Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

[dominus]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

I think I should clarify what i meant when i said tight - i meant tight and quiet (ie hum free) - every passive i've tried (Distortion, JB, invader, Alt 8, d activator) has this inherently present noise when played under high gain (and please don't mention using a noise gate etc - i already do) - it's something i don't mind when playing metal tuned above Db, but for all that super tight riffing like Fear Factory and bands like them, i find that blackouts have this whole "noise gate built into the pickup" thing going, and no passive i've tried has that - something i find essential for playing in B. Plus it allows me to not shut the noise gate too tightly and ruin attack, but when you stop playing, there is absolute silence. I love blackouts for that application, not so much for playing in more standard tunings.

Ahh. Most people mean "brighter" when they're talking about tightness, they mean the sound of the distortion. Yes, actives are less noisy than passives. It's probably because actives are lower output pickups with a preamp. Noise is another reason I switched to actives, I also use lower tunings (open B) with tons of distortion.

 

[B2D]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

Sure it's not the other way around?

It used to be the other way around. I switched it to the configuration i described about 6 months ago and liked it, so I'm keeping it that way.

 

[JOEBACCA]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

In my last band Inverted, I was using EMG 81 in the Bridge & 85 in the Neck in my Washburn X50 Pro. We were tuned to Drop C# and I was on the Gain Channel 95% of the time which worked well for

what we were playing (Originals, kind of a mix between Faith no More & American Head Charge). I love EMG's for everything Metal but eventually my Band split up and I joined a Melodic Hard Rock Original

Band a couple years ago named Coyle. A lot of the songs that were written have a good balance of Clean and Dirty and the EMG's IMO weren't cutting it in the clean dept. So I eventually switched

exclusively to Passives. Dimarzio D' Activators were what come stock in my Iceman and those are Fantastic Pickups, even though they are High Output with Ceramic Mags they had very good dynamics

and slight roll offs on the volume knob did wonders. The DA's are pretty bright but once my Amp was EQ'd to those pickups I was in love!! However my curiosity got the better of me and I decided to give

the Full Shred Set a try in my Iceman. It was the first time I've used a Medium High Output Pickup in the Bridge. To me they give the best overall balance of clean and dirty being that I tend to stay

primarily on the Bridge.....I only use the FS Neck on a couple leads but that's about it. Not to mention we are tuned to Drop C. The Full Shred could easily handle any tuning you could throw at it. I've

been using them for a few years now and I'm very happy. But I'm starting to get the itch to try something else....... I've been going back and forth whether or not to pony up and give the Bare

Knuckle Alnico V Nailbombs a try. On paper they sound perfect for what I'm looking for....warm organic cleans and deep bottom end, throaty midrange and warm highs. IDK we'll see. Batteries are for

flashlights anyway Passives are where its at for me.

 

[B2D]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

So the consistent things I'm reading here are:

- People who don't like actives found them to be too sterile sounding.

- People who went back to passives after a while liked the more organic qualities of the pickups.

- If you're using EMGs, the amp has to be set up for it.

- EMGs tend to do better with noise floor issues and low tunings.

I appreciate everyone's input here. I honestly don't know what I may do quite yet. For my playing requirements I've sort of got one foot in both camps.

I listened to Keith Merrow's pickup comparison tests and took some notes that were helpful. I wish he would've included a Custom 5 in the lineup but it's all good. I'm wondering if one of those Blackout preamps applied to a passive set that I really like would be the best of both worlds.

 

[alteredbeast]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

When i first started playing in 92, i was ignorant as sh!t cuz the few passives i did play never seemed tight enough and i thought they were all that way, so i pretty much shut that door. I then went on an emg kick for roughly 15 years, then when blackouts came out i switched EVERYTHING to blackouts, now my two main guitars are passive and the other three are active. I really do like both, BUT for recording and performing i prefer passive more. Het Set is prob my fav active right now. I considered myself an "active person" for a long time, now i cant pick a side. I have a hard time digging 81's completely tho after a 6 year hiatus from even touching one.

 

[B2D]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

The EMG81 is probably my least favorite name-brand active guitar pickup of all time. I can't stand it. When I discovered the 85 I was like, "Now this is more like it!"

 

[Despised]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

I think I should clarify what i meant when i said tight - i meant tight and quiet (ie hum free) - every passive i've tried (Distortion, JB, invader, Alt 8, d activator) has this inherently present noise when played under high gain (and please don't mention using a noise gate etc - i already do) - it's something i don't mind when playing metal tuned above Db, but for all that super tight riffing like Fear Factory and bands like them, i find that blackouts have this whole "noise gate built into the pickup" thing going, and no passive i've tried has that - something i find essential for playing in B. Plus it allows me to not shut the noise gate too tightly and ruin attack, but when you stop playing, there is absolute silence. I love blackouts for that application, not so much for playing in more standard tunings.

I too have been one of those who used EMG's for years, and still do. The thing that opened my eyes and ears to passives was the DiMarzio D-Activator 7's. I had used the Tone Zone 7 with great reults, but the DA was just a mind blower with how colse to a active they really sound and respond like. However out of the 7 guitars I own (6x 7-strings and 1x 8-string...), only 2 of them are loaded with passives.

I too agree that trying to play really heavy and deeply down-tuned stuff with most passives just don't cut it, and it's mainly because of the noise issue. Granted, while the passives I use are really hot ( DA7 & Blaze SC in one, custom rewinds in the other...), I still find that actives are the way to go with heavy stuff like Fear Factory that's really tight and stoppy. For me, actives take that lead. Even when I play a lot of other stuff like AC/DC or Deftones, I still find that the actives sound, feel and respond much better than any passive. They just have the power and growl and clarity that I look for and crave, even with clean stuff.

Now granted, trying to run one guitar with actives and another with passives thru most normal amps is and has always been a challenge. I currently run all my guitars into a Line 6 Vetta head, and am able to really tweak each guitar and each tone individually. But keep in mind that even though I can really get in and tweak each channel and tone for each guitar, that doesn't mean that all of my guitars sound exactly the same. All of them have different pickups and pickup models/positions, and all have custom wirings to each of them. So while the custom wirigs do make a difference, I can honestly hear a difference between each guitar and each pickup in each and every position. So for anyone that'll say that pickups don't respond and react with a guitar, or that a guitar with certain pickups all sound the same is bull****. Just as it's bull**** that claim EMG's/actives can't do cleans -dial your amp and stuff in better, play with your pickup height and stuff until you get it. It's not hard, and actives are more than capable of getting great clean tones. Hell, just take players like Vince Gill, Steve Lukather and David Gilmour as classic examples...

Just for a quick example: I took the DA7 set out of the ESP AW-7 I have because they are too damn dark and muddy and the guitar itself naturally has sooo much low end growl to it that it needs something really bright to couteract the dark tonality of it. So those same DA7's wound up going into an LTD SC-207 and they sound great. So now with the AW-7, I am using a custom rewound set of Duncan Designed pickups I had laying around. Since being rewound, they are a lot hotter and a lot brighter and better compliment the guitar. I have also tried using the EMG 81-7 several times in a basswood bodied LTD M107, and it still sounds like ass compared to a 707 or a 60-7... Same thing on an ash bodied LTD H207 - a set of DA7's sounded too damn dark and muddy, yet the EMG 81-7 & 707 set just work so much better in it. So with this being mentioned, it IS possible that certain pickups just don't go good at all with certain woods. It's just one of those things and you won't know until you try and play it.

While I have and play both active and passive pickups, I still favor actives. But there are some really good passives also. The trick is getting the two guitars to be similar, yet be different in comparison for obvious reasons. You can have 2 of the exact same car, and yet neither one will drive, perform or handle the same way. Guitars and pickups are no different.

 

[JOEBACCA]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

So for anyone that'll say that pickups don't respond and react with a guitar, or that a guitar with certain pickups all sound the same is bull****. Just as it's bull**** that claim EMG's/actives can't do cleans -dial your amp and stuff in better, play with your pickup height and stuff until you get it. It's not hard, and actives are more than capable of getting great clean tones. Hell, just take players like Vince Gill, Steve Lukather and David Gilmour as classic examples...

I'm not looking to argue for the sake of arguing but I'll take the bait.... EMG 81 & 85 in particular excel at High Gain pure and simple. Thats been readily established but thats not to say that they can't do cleans or mild

overdrive. Sure the EMG's can pull it off but if Cold Hard Cleans are what you like well Great!! If it sounds good to you then use it. Trust me I've dialed them in as best as humanly possible thru my Amp but for my application

the EMG 81 B & 85 N will never be my first choice for cleans. That Pickup Combo would never come to mind when I think of warm organic cleans. Not my cup of tea. I know that EMG's have plenty of other models to choose

from that can cover plenty of tonal ground but for what I was looking for, the 81 & 85 ain't it. No need to call Bull$h!t. It's all a matter of personal preference. More power to you if you prefer Active's. I'm sticking with

Passives.

 

[Despised]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

I'm not looking to argue for the sake of arguing but I'll take the bait.... EMG 81 & 85 in particular excel at High Gain pure and simple. Thats been readily established but thats not to say that they can't do cleans or mild overdrive. Sure the EMG's can pull it off but if Cold Hard Cleans are what you like well Great!! If it sounds good to you then use it. Trust me I've dialed them in as best as humanly possible thru my Amp but for my application the EMG 81 B & 85 N will never be my first choice for cleans. That Pickup Combo would never come to mind when I think of warm organic cleans. Not my cup of tea. I know that EMG's have plenty of other models to choose from that can cover plenty of tonal ground but for what I was looking for, the 81 & 85 ain't it. No need to call Bull$h!t. It's all a matter of personal preference. More power to you if you prefer active's. I'm sticking with passives.

I didn't write it for the sake of starting an arguement. And I agree with you that mainly passives are much better for getting a much better, warmer clean tones. But that's not to say that it couldn't be done with actives. Now mind you, it's been years since I played a normal 81 & 85 and being able to get those really good, warm cleans you speak of, but I know what the 707, 707TW & 707TW-R, 81-7 & 60-7 are capable of doing first hand. I've yet to get into re-tweaking my Blackouts equipped 7 for cleans, but I don't expect them to not be able to get them to produce...

Like I said, not looking to argue. And I know that everyone's tastes are going to be different than mine, and I'm okay with that. I'm also okay with anyone's choice for what they use because of what they like and don't knock it. Isn't that the reason why there's so many different pickups and pickup manufacturers?

 

[Phantasmagoria]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

I've got mostly passives in my guitars..they're more open/round/dynamic/rich etc (ie "organic" to use the cliche). I still have an 81 in one guitar that I'm thinking of replacing, sounds good in there, but I think I could do better.

The only active I'm crazy about is the AHB-2 Blackout metal. It's like a passive on steroids...fat, tight (but not excessively so), punchy, round, organic & really harmonically rich/complex in the mids...easily one of my favourite pickups.

 

[Farkus]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

I have used both. Started with passives, went with EMG for about 4 years (85 in the bridge of a strat, dual 85's in a H-H Washburn) and then switched back to passives. Essentially I tried a guitar with passives again and they felt right to me.

I don't claim to know what is best for others, but there were some clear reasons for me to switch back.
1. I stopped playing metal all the time and I don't like EMG's in an 'overdrive'/light distortion/edge of breakup situation. They don't have the same character as passives in general; not that that's bad, per se, just my preference.
2. I didn't like the way the notes blended when playing chords of any type. The notes bleed together in a way that I found to be less desirable than my passives of choice.
3. The EMG's have a compression that isn't natural sounding to me. When you pick lighter, it sounds less loud, but the tone itself doesn't change like a passive. That may be gold for some players, but I didn't care for it.

YMMV, etc.

 

[Virtual Kevorkian]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

You know me Brenno, I've gone back and forth constantly. Currently as it stands, this is my setup:

Tele - JDH/Phat Cat Bridge (in neck)
Stinnett - 89/81TW
Strat - Mean 90/stock/stock
Schecter - JB/Jazz

What that doesn't tell you is that I've given the same question a lot of thought lately, as I'm unhappy with a lot about that setup. All of what I'm unhappy about are the passive pickups, though.

I love my Stinnett; it's perfect. I might consider switching to the 57/66 set since that guitar is primarily for metal and I don't really utilize the 5-way switch much with it, but I'll never put passives back in it like I have in the past.

The JDH in my Tele is kills; I'm totally happy with it. I'll be swapping the Phat Cat out for the Jazz that's in my Schecter when I get some downtime, but I'm pretty sold on passives for that guitar. I bought the EMG T set (through you, no less!) and while it was really cool, I eventually put humbuckers in that guitar and then moved back to the singles and tried the JDH out; it's staying.

The Strat and Schecter get a bit more interesting; the Mean 90 is alright, but it really is pretty lacking in a lot of areas. I want a humbucker in that guitar, but I've not been happy with any passive humbuckers I've tried after more than a few months. I have a feeling that if/when the Stinnett gets the 57/66 set, the Strat will get the 89 and SLV singles, or I'll just end up getting a 57/SLV setup in it.

The Schecter... the JB is in there because it's all I have to put in there, but I hate that pickup. I don't play the guitar much because of it. The 81 is too sterile for my tastes (works *perfect* for bands I'm producing sometimes, though) and the 85 is too thick in that guitar. The 89 is a bit better but still gets mushy. I'm considering a Hetfield set in it, right now, or maybe a 57/66 set. Either way, it'll be actives.

The conclusion I've come to is that for humbuckers, actives suit me way better. I like the sound of other people playing passives sometimes, but actives tend to put a guitar tone closer to what I have in my head when it comes time to get tones. In a recording situation I appreciate the slight compression and perceived consistency, and in a live setting I appreciate the lower noisefloor in addition to the compression/consistency. I think that most guitarists lack a 'big picture' perspective when it comes to a band situation and tend to think of the guitar as more important than it is. In reality, the drums and vocals are what really matter; guitars fill in the space between kick/snare and cymbals/vocals. That's a huge oversimplification, but it more or less gets my point across. I think that most guitarists tend to think they need or want a more dynamic sound than they do, and don't realize that when recorded there's going to be additional compression to get them where they need to be anyways. I've always been a HUGE fan of staging compressors into eachother to reduce the individual workload while retaining the same end volume/consistency result; active humbuckers just let everything else work a bit less at evening out the playing and the end result is more pleasing and balanced to my ears.

 

[B2D]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

Thanks for that post, Jeff. You definitely have some good point there, especially about the guitar's place in the band as a whole.

Someone reminded me of the 18V mod recently. I almost forgot about that little trick, I should definitely try that in my EMG-loaded guitar before I make a decision.

 

[B2D]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

I'm headed to the local GC today to demo some amps in their loud room. I already did it with my DiMarzio loaded axe, so I'll try it with my EMG loaded guitar today.

I thought I had some spare battery clips lying about but it looks as if I can't find them. I'll try 18V on the EMG guitar before I make my mind up.

 

[B2D]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

Alright... After going back and forth with my EC1000 and an identical guitar with a JB/Jazz set in it, as well as two other Gibson Les Pauls ('75 with a JB/Jazz set and a new Standard with Burstbucker 1/2 in it) I think I'm going to go back to passive.

I spent about an hour or so going back and forth on two different amps that I like very much, and while the actives definitely held court in holding up the clarity under gain and had a touch of added compression that I did like, I know for a fact that there are passive pickups that can do just as well in that area. The clean tones and the response to touch dynamics, and harmonic content were really what pushed me back to passives. One of the amps I was using for testing broke up very quickly on the clean channel with both guitars, but all the passives did it in a more musical manner. The active cleans weren't bad but they just sounded a little stiffer and more "wooden" with no gain on them. The passives also did mid-gain and overdrive tones a little better.

Again, it wasn't as big of a difference as I'd expected right next to each other, but it was enough.

I'll admit I still have not tried the 18V mod for EMGs. Should I do that before making a final decision or should I start choosing what passives I want in my EC1000?

 

[Edgecrusher]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

As simple as the 18v mod is to do I would do it before the swap to passives. Its not night and day but it is a very noticeable change.

 

[Masta' C]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

It will cost you less than $5 to keep yourself from wondering about the effects of the mod after it's too late:

LINK

...might as well give it a try (and this seller is in Texas, so you'll get the harness quickly)

 

[B2D]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

Oh I know how to make an 18V harness, I just need to go to Radio Shack and get the parts. I'll do it tomorrow.

 

[xntrick]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

I've tried quite a few active pickups and I have been using the 81X which has a nice passive feel to them with all the benefits of actives. At some point I will have to try the EMG 57 but I have not seen any used models show up on ebay yet.

 

[Stratman]

Re: Active vs. Passive - for those that have used both, what did you stick with?

Interesting number of post...

About 14 years ago, I tried a set of EMG SA pups into a Stratocaster… it was sold to a musician in Thailand.

I have used passive since then… BUT I just purchased a preloaded EMG DG-20 setup for another Stratocaster.

The EMG DG-20 do have a nice vibe, but just a bit ??? I would not call then dead or lackluster, just different.

I set up the amp differently and it’s OK


SO to me, the bottom lime is that thou need to use your ears and set-up the amp for active pups different that you might with passives, don’t think that you can just plug in passive to active and vice verse and get the same tone.