Gibson 490s in SG opinions

[Sam SG]

To me, pots have a big impact on how the sound is overall, and changing this may take something that's meh to good. Not all CTS pots are created equal either; of the ones which came in my SG (w/ P90s), only one measured 500k, two 470 and one 410. Overall the guitar sounded a bit duller, also since it was wired up modern style, so, loss of high end when turning the volume down.

In the end I got a set of 550k pots and wired them up 50s style - much better: more overall clarity, high end and dynamic sensitivity. Like taking a blanket off and This is a place I usually start before deciding to buy a new pu. Other folks may prefer something else, but since we're trading opinions/experiences here, my 2 cents.

What is the difference between modern and 50s wiring? Are they wired different or do you mean like vintage spec like paper and oil caps etc...?

 

[Mincer]

I'm gonna keep my 490r I like that pickup. While I'm sure there is sonething else I'd like even more. I can't find anything about the 490r I can pin point as to what I'd want to change about the sound.
Now the 490t while I don't mind it at all. I can describe(and did) what id like to improve. So im letting my lust(and cash) grow a little and im pretty sure a WLH is gonna land in the bridge at sone point. The more I think on it the slight overwind and increase in bottom would offset the SGs sharp attack nicely

You always win if you keep a pickup you like.

 

[Ashurbanipal]

What is the difference between modern and 50s wiring? Are they wired different or do you mean like vintage spec like paper and oil caps etc...?

The wiring is different. Basically, 50s style is the tone control being connected to output terminal at the volume; while in modern style, it is done at the input. Good explanation and diagrams here: https://www.fralinpickups.com/2020/03/01/50s-wiring-vs-modern-wiring/.

The way Fralin shows it is typically what you see in pre-1964/65 Gibsons and CS reissues. It's also possible to do it without using the cap to bridge the controls, of course.

It's a matter of taste ultimately but worth trying to find out what one likes.

 

[Securb]

I'm gonna keep my 490r I like that pickup. While I'm sure there is sonething else I'd like even more. I can't find anything about the 490r I can pin point as to what I'd want to change about the sound.
Now the 490t while I don't mind it at all. I can describe(and did) what id like to improve. So im letting my lust(and cash) grow a little and im pretty sure a WLH is gonna land in the bridge at sone point. The more I think on it the slight overwind and increase in bottom would offset the SGs sharp attack nicely

I had a 489/460 set in my LP. I loved it but was jonesing for the WLH bridge. I found the 490 didn't gel with the WLH bridge. It sounded fantastic with the 498, that is the reason I left it in there. When I went to the WLH full set the guitar was perfect.

 

[Sam SG]

The wiring is different. Basically, 50s style is the tone control being connected to output terminal at the volume; while in modern style, it is done at the input. Good explanation and diagrams here: https://www.fralinpickups.com/2020/03/01/50s-wiring-vs-modern-wiring/.

The way Fralin shows it is typically what you see in pre-1964/65 Gibsons and CS reissues. It's also possible to do it without using the cap to bridge the controls, of course.

It's a matter of taste ultimately but worth trying to find out what one likes.

Thanks ill read the article.
EDIT: ya know I've seen this and wondered what the difference was. Thought maybe it was a usable mistake or sonething.
Thanks for the link

 

[Sam SG]

I had a 489/460 set in my LP. I loved it but was jonesing for the WLH bridge. I found the 490 didn't gel with the WLH bridge. It sounded fantastic with the 498, that is the reason I left it in there. When I went to the WLH full set the guitar was perfect.

How so didn't it gel with the 490r? To drastic output increase?

 

[Securb]

How so didn't it gel with the 490r? To drastic output increase?

It has been around 10 years, but I remember he guitar sounding thin and uninspiring in the middle position and the neck pickup losing its bloom. IIRC the output was fine. The two just didn't complement each other well. I think it was more about the settings dialing in the amp for the bridge, did not work for the 490. The WLH set seems more plug-and-play.

 

[Sam SG]

It has been around 10 years, but I remember he guitar sounding thin and uninspiring in the middle position and the neck pickup losing its bloom. IIRC the output was fine. The two just didn't complement each other well. I think it was more about the settings dialing in the amp for the bridge, did not work for the 490. The WLH set seems more plug-and-play.

Ah gotcha. The middle blend. That is another thing I really like my middle selection with both 490s...I'll have to think a bit on this.

 

[Ashurbanipal]

Thanks ill read the article.
EDIT: ya know I've seen this and wondered what the difference was. Thought maybe it was a usable mistake or sonething.
Thanks for the link

I think people who tweak their controls a lot - turning down to get their clean sound etc., prefer 50s. Having tried various kinds treble bleed, I find 50s wiring the most natural sounding; some of those bleeds can sound too bright, in my experience, anyway.

 

[beaubrummels]

There's no perfect solution. I like how the modern volume works, but I like how the 50s volume sounds. Treble bleeds I've tried interfered too much with how the volume worked and didn't sound natural to me. I suppose I could play with values more than I have, but my early experiments didn't produce anything usable or satisfying for me. I'll have to revisit it someday.

 

[Sam SG]

I may try the 50s wiring as I'm a roll down the volume for cleans player