More info about this "Seymourized" bought in 1978, please? :-)

[freefrog]

Hi everybody,

Here's what I've posted on the Seymour Duncan forum, without much effect for the moment:

A luthier from my country has sent me a "Seymourized" PAF clone that he had bought in Paris in 1978.

This double cream pickup has a DRC of 8.5k and an inductance of 4.8H on my Extech multimeter.

Only the screws which hold the coils on the baseplate aren't original: they come from another Duncan.

The rest of the pickup appears to be authentic: see the pictures below...

The feet have been cut to a triangular shape but they had apparently a square foot-print initially...

My friend luthier has told me that Seymour didn't yet make his pickups back in the days but that it's a pre-existing PU which has been modified by him.

I'll be grateful if someone can confirm or correct this thought and tell me WHAT exactly was this pickup before to become a "Seymourized".

http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/3699/img0967ex.jpg

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/5785/img0968rh.jpg

http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/3312/img0969e.jpg

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/2968/img0970iw.jpg

http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/4694/img0971gv.jpg

To precise a bit my question, I wonder if the pickup was initially...

a) a bunch of parts bought by Seymour (to which brand?)
b) a bunch of parts built/made by Seymour
c) a blend of a) and b)
d) a pickup from another brand that Seymour has rewound.

I have my humble idea of the answer but I try to "double check" my intuition and anyway, I could be wrong... So plural opinions are welcome! Thx a lot in advance!

[David Schwab]

It's probably a rewind. He used to do rewinds back then. I once wrote him about having my Ric bass pickups rewound.

But who knows what kind of pickup it is.

Maybe Frank Falbo could shed some light?

[freefrog]

It's probably a rewind. He used to do rewinds back then. I once wrote him about having my Ric bass pickups rewound.

But who knows what kind of pickup it is.

Maybe Frank Falbo could shed some light?

Thanks David!

Frank has kindly answered on SD's forum... According to his explanations, the PU is one of the first SD products (although I would have bet for a rewound one too). :-)

[Possum]

I sent you my opinion on it, but Frank would be more knowledgeable. The bobbins are Duncan mold, the same as a late 70's Duncan I have, but is much hotter than the one I have. Bobbins are probably butyrate but your photos don't show enough detail, the one I have is. I think he must have tried to make PAF repro then offered a hotter version of it and called it "Seymourized." They currently sell a "Seymourized" mini-humbucker and apparently that term means that Seymour did his own take on things (i.e. making it hotter etc.). Its not a rewound PAF, just an early Duncan product, not worth a whole lot but cool anyway. Duncan tones....

[freefrog]

I sent you my opinion on it, but Frank would be more knowledgeable. The bobbins are Duncan mold, the same as a late 70's Duncan I have, but is much hotter than the one I have. Bobbins are probably butyrate but your photos don't show enough detail, the one I have is. I think he must have tried to make PAF repro then offered a hotter version of it and called it "Seymourized." They currently sell a "Seymourized" mini-humbucker and apparently that term means that Seymour did his own take on things (i.e. making it hotter etc.). Its not a rewound PAF, just an early Duncan product, not worth a whole lot but cool anyway. Duncan tones....

Yep Dave. I haven't named you publically as my first source of information because I didn't know if I could state our private discussions... :-)

Now I can thank you for your PM before this topic (topic which doesn't mean that I don't believe you, BTW: I just like to listen various opinions... richness in plurality).

I know what "Seymourized" means: I use their PU's for 30 years and have modified a couple of them.

What Frank said confirms what you explains: it appears to be one of the first Duncan produced PAF clones.

I wasn't taking it for a rewound PAF: I was just wondering where the parts used came from and was asking myself which other PAF replica Seymour could have customized around 1978. :-)

[Possum]

Understood. Good to get other opinions. FWIW, I was told by a credible source that Duncan actually used real PAF bobbins he got from Gibson in his real early humbuckers, but I've not personally seen this in real life and the one I have has the same mold markings as current Duncan butyrate bobbins. Back in the late 70's almost everything was way closer to actual PAF parts than now, the bobbin mount screws were American made and high quality, you can't find those screws anymore unless you have them made unfortunately for us. Magnet wire, plain enamel, was still pretty close to the old wire, baseplates had the "L" tool marks, magnets were still being rough cast, pickup covers were still flat on all sides, 3M paper tape was still being made, etc. etc. Seymour did a good job on making at least a cosmetic repro. I also have DiMarzio's attempt to reproduce PAF's from back then too, YIKES!!!!

[big_teee]

Understood. Good to get other opinions. FWIW, I was told by a credible source that Duncan actually used real PAF bobbins he got from Gibson in his real early humbuckers, but I've not personally seen this in real life and the one I have has the same mold markings as current Duncan butyrate bobbins. Back in the late 70's almost everything was way closer to actual PAF parts than now, the bobbin mount screws were American made and high quality, you can't find those screws anymore unless you have them made unfortunately for us. Magnet wire, plain enamel, was still pretty close to the old wire, baseplates had the "L" tool marks, magnets were still being rough cast, pickup covers were still flat on all sides, 3M paper tape was still being made, etc. etc. Seymour did a good job on making at least a cosmetic repro. I also have DiMarzio's attempt to reproduce PAF's from back then too, YIKES!!!!

Those are full coils, It should be a good hot Bridge Pickup.
I always liked Duncans! I bet it will sound fine.
Has about the same specs as the Antiquity.
http://www.seymourduncan.com/product...01405_humbuck/
Good Luck,
T

[Jim Shine]

I collect these early Duncans as they came in the period guitars I like. The "Seymourized" sticker was used on everything at first. Even stock style winds. As more models came out, they began using an oval shaped white paper label with the model stamped into it. Initially it had both the paper and the sticker like yours, but quickly went to just the paper label.

Seymour did some cool stuff in the early days. I have a set of Tele pickups from this era and he had date stamped the bridge pickup with the same yellow date stamp as seen on Fenders in 1964.

PS- I agree this is all Seymours parts. I have a very early humbucker that has some different stuff going on. The base plate is obviously outsourced and looks like brass or zinc. This one fits the 78-9 look when he was actually producing everything. IMHO, that is a better one than the very first ones.

[freefrog]

I collect these early Duncans as they came in the period guitars I like. The "Seymourized" sticker was used on everything at first. Even stock style winds. As more models came out, they began using an oval shaped white paper label with the model stamped into it. Initially it had both the paper and the sticker like yours, but quickly went to just the paper label.

Seymour did some cool stuff in the early days. I have a set of Tele pickups from this era and he had date stamped the bridge pickup with the same yellow date stamp as seen on Fenders in 1964.

PS- I agree this is all Seymours parts. I have a very early humbucker that has some different stuff going on. The base plate is obviously outsourced and looks like brass or zinc. This one fits the 78-9 look when he was actually producing everything. IMHO, that is a better one than the very first ones.

Thanks for your testimonial! :-)

[Possum]

They're fine pickups but they sound like Duncans under the camouflage ;-) This is what I mean by "cosmetic" copies ;-)

[freefrog]

They're fine pickups but they sound like Duncans under the camouflage ;-) This is what I mean by "cosmetic" copies ;-)

I've two of them now. I've mounted one in a Les Paul copy in order to compare it with a regular contemporary SH1 that I've here...

They're not built in the same way: screws threaded in the baseplate in the old one, and much looser winding pattern for the dark PE wire used.

They don't sound the same either. They have the same kind of crisp attack, roughly the same EQing and distort in the same way BUT the vintage one has a character that I've never found SO pronounced in any Duncan PAF clone that I've tried (SH1, Pearly Gates, Alnico Pro, Seth Lover): after the initial attack, the sound "bounces back" and follows a morphing harmonic decay during ages.
The vintage one also compresses brightly under pick attack, much more than regular Duncan's.

These are PAF characters, no?

Anyway, I tend to see these Seymourised as being somewhere between real PAF's and mass produced SH1's rather than as simply disguised Duncan's.

[Possum]

I've never been able to describe what a PAF sounds like, its pointless to even try. The old Duncan I have doesn't even come close to the two old PAF's I have, it looks cool but sounds like a Duncan. Internally the winding pattern is wrong, the bobbin/coil design is wrong, sounds very bland with little character compared to a real PAF. I seriously doubt any of the alloys are right, they sure don't sound right to me and the screws especially haven't been made in those alloys since the late 50's. If you like it thats all that matters, but its no PAF.

[Possum]

If I had to describe what a PAF sounds like this is what I would "say:"
Junior Wells, Nick Gravenites and Michael Bloomfield - Messin' With The Kid - YouTube

[Steve Conner]

If a "Seymourized" pickup didn't sound at least somewhat like a Duncan, I'd feel cheated!

The guitar in that video certainly has a great tone. It's brighter and scratchier than I'd associate with a covered humbucker. I wonder if he's using a treble boost?

[freefrog]

I've not described the vntage Duncan as sounding lilke a PAF.
I've not said if I like it or not: my personal preferences are OT here.

I've said that I've tried the vintage Duncan and that it doesn't sound like a contemporary model: it blends a Duncan "voice" to what I identify as some PAFish traits (bouncing back long sustain and bright compression under pick attack).

FWIW: I'm a little anonymous hobbyist and I don't own PAF's. I don't even make PU's. I just toy with them, swapping their part etc. That said, recently, my ears made me win a set of PAF clones in a blind test because I had identified several models. Reason why I don't think to be totally deaf... :-)

Thx for the link.