Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

old 490& 498's or burstbucker pro's or 57's???


Recommended Posts

In my opinion the BB(pros) are the most accurate old Gibson PAF replicas Gibson has on offer. The '57s have a more contempary take on the same PAF concept sounding smoother than the BBs. And the 490/498 is more catering to modern rock players using hi-gain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ricochet has sum it up pretty right I think.

INMVHO I liked the 490/498 (and also the 500) but the more I play the more I appreciate crunch levels, and I don't use guitar volume pots at ease.

The BB's sound just right in my Les Paul. Sparkle with that nice pop and bite I do appreciate. But the c57 remain my favorite. They kinda sound more compressed than the BBs and has more grit in their panel. and I can use them in any kind of amp setup.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest icantbuyafender
Ricochet has sum it up pretty right I think.

INMVHO I liked the 490/498 (and also the 500) but the more I play the more I appreciate crunch levels' date=' and I don't use guitar volume pots at ease.

The BB's sound just right in my Les Paul. Sparkle with that nice pop and bite I do appreciate. But the c57 remain my favorite. They kinda sound more compressed than the BBs and has more grit in their panel. and I can use them in any kind of amp setup. [/quote']

 

 

Im partial to 490R/490T set.

 

a contemporary PAF sound, good for old and new.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used BBs, BB Pros and 490/498s in both Epi and Gibson LPs. Apart from the slightly higher output of the 498, I found very little difference in tone....it was more subtle than I expected. I haven't owned a guitar with the Gibson 57s so can't comment on those. The others seem like subtle variations on the same PAF theme. In the neck position, I can't tell them apart.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In my opinion the BB(pros) are the most accurate old Gibson PAF replicas Gibson has on offer. The '57s have a more contempary take on the same PAF concept sounding smoother than the BBs. And the 490/498 is more catering to modern rock players using hi-gain.

 

Hi Rich

 

I have ordered a set of handwound humbuckers and after my research I want a cross between the Lollar Imperial Low Winds and the BB 1's' date=' so that is how the spec was drawn up.

 

Is it true that original PAF's were un-potted, I read that some argue a well wound pup should not necessarily have to be potted, and that some of the early guitar gods played with unpotted pups.

 

This raises a few questions for me when hunting for a true PAF clone..... is potting going against that model.

 

I will not be playing on stage....because my playing is "shoyte"[biggrin'] , but how did those guys control those unpotted pups. Potting is a convenience, but is it essential.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe, IMO as with many things, it's a tradeoff.

The whole waxpotting thing took off when players started to use more volume and gain. A good construction of the PU became critical in preventing "those unwanted squeelies". Older unpotted pickups suffered a bit of "wiresag" in the coil, causing it to slightly alter the tone over the years. So here the waxpotting is essential in preserving the coilshape and tone, and preventing unwanted feedback.

.

There are also who believe free vibrating coilwire is what is adding character to a pickup, and potting the PU just makes it sound clinical and lifeless. Extreme case in point: EMG and Q-tuner using epoxy to pot the PU.

A guy like Jason Lollar(who I rate very highly) stresses the importance of not overpotting a PU, even believing dipping the PU too long will sanitize a PU. Recently I read about a PU-maker who only potted half of his coils.

 

I think your choice of pickups depends on your personal preference in tone, and how much you're willing to accept the tradeoff for one or the other. I also think I should go into politics.

 

So who is winding your pickups?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the BBs, BB Pros, & 57s are Alnico V. I believe the 490/498/500s are ceramic. They have quite different frequency responses. I'm not sure which are potted & which are not. Depending on where you play you might be happier with potted pickups later if you chose them now.

 

I suggest you research the gibson product line for which pickups are in which new models & spend some time at your local guitar shop playing various guitars with the different pick-ups before you buy anything. I think you'll find that various LPs have all of the above pickups (except either the 490 or 498 which is no longer in production). You might also look at the Dirty Fingers pickups, which I believe are an Alnico/Ceramic hybrid.

 

Good Luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Rich

 

I have ordered a set of handwound humbuckers and after my research I want a cross between the Lollar Imperial Low Winds and the BB 1's' date=' so that is how the spec was drawn up.

 

Is it true that original PAF's were un-potted, I read that some argue a well wound pup should not necessarily have to be potted, and that some of the early guitar gods played with unpotted pups.

 

This raises a few questions for me when hunting for a true PAF clone..... is potting going against that model.

 

I will not be playing on stage....because my playing is "shoyte"[biggrin'] , but how did those guys control those unpotted pups. Potting is a convenience, but is it essential.....

 

Long ago "stage" volume was closer to what we call "bedroom" volume now. You didn't need potted pups cause you were barely amplified. Potting a pickup does not kill its tone, only its microphonics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe the BBs' date=' BB Pros, & 57s are Alnico V. I believe the 490/498/500s are ceramic. They have quite different frequency responses. I'm not sure which are potted & which are not. Depending on where you play you might be happier with potted pickups later if you chose them now.

 

I suggest you research the gibson product line for which pickups are in which new models & spend some time at your local guitar shop playing various guitars with the different pick-ups before you buy anything. I think you'll find that various LPs have all of the above pickups (except either the 490 or 498 which is no longer in production). You might also look at the Dirty Fingers pickups, which I believe are an Alnico/Ceramic hybrid.

 

Good Luck.[/quote']

 

The 490R and T are both Alnico II. The 498T is Alnico V. The SG Standard, Les Paul Studio Silverburst, Les Paul Custom and maybe others still use the 490/498 set. The non-faded studios all use the 490R but with the 490T in the bridge.

 

The 496R is the ceramic neck pickup and the 500T the ceramic bridge pickup.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...