Burstbucker Pro vs 59

[CarlosG]

Hi!
I saw this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6g-zSOT0f6I
and i very like Burstbucker Pro. Sound like more open, less compressed JB.
According to Gibson it is a reproduction of PAF 59.I wonder if anyone has compared the BB Pro with the Duncan 59.
Are they similar or are they completely different humbuckers?

 

[freefrog]

The B & N BB Pro's that I've tested in 2006 measured 8.13k and 7.72k, for an inductance of 4.67H and 4.16H respectively.

Nothing surprising here. 8.13k and 4.67H were exactly the values that I measured the same year on a Duncan Alnico Pro B, for instance [edit: and to compare with Duncan 59's: the strongest that I've measured personally clocked at 8.6k and 4.82H. A SH4 is typically in the 16k+ and 7.8H range, for the record].

Now, those BB Pro's had super strongly charged magnets, leading them to deliver 33% more output than a Duncan with similar specs.

They had also a strange behavior in the extreme bass range, apparently due to looser coils than in most humbuckers.

They weren't musical to my ears, TBH. Too loud with a caricatural EQing curve (too much bass and high freq for me). If they sounded like the PU's of a real 59, it's like those in the vintage LP that The ToneQuest Report nicknamed Rocky and qualified as " a brute"...

Although potted, they also tended to squeal, potentially because of their strong magnets.

On this basis, that's not a set that I'd recommend. But maybe BB Pro's have evolved these last 20 years, I don't know...

 

[Aceman]

59 is an Idealized PAF, according to Seymour
The BB Series, 1, 2, 3 and Pro...

Love the BB1, BB2, and BB3 - Gibson should have stopped there.
Would be fine with BB1/2 or BB2/3 or BB1/3 sets.
NOT a fan of the BB Pro. YMMV

And I do not think it is like a classic PAF, or a 59. BB1, 2, and even 3, however - I dig.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

The Burstbucker Pro is nothing like the JB. It's almost the complete opposite as far as humbuckers go, IME. It's vintage output, scooped, very dynamic, and very attacky. The JB is mid-focused, hot, squishy, and somewhat smooth (by comparison).

I have had the '59B and the Bursbucker Pro, but never in the same guitar. But to me, the Burstbucker Pro was brighter and had the typical Gibson raspy voicing to the high-end. Very cool pickup, but otherwise, similar to the '59B. I don't remember mine being noticeably higher output than the '59B, like freefrog mentions, but that was a long time ago, so it might have been.

I've read they changed the BB's at some point too. I remember reading they had plain enamel wire in them at first, but then, they changed them to poly wire dyed to look like plain enamel. Not sure if this is true, and if so, when the change was made.

I'm the other way around than Ace. I like the BB Pro, don't gel with the BB 2/3.

 

[eclecticsynergy]

For me, BB Pros were harsh. 59s are symmetrically wound and lean to the sweeter side of vintagey.
That's not to say 59s are dark or even unusually warm - they're quite well balanced actually.
Just far more musical to my ear than the BBs.

 

[Mincer]

59s aren't specialized like the Nazgul or even like the Whole Lotta Humbucker, so they tend to get overlooked. They are fantastic pickups that are sometimes just the perfect thing. I had a semi hollow Godin for years with a set of 59s that was a fantastic guitar. I only sold it to fund an Eastman 335 (with Antiquities) and that was sold to fund my Gibson Howard Roberts Fusion.