EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

[Artie]

Talking about my Schecter C-1 Platinum in another thread, got me to dig it out play it some more. I like the 85n ok, but the 81b is definitely pure metal. Just not to my taste. I notice that the new C-1P comes with the 57/66 set. From what I read, the 81/85's are ceramic mags, and the 57/66's are A5 and PAF-ish.

Has anyone used the 57/66 set and can relate how they sound? Even better, if you're familiar with the 81/85 set.

Thanks;
Artie

 

[bigcupholder]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

They're not PAF-like at all.

The 57 is not terribly different from an 81. I liked it more, but not enough to keep it. For someone who likes the 81, it's probably different enough to provide another flavor, but for someone who doesn't like the 81, it's too similar.

All the complaints about the 81 remain, only slightly less so: it's still very upper mid focused, with internal clipping and that compression that makes your pick attack sound incredibly consistent. The response is a little broader. It's supposedly hotter but I found it sounded better set lower (while the 81 needs to practically touch the strings), so that might've cancelled that out for me.

Sent from my SM-G970W using Tapatalk

 

[Artie]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

Thanks Bigcup. That helps. So 57/66 probably still wouldn't be my cup 'o tea.

 

[MB89]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

Nice schecter you have, Got the same one with a Floyd and Emg 81/85, i also have a LP with 57/66 and find that set more verstile, i had bare knuckle rebel yell in that guitar before and kept the 57/66, so i like Them very much in that guitar.

I play blues to metal with that axe

 

[Artie]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

Thanks. I don't think Schecter gets the love they deserve. I lean towards "blues." At least, within the limits of my talent. I'm gonna try my Livewire set. If I don't like them, I'll consider the 57/66 set.

 

[EmiAba]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

Talking about my Schecter C-1 Platinum in another thread, got me to dig it out play it some more. I like the 85n ok, but the 81b is definitely pure metal. Just not to my taste. I notice that the new C-1P comes with the 57/66 set. From what I read, the 81/85's are ceramic mags, and the 57/66's are A5 and PAF-ish.

Has anyone used the 57/66 set and can relate how they sound? Even better, if you're familiar with the 81/85 set.

Thanks;
Artie

the 81 is ceramic, the 85 has a A5. I have them as a set (ZakkWylde signature) in my VGS eruption pro. The 85 is a great pickup in both positions (many people swap the position between the two). The 81 is tight but a bit lifeless and thin IMO. I run them both with 18v mod. I tried the 57/66 a couple of time at the guitar shop. Don't remember exactly the model of the schecter they were in. But I found them more usable, with good note separation. the 66 seems brighter than 85 (but I think it depends on the guitar) to me but still warm. the 57 was fuller and warmer than the 81, much more mids.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

the 57 was fuller and warmer than the 81, much more mids.

I guess it depends on what kind of mids you're talking about. The 57 has more low mids, but less of the stuffy nasal core mids. Both a pretty upper-mid present, but the 81 has the edge in that regard. Neither have a real deep bottom-end, but the 57 has a bit more airy (but not harsh) high-end.

They are all EMG's, so they are all upper-mid focused-compared to passives, but I'd say the 57 is the more scoopy of the two. Fuller? Yes, agreed. More mids? Nah, IMO.

 

[Artie]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

The 81 is tight but a bit lifeless and thin IMO.

That's exactly what I thought. When I bought this guitar, I didn't plug it in, in the store. It felt good in my hands, and it looked killer. When I got it home, it sounded "good", simply because it was new. Now that I've played with it awhile, I still love the axe . . . not the pups. The 85 is "ok", but still can't hold a candle to my passive modified Ric bass neck pup in my Schecter Blackjack.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

I guess within the EMG world, the 57 is the most open and passive-like one I've tried (I haven't tried the Retroactives), but it still sounds like an EMG. If you want something completely different, the 57/66 isn't what you should be looking at. The 57/66 is more like a twist on the EMG formula rather than something entirely different. Don't get me wrong, I love them, but I love the 81, 85, and 60 as well.

 

[Artie]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

Yeah. Someone else kinda eluded to that. The C-1 is meant as a "metal" guitar. I lean towards clean, Fender "Blackface" kinda tone. I bought it for its looks. Look for an EMG 81/85 pup set for sale in a theater near you soon.

 

[ToneFiddler]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

I guess within the EMG world, the 57 is the most open and passive-like one I've tried (I haven't tried the Retroactives), but it still sounds like an EMG.
....

I guess it depends on what kind of mids you're talking about. The 57 has more low mids, but less of the stuffy nasal core mids. Both a pretty upper-mid present, but the 81 has the edge in that regard. Neither have a real deep bottom-end, but the 57 has a bit more airy (but not harsh) high-end.

They are all EMG's, so they are all upper-mid focused-compared to passives, but I'd say the 57 is the more scoopy of the two. Fuller? Yes, agreed. More mids? Nah, IMO..

Sounds good. will readd them to my (long) wishlist.

for me the 58X is the most open and passive-like. I didn't try the 57 and also no Retroactives, though.

 

[Sirion]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

Try the 85 in the bridge. For all but pristine cleans I think it sounds better than the 81 there.

 

[ItsaBass]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

For some time, I have wanted to try a 66/66 set. Might be closer to a traditional sound than 66/57.

 

[Masta' C]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

For some time, I have wanted to try a 66/66 set. Might be closer to a traditional sound than 66/57.

Hmm...that could be interesting!

The old 60 and 60A models were surprisingly good in the bridge. I could see the 66 being worth a shot!

 

[LazNovak]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

The simplest thing you can do, which, in my opinion is much better, is to swap the 85 to the bridge and 81 to the neck. I have that in my 87 Charvel and it's awesome. See if you dig it then go from there.

 

[Masta' C]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

Indeed, swapping the 81/85 around (putting 85 in bridge) yields a slightly fuller, more balanced tone in the bridge and a little extra clarity in the neck. Plus, it's fast and free to do

I'm also a huge fan of the 18V mod on these models

 

[ToneFiddler]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

Hmm...that could be interesting!

The old 60 and 60A models were surprisingly good in the bridge. I could see the 66 being worth a shot!

Pole spacing might be an issue with the 66 if you got trem spacing

 

[donaldr]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

Yeah. Someone else kinda eluded to that. The C-1 is meant as a "metal" guitar. I lean towards clean, Fender "Blackface" kinda tone. I bought it for its looks. Look for an EMG 81/85 pup set for sale in a theater near you soon.

Maybe you can try an EMG 60 in the bridge. I have one in my Godin Exit 22 and really like it. Very sensitive to the volume knob. I use it for blues, classic rock and '80s hard rock. Good clean too.
From Wikipedia:
History and design[edit]
The EMG 60 was originally designed for the Fender Tele-Elite Model in 1979 until Fender changed its plans. The EMG 60 features close aperture coils loaded with ceramic magnets. This produces a brighter attack than other humbuckers produced by EMG. It has a higher peak than other EMG models but a steeper resonance slope.

The EMG 60 is used primarily by rhythm guitarists who play heavy metal. The EMG 60 has lots of output and clarity giving it its distinctive crunch when used with lots of mid-range. For lead guitar, it has its own distinctive tone as a clear but fat sound. It is also often used for its clean tone, providing a very bright and almost single coil-like characteristic in the neck position.

 

[ItsaBass]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

Pole spacing might be an issue with the 66 if you got trem spacing

No more of an issue than any regular spaced humbucker in the bridge position of a Strat...which works fine, and was done by many people for many years before T/F spaced pickups were invented.

 

[JB_From_Hell]

Re: EMG 81/85 vs 57/66 sets?

Artie, as mentioned above, try swapping the pickup’s positions. 81b/85n is the classic EMG metal setup, but 85b/81n has a whole different flavor.

Btw, I had the same guitar, and agree with you, it’s pretty killer.