Are the 490r/498t pickups on a LP desirable? I'm not planning on swapping them oot or anything, was just wondering if they are quality gear. I was planning on removing the covers but have since decided I like the covers better.
I've never considered them to be anything special.
there okay, nothing special.
Quote from: bass sic on March 12, 2012, 07:41:44 PM
Are the 490r/498t pickups on a LP desirable?
very! the damn guitar is way too quiet without them, even plugged in.
8D
Can't I just strum harder?
So what would be a decent replacement for a metal type tone? So I can eventually change my mind about not swapping them out.
Quote from: bass sic on March 12, 2012, 08:37:37 PM
So what would be a decent replacement for a metal type tone? So I can eventually change my mind about not swapping them out.
if you want something hot check out BKP Warpigs
Seymour Duncam JB's and dimarzio Super distortions are good choices too. I think GFS has some inexpensive models based on those options as well.
Warpigs look promising, but not at 300 bones.
^ hence why I didn't go that route ;)
Ok, so say I was to find several super distortions on evilbay. Is there a chance of the pole spacing being different? Or is that pretty standard?
They always had the normal and f spacing but I never got the impression it made a difference. The f spacing had something to do with Floyd rose trems. Guitarfetish.com sells some crunchy pats that are touted as being pretty similar and are pretty cheap.
http://www.guitarfetish.com/Crunchy-PAT-High-Output-Humbucker-Black_c_139.html
I swapped out my old 490 & 498 of my studio and dropped in DiMarz Super 2's. I found the Gibby's to be dull and kinda muddy. The Super 2's were really bright and hot. A little too hot for my pedal choices. I moved on to cleaner vintage wound specs, GFS '59 and D180's.
Quote from: Baltar on March 13, 2012, 08:32:22 AM
I swapped out my old 490 & 498 of my studio and dropped in DiMarz Super 2's. I found the Gibby's to be dull and kinda muddy. The Super 2's were really bright and hot. A little too hot for my pedal choices. I moved on to cleaner vintage wound specs, GFS '59 and D180's.
i'm almost thinking the amplification rig has a lot to do with bright-dull. my complaint (studio LP also here) if any is they are too bright. output level at full volume actually can crap some input stuff out. i have to back off volumes to like 3/4 certain times and i always back off the tones, esp the bridge unless im doing twangy country/bg sounding stuff.
my rig is a practice amp and a stereo. the detail and subtle sounds from the guitar are awesome but too bright
so this is what is making me wonder like "do we even have the same guitars?" from the descriptions, or are the rigs a large factor in th ebright dull thing
None of this makes too much difference to me right now as I'm just a hack on the guitar and just playing thru either a crappy fender ss combo or thru pod farm on the pc. Not gonna get killer tone either way. But when the day comes when I do plug into a decent rig I wouldn't mind my guitar being ready to go.
Quote from: bitter on March 13, 2012, 12:17:06 AM
They always had the normal and f spacing but I never got the impression it made a difference. The f spacing had something to do with Floyd rose trems. Guitarfetish.com sells some crunchy pats that are touted as being pretty similar and are pretty cheap.
http://www.guitarfetish.com/Crunchy-PAT-High-Output-Humbucker-Black_c_139.html
I have these in my les paul. when I was using my mesa, i was able to get really nice tones. now that im using in this reissue model T, they are just too bright for my liking.
RAY and Baltar: I'm not surprised by your findings. Big reason I went for those fat pats in my hagstrom. Not too bright and not too hot; just right. In the end, I found didn't need a super hi output pickup set when I had plenty of pedals and a high gain amp.
Yep, I'm a confirmed fuzz-junkie. I'm currently on my 4th Big Muff.
i tend to think they're a bit scratchy
I was wondering about SG guitars which are similar, seymour duncan forum recommended the C8 bridge and the pearly gates neck for me
Quote from: bitter on March 13, 2012, 12:17:06 AM
They always had the normal and f spacing but I never got the impression it made a difference. The f spacing had something to do with Floyd rose trems. Guitarfetish.com sells some crunchy pats that are touted as being pretty similar and are pretty cheap.
http://www.guitarfetish.com/Crunchy-PAT-High-Output-Humbucker-Black_c_139.html
F spacing is for Strats and "super strat"(metal looking guitars) as far as I know. The other spacing option is for Gibson type guitars.
I'm about 5 seconds away from ordering Dimarzio Deactivators for my Epi LP for a more metal tone. They are pretty cheap when ordered as a neck and bridge set. I'd probably get Duncan Invaders if they weren't known for being bassy, I don't need a lot of bass(or low mids in guitar terms).
C a n ' t d e c i d e . . . A A A A A A A A A H H H H H ! ! ! ! ! !
Quote from: liquidsmoke on March 23, 2012, 01:34:19 PM
Quote from: bitter on March 13, 2012, 12:17:06 AM
They always had the normal and f spacing but I never got the impression it made a difference. The f spacing had something to do with Floyd rose trems. Guitarfetish.com sells some crunchy pats that are touted as being pretty similar and are pretty cheap.
http://www.guitarfetish.com/Crunchy-PAT-High-Output-Humbucker-Black_c_139.html
F spacing is for Strats and "super strat"(metal looking guitars) as far as I know. The other spacing option is for Gibson type guitars.
I'm about 5 seconds away from ordering Dimarzio Deactivators for my Epi LP for a more metal tone. They are pretty cheap when ordered as a neck and bridge set. I'd probably get Duncan Invaders if they weren't known for being bassy, I don't need a lot of bass(or low mids in guitar terms).
C a n ' t d e c i d e . . . A A A A A A A A A H H H H H ! ! ! ! ! !
The "F" stands for for Fender. Regular spaced are for Gibson type guitars.
Quote from: Volume on March 23, 2012, 01:40:51 PM
The "F" stands for for Fender.
I seriously never thought of this! haha
NOW I'M REALLY FUCKING CONFUSED
From the DiMarzio website-
"F-spaced pickups measure 2.01" (51 mm) center-to-center from the first polepiece to the sixth. Standard-spaced pickups measure 1.90" (48 mm). Although some players believe that F-spaced pickups are only for the bridge position of tremolo bridge guitars, many guitars with fixed bridges (including post-1998 Gibson and Epiphone Les Pauls, SGs and semi-hollow guitars) should have F-spaced pickups in the bridge position. Most tremolo equipped guitars that have a nut width of 1-11/16" (43mm) or more should also use an F-spaced pickup in the neck position. If you're replacing a bridge-position pickup and you're not sure what your string-spacing is, it's usually better to get an F-spaced model. It is not necessary for the strings to pass exactly over the center of the polepieces for best performance, but it is wise to avoid a situation where the E strings are sitting completely outside of the outer polepieces."
So I need an F-spaced pup in my Epi Paul bridge position but what about the neck position? Anyone?
I just looked and the box my Super Distortion came in which is now in my Epi Junior says F-spaced! And I remember that the other DiMarzio I had in my SG that I sold was also F-spaced.
So I have no idea what guitar don't use F-spaced pups.
Oh, I always assumed it was for Fender. I've never bought any f-spaced pups, I have normal spaced in my '74 SG.