Fishman Fluence Modern set - My thoughts

[Rex_Rocker]

I grabbed a set of Fishman Fluence Moderns to see what the hype was all about. TBH, I was a bit skeptical. I was under the impression that there was a lot of marketing involved, but I really wanted to try them because I love trying different pickups out.

I'm usually not the kind of guy who looks for versatility in a pickup. I don't play anything but distorted chugs with some ocasional leads and very rare clean passages. These pickups, however, offer A LOT of different options. Coil splits, two voicings, an output pad, and a switchable high-end rolloff. TBH, I didn't wire it all. I'm just running a single volume knob where the push/pull toggles between the two different voicings.

The passive voicing is kinda cool. It's supposed to be inspired by the Bill Lawrence 500XL in the bridge, or so I've read. I've never tried one of those, but I've tried the Dimebucker, and it's nowhere near as harsh, but it's kinda similar in that it's not an overly mid-focused (for a high-output pickup), and it's hot but not overly so. It's a cool sound, but I don't feel it's as good as my favorite passive: the Duncan Black Winter. Not that it's trying to be a Black Winter, though. Maybe it's just a taste thing. I do like it, but I just don't love it. The neck pickup in the passive voicing is great for cleans, though. Super clean, and not plinky or weak like many neck pickups tend to be.

The active voicing... man... where to start. I absolutely love it! My all-time favorite bridge pickup has been the EMG 81 ever since I've tried it many years ago. No matter how many pickups I try, I always end up coming back to the trusty old 81. It just sits in the mix right, and it records beautifully. The Modern Ceramic bridge pickup is everything I like about the EMG 81, and then some! It's slightly tighter (yes! I found that hard to believe at first, but it is) and slightly clearer. It has a bit more high-end detail, and slightly less low-end mud. If you want a fat/thick sound, this is probably not the pickup for you. But for me, and EMG 81 fanboi, this is perfection. The neck pickup in the active voicing is fantastic as well. It's smooth like the EMG 85, but it's nowhere near as dark/muddy. It balances much better with the Modern Ceramic bridge pickup than the 85 does with the 81. It's definitely more 85-inspired than 60, IMO. It's not as harsh or chirpy as the 60 can be up past the 12th fret. I love how it works with the Ceramic in the bridge as a set.

So all in all, yes, there's definitely marketing involved in these pickups' reputation, but man, they totally lived up to the hype for me. The active voicing sounds incredible, and the passive voicing is totally usable. Add coil-splitability to that, (as well as tons of other options), and the pickups are truly something else.

So now I want a different set of Fluences to try in my other LTD, lol.

[ArtieToo]

Nice review. I've been intrigued by the Fluence pups also. The more info, the better. I'm even more interested in your EMG 81/85 review. I'll have to go back and revisit mine, in my Schecter. I'm not taken by them at all. Then again, it may be because you play "distorted chugs with some occasional leads and very rare clean passages", while I play almost exclusively clean.

But great review. Thanks.

[Rex_Rocker]

Nice review. I've been intrigued by the Fluence pups also. The more info, the better. I'm even more interested in your EMG 81/85 review. I'll have to go back and revisit mine, in my Schecter. I'm not taken by them at all. Then again, it may be because you play "distorted chugs with some occasional leads and very rare clean passages", while I play almost exclusively clean.

But great review. Thanks.

I dig the 81/85 combo. I dig the 81 in that set more than I do the 85, TBH. I prefer the 81/60 set, or even better, the 81/66 combo. I'm still going to keep an 81/60 set in another guitar for when the mood strikes.

The 81 is definitely an acquired taste for me. It's tight (tighter than anything I've tried in the passive realm), but at the expense of low end power. If you have an amp with the balls to counter that (like a 5150 or a Rectifier), the low end rolloff translates into a razor tight distorted tone. I don't get the people who describe the 81 as "scooped", TBH, when it's a pickup that barely has any low-end at all. It isn't dark, but it's got more of a high-mid stridency than an airy, sizzly high-end. Its preamp distorts lightly when you pick hard at 9V, so it's almost like you've got a pre-boosted tone (which is what I suspect people describe as "compressed"). It has a lot of "flaws", but when you hear it in a mix, it sits just right. It's a very "familiar" 90's/2000's sound. I love it, personally.

The 85... well... It's smooth. Like I said, I don't exactly love it, and I prefer other EMG's in the neck position. It's not impossible to balance, but it is slightly hotter than the 81, so you have to keep it considerably further from the strings to get it to work. It's not dark, but it hasn't got the high-mid presence of the 81. It's got more of a low-mid growl (which can sometimes work great in the bridge position too). It's reasonably tight because it also has the typical EMG low-end rolloff, but it's very smooth. This, plus the compression from it being hot, translates into a liquid-y fluid lead tone. That's is biggest strenght, IMO.

If you play clean mostly, then yeah, these are probably not the pickups for you. They can be made to work clean with some tweaking. They have a characteristic Metallica-like clean tone (though, if you want that, you're better off with the 60, TBH), but if you're not going for that, then you're probably better off with something else. Same goes for the Fluences. The Fluences sound better clean because they've got the passive voicing, but if you're going for something more tame/traditional, then you're probably better off with passives or maybe the Fluence Classic set (which I have not tried, but it's probably the next thing I'm buying myself).

[ArtieToo]

If you have an amp with the balls to counter that (like a 5150 or a Rectifier), the low end rolloff translates into a razor tight distorted tone.

That's probably the other half of my "problem." I'm sure my Bogner Alchemist is up for the job, but along with playing clean, I also play at mostly "bedroom" volume. I doubt that either condition brings out what the 81/85 set is designed for. I'm still going to mess with them a bit, but they'll probably be replaced.

And thanks again for the nicely detailed critique.

[Rex_Rocker]

No problem, man.

[ToneFiddler]

thanks for the review!
you‘re descriptions of the EMGs are always spot on

i thought you wanted something with a lil more balls than the 81? isn’tthe fluence is a step in the other direction?

[Top-L]

I grabbed a set of Fishman Fluence Moderns to see what the hype was all about. TBH, I was a bit skeptical. I was under the impression that there was a lot of marketing involved, but I really wanted to try them because I love trying different pickups out.

I'm usually not the kind of guy who looks for versatility in a pickup. I don't play anything but distorted chugs with some ocasional leads and very rare clean passages. These pickups, however, offer A LOT of different options. Coil splits, two voicings, an output pad, and a switchable high-end rolloff. TBH, I didn't wire it all. I'm just running a single volume knob where the push/pull toggles between the two different voicings.

The passive voicing is kinda cool. It's supposed to be inspired by the Bill Lawrence 500XL in the bridge, or so I've read. I've never tried one of those, but I've tried the Dimebucker, and it's nowhere near as harsh, but it's kinda similar in that it's not an overly mid-focused (for a high-output pickup), and it's hot but not overly so. It's a cool sound, but I don't feel it's as good as my favorite passive: the Duncan Black Winter. Not that it's trying to be a Black Winter, though. Maybe it's just a taste thing. I do like it, but I just don't love it. The neck pickup in the passive voicing is great for cleans, though. Super clean, and not plinky or weak like many neck pickups tend to be.

The active voicing... man... where to start. I absolutely love it! My all-time favorite bridge pickup has been the EMG 81 ever since I've tried it many years ago. No matter how many pickups I try, I always end up coming back to the trusty old 81. It just sits in the mix right, and it records beautifully. The Modern Ceramic bridge pickup is everything I like about the EMG 81, and then some! It's slightly tighter (yes! I found that hard to believe at first, but it is) and slightly clearer. It has a bit more high-end detail, and slightly less low-end mud. If you want a fat/thick sound, this is probably not the pickup for you. But for me, and EMG 81 fanboi, this is perfection. The neck pickup in the active voicing is fantastic as well. It's smooth like the EMG 85, but it's nowhere near as dark/muddy. It balances much better with the Modern Ceramic bridge pickup than the 85 does with the 81. It's definitely more 85-inspired than 60, IMO. It's not as harsh or chirpy as the 60 can be up past the 12th fret. I love how it works with the Ceramic in the bridge as a set.

So all in all, yes, there's definitely marketing involved in these pickups' reputation, but man, they totally lived up to the hype for me. The active voicing sounds incredible, and the passive voicing is totally usable. Add coil-splitability to that, (as well as tons of other options), and the pickups are truly something else.

So now I want a different set of Fluences to try in my other LTD, lol.

Have you tried the EMG 57/66tw set?

I got those in my LTD and was planning to rip them out for passives, but they are excellent. IDK how they compare to the 81s (its been years since I was into them).

I'm curious if you've played the 57/66 set because there are some guitars I like that ship with the Fluence, and wonder how they compare. The 57/66 has an "almost passive" vibe.

[ToneFiddler]

Top-L : yes he has (the non TW version though). there should be a review on here, search for it.
he even got two sets because of some possible preamp change...

by the way: i am also curios about that passive voice/voice 2, but i asked and it's NOT modeled after a Bill Lawrence 500XL. i read that 500XL statement somewhere too, but it's false.

[JB_From_Hell]

Glad to see another Fluence fanboy. You’re right, they live up to and exceed expectations.

Keep an eye out for the Abasi set. That’s what is in my 8 string, they’re incredible, and due to the technology, the 6 and 7 versions sound exactly the same. The neck is warm and jazzy or PAF, or a Tele neck split. The bridge is a brutal mid heavy hot humbucker, a passive voicing that Frank describes as a mid-wind that I think is perfect for thrash, or a very clucky position 2 Strat sound.

Seriously, there’s a reason all the guys who are switching are doing so.

[ToneFiddler]

@Top-L:

found it!

https://forum.seymourduncan.com/forum/the-pickup-lounge/6009353-my-review-on-two-different-emg-57-66-sets

[Top-L]

@Top-L:

found it!
https://forum.seymourduncan.com/foru...emg-57-66-sets

Thanks for the link. I went down that rabbit hole past 20 minutes and it seems there are changes intentional or otherwise, that make active pickups sound different.

Everyone knows that magnets demagnetize over time and cause pickups to change in sound. I wonder what 30 years will do to the magnet in an old EMG? They are much lower output to begin with so it reasons that small changes might be amplified.

Also,,, the preamp.... I suppose there really is no locking down production specs on those, so they are bound to sound different, even from the same batch.

I like the actives, but they are enough different from my other pickups that the amp settings are different. I may eventually replace them with passives.

The 57/66 set have a ton of output, yet are also clear, which puts them in a category by themselves. They also have a toneful mid and I wouldn't call them "lifeless" like people would claim about actives. But they haven't changed my life either.

EDIT: Imo, if they changed the spec of a pickup, they should have given it an official new designation, instead of calling it the same thing.

[Rex_Rocker]

Have you tried the EMG 57/66tw set?

I got those in my LTD and was planning to rip them out for passives, but they are excellent. IDK how they compare to the 81s (its been years since I was into them).

I'm curious if you've played the 57/66 set because there are some guitars I like that ship with the Fluence, and wonder how they compare. The 57/66 has an "almost passive" vibe.

I have not tried the TW set, but I have the 57/66 set in my EC-401. Thing with EMG's is I read they change some components in the preamp more or less recently. I had a new 57/66 set which sounded unusably twangy through my setup. I now have an old beat-up set that sounds as expected from EMG's.

I still think they sound like EMG's, TBH. The 57 is both chunkier and more open than the 81, but not by much. TBH, I just found dig the 81 better. The 66 is my favorite EMG neck pickup. It's tighter and clearer than the 85, but not as harsh and plinky as the 60. I love it. The Fluence Modern Alnico reminds me a lot of it, except a bit tighter and smoother.

But when comparing an old 81/60 set to the old 57/66 set I kept, the headroom isn't different at all. I have recorded DI's with both, and they both clip at the exact same threshold. The 57 is slightly more attacky and open, so that may give off the impression that it's more passive-like, but the actual pickup itself (before the preamp) is hotter and louder, so it clips a whole lot more. I find they REALLY benefit from the 18V mod to really open them up.

That has been my experience. If I had to pick a favorite set of EMG's, it would be the 81/66. I'm probably going to keep a guitar around with that set, TBH.

Glad to see another Fluence fanboy. You’re right, they live up to and exceed expectations.

Keep an eye out for the Abasi set. That’s what is in my 8 string, they’re incredible, and due to the technology, the 6 and 7 versions sound exactly the same. The neck is warm and jazzy or PAF, or a Tele neck split. The bridge is a brutal mid heavy hot humbucker, a passive voicing that Frank describes as a mid-wind that I think is perfect for thrash, or a very clucky position 2 Strat sound.

Seriously, there’s a reason all the guys who are switching are doing so.

I definitely want to try more sets of Fluences. I'm looking at either the Classics or the Devins. I wish they offered the Adlers in other finishes, though.

Even with all the hype around Fluences, they did not disappoint me one bit. They are definitely a good innovative product (with a good marketing strategy) that functions just as described.

[Rex_Rocker]

thanks for the review!
you‘re descriptions of the EMGs are always spot on

i thought you wanted something with a lil more balls than the 81? isn’tthe fluence is a step in the other direction?

Yeah, the Modern Ceramic is definitely a step in the opposite direction. It's got ever-so-slightly less low-end and ever-so-slightly more high-end. It feels clearer and tighter because of that, though. So I just sucked it up and turned the bass knob up in my amp, LOL. The result is very pleasing, so no complaints here.

I guess if I wanted to, the Modern Alnico would make for a great bridge pickup that's chunkier. Still got to try that, but I'm loving the Modern Ceramic so much, I don't feel like I need to, haha.

The thing about the Modern Ceramic is it's also got the passive voicing which is definitely fatter than the active voicing, so there's that option as well.

[Rex_Rocker]

Top-Lby the way: i am also curios about that passive voice/voice 2, but i asked and it's NOT modeled after a Bill Lawrence 500XL. i read that 500XL statement somewhere too, but it's false.

Is it not? I heard an interview with Ken Susi where he mentions the passive voicings is "close to what Dimebag used". I'll see if I can dig the interview up.

Still, it's a VERY usable voicing, IMO. Though I prefer a Black Winter as far as high-output ceramic passives go.

*EDIT* He says so here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nppa9X_Noo

I don't mean to say I doubt you, BTW. Just maybe Ken meant that in a very loose sense?

[Top-L]

I still think they sound like EMG's, TBH. The 57 is both chunkier and more open than the 81, but not by much. TBH, I just found dig the 81 better.

The 57 is hot and the distortion it produces is "clear". This puts it in a category by itself, if what I remember about the 81 is true (that its an aggressive tone. most hot pickups are voiced aggressive with some honk.)

Which means I kinda understand why they call it a "PAF" style tone. It has the openness of a lower output humbucker, smoother than an 81, but its hot as hell. Mine came in a new guitar, which means they are probably the "new" style, but I wouldn't call them twangy in any way. Is it possible the ones you got were defective?

I use an SD-1 in front of almost all my rigs and I found that to get the 57 to sound more like my passive pickups (D Sonic, Crunch Lab, Quantums, Evolutions), I lower the output and raise the drive. So I'm adding some harmonic distortion and lowering the output before it hits the amp.

The 66 is my favorite EMG neck pickup. It's tighter and clearer than the 85, but not as harsh and plinky as the 60. I love it. The Fluence Modern Alnico reminds me a lot of it, except a bit tighter and smoother.

The 66 is like a really hot, tubular PAF style tone in the neck. I can understand why thats your favorite neck pickup. It bounces and sings.

My only complaint with the TW set is that the "single coil" voice is too similar to the normal voice. Its still really hot. Would be great if there was a pot that could adjust the relative output.