@SpudMan - Finally got to try out the current version of the Burstbuckers in a new Les Paul Standard '50s. Everything that follows is just my opinion and everyone has different ears. If there's anything you'd like to know that I didn't cover, just let me know!
First impression was that they are nice pickups. They're certainly in the vintage output range but are nicely full and even sounding. The middle position is nice and has a great chime. Neck position is round, might be a little muddy for some, but I didn't think it was bad. Bridge has a nice bite to it. Could easily do classic rock to '80s.
I then compared them to the Burstbuckers I got back in 2003. They are not the same, which is not surprising. IIRC, in 2003, the Burstbuckers were only available in Custom Shop models. The current version is available aftermarket and is standard on several current production models. So, they're probably made in much larger quantities these days. When they did become available aftermarket, 2006 or so, I tried one of the BB3s, and remember I didn't like it as well as the Burstbuckers I had. Interestingly, what I have is supposed to be a BB2 in the bridge and a BB1 in the neck. However, my BB1 measures 7.82k and the BB2 is 7.71k. IDK, weird that the BB2 is actually lower than the BB1, but that doesn't really matter, they sound great. For comparison, the new BB2 measured 8.08k and the BB1 is 7.60k, which is what I expected from the published specs.
The both old and new are unpotted and use Alnico II. They have that same A2 softness and compression, which I personally really like. The old ones are a little brighter and the highs seem to be centered a little higher. They have a zing to them that the new ones just don't have. The old was had more of a vocal sound. The new ones seem more balanced, more like an improved version of the '57 Classics (which themselves are good pickups). The extra brightness in the old ones made them seemed a little more scooped, but I wouldn't call either set scooped, not compared to a Duncan Alnico Pro II or a BKP Stormy Monday. The perceived output was similar, but I think the old ones sounded a touch hotter, probably the shift in the highs and just more present.
If I had to sum up, the new Burstbuckers sound like a modern pickup. Not as much character as a BKP Mule, more character than a '57 Classic, but modern in the same kind of way as both of those.
Then, I plugged in the Custombuckers in my R0 and got blown across the room. These just sizzle! They sounded downright hot playing them back-to-back. For reference, my Custombuckers measure 7.92k at the bridge and 7.88k at the neck, so not quite as high in the bridge, but more closely matched. These things sound old, too. Just smoked. The old Burstbuckers hold their own against them even though they're quite different pickups, but the new BBs, well, not so much. Unplugged, the guitars didn't sound that different, certainly not as drastically as they did plugged in.
I'll note that I played these 3 sets through a Fender '57 Champ and a '57 Deluxe, both new hand-wired series amps, got to crank them up a bit, too. I just didn't want to drag along an entire rig. I've played both the old Burstbuckers and the Custombuckers through the 5F1 Tweed and Tweed Deluxe models in the AxeFX recently and they sounded the same to me through the Fender amps.
One last thing I want to add about the quality of the guitar itself as this was a new Gibson production model made in 2023. I couldn't find a flaw in it anywhere, even took it outside (beautiful sunny day here) to get a good look at it. Neck was nice and straight, nut seemed well cut, intonation very good, action was medium and a little higher than I like it but very playable as is. Being the '50s version of the Les Paul Standard, it had a thicker neck, thicker than I was expecting, but very close to my '57 Custom RI and nothing outrageous. It had the smaller frets, too, like the R7 Goldtops, and a little smaller than the medium jumbos on my R0 (Gibson says they're both medium jumbo, but these were definitely not the same size). Acoustically, it sounded very good and was very resonant. My impression was that it was a really nice guitar and worth the price, which was about half of what I paid for my R0.
So, was the R0 worth twice the price? I thought so when I bought it and I thought so as soon as I picked it up after putting down the new Standard. The R0 feels like an old guitar. The wood is, well, different sounding and aesthetically better looking. The flame top was much more alive on the R0 compared to the Standard. So was the grain in the mahogany back. While the Standard has a 2-piece back, they did a great job of matching the grain, not just on the back but along the sides, too. I had to look very closely to see the seam. For me, the R0 was exactly the Les Paul I wanted, but the Standard was probably 90-95% of the way there and was half the price.
Bottom line is I'm just not seeing any of the quality control issues that others have claimed on various forums. Again, maybe I'm lucky, but the recent production Gibsons I've seen have all been good guitars as far as I can tell and noticeably much better than what they were producing 15-20 years ago.
. Craig from Vineham said he will send them either this Friday or Tuesday at the latest.
