SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

[mi_canuck]

what are the Seymour Duncan equivalents - or the closest within SD's range - to the Gibson Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro? the 1, 2, 3 have A2s, Pros have A5s.

just curious... Gibson Custom Shop R8, R9, R0 reissues use Burstbucker 1 (neck) & 2 (bridge). Jimmy Page Custom Shop model uses "custom" Burstbucker pickups, doesn't really say 1, 2, 3 or Pro...

are the BB Pro's = SD '59s
and BB 1,2 or 3 = APIIs

??


thnx

 

[Zhangliqun]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

The 59 sounds a lot like BB's to me. Burstbucker Pro is just a Burstbucker with an A5 magnet instead of A2. Between the 59 neck and bridge and magnet swapping with A2 and A5, you could get really close to all 4.

 

[mi_canuck]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

so where would the APII's fit in? are they also similar to the BB's? or not at all?

from the SD sounds clips... 59's and APII's aren't all that different sounds, at least from the clips... APII's might have a bit more mid maybe and a bit less bass???


cheers


EDIT: I guess maybe the Seth Lover's (SH-55) are more equivalent to BB's than APII's are... (SH-55 are A2 and unpotted, like the BB 1, 2 or 3)

 

[Zhangliqun]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

Alnico 2 Pro sounds like a totally different pickup to me. Fat and full while the 59 is scooped and harsh to my ear.

 

[Benjy_26]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

The PG neck and bridge are what the BB 1&2 combo should sound like, IMHO.

The Pro's are just a bit too shrill and brittle to my ears. The 59's are similar, but are more refined.

 

[pstarove]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

The PG neck and bridge are what the BB 1&2 combo should sound like, IMHO.

The Pro's are just a bit too shrill and brittle to my ears. The 59's are similar, but are more refined.

+1

 

[Aceman]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

The PG neck and bridge are what the BB 1&2 combo should sound like, IMHO.

The PG set is what ALL P's should sound like out of the box. Nothing humble about that opinion.

I've said it before: The PG sound is what we are talking about when we hear a great old LP. Not the 59, not the a2p, not even seths's.

 

[Benjy_26]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

I've said it before: The PG sound is what we are talking about when we hear a great old LP. Not the 59, not the a2p, not even seths's.

Couldn't agree with you more, Ace.

 

[mi_canuck]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

The PG set is what ALL P's should sound like out of the box. Nothing humble about that opinion.

I've said it before: The PG sound is what we are talking about when we hear a great old LP. Not the 59, not the a2p, not even seths's.

i don't dissagree with you... although i have run into some contradicting info (https://forum.seymourduncan.com/showthread.php?t=130243)... so it all depends on what sounds good to whos ears...

i already have a set of 59's that i'm going to try (got them new for a good deal), and if that doesn't work to my liking... may try PG set or APII set...


peace

 

[blueman335]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

The PG set is what ALL P's should sound like out of the box. Nothing humble about that opinion.

I've said it before: The PG sound is what we are talking about when we hear a great old LP. Not the 59, not the a2p, not even seths's.

The challenge with the original PAF's is that they used A2, A3, A4, & A5 magnets, which gave them very different EQ's. Plus they were handwound & the coils often unbalanced to some degree, and the neck & bridge PU's weren't calibrated for the positions. The "true" PAF sound covers a lot of territory, which is why you have SD making Seth's, PG's, '59's, APH's, and Jazz's to catch some of the variety in those PU's. Gibson has '57's, Burstbuckers, & the 490's (all with A2 magnets). Dimarzio makes the PAF, PAF Classic, and Virtual PAF (all with A5's). There are lots of other manufacturers with their own interpretations.

All these reflect the diversity of the originals (but only a part of it, as they're not using the other magnets). If you gravitate towards one (Aceman), it doesn't mean the others are any less valid. There is no "one" PAF sound today, just as there wasn't 50 years ago. Some of the originals sounded better than others, and some sounded great in one guitar, but not as good in another (much to the chagrin of someone who just paid thousands for one). I prefer '59's to PG's, but both have a PAF sound. All a matter of personal taste.

And yes, PG's are probably closest to BB's. But from many posts on this forum, PG's are usually perceived to have more definition & brightness than Burstbuckers.

 

[Benjy_26]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

FWIW, PAF's were all either alnico II or V and were wound on a Leesona machine, not by hand.

 

[mi_canuck]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

so blueman... are you saying that originally, back in the late 50's, gibson was using all sorts or magnets, so what you got was a crap shoot? so there was that much variety in tone back then? i always thought PAF meant a specific combination of magnets (A2), specific winding, impedance, etc. etc... sounds like that wasn't the case at all....


cheers

 

[mi_canuck]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

FWIW, PAF's were all either alnico II or V and were wound on a Leesona machine, not by hand.

slightly off-topic, but how did/do owners of vintage les pauls tell if they have AII or AV magnets? was it just luck of the draw on what you got back in the day? or was it an option - either AII or AV... ??

just curious on the history... that's all


peace

 

[mi_canuck]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

found this..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAF_(pickup)


seems like AIV was most common... they were wound by machine, but manually operated... and it seems like gibson kept changing them over the years... switch to A5 as standard in '61, switch from enamel to poly coated wire in '63, automatic winding machines in 65-68 timeframe...

anyways... it's all listed in the wiki page... don't know how factual it is but surely some of it is fairly accurate i assume...

but all the modern "interpretations" are listed just as blueman was indicating... nice job bro


peace

 

[blueman335]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

so blueman... are you saying that originally, back in the late 50's, gibson was using all sorts or magnets, so what you got was a crap shoot? so there was that much variety in tone back then? i always thought PAF meant a specific combination of magnets (A2), specific winding, dc resistance, etc. etc... sounds like that wasn't the case at all....


cheers

It was ladies winding these (more detail-oriented), and I've read on this forum from informed sources that they used four different kinds of magnets, mainly A2's at first, than standardized to A5's in the early 1960's. But that A3's & A4's were in the mix to a lesser degree in the late 1950's. I'm not going to debate that. All I know is what's been posted. Back then they counted turns, but didn't always stop turning at the same time, and even with the exact number of turns, the resistence (ohms) will vary depending on the uniformity of the winding.

Yes PAF's were variable. Today, a maker couldn't get away with so much variation in one model. It was new technlogy back then & little was standardized yet. You were buying a humbucker, and Gibson made them. Only offered one kind, and they didn't worry about being consistent. The impacts of the variables on tone weren't considered like they are today. Now we analyze PU's in infinite detail and there's so much competition amongst makers. Back then, there were no aftermarket PU's. You got what came with your guitar, & to change your sound, you changed guitars. We're spoiled now with what's available.

 

[Sanford]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

We're spoiled now with what's available.

Thank you!

Personally, I don't care about achieving a "vintage" tone, I try to find pickups that start with a good foundation or basic sound. Meaning, I'd prefer to hear a clean sound first, listen for the eq and volume, then start adding effects and listening for changes. Same with amps. Blueman's right, today we're spoiled by too many options. Seems like I spend more time considering gear choices than just playing the **** music.

 

[Rick1114]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

And yes, PG's are probably closest to BB's. But from many posts on this forum, PG's are usually perceived to have more definition & brightness than Burstbuckers.

The BB Pros are already pretty bright, if the PG's are brighter than that, I'd probably go with a '59's!

 

[blueman335]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

FWIW, PAF's were all either alnico II or V and were wound on a Leesona machine, not by hand.

Check out the links. Looks like the threads I read were right.

 

[pstarove]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

The BB Pros are already pretty bright, if the PG's are brighter than that, I'd probably go with a '59's!

blueman335 meant that PG's are brighter than BB1&2s, not BBPros. But from the clips I heard (playing the same riffs on the same guitar through the same amp/settings), the PG has more bass than the BB1/2s and BB1/2s are perceived brighter because of that, though they are really, really close.

 

[Boogie Bill]

Re: SD equivalent of Burstbucker 1, 2, 3 & Pro ??

My two cents is that, at least for me, I have guitars with '57 Classics, BB 1&2, Antiquitys, Seths, A2 Anniversary Seths, '57 Classic/Classic Plus--and ALL are good. I've got a set of Pearly Gates going into an LP Supreme soon, and I can't wait.

I even like the BB 2&3 combination used in the 54 Oxblood Historic LP, though they wouldn't be my fav combination for a "everyday, do-all" guitar.

The Burstbucker 1 & 2 sets in the Historic Les Pauls are good sounding pickups. I've covered Santana, Cream, Allman Bros., Charlie Daniels and more with those pickups; gotten nice compliments on my tone--and had a blast doing it.

What more could a man ask for?

Bill