banner

Announcement

Collapse

Forum Upgrade Monday 1/24 @ 8pm PST

Going through a forum upgrade Monday 1/24 @ 8pm PST. Forum should be down an hour or so.
See more
See less

Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

    I just played both my amps and both my guitars and after playing my jackson, which sounds magnificent mind you and its such a cheap guitar, i picked up my new gibson es137custom with 57classics and plugged it in. Now granted the jackson is quite a lighter guitar, and for some of the cleans i was playing it through the jacksons single coils (some was bridge JB though), but when i plugged in the gibson on all the clean stuff it was really woofy in the neck position. The bridge position was actually pretty shrill and not too pleasant on the ears. Although the neck pickup seems good for some thick jazzy cleans, i think its too thick, and im sure there are better duncans out there that arent woofy but do cleans and jazzy leads a lot better than the 57 classic.

    What does anyone else think about that? Do you find the same thing with stock gibson pickups?
    My Soundclick page.

  • #2
    Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

    That exact reason is why a '57 Classic inhabited the neck position of my Explorer very briefly. It was replaced by a Duncan '59 which had very similar tone without the woofiness or mud.
    Originally posted by crusty philtrum
    And that's probably because most people with electric guitars seem more interested in their own performance rather than the effect on the listener ... in fact i don't think many people who own electric guitars even give a poop about the effect on a listener. Which is why many people play electric guitars but very very few of them are actually musicians.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

      Really, so the 59 still has that thick sorta sound but without the crap? Because that might be exactly what im after for a replacement.

      (if that made sense....you know what i mean )
      My Soundclick page.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

        I found the '59n quite woofy in certain guitars. For an ES 137, I'd go for the Jazz model w/o hesitation.
        Edwards Jimmy Page, Fender AmDlx Strat, PRS CE24, Edwards E-FV, AGILE Valkyrie Double-neck, Ibanez EP9. Metroamp 50w, Fender SFSR, Blackstar HT40 VP

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

          The 59 sound very similar to the 57 Classic, it simply has less mud and better clarity. If you're not looking for a PAF tone, the 59 is not your pickup.

          You may like the Jazz better (it's my fav neck pickup) it's much more clear than the 57 Classic or 59 with very glassy highs.
          Originally posted by crusty philtrum
          And that's probably because most people with electric guitars seem more interested in their own performance rather than the effect on the listener ... in fact i don't think many people who own electric guitars even give a poop about the effect on a listener. Which is why many people play electric guitars but very very few of them are actually musicians.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

            The 59 neck can be woofy also as I have found.

            That said, it all depends on the guitar as some love Gibson pickups. i thin the BB Pros are nice.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

              Im looking for a vintage PAF type tone here, something with great cleans that will do great for jazzy and funky and latin type cleans, as well as crunchy and distorted sounds in the same ball parks.

              Im thinking of a PGb/SETHn combo. That wouldnt be woofy would it?
              My Soundclick page.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

                The 57's in my 135 sound quite good, both front and rear. Depending on your amp settings (and I find it really occurs if I've got a lot of compression going), you might get some undesireable low end tones or "woof". Otherwise, there isn't anything wrong per se' with those particular pups for that type of guitar.
                www.enigmaduo.com

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

                  Sorry, I meant to say "the '59's" in my 135.... Silly computer......
                  www.enigmaduo.com

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

                    ....Anyway, that said, some of the stock Gibbys sound quite nice to me. I really like the Burstbuckers (it may be that coil dominant thing, but they just sound nice), the original epoxy potted Super Humbuckers were really great in the 70's SGs, I still have a neck Dirty Fingers loaded in the front end of one of my SGs and it sounds really nice there, although I still think they're an anemic pickup (and I don't care what anyone says about that! LOL), and the Tony Iommi models are incredible. Now, having said THAT, I still think SD pups are the quietest and best sounding pickup made.
                    www.enigmaduo.com

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

                      i think the burstbucker 1 and 3 setup is a good one but overall i dont think gibson pups are that great. i think the combined sounds on a gibson are the best for clean chording

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

                        Originally posted by jeremy
                        i think the burstbucker 1 and 3 setup is a good one but overall i dont think gibson pups are that great. i think the combined sounds on a gibson are the best for clean chording
                        Wish I'd known that before I shelled out on a 2 & 3 set. If I had known PGs were imbalenced coils I'd probably
                        gotten them although at that time I thought imbalenced coils would have less bottom and one should add 200 ohms to compensate so I still would have shied away from the PGn...Imbalenced coils have a more scooped mid rather more pronouced bass and treb...now I know.

                        I like the BB 2 better than the 57 classic neck (It sounds like Bett's neck PU on the first album (a real PAF) but they definitely require the low E side be lower into the body (to reduce woofieness), almost passing the sweet threshold.

                        Classic neck & BB2 are 8k #42 pickups. The 59 n is a 7.43 #42 like a Gib patent embossed (T Top). After the T disapeared, patent embossed pickups started consistantly reading 7.6, even with variations of the base plate (epoxy type and the leadless model). Then came the first Gibson PAF reissue (never got to measure one of them...does any one know?) followed by the 490R (7.6k).

                        Of #42 gauge HB neck pickups I have 7.1 to 7.36 (T Tops)are best for clean chording. Once you pass 7.4 (I don't get a good solo tone until 7.6) I'm hearing the need for a series/para switch for clean chords due to amp clipping. I think woofiness starts at 7.8 ah 7.9.

                        57 Classic's eq will even out, maybe make you happy if you put an a5 mag in but I'm banking on to woofie.

                        8k WOOFIE EXCEPTIONS:

                        I have an old DiMarzio PAF 8k a5 that I wish had more woofiness (that's why its not in a guitar) it has a very very sweet top end.

                        This contradicts everything I just said...I know. I have a handful of Japanese pickups that measure around 8k that are my favorite's, they are not woofie. They have the most killer midrange thru the Dual Recti. Not good for clean chord work in series either (they need para sw) I think the metric equivalent to #42 gauge is a smaller in diameter and that's how the DC resistance can be so high and still be a very balanced pickup.

                        Can't explain that Dimarzio PAF...I even took the plate off of a Gibson pickup and replaced the original brass plate and the pickup still sounds the same to me.

                        CONCLUSION:

                        In general 8k #42 pickups are woofie.

                        MY GIBSON ISSUE:

                        Gibson should make a 57 Classic 1, 2, and 3, 1 being a 7.6. (Classics and BBs use enamel wire the 490R is 7.6 urethane).

                        Then like the BB2 I could say the Classic 2 is woofie and useless to me as a neck pickup but I'd recommend them for bridge pickups where the neck pickup is a 7.1 T Top.

                        Seymour walks #42 neck pickups up from 7.2k in finer increments and not to exceed 7.7 making it impossible to buy a woofie neck pickup.

                        If you look at it that way Gibson only makes 3 neck pickups 490R, BB1, and the BB Pro 1 all measuring 7.6.

                        On paper the Seth bridge is like the same pickup as a 57 Classic.

                        The Classic Plus 8.6k is a bridge screamer (Hotter than BB 3). I'm intrigued by the Angus T (Doc B says it clocks in at 10k) and I doubt it's an under wound C5 like the SD (both use #43).

                        I bought a Golden Age 9.75k #42 Urethane (that's how it was described at Stew Mac) off of eBay the other day thinking I circumvented the price of the Angus. It came in and only measured 7.9k. I called Stew Mac and talked to their tech. He said they recently received a shipment that were 7.9k and they were mixed in with the 9.7ks so the only way to guarantee a 9.7 is to order it direct from stew Mac and have the sales girl get him on line to pull my order. So if any one wants to hear what a Urethane Angus would sound like they're $47.

                        Seymour doesn't make a #42 10k pickup so I have to wonder why...that'll make you think before you plunk down $130 for the Angus T. Lew likes the Fralin #42 9.5 with a4 though. I do not know if the Angus is enamel.
                        Last edited by Lightning; 05-22-2004, 12:05 AM.
                        Me and Neal's stage rig.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

                          umm what is WOOFY EXACTLY?
                          Proud Master of Strats.....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

                            Has more output at 120hz than at 400hz and everything I just said was based on playing through a Fender for clean and a Dual Recti for distorted. A Marshall's air core output xformer has everything to do with that shift in low peak to 400hz (that's what the Clapton Woman Tone is which has everything to do with EVH Tone which has everything to do with...)

                            Look guys when the filter caps went in my Marshall and took out a brand new set of tesla tubes 5 years ago I bought the Dual Recti.

                            Please disregard my previous long post because all opinions in that post were based on a non reference standard amp.
                            Me and Neal's stage rig.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Who else finds stock gibson pickups woofy?

                              Haha, after reading all that

                              Seriously though, would it be hard to tell the sounds of a seth and a gibson 57 classic apart? That is what you said somewhere up there isnt it?
                              My Soundclick page.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X