software

Years and years ago, I believe this combo was in a Les Paul Std, and maybe a Custom I had...but I don't remember much other than them being creamy compared to a raw crunchy sound...

I've got a guitar coming with these in it...BIG mahogany body ...mahogany set neck...no maple cap.....guitar should be kinda dark with all that mahogany...

whats the general tone concensus of these pups? The 489T (alnicoV) looks hot compared to a BBPro...nearly on par with a 500T ceramic...490R I remember being sort of like a less defined Duncan 59...are these pups bright?

Thanks for any info you can provide

Those were the stock pups in my '96 LP Standard, and I played them for a couple of years before I started experimenting with Duncans.

The 498T is, as you say, pretty hot (around 16k?). It gets some pretty good hard rock tones, but it has an upper midrange spike that tends to detract from the lower mids and bottom end. Sounds OK under gain, but (IMO) doesn't clean up well - it sounds 'tinny' or 'clangy', quite harsh in the clean channel.

I found the 490R to have the opposite problem. However I adjusted it, the tone was too thick and woolly. I found it to be quite a muddy pickup. I have heard other people rave about this pup - perhaps they are built inconsistently, perhaps they work better in other guitars (SGs?), but I didn't like it in the LP. I use the neck position a lot more since the 490R went.

So in summary, I found the 490R/498T to be *OK*, but a little too extreme in both directions for my tastes - too hard and tinny at the bridge, too woolly and thick at the neck. I have since tried quite a lot of different Duncan pups in LPs and have preferred them all to the 490R/498T.

EDIT - A couple of years ago, after upgrading the pots and caps in the Standard, I thought I'd give the 490R /498T another try, in case I'd misjudged them on account of the stock pots/caps. Not much improvement really, but by then I was already hooked on Duncans.

simon pretty much hit the nail on the head.

Hot but clangy bridge, dark and inarticulate neck.

What most people forget is that the 490 is an alnico II pickup. Which I think was a mistake for that one. Plus the fact you have a metal cover on it, and heck, its like you have to FIGHT to get any treble out of that thing.

Do yourself a favor and get a Duncan 59 for the neck, and a Custom 5 for the bridge. The 59 is thick but with great sparkle and definition, and the custom 5 is fat, but with open/neutral mids that let the guitar's voice come thru, and it has a great high end that goes with the huge LP mahogony body.

Then sell the 490/498 to some poor shmuck on ebay. haaaaaaaaaaa.


Originally Posted by Simon_FThose were the stock pups in my '96 LP Standard, and I played them for a couple of years before I started experimenting with Duncans.

The 498T is, as you say, pretty hot (around 16k?). It gets some pretty good hard rock tones, but it has an upper midrange spike that tends to detract from the lower mids and bottom end. Sounds OK under gain, but (IMO) doesn't clean up well - it sounds 'tinny' or 'clangy', quite harsh in the clean channel.

I found the 490R to have the opposite problem. However I adjusted it, the tone was too thick and woolly. I found it to be quite a muddy pickup. I have heard other people rave about this pup - perhaps they are built inconsistently, perhaps they work better in other guitars (SGs?), but I didn't like it in the LP. I use the neck position a lot more since the 490R went.

So in summary, I found the 490R/498T to be *OK*, but a little too extreme in both directions for my tastes - too hard and tinny at the bridge, too woolly and thick at the neck. I have since tried quite a lot of different Duncan pups in LPs and have preferred them all to the 490R/498T.

I agree completely. My 98 Custom had them I pulled out the 490R and put in a 57 classic, it was a definite improvement.

The 498 sounded kinda clangy, but had a JB like high mids spike, I tried a C5 in that guitar and put the 498 back in. Later I switched the magnets between the two pup. I ended up with a Gibson 59, and a Gibson CC. The guy who I traded the guitar to thought that was the best non antiquity he had ever heard.

Luke


Originally Posted by RockStarNickWhat most people forget is that the 490 is an alnico II pickup. Which I think was a mistake for that one. Plus the fact you have a metal cover on it, and heck, its like you have to FIGHT to get any treble out of that thing.

The funny thing is, I have Seths and Ants in my LPs now, both alnico II, both covered, both sound wonderful, neck or bridge position! No mud, no clang!

What I'm getting is not a Les Paul...so I'm thinking the 498T *may* work OK...since I wont have the added brightness/upper mids from a maple cap. I'm quite fam with a Duncan 59 and normally would be my neck pup of choice however I DO want this guitar to be a bit more high output and less vintage sounding. Somewhere between say a 59/Seth/APII type sound, and a Duncan Custom/Distortion type sound.

Guess I'll jes have to wait and analyze the guitar sonically when it gets here, and go from there...I do have some DiMarzio's on order for it...but I *think* my particular choices (Air Zone bridge, Air Norton neck) may not have been the best now that I've read up some more on this particular guitar and it's inherent darker tone.

Thanks for the info folks, much obliged

Any other suggestions/comments are appreciated

I personally like the 498T, I have it in both of my Gibsons, but I have a 496R(ceramic) in the neck position on my LP, this combo works great for me, plus I have them set up for coil split, so it was just what I was looking for. Big clean, no mud when using the neck pup. I always disconnect all tone controls.


Originally Posted by marvarI personally like the 498T, I have it in both of my Gibsons, but I have a 496R(ceramic) in the neck position on my LP, this combo works great for me, plus I have them set up for coil split, so it was just what I was looking for. Big clean, no mud when using the neck pup. I always disconnect all tone controls.

What kind of amp are you using? I can't live without my tone controls!!

I´m not familiar with the 498, but had a 490R in the neck and a 490T in the bridge of my semi-hollow Gibson Howard Roberts Fusion. The 480R in the neck sounds really great in this guitar. Don´t know why, but perhaps semi-hollows with maple tops are bright enough to sound great with a 490R? The 490T sounded extremely trebly in the bridge of this guitar so I switched to a Air Norton, somewhat darker and slightly louder.


Originally Posted by Luke DukeWhat kind of amp are you using? I can't live without my tone controls!!

I have a '59 bassman reissue, and and Marshall JCM602, with greenbacks, I've never used my tone controls on any of my guitars, they just seem to dull the tone too much. I get my tones thru the way I use my selector switch, volume controls and settings, and technique.

I can see those amps working well well with no-tone 500T's.

If you like the 500T you should give the Custom a go sometime, it has a less nasal sound, but a similiar character.

BTW Welcome to the forum Marvar!

Luke


Originally Posted by Luke DukeI can see those amps working well well with no-tone 500T's.

If you like the 500T you should give the Custom a go sometime, it has a less nasal sound, but a similiar character.

BTW Welcome to the forum Marvar!

Luke

Thank you, I've tried the 500T and didn't care for it in the LP, so I went back to the 498T in the bridge, I also use a Boss ME-50 for effects, but don't use the tone section. But I swear by the 496R in the bridge position.


Originally Posted by marvar

But I swear by the 496R in the bridge position.

Now that's an interesting twist! I'd be eager to hear that, any clips?

Sorry I misunderstood your post earlier, I thought you were talking about multiple Pauls.

Luke


Originally Posted by Luke DukeNow that's an interesting twist! I'd be eager to hear that, any clips?

Sorry I misunderstood your post earlier, I thought you were talking about multiple Pauls.

Luke

It wasn't you! I don't know what I was thinking, let me restate-
I have an ES333 with the stock setup 490R/498T sounds great so I left it alone.
In my LP I have the 498T in the bridge, the 496R in the neck.
My bad, sorry for the confusion, hey, it's Friday, and I have the weekend on my mind!


Originally Posted by marvarIt wasn't you! I don't know what I was thinking, let me restate-
I have an ES333 with the stock setup 490R/498T sounds great so I left it alone.
In my LP I have the 498T in the bridge, the 496R in the neck.
My bad, sorry for the confusion, hey, it's Friday, and I have the weekend on my mind!

You're not the only one!

Yeah the 498T reminds me of a JB, but it was harsh so I did my magnet swap. In my heritage that I've got now I've got a Jazz neck and an Alnico 2 Pro in the bridge. Very smooth, but it's the complete opposite end of the spectrum.

Luke

I really like the 498T and 490R pickups in my 1991 Gibson Les Paul Standard.
I mean, they ARE the sound of a Gibson Les Paul.

I guess if you change them out it means you are looking for another, more personal sound.