490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

[msplines]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

The problem is usually only hidden when you ain't got a back-to-back, when I got my Studio, it was just raw, harsh and unbalanced when compared to the SDs I have. My mates thort it wunnerful until they tried the real thing, then they said "Hey, it's raw, harsh and unbalanced .......er......."

 

[Benjy_26]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

Anyway... I will keep the original picups when I get my Les Paul! I want the original Les Paul sound!

Get a set of Seths, Antiquities, or Pearly Gates then.

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

I think Gibson is currently making the best pickups they have made since about 1965, and those would be the 57 Classics and the Burstbuckers. I also owned a nice 80's Flying V with some kind of stock Gibson pickups that sounded very good!

The trashing thing is kind of adolescent. But boys will be boys...

Lew

 

[KLINKDETROIT]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

I tried a C5/ PATB2/ PATB3/ CUSTOM CUSTOM/ CUSTOM / JB, in my 2004 studio and have went back to the stock 498 T- 490 R pickups. I love the neck 490-R and was mostly trying to get a better bridge sound. My favorite Duncan is the C5 but I think it lacks the mids that a dark guitar like the Studio needs. The Gibson 498T is perfectly suited for the Les Paul Studio as far as EQ is concerned. I do however dislike the 498T as far as the harsh high end is concerned. I like the C5 in my Schecter C1 plus because it is a brighter guitar than thr Gibsons and I also love the C5 in my 1994 Les Paul Classic gold top as it is a brighter guitar than my Studio. Hope this helps. I just trded my Custom (very hot ceramic) for a PATB1 (Alnico 5). I will see how this compares?

 

[gt5litre]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

My 89 Les Paul Standard comes to the party armed with a Pearly Gates in the bridge and an Alnico Pro in the neck. This guitar would not have had the 490/498 combo. LPs from these years had humbuckers that had circuit boards and may have been designed by Bill Lawrence. I am not positive on this point and if anybody knows what pickups were stock please chime in.

I had a LP Studio that came with the stock pickups and they could be harsh, but tweak the tone and volume controls on the guitar and/or amp and it can be dialed out. My Pearly is above the pickup ring, but the polepieces are as low as they can go with a little tweak (raised a turn or two) on the high E string. The Pearly/Alnico Pro combo is very impressive and really has a great tone with the selector in the mid-position.

Brent

 

[korovamilkdud]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

I actually do like the stock SG Special's 490 set.

 

[skh515]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

I actually do like the stock SG Special's 490 set.

This coming from the guy who is single-handedly keeping Seymour Duncan in business. (See Below)

Pickups I've tried in my Gibson Les Paul Studio...Custom, 5, 3, CC, JB, Demon, 59 set, Gibson 490R bridge, 498t, APH-1B, DD set, DDn bridge, JB2, JB neck

Cool cat by the way! :werd:

 

[korovamilkdud]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

This coming from the guy who is single-handedly keeping Seymour Duncan in business. (See Below)



Cool cat by the way! :werd:

Oh, stop I'm blushing. :laugh2:

I tried an sg special at GC one time and thought the pups were pretty decent. I really didn't even have much of a problem with the 498t either, the thing is those pickups are made for versaitlity. Whereas Duncans are specialized. That's all.

 

[Johtosotku]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

I see other people share my experiences too. A good thing to know that I'm not too paranoid.

I have to add to my earlier post, that I like the 490r neck quite a lot. It's just the 498t that I find "harsh, shrill, unbalanced". I'll propably change them both to have them as a balanced set. If anyone wants to help me choose, I have a thread going on somewhere in the back.

Hasn't anybody else had problems while changing between neck and bridge pickups while playing? I find the 498t horribly thin compared to the 490r. Anyone else?

 

[MattPete]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

I actually do like the stock SG Special's 490 set.

The only thing I don't like about the 490 set in the SG Special is that they are not well matched. Amp setting that make the bridge sound good make the neck sound like mud, and amp setting that make the neck sound good make the bridge sound weak and thin.

To get the 490r (neck) to sound good with with 490t (bridge), I had to back the 490r way down, and raise the pole pieces far out of the bobbin. So, it's a bit of a compromise. That's why I'm thinking about replacing them with a set of Seth Lovers.

 

[MattPete]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

Hasn't anybody else had problems while changing between neck and bridge pickups while playing? I find the 498t horribly thin compared to the 490r. Anyone else?

Yep, but my experience is with the 490t and 490r. From the reviews I've been reading, it sounds like the 49x pickups are pretty OK, but it's as if the neck and bridge pickups were designed indepedently, with no thought going into making them a calibrated set.

 

[korovamilkdud]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

So true. Come to think of it, I always thought my 490R with the 498t sounded a bit muddy.

Now the interesting thing is when you use the 490r in the bridge instead...:scared:

 

[Luke Duke]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

I went from a 498 in my custom to a C5. I loathed the C5 so in went the 498. It still had the ice-picky highs so I exchanged magnets between that and my 57 classic. I was shooting for a CC esque eq. I've heare the 498 is akin to a JB which I feel is very accurate. It (a2 mag) really smoothed the rough edges of the 498 and the guy I traded the guitar too LOVED it. So what I guess I was hearing was a gibson A2 JB tone.

By putting an A5 in the 57 it got brighter and less grainy (my beef with it) under gain. Clean the A2 mag sounded great though.

Luke

 

[Aceman]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

Man I hope you don't kick any time soon, you've only have one (or possibly two) Les Pauls listed!!!! :biglaugh:

You know - as I get older, I do notice that I have lowered my standards! That's two "real" pauls and two "sort of's" I count the Kaman GT-36 black custom these days...but hey for $150, it's close enough! But a DiMarzio tone zone is going in there - save the choice tones in the real Pauls for Seymour! Yet again I wasn't good enough for Santa to bring that Wine Red Cusom! But damn if the kids didn't get some cool stuff!

Some mentioned in a thgread a whiule back that late 70's/early 80's 490's used A2's in the 490; Is that true and would that make them basically a Alnico pro2?

 

[big_black]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

I just bought an SG with the 500T in it. What can I expect it to sound like?

 

[Bluzboy66]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

I agree, to an extent.....

My '91 Les Paul Classic has always sounded great to me with the stock ceramic pu's..........until I started cleaning my tone up a bit. After 25 years, I'm reinventing myself after listening to Johnny A., old ZZ Top, Allman Bros., Peter Green, BB King, etc. I'm playing through a Fender Super-Amp (4x10) now, instead of my Hot Rod Deluxe, or DeVille. I recently quit the Variety Cover band that I'd been in for 4 years. The Fender Hot Rods were perfect 'grab and go' amps for that band. In the past, my main stage amps were a Soldano Hot Rod 50, and a modded '78 Marshall Super Lead 100, both with 4x12 top cabs. As you can see, high gain was my goal all along.

I'm preparing to launch a Blues project, and now that cleaner tone is my goal, the ceramic pu's just aren't cutting it. To me, they sound harsh and sterile if they're not being pushed into heavy OD.

I'm hoping that my new '59 set of SDs will give me what I'm looking for. I've had the '59 neck pickup in MANY guitars, mostly Hamers, and Gibsons, but I've never tried the '59 bridge.

All in all, I'd recommend the ceramic Gibsons if you're into crunch. I'll be keeping the PRS 'HFS', and 'Vintage Bass' ceramics in my bone stock '91 Paul Reed Smith Custom for the heavier stuff.

Mike

 

[Fusion1]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

Big Black, did you get an SG-X, with the single 500T at the bridge? I have a Les paul Studio with a 500T bridge and it sounds full and brightens up the guitar and it is very powerful.

In my SG I installed the 496R and 500T set and I am trying to like the 500T in the bridge compared to the Duncan Distortion that was in it previously, and it isn;t bad as it is bright and powerful, but in the SG it sounds a bit thin to me.

 

[big_black]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

Yeah, I got an SG-X. I'm going to refinish it and mod it out, get a sweet
MOP headstock overlay. Thanks for the tip. Is it bright like a JB? Maybe change out the pots to 250k?

 

[That90'sGuy]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

Sorry guys, the 490/498 set in my Gibson Les Paul Standard was complete trash. You can play any music style with the right amp, regardless of pickups. The 490/498 were bland and boring. Buy a set of Wagner Custom Rewinds or some Seymour Duncan custom shops / Antiquity line and you'll hear what a "real" pup is supposed to sound like.

Gibson once made amazing pickups, they were known as the PAF humbuckers. I played an original Gibson Les Paul stock with the old school PAFs (yes, it was the real deal, I can thank a good friend of mine for that) and they were everything people praise them to be. They were sweet, they sung and could bite like no tomorrow. They made you want to play like a pro and well, the pickups Gibson does now, don't.

Duncans, Dimarzios, Bill Lawrence, Fralins, WCRs, Harmonic Design etc... they almost always sound better than a guitar's stock pickups. I bought a Genesis Sounds "Mr. Browney" and it was a true PAF type pickup that really brought out harmonics, try finding that with Epis stuff. There is a market for pickups for a reason, they are sorely needed.

 

[Aceman]

Re: 490/498/500T undeserved bad rep!

Again - here we go calling them trash! I have to say, though, I was very surprised by the general positive responses that have been popping up here. You clearly want the tone of an old tired mellow vintage paul. Great. But just because you don't like the tone doesn't mean they suck. As Seymour would say "Tell me what you need more/less of." I think big black asked the right question - What's the 500T going to sound like? Not "Do 500T's stink"

And by the way - that "vintage PAF" you heard probably didn't sound that way 50 years ago! Unreliable production and time works some freaky mojo on those magnets. On my '79 I feel like the neck has became awesome sounding over time. The bridge however, just sounds tired. By tired I mean low output. So I'll be moving to a Duncan Distorion eventually.