Pearly Gates Plus spec
- Thread starter tchewtch
- Start date
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
An HB is always rated as both coils together in series. BTW, almost all production PU's have balanced coils.
An HB is always rated as both coils together in series. BTW, almost all production PU's have balanced coils.
Chris of Arabia
Desert RATT
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
It doesn't seem to matter how many times this myth is laid to rest, it still keeps resurfacing. The PG+ is standard spaced despite it having been created for use in a Fender Strat. I have one here from my MIA 'Lonestar', and is most assuredly not an 'F' spaced design.
It doesn't seem to matter how many times this myth is laid to rest, it still keeps resurfacing. The PG+ is standard spaced despite it having been created for use in a Fender Strat. I have one here from my MIA 'Lonestar', and is most assuredly not an 'F' spaced design.
Masta' C
Well-known member
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
Yep, the Pearly Gates Plus is a regular-spaced, slightly overwound Pearly Gates with an Alnico V magnet instead of Alnico II. You might also think of it as an overwound (~5/6%) SH-1 '59. Resistance specs are based on the coils in series, just as Blueman said.
Yep, the Pearly Gates Plus is a regular-spaced, slightly overwound Pearly Gates with an Alnico V magnet instead of Alnico II. You might also think of it as an overwound (~5/6%) SH-1 '59. Resistance specs are based on the coils in series, just as Blueman said.
darthphineas
New member
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
yeah. keep on spreading myths about specs and SD will have to put you on the payroll. lol!
yeah. keep on spreading myths about specs and SD will have to put you on the payroll. lol!
Last edited:
Masta' C
Well-known member
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
Are you referring to me? If so, I've owned both. All 3 actually (PG, PG+ and '59). The following is straight from Evan, who DESIGNED it
Mike Lewis, who was then head of Fender's guitar marketing (he's now running Gretsch) and I were the ones who worked on that pickup. Mike had a background in retail sales knew what the Pearly Gates sounded like and he wanted that tone for this Strat. But, he wanted around 6dB of boost over and above a regular Pearly Gates for the bridge pickup. According to Mike, "When you go into the bridge position, I want a noticeable boost. And the Texas Specials are already on the hot side." So we took a stock Pearly Gates, changed the magnet from an Alnico 2 to an Alnico 5, and added a few hundred more turns. And viola! The Pearly Gates Plus was born.
ALSO...
Adding a few hundred more turns will increase the d.c. resistance which bumps up the output a bit. But it will also lower the resonant peak. To account for that, we switched the magnet to an Alnico 5, which has a slightly sharper attack on the note; the effect to your ear is increased brightness. The result: the signature Pearly Gates tone with slightly more output.
Are you referring to me? If so, I've owned both. All 3 actually (PG, PG+ and '59). The following is straight from Evan, who DESIGNED it
Mike Lewis, who was then head of Fender's guitar marketing (he's now running Gretsch) and I were the ones who worked on that pickup. Mike had a background in retail sales knew what the Pearly Gates sounded like and he wanted that tone for this Strat. But, he wanted around 6dB of boost over and above a regular Pearly Gates for the bridge pickup. According to Mike, "When you go into the bridge position, I want a noticeable boost. And the Texas Specials are already on the hot side." So we took a stock Pearly Gates, changed the magnet from an Alnico 2 to an Alnico 5, and added a few hundred more turns. And viola! The Pearly Gates Plus was born.
ALSO...
Adding a few hundred more turns will increase the d.c. resistance which bumps up the output a bit. But it will also lower the resonant peak. To account for that, we switched the magnet to an Alnico 5, which has a slightly sharper attack on the note; the effect to your ear is increased brightness. The result: the signature Pearly Gates tone with slightly more output.
ItsaBass
New member
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
That's both coils in series. Each coil will be roughly half of that.
I just got my first one from Rumblebox. First off, it sounds really good in a Strat, regardless of the specs. I have it covered, and it's a pretty classic bridge humbucker sound. Like with anything, the more headroom you have, the more clarity you will get from it. It can get pretty thick and swampy through my 15W combo, though it still sounds good unless you are looking for a ton of high end. But it holds together more through my 100W amps...almost too much, so it can sound a bit stiff. I think a 50W amp (like my Reverbrocket) is perfect for this pickup. Breaks up the amp just enough, but not too much. Subjective, of course...and I don't use O.D. pedals.
It's regular spacing, double parchment...but the parchment is really "cream" in comparison to Fender's version of parchment (and most aftermarket parchment pickguards). Those parchments look white until you hold up something that is a truly neutral white. Then you see that it is really "eggshell white." Too bad Duncan's parchment is not a similar color. It's quite "classy," as it looks like white when looked at without comparison, but it has a slightly softer effect, visually. Doesn't look "fake aged" like the Duncan parchment.
It doesn't sound like a PG. Not even close. It sounds more like a '59. But it sounds good. It has an Alnico 5 magnet, like a '59. But it is wound hotter than a '59 or a PG. It's kind of like a WLH, actually, now that I think about it.
That's both coils in series. Each coil will be roughly half of that.
I just got my first one from Rumblebox. First off, it sounds really good in a Strat, regardless of the specs. I have it covered, and it's a pretty classic bridge humbucker sound. Like with anything, the more headroom you have, the more clarity you will get from it. It can get pretty thick and swampy through my 15W combo, though it still sounds good unless you are looking for a ton of high end. But it holds together more through my 100W amps...almost too much, so it can sound a bit stiff. I think a 50W amp (like my Reverbrocket) is perfect for this pickup. Breaks up the amp just enough, but not too much. Subjective, of course...and I don't use O.D. pedals.
It's regular spacing, double parchment...but the parchment is really "cream" in comparison to Fender's version of parchment (and most aftermarket parchment pickguards). Those parchments look white until you hold up something that is a truly neutral white. Then you see that it is really "eggshell white." Too bad Duncan's parchment is not a similar color. It's quite "classy," as it looks like white when looked at without comparison, but it has a slightly softer effect, visually. Doesn't look "fake aged" like the Duncan parchment.
It doesn't sound like a PG. Not even close. It sounds more like a '59. But it sounds good. It has an Alnico 5 magnet, like a '59. But it is wound hotter than a '59 or a PG. It's kind of like a WLH, actually, now that I think about it.
Last edited:
Artie
Peaveyologist
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
But there's always a "fly in the ointment".
Vintage Rails, and Duckbuckers are humbuckers. Both are listed with the DCR being wired in parallel.
Don't shoot me.
Artie
But there's always a "fly in the ointment".
Vintage Rails, and Duckbuckers are humbuckers. Both are listed with the DCR being wired in parallel.
Don't shoot me.
Artie
Masta' C
Well-known member
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
To follow up....
Whether you conclude the PG+ is a "Pearly Gates with a few more winds and an A5 magnet" as Evan has long claimed or, as has been cited by Duncan's marketing department, the PG+ has a wind "closest to the '59" (which comes with an A5 stock), the result is the same: You've got a 42AWG wire, Plain Enamel insulated, PAF-based humbucker mechanically wound on the same Leesona winder as the PG and '59, which means the winding "pattern" is going to be very close, if not identical, between all 3. There may be a difference in the tension used and/or thickness of the wire insulation, but that's up for debate.
Going on Duncan's published specs alone, the higher DCR of the PG+ compared to the '59 indicates more turns of wire. Same with the PG+ compared to the regular PG...higher DCR = more turns of wire. I'm aware that players across the net have reported wide ranges of resistance readings for all 3 of these pickups, but there are many explanations for that (temp, humidity, production tolerance) and I've yet to see a PG/PG+/59 pickup that was "way off" from the norm.
Also, while Fender offered the PG+ for a short while outside of their production instruments as a replacement/aftermarket pickup, I do not recall ever seeing it in trembucker spacing. I did an internet search and still couldn't find evidence of a trem-spaced PG+. Obviously, a '59 Trembucker would be essentially the same thing, but you could always order the "real" thing from the Custom Shop if you just had to be sure.
To follow up....
Whether you conclude the PG+ is a "Pearly Gates with a few more winds and an A5 magnet" as Evan has long claimed or, as has been cited by Duncan's marketing department, the PG+ has a wind "closest to the '59" (which comes with an A5 stock), the result is the same: You've got a 42AWG wire, Plain Enamel insulated, PAF-based humbucker mechanically wound on the same Leesona winder as the PG and '59, which means the winding "pattern" is going to be very close, if not identical, between all 3. There may be a difference in the tension used and/or thickness of the wire insulation, but that's up for debate.
Going on Duncan's published specs alone, the higher DCR of the PG+ compared to the '59 indicates more turns of wire. Same with the PG+ compared to the regular PG...higher DCR = more turns of wire. I'm aware that players across the net have reported wide ranges of resistance readings for all 3 of these pickups, but there are many explanations for that (temp, humidity, production tolerance) and I've yet to see a PG/PG+/59 pickup that was "way off" from the norm.
Also, while Fender offered the PG+ for a short while outside of their production instruments as a replacement/aftermarket pickup, I do not recall ever seeing it in trembucker spacing. I did an internet search and still couldn't find evidence of a trem-spaced PG+. Obviously, a '59 Trembucker would be essentially the same thing, but you could always order the "real" thing from the Custom Shop if you just had to be sure.
darthphineas
New member
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
what? Skoop "designed" it? that's just putting an A5 in an existing model. according to that logic, there are scores of people in the SDUGF that have "designed" a LOT of new models. :laugh2:
remember when someone tried to 'design' a new neck A2P for Slash only for MJ to tell them that putting an A5 in it meant that they just discovered the Jazz neck model?
what? Skoop "designed" it? that's just putting an A5 in an existing model. according to that logic, there are scores of people in the SDUGF that have "designed" a LOT of new models. :laugh2:
remember when someone tried to 'design' a new neck A2P for Slash only for MJ to tell them that putting an A5 in it meant that they just discovered the Jazz neck model?
Inkstained
New member
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
One of the best bridge humbuckers for a Strat anytime, anywhere.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
One of the best bridge humbuckers for a Strat anytime, anywhere.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dr.K
Formerly Active Member
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
That someone was Evan Skopp. I remember the story also, lol.
That someone was Evan Skopp. I remember the story also, lol.
darthphineas
New member
Re: Pearly Gates Plus spec
I am the one who said I "think" they are F-spaced, this is because I keep reading different things about the PG+, some say it is and some say it isn't. Sorry for my mis-statement, but I did say "I think...". Thanks for clearing that up.
Al
I am the one who said I "think" they are F-spaced, this is because I keep reading different things about the PG+, some say it is and some say it isn't. Sorry for my mis-statement, but I did say "I think...". Thanks for clearing that up.
Al
