Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

[SirJackdeFuzz II]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

SD needs to add an Antiquity 59 set to their list .
Unpotted , roughcast A5 degaussed and aged .
Guaranteed it will sell like hotcakes .

I deff second the '59 Ant idea !!!

[Clint 55]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

I'm not eclecticsynergy but I'll add something to my contribution: vintage ones can be frail because unpotted wire wound on soft plastic tends to move. I had to repar two of them because of that (reason why I know these pickups "intimately").

Regarding your question: in my experience & understanding, very early 59's are not quite the same pickups than recent SH1's although they bear the same name. Not sure that a love for the last ones would find full satisfaction with the fist ones.

YMMV, do what you want and be happy, etc. :-)

Thx that's been my limited experience with vintage pups. I think I could find a use for it but I already have a Seth for a thinner, tastier sound than the fat production 59.

[Mincer]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

I wonder how different an Antiquity 59 would be from a regular Antiquity? Not so much construction, but tone.

[eclecticsynergy]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

I'm surprised they don't use the butyrate bobbins anymore. That used to be one of the selling points.

I don't feel the old ones were necessarily thinner, just a little sweeter in the top end. Perhaps a tad less scooped.
Syrupy is a good description. My oldest 59s aren't necessarily first generation; got my first set around 1981 as I remember.

Full disclosure: I've never A/B'd newer versus older versions in the same guitar. Also, my newest 59 is more than ten years old now.

[Clint 55]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

I don't feel the old ones were necessarily thinner, just a little sweeter in the top end. Perhaps a tad less scooped.

Woohoo. I got it. Fav jazz neck pup. Had to get it.

[JB6464]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

I wonder how different an Antiquity 59 would be from a regular Antiquity? Not so much construction, but tone.

Well for starters there would be a big difference in an A2 verses an A5 degaussed magnet .
Then i'm sure the wind is different as well , so I bet it would offer a nice alternative to the Ant line .

[Lewguitar]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

I'm wondering if I should get one since the 59 is my favorite jazz pup. I'd probably end up liking it cuz I do like that aged sweetness. Just wondering if it's as fat or thinner than the new ones or if the difference would be worth it.

Just buy a set of new 59's and two roughcast A5 magnets. Might as well get two roughcast A2 magnets too.

I get mine from Addiction FX.

Magnet swapping is easy - especially on pickups that are not wax potted.

The 59 set is a great set for experimenting with magnets and finding out what YOU like.

It's well worth the effort.

[JB6464]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

Just buy a set of new 59's and two roughcast A5 magnets. Might as well get two roughcast A2 magnets too.

I get mine from Addiction FX.

Magnet swapping is easy - especially on pickups that are not wax potted.

The 59 set is a great set for experimenting with magnets and finding out what YOU like.

It's well worth the effort.

That would be a good idea for the tone of the older production 59 model but wouldn't be close for a Ant 59 .
Unpotted is the way to go with a neck pickup , it opens up the pickup tone like the Unpotted Ant's do .

[Lewguitar]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

That would be a good idea for the tone of the older production 59 model but wouldn't be close for a Ant 59 .
Unpotted is the way to go with a neck pickup , it opens up the pickup tone like the Unpotted Ant's do .

You know what? I've put RCA5 magnets in Antiquitys and RCA5 magnets in new 59's.

It's surprising how similar the 59 sounds to the Antiquity when they have the same magnet.

And that's from actual experience. Not from reading something and accepting it as gospel.

Oh...the magnets in Antiquitys ARE ROUGHCAST.

I've read here on this forum that they are not.

But they are.

[Lewguitar]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

Here's a photo of the magnet I just removed from a Seymour signed Antiquity Neck humbucker. I removed it to install a RCA3 magnet. As you can see, it's roughcast. BTW, it's sitting on the body of my '54 Esquire.

[jeremy]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

not all antiquitys have rc magnets. i have two sets that have polished magnets from the factory. is there a signature on the magnet?

[Lewguitar]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

not all antiquitys have rc magnets. i have two sets that have polished magnets from the factory. is there a signature on the magnet?

Every one I've taken apart has been roughcast.

This one has "MJ" written on it.

[JB6464]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

You know what? I've put RCA5 magnets in Antiquitys and RCA5 magnets in new 59's.

It's surprising how similar the 59 sounds to the Antiquity when they have the same magnet.

And that's from actual experience. Not from reading something and accepting it as gospel.

Oh...the magnets in Antiquitys ARE ROUGHCAST.

I've read here on this forum that they are not.

But they are.

I once took my degaussed roughcast A5 out of my ANT and put it in a regular production Unpotted 59 and it did sound very close ., the big difference I noticed was it still ddi'nt have that openness to it like an ANT pickup has .
So there must be some other special mojo going on when they build the ANT pickups verses the production models .

[Lewguitar]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

I once took my degaussed roughcast A5 out of my ANT and put it in a regular production Unpotted 59 and it did sound very close ., the big difference I noticed was it still ddi'nt have that openness to it like an ANT pickup has .
So there must be some other special mojo going on when they build the ANT pickups verses the production models .

For even more "openness" try a RCA3 in the neck position. Leave RCA2 in the bridge Antiquity.

Maybe Duncan already offers that set...but if they don't they should!

Sounds killer in a set of 59's too.

BTW, did you mean "RCA5"? It's more typical for a degaussed RCA2 to be used in the Antiquity humbuckers.

[JB6464]

Re: Difference between '59 reissue and regular '59 ?

For even more "openness" try a RCA3 in the neck position. Leave RCA2 in the bridge Antiquity.

Maybe Duncan already offers that set...but if they don't they should!

Sounds killer in a set of 59's too.

BTW, did you mean "RCA5"? It's more typical for a degaussed RCA2 to be used in the Antiquity humbuckers.

Ooops , I should of said my degaussed RCA5 from an ANT / JB and put it in my unpotted 59 .
I was looking for the Ant sound with an A5 instead of the normal A2's they use .
I tell ya what though , it still sounded badass and much better than the production polished A5 magnet .
That's why I'm on the fence of having SD making me a set of Antiquity 59's , it's a much better sounding 59 by a mile .
And again , I say SD should just make a Antiquity 59 set , they will sell like hotcakes .