So, i didn't really dig the antquities (until now)

[GuitarStv]

Re: So, i didn't really dig the antquities (until now)

They are particularly excellent if your amp doesn't have much headroom (e.g. a vintage Fender Princeton Reverb or something like that), and you want to control the pickup from clean to dirty by setting your amp's volume just right and using your hand to change the amount of crunch.

Honestly, I'd say that the '59 and Seth set are both great for this as well.

[ItsaBass]

Re: So, i didn't really dig the antquities (until now)

Honestly, I'd say that the '59 and Seth set are both great for this as well.

'59s and Seths are almost complete opposite ends of the Duncan [standard production] P.A.F. spectrum. Seths are nearly the weakest (only Ants are weaker). '59s are the strongest.

IME, the '59 is far too powerful for what I described when using a Princeton Reverb. If you move up to a cleaner (which usually means more powerful) amp, then yes. '59s in combination with a Deluxe Reverb (or other Fenders in that general size/power range), or a Super Reverb, for example, are a match made in heaven.

Seths are great for this through my 12–15 W 1x combos. Ants a bit better, though.

[GuitarStv]

Re: So, i didn't really dig the antquities (until now)

I use a '59 neck and Seth bridge in the same guitar. While I agree that the '59 is a bit more powerful, there is not a huge difference in output between the two. I've got the seth about 2 mm from the strings and the '59 about 3 mm away. They balance well (no volume change) when switching between pickups, they both cause my amp's clean channel to distort when full up, and both are very clean with the volume rolled back.

I adjusted the pole pieces slightly differently to control the bass on the '59 and the highs on the Seth.

[ItsaBass]

Re: So, i didn't really dig the antquities (until now)

I use a '59 neck and Seth bridge in the same guitar. While I agree that the '59 is a bit more powerful, there is not a huge difference in output between the two. I've got the seth about 2 mm from the strings and the '59 about 3 mm away. They balance well (no volume change) when switching between pickups, they both cause my amp's clean channel to distort when full up, and both are very clean with the volume rolled back.

I adjusted the pole pieces slightly differently to control the bass on the '59 and the highs on the Seth.

In other words, you put the underwound (i.e. neck) variant of the stronger model with the overwound (i.e. bridge) variant of the weaker model. Of course they balance OK with some setup.

Compare a Seth neck to a '59 neck in the same position, and a Seth bridge to a '59 bridge in the same position, and you'll see what I mean. The '59s are significantly stronger than the Seths.

[GuitarStv]

Re: So, i didn't really dig the antquities (until now)

In other words, you put the underwound (i.e. neck) variant of the stronger model with the overwound (i.e. bridge) variant of the weaker model. Of course they balance OK with some setup.

Compare a Seth neck to a '59 neck in the same position, and a Seth bridge to a '59 bridge in the same position, and you'll see what I mean. The '59s are significantly stronger than the Seths.

I agree with you, the A5 makes the '59 a tad stronger than the A2 in the Seth. I was just pointing out that they're certainly not miles apart . . . and the neck version of either will easily balance with the bridge version of either. (Actually, if you put an A5 in a Seth bridge, you should actually get a bit more output than you would from a stock '59.) As far as the cleaning up with the volume control thing . . . I'd wager that any low output pickup will do that reasonably well.

[Mincer]

Re: So, i didn't really dig the antquities (until now)

the 59 certainly has a harder attack to me, and that is something I wasn't used to after using A2-based pickups for years.