software

What do you think this would sound like? Has anyone tried this? I have a Duncan Custom on the table in front of me and a 59 in the drawer ... if you don't stop me now, I'll swap the mags and see (or rather hear) for myself!

Tony


Originally Posted by Tony_HWhat do you think this would sound like? Has anyone tried this? I have a Duncan Custom on the table in front of me and a 59 in the drawer ... if you don't stop me now, I'll swap the mags and see (or rather hear) for myself!

Tony

Strong,loud,brighter,tighter,and strong tight lows,very in your face presentation...I don't use ceramic magnets at all,but I'm sure my findings will be dead on...

I'll go with John on this one. You might want to use a higher value cap, or a lower value pot to attenuate the high end.

Luke

I don't know about Ceramic in a 59, but Alnico II in a 59 was great.


Originally Posted by Benjy_26I don't know about Ceramic in a 59, but Alnico II in a 59 was great.

Sought of Seth Lover sounding I'd imagine with the A2 right?


Originally Posted by STRATDELUXER97Sought of Seth Lover sounding I'd imagine with the A2 right?It had a bit more midrange and the highs were creamier. I can't really explain why. Maybe the potting?

I've tried an A2 in a 59, and I have a Seth Lover, but alas, I've never tried them in the same guitar, so it's hard to make comparisons (the Seth was tried in an SG, and since the pickup is closer to the bridge in an SG, that really throws a wrench into the comparison). My take on the A2 59 is that it sounds a lot like a Custom Custom, but, if you imagine the CC response curve looking like a bell curve, the A2 59 takes that bell curve and squashes it down. That is, the mid peak is in the same location, but it's not as prominent. As a consequence, the A2 59 has more (relative) bass and treble. Great sounding pickup.

I never tried it at the bridge. I had it in the neck of my LP.

Sounds a lot like Dimarzio humbucker from Hell.

Well, as no one really stopped me ... I did the swap. I must say I didn't like the tone of the 59 with a ceramic magnet. That is, I didn't like it in the guitar. So I put the A5 back in and tried the stock 59 and it was better.

You see this thread evolved from my quot;59 vs Screaming Demon vs Duncan Customquot; thread. I'm looking for a pickup for the guitar described in that thread, and I thought this could be an option to explore. Well, not exactly in the bullseye

Next time I'll try putting an A2 magnet in the 59. But right now I gotta get back to work

Thanks for your contributions
Tony


Originally Posted by Tony_HWell, as no one really stopped me ... I did the swap. I must say I didn't like the tone of the 59 with a ceramic magnet. That is, I didn't like it in the guitar. So I put the A5 back in and tried the stock 59 and it was better.

You see this thread evolved from my quot;59 vs Screaming Demon vs Duncan Customquot; thread. I'm looking for a pickup for the guitar described in that thread, and I thought this could be an option to explore. Well, not exactly in the bullseye

Next time I'll try putting an A2 magnet in the 59. But right now I gotta get back to work

Thanks for your contributions
Tony

So what did it sound like?


Originally Posted by Tony_HWell, as no one really stopped me ... I did the swap. I must say I didn't like the tone of the 59 with a ceramic magnet. That is, I didn't like it in the guitar. So I put the A5 back in and tried the stock 59 and it was better...

FWIW Alembic used to sell Hot Rod kits for Gibson humbuckers back in the 70's, with two ceramic magnets to replace the Alnico ones. It would increase the output of the pickups, which would allow them to overdrive the amps we had back then. But it really made them sound like crap...

One good thing about pickup swaps is that they are reversible- if it doesn't work you can always put the old magnet back in.

Thanks for posting your results here!

How do you think an A2 '59n would compliment a '59b in an SG?


Originally Posted by gripweedSo what did it sound like?

Sorry to revive this sorry post that's long overdue --- Well, right, I didn't actually say what the sound was like. It was more balanced in terms of low-to-mid-to-high ratio, but yes, the sound was hard ... it's hard to describe: the midrange did not get any juicier, it was just bold and more prominent in the mix.

Geez... this reminds me of two reader letters that I read in the Guitar Player Magazine Feedback section. The folks wondered how they (the writers) come up with the adjectives describing the tone: quot;If the tone is creamy, well ... maybe, but what about buttery? And if it's quot;chimey with a touch of warmthquot;, what is quot;warm with a touch of chiminess?quot;).

Thanks for reading
(Ummm, I must try the 59 with A2 mag before I order those Seths )

Tony


Originally Posted by Tony_HSorry to revive this sorry post that's long overdue --- Well, right, I didn't actually say what the sound was like. It was more balanced in terms of low-to-mid-to-high ratio, but yes, the sound was hard ... it's hard to describe: the midrange did not get any juicier, it was just bold and more prominent in the mix.

Geez... this reminds me of two reader letters that I read in the Guitar Player Magazine Feedback section. The folks wondered how they (the writers) come up with the adjectives describing the tone: quot;If the tone is creamy, well ... maybe, but what about buttery? And if it's quot;chimey with a touch of warmthquot;, what is quot;warm with a touch of chiminess?quot;).

Thanks for reading
(Ummm, I must try the 59 with A2 mag before I order those Seths )

Tony

I think the difference you may hear between the Seth and the A2-59 is an axe with wax.