I'm a PRS nut...

chilipeppermaniac said:
Ecclectic,

I sure must be deaf because I cannot hear as many nuances as almost 95% of our members seem to with guitar pickup choices, amp tube swaps, guitar caps, etc. Although, I can hear many glorious sounds as a guitar gets played through certain amps.

I must not have a clue what to listen for when it comes to making 3 D magic, notes sounding this or that just so like s sound engineer would have the ear for, etc. But, if we want to talk about a juicy oooooooooooooooooooooo type sound, I think I can comment on some of that. Bastarddon, VoxAC30, Smitty and IvanH will be able to add their own take on this experience since Smitty has played his guitars through my exact amp, while Ivan has hand built one like it too. Don knows a lot about amps, sound etc, and Voxy owns and has played similar units and a variety of others of the same era. That thing I am referencing is just how an amp like my '72 Marshall JMP 50 watt sounds through 4- 12 inch Celestian speakers. I can hear how it is nothing like any other amp I have ever played through or had other more accomplished players demo for me.

Now back to ecclectic's statement. I also have never heard of some of these pups discussed. 57/08 pr Tom Holmes ones. Fill me in please. My usual M. O. at times like this would be to don my headphones and pull up some youtube clips of these to hear what he means.
Click to expand...
Hi - just got around to revisiting this. We all listen for different qualities and I know each of us hears things a bit differently too. For me, it's as much about touch and feel as actual sound. As far as comparing the subtler aspects, I don't claim to have great hearing. Actually quite the opposite after 45 years of rock n roll gigs.

But it helps to have a rig - like you do - that you've been intimately familiar with for a long, long time. I've got that covered myself; have been using the same Triaxis since 1995. And I've had my warhorse Mk II since the 70s.

It also takes time spent with the pickups. Some differences I can hear right away, of course, but that's only the broadest aspects. For me, to really get a handle on the subtleties usually requires playing them for a couple of hours or a couple of gigs.

That's when I really begin to get a fuller understanding of what their attack character feels like at various settings, how they interact with the volume knob and the front end of my amp, what their fingertouch is like at volume. These are all aspects I can't tell anything about from a an overcompressed YouTube video, even if most of those weren't made with a cellphone, or smeared with way too much gain or repeats from a delay.

Who would leave their echo and distortion pedals on when demoing pickups or an amp? Evidently lots of people.

Even dry demos from pickup makers aren't always very revealing. You can tell a few things - is it bright or bassy overall, does it have a vowely midrange, or crisp uppermids, or fat low mids. Occasionally you can tell whether the low end is loose or tight. Occasionally you can tell whether the highs are biting or smoother, whether the pick attack is aggressive or gentle. Not always.

Some of these vids don't even show you whether a humbucker is open or congested in character.

Okay, rant over.

~~

So, getting around to the specific humbuckers in question.

The Tom Holmes 450/455 set has been among my favorite PAF types for a long time. They're remarkably detailed and revealing, when you play you literally can hear nuances that weren't audible before. Fairly even-voiced, crisp but not harsh, full (but not in a hyped way like some big sounding modern pickups). Sweet, voicelike mids are rich yet never nasal. Very clear overall, really transparent to the natural voice of a guitar. And the first time I played them the amount of detail they revealed was downright startling, like shining a light.

People talking about an equipment change sometimes say, "It was like taking a blanket off the amp." When I hear that phrase, what comes to mind first is what happened when I replaced the stock Gibson pickups in a Les Paul with the Holmes.

The 57/08s are equally great and entirely different. Far from neutral - they have tons of personality, a vintage sepiatone character that's seductive and highly addictive. Then there's that fascinating 3-D quality, so hard to put into words. It's almost holographic: they sit differently in the soundfield depending on how you play. Incredibly responsive, with great fingertouch. Highs are impossibly open and airy. Mids are fairly dry, almost chalky - not unlike the best of the authentic vintage PAFs. And the lows are slightly restrained without sounding thin. Just right.

I often say that if the Holmes are like a magnifying glass, the 57/08s are like rose-colored glasses. They are not uncolored. But it's a magnificent coloration that makes everything better. They make me think of smoky bars and late night blues sessions.

So, those two are my absolute favorites for off-the-shelf PAF humbuckers. I have others which I like just about as much, from Zhangbucker and Rewind and one or two others. But those are custom winds from boutique makers: some were specifically made to suit individual guitars, and four of the Zhangbuckers were actually hand-wrapped like Tim White used to do when he was making Timbuckers. David (Zhangbucker) is the only winder I know of who still does that; he makes it available as an extra option when he has the time. So those are a whole different thing. For standard models. the Homes and the 57/08s are it.

I hear a bit of that magical 3-D effect in the PRS 59/09 too, made using the same special wire from one vintage extruder. Another great pickup - a little less open and slightly more throaty than the 57/08.
 
Last edited:
eclecticsynergy said:
Hi - just got around to revisiting this. We all listen for different qualities and I know each of us hears things a bit differently too. For me, it's as much about touch and feel as actual sound. As far as comparing the subtler aspects, I don't claim to have great hearing. Actually quite the opposite after 45 years of rock n roll gigs.

But it helps to have a rig - like you do - that you've been intimately familiar with for a long, long time. I've got that covered myself; have been using the same Triaxis since 1995. And I've had my warhorse Mk II since the 70s.

It also takes time spent with the pickups. Some differences I can hear right away, of course, but that's only the broadest aspects. For me, to really get a handle on the subtleties usually requires playing them for a couple of hours or a couple of gigs.

That's when I really begin to get a fuller understanding of what their attack character feels like at various settings, how they interact with the volume knob and the front end of my amp, what their fingertouch is like at volume. These are all aspects I can't tell anything about from a an overcompressed YouTube video, even if most of those weren't made with a cellphone, or smeared with way too much gain or repeats from a delay.

Who would leave their echo and distortion pedals on when demoing pickups or an amp? Evidently lots of people.

Even dry demos from pickup makers aren't always very revealing. You can tell a few things - is it bright or bassy overall, does it have a vowely midrange, or crisp uppermids, or fat low mids. Occasionally you can tell whether the low end is loose or tight. Occasionally you can tell whether the highs are biting or smoother, whether the pick attack is aggressive or gentle. Not always.

Some of these vids don't even show you whether a humbucker is open or congested in character.

Okay, rant over.

~~

So, getting around to the specific humbuckers in question.

The Tom Holmes 450/455 set has been among my favorite PAF types for a long time. They're remarkably detailed and revealing, when you play you literally can hear nuances that weren't audible before. Fairly even-voiced, crisp but not harsh, full (but not in a hyped way like some big sounding modern pickups). Sweet, voicelike mids are rich yet never nasal. Very clear overall, really transparent to the natural voice of a guitar. And the first time I played them the amount of detail they revealed was downright startling, like shining a light.

People talking about an equipment change sometimes say, "It was like taking a blanket off the amp." When I hear that phrase, what comes to mind first is what happened when I replaced the stock Gibson pickups in a Les Paul with the Holmes.

The 57/08s are equally great and entirely different. Far from neutral - they have tons of personality, a vintage sepiatone character that's seductive and highly addictive. Then there's that fascinating 3-D quality, so hard to put into words. It's almost holographic: they sit differently in the soundfield depending on how you play. Incredibly responsive, with great fingertouch. Highs are impossibly open and airy, mids are fairly dry - not unlike the best of the authentic vintage PAFs - and the lows are slightly restrained without sounding thin. Just right.

I often say that if the Holmes are like a magnifying glass, the 57/08s are like rose-colored glasses. They are not uncolored. But it's a magnificent coloration that makes everything better. They make me think of smoky bars and late night blues sessions.

So, those two are my absolute favorites for off-the-shelf PAF humbuckers. I have others which I like just about as much, from Zhangbucker and Rewind and one or two others. But those are custom winds from boutique makers: some were specifically made to suit individual guitars, and others were actually hand-wrapped like Tim White used to do when he was making Timbuckers. So that's a whole different thing. For standard models. the Homes and the 57/08s are it.

I hear a bit of that magical 3-D effect in the PRS 59/09 too, made using the same special wire from one vintage extruder. Another great pickup - a little less open and slightly more throaty than the 57/08.
Click to expand...

OK, so since we are talking PRS and pups and all. I have to go back to my 2 Maryland made PRS's. My Santana 2 had PRS Santana pickups in it, BUT, to my surprise, the Santana 3 didn't have Santana III pickups in it like was spec'd but instead it had PRS pups from a different model. My memory thinks they might have been Dragon 2 pickups. So, as usual, I was curious how this came to be. Was it a special request by the original buyer, or did a buyer swap them in before I bought the guitar? Either way, it was a super nice PRS S3 10 top.
 
chilipeppermaniac said:
OK, so since we are talking PRS and pups and all. I have to go back to my 2 Maryland made PRS's. My Santana 2 had PRS Santana pickups in it, BUT, to my surprise, the Santana 3 didn't have Santana III pickups in it like was spec'd but instead it had PRS pups from a different model. My memory thinks they might have been Dragon 2 pickups. So, as usual, I was curious how this came to be. Was it a special request by the original buyer, or did a buyer swap them in before I bought the guitar? Either way, it was a super nice PRS S3 10 top.
Click to expand...
I think the Dragon II bridge and the Santana III bridge used the same coils, with the only difference being that the Dragon II had leads for split/rotary wiring and the Santana III was a two-wire pickup. I can't be positive but I know both were spec'd at 12K with alnico mags, as opposed to the original Santana bridge which was 10K with ceramic. Santana neck and Santana III neck were the same 7K wind, and the Dragon neck (both I and II) was 8K. PRS is not very forthcoming with detailed specs of their pickups - especially magnets. That's their right, of course. But it can sometimes be frustrating for us players.

I'd say it's likely your Santana was ordered with Dragon IIs; they were more heavy rock oriented and were pretty popular with metal players for awhile. But it's not inconceivable that if they were running low on the Santana III bridge model, they might've substituted the Dragon II bridge instead.

Do you remember if the neck pickup was a Dragon also? or might it have been a Santana neck? And what year was the guitar?
Neither of the Dragon sets was made for very long compared to most others.
 
Neither pup was a S3. Both were the Dragon 2. I also ordered a set of the Santana 3's and found out the wiring differences.
If memory serves me right, I wrestled with the notion of soldering in the S3's and selling off the Dragon's, but I think eventually I sold the guitar as is, and sold the S3 pups as new in the boxes. Pretty sure my guitar was made around 2000. I don't have any pictures on my laptops and basically think my only ones I ever had were on my original Windows 98 PC I got in 2000. It no longer boots up if I remember right.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top