Passive alternatives to EMG 81/85's ?

[Inflames626]

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

I can't imagine a pup with less output than an HZ3 actually--just very even and flat sounding. And that includes my using a Gibson 57+ Alnico II in the bridge (which was fine for metal boosted and dialed in right).

I've always had a tough problem cleaning up overwound pups but not boosting underwound ones, so I usually start conservative on the hotness and go up as I need. Tone isn't as important these days as feel--tone isn't worth it if you're fighting the pups to hear your technique come through.

I agree with Rex that the 81 can be harsh, but in a different way than a Duncan Distortion. A lot of people find 81s to be choked off with a narrow frequency range compared to other pups--that's just part of that "all high mids" thing. But it sits well in a mix and cuts through if you're mixed well. Going to 18 volts rounded off some of the sharpness of the transients, which I didn't liked, but added on more body, which I did like.

I also agree on more lows and highs with passives. I was very surprised when I switched to passives about ten years ago and found myself with more lows and highs than EMGs. Where actives shine, I think, are in consistency of pick attack and flat response.

For metal, I keep my EMGs in 18 volts as a certain base line stock sound. I wouldn't give them away. Every new player should at least try them (along with a DMZ Super Distortion and JB) just to experiment with a classic pickup. But I've added on other tools.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

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

FWIW, I still love the plain old 81. I always go through phases cause I want to try other stuff out, and I'm really digging the JB and Distortion right now, but so far, I've returned to the 81 a few times. It is indeed very mix-ready both recorded or in a live scenario, IMO.

I just got a DiMarzio Dominion which is often compared to the 81 too. I'll be installing it tomorrow. In a way, I kinda hope it does resemble the 81, lol.

 

[RustInPeace]

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

Have you guys tried the new emgs? I have a guitar witht he JH set and another with the 57/66. Both are quite excellent, although the JH set is definitely my favorite. More balanced eq wise than the regular 81 but still aggressive and open sounding. The JH neck is a better 60. Clean, powerful, scooped.

The 57 is less aggressive than the 81 or jh but has a really "jangly" high end, same with the 66. Easily the most versatile of EMG's pickups.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

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

Yes. I used to have the Hets in my RGA121. I used to LOVE LOVE LOVE the bridge pickup, just never cared for the neck pickup, really. Both were too powerful for an already heavily compressed amp like my Peavey XXX.

The bridge pickup was particularly cool because it had a touch more low-mid grunt, slightly sharper high-end attack, and tons more power than an 81. The EQ I guess was more "passive-like", but that was slight. The added power was not very passive-like to me, lol.

Quite honestly, my favorite bridge position EMG was the 81TW. It was killer. The humbucker mode was pretty close to the 81, but not quite. It was slightly fatter, and slightly less hot, but the pickup itself way too humongous for my thin-bodied RGA with direct-mount routes, so I was never able to fit one in, so I just started looking someplace else other than EMG.

 

[Inflames626]

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

Are the Hets all that? I always kind of thought they were just marketing for people who didn't want to do the 18 volt mod or the 60x/81x. Basically maybe a 60x/81x combined with what are considered passive PAF qualities (warmth, organic-ness, whatever that means).

I'm not big on the return to vintage tones of the past 5-10 years. I still much prefer the consistency of the old school actives for extreme metal, especially compared to the new crop of super hot and aggressively voiced passives.

Where I find passives do shine are in getting a variety of tones out of different wiring options through a moderate gain amp.

 

[Magic]

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

Are the Hets all that? I always kind of thought they were just marketing for people who didn't want to do the 18 volt mod or the 60x/81x. Basically maybe a 60x/81x combined with what are considered passive PAF qualities (warmth, organic-ness, whatever that means).

I'm not big on the return to vintage tones of the past 5-10 years. I still much prefer the consistency of the old school actives for extreme metal, especially compared to the new crop of super hot and aggressively voiced passives.

Here's a video of "One" that I think shows the Het Set tone pretty well. I personally prefer the 57/66 set over both the 81/85 and the Het Set. They sound like a fatter version of the 81/85 to me.

 

[LazNovak]

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

I've tried the HET Set in his signature ESPs through a Marshall JVM. I didn't really like them that much. They weren't as punchy as like my tone.

I prefer 81/81, 81-7/707 or 81-8/808.

 

[Inflames626]

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

That's a pretty good cover.

They sound rounder than his old tone, which is what I figured.

A bit of a digression, but I wonder if the preference for vintage "warmth" currently popular with aggressive pickup marketing is in response to our recording at higher sampling rates, revealing the deficiencies in older designs.

Also, the ability to use impulse responses has greatly improved the usability of even less than ideal pickups and tone settings.

My concern with a lot of metal put up on YouTube by self-recorded artists is the emphasis on wide frequency response on every instrument to the point that mixes are not very good. The focus seems to be on finding a guitar that sounds great by itself but, unintentionally, may not be ideal in a mix. This is especially on the low end, below 100hz, where a lot of consumer grade speakers and car 6x9s are not going to sound that good. Wider frequency response will also be degraded by lossy compression types like mp3.

It's almost like people want their guitars to sound like a guitar and bass at the same time, which is very much the case with djent players. Bass players have nowhere to be in the mix.

As an example, I might not always be happy with the low end or body of my 81s compared to other pickups, but I know the bass and kick are going to be there for support, so it doesn't bother me much.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

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

The Het Set has the regular series preamp, not the X series preamp. The pickups are wound hotter than the 81 and 60, so the preamp clips a whole lot more. Strictly speaking, they are techincally more compressed, but my guess is people comment on them being "more passive-like" because their EQ emphasises the pick attack a bit more, and they boom a bit more than the 81 when you palm-mute.

But yes, they're not completely different from the 81/60. To me, they're like the complete opposite direction from the 81/60 than the 81X/60X, but it's not like the 81X/60X sound radically different than the regular 81/60 either.

Honestly, I liked the bridge pickup a lot when I had it, but a lot of them is way overhyped. They are still EMG's. They behave like EMG's. They sound great, but I guess it's not "cool" to like active pickups nowadays.

 

[Inflames626]

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

Rex, I may be wrong, but I don't think there is a difference in the preamp. 60/81s in 18 volt ARE X series pickups, at least according to the email I got from tech.

According to an email I got on Oct 12, 2012:

Hello,



Yes the X-series pickups sound like regular actives running at 18 volt they have increased headroom and I suggest people use the X-series instead of preforming the 18volt mod, which can damage pickups if done incorrectly.



Hope this helps.

Derek Bartlett

EMG tech support.


I only emphasize this so that people don't waste their money trying an X series if they have an old 60 or 81 lying around.

 

[Demanic]

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

Been holding my tongue until now.
This
The Lace Deathbucker. EMG without a battery.

 

[Inflames626]

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

P bass pup for guitar.

I've wondered about Lace. And they retail for a lot less than other brands.

 

[Edgecrusher]

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

I only emphasize this so that people don't waste their money trying an X series if they have an old 60 or 81 lying around.

but its also not 100% true... the x series have active tone controls the 81's use passive. The preamp might be the same type but the gain has been reduced 6db its not the same as using 18volts.


actually that email stinks like bs... emg says they are rated for 27 volts so how would you do an 18v mod incorrectly and damage them?

 

[Inflames626]

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

Beats me, Edge. I might have done it wrong the first time I did it. The batteries got hot. But a little resoldering and it was fine. The only downside to the mod is there isn't much room in the control cavities of all my Kellys so I have to get creative.

Would the tone controls matter if you don't use a tone pot? Back in the day when I was at GIT I had John Carruthers at Carruthers Guitars in Venice (who taught guitar maintenance at GIT and helped design the EMG pickup, according to his site) build me an 81/89 with a BTC control. The BTC sounded pretty active to me. It boosted the treble so much that it was pretty much unusable, although it helped EMGs with the pinch harmonics problem I was having.

Also, regarding the email, if you tempt people into thinking 18 volt mods are hard to do, it makes people want to go out and buy X series pickups.

I did want a little more body out of my 81s, but I like them also for their brittleness and sharp attack. Going to 18 rounded them off a bit. I kind of prefer the HZ4s in that they're rounder than a 9 volt 81 but keep a similar attack.

All of this is a moot point, though, as Blackouts kept highs and lows, a tight bottom, and a wider frequency response, which is why I use them for lower tunings (and the Thomsons for really low tunings--the mids are voiced higher).

I've just had the EMG sound hammered into my head so much over the past 25 years and I can't imagine not using them somewhere even today. I much prefer them to a JB, which I have to roll off around 100-200hz on a parametric to tighten it up.

In the old days whereas I might have used EMGs for tracking standard or near standard tuned rhythms, I might use something like a Full Shred now, especially if it has a lot of soloing, dynamics, and legato playing.

And yet, while opinions on EMG guitar pups seem divided as always, there seems to be a solid approval of their bass pickups, as EMGs are used for bass playing of all styles. I stay away from them. They seem to have a certain falseness to the upper mids. It doesn't seem like SD or DMZ have been able to dent EMG's position in the bass market, anyway. I haven't seen Blackouts for bass take off like Blackouts for guitar.

 

[Rex_Rocker]

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

FWIW, I have not tried the DiMarzio D-Activator, and I have not played an EMG H4 in a LOOOONG time, but I have installed the DiMarzio Dominion in the bridge position of my RG570. My thoughts are it definitely definitely resembles the 81, and I do feel I'm pretty familiar with the 81.

It's obviously not dead-on 81. It seems more attacky and more raspy up top. The mids don't seem to be voiced as bitey as the 81, but rather voiced more DiMarzio. It's slightly more core-mid-focused rather than high-mid-focused. Both of these characteristics are relatively subtle, but they do give the pickup a bit more of a rawer old-school edge. The low-end, though... I have never ever tried a passive as tight as the Dominion. This is where it resembles the 81 the most. They are hyper articulate and tight. It has less going on in the low and low-mid department compared to the JB, but so does the 81, and that adds to both the 81's and the Dominion's articulate feel. The output level is not far off either. Preeeetty damn close to both the 81 and the JB in that department.

Good pickup for sure, and definitely something to consider if you're wanting a passive alternative to the 81. Honestly, I feel that the Dominion resembles the 81 a whole lot more than the standard Duncan Blackout Bridge.

 

[Darth Nihilus]

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

After looking for a passive pickup that sounds like an active since 2001, I can safely say there are NONE! For better or worse, passive pickups can't sound that way. Not sure why, they just don't.

 

[vinta9e]

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

Passive pickups can't produce preamp distortion, that's why.

 

[Darth Nihilus]

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

Passive pickups can't produce preamp distortion, that's why.

Then there you go. That's reason enough lol

 

[MkIII Renegade]

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

Get an EMG 60 for the neck and figure out if you prefer the 81 or 85 in the bridge.

Yep. I consider the EMG 60 head and shoulders above the 85 for all around versatility and a more traditional neck sound, especially for cleans.

The 85 would be a great complement to it at the bridge, although thick guitars like LPs do just fine with the 81.

 

[Gibson 1964]

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

Passive pickups can't produce preamp distortion, that's why.

Umm, what nonsense is this? I use solely passive pickups, generally live by the preamp distortion and use unboosted high gain. (my amps go to insane levels of gain on there own) They most certainly can generate preamp distortion. If you are referring to the internal pickup preamp... generally they don't there either in tests I have heard. The signal should be clean.