Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
- Thread starter SFW
- Start date
Edgecrusher
New member
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
I can easily play "still got the blues" on a tele... Played right you can use almost anything. Fingers matter more than the difference between a 59 and a 57 classic
I can easily play "still got the blues" on a tele... Played right you can use almost anything. Fingers matter more than the difference between a 59 and a 57 classic
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
I prefer a hot ceramic pick up for the bridge and an A2 type pick up for the neck. My favorite neck pick up is the A2 pro. It depends what you use the neck for though. I gravitate towards metal and hard rock but don't use the neck for high gain or shred solos. Usually I use it for cleans and more bluesy stuff, so I want a nice, thick, syrupy neck pick up. I also like it combined with the bridge pup to tame the high output a bit and give me a nice, stronger clean tone.
I prefer a hot ceramic pick up for the bridge and an A2 type pick up for the neck. My favorite neck pick up is the A2 pro. It depends what you use the neck for though. I gravitate towards metal and hard rock but don't use the neck for high gain or shred solos. Usually I use it for cleans and more bluesy stuff, so I want a nice, thick, syrupy neck pick up. I also like it combined with the bridge pup to tame the high output a bit and give me a nice, stronger clean tone.
Last edited:
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
But seeing as how you have the same fingers, regardless of the guitar you play, there will be a noticeable difference when you use different PU's in any given guitar.
But seeing as how you have the same fingers, regardless of the guitar you play, there will be a noticeable difference when you use different PU's in any given guitar.
Edgecrusher
New member
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
Your missing the point cause you want to argue with me. Here ill spell it out since you seem to not be getting the drift. You can play x song on any pickup hell you can play them without pickups and if your chops are up to par and you play well the audience will recognize it and groove along. Him asking can it do X song is just silly. yes it can any pickup can thats my point.
For years I gigged with a pair of RG750's And never once did I have a person tell me. "You know sweet child o mine would have sounded better on a Les Paul." Never once did someone come up to me and say "you know Cold Shot doesnt sound right unless its played on single coils" Not a single time.
Your missing the point cause you want to argue with me. Here ill spell it out since you seem to not be getting the drift. You can play x song on any pickup hell you can play them without pickups and if your chops are up to par and you play well the audience will recognize it and groove along. Him asking can it do X song is just silly. yes it can any pickup can thats my point.
For years I gigged with a pair of RG750's And never once did I have a person tell me. "You know sweet child o mine would have sounded better on a Les Paul." Never once did someone come up to me and say "you know Cold Shot doesnt sound right unless its played on single coils" Not a single time.
soulforger
New member
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
Zombies!!!
Zombies!!!
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
'59's have an A5 magnet. That gives them a sharp high-end, scooped mids, and a lot of firm low-end.
'57's have an A2 magnet. That gives them a rounded, duller high-end, more mids, and the low-end is less prominent and looser.
Gibson puts a lot of '57's in their guitars (God only knows why). Many of the guys that like '57's have tried few, if any other PAF's. There are better PAF's out there, and a lot of them cost less.
'59's have an A5 magnet. That gives them a sharp high-end, scooped mids, and a lot of firm low-end.
'57's have an A2 magnet. That gives them a rounded, duller high-end, more mids, and the low-end is less prominent and looser.
Gibson puts a lot of '57's in their guitars (God only knows why). Many of the guys that like '57's have tried few, if any other PAF's. There are better PAF's out there, and a lot of them cost less.
JeffB
Let it B
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
Then there are guys like me who have played and owned many aftermarket PAF types and even wrangled with a bunch of PAT#s, PAFs from the 50s, T tops,Super humbuckers, Shaws, etc. And I choose to use 57 classics when it comes to new production. In a good piece of wood, with correct pots, they are excellent pickups
. IME, the more accurate scenario is a big chunk of people put them in junky fast growth, unaturally and not completely dried low quality faux wood with pot metal bridges, and a 1/8" of plastic finish, then complain the pickups are muddy/warm.
Then there are guys like me who have played and owned many aftermarket PAF types and even wrangled with a bunch of PAT#s, PAFs from the 50s, T tops,Super humbuckers, Shaws, etc. And I choose to use 57 classics when it comes to new production. In a good piece of wood, with correct pots, they are excellent pickups
. IME, the more accurate scenario is a big chunk of people put them in junky fast growth, unaturally and not completely dried low quality faux wood with pot metal bridges, and a 1/8" of plastic finish, then complain the pickups are muddy/warm.
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
^ +1
In the right guitar, the Classic '57 is excellent.
Plus it depends also on the tonal expectations of the guitarist. If you are expecting a sharp high end, mid-scooped, strong bass pup (Blueman's excellent description of the '59), and you install a Classic '57, you are going to be very disappointed and claim that it's a horrible pup...dull, lifeless, and muddy.
However, like I said in my earlier post, if you are looking for the mids, smooth highs, and softer bass, if you put a Classic '57 in your guitar you'll be in heaven...but if you put a '59 in your guitar, you're going to be very disappointed.
^ +1
In the right guitar, the Classic '57 is excellent.
Plus it depends also on the tonal expectations of the guitarist. If you are expecting a sharp high end, mid-scooped, strong bass pup (Blueman's excellent description of the '59), and you install a Classic '57, you are going to be very disappointed and claim that it's a horrible pup...dull, lifeless, and muddy.
However, like I said in my earlier post, if you are looking for the mids, smooth highs, and softer bass, if you put a Classic '57 in your guitar you'll be in heaven...but if you put a '59 in your guitar, you're going to be very disappointed.
Chickenwings
Alnico 6/8
Last edited:
Inflames626
New member
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
I have tried a Classic 57, 57+, and 498t in a Hamer Scarab I own (all mahogany, set neck, rosewood, 500k pots). I haven't tried a 59, but even a Jazz sounds a little warm to me compared to a ceramic neck pup like the EMG 60.
I'm normally an EMG 60/81 (18 volt) guy who wanted a little more warmth for tracking rhythms.
My experience with the 57 is that it is very warm but it doesn't cut through very well. It gets PAF "woo woo" on bends above 12th fret, but it doesn't sizzle, and the notes often pluck instead of sound clearly. It's better for semi hollow, hollow, and jazz, although it doesn't do bad with high gain in Pod Farm 2.5.
I put a 57+ in the neck and it helped a lot. It has more mids and is wound a bit more than the 57, so it cuts through better. Unfortunately, the Classic 57+ doesn't split. The closest thing to it that splits would be a 490t (t since the 57+ is supposed to be used in the bridge--you might try an r). I think they both use A2 magnets and I'm still not sure what the difference is between the 490t and Classic 57+ aside from the splitting and the 57+ having a bit more output.
As for a lot of guys not liking A2 magnets here in favor of the A5, I was pleasantly surprised. When I think of an A2, I think of the bass as being a bit springy and spongy, but this variation also allows you to have pick dynamics. You can vary up the tone by touch a lot, and play with saturation settings. The 57+ was great for that in the bridge--it just wasn't quite firm enough in the bass for me (although it could easily do distorted prog rock stuff like George Lynch). You can always compensate with the amp, though.
I contrast a "spongy" bottom to a flabby bottom, which would be the JB to my ears. The thing sounds flabby, but the flab sounds the same with every attack. In some guitars this might add body, but in all of mine (mostly alder/maple/rosewood/Floyd Rose) it has to be dialed back with a high pass filter for tightness.
As far as matching the 500t, I haven't played it, but to me it depends on if you want a "warm neck/bright bridge" guitar or a "relatively bright neck/bright bridge" guitar.
Some guys like a huge difference between neck and bridge tones for versatility. Others want to be closer matched.
I think if you do a 57/500t you'll have a huge difference. If you want a similar tone to the 57 but with a bit more bite and clarity, try the 57+ in the neck instead.
I've also considered a 496/500t or even a 498t/500t, but I think the 57+ and 500t would be good for you.
My experience with Gibson pickups is that they aren't bad at all, but they are pricey for what you get. Used Duncans would get you a similar tone for a better price. I just bought Gibsons because I know they're only available in a tune o matic spacing and I wanted to save Duncans for if I wanted a PAF tone in a Floyd Rose guitar.
I have tried a Classic 57, 57+, and 498t in a Hamer Scarab I own (all mahogany, set neck, rosewood, 500k pots). I haven't tried a 59, but even a Jazz sounds a little warm to me compared to a ceramic neck pup like the EMG 60.
I'm normally an EMG 60/81 (18 volt) guy who wanted a little more warmth for tracking rhythms.
My experience with the 57 is that it is very warm but it doesn't cut through very well. It gets PAF "woo woo" on bends above 12th fret, but it doesn't sizzle, and the notes often pluck instead of sound clearly. It's better for semi hollow, hollow, and jazz, although it doesn't do bad with high gain in Pod Farm 2.5.
I put a 57+ in the neck and it helped a lot. It has more mids and is wound a bit more than the 57, so it cuts through better. Unfortunately, the Classic 57+ doesn't split. The closest thing to it that splits would be a 490t (t since the 57+ is supposed to be used in the bridge--you might try an r). I think they both use A2 magnets and I'm still not sure what the difference is between the 490t and Classic 57+ aside from the splitting and the 57+ having a bit more output.
As for a lot of guys not liking A2 magnets here in favor of the A5, I was pleasantly surprised. When I think of an A2, I think of the bass as being a bit springy and spongy, but this variation also allows you to have pick dynamics. You can vary up the tone by touch a lot, and play with saturation settings. The 57+ was great for that in the bridge--it just wasn't quite firm enough in the bass for me (although it could easily do distorted prog rock stuff like George Lynch). You can always compensate with the amp, though.
I contrast a "spongy" bottom to a flabby bottom, which would be the JB to my ears. The thing sounds flabby, but the flab sounds the same with every attack. In some guitars this might add body, but in all of mine (mostly alder/maple/rosewood/Floyd Rose) it has to be dialed back with a high pass filter for tightness.
As far as matching the 500t, I haven't played it, but to me it depends on if you want a "warm neck/bright bridge" guitar or a "relatively bright neck/bright bridge" guitar.
Some guys like a huge difference between neck and bridge tones for versatility. Others want to be closer matched.
I think if you do a 57/500t you'll have a huge difference. If you want a similar tone to the 57 but with a bit more bite and clarity, try the 57+ in the neck instead.
I've also considered a 496/500t or even a 498t/500t, but I think the 57+ and 500t would be good for you.
My experience with Gibson pickups is that they aren't bad at all, but they are pricey for what you get. Used Duncans would get you a similar tone for a better price. I just bought Gibsons because I know they're only available in a tune o matic spacing and I wanted to save Duncans for if I wanted a PAF tone in a Floyd Rose guitar.
Last edited:
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
Oh, and it's not that hard to convert the 57+ to a four conductor wire so you can split it (or even just add a third wire to where the two coils are joined together, this will allow you to split it...and this is the simplest thing to do).
Oh, and it's not that hard to convert the 57+ to a four conductor wire so you can split it (or even just add a third wire to where the two coils are joined together, this will allow you to split it...and this is the simplest thing to do).
Big Flannel
New member
Inflames626
New member
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
Output: 8.3
Position: Bridge
http://store.gibson.com/57-classic-plus-pickup/
Magnet: Alnico II
Wiring: 2-Conductor (Also availble in Quick Connect™)
Details: Like the ’57 Classic but slightly overwound for increased output
Output: 8.3
Position: Bridge
http://store.gibson.com/57-classic-plus-pickup/
Magnet: Alnico II
Wiring: 2-Conductor (Also availble in Quick Connect™)
Details: Like the ’57 Classic but slightly overwound for increased output
Inflames626
New member
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
Also, to the people who say Gibson is a guitar company and they don't know about pickups, etc.
We're the hardcore crowd. Most lay people, when they buy a guitar, don't want to mess with the electronics.
Yet despite these "awful" stock Gibson pickups, people still love the sound of Les Pauls. If the pickups were that bad, they would detract from the sound of the guitar to the point that no one would want to buy a stock Les Paul. But people still do, and many think if you alter the original equipment you ruin the sound of the guitar.
Not saying they're right or wrong--just saying, if the pickups were that bad, it would reflect badly on the desirability of LPs.
Also, to the people who say Gibson is a guitar company and they don't know about pickups, etc.
We're the hardcore crowd. Most lay people, when they buy a guitar, don't want to mess with the electronics.
Yet despite these "awful" stock Gibson pickups, people still love the sound of Les Pauls. If the pickups were that bad, they would detract from the sound of the guitar to the point that no one would want to buy a stock Les Paul. But people still do, and many think if you alter the original equipment you ruin the sound of the guitar.
Not saying they're right or wrong--just saying, if the pickups were that bad, it would reflect badly on the desirability of LPs.
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
Not saying '57's are 'awful' just that there's better PAF's, Burstbuckers being one of them. Why aren't they using a lot more of those? I have and have had a number of good PAF's, and '57's just don't have the tone quality of a Seth, WLH, Bonamassa, Fralin, etc. Maybe LP sales would be higher, and Gibson wouldn't be producing so many low-end models to entice buyers, if they used better PAF's in their mid and high-end LP's. For a $2,500-$4,000 LP to come with '57's, 490's, or the 498T/490R pair is kind of a let down. For that kind of money, you should get a BB1 & 2.
Not saying '57's are 'awful' just that there's better PAF's, Burstbuckers being one of them. Why aren't they using a lot more of those? I have and have had a number of good PAF's, and '57's just don't have the tone quality of a Seth, WLH, Bonamassa, Fralin, etc. Maybe LP sales would be higher, and Gibson wouldn't be producing so many low-end models to entice buyers, if they used better PAF's in their mid and high-end LP's. For a $2,500-$4,000 LP to come with '57's, 490's, or the 498T/490R pair is kind of a let down. For that kind of money, you should get a BB1 & 2.
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Gibson 57 Classic vs Duncan 59?
Funny that Seth's, Fralins, A2P's, & BB's all manage to sound very nice and clear in my mid-price imports, while '57's struggle (and get sold).
Funny that Seth's, Fralins, A2P's, & BB's all manage to sound very nice and clear in my mid-price imports, while '57's struggle (and get sold).
Similar threads
