How does the Duncan '59 compare to the Dimarzio Paf Pro?

[Xeromus]

differences/similarities? Pros/cons? How does the sound differ?


this question is aimed mainly at both for the neck position

[Kent S.]

differences/similarities? Pros/cons? How does the sound differ?


this question is aimed mainly at both for the neck position

The PAF not PAF Pro is closer to the '59 ... the Paf Pro is not a PAF sounding pup, nor is it meant to be, the Paf Pro is a bit closer to the Pearly gates, and even that's a stretch ... I say that because they both have extra high end presence, and some growl in there mid range. Probably one of the newer PAF classic models or air classic models would be closer still to the '59 (maybe).
I've never A/B'ed them so I couldn't compare them for you, they are however not even remotely the same. They both sound great, but the Paf pro to me has an edgey brightness and midranginess to it, the low end is a bit pulled back, fine in the neck, but could sound a bit thin in the bridge. I couldn't comment on the '59 as I've never used it much.
Somebody else perhaps ... bump....

[jeremy]

kents right, there is quite a difference between those two. the 59 has a much bigger bottom, cleaner mids and a more open top. the paf pro is a good pup but is a more modern tone to my ears

[Metalman_666]

I don't think any Dimarzio pup compares with a Duncan pup in sound... They both have their own "signature" sounds, so to speak.

[jeremy]

i tend to agree with that, especially buckers

[philthis]

I have alot on both and I found the duncan to sound a whole lot better. the Paf Pro sounded trebely and thin no matter the amp or speaker I played it thru were as the duncan 59 sounds more full and tighter but not quite as brite. the paf pro sounded shrill and thin compared to the 59. just my experiance thru mesa triaxis with 4 vintage 30 speakers. and thru many various fender amps. thats what I was useing at the time. I also tried it thru hughes and ketner triple channel head and several combos and rectifier head.