Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

[scottffitch]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

In my experience, the 490R and 498T are decent. I think they're Gibson's attempt at creating a higher output, modern PAF style pickup for mass production. They do what they need. They're particularly decent in all mahogany bodied guitars (SG..) but I've found anything with a maple cap tends to draw out more treble and to my ear the bridge can be a little too bright.

They can't be too terrible; Gibson's kept them in the LP Custom for years. Like I said, they're voiced very nicely for mahogany guitars and higher output situations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[blueman335]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

They can't be too terrible; Gibson's kept them in the LP Custom for years.

That logic doesn't necessarily hold. Gibson management has a tendency to ignore customer input. They know a large part of their sales come simply from the name on the headstock.

[scottffitch]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

That logic doesn't necessarily hold. Gibson management has a tendency to ignore customer input. They know a large part of their sales come simply from the name on the headstock.

That's a very good point. I hadn't thought of Gibson in that light. (you're 100% correct, IMHO)

Regardless, I don't regard the 490R and 498T as sub par pickups. I think of them as a benchmark set; as close to the middle of classic design meets modern tone that Gibson offers. You could potentially go both ways with upgrades; more vintage with a set of '57 classics or burst buckers; or go more modern with a set of dirty fingers, or other Gibson ceramic sets. I'm only using Gibson products to compare apples to proverbial apples..

I'm of the opinion that Seymour Duncan makes the best bang for your buck pickups money can buy. Also, the SD selection leaves nothing on the table. They're like a Whitman's Sampler--something for everyone. But don't expect any of us to agree on what's the "best."

[Shooter.556]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

They're not bad but you can get a lot better pickups for the same amount of money you're gonna spend on Gibsons new or used..
There are just a lot more and better pickup options for the money than a 490R or 498T..
I'm not saying they suck, I own a couple of Gibsons, I'm just saying you can do much better..

[LtKojak]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

What's the consensus here on these pickups?

Separatly, they're passable, at most.

As a set, they're pretty bad...

HTH,

[Inflames626]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

Inkstained, this isn't really your style I think, but it's me demonstrating the 498t in the bridge of a mahogany Hamer tune o match in Pod Farm 2.5. It's through a Tube Screamered JCM800. It has a bit of reverb and delay on it for an 80s lead sound. It's a single tracked guitar.

The pickup is NOT mellow. I just think a lot of people prefer to play with mid gain heads without boosts or want to turn their gain to 10 by default.

The latter part is the 57+ in the neck.

https://soundcloud.com/devolve1980/hamer-tone

With all due respect to the great company that runs this forum, and the folks who have played longer than I have and have more experience with vintage electronics and so on, I think there is a definite aftermarket pickup bias. It is diametrically opposed to the "awesome because it says Fender/Gibson" bias.

I am skeptical of the logic that says just because Fender and Gibson are big guitar companies they cannot find talented people to R&D pickups. Most people who buy a Fender or Gibson aren't going to tinker with the electronics to keep from altering the resale value. And, for the less informed, Gibson and Fender's reputations are going to depend on how good those pickups sound because laypeople don't know about things like pickup swaps. People are just going to think that's how Fenders/Gibsons sound. That's a lot of responsibility riding on the pickup design. And, ideally, it's being designed for that particular axe instead of, as in the case of aftermarket pups, potentially going into anything.

I am somewhere in between Gibson/Fender and aftermarket. For example, I think the 57+ in the neck is much better than the 59n I tried. And yet I've also found the Full Shred set to be one of the best Duncan sets I've ever had. And so on. It can be difficult to find analogous products across companies since the perception of sound is so subjective.

There really is no shortcut around trying them all individually. Yes, Gibsons are a bit expensive (mine were chrome covered and about $85 each), but compared to what I have tried so far, they were worth it.

[blueman335]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

With all due respect to the great company that runs this forum, and the folks who have played longer than I have and have more experience with vintage electronics and so on, I think there is a definite aftermarket pickup bias. It is diametrically opposed to the "awesome because it says Fender/Gibson" bias.

I am somewhere in between. For example, I think the 57+ in the neck is much better than the 59n I tried. And yet I've also found the Full Shred set to be one of the best Duncan sets I've ever had. And so on. It can be difficult to find analogous products across companies since the perception of sound is so subjective.

There really is no shortcut around trying them all individually. Yes, Gibsons are a bit expensive (mine were chrome covered), but compared to what I have tried so far, they were worth it.

The difference between the companies is that Duncan continues to exist is solely if they have better (or more appropriate) tones than stock PU's. It's a lifelong passion of Seymour's. If he can't beat Gibson and Fender PU's, he can't stay in business. Gibson makes PU's so they have something to put into their guitars. They're going to sell guitars regardless of how the PU's sound. They know that. I don't see as much pride or passion there.

One of the issues I have with Gibson PU's, besides the poorly-matched 4987/490R set, are '57 Classics. Counting neck and bridge PU's, I have, and have had, over a couple dozen PAF's; '57's are the worst-sounding of them all... big disappointment. That's a PU that retails for $150, which is up in the boutique range, and those boutiques blow away '57's right out of the starting gate. Nor can '57's compare to Seth's, or any of Duncan's other PAF's. I'm baffled at all the guitar models Gibson puts '57's and 498T/490R's in. The 490 set is okay (better with different magnets), but it's easy to find better-sounding PU's for less money. I feel that at the prices their guitars retail for, there should be more effort put into their PU's. They'd be much better off using Duncan's in their guitars. Sorry, but it looks like complacency.

[Inflames626]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

The difference between the companies is that Duncan exists solely if they have better (or more appropriate) tones than stock PU's.

The more appropriate tone thing becomes difficult when we consider all the variations of vintage pickups due to manufacturing inconsistencies. *Which* appropriate?

And when Duncan and DiMarzio started, Gibson and Fender pups were crap because US manufacturing began going downhill between the late 1960s and 1970s. Aftermarkets didn't have a lot of competition. Also, new forms of music were pioneering new guitar designs. This isn't to downplay their designs. But they had an angle other than vintage. It would have been interesting to see what the great aftermarket designers would have done in the 1950s-60s.

And, as an aside, nobody trashes Fender by saying, "That's a guitar company that doesn't know how to build amps." It just builds the Twin, Deluxe Reverb, EVH III, and so on.


They're going to sell guitars regardless of how the PU's sound.

I'm not so sure about this--the guitars sell because of looks, yes, but also because of how they are REPUTED to sound, with a batteries not included each sold separately disclaimer of the right Fender/Marshall amp. Perhaps to collectors. Doubtful to amateurs who can't afford the guitar but want the name. Not to serious but uninformed players seeking their first, say, $2,000+ axe. There's a lot of overlay between serious but uninformed players juggling a name and a sound and serious but informed players wondering if they can have the name and the sound. I think that makes sense--point being, when a person is hard pushed on affordability, but owning a name is possible AND the tone is right, marketing psychology comes into play.

That's a PU that retails for $150

Nearly everything retail is overpriced. But they aren't necessarily expensive if you find a good deal. Google shows cheap retail and used ones at around $80. I agree they're expensive relative to production line aftermarket models, but I think any "boutique" movement is rather silly once pickups cross the $100 range because other items in the signal chain can compensate for the pickup's deficiencies.

They'd be much better off using Duncan's in their guitars.

But then they'd appear to be losing credibility to laymen, because back in 1957 we didn't need no stinking aftermarket pickups.

Are there cheaper solutions to Gibsons? Probably. The question is, if there is a cheaper solution and they're marginally worse (say, in my case, the Duncan Custom 5 vs. the 498t, which I think have a similar sound), I'm going to go with the 498t because I like it better. It has the big, tight bottom but without the mid hole of the Custom 5. The Custom 5 still sounds good, but I'd pay more for the 498t than to substitute a Custom 5 for a 498t. And those tradeoffs are where it gets complex.

[Inflames626]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

Also, I'm not sure that beating Gibson and Fender are why aftermarket gear designers are staying in business. They've long come out from under Gibson and Fender's shadows.

You can look at a lot of budget makers like GFS, Dragonfire, even something like Golden Age out of StewMac, or perhaps Bill Lawrence or Wild Pickups, who would probably be considered budget because their prices are lower and their marketing is less visible than SD/EMG/DiMarzio. Those makers (to a lesser extent BW and Wild) are the ones who have to prove themselves.

Sometimes success depends on if they can make a unique sound. More often than not I think it means being able to make a cheaper knockoff of an established model. It doesn't have to be better--just the same at a lower price point. The EMG 81 has been hacked so much by other companies trying to build budget gear for metal players.

And a lot of this competition at retail goes out the window once you hit the used markets like reverb.com and musicgoround. I'd be a lot more willing to try other brands if I can find them used but it takes a few years for a model or type of gear to become popular enough to show up often.

[Rhandy]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

Alnico 4 magnet for the neck/Rhythm pickup. UOA5 for the bridge.

I´m trying the alnico 5 V from 498t on 490R and Alnico 8 on 498t.

Works good.

But I also buy Alnico iV and UOA5, but never try it. Because After chang Magnets I re-potted pups for not have microphonics.

[Jeff5]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

I tried a 498T in the bridge of my Hamer. (Les Paulish guitar) Honestly, I felt that it was a step below most comparable Duncan's I've used(Custom, C5, etc.) and quite below the Suhr, PRS, Motor City pick ups I've used as well. It almost reminded me of a lower quality, less defined Custom.

[vinnie1971]

Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

I like those pickups a lot. Although I find the bridge a bit hot and bright. To balance I got the neck to where I want it so it's quite bright by lowering the pickup then raising the poles then on the bridge I screwed the poles just above flush with the pickup cover to tame the brightness and then lowered the whole pickup to balance the volume with the neck.
I would want to change them. I really like them a lot. I like them as much as my APH1s but for different reasons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rex_Rocker]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

I like the 498T. It's nice and bright and aggressive. Works well in a heavy chunk of mahogany. JMO.

[bldrst]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

I think the general consensus here is that they aren't good pickups - though I disagree with the consensus.

I think they can be *great* in the right application.

490R tends to be dark and muddy - which is perfect for Sabbath-y sludge-y stoner stuff.

498t is like a JB after a 3-day bender - dirty, ragged, big ol high mid spike in your stuff. Great for cutting through a mix in a hard rock setting.

I agree they don't go well together. Burstbucker Pro neck, being an A5, might pair better with a 498T. 490R would pair better with a similarly warm bridge pickup like, say, a Custom Custom or Dimarzio Breed.

Custom Custom gets my vote.

[EmiAba]

Re: Are the Gibson 490R and 498T good pickups?

I like the 498T. It's nice and bright and aggressive. Works well in a heavy chunk of mahogany. JMO.

I like the 498T too especially with a UOA5 and in guitars like SG. It is the gibson pickup I prefer the most. But at the end the overall impression is that there is always something missing with gibson pickups. You will never fully satisfy. They are ok only for a while.