RIP EMTY AHB3...

I

Inflames626

New member
I noticed the AHB3 has been discontinued because Mick had to get on the Fishman Fluence train like everyone else these days, although I expect retailers will have stocks of AHB3s for some time.

I hate to see them go. I consider them one of the finest pickups Seymour Duncan has ever produced.

I use them in my C standard Jackson Kelly purely for my Gothenburg style riffage, so you could say out of the 70-80 guitars/basses I have the AHB3 is one of my favorite/main choices in pickups.

The AHB3 was very balanced and articulate whereas the AHB1 was a little warmer and mushy in the lows. Like them both. But the EMTY was just voiced wonderfully.

My thanks and appreciation to Mr. Beller and all those who worked on the Blackout designs.

If Tosin Abasi himself basically says, "You really only hear the difference in Fluences when they are played clean. You will not notice a big difference between Fluences and traditional pickups when distorted," then I'm not terribly interested in the design. They're just flatter and more sterile than a lot of active/wannabe active passive designs that try to be as flat as possible.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, although if he doesn't co-own the design, I bet they would re-appear under a different name.
 
Inflames626 said:
If Tosin Abasi himself basically says, "You really only hear the difference in Fluences when they are played clean. You will not notice a big difference between Fluences and traditional pickups when distorted," then I'm not terribly interested in the design. They're just flatter and more sterile than a lot of active/wannabe active passive designs that try to be as flat as possible.
Click to expand...

Highly disagreed.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/qzz9...-KSE.mp3?rlkey=6se2e46lffgfop06rgjmbb38a&dl=0

This is both voicings on the Adlers vs. the KSE's compared. Honestly, if Tosin can't hear the difference, I don't know what to say. (Excuse the extreme low-end at times, I had just gotten the HX Stomp and was still messing around with the settings).

I have not tried the EMTY's, but I did try the AHB-1b, and I was highly disappointed, personally. I much preferred EMG's at that time. I would like to try the EMTY's, though. And it's a shame if they're discontinued, but I mean... don't discount Fishmans until you've tried them. I was super skeptical as well, and I was late to the party, but I did very much like them. If you like EMG 81's, I don't see how you wouldn't like the different variatons they have on the Modern.
 
Now that I think of it, I still see Gus G. Fire Blackouts available new online and he went to make his own pickups years ago.

I consider the standard Blackouts to be fatter than the 81s and use them for lower tunings--fatter in a way a similar voiced pickup with sound with Alnico 5s vs. ceramics. The AHB3s were meant for even lower tunings, hence their rolled off bass and increased treble response. If the AHB1 is "Alnico 5 sounding," then the AHB3 to me is more ceramic in tone.

IMO, Fishman has too many lines and too many endorsees. I like Devin Townsend and such too, but I know if I want his sound from the Strapping Young Lad era I'm going EMG 81 into Dual Rec/Mark IV (I think that was the newest at the time). He may have also used the since discontinued Stilettos.

Usually whenever I want to match my gear to an influence I research what they used historically, not now.

The best thing the Fluences have going for them besides their great clean tone is the ability to switch between multiple voicings, IMO.

I'm impressed that, like Lace, they found an innovative new design, but they're not really doing anything my current gear doesn't do in terms of tone when dialed in right.

And I think that's what Tosin was trying to point out--it's not that he can't hear the difference between them. It's that under high gain they don't really do anything any other pickup voiced for such a style can't do. And they still need batteries. The cleans may be a whole other matter. I will try to find the video where he says this.

I can hear the differences between them in the Dropbox but there's almost no color to them. Very clinical. Which seems to be what gear manufacturers are going for now, along with "PAF" style voicings.

I have enough guitars where if I want to sound vintage I just grab a guitar that has that sound. Likewise I can find so many Duncans, EMGs, and DiMarzios used online while offerings from Lace, Bare Knuckle, and Fishman remain few and expensive. If I got a guitar with Fishmans in it I would probably keep them in there. But in my situation I see little need to go chasing them to install into a guitar I buy used.

The Jim Root, like most of the newer endorsed models, really wasn't on my radar. Same as the X series or the cleaner sounding (vs. regular 81) Glen Tipton model. All just minor tweaks to standard models, IMO, that going to 24 volts largely fixes.

I had been over EMG for a while the way a beer connoisseur might be over Budweiser/Miller/Coors. But going to 24 volts has really rescued them for me.

I retain my Duncans for things needing more tonal versatility using the Triple Shot. I also have my Gibson builds and will probably start my first DiMarzio experiments in my Ibanez Destroyers soon.
 
Last edited:
It makes sense that Fluence cleans would be great. Fishman has been respected far longer for their acoustic guitar pickup systems than for their relatively new Fluence line.
 
Inflames626 said:
I can hear the differences between them in the Dropbox but there's almost no color to them. Very clinical. Which seems to be what gear manufacturers are going for now, along with "PAF" style voicings.

The Jim Root, like most of the newer endorsed models, really wasn't on my radar. Same as the X series or the cleaner sounding (vs. regular 81) Glen Tipton model. All just minor tweaks to standard models, IMO, that going to 24 volts largely fixes.
Click to expand...
I think your preconception of Fishmans is what's speaking. You're right, they're extremely overhyped and they're basically advertising them like they are the be-all-end-all of pickups when they're really not. But bottom line for me is they do sound good. Do they sound better than EMG's or passives? Maybe not, but they don't sound worse for sure, and they've got the multivoice thing going for them.

When I first tried them, I was dubious because of the hype. But I bought them because EMG's don't really sound like EMG's these days, and I wasn't going to go out of my way to hunt a pre-2018 EMG 81. I was pleasantly surprised. The Modern Ceramic basically sounds like an EMG 81 that's tighter and more polished. I get why some people might prefer the EMG 81, but the reason I like the EMG 81 is it's tight and polished, LOL, not because it's fat and raw. So the FIshman basically gave me more of what I like about the EMG 81. And then you have the totally usable passive voice on top of that.

The Classic Bridge sounds like a better Duncan '59B and JB in each voice, and I love both of those pickups, so that one also stuck. The KSE's sound like the Moderns, just more aggressive. The Adler Bridge sounds like a clearer lower output Duncan Distortion, and then it's also got the Modern Ceramic voicing. The Modern Alnico also sounds great in the bridge. All good sounds.

So yeah, I agree, they're overhyped to the point where I didn't want to try them myself. But I'm glad I did.

TBH, I've liked all the sets I've had. I have not liked all the Duncans I've had.

And the Roots sound NOTHING like the 81/60 combo he was using before. It's not like the X series which are slight tweaks. The Roots pretty much sound like super hot Ceramic passives wiith some active thrown on top. I wouldn't be recommending them because I dislike Slipknot, and I particularly dislike that Jim Root hipster guy, but I found a good deal on a set used, and I was pleasantly surprised.
 
Last edited:
Always wanted to try one, but I already have many more pickups than places to put them. I still have the 81/85 set in a couple guitars, at 9v even. I did prefer 18v in one specific single-bucker guitar but ended up with a C-pig in that one anyways.
 
Rex_Rocker said:
I think your preconception of Fishmans is what's speaking. You're right, they're extremely overhyped and they're basically advertising them like they are the be-all-end-all of pickups when they're really not. But bottom line for me is they do sound good. Do they sound better than EMG's or passives? Maybe not, but they don't sound worse for sure, and they've got the multivoice thing going for them.

When I first tried them, I was dubious because of the hype. But I bought them because EMG's don't really sound like EMG's these days, and I wasn't going to go out of my way to hunt a pre-2018 EMG 81. I was pleasantly surprised. The Modern Ceramic basically sounds like an EMG 81 that's tighter and more polished. I get why some people might prefer the EMG 81, but the reason I like the EMG 81 is it's tight and polished, LOL, not because it's fat and raw. So the FIshman basically gave me more of what I like about the EMG 81. And then you have the totally usable passive voice on top of that.

The Classic Bridge sounds like a better Duncan '59B and JB in each voice, and I love both of those pickups, so that one also stuck. The KSE's sound like the Moderns, just more aggressive. The Adler Bridge sounds like a clearer lower output Duncan Distortion, and then it's also got the Modern Ceramic voicing. The Modern Alnico also sounds great in the bridge. All good sounds.

So yeah, I agree, they're overhyped to the point where I didn't want to try them myself. But I'm glad I did.

TBH, I've liked all the sets I've had. I have not liked all the Duncans I've had.

And the Roots sound NOTHING like the 81/60 combo he was using before. It's not like the X series which are slight tweaks. The Roots pretty much sound like super hot Ceramic passives wiith some active thrown on top. I wouldn't be recommending them because I dislike Slipknot, and I particularly dislike that Jim Root hipster guy, but I found a good deal on a set used, and I was pleasantly surprised.
Click to expand...

I can sum up the EMG 81 in one word: Slayer. Particularly 1994 and before. Very mid forward, boosted Marshall JCM800 sound. Highs and lows rolled off. People only later considered them "thin" sounding when they listened to them alone and concluded they didn't chug while they conveniently ignored how the 81 sits well in a mix. Nobody had an issue with 81s chugging through Mesas on "Sad But True."

With "Sad But True" in mind, you can scoop 81s too. They produce an interesting sound when used with my EXG control through my Carvin MTS3200 (JCM 800 clone from about the year 2000). But scooping them kind of goes against the voicing they were designed for--about 2khz emphasis. This mid focus also gave 81s, to my ear, a vintage kind of late 70s/early 80s sound similar to some DiMarzios when used through British amps (like on old Judas Priest or Accept records). I also find scooping a Marshall tone produces mixed results. You have to really sculpt the problem frequencies out and boost the right settings up front. But, when it works, it's gold.

In contrast the EMTYs were consistent like the 81 but with a more modern voicing--less British, less mid forward, less grainy and textured, more designed for people who like to play through Mesas, 5150s, Engls, Diezels, Riveras, etc., and like a balanced, tight, but cutting tone.

I would say the Fluences have two main things going for them:

1) Ease of installation (my understanding is they are modular like newer EMGs).

2) Voicing options that standard pickups like the EMG 81 don't have. You need an 89tw/89twr/81tw for that. Fluences have made active pickups more flexible and, in this day and age, for guitarists seeking tonal flexibility from active pickups, there really isn't an excuse for a one tone active pickup unless you want to be a master volume only player.

3) The main drawback with more traditional makers like SD and DiMarzio is they seem resistant to a modular design for passive pickups. My Duncans wired to Triple Shots, independent volume knobs, a phase switch, a killswitch, and a tone knob are always a pain in the ass to wire up relative to my EMGs, but the tonal flexibility I get from the Duncans is worth it. The downside is once they are installed I don't want to go back through that ^&(& again so they stay there.

I strongly advise Seymour Duncan to *consider* a modular passive pickup design, especially for people who use all 4 conductors for split/parallel voicings, and not see modularity as some unacceptable concession to modernity. You can always offer the traditional designs to purists. I guess the Liberator was a step in the right direction but I don't consider it as easy as putting quick connects on pins (simply doing this from the Triple Shot to pins on the back of a passive pickup would sell a lot more Triple Shots, IMO). You can always cut the connects off for non-Duncan brands.

That said, most people aren't going to go for the complicated wiring setups I tend to favor like something that would be on an old school BC Rich Bich. They just want the thing to be wired up simply and to work, if they even know how to solder at all.

Don't get me wrong. If you gave Fluences to me I'd use them. But I don't see much use in buying them new with the setup I currently have.
 
dave74 said:
Always wanted to try one, but I already have many more pickups than places to put them. I still have the 81/85 set in a couple guitars, at 9v even. I did prefer 18v in one specific single-bucker guitar but ended up with a C-pig in that one anyways.
Click to expand...

Going from 18v to 24 won't fatten the pickup that much. It will make it sound closer to an 85 in a pleasing way. It will widen the pickup's tone and give it more headroom while keeping the bottom end tighter than an 85. What going to 24 volts does do is speed up transients and make EMGs sound much more dynamic and expressive. It's a feel thing more than tone.

I don't know that it helps with harmonics and such coming from an 81 because the highs and lows are so rolled off on that pickup. My Duncan Distortions and something like a Bill Lawrence 500XL tend to produce much better squeals than a non-boosted 81 in my experience.
 
Inflames626 said:
I can sum up the EMG 81 in one word: Slayer. Particularly 1994 and before. Very mid forward, boosted Marshall JCM800 sound. Highs and lows rolled off. People only later considered them "thin" sounding when they listened to them alone and concluded they didn't chug while they conveniently ignored how the 81 sits well in a mix. Nobody had an issue with 81s chugging through Mesas on "Sad But True."

With "Sad But True" in mind, you can scoop 81s too. They produce an interesting sound when used with my EXG control through my Carvin MTS3200 (JCM 800 clone from about the year 2000). But scooping them kind of goes against the voicing they were designed for--about 2khz emphasis. This mid focus also gave 81s, to my ear, a vintage kind of late 70s/early 80s sound similar to some DiMarzios when used through British amps (like on old Judas Priest or Accept records). I also find scooping a Marshall tone produces mixed results. You have to really sculpt the problem frequencies out and boost the right settings up front. But, when it works, it's gold.

In contrast the EMTYs were consistent like the 81 but with a more modern voicing--less British, less mid forward, less grainy and textured, more designed for people who like to play through Mesas, 5150s, Engls, Diezels, Riveras, etc., and like a balanced, tight, but cutting tone.

I would say the Fluences have two main things going for them:

1) Ease of installation (my understanding is they are modular like newer EMGs).

2) Voicing options that standard pickups like the EMG 81 don't have. You need an 89tw/89twr/81tw for that. Fluences have made active pickups more flexible and, in this day and age, for guitarists seeking tonal flexibility from active pickups, there really isn't an excuse for a one tone active pickup unless you want to be a master volume only player.

3) The main drawback with more traditional makers like SD and DiMarzio is they seem resistant to a modular design for passive pickups. My Duncans wired to Triple Shots, independent volume knobs, a phase switch, a killswitch, and a tone knob are always a pain in the ass to wire up relative to my EMGs, but the tonal flexibility I get from the Duncans is worth it. The downside is once they are installed I don't want to go back through that ^&(& again so they stay there.

I strongly advise Seymour Duncan to *consider* a modular passive pickup design, especially for people who use all 4 conductors for split/parallel voicings, and not see modularity as some unacceptable concession to modernity. You can always offer the traditional designs to purists. I guess the Liberator was a step in the right direction but I don't consider it as easy as putting quick connects on pins (simply doing this from the Triple Shot to pins on the back of a passive pickup would sell a lot more Triple Shots, IMO). You can always cut the connects off for non-Duncan brands.

That said, most people aren't going to go for the complicated wiring setups I tend to favor like something that would be on an old school BC Rich Bich. They just want the thing to be wired up simply and to work, if they even know how to solder at all.

Don't get me wrong. If you gave Fluences to me I'd use them. But I don't see much use in buying them new with the setup I currently have.
Click to expand...
For me, EMG's are all about the 2000's Melodeath and Metalcore sound. I don't like Slayer's tone. I do like the Black Album, but it's also not the tone I go for. But then again, I'm kind of over EMG's because new 81's don't sound like the OG 81's that I started playing on. I hate to sound like an old fart, but I did have first hand experience with a set that I bought a few years ago. https://forum.seymourduncan.com/foru...esign-recently

About the Fluences, I don't need versatility from my pickups. TBH, if the Fishmans only had one voicing, I'd still think they'd be worth looking at. They do sound good, man. It's not like it's a magic recipee or whatever. But they're just all around good pickups. And they sound like good pickups. I don't notice them sounding more clinical or colder or whatever. They just sound like good well-designed pickups. And on top of that, they sound like several good pickups in one.

Like I said, though, I'd still gladly play a JB or a Black Winter (or I'd love trying out the EMTY's). I'm about to swap the Fluences out of my Gibson for a 500T/SH-6N, but not because I don't like them, but because I'm in the mood for a hot Ceramic screamer right now. The Fluence Classics don't quite do that. Matter of fact, none of the Fluences sound like the 500T. It's just the current production classic series (81, 85, 60, 57, etc.) EMG's that I'm not even interested in nowadays. I would buy some old 2000's or 2010's EMG's if felt like needing them, but TBH, the Fluence Moderns cover that ground for me nowadays.
 
Last edited:
Inflames626 said:
I noticed the AHB3 has been discontinued because Mick had to get on the Fishman Fluence train like everyone else these days, although I expect retailers will have stocks of AHB3s for some time.

I hate to see them go. I consider them one of the finest pickups Seymour Duncan has ever produced.

I use them in my C standard Jackson Kelly purely for my Gothenburg style riffage, so you could say out of the 70-80 guitars/basses I have the AHB3 is one of my favorite/main choices in pickups.

The AHB3 was very balanced and articulate whereas the AHB1 was a little warmer and mushy in the lows. Like them both. But the EMTY was just voiced wonderfully.

My thanks and appreciation to Mr. Beller and all those who worked on the Blackout designs.

If Tosin Abasi himself basically says, "You really only hear the difference in Fluences when they are played clean. You will not notice a big difference between Fluences and traditional pickups when distorted," then I'm not terribly interested in the design. They're just flatter and more sterile than a lot of active/wannabe active passive designs that try to be as flat as possible.
Click to expand...

i sold them of this summer for a good price. i figured if Thompson is not using them anymore, they might loose it's value pretty quick and i don't want to risk that.

i always liked them, from the first installation (blown away) til the end, but my current amp doesn't like the high output that much.
For these i was forced to use channel 2 instead of 3 which i normally use for those kind of sounds or else it's was too gainy.
I don't play actives and metal that often also. too many PUs laying around, too "few" guitars, too.

I did like the AHB-1 for about a week (crazy huge sound), but quickly i realized it's very bloated and not very tight and the output is totally stupid.

the AHB-3 has the tighness (and maybe lower output than the AHB-1???) and i like the EQ actually better than an EMG 81, but this summer i figured i only have the active guitars sticking around to cover some early 90s original EMG sounds, so i stick with the original. It's a bit of a love hate relation ship with the typical active EMG humbuckers. the EQ is actually totally bad with that mid bandpass, but they do that one great thing for that specific sound, but too me they suck for everything else. I hate them for crunch/low gain especially.

i might regret selling them at one point, though.
 
All my emgs are old logo before the solderless systems came out (2010ish?). I've never directly compared them to newer emgs but supposedly "someone" from emg admitted that the preamp was not built with the same parts as in the old days.

I really don't relate any specific tone or period to the emgs. Everyone was using them for a long time yet imo there were drastic differences in their recorded tones.
On the other hand I can totally see how people connect that polished studio tone of emgs>ts>5150/recto>mesa412>sm57 to the individual components of said tone.
That tone became sort of generic too because the same few guys were/are recording so many of the top bands of that genre.
 
Metallica single-handedly made EMG. Their signing the endorsement deal for them in 87 or 88 just before Justice set EMG up for life, even now.

What killed the "classic" EMG line was this desire for an "organic" active tone that seemed to become popular sometime around 2010 with the rise of YouTube guitar pundits who were resorting to increasingly complex setups that made tones from the 80s and even 90s sound dated and lacking.

Suddenly the EMG sound had gone from an asset to a liability.

Meanwhile, when I'm hearing "organic," I'm hearing a desire for the power from the whole mix from just the guitar. They want everything--kick, bass, guitar--gelled together when they hit a power chord. With a guitar tone like that, where's the room for the rest of the band?

How many rhythm tracks are we doing now? 4? 6? With stereo widening? 48khz bit rate? 32 bit depth? Has no one heard of adding a 16th or 32nd of digital delay to a rhythm track to thicken it up while keeping it tight, or does that sound too wet and thus too 80s?

I figure the Thomsons may go up in price, but not if they remain widely available as they are now.

I don't really hear a difference between old and new EMGs, but haven't paid much attention. If anything, the newer ones sound a little mushier, like 85s perhaps, but that's just more of that "organic" tone nonsense. Again, going to 24 volts makes them brand new pickups for me.

The oldest set I have is a 1996 ish set with old logo block letters and is hard wired.

Newer sets I have combine an old hardwired pickup from 2000 with a 60 of recent make. I just clip the quick connects off one end and solder them to the pots. Works just fine.

Also did my old Gus G. star LTD this way. 60/81 in 24 volts. Very comfortable to play. Just wish it had a Floyd.

As far as the classic line being devalued, EMG may have shot themselves in the foot as well with all of the pickups they had come stock on new guitars from the 80s onwards.

Since everyone buys used at one point, people have probably bought used guitars for what just the EMGs in the guitar are worth. They then either use those pickups or remove them and sell them used. Suddenly EMG is out two pickups they could have sold because they chose to outfit a guitar (probably an LTD) with them stock--and even then at a discount price compared to retail.

EMG 60/81s and Duncan Jazz and JBs have been indirectly selling this way for decades now. Who would buy an EMG 81 new? Not me. I love their blem outlet they have linked to their page. I can buy "new" 81s at 90s and 00s prices.

Also, When I say I have upward of 50 guitars, I don't mean to brag. They are nothing special--mass produced and mostly low to mid tier Japanese stuff from the 90s and 00s.

I buy them dirt cheap, beat up, and used and put nice stuff on them with the intention of making the whole build under $1000-1200. I've just been playing guitar for nearly 30 years and have had time to build up a collection. I stopped buying tube amps years ago and use software instead. So that saves there.

As far as the Fluence being sterile, if I wanted to go that route, I'd just go with Lightwave pickups if Lightwave made sets for distorted electric guitar (they mostly make bass and acoustic systems incorporated into Willcox guitars). It's the cleanest system I've ever heard because it's optical--no magnets involved. But I don't think there's a way to incorporate the Lightwave system with a Floyd unless they try to do something like Graphtech did with the Ghost system.

If current metal players want to go flat, sterile, and clinical because they can micromanage everything in their DAW, then pickups--even amps, cabs, and mics--don't matter at all because they color the sound. Hence the increasing importance of impulse responses.

I'm waiting for the creation of some kind of completely digital pickup that doesn't even use coils, wires, or magnets at all. It would simply sense the string somehow like a hard drive senses data, perhaps with wires coming from each saddle to the pickup. It would transfer that signal digitally via USB to an amp, also digital, which would then convert the digital signal to analog in the amp "head" and send it to the speakers as a sound we can hear. Increased computing power and speed would destroy latency.

Meanwhile, whenever we play standard pickups, I feel like we're doing the equivalent of using a needle and record on a phonograph.
 
dave74 said:
All my emgs are old logo before the solderless systems came out (2010ish?). I've never directly compared them to newer emgs but supposedly "someone" from emg admitted that the preamp was not built with the same parts as in the old days.

I really don't relate any specific tone or period to the emgs. Everyone was using them for a long time yet imo there were drastic differences in their recorded tones.
On the other hand I can totally see how people connect that polished studio tone of emgs>ts>5150/recto>mesa412>sm57 to the individual components of said tone.
That tone became sort of generic too because the same few guys were/are recording so many of the top bands of that genre.
Click to expand...
Nah, the solderless stuff is 2000's for sure. My first EMG set was the ZW set with the old logo, and it was solderless. I must have bought it when I was in high-school around 2002? 2003?

The newer logo stuff sounded the same for like 15 years or so. It's just relatively recently that I noticed that change.

I like that EMG-5150 setup, personally. Lots of different tones can be had from that setup. Machine Head sound nothing like KSE, for example. I do prefer a Recto over a 5150, personally. Or a Krank (another 2000's blast from the past, LOL), but I wouldn't say no to a 5150. I do prefer the 5150III over the Peavey, tho.
 
Last edited:
I like a blend of all of them. 5150s tend to sound harsh and overly fizzy. Dialing in a Mark Tremonti tone on a Dual Rec was always tough for me--getting it tight but also saturated and not too boxy. I think blending them with Marks, which tend to have more mids, really helps. I have a Randall Cyclone from the 90s that pretty much only makes one sound, but having a graphic and parametric on it helps. I also have a 2x15" cab from the Dime Warhead era that you don't see much anymore. This is in addition to my Carvin Marshall sounding stuff. I like using a BBE Sonic Maximizer with that in the loop.

In plugins, anything goes. Neural DSP. Guitar Rig. Pod Farm (still love using that old thing). Amplitube. Revalver. Softube Metal Amp Room. I probably have 20-30 plugins just for amps. But a JCM800 boosted with a Tube Screamer--that old 80s thrash standby--is still probably my main tone these days. Emulated Rectos, Diezels, Engls, Bogners, Riveras, etc., can sound flabby if not dialed in right.
 
I guess that's where we differ. I just don't get along with JCM800's, or most Marshalls in general. The EQ is all wrong for me. The lows are placed too high in the freq spectrum (for me), and the high and the presence knobs are inverted to what I'm used to (the high controlling the high mids and the lower highs and the presence controlling the upper sizzle like it is in a 5150 or a Rectifier). The low end is there in an 800, it's not thin, but it's not deep either. They're not boomy like a Recto can be, that's true. But the more you raise the gain on 800's, the fatter and more flubby and undefined the gain structure becomes because of the bright cap. And you usually have to run the gain high on those because they don't really have much on tap (at least the 2203's).

Then again, I've not really spent a lot of time with an 800 running it through different speakers. I supposed it would sound better through 65's or 75's, but that's another can of worms. I normally don't tend to like those speakers either, LOL.

TBH, I'm not a Thrash guy in general. I do like Chuck Schulinder's tone because it's sorta Thrashy not being super downtuned and whatnot, and he used a Marshall. But we both know he doesn't really play thrash.
 
Chuck used a Valvestate IIR. Prong also used Valvestates in studio. I think Rob Zombie did as well. They can get a heavy tone if dialed in right. Just don't do Van Halen style licks on them because they sound like **** being all boxy and having no dynamics. Valvestates and other Marshall solid states are the anti-Plexi, even the dreaded Mode 4 (which Alex Skolnick somehow loves).

I've only dialed in a JCM800 in software. It depends a lot on cab and mic placement. In Pod Farm GT75s tend to produce a brighter sound, whereas vintage 30s are warmer and more low mids.

This is me using Pod Farm Platinum in Cakewalk Sonar X2. 00s Crimson swirl Jackson Kelly Floyded with the EMTYs in it. Rhythm tracks are only doubled. Tube Screamer up front to boost the gain because JCM800s on their own can't really get there.

It depends a lot on mix vs. individual instrument too. I loved Revalver for its realistic tones but I couldn't quite get it to gel. I knew Pod Farm was considered lower end for amp software even by 2010 standards, but it just sat right in the mix to my ear.

Intro is a Electro Harmonix Small Stone phaser clone that is a dead ringer for the original.

Edit: Riggs in Rob Zombie solo band might have used a Marshall MG, basically an updated Valvestate, on "Hellbilly Deluxe."

https://soundcloud.com/devolve1980/g...m-their-davids
 
Last edited:
I know a lot of guys like to pan hard right and left and then maybe 60-75% left and right so their guitars are quad tracked. I prefer using a slight digital delay instead. Four rhythm guitar tracks produces too many oscillations for me no matter how tight the playing. I think the key is to make the guitars on the outside louder and the interior guitars slightly lower in the mix so your ear can't pick out how many guitars there are--just a wall of them.

I probably should have quad tracked the riff at 1:41 as it always sounded thin to me relative to the rest of the song. But overall I was happy with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top