# EMG guys help me out - Standard EMGs vs the X-series (and the X-TW line)



## HighGain510 (Nov 14, 2011)

So here's my dilemma guys, I have a relatively cheaper guitar coming for Drop-B stuff and would love to have one guitar with a set of actives around. I'm not sure I really want to look at the Het-Set or anything as the PRS Allender I had previously had the standard 81-TW/89-TW set and sounded phenomenal. I have not as of today tried out the X-Series pickups at all though. 

How significant is the difference between an 81 and an 81-X? Does it sound much more organic? Honestly, I think part of why I want the actives IS that they have a distinct sound (and it's not bad depending on the application) so I'm not sure if the X-series moves away too far from the core EMG sound?  Also, if you've tried the X-series and the regular series, does the EMG X-TW (as in the X-series that is splittable) sound close to the standard TW series pickups when split?

Thanks!


----------



## kmanick (Nov 14, 2011)

I'm also interested in this too.


----------



## loktide (Nov 14, 2011)

this has been discussed quite a bit over at the andy sneap forum at ultimatemetal.com

there were also quite a few AB clips there


----------



## djpharoah (Nov 14, 2011)

HighGain510 said:


> So here's my dilemma guys, I have a relatively cheaper guitar coming for Drop-B stuff and would love to have one guitar with a set of actives around. I'm not sure I really want to look at the Het-Set or anything as the PRS Allender I had previously had the standard 81-TW/89-TW set and sounded phenomenal. I have not as of today tried out the X-Series pickups at all though.
> 
> How significant is the difference between an 81 and an 81-X? Does it sound much more organic? Honestly, I think part of why I want the actives IS that they have a distinct sound (and it's not bad depending on the application) so I'm not sure if the X-series moves away too far from the core EMG sound?  Also, if you've tried the X-series and the regular series, does the EMG X-TW (as in the X-series that is splittable) sound close to the standard TW series pickups when split?
> 
> Thanks!


I've tried both the original series and the x-series and here are my thoughts.

I found the original 81/85 combo to sound good but they were really compressed and great at maybe just only metal. You could get your insane high gain rhythm and leads ala metallica/<insert emg using metal band>. I had them in the Hulk but wasn't satisfied.

I've tried the 81-7x and the 81-7 and to me the differences are pretty big. The X-series has "lowered" gain (still a ton though) and this causes the headroom to be larger (it's probably the same as the old series) however now wiwht the lowered gain your dynamics don't get compressed to shit. Meaning the pickup sounds very passive like. You can lower the volume to like 80% and you can say the tone is like a passive humbucker, crank it and you get that thick active tone. 

The tone sounds better to me with the X-series - more nuances of your playing come through and I find it makes the guitar much more versatile. I'm all for them - I've got an 85x and 89X-TW-R in the Hulk currently and love them.

That being said - a lot of people who love the original EMG sound *might* not like the newer X-series. The X-series seems to be more for people who've grown tired of the EMG sound, people who've loved passives and kind of want more punch/kick/whatever from their pickups etc. A lot more passive people love the x-series than the sole original EMG fans. YMMV 

As for the X-TW series, yes it sounds like the original but if you coil tap and say like lower the volume a bit you get some very awesome single coil tones. Better I'd say than the originals. My 89X-TW-R sounds like an EMG SA-X when tapped giving some great lead or even clean tones.

If you want just a pure metal guitar and have others to cover your genres and love the original EMG tone - stick with the orignals. 

If you want that active tone with better qualities of passives and more dynamics/nuances allowed into your tone from your playing and would like the guitar to be more versatile due to limitations - get the X-series.

Hope this helps.


----------



## HighGain510 (Nov 14, 2011)

djpharoah said:


> I've tried both the original series and the x-series and here are my thoughts.
> 
> I found the original 81/85 combo to sound good but they were really compressed and great at maybe just only metal. You could get your insane high gain rhythm and leads ala metallica/<insert emg using metal band>. I had them in the Hulk but wasn't satisfied.
> 
> ...



Cool, thanks for the in-depth response Mesh!  I'm curious, when you said "89X-TW-R", are you talking about the "89XR" model? I don't see an 89X-TW-R, but since the 89XR splits that might be the same one you're talking about right? That pickup sounds like it's right up my alley as far as what I wanted from the neck. I'm still not sure how much "passive tone" you would get from an 81-X vs the 81 aside from having the rolled-down tone being a little closer right? 

I'd still like the core sound of the EMG 81 for the bridge as I'll be using the guitar for mostly metal stuff, and having the split in the neck sound more like a passive would be great (hence the request for the split ) as the neck will mostly be for clean, tapping and lead portions. Have you tried mixing the two types of pickups (standard and X-series) in a guitar? I'm curious if having an EMG 81 in the bridge and an 89XR in the neck would be too out of balance or not?


----------



## HighGain510 (Nov 14, 2011)

loktide said:


> this has been discussed quite a bit over at the andy sneap forum at ultimatemetal.com
> 
> there were also quite a few AB clips there



Just looked over there for the first time, not familiar with their forum setup, where exactly should I be looking for that?


----------



## djpharoah (Nov 14, 2011)

HighGain510 said:


> Cool, thanks for the in-depth response Mesh!  I'm curious, when you said "89X-TW-R", are you talking about the "89XR" model? I don't see an 89X-TW-R, but since the 89XR splits that might be the same one you're talking about right? That pickup sounds like it's right up my alley as far as what I wanted from the neck. I'm still not sure how much "passive tone" you would get from an 81-X vs the 81 aside from having the rolled-down tone being a little closer right?
> 
> I'd still like the core sound of the EMG 81 for the bridge as I'll be using the guitar for mostly metal stuff, and having the split in the neck sound more like a passive would be great (hence the request for the split ) as the neck will mostly be for clean, tapping and lead portions. Have you tried mixing the two types of pickups (standard and X-series) in a guitar? I'm curious if having an EMG 81 in the bridge and an 89XR in the neck would be too out of balance or not?



No worries man. 

No I actually have an 89X-TW-R - an 89R with coil tappable capabilities and the single coil is now "R"eversed towards the neck sounding more like a neck single. The EMG site is super outdated dude - you can easily find this one online.

In all honesty it's something you gotta try out man. My def of "passiveness" might be totally different from yours. I like medium to high gain passives so if I turn the volume down a smidge, the tone on the pickup does decrease in gain and volume. Also the other advantage I find in the X-series is that hte tone pot does change the tone since it's an active pot - what I mean is the tone wasn't as big of an option with the original EMGs since you couldn't really hear the difference between (imo).

As for running both types of pickups I think you CAN but you won't be able to run a tone pot since the X-series requires an active 25k pot which the original ones don't.

Try the 81x - you might be pleasantly surprised since it'll get all the tones from the 81 and then some with more "toanz" 

I was a skeptic till I tried them - they sound just delish with my mark iv.


----------



## stevo1 (Nov 14, 2011)

djpharoah said:


> As for running both types of pickups I think you CAN but you won't be able to run a tone pot since the X-series requires an active 25k pot which the original ones don't.



when I had an 81x in my jackson, the reg. 25k tone pot worked with it. I think it has a different effect though between the two. But a regular tone pot should work.


----------



## Kamikaze7 (Nov 15, 2011)

Yes, I too will agree with Mesh and the comparison between the standard EMG and the EMG X series. I was using an 808 in both positions of my FM-8 until I fried both of them trying to install a 9-18V mod that wasn't labeled. One pickup would work, while the other wouldn't. Thankfully it was the bridge one that stayed working. But in looking at a replacement, I went with the 808X and am much happier with the results. Much cleaner tone, not as muddy especially for the low F# while still retaining the same clarity and dynamics for the low B and the E-E. Not as hot as the std. 808, but has a lot more headroom and dynamics in comparison. A much more organic feel which is a lot more useable.

I am yet to get a set of the 707TWX's (707TWX and 707TWX-R) for the soon to arrive Eclipse 7, (not to mention a set of the std 707X's for Green Meanie...) but as far as coil-split capablities in just one or both positions, the TW's or the 89 are great and extremely useful and versatile. Depending on how you wire them you can blend them together using each push/pull pot as a individual pickup volume and blending the 2 pickups together for some nice tones too - in either humbucker or in single coil mode.

And you can mix-match the std's with an X and it'd still sound good. Not out of balance output wise or tone wise. But I think you'd be better off using both X's, and also using a TW-X and something like the 89X-R would help in giving you more distinct and diverse tones as well.

X-series =


----------



## Jessy (Nov 15, 2011)

The only reason not to get an X series is if you're too poor to buy a pickup and a compressor. The X series can do everything the non-X can. *You don't need compression in the pickup. Compressors exist that are not built into pickups.*


----------



## Jessy (Nov 15, 2011)

Seriously, mods? 

Stop deleting shit without warning, you worthless pieces of shit. Fuck you. I'm done with you shitheads.


----------



## djpharoah (Nov 15, 2011)

Jessy said:


> Seriously, mods?
> 
> Stop deleting shit without warning, you worthless pieces of shit. Fuck you. I'm done with you shitheads.



My mistake - I had made your post invisible along with another one when I had two tabs open in Firefox. Way to be a huge penis about it though - think the nap you get will definitely make you think about it. 

Another example of where if you had PM'd the mods before going postal on here you:

a) Wouldn't come off as a self righteous asshat
b) You wouldn't be banned.


----------



## The Reverend (Nov 15, 2011)

After a month or so of playing around with my brand new 707X's (in white!) I decided to go back to the Blackouts my guitar came with. I have two projects, which have very different sounds, and while the X's were amazing for the prog work, I didn't like how I had to drive the amp end harder to keep up the br00t4alz for my deathcore project. 

They are definitely less compressed, and like the Pharaoh man said, roll back the volume a bit and they respond to your hands quite like a passive. I also was amazed at the difference in note definition between the regular 707 and the 707-X. The cleans are decent, if you play around with your tone controls you can get a few different feels or types of clean tones. 

So yeah, basically everything everyone else here already said.


----------



## Sepultorture (Nov 16, 2011)

Would love to try out the X series and see whats what sound wise, but i loves me the EMGs for straight up death. but then i get the characteristics of said compressed EMGs. i like the dynamics of my BKPs and the tone and the chording and single note definition, only thing i miss about my EMGs was the ease of pinch harmonics, shit jumped off even if i gimped a pinch yo.

i wonder if the X's are the go between for this, fantastic pinchiness and the other passive stuff?


----------



## Kamikaze7 (Nov 17, 2011)

Sepultorture said:


> Would love to try out the X series and see whats what sound wise, but i loves me the EMGs for straight up death. but then i get the characteristics of said compressed EMGs. i like the dynamics of my BKPs and the tone and the chording and single note definition, only thing i miss about my EMGs was the ease of pinch harmonics, shit jumped off even if i gimped a pinch yo.
> 
> i wonder if the X's are the go between for this, fantastic pinchiness and the other passive stuff?



The answer is yes. I have no issues still getting the pinch harmonics easily with my 808X, yet still have a lot of the clarity, depth and punch of the EMG's but with a LOT more definition, headroom and dynamics all around. EMG's are great, but the X-series is WAY better!


----------



## loktide (Nov 17, 2011)

this was the thread

EMG 81-x and 85-x experiences? - Ultimate Metal Forum

i don't think the clip are still alive, though :/


----------



## HighGain510 (Nov 18, 2011)

Cool, thanks for all the advice guys! Think I'm going to go with the X-series!


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (Nov 26, 2011)

I don't like normal EMG's, but i like my blackouts. I'm looking for something that sounds like Blackouts but with less output and bass. Emg-X?


----------



## Kamikaze7 (Nov 26, 2011)

AngstRiddenDreams said:


> I don't like normal EMG's, but i like my blackouts. I'm looking for something that sounds like Blackouts but with less output and bass. Emg-X?



If this is the case, I would look HERE... Get in on these while they're still available...


----------



## djpharoah (Nov 26, 2011)

Kamikaze7 said:


> If this is the case, I would look HERE... Get in on these while they're still available...



That run is ONLY for 7 string guitars though.

Matt - did you ever get these?


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (Nov 27, 2011)

Which Matt? haha


----------



## djpharoah (Nov 27, 2011)

AngstRiddenDreams said:


> Which Matt? haha



The OP. I never knew you were also a Matt


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (Nov 27, 2011)

yeah i am.


----------



## HighGain510 (Nov 29, 2011)

djpharoah said:


> That run is ONLY for 7 string guitars though.
> 
> Matt - did you ever get these?



Not yet, I need to pay off some stuff first, my Thorn hit completion about 2 months ahead of schedule!  Between that and the surprise McCarty Rosewood that popped up and unexpectedly made it's way over to my house, I haven't had the spare cash to grab the other guitar or the pickups yet. I will be getting a set to go in something though!


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Nov 29, 2011)

Christ Matt, they need to change your name to HighVolumeBuyer instead of HiGain 

If you want more if a passive feel have you considered Blackouts? Seems to be love or hate with most people.


----------



## stevo1 (Dec 1, 2011)

When the x series first came out, I had finances for one so I bought one of the first available. I bought an 81x and when I got it, I had high hopes. I had a regular 81 and that. It has characteristics of the 81, tone wise, But it doesnt sound like one. It doesn't have the Emg 'magic' as I call it, and it doesn't sound as chunky for rhythm. 

This was in the bridge position though.

I put the x in the neck position, and It sounded better to me there. The lowered gain helps with muddiness usually associated with the neck pickup, it cleans leads up if you use the neck pickup for them, and the cleans do sound better with it, as a lot of people use the neck for cleans. I found that this combo has a lot of versatility for me because you can have the real emg chunk in the bridge, and then have a cleaner pickup for leads and cleans in the neck. If you like the way the regulars react to your playing, I would suggest sticking to them, as the x series responds to picking. If you're coming from actives, You'll probably have to get used to the way it responds.


----------



## Nitsuj (Dec 3, 2011)

good to know I'm not alone on this. I've had 81's before and the 81X has a little more low mids added but its missing some bite. It has less output as well. Will get an 81 in a day or two and do more A/B's. 

The 85X is great in the neck though. That one's a keeper.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Dec 3, 2011)

Nitsuj said:


> good to know I'm not alone on this. I've had 81's before and the 81X has a little more low mids added but its missing some bite. It has less output as well. Will get an 81 in a day or two and do more A/B's.
> 
> The 85X is great in the neck though. That one's a keeper.


 
Your sure not alone. I hear/feel it the same. Xs don't do it for me on their own for the signature 81 sound. Like you said though, they can definetely have their specific uses and advantages. I think having a left side guitar with the Xs and the right side (or vice-versa of coarse) regular series would sound awsome.


----------



## Kamikaze7 (Dec 4, 2011)

stevo1 said:


> When the x series first came out, I had finances for one so I bought one of the first available. I bought an 81x and when I got it, I had high hopes. I had a regular 81 and that. It has characteristics of the 81, tone wise, But it doesnt sound like one. It doesn't have the Emg 'magic' as I call it, and it doesn't sound as chunky for rhythm.
> 
> This was in the bridge position though.
> 
> I put the x in the neck position, and It sounded better to me there. The lowered gain helps with muddiness usually associated with the neck pickup, it cleans leads up if you use the neck pickup for them, and the cleans do sound better with it, as a lot of people use the neck for cleans. I found that this combo has a lot of versatility for me because you can have the real emg chunk in the bridge, and then have a cleaner pickup for leads and cleans in the neck. If you like the way the regulars react to your playing, I would suggest sticking to them, as the x series responds to picking. If you're coming from actives, You'll probably have to get used to the way it responds.





Nitsuj said:


> good to know I'm not alone on this. I've had 81's before and the 81X has a little more low mids added but its missing some bite. It has less output as well. Will get an 81 in a day or two and do more A/B's.
> 
> The 85X is great in the neck though. That one's a keeper.





TRENCHLORD said:


> Your sure not alone. I hear/feel it the same. Xs don't do it for me on their own for the signature 81 sound. Like you said though, they can definetely have their specific uses and advantages. I think having a left side guitar with the Xs and the right side (or vice-versa of coarse) regular series would sound awsome.




Well, I'm sure if you do the traditional 18V mod on it, you'll notice a BIG difference in it. I noticed a difference when I did this with my 808X in my FM408. Like a LOT of guys in the EMG thread have mentioned, doing the voltage upgrade can make a big difference in these, not just the normal EMG's...


----------

