Members KillDozer Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 I'm looking to put a PAF humbucker in a Squier '51, and I want to retain the coil splitting function, so I need one with four conductor wires. Anyway - whaddya think of Dimarzio Virtual PAF and/or Seymour Duncan '59 - which has the truer PAF sound? thanks, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blardie Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 I've never played a true PAF so I can't answer how they compare but I have experience with the Virtual PAF and the 59. I've had both in my latest guitar. I like the 59 better. The Virtual PAF is not a bad pickup it just kind of had a "fizziness" with my rig that the 59 didn't. The split sounds of the Virtual PAF are pretty good. I don't have the 59 set up to split right now so i can't comment on that. My Virtual PAF isn't F-Spaced but I don't know the string space on your Squire. I'll sell it if you want it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BluesJunkie Posted April 3, 2005 Members Share Posted April 3, 2005 I haven't played with a real PAF either, but I've read about them and heard plenty on records. PAFs weren't standardized, so there were lots of variations. Virtual PAFs and '59s both sound like PAFs to my ears, just different PAFs. The '59s are scooped sounding while the VPAFs have a good deal of midrange. I have '59s in the neck positions of a couple of guitars, and they sound great. However, ever since I put VPAFs in the neck and bridge positions of a Yamaha Tele (with coil splits), it's been my favorite guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members batotman Posted April 3, 2005 Members Share Posted April 3, 2005 59 sounds great to me! Much better in the neck than the bridge though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Clawhammer Posted May 5, 2005 Members Share Posted May 5, 2005 Originally posted by BluesJunkie I haven't played with a real PAF either, but I've read about them and heard plenty on records. PAFs weren't standardized, so there were lots of variations. Virtual PAFs and '59s both sound like PAFs to my ears, just different PAFs. The '59s are scooped sounding while the VPAFs have a good deal of midrange. I have '59s in the neck positions of a couple of guitars, and they sound great. However, ever since I put VPAFs in the neck and bridge positions of a Yamaha Tele (with coil splits), it's been my favorite guitar. This is right on the money... I have used both of these pickups ... as he says: 59 is more mid scooped, more treble and bass. Virtual PAF is richer mids and upper mids, less boomy bass. So Id say for a fat sounding guitar ie mahogany use the 59, for a less midrangey guitar use the vpaf to fatten her up. So Id use that in a fender. Frankly, mids are the key to good tone in a band ... dimarzio virt paf is my absolute fave bridge pup. I have mine wired for series/parallel in a strat bridge and ibz jetking bridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.