pickups.
And I've heard bad things about Burstbuckers (https://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.php?threads/why-does-everyone-think-burstbuckers-suck.820460/)
But once upon a time the namesake of thornbuckers used them (https://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?137228-Pete-Thorn-Anyone-got-a-clue-on-what-pickups-he-uses) - notice he does talk about changing them....
Anyway, I am going to take my 335 to a tech and see about the 500k pots, you may well be right on that one
Another thing I want to now look into is 1950s wiring.
Unfortunately I may have now opened up (another ) can of worms....
I did admit in my last post that I shouldn't say all Gibson and Fender pickups suck - you won that point of our discussion. I will however keep my belief that Gibson changed to 350k pots to hide the harsh frequencies of MOST of their pickups, which I still believe are inferior to Seymour's or Suhr's. I should add that my SG also sounded terrible stock, but now sounds great thanks to Seymour's pickups and 500k pots. I compared a Mike Landau signature strat to one of my Suhrs and thought the Fender pickups sounded very similar, so I guess if you pay Fender enough money for a guitar, they'll get the pickups right. I did not experience that with their EJ model or their Jeff Beck model. Again, that's just my personal opinion.
John Suhr doesn't have anything good to say about 1950's wiring, and says I'd hate it. I haven't heard it, but I believe he knows what I like.
I had an experience with pickups that relates to the discussion:
I had a tele and had someone put in Seymour Seth Lover pickups. He didn’t change from 250 pots to 500k. When I heard the guitar I thought “god these old pafs were dark”
Then when I had 500k pots put in and realized the opposite. They were almost as bright as single coils but it was a nice sound.
Now I have Lollar low wind imperials in that tele. They are really bright in a nice way too.
I notice that in Landau’s new strat he has 2 humbuckers and in the clips they sound nice and chimney...to the point that I didn’t notice they were humbuckers until I looked at the guitar.
When humbucking pickups first came out, it was to get rid of the hum, not to drastically change the tone of the guitar. Good low output humbuckers like the Thornbucker or Seymour '59 have that chimey sound and a fairly even frequency response, but they're meant to be used with covers and 500k pots.
Some humbuckers became midrange machines, due to overwinding or using lower value pots. Heavy metal guys love them, and need them, because all that mid pokes through the mix, which is usually very bass & drums heavy. My tone would be completely lost in a metal mix.
I sat in with a friend's band - during soundcheck I told him his wah was on because that's what I really thought. Turns out that was his tone... When the band started playing, I could see why he needed that much midrange.
I looked into it - the OBG 335 and my LP both have 500k pots as does the Morse.
My guess is the thirnbucjers sound so much brighter is lack of covers. That's not problematic as I just turn down the presence and treble on the OD100...
But my stock johnny a with gold covers sounds good too and it prol has 350k pots. Maybe I just don't know good tone...
I looked into it - the OBG 335 and my LP both have 500k pots as does the Morse.
My guess is the thirnbucjers sound so much brighter is lack of covers. That's not problematic as I just turn down the presence and treble on the OD100...
But my stock johnny a with gold covers sounds good too and it prol has 350k pots. Maybe I just don't know good tone...
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Users Currently Chatting
), and maybe you don't dig gibson's pickups, but to say point blank they all suck is a little silly.
