# EMG hatred



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 6, 2015)

Okay, when I was younger I loved active pups. That overly compressed, super saturated sound was the be all end all for me. Then I grew up, and decided that synthetic sound was not for me. I have systematically gotten rid of all active pups or guitars with actives since. 
I have proudly been active free for a few years now, and had no desire or intention of ever owning another. Well, I came across a very good deal on a guitar a few days ago that had EMGs (81/60) that I couldn't pass up. Planned on changing them, but after playing it through my Nitro, unboosted, I am floored. It sounds amazing. So i don't think I'm gonna swap them. Not exactly gonna buy more actives, but I'll leave these in. And they've kinda restored a bit of hope in active pickups. Blog over.


----------



## yellowv (Oct 6, 2015)

Try the 57/66.


----------



## ihunda (Oct 6, 2015)

Same thing happened to me on a RG with EMG 81/85, the 81 sounded amazing unboosted in a dual rec. One trick pony but damn a pretty good one.


----------



## High Plains Drifter (Oct 6, 2015)

At least from my own experience, there's very few "terrible" pickups out there these days. It's more a matter of what kind of guitar/ wood they're in as well as their position and what I'm running them through. 

I love my actives and passives alike... just depends what kind of music I'm playing and where my amp knobs are set.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 6, 2015)

I still think they sound like .... through my Mark V, but in the Splawn they're amazing. And yes, I wanna try the 57/66 set.


----------



## Lemons (Oct 6, 2015)

I guess I've always thought of them as not so much bad but just mediocre, and with the amount of money I spend on gear I'm happy to spend the cash on great pickups instead.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 6, 2015)

Lemons said:


> I guess I've always thought of them as not so much bad but just mediocre, and with the amount of money I spend on gear I'm happy to spend the cash on great pickups instead.



This is basically how I feel too. They're great for making cheap guitars sound decent though. You could put an 81 on a potato and it'll sound decent.


----------



## Devyn Eclipse Nav (Oct 6, 2015)

To me they're not bad, they're just not my thing - tho from what I've heard, the 81-8 might be something I should try. I do really enjoy the sound of the 81 in my old students' two guitars, so it's worth a shot, if I have the money in the near future

The thing for me, with the 57-8 is that it's very round in the low mids, and not a ton of treble - whereas I like a lot of very bitey treble.

I also think it might be the fact it's an alnico magnet is another reason I dislike it, since my favorite bridge pickups are all ceramic, but who knows?


----------



## KailM (Oct 6, 2015)

Ya know, I've never played a pickup that I thought was 'terrible,' provided it was the right spec for the job (obviously a Strat with single coils isn't ideal for downtuned death metal). That goes for actives vs. passives as well.

I've never really understood the hate for EMGs or other high-output actives. I've got a set of Blackouts in one guitar, and have tried various other high-output passive pickups for the genres I play; black metal and death metal. At the end of the day, there is not a huge difference in what they can do, and I think anyone who says there's a HUGE difference is exaggerating.

Case in point, I've owned a Dimarzio D Sonic and currently have a Black Winter set in one of my guitars. Between the Blackouts, D Sonic, and Black Winters, yeah, I can tell a difference between them -- but when it comes down to it, when I play my songs through my rig, it sounds like ME every time. In a nutshell, I've enjoyed the sounds of all of them, and can't really say one is better than the other.


----------



## feraledge (Oct 6, 2015)

I'm a former EMG diehard and also, not coincidentally, a former user of a lot of "always on" effects. I feel like passives woke up a lot of options and a broader spectrum of tones, even though it's more torment since there are nearly infinite options. 
However, I think people get used to saying a pickup like the 81 has a universal sound and it doesn't matter what you put it in, which is just false really. Doesn't mean you have to like it always, but there are certain guitars that it really just fits with. It's kind of like, ya know, any other pickup.


----------



## Emperor Guillotine (Oct 6, 2015)

I disliked actives (was a purist passive user) before I got the EMG 57/66 set. Then it was game over. Like a real "best of both worlds" pickup set. It has become my hands-down favorite set, and I can see why so many artists like Chris Letchford, Sarah Longfield, Devin Townsend, Paul Masvidal, Jeff Loomis, and many, many other players that people on this forum dig all use the 57/66 set.


----------



## Steinmetzify (Oct 7, 2015)

I dig em and have em in like 4 guitars including one of my LPs, but I like passives a bit better. 

The preamp/gain boost makes them sort of uncontrollable with the amount of gain I use, and I'm not really a big fan of that push...I like high output pickups, and my favorite two right now are a Painkiller and a Warpig...just seems to me that I get a lot of what I like about EMGs from them...tight bass, accurate tracking, massive harmonics, and I don't have to adjust settings and/or presets to have them sound good. 

My favorite EMGs are the 57/66 set...they don't seem to be as nuts on the output and it's a more controllable feel. I have the Het set in my gold top and I think I'm going to swap them out for an 81 at least on the bridge...I like the neck of that Het set a lot better than I do the bridge. 

My only other gripe is that to me, they have a pretty one dimensional sound, and don't really roll off with the volume knob, and I dig swells for dynamic variety...whereas even with the high output passives this isn't the case...the tone changes a great deal with volume changes, and I can't seem to get that with actives. 

I think they all have their place. I ran EMGs in everything for a long time; I think I'm just tired of them after all this time and different tones sound better to my ears.


----------



## Hollowway (Oct 7, 2015)

Could it be that the SSO EMG pendulum is swinging the other way? I think this is the most responses in a row of people not bashing EMG since I've been on this forum!  I'm pretty neutral about pickups. The only EMG pickups I've played that I absolutely despised were the HZs. I'm not thrilled about the 808s, but other than that I'm OK with EMGs in general. I'm definitely not a "I just ordered a guitar, and I'm pulling the EMGs and getting the [insert BKP flavor of the month here] to put in" type of guy.


----------



## cardinal (Oct 7, 2015)

I think a lot of the SSO hate for EMGs is because of the soapbars. Some folks don't like EMGs, and I think even the folks that do like them will concede that an EMG 81 ain't right for a lot of applications. But for getting certain tones, they are awesome.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 7, 2015)

All I know is that even though I've heard a lot of people say differently, to me an 81 sounds exactly the same in every guitar I've ever played one in. Mahogany, ash, alder, neck through, bolt on, whatever. TO ME it sounds identical. It's just that through certain rigs it sounds good and certain rigs it sounds bad. Just so happens that through my Splawn it sounds glorious.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 7, 2015)

Another thing about actives that's always thrown me is how much preamp gain you can run through them. With passives I always prefer as little gain as I can feasibly get away with to maximize dynamics and increase articulation. With actives they always sound better with more gain. The more the better. You never have dynamics because they're so compressed, but it seems like the more gain you run, the tighter they get.


----------



## RevelGTR (Oct 7, 2015)

The 81 really shines in a mix, it inherently has the properties that a guitar sound needs to sound great with drums, bass, etc.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 7, 2015)

WSchaferJR said:


> The 81 really shines in a mix, it inherently has the properties that a guitar sound needs to sound great with drums, bass, etc.


 This is true.


----------



## Quiet Coil (Oct 7, 2015)

Variety is the spice of life. I'm just waiting for Fishman to have more than two (okay technically four) humbucker models available.


----------



## pylyo (Oct 7, 2015)

ihunda said:


> Same thing happened to me on a RG with EMG 81/85, the 81 sounded amazing unboosted in a dual rec. One trick pony but damn a pretty good one.



Same here... I was a hater for more than a decade and never even wanted to give them another chance. 
Until one day I bought a 2nd hand Regius fitted with 81/85, thinking of swapping them out straight away without even trying them out. And I got flored so hard.
On my higain settings, unboosted, they were ripping so badass, I couldn't believe my ears. 
True, that they are kinda one trick pony and one dimensional though... but the gainz are heavenly.


----------



## vick1000 (Oct 7, 2015)

I dig the 808x in my RG8. But I am thinking of putting a Blackout in there, I loved them on my 7.


----------



## Action (Oct 7, 2015)

Hollowway said:


> The only EMG pickups I've played that I absolutely despised were the HZs. I'm not thrilled about the 808s, but other than that I'm OK with EMGs in general.



Hmm. I bought my schecter earlier this year before I knew a thing about actives and their limitations. It has a pair of 808s, and since I got it I've been telling myself repeatedly that:

- people exaggerate the meh nature of 808s because they are a common stock pickup
- I must be doing something wrong with my patches to not be able to get any really great sounds out of them in any style

it's been like six months, and I'm not all that happy, so I guess I've been wrong.

i also have a 45cs in the neck of my bass, which i've had wired up all of a couple days, and have not got a chance to use much yet, but dug what I did hear. no brittleness to the tone, and the compression and behavior of the volume knob, work as positives for me in this application. I connected it expecting more of the same .... and hey, whaddyaknow.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 7, 2015)

New from emgTV. This thread just reminded me to go look for newly added performances 




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R6NiX5-eLs#t=116


----------



## Edika (Oct 7, 2015)

The guitar I had with EMG's 81/85 gave me an awesome heavy sound. I played through my sorely missed Triple Rec and it blew out of the water the rest of my guitars. When playing clean though I'd reach for a guitar with passives. If you have one guitar only and want to be versatile they're not the best choice. If you want to do the brutz then they're a great choice.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 7, 2015)

Essentially actives are just a standard pickup with an un-accessible and un-adjustable overdrive that is permanently locked ON


----------



## Andromalia (Oct 7, 2015)

I actually don't care if a pickup is passive or active: Pickup X sounds like pickup X, end of story. I currently have two guitars with 81.85, one with 81 only, one wit 85/SA/SA, and many with passive pickups, all are sounding different and I like all of them.
The only downside is, I have to get specific axefx patches for each guitar. First world problems... ^^


----------



## Lemons (Oct 7, 2015)

Andromalia said:


> I actually don't care if a pickup is passive or active: Pickup X sounds like pickup X, end of story. I currently have two guitars with 81.85, one with 81 only, one wit 85/SA/SA, and many with passive pickups, all are sounding different and I like all of them.
> The only downside is, I have to get specific axefx patches for each guitar. First world problems... ^^



Now that you mention it I actually loved the EMG SA's that I tried, the only problem now is mixing active and passive sets...


----------



## JohnIce (Oct 7, 2015)

The SA is a great pickup. The 57/66 too, they're like an 81/85 set that just grew the f*ck up and stopped yelling


----------



## 7 Dying Trees (Oct 7, 2015)

Prefer passives, but have to admit, EMGs work really well for recorded rhythm. Plus it's a lot less searching for the right pickup to match a guitar. 

Having said that, I have one active guitar only. 

I used to love them, but did just fall out of love with them, ended up preferring the dynamics that passives give you, plus that they let you get away with less, actives compensate for poor picking in my book, as they let you get away with hitting the strings like an underpowered fairy.


----------



## JohnIce (Oct 7, 2015)

7 Dying Trees said:


> ...they let you get away with hitting the strings like an underpowered fairy.



I think they actually sound _better_ if you hit the strings like an underpowered fairy. Unless of course you like your pick attack to have that clicky sound of a phone hanging up on you.


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Oct 7, 2015)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Essentially actives are just a standard pickup with an un-accessible and un-adjustable overdrive that is permanently locked ON



I know you're trying to be funny, but come on, you know this is wrong.

Active pickups get a certain reputation because most of the ones on the market are aimed at a certain type of player and sound - they are potentially much more flexible, which is why many jazz players ....ing LOVE them, despite using polar opposite tones to metal guys.

The whole point of an active pickup is to get around some of the weaknesses of a traditional high-output passive.

To get high output out of a passive you need stronger magnets or more turns of wire. The disadvantages of that are:

1 - Stronger magnets exert more string pull, reducing sustain and potentially causing intonation problems or exacerbating deadspots or wolf tones depending on the excursion of the string above the poles.

2 - More turns of wire results in the pickup having less high frequency response and a lower resonant peak, after which point the strength of the signal drops off precipitously - it's essentially like adding a low-pass filter to your pickup - the more turns of wire you use, the lower the frequency is set and the tighter the Q is set, resulting in freaky boosts to certain frequencies and an overall "peaky" output. This is, for example, why the JB has that particular midrange honk that some people hate.


When you make a pickup that's active, the need to use more wire or stronger magnets to obtain output is removed, the preamp takes care of boosting the output to a given level - whether that level is high or low is a CHOICE made by the pickup designer, you can do both.

But since you no longer have to worry about output levels too much (as long as your preamp is getting enough signal to do its job), you can do some things differently, and potentially much better.

1 - You can use much weaker magnets, reducing magnet pull. 

2 - You can use less turns of wire, meaning your pickup can retain much more of it's high frequency response and reduce the influence of the peak frequency in relation to the rest of the pickup's sound signature. More balanced EQ overall.

3 - Because you can set the output level very high, and also because you can control whether it is high or low impedance, Active pickups are less susceptible to "tone suck" caused by long pedal chains, and don't need to go through buffers or the like. 

4 - The strong signal usually chosen by pickup designers is also useful because it inherently makes it easier to maintain a high SNR and avoid buzz and noise.

5 - On top of that, depending on the design of your preamp, you can also apply EQ right in the pickup, or even make the pickup adjustable on the fly (Like GFS Redactives, or the Dialtone Pickups, both of which I will admit sound kind of bad, but still, that flexibility exists)


None of this means the pickup has to sound a certain way compared to a passive - it's just that active pickups inherently lend themselves to producing a less coloured sound than the comparatively inaccurate and peaky passive designs they usually compete with, and, much like the EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA CLUB SOUND BASS BOOST X button on a ....ty home cinema system, a lot of people interpret "less coloured" as something other than what it is.


----------



## CaptainD00M (Oct 7, 2015)

TRENCHLORD said:


> Essentially actives are just a standard pickup with an un-accessible and un-adjustable overdrive that is permanently locked ON



Pretty much. Although arguably is a low output standard pickup to give the preamp more room to make the drive prominent. Hence why EMG's do a very crisp clean and a very compressed distortion and in my opinion nothing in between.

I'm personally not a fan of any of the active PU's ive played so far, but then I'm not in the mode of rejecting something just because its active. I reject stuff because I don't like the sound


----------



## ghostred7 (Oct 7, 2015)

I've had no problems with the EMGs I have. I have the 81/85 ZW set in my LP. That running through the HD100 head into 2x12 EVM12L Classics sounds beastly. Also, don't hate the gen1 Loomis' pickups (707s?). 

Different people like different tones. There is no right or wrong...only right or wrong for the individual


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Oct 7, 2015)

CaptainD00M said:


> Pretty much. *Although arguably is a low output standard pickup to give the preamp more room to make the drive prominent.* Hence why EMG's do a very crisp clean and a very compressed distortion and in my opinion nothing in between.
> 
> I'm personally not a fan of any of the active PU's ive played so far, but then I'm not in the mode of rejecting something just because its active. I reject stuff because I don't like the sound



I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that's not it. Rationale as follows, all numbers pulled out of my ass, to illustrate the thinking:

Scenario 1 - Compressed output because the preamp used can't quite handle the job being asked of it.

Scenario 2 - Compressed output because to make the output that high puts other components at risk of damage.

Think of it this way -

A standard passive pickup, nothing super mega high output, can probably put out a voltage swing up to around 2V or so. 2000mv.

Dimarzio measures their pickups in mv - nobody knows how, but we assume its an "average strum" kind of output figure and not a measurement of the peak.

Now, your active is based on a low magnet strength, low wind-count base, and you have a low output pickup, lets say that measured dimarzio's way, it's 100-150mv versus something like an X2N which is 510, or their lowest output passive humbucker which is the EJ Custom Neck at 178mv.

When you brush the strings with a feather, you get 50mv.
When you beat them with a sledgehammer you get a massive peak of something above 1500mv. 

You then have a preamplifier whose job is to make that entire range usable, from 50mv up to 40 times that. 

For an amplifier to do a reasonable job with the lowest dynamic of that pickup, it probably needs to be boosted. Lets say to 2x strength or so, so 100mv.

The preamp, to maintain the exact same comparative dynamic range, then needs to be able to output a solid 3V signal at the peaks of those sledgehammer beatings.

If your preamp can't do that, it'll compress the signal.

If your preamp can, it'll output 3V, which is a full volt above what a normal Line Level input is designed to handle. You'd probably blow such an input up if you chugged along like a brute with your 3V peaks.

Your amp input is probably not so picky, and can handle that fine, but the pickup designer knows some inputs are going to clip regardless, with an input that hot. 

So the pickup designer moderates the output power of the pickup to a certain maximum level in order to maintain safe margins with more gear.

You might say this is academic and that amps should be able to handle anything, but remember, compared to some of the monster active circuits of yesteryear, modern high output actives aren't as brutal - I know of at least one bass player whose active circuit on his P-Bass has claimed several Ampeg SVT heads over the years. He refuses to use anything less powerful.

That's why active pickups compress - but again, they don't *have* to do this. It's a design choice. A design choice that plenty of active Jazz pickups don't make, and they sound prefectly "organic" and "dynamic" because of it.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 7, 2015)

This just got deep.


----------



## vividox (Oct 7, 2015)

I am definitely a passive > active guy. I'm not going to sit here and pretend I know the technical difference or even that I've given both sides a fair shot (I've only ever played EMG-HZs on the active side), my reasons are quite simple:

I don't like dealing with the 9V battery.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 7, 2015)

vividox said:


> I am definitely a passive > active guy. I'm not going to sit here and pretend I know the technical difference or even that I've given both sides a fair shot (I've only ever played EMG-HZs on the active side), my reasons are quite simple:
> 
> I don't like dealing with the 9V battery.



I don't think HZs are actives.


----------



## TonyFlyingSquirrel (Oct 7, 2015)

GuitarBizarre said:


> I know you're trying to be funny, but come on, you know this is wrong.
> 
> Active pickups get a certain reputation because most of the ones on the market are aimed at a certain type of player and sound - they are potentially much more flexible, which is why many jazz players ....ing LOVE them, despite using polar opposite tones to metal guys.
> 
> ...



This is what makes the Dialatone pickups interesting to me, as the user can adjust the resonant peak and output level to tasted, balance both pickups with each other and their own amp settings, find that sweet spot, then lock the set screw & now your setup is even more personalized.


----------



## vividox (Oct 7, 2015)

Jaxcharvel said:


> I don't think HZs are actives.



Oh really? [Checks] Huh. Well then. That guitar had a 9V, and I suppose that means the 9V was for the 20dB boost and not the pickups. You learn something new every day! I guess I've never played actives then.


----------



## 7 Dying Trees (Oct 7, 2015)

Jaxcharvel said:


> I don't think HZs are actives.


They're not. I think they're classified as a crime though...


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Oct 7, 2015)

vividox said:


> Oh really? [Checks] Huh. Well then. That guitar had a 9V, and I suppose that means the 9V was for the 20dB boost and not the pickups. You learn something new every day! I guess I've never played actives then.



There are more than a few different HZ model pickups, to make things even more complex. H1, H1A, H2, H2A, H3, H3A, H4, H4A, or SRO OC1, and I've heard good things about most of them, when it's come from the mouths of people who have a clue, rather than just picking sides in the "active/Passive Debate before listening.

EMG select are really the only pickups EMG are involved with that I would discount as "always bad".

The "EMG-HZ with active electronics later in the circuit" approach is what Alexi Laiho's signature ESPs have used forever and a day though, were you playing one of those? He has a signature EMG ALX passive in his current set, and used to use an EMG-HZ H4 with a Lee Jackson active Preamp.


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Oct 7, 2015)

TonyFlyingSquirrel said:


> This is what makes the Dialatone pickups interesting to me, as the user can adjust the resonant peak and output level to tasted, balance both pickups with each other and their own amp settings, find that sweet spot, then lock the set screw & now your setup is even more personalized.



I listened to a couple of Dialtone demos that Fluff did, and I don't know if it's just his tastes, or the gear chain he was running through or something like that, but I found that no matter where I jumped to in the video, the sound seemed to lack anybite and came across muffled.

Could just be me, could be the video, could be anything - I'm not judging right now, but I didn't get a favourable first impression.

I do agree though, there's a lot of untapped potential in designing a better pickup than the bog standard humbucker/single design, including CycFi's crazy designs, or even some weirder stuff I'm sure someone has thought up at some point.


----------



## TonyFlyingSquirrel (Oct 7, 2015)

GuitarBizarre said:


> I listened to a couple of Dialtone demos that Fluff did, and I don't know if it's just his tastes, or the gear chain he was running through or something like that, but I found that no matter where I jumped to in the video, the sound seemed to lack anybite and came across muffled.
> 
> Could just be me, could be the video, could be anything - I'm not judging right now, but I didn't get a favourable first impression.
> 
> I do agree though, there's a lot of untapped potential in designing a better pickup than the bog standard humbucker/single design, including CycFi's crazy designs, or even some weirder stuff I'm sure someone has thought up at some point.



I think the video's could have been done better, for sure. Only a handful really captured the brighter end of the tonal spectrum, which is what pique'd my interest. I don't think that Fluff was the ideal choice to demo this. I'd really look forward to a well rounded review by one of the staff people at Premier Guitar, or by Mitch Gallagher at Sweetwater, but they'd have to have production levels up enough in advance to meet any potential demand. They're a small, startup shop, so it's still too early to tell what kind of traction they'll get in the marketplace.


----------



## TedEH (Oct 7, 2015)

I've always found it really odd that people "hate" actives so much, but then pile on the boosts. When EMG does it, it's "sterile", but when you do it with a boutique boost pedal it's "tight". 

I know, I know, it's not as simple as that, but it's still amusing.


----------



## vividox (Oct 7, 2015)

GuitarBizarre said:


> There are more than a few different HZ model pickups, to make things even more complex. H1, H1A, H2, H2A, H3, H3A, H4, H4A, or SRO OC1, and I've heard good things about most of them, when it's come from the mouths of people who have a clue, rather than just picking sides in the "active/Passive Debate before listening.
> 
> EMG select are really the only pickups EMG are involved with that I would discount as "always bad".
> 
> The "EMG-HZ with active electronics later in the circuit" approach is what Alexi Laiho's signature ESPs have used forever and a day though, were you playing one of those? He has a signature EMG ALX passive in his current set, and used to use an EMG-HZ H4 with a Lee Jackson active Preamp.


No, mine is a 2002 Jackson DKMG.

http://support.jacksonguitars.com/catalogs/us/Jackson2002_catalog.pdf

Pages 6 (picture) and 11 (specs). It just lists the pickups as EMG-HZ and the boost as a "EMG TurboCharger". Not sure what kind of HZs they were.


----------



## vividox (Oct 7, 2015)

TedEH said:


> I've always found it really odd that people "hate" actives so much, but then pile on the boosts. When EMG does it, it's "sterile", but when you do it with a boutique boost pedal it's "tight".
> 
> I know, I know, it's not as simple as that, but it's still amusing.


I HATED that boost so much. I initially never used it, then eventually ripped it out when I swapped out the EMG-HZs for DiMarzio Evolutions. Good riddance.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Oct 7, 2015)

Noisy Humbucker said:


> Variety is the spice of life. I'm just waiting for Fishman to have more than two (okay technically four) humbucker models available.



I'm waiting for the Devin Townsend set. Supposed to be based on the EMG 81/66 set he uses, with a 2nd, more PAF-y tone.

I think there's also an Eric Christian (Testament) set in the works as well?

But yeah, I LOVE the 81/60 set. My favorite pickup set for metal. 

But I've started to play more than metal over the years.  It's why I wanna try Fishman pickups. You can switch from the ultra-super-tight-chugga-chugga sound, and then a more tame, dynamic passive sound at the flick of the switch.


----------



## Andromalia (Oct 7, 2015)

Since he put Fishman fluences in his last guitar, I guess his EMG sig model will go the way of the dodo Peavey.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 7, 2015)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> I think there's also an Eric Christian (Testament) set in the works



You mean Eric Peterson. Eric Christian is the former username of a guy on here that got banned awhile back , although i'm sure there's many other E.C. out there also.


----------



## RustInPeace (Oct 7, 2015)

The new emgs (57/66 and het set) are really great, because they actually sound decent through a clean channel.

I have both sets in different guitars and love them.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Oct 7, 2015)

TRENCHLORD said:


> You mean Eric Peterson. Eric Christian is the former username of a guy on here that got banned awhile back , although i'm sure there's many other E.C. out there also.



You're right. I was actually thinking of Greg Christian's last name for some reason. Probably because of the drama last year.


----------



## CaptainD00M (Oct 7, 2015)

GuitarBizarre said:


> I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that's not it. Rationale as follows, all numbers pulled out of my ass, to illustrate the thinking.



Ah fair point man. 

I said that based on a very convincing argument from my old Guitar Teacher which I will admit I took as gospel around 13 years ago and have never really bothered to check. 

You're hypothetical calculations do seems to make sense with what little I understand of the Alchemy of Pickups and the way compression works (Probably why I can't stand the EMG's i've played so far). I'm in the camp of 'Guitar Player Science' to Quote Billy Gibbons guitar tech.

Thanks man, this is one of those moments where I've actually learnt something tangible form ss.org rather than just drooled over guitars or whatever


----------



## JohnIce (Oct 7, 2015)

TedEH said:


> I've always found it really odd that people "hate" actives so much, but then pile on the boosts. When EMG does it, it's "sterile", but when you do it with a boutique boost pedal it's "tight".
> 
> I know, I know, it's not as simple as that, but it's still amusing.



The sound of an amp clipping and the sound of a pickup clipping are very different things to my ears


----------



## Konfyouzd (Oct 7, 2015)

Hollowway said:


> Could it be that the SSO EMG pendulum is swinging the other way? I think this is the most responses in a row of people not bashing EMG since I've been on this forum!  I'm pretty neutral about pickups. The only EMG pickups I've played that I absolutely despised were the HZs. I'm not thrilled about the 808s, but other than that I'm OK with EMGs in general. I'm definitely not a "I just ordered a guitar, and I'm pulling the EMGs and getting the [insert BKP flavor of the month here] to put in" type of guy.



This... I've always liked EMGs except the 808 and HZs.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Oct 7, 2015)

I've been curious about the other H-series pickups. I HATE the H4 series, but apparently the other ones are decent?

I just know the H4/H4A set was bad compared to the 85.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Oct 7, 2015)

To be completely honest, I've been biased enough that I never even tried them after the H4s... 

BUT, I also really liked the 81, 60 and 85 enough to not really bother I suppose.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 8, 2015)

I like an 85 in the bridge (Reb Beach doesn't know how to be wrong) but a ways hated it as a neck pickup.


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 8, 2015)

I get along well with the 85-neck for cleans with the volume rolled down about halfway, and for the fat fluid leads by itself or blended with the bridge.

For lower chord-riffing I only like it as more of an occasional bassy/muffle effect, and even then I use it blended with the bridge.


85 in bridge can be great in brighter guitars that have a snappier attack. Love them in the bridge with Dinky-Pro type guitars. (maple, alder, bolt-on)


----------



## Lemons (Oct 8, 2015)

Is anyone else surprised that this thread somehow hasn't descended into chaos and been locked yet? 

+10 points to everyone for a civil discussion


----------



## vividox (Oct 8, 2015)

vividox said:


> No, mine is a 2002 Jackson DKMG.
> 
> http://support.jacksonguitars.com/catalogs/us/Jackson2002_catalog.pdf
> 
> Pages 6 (picture) and 11 (specs). It just lists the pickups as EMG-HZ and the boost as a "EMG TurboCharger". Not sure what kind of HZs they were.


Checked last night, they say "HZ-3" on the backside.


----------



## TedEH (Oct 8, 2015)

JohnIce said:


> The sound of an amp clipping and the sound of a pickup clipping are very different things to my ears



Pickup clipping? I've got an 81, and it doesn't sound like it's clipping to me. It's not the most natural clean sound in the world, but I don't think anything in there is "clipping". Unless the battery is almost dead, but that's a whole other thing. Honestly, actives, to my ears, don't sound that different from passives with a clean boost.


----------



## JohnIce (Oct 8, 2015)

TedEH said:


> Pickup clipping? I've got an 81, and it doesn't sound like it's clipping to me. It's not the most natural clean sound in the world, but I don't think anything in there is "clipping". Unless the battery is almost dead, but that's a whole other thing. Honestly, actives, to my ears, don't sound that different from passives with a clean boost.



Unfortunately the 81/707-equipped guitars I've had I've sold or switched pickups in, so I can't record anything myself to show you what I mean. What I'm talking about is what you hear in the pick attack, the indeed "clean" sounding click on each note, even through a high gain amp. This sounds to me like what you get when you run out of headroom on a clean solid-state amp or in a DAW, built into the pickup. Basically the kind of gain-staging every recording engineer warned you about. Whether it's technically correct to call that clipping or not I'm not sure, but that's the definition I've been taught at least. It's why people do the 18v mod, etc.


----------



## TedEH (Oct 8, 2015)

Admittedly, I don't play with one of those massive picks everyone seems to like lately, so maybe it just works for me. I use picks under .6 most of the time, but maybe someone with crazy picks and a harder attack would have issues that I don't run into.


----------



## JohnIce (Oct 8, 2015)

TedEH said:


> Admittedly, I don't play with one of those massive picks everyone seems to like lately, so maybe it just works for me. I use picks under .6 most of the time, but maybe someone with crazy picks and a harder attack would have issues that I don't run into.



That seems very likely  I remember it bothering me the most when playing clean fingerstyle stuff, because it sounded ok playing softly but when you wanted the music to go somewhere dynamically, and forte fortissimo that sh*t, the pickup said no.

- edit - Here's an old recording of O' Holy Night I did in 2009 I think with 707's, and you can definitely hear (I think) how the tone goes from round and full to spanky and thin as I increase the dynamics. http://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=8800027


----------



## Emperor Guillotine (Oct 8, 2015)

TRENCHLORD said:


> New from emgTV. This thread just reminded me to go look for newly added performances



And just when I thought that this style of playing was forgotten about and gone thanks to all of the washed-up Abasi wanna-bes.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Oct 8, 2015)

Emperor Guillotine said:


> And just when I thought that this style of playing was forgotten about and gone thanks to all of the washed-up Abasi wanna-bes.



You might want to browse other forums besides SSO.


----------



## vividox (Oct 8, 2015)

TRENCHLORD said:


> New from emgTV. This thread just reminded me to go look for newly added performances




That first one is AWESOME.
That second is exactly why I am SOOOO over thrash metal.


----------



## Emperor Guillotine (Oct 8, 2015)

vividox said:


> That first one is AWESOME.
> That second is exactly why I am SOOOO over thrash metal.


Everyone has secretly been over thrash metal since the 80s ended. Boring. Repetitive. Blah.


----------



## JohnIce (Oct 8, 2015)

I feel like thrash has become the blues of metal. Meaning: it's mostly played at small pubs and guitar stores, by either older men or teenagers, who always play it well enough to not piss off the beer drinkers, but at the end of the day no-one really listens to it anymore. It's the people's metal.


----------



## chassless (Oct 9, 2015)

Emperor Guillotine said:


> And just when I thought that this style of playing was forgotten about and gone thanks to all of the washed-up Abasi wanna-bes.



are you kidding me this is what they said during the nu-metal craze... or basically any heavy music current that's post 1991

edit: just read the other replies. well i agree with those, too!


----------



## TRENCHLORD (Oct 9, 2015)

Emperor Guillotine said:


> Everyone has secretly been over thrash metal since the 80s ended. Boring. Repetitive. Blah.



To each their own I guess 

The second video (I have no clue who he is, just that it was a fairly new posting and was with the X-series instead of the normal 81/85) sounds IMO a lot like Machine Head's blackened album music-style, which I don't mind at all, especially being vocal free. 

I'm not a huge Death Angel fan (there OK IMO), but there tracks without vocals on EMGtv awhile back are killer.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Oct 9, 2015)

TedEH said:


> Admittedly, I don't play with one of those massive picks everyone seems to like lately, so maybe it just works for me. I use picks under .6 most of the time, but maybe someone with crazy picks and a harder attack would have issues that I don't run into.



I actually use thicker picks so I can apply less pressure and get a similar effect to picking harder w a thinner pick. I may be in the minority though.


----------



## TonyFlyingSquirrel (Oct 9, 2015)

The kid in the first video is only 16.


----------



## vividox (Oct 9, 2015)

TonyFlyingSquirrel said:


> The kid in the first video is only 16.


----------



## Alex79 (Oct 11, 2015)

TedEH said:


> I've always found it really odd that people "hate" actives so much, but then pile on the boosts. When EMG does it, it's "sterile", but when you do it with a boutique boost pedal it's "tight".
> 
> I know, I know, it's not as simple as that, but it's still amusing.



Totally my opinion. Overdrives imprint a lot of their nature and make everything sound very similar.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 11, 2015)

Alex79 said:


> Totally my opinion. Overdrives imprint a lot of their nature and make everything sound very similar.


 I agree with this, but I think actives do too.


----------



## Pav (Oct 11, 2015)

I don't hate EMGs.


----------



## jarledge (Oct 11, 2015)

i like the 85 in the bridge. The 81 in the neck isn't bad. I hate the 81 in the bridge. Dont care for the 60 in the neck and the HET set is surprisingly good. They got the dynamics thing down a little better with the HET set. The 707s are ok.

I like emgs because they always sound like emgs reguardless of what you put them in. The consistency aspect of it is great. 

They really aren't great for cleans, dynamics, or anything else that requires a little less distortion and a little more finesse. 

I'd ultimately rather have dimarzios or lace alumitones/deathbucker/bars but Emgs are ok in the meantime.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 12, 2015)

Nor do I, but I feel like the EMG name has fallen from grace over the last 15 years or so. I think it's primarily due to 7 strings. People got burned out. For the longest time all you had to choose from were ....ty Ibby pups and EMGs.


----------



## 777timesgod (Oct 13, 2015)

I named the EMGs as the "Ketchup pickups", if you are guitar does not possess great craftsmanship or quality woods, they'll cover it under their trademark sound.

At the end of the day its taste and whether you want to reach a trademark sound fast.


----------



## vividox (Oct 13, 2015)

And never, ever put ketchup on a steak.


----------



## Low Baller (Oct 13, 2015)

I wasn't into emgs but I tried an agile (first agile I ever played) that had emgs. I gotta say it sounded good I was playing it through an orange amp. I prefer Duncan's and passive for guitar but I won't go saying emgs suck because they don't and never have. Guitars, pick ups, and any music gear is just a tool some people can get their sound out of emgs and others prefer another tool to get their tone.

lets take building houses as an example. Let's say the house is our song and our pick ups are just a set of tools to build the house. Some people use makita, some Milwaukee, you may get a guy using a rock and nails. So let's say all three guys build three perfect amazing houses same in quality. Would you not buy a house because the guy who built this perfect house did it with a rock and nails or you don't like makita products so that house is out of the question. No at the end of the day it doesn't matter what we use to get our finished product because it's only the finished product that matters.


----------



## RustInPeace (Oct 14, 2015)

The one thing I really dont understand is why some passive players who hate on emgs because "they are so compressed", who themselves run their trendy bk pups into a compressor and an OD...


----------



## coffeeflush (Oct 14, 2015)

I know people who run 1 compressor, heavy gain , 2 noise suppressors. 
Then they buy bareknuckles, because these pickups have character.


----------



## JohnIce (Oct 15, 2015)

RustInPeace said:


> The one thing I really dont understand is why some passive players who hate on emgs because "they are so compressed", who themselves run their trendy bk pups into a compressor and an OD...





coffeeflush said:


> I know people who run 1 compressor, heavy gain , 2 noise suppressors.
> Then they buy bareknuckles, because these pickups have character.



Most of these djentheads use digital processors, they record DI, they are constantly upgrading firmwares and reworking their tones, it's in their very nature not to commit to a sound, and that includes wanting a pickup that gives options. To play devil's advocate, I'd rather have a neutral guitar that I can play anything on through the appropriate gear, than a guitar pre-programmed for only a heavy rhythm tone. If compressors and overdrives make your metal rhythm tone the way you want it, that doesn't mean you'd use them for a blues tone as well. I hated my Hellraiser for being so bad at damn near any genre besides metal.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 15, 2015)

coffeeflush said:


> I know people who run 1 compressor, heavy gain , 2 noise suppressors.
> Then they buy bareknuckles, because these pickups have character.



The compressor part I get, but unless you choke the .... out of your signal with the gates they don't do a whole lot the change the dynamics of your pickups. And even if you dime your gain you can still tell a difference in the sound of different pups. Personally I don't like that much gain, because to me it sounds like ...., but different pups will give you different flavors of .....


----------



## A-Branger (Oct 15, 2015)

I have a set of the HET set on my LTD eclipse and I love them. I first try a EC-1000 vs LTD Iron Cross on my local shop and I liked the HET set better both on the bridge with distorsion and cleans on the neck.

In fact it was the cleans on the neck that sold me on those over the 81-60 combo.

I know a lot of ppl complain about the lack of dynamics on them, but I think thats why I like them lol..... I got two guitars my LTD and a ibanez iceman with Dimarzio Evolution on it. When I play cleans I LOVE the EMGs, all the arpegios notes I play sounds. with the dimarzio is bit too dynamic, not only I have a massive drop in sound, but I have to pay more attention to my picking hand to be sure Im picking every note with the same intensity. With the EMG I feel is way easier, plus my clean sound level is closer to my distorsion one...... I know is prob me for my "lack" of guitar playing skillz, but I like that.

Now on the distorsion I love them, and love how easy is to get harmonics, but every time I go back to my Ibanez Im like  it sounds cleaner and not that muddy anymore. I know the Evos tend to be really bright, so maybe is my fault I dont have my amp/pedals settup for optimal EMG performance?


----------



## A-Branger (Oct 15, 2015)

also I ahve always have this question and not sure if its been answer here but:

Why EMG pups for 7 strings are in a soapbar config?????

6 strings are normal shape pups, but then 7 strings are that bick ugly block? I know in the past EMG almost ruled the world of pups for factory 7 string guitars and they could do whatever they want, no need to follow "tradition", but never knew the why.

Is it because it borrowed from bass pups?

Or they are trying to mimic the physical space of a normal pup with the mounting ring?

Nothing trows me off of a 7 string guitar quicker than the soapbar block shape pups


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Oct 15, 2015)

A-Branger said:


> Is it because it borrowed from bass pups?



Rumor is that the EMG 707, EMG's first 7-string pickup, was a modded EMG DC bass pickup. I think this was confirmed somewheres. 

But they stuck with the soapbar size for the longest time mostly likely because it was cheaper than R&D for a new pickup size, and a lot of guitars at the time were only equipped with EMG 7-strings. 

But now since most people are using passives in their 7-strings, EMG started offering the new sized humbuckers. I assume manufacturers still use the regular soapbars because they're cheaper to mass-produce and buy in bulk.


----------



## RevelGTR (Oct 16, 2015)

I think a lot of the "too compressed" people are mostly just repeating what they've read. I don't know about you guys, but especially when recording I run through a tube screamer (limiting your dynamics) into a high gain amp (already somewhat limited dynamics) and then further compress the guitar tracks in my daw, AND compress everything on the master bus. At that point, the "over compressed" sound of EMG's is considerably less apparent and in many cases is an advantage. 

Conversely, I love the Aftermaths in my FR6UC, but they can be a bitch to record. I end up with a really dry, overly midrangey sound that I have to compensate for down the line.


----------



## TonyFlyingSquirrel (Oct 16, 2015)

Their Bass pickups are top notch too, even some of their passives, like the Geezer Butler set, just wish they were available as a full "J" set.


----------



## RustInPeace (Oct 16, 2015)

A-Branger said:


> I have a set of the HET set on my LTD eclipse and I love them. I first try a EC-1000 vs LTD Iron Cross on my local shop and I liked the HET set better both on the bridge with distorsion and cleans on the neck.
> 
> In fact it was the cleans on the neck that sold me on those over the 81-60 combo.



I used to have a Mark V, and the Het Set neck into the fat clean channel was AMAZING


----------



## crankyrayhanky (Oct 16, 2015)

As a music fan, I seem to like a lot of guitar players who use them, but as a player they fizz out my ears at moderate volume levels, something in the eq? I can play at almost any level volume with a few different BKs with no issues; thus I "hate" EMG


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 16, 2015)

WSchaferJR said:


> I think a lot of the "too compressed" people are mostly just repeating what they've read. I don't know about you guys, but especially when recording I run through a tube screamer (limiting your dynamics) into a high gain amp (already somewhat limited dynamics) and then further compress the guitar tracks in my daw, AND compress everything on the master bus. At that point, the "over compressed" sound of EMG's is considerably less apparent and in many cases is an advantage.
> 
> Conversely, I love the Aftermaths in my FR6UC, but they can be a bitch to record. I end up with a really dry, overly midrangey sound that I have to compensate for down the line.



That's the thing, EMG's (or most actives in general) record very, very well for that exact reason. The only issue is, for me, they only do well for heavy music. With light gain they sound very flaccid. They're like the Peavey 5150 of pickups; they don't do much very well, but what they excel at, they really excel at.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Oct 16, 2015)

Jaxcharvel said:


> That's the thing, EMG's (or most actives in general) record very, very well for that exact reason. The only issue is, for me, they only do well for heavy music. With light gain they sound very flaccid. They're like the Peavey 5150 of pickups; they don't do much very well, but what they excel at, they really excel at.



They seem to do well with the extremities- they do well with high gain, AND when you clean them up, they're pretty clear.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 17, 2015)

Science_Penguin said:


> They seem to do well with the extremities- they do well with high gain, AND when you clean them up, they're pretty clear.



Indeed. So in retrospect they're slightly more versatile than a 5150. They're an Engl Fireball.


----------



## coffeeflush (Oct 17, 2015)

I have no problems with compressed tones, for playing stuff like behemoth and belphegor, they were superb. I use passives because I love being able to get very different tones using just changes in pick attack and left hand pressure. 

That being said, great read here. 

USING A COMPRESSOR TO COMPRESS A COMPRESSED INSTRUMENT BEING COMPRESSED WITH COMPRESSION AFTER ITS BEEN COMPRESSED - Welcome to Sound Instruction

I have nothing against compressors, sometimes I use them myself. But using super high gain + compressor + noise gain + emg's etc.
You might as well as play through a midi instrument with the velcoty sensitivity turned off. 

Mind you my rant is for a very particular case, lot of people use emg's and other actives musically too.


----------



## Bloodshredder (Oct 18, 2015)

coffeeflush said:


> I have no problems with compressed tones, for playing stuff like behemoth and belphegor, they were superb.



Exactly. They have their place and they are great for achieving specific tones.

When I was more into modern sounds, i found them to be perfect. Now that I have to cover a wider range of sounds, I started changing out the whole rig and it sounds better with passive PU's.

on a sidenote, I liked the EMG-X series a bit better than the normal ones. Now, after switching back to passive, I think that the X's come a bit closer to the passives.


----------



## frahmans (Oct 18, 2015)

David Gilmour's played emg back when he was still using the red strat and still made it sound dynamic. So emg can do more than metal. Granted he was using emg SA.


----------



## MattThePenguin (Oct 19, 2015)

I hate the way they respond to my playing, but Ben Weinman's guitar tones are seriously top notch and he uses 85/81. I just don't think I'll find a pickup that will respond the way a Dimarzio Dominion does... the perfect amount of everything


----------



## Blytheryn (Oct 19, 2015)

Jeez, this thread is making me GAS for a EMG 81 and 60 loaded axe again...


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 20, 2015)

Blytheryn said:


> Jeez, this thread is making me GAS for a EMG 81 and 60 loaded axe again...



That's why I made it. Wasn't really gassing for em (at all) but ended up with an axe loaded with em and it made me realize what I lived about them to begin with.


----------



## JohnIce (Oct 20, 2015)

frahmans said:


> David Gilmour's played emg back when he was still using the red strat and still made it sound dynamic. So emg can do more than metal. Granted he was using emg SA.



Yeah, the SA's are a different beast to the typical 81/85. However, Gilmour had this to say about them:

_"Those effects pedals really tended to pick up interference, as did the dimmers on the lighting rigs. And with Pink Floyd we did have extensive lighting rigs, which buzzed horribly. But when I first heard of and got hold of those EMG pickups, they stopped that dead. They sounded great - a very full and rich tone - but they didn't sound quite as 'Stratty' in some ways.

"There's something in the thinness and particular range a Strat has that makes it a Strat. With EMG pickups you tend to lose that a little bit. But nowadays, of course, everything is much better shielded and the lighting rigs operate from a completely different generator. Things are set up far better. So these days I can go back to using the older Strats live and I've been using my black Strat again, as I did at Live 8."_


----------



## Spectivum (Oct 21, 2015)

The big benefit of EMG 81/85 is that you get a record ready metal tone with one of those, straight out of the box. 
With passives, you can spend years going through the ones you random picked from hundreds of different options to find your sound but can never be sure it is the best because you haven't tried all.


----------



## DslDwg (Oct 21, 2015)

Their just a tool in the toolbox. 

As a guitarist that isn't gigging. I don't need back-ups of back-ups. So every guitar being pretty different is fine and frankly what I shoot for. 

If I have a go to pick-up it's probably the S/D Distortion, but definitely love the 81/60 combo and also the Dual Mode 81TW and 89. 

Frankly, this board is probably responsible for a huge part of the hate for EMG's. Lots of seven strings were coming with the 7-string soapbar which at the time made changing pick-ups difficult(gotta give EMG this, if doing this was an actual decision on their part and not just a simple design convenience, it was pure genius. At least initially you kept other pick-ups out of those guitars)

Then all of the sudden your weren't a "cool" six-string" player unless you had a set of BKP or some other boutique brand of passive pick-ups in your guitar.

Through all this EMG's didn't become ..... Are they great at everything, nope. But are they really good at some things, hell yes.


----------



## Quiet Coil (Oct 21, 2015)

89XR in the bridge is pretty sweet, that's what I've got in the bridge of my single pickup RR24.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Oct 21, 2015)

^Checking this out...


----------



## TankJon666 (Oct 22, 2015)

DslDwg said:


> Their just a tool in the toolbox.
> 
> As a guitarist that isn't gigging. I don't need back-ups of back-ups. So every guitar being pretty different is fine and frankly what I shoot for.
> 
> ...



^ 100% this ^

I've used EMG's for years - from when they were cool to when they became "teh sux". I'm getting a tele built with a set of white P81 and P85 pickups in too


----------



## Science_Penguin (Oct 22, 2015)

DslDwg said:


> Then all of the sudden your weren't a "cool" six-string" player unless you had a set of BKP or some other boutique brand of passive pick-ups in your guitar.



Frankly, I don't get "boutique" pickups like that. EMG's at least have specific, unique qualities for which people might seek them out, but I swear you can get any mid-rangey Dimarzio to sound like an Aftermath with some amp tweaks... Especially considering you're probably plugging into AxeFX or compressing to the moon and back anyway, so why spend the extra money? Just dial in the settings to make it work!

...I feel like I'd be a broken record on this if I didn't post so scarcely on this forum...


----------



## lewis (Oct 23, 2015)

all the things that Actives how going for them, i.e compressed, noise free, hot etc etc. I now get out of my Lace Deathbar/Xbar set. They look cooler, sound better (imo), dont require batteries to run and are 100% noise free.


----------



## wakjob (Oct 23, 2015)

I don't understand the "lack of dynamics" comment I see all the time.

I recently played a friends '83 custom shop BC Rich that had an EMG 81 in the bridge. I was running through the Crunch channel of his Mesa Mark V and getting some of the best vintage Fender Tweed tones ever! Rolling back the volume knob on the guitar cleaned up extremely well, as did hybrid finger-picking nuances.

And I'm a vintage Fender amp/guitar nut.

I'm assuming it was an old cream bottom EMG 81, as if that makes any difference.

When my Viper comes back from its re-fret, and I don't care for the Lace Deathbucker/Alumitone combo that's currently in it, it's getting the EMG 81/60 treatment.


----------



## wakjob (Oct 23, 2015)

Another EMG 81 experience I had that floored me was when I had the amp you see in my avatar. 
It's a JCM 800 2204S from '86.

I modded that amp to hell and back and couldn't get it to do what I wanted at the time.

My cousin stops by with his EMG 81 loaded Godin Redline 1. Plugged straight in, no pedals, no nothing. 
Amp returned back to stock specs.

Absolutely stunning.


----------



## coffeeflush (Oct 25, 2015)

^^ When I change my picking technique with my dimarzio it makes world of a difference in sound , when I do the same with emg's in the guitar, it sounds more or less even. The difference is there but not much. This is the lac k of dynamics that bothers me. 

Im curious , why is the deathbucker/alumitone combo not working for you ? Im planning to get them into my baritone 6 sometime later.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 25, 2015)

coffeeflush said:


> Im curious , why is the deathbucker/alumitone combo not working for you ? Im planning to get them into my baritone 6 sometime later.



I adore the Lace pups. Definitely give em a fair shot before you ditch em.


----------



## Sumsar (Oct 25, 2015)

I think there is nothing wrong with active pickups, they certainly have some uses (see thrash metalz!) however I do hate EMG, here is why:

\begin{rant}

Yes they did the 85 and 81 in the 1980's and they are "great" (for some uses) and fun to play with.

Much later they then did the 81-7 and the 707 for 7 string guitars and they completely cocked up on that. Even though those pickups are supposed to be 7 string versions of the 85 and 81, there is almost no resemblance. They sound like garbage: flat and bassy and makes your guitar sound like the strings are 25 years old.

Now if that was the end of the of that story it would be okay, \emph{but} they took their cock up to a whole other level:
They decided that their ....ty 7 string pickups should come in a bass housing, such that you could not easyly replace their pieces of .... with proper pickups. Next they somehow convinced many of the large companies producing 7 string guitars that they should only use these ....ty EMGs for their guitars (Jackson, Schecter, ESP, and to a certain extend Ibanez). This meant that for a long period of time you could only get 7 strings with ....ty, hard to replace pickups.

This has now changed somewhat, such that Jackson and Schecter now offer a lot of models with passives as well, while ESP still more or less only have 7 strings with 707 or 81-7 pickups.
The uses market is still more or less only 7 strings with ....ty pickups.
So yeah \bold{F&CK EMG PICKUPS!}

\end{rant}

So with that out of the way: I have never tried any of Seymour Duncans 7 string actives or the Fishman sets. I have a vague feeling that they might be what I actually want from an active pickup in a seven string guitar, I just haven't gotten to try them yet


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 25, 2015)

Sumsar said:


> I think there is nothing wrong with active pickups, they certainly have some uses (see thrash metalz!) however I do hate EMG, here is why:
> 
> \begin{rant}
> 
> ...



I ordered my DC700 with the active Carvin pups (even worse if you can believe that) and I hated them. I got a set of Blackouts to replace them with, and while they were better than the stock Carvins, and better than any 7 string EMGs I've played, they still retain that sterile active character. IMO if you don't like EMGs you won't like Blackouts either.


----------



## Steinmetzify (Oct 25, 2015)

wakjob said:


> I don't understand the "lack of dynamics" comment I see all the time.



Different perception....mostly for me it was because I used EMGs for a long ass time and got used to what they sounded like, and then changed to passives, and it was different. EMGs can do cleans and have some dynamics, just different from what passives do.

I prefer the dynamics from passives vs the dynamics from actives, given the gear I use, is all. People hear different things with different pieces of gear....if I was running EMGs into pedals into a vintage Fender I'd probably hear them differently as well. Clean amp with certain freqs boosted via pedals? Yeah, EMGs are going to sound different than a volume roll off in front of a 5153 with a Decimator and 10 band in the loop and an 808 in front. I don't know anyone that's been playing the last 25 years that'd call the Crunch channel of a Mark IV 'super high gain', not that you were saying it was...

I think what people are running INTO has a lot more to do with what they hear than the pickups they're using, but that's just IMO.


----------



## Blytheryn (Oct 26, 2015)

steinmetzify said:


> Different perception....mostly for me it was because I used EMGs for a long ass time and got used to what they sounded like, and then changed to passives, and it was different. EMGs can do cleans and have some dynamics, just different from what passives do.
> 
> I prefer the dynamics from passives vs the dynamics from actives, given the gear I use, is all. People hear different things with different pieces of gear....if I was running EMGs into pedals into a vintage Fender I'd probably hear them differently as well. Clean amp with certain freqs boosted via pedals? Yeah, EMGs are going to sound different than a volume roll off in front of a 5153 with a Decimator and 10 band in the loop and an 808 in front. I don't know anyone that's been playing the last 25 years that'd call the Crunch channel of a Mark IV 'super high gain', not that you were saying it was...
> 
> I think what people are running INTO has a lot more to do with what they hear than the pickups they're using, but that's just IMO.




This is exactly what made me make the jump from EMGs. I simply got bored of the tone, having only one guitar at the time. I did like the tone, but it just felt really sterile. This was around 2 years ago when SD started putting out the Nazgûl, Black Winter etc... When I actually got passives installed in my guitar I heard nuances in my playing and little things I hadn't heard before, which just sounded so much more interesting for the stuff I was playing at the time.

I wouldn't mind having an EMG loaded axe now, because they do sound great, but I don't know if I would rather try the EMTY's instead. Still, EMG 81 and 60 = best thrash tone you will ever get.


----------



## Andromalia (Oct 26, 2015)

Not getting the 707 hate, I recently bought a guitar with them and expected to have to change them since most of SSO is dissing on them and they sound fine.


----------



## TankJon666 (Oct 26, 2015)

Andromalia said:


> Not getting the 707 hate, I recently bought a guitar with them and expected to have to change them since most of SSO is dissing on them and they sound fine.


 
Me neither!

Though my Ltd Viper 407 with 707's in sound WAY different to my Hagstrom Deuce with 81/85 in. Different body woods though. The Hagstrom has more upper midrange than the Ltd though which sounds naturally very scooped. My Gibby SG sits somewhere between the two with 81/85s in. 

So to anyone that says that EMG's make every guitar sound the same as the next clearly hasn't spent much time with them!


----------



## Galeus708 (Oct 27, 2015)

I have to say I disagree with the common refrain of "They make all guitars sound the same". I have three guitars that have EMG 81s in the bridge, an ESP Eclipse, an LTD KH-602 and a Gibson Explorer (which I believe used to be a Gothic II, but it's been modified quite a bit), and they all sound pretty different. Even the Explorer and Eclipse have easily discernible differences, despite both being Mahogany bodied and Ebony Boarded axes.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Oct 30, 2015)

Personally, I've never been able to tell much difference in any EMG equipped guitar. If the spacing to the strings is the same for each guitar, they sound all but identical to me. At least much more than say a JB and a Full Shred, or (insert passive pickups here).


----------



## p4vl (Oct 31, 2015)

coffeeflush said:


> I know people who run 1 compressor, heavy gain , 2 noise suppressors.
> Then they buy bareknuckles, because these pickups have character.



Don't blame Bare Knuckleshuffle for trendy Djerkoffs. The C-hawk sounds great while riffing in standard tuning.

When was the last time someone playing a low-tuned mahogany guitar with an EMG 81 -> TS9 -> Recto/6505+ -> cab w/v30's had a tone that really _surprised _you? I heard that exact tone while I was typing that sentence. EMG's aren't _the_ problem but they are certainly a symptom of what's boring about modern metal tone.


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Oct 31, 2015)

p4vl said:


> Don't blame Bare Knuckleshuffle for trendy Djerkoffs. The C-hawk sounds great while riffing in standard tuning.
> 
> When was the last time someone playing a low-tuned mahogany guitar with an EMG 81 -> TS9 -> Recto/6505+ -> cab w/v30's had a tone that really _surprised _you? I heard that exact tone while I was typing that sentence. EMG's aren't _the_ problem but they are certainly a symptom of what's boring about modern metal tone.



Not really. 

Any gear can, within reason, be made to sound that way. EMGs and Bareknuckles are no exception.

People choose to sound that way, the gear doesn't force it upon them. 

Modern metal tone is functional - staccato riff writing is what people are interested in, not oldschool thrash riffs - that sounds bad if the tone isn't right for it.


----------



## aesthyrian (Oct 31, 2015)

Got my RG7620 back together with an EMG 707 and it's tons of fun to play. Tons of pick attack, but at times it can be too much. It's really just a taste and application thing. Personally, I like to have at least one guitar with actives for that type of tone, but I really do prefer the versatility of passives.


----------



## Unleash The Fury (Nov 1, 2015)

Question, A 27" scale + .011-.056 + drop A + emg 81/85 = great match?

I'm doing this because the guitar I ordered has the emgs and 27 scale. I don't know if these pickups are voiced for a particular tuning. Are they flexible enough to sound good with this tuning with this setup? I guess I'll find out soon enough but I might avoid setting it up for drop A if theres some red flags about this idea.


----------



## coffeeflush (Nov 1, 2015)

I don't like 56 for drop A, you would need atleast 62 to get good definition. 
The 81 does sound nice on it though.


----------



## Unleash The Fury (Nov 1, 2015)

coffeeflush said:


> I don't like 56 for drop A, you would need atleast 62 to get good definition.
> The 81 does sound nice on it though.



Thanks, in that case I may get 12 to 60/62 because I don't know if set comes in 11 to 60/62.


----------



## p4vl (Nov 1, 2015)

GuitarBizarre said:


> People choose to sound that way, the gear doesn't force it upon them.



That was my point. Gear doesn't force people to be boring but how many three channel amps are actually one trick ponies? 



GuitarBizarre said:


> Modern metal tone is functional - staccato riff writing is what people are interested in, not oldschool thrash riffs - that sounds bad if the tone isn't right for it.



Are you aware that there are some bands that play slowly and heavily?


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Nov 1, 2015)

The only reason I prefer passives is lack of battery. I can get good cleans, crunches, and balls to the wall distortion out of either. 

I do really like blackouts though. I have one of the Mick ones and its very easy on my ears. I've played plenty of EMG's and they sound well enough. No reason to love or hate them for me.


----------



## TankJon666 (Nov 1, 2015)

p4vl said:


> Don't blame Bare Knuckleshuffle for trendy Djerkoffs. The C-hawk sounds great while riffing in standard tuning.
> 
> When was the last time someone playing a low-tuned mahogany guitar with an EMG 81 -> TS9 -> Recto/6505+ -> cab w/v30's had a tone that really _surprised _you? I heard that exact tone while I was typing that sentence. EMG's aren't _the_ problem but they are certainly a symptom of what's boring about modern metal tone.



When was the last time someone playing a BKP loaded 8 string into an Axe Fx had a tone that really surprised you? ....me neither.


----------



## Sumsar (Nov 1, 2015)

I spend some time with my 2x 81 loaded ltd JH600 and it sounded great. Added a ton of delay and all of a sudden I was in Devin (Townsend) land 

So yeah nothing wrong with 6 string EMGs, I am only hating on the 7 string versions, which I am however hating very very mcuh.


----------



## Given To Fly (Nov 1, 2015)

coffeeflush said:


> ^^ When I change my picking technique with my dimarzio it makes world of a difference in sound , when I do the same with emg's in the guitar, it sounds more or less even. The difference is there but not much. This is the lac k of dynamics that bothers me.



Thank you for explaining this! What you are describing is a change in _timbre_ or tone color, not _dynamics_. I'm going to use your post as an example because you clearly describe how you play but use the wrong noun in your description. I don't blame you for doing it. This is how guitarists have learned to discuss active pickups. The problem is these words have specific meanings. Its equivilant to playing a wrong pitch and saying "my rhythm was off." 

The fundamental elements of music are _pitch, rhythm, timbre, dynamics, and articulation. _ (_Articulation_ sometimes gets lumped together with _timbre_.) 

_Dynamics_ in the realm of music primarily focus on volume:

*ppp*  Pianississimo  The softest possible sound! Every note may not be heard!

*pp*  Pianissimo  The softest possible sound that can be played while maintain an audible and quality tone.

*p*  Piano  Quiet, almost a whisper but every note is audible. 

*mp*  Mezzo-Piano  Normal speech, used in a conversation. (Context)

*mf*  Mezzo-Forte  Normal speech at a distance. (Context)

*f * Forte  Loud, similar to a yell.

*ff*  Fortissimo  The loudest possible sound that can be played while maintaining a quality tone.

*fff * Fortississimo  The loudest possible sound! Ugly tones are acceptable.

The only way to significantly change the dynamic range of a distorted electric guitar is to turn the Volume (or Master Volume) up and down on your amp. You can also run a volume pedal in the FX loop which is essentially the same thing.

A clean tone with plenty of headroom will allow a guitarist to make dynamic changes based off how hard they play the strings but I have not heard that type of tone on this forum in a really really long time. 

Ok, I've done my part. Carry on...


----------



## p4vl (Nov 1, 2015)

TankJon666 said:


> When was the last time someone playing a BKP loaded 8 string into an Axe Fx had a tone that really surprised you? ....me neither.



The 8-string/BKP/AxeFX rig is the 21st century version of the EMG/TS9/Recto/5150/V30 rig that I described previously. 

I can't think of _any_ music that I listen to that is played on 8 string guitars; I find 8-guitars are very uninteresting. Maybe it's odd to say on sevensstring.org but I don't think anyone will write a classic album like Reign in Blood, Ride the Lightning, or Don't Break the Oath on an 8-string. Much of the music I've heard on ERG's is dismissible. 

I am holding out hope for 15-strings, though.


----------



## Sumsar (Nov 1, 2015)

p4vl said:


> The 8-string/BKP/AxeFX rig is the 21st century version of the EMG/TS9/Recto/5150/V30 rig that I described previously.
> 
> I can't think of _any_ music that I listen to that is played on 8 string guitars; I find 8-guitars are very uninteresting. Maybe it's odd to say on sevensstring.org but I don't think anyone will write a classic album like Reign in Blood, Ride the Lightning, or Don't Break the Oath on an 8-string. Much of the music I've heard on ERG's is dismissible.



Well Meshuggah have made some very good albums on 8 string which will probably go over in history as classic albums.
Ihsahn also used 8 string, although along with 6 and 7 strings for his "After" album which I also find to be quite an important pierce of work, which may also become a proggresive metal classic.
But yeah in general not many 8 string albums will go down in history as classics, but on the other hand - these days very few albums written seem to be instant classics.


----------



## Sumsar (Nov 1, 2015)

Given To Fly said:


> *fff * Fortississimo  The loudest possible sound! Ugly tones are acceptable.



I agree with everything in your post, but is "fff" not "forte fortissimo"? and actually similarly "ppp" being "piano pianisimo". Any way thats what I remember my classical guitar teacher telling me. I can see that wikipedia states otherwise, but I learned it differently from several teachers.

Yes slight derailing of thread but oh well


----------



## p4vl (Nov 1, 2015)

Sumsar said:


> Well Meshuggah have made some very good albums on 8 string which will probably go over in history as classic albums.
> Ihsahn also used 8 string, although along with 6 and 7 strings for his "After" album which I also find to be quite an important pierce of work, which may also become a proggresive metal classic.



Meshuggah worship baffles me, as it did in the 90's. I like some technical metal (old Cynic, Atheist, Gorguts, old Cryptopsy, Anata.) but if you traveled in time back to the 90's and informed me that a lot of 21st century metal bands would be influenced by/rip off Meshuggah, I would have asked 'why?'. 

I also wouldn't have predicted that a bunch of hardcore/metalcore bands would rip off At the Gates in the 00's, so maybe I'm just not paying attention. 

Ihsahn should go back to 6-strings, old Emperor didn't make 'historic' metal albums, they made 'Stranded on a Desert Island' albums (in a different genre compared to what he does now but still). At least he has the decency to not make another Emperor album; Prometheus was a sad example of ending with a whimper.


----------



## FILTHnFEAR (Nov 1, 2015)

p4vl said:


> Meshuggah worship baffles me, as it did in the 90's. if you traveled in time back to the 90's and informed me that a lot of 21st century metal bands would be influenced by/rip off Meshuggah, I would have asked 'why?'.


----------



## Given To Fly (Nov 2, 2015)

Sumsar said:


> I agree with everything in your post, but is "fff" not "forte fortissimo"? and actually similarly "ppp" being "piano pianisimo". Any way thats what I remember my classical guitar teacher telling me. I can see that wikipedia states otherwise, but I learned it differently from several teachers.
> 
> Yes slight derailing of thread but oh well



I apologize for the derailment but I figured I should say something instead letting it continue to bother me. I'll try to keep my rage under control from here on out.  

What I wrote was cliff note version of an article that I can no longer find. (I think its somewhere on newmusicbox.org ) The article was well written and all researched, mostly through experience, and basically laid out what he found to be a realistic dynamic range for performers to be able to perform. The article described the intent the performer should have while taking into account the limitations of their instrument. I would have just posted a link but like I said, I can't find the article anymore.


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Nov 4, 2015)

Given To Fly said:


> I apologize for the derailment but I figured I should say something instead letting it continue to bother me. I'll try to keep my rage under control from here on out.
> 
> What I wrote was cliff note version of an article that I can no longer find. (I think its somewhere on newmusicbox.org ) The article was well written and all researched, mostly through experience, and basically laid out what he found to be a realistic dynamic range for performers to be able to perform. The article described the intent the performer should have while taking into account the limitations of their instrument. I would have just posted a link but like I said, I can't find the article anymore.



I think what most people mean when they say "dynamics" aren't dynamics in the true sense, but simple picking dynamics. Active pups have loads of natural compression so picking dynamics mean little to nothing.


----------



## coffeeflush (Nov 4, 2015)

Jaxcharvel said:


> I think what most people mean when they say "dynamics" aren't dynamics in the true sense, but simple picking dynamics. Active pups have loads of natural compression so picking dynamics mean little to nothing.



thanks Jaxcharvel, I was referring to picking dynamics. 

I play a fret less guitar so slight changes in pressure of left and right hand changes the tone quiet a bit. 

While using passive (though very high output) pickups I am able to get these subtleties across. 
Using Active pickups I am not though they do sound good even on cleans.

This is why I use passives. Maybe I did used the term dynamics wrong but I meant to refer changes in volume from changing the pressure in my picking. Not the timbre. 

But thanks for correcting it.


----------



## Sumsar (Nov 4, 2015)

p4vl said:


> Meshuggah worship baffles me, as it did in the 90's. I like some technical metal (old Cynic, Atheist, Gorguts, old Cryptopsy, Anata.) but if you traveled in time back to the 90's and informed me that a lot of 21st century metal bands would be influenced by/rip off Meshuggah, I would have asked 'why?'.
> 
> I also wouldn't have predicted that a bunch of hardcore/metalcore bands would rip off At the Gates in the 00's, so maybe I'm just not paying attention.
> 
> Ihsahn should go back to 6-strings, old Emperor didn't make 'historic' metal albums, they made 'Stranded on a Desert Island' albums (in a different genre compared to what he does now but still). At least he has the decency to not make another Emperor album; Prometheus was a sad example of ending with a whimper.



Not saying that I get the Meshuggah worshipness either, but from looking at where the (pop) metal scene is going these days it seems they are pretty influencial and therefore some of their albums may end up in the history books.

About Emperor: I actually like Prometheus very much, but maybe I am just a bit of an Emperor / Ihsahn fanboy haha


----------



## p4vl (Nov 4, 2015)

Sumsar said:


> About Emperor: I actually like Prometheus very much, but maybe I am just a bit of an Emperor / Ihsahn fanboy haha



I'll always love In the Nightside Eclipse (I've listened to Anthems so many times that I'm burned out on it). IX Equilibrium is great but the fact that Samoth is listed as 'Additional Guitars' in the booklet for Prometheus kind of makes it seem like Ihsahn's first solo record. 

His Emperor tablature book kicks all kinds of ass, though. Some of the riffs and counterpoint harmonies they were doing even back on the EP were very, very different from what other Norwegian bands were doing and are impossible to figure out without that book.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Nov 4, 2015)

p4vl said:


> Meshuggah worship baffles me, as it did in the 90's. I like some technical metal (old Cynic, Atheist, Gorguts, old Cryptopsy, Anata.) but if you traveled in time back to the 90's and informed me that a lot of 21st century metal bands would be influenced by/rip off Meshuggah, I would have asked 'why?'.



Personally, I prefer the "Pop Metal" Meshuggah "rip-off's" over the bore fest that is the original. If they want to take crap and improve it, I'm not going to complain...


----------



## BlueGrot (Nov 4, 2015)

Meshuggah was good up until about Nothing/C33, then they got inspired by the artists they inspired. Ew.


----------



## rewihendrix (Nov 5, 2015)

Meshuggah is still awesome and you all smell so there.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Nov 6, 2015)

BlueGrot said:


> Meshuggah was good up until about Nothing/C33, then they got inspired by the artists they inspired. Ew.



I don't care if people like the post-Nothing stuff, but when people go as far as calling their earlier albums, especially Contradictions, "....ty thrash metal"...


----------



## Science_Penguin (Nov 7, 2015)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> I don't care if people like the post-Nothing stuff, but when people go as far as calling their earlier albums, especially Contradictions, "....ty thrash metal"...
> 
> (Image)



That is one thing I will concede, I haven't heard anything pre-Nothing, so, for all I know, they were decent at one point. Hell, there's even some post-Nothing stuff I haven't bothered to check out that might be good. I just REALLY don't understand the praise Nothing gets.


----------



## coffeeflush (Nov 7, 2015)

I personally think Meshuggah is great. 
Fanboy ism in any excessive form is harmful and lot of criticism for meshuggah is perfectly valid. 

I personally don't like AAL (and prog in general) much either but I think their albums would be one of the most influential metal albums post 2010.

Its true that most of the 8 string music out there is not that great but its no reason to diss them. Korn after all started popularizing the 7 string craze.


----------



## aesthyrian (Nov 7, 2015)

How is a thread about EMG hatred, now a thread about Meshuggah, who don't even use EMG's?

Jeeze, I thought my attention span was short


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Nov 7, 2015)

This thread has performed quite the shift. I personally dig Meshuggah, although I have to take em in small doses. Kind of like EMGs.


----------



## TheWarAgainstTime (Nov 8, 2015)

Jaxcharvel said:


> This thread has performed quite the shift. I personally dig Meshuggah, although I have to take em in small doses. Kind of like EMGs.



Hey, it's SSO after all  even we, a community of some of the most notorious EMG haters, can only talk about pickups for so long before it all morphs into a big Meshuggah comment fest


----------



## coffeeflush (Nov 8, 2015)

On a related note : How do the lundgrens compare to emg ?


----------



## Jaxcharvel (Nov 8, 2015)

coffeeflush said:


> On a related note : How do the lundgrens compare to emg ?



The only Lundgren I've ever played was an M6, and it was a while ago. From what I recall though, tonally they were similar, but the Lundgren has much better touch sensitivity.


----------

