Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

[greekdude]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

Noisier than passives for sure.

And much noisier than the livewires, if you had any to compare to. So the noise of the EMGs is a result of the imbalance in their design, and not related to being active.

 

[greekdude]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

They use 25K pots, but I've run them directly to the jack and still didn't find them too bright.

Must have been the guitar maybe. Anyway, I recall 85 was so much louder than Seymour Duncan livewires neck, which is a quite hot pup. Put the livewires metal back to the bridge (with the cut vol mod), sold the 85, problem solved. Next owner of this very 85 was happy.

 

[Gibson 1964]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

And much noisier than the livewires, if you had any to compare to. So the noise of the EMGs is a result of the imbalance in their design, and not related to being active.

Please don't misquote me like that. I said in a very specific environment, in one location, (Though in reality, in two locations I have played) EMG 81/85s were noisier than passives. In the primary instance the wiring was a disaster. The second was bad wiring as well at the location, though I was not as familiar as I was with the nightmare of my own apartment's wiring. (Note, I don't live there anymore and got out as soon as the lease expired.)

 

[Chazzy]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

Im no active guy but arent you suppose to use 25k pots for active? a 100k would be bright as all hell... the normal 85 is quite nice, high output, balanced and warmer than the shrill 81

 

[Inflames626]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

Sentences 1 and 2 are just my personal opinion. Ok lots of people like EMG 85 in the bridge. I didn't. And yes 81/60 work fine for me! (sans the noise of course) and so they do for so many known guitarists, so I guess not much of a shock here, right? Sentence 3 is generally accepted, in fact, SD uses this in their marketing for blackouts :

and also lots of people complain about EMG81 being noisy, here is a serious article describing this : http://www.electrosmash.com/emg81 :

I'm going to chime in here too.

A lot of people find the 81 brittle in the mids--think Slayer's boosted mids sound. But an 81 played clean in the bridge has its own terrible/good duality for metal.

Anyway, to my ear, the point of the 85 was to add more thump and chug to an 81. The 85 does seem to have a little more high end to my ear and it is slightly hotter than an 81 (or so EMG head tech Rick Hunt once told me years ago), but nothing like a Duncan passive like the Distortion. Dominus is dead on about EMGs not being really bright. They just sit well in a mix because they're so mid focused. People mistake the cutting through for treble and high output. My pinch harmonic technique instantly improved when I switched to passives.

However, my beef with the 85 in the bridge is that it has a looser bottom end than the 81 and doesn't track as quickly in the bridge. It's nice to fill out a mix but I don't like how it sounds by itself. I'd probably be in the minority among newer players, though.

The 60 in the neck is the single best pickup EMG makes. I want to try a 60a but they are much rarer to find.

Of the passives, the HZ3 is similar to a 60, and it sounds good in the bridge. Very even. But it doesn't cut through because it doesn't have the 81s boosted mids.

I did try an 89 in the neck, which is similar to an 85 but splittable, and it was quite nice if you like a hot neck bucker.

As far as EMGs being noisy, I've never had that problem.

I go with Blackouts for my lower tuned (C# standard and below) guitars because I find they have more body than EMGs (even in 18 volts) and are much more evenly balanced than EMGs. However, EMGs just have a tonal color that I like to have in my toolbox.

 

[JOLLY]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

Speaking of actives, where is Dino's new active pickups for 6-string?

*tap tap* calling Seymour! Hello? Retribution for the masses, pwetty pweeease.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've already spoken with the Duncan camp about this. It's not going to happen for six strings.

 

[Edgecrusher]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

I've already spoken with the Duncan camp about this. It's not going to happen for six strings.

Its a 7 string only deal?

 

[Dahla]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

I've already spoken with the Duncan camp about this. It's not going to happen for six strings.

Oh crap... [emoji19]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Inflames626]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

I've already spoken with the Duncan camp about this. It's not going to happen for six strings.

Wasn't that the case for the Sentient/Nazgul/Pegasus for a while? They changed.

It's a nice sounding pickup--sounds even tighter than the Thomson Blackout, which is very nice and tight indeed for low tunings.

I don't know how they can keep introducing similar sounding artist pups, though, without one model cannibalizing the other.

 

[greekdude]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

Please don't misquote me like that. I said in a very specific environment, in one location, (Though in reality, in two locations I have played) EMG 81/85s were noisier than passives. In the primary instance the wiring was a disaster. The second was bad wiring as well at the location, though I was not as familiar as I was with the nightmare of my own apartment's wiring. (Note, I don't live there anymore and got out as soon as the lease expired.)

I don't use to misquote anyone. I said that *IF* you had those specific actives (livewires) on the specific environment you described, you would see that they would be less noisy than the 81. Plain cut and simple. Also I linked to an article proving the noisy character of the 81 (for those who can follow basic physics).

 

[greekdude]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

Dominus is dead on about EMGs not being really bright. They just sit well in a mix because they're so mid focused. People mistake the cutting through for treble and high output. My pinch harmonic technique instantly improved when I switched to passives.

However, my beef with the 85 in the bridge is that it has a looser bottom end than the 81 and doesn't track as quickly in the bridge. It's nice to fill out a mix but I don't like how it sounds by itself. I'd probably be in the minority among newer players, though.

Basically, having read the comments about 85 in the bridge, I was under the expectation to hear a very heavy and full rythme sound in the bridge. I was very disappointed, taking into account that Livewires Metal was in the bridge before the 85, which I considered as (and truly is) a mid range monster. By treble-focused I guess I meant more trebly than what I perceived as mid boosted (livewires metal). Also coming from this pup, i compared 85's volume and tone to the livewires neck, which is also treble focused and hot. Usually bright pups are designed for the neck, what's the surprise with the 85?
81 resonant freq : 1.63 KHz
85 resonant freq : 1.87 KHz
Now we heard all those people claiming 81 as shrill, right? We can draw some conclusions from that.

The 60 in the neck is the single best pickup EMG makes. I want to try a 60a but they are much rarer to find.

I agree on this.

 

[Inflames626]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

Basically, having read the comments about 85 in the bridge, I was under the expectation to hear a very heavy and full rythme sound in the bridge. I was very disappointed, taking into account that Livewires Metal was in the bridge before the 85, which I considered as (and truly is) a mid range monster. By treble-focused I guess I meant more trebly than what I perceived as mid boosted (livewires metal). Also coming from this pup, i compared 85's volume and tone to the livewires neck, which is also treble focused and hot. Usually bright pups are designed for the neck, what's the surprise with the 85?
81 resonant freq : 1.63 KHz
85 resonant freq : 1.87 KHz
Now we heard all those people claiming 81 as shrill, right? We can draw some conclusions from that.


I agree on this.

To my ear, the 85 has a wider frequency response than the 81, but also a meatier tone. It does have a bit more highs than the 81 but they are very crisp and on the top end to me. The 81's tight bottom in the bridge is the selling point for me. The 85 just sounds rounder, which I attribute to the Alnico magnets vs. the ceramics in the 81. I like the 81s in mixes for rhythm because they don't cause me ear fatigue due to all the high end like the Duncan Distortion can do.

With the 81, I saw the biggest hump in my DAW (Voxengo SPAN) around 2khz. Not very precise but I've always felt like the 81 was centered around 2 khz with the lows and highs rolled off to the extreme.

It doesn't surprise me that the Livewires Metal sounded more aggressive than the 81/85, which were designed in the late 70s/early 80s. I'm pretty sure the LWM and derived Blackouts Metal lines are newer designs.

I consider 2khz to be the strongest point of upper mids. To me highs don't really start coming in until 5-7khz. I think a lot of people would consider my mids to be their highs.

Still, I just like tight, bright bridge pups, and for that reason I like the 85 in the neck. I've tried an 81 in the neck and it is worthless. It is too brittle for the position and its highs and mids are dampened in that location. It doesn't clean up well enough for cleans from that position. And it doesn't have a round brown PAF type sound for soloing. The 85 is closer to this IMO.

Still, before you give up on EMG models, try the 18 volt mod. You might be pleasantly surprised. And with the shift back to vintage passive designs relative to the active pickup dominated late 90s/early 00s, you should be able to modify a lot of used standard EMG models without paying extra for X series designs, which aren't as common in used markets.

Other designs I'd like to try are the passive HZ1 and HZ2 models, which don't seem to have active equivalents.

 

[Demanic]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

Other designs I'd like to try are the passive HZ1 and HZ2 models, which don't seem to have active equivalents.

Don't be in too much of a rush. I played them through a buddy's Jackson Soloist several years back. Very unforgiving of technique, yet nothing really special about them. I suppose on the other hand, that may appeal to some.

 

[JOLLY]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

Its a 7 string only deal?

Correct.

 

[JOLLY]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

Oh crap... [emoji19]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My exact sentiments.

 

[Inflames626]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

Don't be in too much of a rush. I played them through a buddy's Jackson Soloist several years back. Very unforgiving of technique, yet nothing really special about them. I suppose on the other hand, that may appeal to some.

Demanic, how about the SROs?

I know they're supposed to be a less expensive pickup, but if I like the tone, I like the tone. They seem very balanced.

The only time I got badly burned on stock pickups were with the Duncan Designed Invaders copies. They were so bassy, especially in the neck, that they were unusable.

IMO, pups being unforgiving of technique don't really bother me unless they're too muddy/sloppy or you have to fight them on something like harmonics. You have to dig in really hard to find a node point even to the point of slowing down. I had that issue with EMGs when I wasn't boosting the front of my amp.

As far as pups being too clean or revealing, even when I'm practicing thrash I play with a clean tone to make sure I'm not sloppy. Some folks have said the same about the Full Shred but to me it isn't an overly clean pickup--it's just the way a pickup should be.

The Demon on the other hand is so clean that it just feels a bit off--like a single coil masquerading as a humbucker.

 

[dominus]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

The only time I got badly burned on stock pickups were with the Duncan Designed Invaders copies. They were so bassy, especially in the neck, that they were unusable.

I think that was the guitar itself, the Detonator is like a Distortion with Invader poles. Not super bright, but still has plenty of clarity.

 

[Inflames626]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

I think that was the guitar itself, the Detonator is like a Distortion with Invader poles. Not super bright, but still has plenty of clarity.

Dominus, might have been. It was an MIJ Jackson KV. It's a lightweight guitar without much tone--ideally suited to the Full Shred.

I'm guessing those pups were Invaders because of the pole shape. Then again, I don't think I'd like the Invader sound anyway. Again, prefer my juice from the booster on the amp and not the pup.

 

[Chazzy]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

no its a copy of the invader... and the poles round off the highs so all you hear is bass...

 

[Rex_Rocker]

Re: Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

If you're used to 81's, I can totally see how the Detonators could definitely have way too much lows for you.

You aren't missing out if you've not tried H1's, BTW. They're cool because they're not noisy and are not overly fat nor over-the-top when it comes to output, but otherwise, they're pretty generic and bland-sounding.

Also, I agree about the 81's power being pretty much all high-mids, not highs. Also, regarding the 85, I personally don't find it's too different when it comes to actual high-end content compared to the 81. Maybe a bit more? Maybe, but the mids and low mids I find are MUCH more emphatic than anything else in the 85 and the high mids are way backed off compared to the 81 for >me< to perceive it as a harsh pickup.

Then again, the Duncan voicing and passives in general are waaaay different than EMG's. Absolutely every Duncan I've tried has had A LOT more going on in the extreme lows and highs, yet still not always do they come out as "harsher" or "looser" necessarily.