Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

[Jeffrec]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Sounds like the Seths are the way to go. Everyone might disagree here and there, but seems like the commonality is the universal love for the Seth Lover.

Me too. My old Hamer Studio came with a JB & 59 combo (or maybe it was a JB & Jazz combo - can't remember) but for a while it was sort of my humbucker test guitar.

I put Fralins in it, then a Antiquitys in it and then tha Seth neck & Custom 5 (to bright for me) and then stuck with a set of the Seths.

So five sets of pickups total and the Seths were my favorites. More output and clearer highs than the Antiquity.

Lew- Did your Hamer have a maple cap, or all mahogany? I'm sure I've mentioned before that I have a prototype of the Hamer Archtop Custom that's all mahogany. It came with the usual '59n/JBb combo. I put Seths in it years ago and it really made the guitar come alive. That's why I'm using a Seth bridge in my SG/LP.

Jeff

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Lew- Did your Hamer have a maple cap, or all mahogany? I'm sure I've mentioned before that I have a prototype of the Hamer Archtop Custom that's all mahogany. It came with the usual '59n/JBb combo. I put Seths in it years ago and it really made the guitar come alive. That's why I'm using a Seth bridge in my SG/LP.

Jeff

I don't own the guitar any more but yes, it had a maple top and mahogany body and neck.

I called it a Studio but but maybe it was a Custom? Looked like this:

 

[Jeffrec]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I don't own the guitar any more but yes, it had a maple top and mahogany body and neck.

I called it a Studio but but maybe it was a Custom? Looked like this:

What a beauty! Depending on the year, it might have been either. Mine is a '91, when they went to the archtop instead of flat. Later on they started calling it the "Studio". Too bad Hamer isn't still around. They were such nice guitars. Equal to any PRS I've seen

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

What a beauty! Depending on the year, it might have been either. Mine is a '91, when they went to the archtop instead of flat. Later on they started calling it the "Studio". Too bad Hamer isn't still around. They were such nice guitars. Equal to any PRS I've seen

Always liked Hamers. One odd thing about them is that in every Hamer I've had the tone control was attached directly to the output jack. That's the 50's mod and it makes the whole guitar brighter and clearer. I don't know if there's an easy way to do "modern" wiring on a Hamer. I guess it's just part of the sound of a Hamer but I wonder if they would have been more popular if "modern" wiring had been standard?

 

[blueman335]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

A lot of dislike for 57 Classics comes from them being used with something other than 500K pots. They sound dark and lacking in treble with 250K or 300K pots.

...much like you do with your import Epiphone guitars Bluesman. That's a guaranteed tone killer.

Oh, I've tried 500K's with many bridge PU's, and even with 500K's, I can't get the edge I want from '57's. No matter how much treble I add at the amp, it seems like it stays in the background and doesn't sharpen the sound. They can have a weird 'ribbony' sound in LP's. Not the tone I'm after. I've read that '57's are much better in SG's; the thin body and long neck may help. that may be, but there's other PU's I'd rather have in my SG's ('59's for example). I just don't think '57's are anything special; they're ridiculously priced, and there's many better PAF's there for that kind of money, or less. Why on earth would anyone buy a '57 when they can get a Seth for less?

As far as a 'guaranteed tone killer', there are no guarantees in life, old fella. A number of us here use one or two 250K's on our bridge PU's, and we'd like that think that we're not all a bunch of tone deaf hacks. Almost every time I've played on stage I've gotten compliments on my tones from the audience and fellow musicians, so apparently I'm doing something right, even though it may not compute to your way of thinking.

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

...every time I've played on stage I've gotten compliments on my tones from the audience and fellow musicians, so apparently I'm doing something right, even though it may not compute to your way of thinking.

Both times, huh?

 

[Jeffrec]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Always liked Hamers. One odd thing about them is that in every Hamer I've had the tone control was attached directly to the output jack. That's the 50's mod and it makes the whole guitar brighter and clearer. I don't know if there's an easy way to do "modern" wiring on a Hamer. I guess it's just part of the sound of a Hamer but I wonder if they would have been more popular if "modern" wiring had been standard?

I wasn't aware of the wiring thing. When I got mine (traded a Gibson Explorer reissue for it), the previous owner had switched the wiring around so the middle position gave you that out-of-phase, Peter Green thing. It is puzzling why Hamer wan't more popular. I think one reason that PRS has done so well is that they became real popular with a whole generation of younger guitarists, and therefore got more exposure.

P.S. Love your Avatar Lew

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Both times, huh?

:laugh2:

 

[uOpt]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I'm looking for pickups to go into my '84 Les Paul Standard. I want to be able to get as traditional a PAF tone for a Les Paul as I can get. I want to get anything from a nice warm Jazz tone all the way to Cream and Zep style tones. Of these pickups, which is the most true to vintage PAF? Also, is there any other pickups you would recommend?

The 57 are thin sounding crap, IMHO.

The Seths and the Antiquities mostly do the same thing to my ears, which is a good PAF sound with some extra sparkle in there. I am not sure how much of that is rooted in not being potted. I strongly feel that these two have the same character and that the Ant is just doing more of it and that I prefer the Ant as being "better".

Things get a bit more complicated when you consider more factors that just one pickup test played. The Seth set has less difference between neck and bridge, which I normally prefer. The Seth set is not aged which depending on age grade of your specific Ant set might be better looking. The Seth set is cheaper, so even if you have a tiny bit of extra sparkle in there the question is whether it's worth the money and the looks.

The bridge Ant has a bit more honk to it which I attribute to mechanical effects from the different cover and the slightly hotter wind. I think the Seth would be better for the Jazz end of your scale and the Ant better for the Zep end. You're welcome. Just get another Les Paul Or two.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Both times, huh?

Both of the times in the last month. You seem to know quite about my tones, telepathy perhaps?

And I could always take some cheap shots at you that's how want to play, baby.

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Both of the times in the last month. You seem to know quite about my tones, telepathy perhaps?

And I could always take some cheap shots at you that's how want to play, baby.

All in fun though right guys?:beerchug: I read through both of your all's posts.Always good info to be had.

 

[ItsaBass]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I have played all three, but I have never actually owned the Antiquities.

I like the Seths the best. However, I like the neck pickup a lot more than I like the bridge pickup. The bridge pickup is nice, but it's not that unique sounding. The Seth neck...there is nothing else like it (that I've tried, anyhow), as it's extremely clear, yet also somehow buttery, without sounding brash on the top end. I even like it better than any real PAF I've played in a real antique Les Paul.

The '57 Classics are good pickups if you like a thick, creamy sound - think some of the tones that Clapton used in Cream. They don't excel in low-headroom amps, as they can turn to mush if you turn up much past 2.5 or so (in general). You want at least 50W for them to really come to life, IME.

Antiquities are nice pickups, though the fake cosmetic aging is absolutely ridiculous to me. I prefer the Seths, as the Antiquities seem both more mushy and more abrasive. Something about the frequency they are tuned to, I guess.

 

[Jeffrec]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I like the Seths the best. However, I like the neck pickup a lot more than I like the bridge pickup. The bridge pickup is nice, but it's not that unique sounding. The Seth neck...there is nothing else like it (that I've tried, anyhow), as it's extremely clear, yet also somehow buttery, without sounding brash on the top end. I even like it better than any real PAF I've played in a real antique Les Paul.

The '57 Classics are good pickups if you like a thick, creamy sound - think some of the tones that Clapton used in Cream.

As someone who has searched for the right pickup to nail the Cream-era Clapton tone for years, I have to say that the Seth is as close as I've come. The '57 Classic in my '61 LP/SG reissue couldn't do it. The Seth has pretty much nailed it. It was recommended to me when I contacted the Custom Shop about doing a Cream-style pickup.

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

As someone who has searched for the right pickup to nail the Cream-era Clapton tone for years, I have to say that the Seth is as close as I've come. The '57 Classic in my '61 LP/SG reissue couldn't do it. The Seth has pretty much nailed it. It was recommended to me when I contacted the Custom Shop about doing a Cream-style pickup.

Clapton used a '58 Les Paul, I think, for the Fresh Cream album and that would have probably had alnico 2 pickups like the Seth Lover.

His '60 Les Paul was lost by then (that's the one he used with John Mayall) and I always assumed that one had alnico 5 or maybe alnico 4 pickups. Sounds like it anyway. Not as much midrange and brighter than alnico 4 or 5.

This is what I think of when I think of Clapton's Fresh Cream tone:

 

[Jeffrec]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Clapton used a '58 Les Paul, I think, for the Fresh Cream album and that would have probably had alnico 2 pickups like the Seth Lover.

His '60 Les Paul was lost by then (that's the one he used with John Mayall) and I always assumed that one had alnico 5 or maybe alnico 4 pickups. Sounds like it anyway. Not as much midrange and brighter than alnico 4 or 5.

This is what I think of when I think of Clapton's Fresh Cream tone:

Thanks Lew,

Some of Fresh Cream was done with that Black LP Custom he used to have, also.

I've been after the tone he got with the '64 SG on live Spoonful, Sweet Wine, Crossroads, etc. at the Winterland in '68. I know that guitar might have had A-5 magnets in it and could be trebley on some songs, but the thick tone he got on those songs is the one I was after. The Seth seems to do it nicely.

 

[phil_104]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Wicked threads on PAFs lately. I'm almost getting the urge to slap a set of Seths in my LP.

 

[blueman335]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I've been after the tone he got with the '64 SG on live Spoonful, Sweet Wine, Crossroads, etc. at the Winterland in '68. I know that guitar might have had A-5 magnets in it and could be trebley on some songs, but the thick tone he got on those songs is the one I was after.

+1. His live tones from then were great. I don't think his Strat-era tones are anywhere close to that level of quality.

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Thanks Lew,

Some of Fresh Cream was done with that Black LP Custom he used to have, also.

I've been after the tone he got with the '64 SG on live Spoonful, Sweet Wine, Crossroads, etc. at the Winterland in '68. I know that guitar might have had A-5 magnets in it and could be trebley on some songs, but the thick tone he got on those songs is the one I was after. The Seth seems to do it nicely.

I think of that ax as being the Disraeli Gears guitar. Probably because I saw Cream on that tour and he was playing that guitar - the psychedelic SG. They opened with Tales of Brave Ulysses. I was right up there at the foot of the stage of the Grande Ballroom in Detroit. Saw so many great shows there: Jeff Beck Group, the Who, The Bluesbreakers, BB King, James Cotton, Buddy Guy & Junior Wells...awesome, awesome times. The Grande's been closed for decades now...the building's still there (it's an old Ballroom from the 1920's I believe) but it's falling apart - like so many historic buildings in Detroit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grande_Ballroom

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

+1. His live tones from then were great. I don't think his Strat-era tones are anywhere close to that level of quality.

I Know Clapton is a better player overall and vocalist then he was with Cream..I also loved his tone then and with the Bluesbreakers.I think he's just more comfy on a strat for so many years and with the onboard preamp on the EC strats and the switching options,he probably just gets that versatility that most of us strat guys like.I'm guessing? He was into Bonnie and Delaney and Robbie Robertson of The Band,maybe Harrison also and it seemed to lean him into the strat direction..At times I feel like his Fender Tweed amps get mushy and I feel it's more the amp(s) than his guitars.

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I think of that ax as being the Disraeli Gears guitar. Probably because I saw Cream on that tour and he was playing that guitar - the psychedelic SG. They opened with Tales of Brave Ulysses. I was right up there at the foot of the stage of the Grande Ballroom in Detroit. Saw so many great shows there: Jeff Beck Group, the Who, The Bluesbreakers, BB King, James Cotton, Buddy Guy & Junior Wells...awesome, awesome times. The Grande's been closed for decades now...the building's still there (it's an old Ballroom from the 1920's I believe) but it's falling apart - like so many historic buildings in Detroit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grande_Ballroom

So awesome Lew...Add Jimi to the mix and it wouldn't get any better than that!