Gibson ES 339 : Revisited
- Thread starter jones
- Start date
Empty Pockets
BadHairDayologist
Re: Gibson ES 339 : Revisited
I am pretty sure I am just gona start recommending the Ants to everybody.
My Les Paul has 'em and I only know of three Les Pauls that I like the tone of better... one is a real 59 and two are R9s that cost three times what mine did.
I am pretty sure I am just gona start recommending the Ants to everybody.
My Les Paul has 'em and I only know of three Les Pauls that I like the tone of better... one is a real 59 and two are R9s that cost three times what mine did.
jones
New member
Re: Gibson ES 339 : Revisited
So, after much thought. What I'm looking for is more air in the tone. I like the basic tone of the 57s, but I can hear the muffled response others have mentioned. I'm guessing its the potting, based on what people say. They are really quite nice pickups in this guitar though. I think the clean and medium overdrive tones would better with an I unpotted pickup. I do use a fuzz, right now I have a Dark Arts Pharaoh, occasionally though. But cleanish od to medium heavy od sounds are what use the most.
My main amp is a 1990 JTM45 RI with a Metro turret board upgrade, and I run 6l6 in it. I've tried the modern kt66, but I have some 80s era Phillips 6l6s that I like the overall tone of better. NOS KT66 cost too much!
My musical styles go from blues to bluesy rock, psychedelia, shoe gazer, folksy alt rock, dash of rockabilly and punk. I sometimes get quite poppy and noodle around upbeat major key stuff too.
Based on that, and if you're still paying attention, any other input?
I'm thinking the Seth's may be my overall best choice, especially since I got a quote on the install ha! I don't have the patience to do this one myself!
Thanks for the observations.
So, after much thought. What I'm looking for is more air in the tone. I like the basic tone of the 57s, but I can hear the muffled response others have mentioned. I'm guessing its the potting, based on what people say. They are really quite nice pickups in this guitar though. I think the clean and medium overdrive tones would better with an I unpotted pickup. I do use a fuzz, right now I have a Dark Arts Pharaoh, occasionally though. But cleanish od to medium heavy od sounds are what use the most.
My main amp is a 1990 JTM45 RI with a Metro turret board upgrade, and I run 6l6 in it. I've tried the modern kt66, but I have some 80s era Phillips 6l6s that I like the overall tone of better. NOS KT66 cost too much!
My musical styles go from blues to bluesy rock, psychedelia, shoe gazer, folksy alt rock, dash of rockabilly and punk. I sometimes get quite poppy and noodle around upbeat major key stuff too.
Based on that, and if you're still paying attention, any other input?
I'm thinking the Seth's may be my overall best choice, especially since I got a quote on the install ha! I don't have the patience to do this one myself!
Thanks for the observations.
Re: Gibson ES 339 : Revisited
Have you bought the seths yet? Hmm.. More air in tone.. I think it's not the potting that muffles the sound (potting makes pickup shriller *bad choice of word* IMO). Do you want covered pickups only or uncovered is fine? Because I think that uncovered 59 might be what you want.
Just a newbie opinion, Hope it can be any help to you
Have you bought the seths yet? Hmm.. More air in tone.. I think it's not the potting that muffles the sound (potting makes pickup shriller *bad choice of word* IMO). Do you want covered pickups only or uncovered is fine? Because I think that uncovered 59 might be what you want.
Just a newbie opinion, Hope it can be any help to you
Lewguitar
New member
Re: Gibson ES 339 : Revisited
Much of what people hear as muffled response with 57 Classics is because Gibson uses 300K volume pots. If you exchange your 57's for Seths and retain those 300K pots you'll still get a muffled response. Get rid of those 300K pots and exchange them for 500K.
The 57 Classics are very good pickups with 500K pots and a very good player would get a very good tone demonstrating them and would convince players of how good the 57's are.
And a lousy player would get a lousy tone demonstrating Seths, Antiquitys or Pearly Gates. :boggled:
All that said, I do like the Seths a lot but I'd also change to 500K pots.
Much of what people hear as muffled response with 57 Classics is because Gibson uses 300K volume pots. If you exchange your 57's for Seths and retain those 300K pots you'll still get a muffled response. Get rid of those 300K pots and exchange them for 500K.
The 57 Classics are very good pickups with 500K pots and a very good player would get a very good tone demonstrating them and would convince players of how good the 57's are.
And a lousy player would get a lousy tone demonstrating Seths, Antiquitys or Pearly Gates. :boggled:
All that said, I do like the Seths a lot but I'd also change to 500K pots.
jones
New member
Re: Gibson ES 339 : Revisited
Good point, the only issue is, the cost to install those pots would be the same as the cost of doing a pickup swap. I am not in the mood to do this one myself! I've worked plenty on my strat, but the 339 is much more involved. I'd hate to spend the money to install the pots, only to find I want to swap the pickups anyhow. Decisions...
Much of what people hear as muffled response with 57 Classics is because Gibson uses 300K volume pots. If you exchange your 57's for Seths and retain those 300K pots you'll still get a muffled response. Get rid of those 300K pots and exchange them for 500K.
The 57 Classics are very good pickups with 500K pots and a very good player would get a very good tone demonstrating them and would convince players of how good the 57's are.
And a lousy player would get a lousy tone demonstrating Seths, Antiquitys or Pearly Gates. :boggled:
All that said, I do like the Seths a lot but I'd also change to 500K pots.
Good point, the only issue is, the cost to install those pots would be the same as the cost of doing a pickup swap. I am not in the mood to do this one myself! I've worked plenty on my strat, but the 339 is much more involved. I'd hate to spend the money to install the pots, only to find I want to swap the pickups anyhow. Decisions...
Inkstained
New member
Re: Gibson ES 339 : Revisited
Just a brief note and you can go back to your regular thread:
I want a Gibson ES-339. Badly. One day it will be mine. Oh yes.
OK. Thanks.
Just a brief note and you can go back to your regular thread:
I want a Gibson ES-339. Badly. One day it will be mine. Oh yes.
OK. Thanks.
jones
New member
Re: Gibson ES 339 : Revisited
I probably shouldn't mention this, but I work for a dealer, otherwise the 339 would have been out of my price range. I feel for ya! They are sweet.
I think I may just bite the bullet, get some 500k and put those in myself first. If I really dig it, it's a win, if I still want to change the pickups, I'll only be out the install cost once around. I was really hoping to avoid working on the electronics in this guitar...
I probably shouldn't mention this, but I work for a dealer, otherwise the 339 would have been out of my price range. I feel for ya! They are sweet.
I think I may just bite the bullet, get some 500k and put those in myself first. If I really dig it, it's a win, if I still want to change the pickups, I'll only be out the install cost once around. I was really hoping to avoid working on the electronics in this guitar...
Lewguitar
New member
Re: Gibson ES 339 : Revisited
Boy...it's such a chore with those hollowbodies that I think I'd change the pots and pickups at the same time if you can afford it.
I just put new 500K pots in my PRS. That was pretty easy.
I had a bunch of CTS 500K pots that I bought from Mojo, and I was surprised that most of them measured a lot less than 500K.
Most came in at around 460K to 480K. I don't think it would have made a huge difference, but I did measure about 20 of them and then used those that were actually 500K. None were more than 500K, BTW.
Boy...it's such a chore with those hollowbodies that I think I'd change the pots and pickups at the same time if you can afford it.
I just put new 500K pots in my PRS. That was pretty easy.
I had a bunch of CTS 500K pots that I bought from Mojo, and I was surprised that most of them measured a lot less than 500K.
Most came in at around 460K to 480K. I don't think it would have made a huge difference, but I did measure about 20 of them and then used those that were actually 500K. None were more than 500K, BTW.
jones
New member
Re: Gibson ES 339 : Revisited
I've heard that before. I wouldn't mind if mine were off that much, it's still more than what I have now. But I still think I'm looking for an unpotted pickup. I think the microphonic tendencies are what I think of as "air". So perhaps it's best to do it all. Hmmm.
I'm still intrigued by the idea of Jimmy Page wiring in this guitar, and a bigsby. It would crazy!
I've heard that before. I wouldn't mind if mine were off that much, it's still more than what I have now. But I still think I'm looking for an unpotted pickup. I think the microphonic tendencies are what I think of as "air". So perhaps it's best to do it all. Hmmm.
I'm still intrigued by the idea of Jimmy Page wiring in this guitar, and a bigsby. It would crazy!