In the bridge, the PAF construction takes over and that's what you hear. In the neck, I hear more jangly, wet, strat voiced tone, even though the thing is technically built like a PAF.
IME, a PG has the inductance of a P.A.F. (4.6 Henry for the bridge model in my archives) but also a higher Q factor than other Duncan P.A.F. replicas. IOW, it has a narrower and pointy resonant peak... reminding the resonance of a Fender single coil, albeit the PAFish inductance locates this resonance @ a typically PAFish frequency.
Hence your feeling VS what Jeremy says: he hears mostly the
frequencies at play, you're more sensitive to the
shape of the resonant peak giving to this model a narrowed response. IMHO. YMMV.
To come back to the comparison: a Seth has a lower Q factor (= a flatter, more even frequency response), a slightly lower inductance (4.4H for bridge models in my archives) and this 3D vocal mids quality evoked above, making it the best mass produced Duncan P.A.F. clone in my perception too.
Unlike some vintage HB's and replicas, it doesn't produce this squeaky atonal transient / attack that some people find so important in a P.A.F. or P.A.F. clone BUT the Seth is really a rewarding pickup in my subjective experience. I find the PG a wee bit simpler / ruder - and with too much character for bridge position in acoustically bright guitars IMHO. Again, YMMV.
