Benthedemon007
New member
No seriously, why? Burstbuckers are $175 and an Angus Young signature model is $190! You could get your own custom model at Seymour Duncan for less. Why are they so pricey?
Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
- Thread starter Benthedemon007
- Start date
Drunken Bowling
New member
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
The brand name? I don't know, that's just my opinion.
The brand name? I don't know, that's just my opinion.
beaubrummels
Well-known member
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
Reminds me of when my buddy worked repairing fine British automobiles. The distributor cap for a particular Jaguar sold for $120. Turns out, that cap was actually the same cap from a Chevy stepsider V8, retail $12.
Reminds me of when my buddy worked repairing fine British automobiles. The distributor cap for a particular Jaguar sold for $120. Turns out, that cap was actually the same cap from a Chevy stepsider V8, retail $12.
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
You're paying extra for the name, not quality. For what Gibson charges for their aftermarket PU's, you can get a much better boutique one. This is all the more ironic as 490's are so-so sounding, and '57 Classics are (in my opinion) the worst-sounding PAF's on the market. Gibson makes PU's so they have something to put in their guitars. Duncan & DiMarzio have a true passion for PU's, and exist because the stock PU's in many guitars leave something to be desired.
You're paying extra for the name, not quality. For what Gibson charges for their aftermarket PU's, you can get a much better boutique one. This is all the more ironic as 490's are so-so sounding, and '57 Classics are (in my opinion) the worst-sounding PAF's on the market. Gibson makes PU's so they have something to put in their guitars. Duncan & DiMarzio have a true passion for PU's, and exist because the stock PU's in many guitars leave something to be desired.
LtKojak
New member
astrozombie
KatyPerryologist
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
I truly hate the 57s with a passion.
I think it's the sort of thing where on it's own it sounds great but when you play in a band you realize how much MUSH there is.
I have a set of burstbuckers with alnico 4 magnets (like the saturday night special)
it's currently for sale FYI, I'm looking for a more hot rodded sound.
I truly hate the 57s with a passion.
I think it's the sort of thing where on it's own it sounds great but when you play in a band you realize how much MUSH there is.
I have a set of burstbuckers with alnico 4 magnets (like the saturday night special)
it's currently for sale FYI, I'm looking for a more hot rodded sound.
astrozombie
KatyPerryologist
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
I hear you, even though I bought a new Gibson.
I'd say that they definitely nicer feeling guitars than most but the cost is a little inflated.
It's been the closest "out of the box perfect" guitars I've owned though.
I hear you, even though I bought a new Gibson.
I'd say that they definitely nicer feeling guitars than most but the cost is a little inflated.
It's been the closest "out of the box perfect" guitars I've owned though.
loversmoon
New member
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
Over priced all due to the brand name itself. To me they are not a higher quality pup than dimarzio, Duncan, fender etc
Over priced all due to the brand name itself. To me they are not a higher quality pup than dimarzio, Duncan, fender etc
Rex_Rocker
Well-known member
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
On Gibson's defense, I think both the Burstbucker Pro and 500T are great-sounding pickups.
Better than Duncans? No. I wouldn't say so, but not worse either. But then again, they can be found in the used market for decent prices.
On Gibson's defense, I think both the Burstbucker Pro and 500T are great-sounding pickups.
Better than Duncans? No. I wouldn't say so, but not worse either. But then again, they can be found in the used market for decent prices.
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
I also don't think Gibson is really concerned with the aftermarket pickup business. Their pickups seem to be made just to throw something in their guitars, really. But if you really want a pickup, they have them available. You are just gonna pay for it. After all, you didn't balk when you paid $4k for an LP.
I also don't think Gibson is really concerned with the aftermarket pickup business. Their pickups seem to be made just to throw something in their guitars, really. But if you really want a pickup, they have them available. You are just gonna pay for it. After all, you didn't balk when you paid $4k for an LP.
blueman335
Mojo's Minions
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
500T's are good for metal & hard rock, but not everyone plays those genres. I like BB's, and although I haven't tried them, Gibson had a rare moment of creativity in their PU department a couple years ago and introduced several new PAF's.
Haven't felt inspired to get a BBP though; some guys here like them, others are disappointed.
But it always comes back to Gibson PU's being grossly overpriced at the retail level, and because of that, often overpriced in the used market. With so many craftsmen these days meticulously making great PU's, it's hard to justify putting much money into Gibsons.
500T's are good for metal & hard rock, but not everyone plays those genres. I like BB's, and although I haven't tried them, Gibson had a rare moment of creativity in their PU department a couple years ago and introduced several new PAF's.
Haven't felt inspired to get a BBP though; some guys here like them, others are disappointed.
But it always comes back to Gibson PU's being grossly overpriced at the retail level, and because of that, often overpriced in the used market. With so many craftsmen these days meticulously making great PU's, it's hard to justify putting much money into Gibsons.
Rex_Rocker
Well-known member
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
Yeah, I do agree in the fact that they're overpriced, but I disagree with people saying "yeah, they're expensive and they suck!". They don't suck, IMO.
Yeah, I do agree in the fact that they're overpriced, but I disagree with people saying "yeah, they're expensive and they suck!". They don't suck, IMO.
Last edited:
jmh151
Active member
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
It's because they're OEM.
In the past I hated Gibson pickups- the 57 Classics in my 89 Les Paul were pure muffled mud, though that may have been due to the 300k pots which I later replaced with 500k.
I have Burstbucker Pro's in my newest Les Paul, and while they don't necessary suck, they're a little flat, but good enough that i won't be switching them out anytime soon. I can't justify the cost difference for new pickups since they're close enough
It's because they're OEM.
In the past I hated Gibson pickups- the 57 Classics in my 89 Les Paul were pure muffled mud, though that may have been due to the 300k pots which I later replaced with 500k.
I have Burstbucker Pro's in my newest Les Paul, and while they don't necessary suck, they're a little flat, but good enough that i won't be switching them out anytime soon. I can't justify the cost difference for new pickups since they're close enough
Lewguitar
New member
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
Well don't stop there...how did it turn out after changing to 500K pots?
Still muffled?
I've always felt that the 57 Classics got an undeserved bad rap because Gibson used them with those 300K pots instead of the 500K pots they should have used.
Well don't stop there...how did it turn out after changing to 500K pots?
Still muffled?
I've always felt that the 57 Classics got an undeserved bad rap because Gibson used them with those 300K pots instead of the 500K pots they should have used.
The Convert
New member
Re: Why do Gibson pickups cost so much?
I played the Angus Pickup and it was the worst sounding, most absurdly blown out, and least refined pups I remember playing. I couldn't believe I paid for that and lost 1/2 its value when I sold it used a week later.
Having said that, while I love many SD pups, two of my favorite sets are from Gibson (57/57+) and the Fender NoCaster set. I know not everyone does, and there are surely a several SD pickups I love, too.
My observations suggest that, I think companies like SD really focus on (as silly as it sounds) making "good sounding" pups. What I mean by that is pups that really sound nice to the modern ear. I think sometimes companies like Gibson or Fender make a pickup aimed (almost) more at physical reproduction as opposed to sonic reproduction. I also think that some of those old pickups that they Gibson and others look to reissue WERE a little muddy or under-stated by today's standards, so I can see how some people might like my SD 59'er better than my Gibson 57s. To me they're just different. I bet to SD, the 59er sounds best and to Gibson the 57s are most authentic. Maybe all those things COULD be true?
EDIT: Realized I didn't answer the question...heh...I bet there are several factors. I'd guess that one part is paying for the brand. This might not just be wasting money for brand alignment, but could include things like better QA, warrantee, etc. It could be that, because they make relatively few of them, the balance between market and manufacturing costs demands a higher price. Some competitors may not build in the US and pay US labor costs. And I think the big one is: look at Les Pauls: IMO, there is no reason to pay $3,000 for an instrument that isn't hand made. Gibson, even when compared to closest competitor Fender, either has much higher productions costs or demands a higher profit margin. Conversely, though, I do find that the "street" price of a Gibson pup is much lower than ESRP by percentage than any competing pups.
I played the Angus Pickup and it was the worst sounding, most absurdly blown out, and least refined pups I remember playing. I couldn't believe I paid for that and lost 1/2 its value when I sold it used a week later.
Having said that, while I love many SD pups, two of my favorite sets are from Gibson (57/57+) and the Fender NoCaster set. I know not everyone does, and there are surely a several SD pickups I love, too.
My observations suggest that, I think companies like SD really focus on (as silly as it sounds) making "good sounding" pups. What I mean by that is pups that really sound nice to the modern ear. I think sometimes companies like Gibson or Fender make a pickup aimed (almost) more at physical reproduction as opposed to sonic reproduction. I also think that some of those old pickups that they Gibson and others look to reissue WERE a little muddy or under-stated by today's standards, so I can see how some people might like my SD 59'er better than my Gibson 57s. To me they're just different. I bet to SD, the 59er sounds best and to Gibson the 57s are most authentic. Maybe all those things COULD be true?
EDIT: Realized I didn't answer the question...heh...I bet there are several factors. I'd guess that one part is paying for the brand. This might not just be wasting money for brand alignment, but could include things like better QA, warrantee, etc. It could be that, because they make relatively few of them, the balance between market and manufacturing costs demands a higher price. Some competitors may not build in the US and pay US labor costs. And I think the big one is: look at Les Pauls: IMO, there is no reason to pay $3,000 for an instrument that isn't hand made. Gibson, even when compared to closest competitor Fender, either has much higher productions costs or demands a higher profit margin. Conversely, though, I do find that the "street" price of a Gibson pup is much lower than ESRP by percentage than any competing pups.
Last edited:
Similar threads
