Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

[Lewguitar]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I think Clapton, even today, would blow most of us (all of us?) right off of the stage. He's still a one in a million guitarist.

But that said, I prefer his playing and his "humbuckers through a cranked Marshall" tone from when he was younger and played Gibsons.

Even today, that Clapton tone from the 60's is now standard rock guitar tone.

I guess he got bored with it...especially after every rock guitarist wanted to sound like him.

 

[ItsaBass]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I am not talking about copping Clapton's tone or anything. Just using him as an example of the smooth and muddy humbucker tone that the '57 Classics are practically made for. You can cop Clapton's tones with any P.A.F. and a few turns of some knobs...and each humbucker will react differently with each player's setup. My point was simply that Seths have more inherent clarity than '57 Classics, not that they can't get muddy too, if you tell them to.

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I think Clapton, even today, would blow most of us (all of us?) right off of the stage. He's still a one in a million guitarist.

But that said, I prefer his playing when he was younger and played Gibsons.

Absolutely,but he was younger and hungrier then..Agree...He's great and a very big influence..

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

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

I never saw Jimi live. Never saw Bob Marley or Muddy Waters live either. Wish I had.

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I never saw Jimi live. Never saw Bob Marley or Muddy Waters live either. Wish I had.

I was 10 when Jimi left us and then the Beatles(who I Loved,and still do) broke up...WOW!

 

[Jeffrec]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I think Clapton, even today, would blow most of us (all of us?) right off of the stage. He's still a one in a million guitarist.

But that said, I prefer his playing and his "humbuckers through a cranked Marshall" tone from when he was younger and played Gibsons.

Even today, that Clapton tone from the 60's is now standard rock guitar tone.

I guess he got bored with it...especially after every rock guitarist wanted to sound like him.

I couldn't agree more, Lew.

Unfortunately,I think that Clapton spends a lot of time avoiding his past. He's gone all out changing his tone so it doesn't sound like the Cream/Mayall stuff, but lost a lot in the transition.

 

[Lewguitar]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I couldn't agree more, Lew.

Unfortunately,I think that Clapton spends a lot of time avoiding his past. He's gone all out changing his tone so it doesn't sound like the Cream/Mayall stuff, but lost a lot in the transition.

Clapton plays a lot more acoustic guitar now. So do I. I play more acoustic guitar than I do electric and that really changes what I want to hear from my electric guitar. I want that kind of subtlety and clarity for chords and rhythm.

What I remember about seeing Cream live is how wonderful Clapton's solos sounded and how muddy and grindy his rhythm playing was.

He played very simple bar chords and because his Marshalls were cranked up so loud and were so distorted, he couldn't really get a great rhythm tone live.

Most of our time spent playing a song live is spent playing chords and rhythm parts and accompaniment. When we mature as players we start to see that those parts have to sound good too - not just our solos.

So I think that's what's happened with Clapton and why he plays Strats now and uses the tone he uses.

But I think EC is a genius.

He's does so much more now than he did when he was with Cream - but I do miss that Gibson through a cranked Marshall tone of his.

 

[STRATDELUXER97]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Clapton plays a lot more acoustic guitar now. So do I. I play more acoustic guitar than I do electric and that really changes what I want to hear from my electric guitar. I want that kind of subtlety and clarity for chords and rhythm.

What I remember about seeing Cream live is how wonderful Clapton's solos sounded and how muddy and grindy his rhythm playing was.

He played very simple bar chords and because his Marshalls were cranked up so loud and were so distorted, he couldn't really get a great rhythm tone live.

Most of our time spent playing a song live is spent playing chords and rhythm parts and accompaniment. When we mature as players we start to see that those parts have to sound good too - not just our solos.

So I think that's what's happened with Clapton and why he plays Strats now and uses the tone he uses.

But I think EC is a genius.

He's does so much more now than he did when he was with Cream - but I do miss that Gibson through a cranked Marshall tone of his.

I think you're onto something.Totally agree!

 

[Jeffrec]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Clapton plays a lot more acoustic guitar now. So do I. I play more acoustic guitar than I do electric and that really changes what I want to hear from my electric guitar. I want that kind of subtlety and clarity for chords and rhythm.

What I remember about seeing Cream live is how wonderful Clapton's solos sounded and how muddy and grindy his rhythm playing was.

He played very simple bar chords and because his Marshalls were cranked up so loud and were so distorted, he couldn't really get a great rhythm tone live.

Most of our time spent playing a song live is spent playing chords and rhythm parts and accompaniment. When we mature as players we start to see that those parts have to sound good too - not just our solos.

So I think that's what's happened with Clapton and why he plays Strats now and uses the tone he uses.

But I think EC is a genius.

He's does so much more now than he did when he was with Cream - but I do miss that Gibson through a cranked Marshall tone of his.

+1

 

[JayD.]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

Nice clips! Tone wise I think i preferred the Seths. They sound like they have more balls to me. Much appreciated.!

I have both '57 Classics and Seth Lovers... I'd say the '57 Classics have more low-mids and a little more grind on top - the Seths are a little clearer.

But hey, talk is ****, here's some wanktastic clips going through pretty much the same rig setup (different but similar guitars though) and post-production with each:

Seth Lovers:
http://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=12360388

'57 Classics:
http://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=12356901

 

[Jeffrec]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I have both '57 Classics and Seth Lovers... I'd say the '57 Classics have more low-mids and a little more grind on top - the Seths are a little clearer.

But hey, talk is ****, here's some wanktastic clips going through pretty much the same rig setup (different but similar guitars though) and post-production with each:

Seth Lovers:
http://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=12360388

'57 Classics:
http://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=12356901

Really nice clips! Seths take the prize IMO

 

[Boogie Bill]

Re: Antiquites, Seths, or 57' Classics?

I have a set of production Seths in a chambered LP Supreme, a set of the Musician's Friend/Custom Shop A2 Seth Lover 50th Anniversary pickups in a LP 1960 Classic, and a set of Antiquitys in another LP 1960 Classic--these are weight-relieved, but functionally solid-body guitars. I have a couple of Historic Les Pauls with Burstbucker 1&2 sets; I have a Custom Shop Les Paul Elegant with '57 Classics and three ES-335s, also with the '57s. And there are a couple of LP around here that have uncovered '57n/'57 Plus bridge sets, too.

I play in a Classic Rock/Blues/Country/Jazz/Pop G/B/K/D cover band. We don't do metal, maybe a couple of Van Halen covers; we don't play at extremely high volume. I use Mesa amps: Mark III, Mark IV, Mark V, Maverick and DC-3 and I rarely have my channel gain above 6-7. We are not super-loud.

I like all of these pickups. To me they are fairly close, with differences I consider subtle. The BB set is probably the exception--it seems to be the brightest of the bunch, with the '57 being the warmest. In my Historics, the bridge BBs will give enough twang to make you think it's a Tele on steroids. What I have found is this: if I'm going to a gig and I know there will be a lot of older people (my age, LOL!) where I'm doing softer stuff or more jazz, then I will usually take the one of the guitars with the '57 Classics, and take the BB guitars when I might have a more rocking, younger crowd. Think Santana covers, or "Moondance"--'57 Classics. Allman Bros., Charlie Daniels, Free--then I'm going with the BBs. The guitars with the '57 Classic Plus pickup in the bridge give a bit more midrange emphasis--I liken them to the guitar I have with the TB-4 bridge--just a great tone that says "ROCK".

So where do the Seths and the Ants fit in? They occupy a spectrum right in the middle of all of these. The production Seths seem to have the lowest output. They sounded kinda bland to me at first, but with much better separation and clarity then the '57s--and as it turned out, that blandness just meant that they were so perfect for nearly anything I threw at them. Not as bright and trebly as the BB set; not as dark as the '57s. Tremendous VALUE. The Ants are the next highest output, and they have a very complex midrange--like a fine red wine. They sound just slightly warmer than the Seths, a certain sweetness that is hard to resist. The A2 Anniversarys get real interesting--they are slightly over-wound and just bigger sounding than the production Seths, without losing anything in the process. Very, very nice pickups

It is really hard for me to pick a favorite--they all sound good to me, and I tend to be happy no matter which guitar is slung over my shoulder. The Mesa amps have a way about making every guitar I own sound good. Of the Duncan's--I don't think you could really go wrong with either Seths or Ants for blues, jazz or classic rock.

I have another LP Supreme, still with the factory 490R/498Ts, and I have to change those out. I've got a set of Seths and a set of Pearlys, and when I have them done, I'll try to have some sort of quick-disconnect installed, like 9-volt clips, so I can change the pickups easily. (There's no back plate on the Supreme--all the wiring changes have to be done through the over-sized jack-plate.)

I have been thinking about changing the pickups on the Elegant too. I have a set of Pearlys that I could use, but the WLH set is intriguing, too.

If you hang out over on the LPF, you'll find a lot of guys that like the Wolftones, Voodoos, or the Throbaks. Those are all highly rated, and not cheap--I think the Throbaks sell for around $500 for a set. Ouch!

In the end, you listen to all the advice, take in a deep breath and roll the dice.

Good luck, I hope my post helps.

Bill