'59 bridge vs. Little '59 for tele bridge

[NotCardio]

I've got a little 59 for tele bridge in an Explorer-type, and I really like it.

If I sell the pickup, I thought that later on I would replace it with a regular 59 bridge.

I've never had a regular 59 bridge, so I don't know what the sonic difference would be.

If anyone has had both, care to respond?

Or, if anyone knows of something that would sound more similar than a regular 59?

I know this answer will require someone with a very specific set of circumstances, so I don't expect much in the way of replies.

 

[darthphineas]

Re: '59 bridge vs. Little '59 for tele bridge

they really don't sound all that much the same as you'd expect from how they are both called "59"

 

[NotCardio]

Re: '59 bridge vs. Little '59 for tele bridge

That's what I was afraid of. To me, the little 59 didn't sound much like what I thought something called a '59' would sound, but never having had a 59 bridge, I didn't know if the full size one would either. I've got a 59 neck in the Explorer, but that's kind of apples and oranges.

 

[Mincer]

Re: '59 bridge vs. Little '59 for tele bridge

If you like the Little 59, why sell it?

 

[eclecticsynergy]

Re: '59 bridge vs. Little '59 for tele bridge

I have both the Lil59 for Tele and a couple of 59Bs. But the Lil59 is in a Tele and the 59s are in Gibsons so it's difficult to compare them. My impression is the Lil59 may be less round and more punchy, with faster attack and less sustain. It's hard to judge how much of that is due to the brighter/thinner/more "wiry" character of a bolt-on Fender-scale Tele compared to Gibsons with their 24¾" scale, set necks, and warm woods. Only one of my other Teles has a humbucker at the bridge and that's an Esquire Scorpion, with a set neck and Fender Atomic pickup (comparable in output to a JB) so that's pretty useless for comparison purposes. And none of my Explorer types has ever had a narrow-format humbucker as a bridge pickup. I will say that tonewise the Lil59 in my Tele seems to have nearly as much in common with P90 bridge pickups in Les Pauls as it does with the 59B. Maybe a tad less rude than P90s, with less bite and snot, and a lot less noise of course. But to me they both occupy a sort of middle ground between humbucker smoothness and Fendery pluck-&-sparkle. If there were a midline, I picture P90s leaning on the fence from the singlecoil side and the Lil59 standing nearby- inside humbucker territory, yet not too far from the line. Wish I could compare it to conventional mini humbuckers but the only ones I have personally are a rather stiff DiMarzio with ceramic mag and a RioGrande Babybucker that's huge and sweet and lively but wound extremely high with superfine wire. Both quite unsuitable as points of reference relative to the Lil59.

So, with that said, IMO an actual 59B might give you deeper, looser lows & maybe a bit less midrange snarl, and some extra air in the very high treble. I'd expect a more vintage attack and improved responsiveness to fingertouch & pick dynamics at that critical boundary between grit and chime- that's one area where I feel the Lil59 falls a bit short of its namesake. I also suspect the 59B would have slightly less output and at the same time feel a little more open. But I have to emphasize that's only my best guess.