Your opinion about EMG's?

[Benjy_26]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

Actually the DG setup is not more a signature set than the JB is a Jeff Beck signature.
Notice the site doesn't say anything more than "David hs used..." david who?

Just because he didn't actively endorse them doesn't mean they weren't made for him. Just like the JB in "you know who's" Tele-Gib.

 

[Benjy_26]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

I've had the experience to back it up. EMGs are more worthless than a used condom. I lost ten years of playing a fantastic sounding guitar because I actually believed that EMGs were worth more than pocket lint.

The metal kids seem to do well with them...and more power to them if it works for them. But for my uses they're tone-sucking garbage that are best relegated to a trash bin than actually installed in an instrument you believe may actually have some positive tonal qualities to it.

Aren't we supposed to not talk trash about companies that aren't here to defend themselves?

 

[WICKED LESTER]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

No offense dude, but you're the typical kind of guy who doesn't like the way their guitar sounds with them then bags the whole company.

You could have put ANY pickup in that guitar and it might not have been the sound you wanted....if I gave up on Duncan after the first THREE pickups I tried from them I'd never be a Duncan fan. Passive or active, not all pickups work well with all setups. For every guitar that sounds good with a JB in it I can find at least two that sound like ass.....are Duncans crummy?

Just because YOU can't get them to work doesn't mean they are crummy pickups by a longshot.

Sounds like a lot of people expect pickups to perform magic instead of getting the pickup that matches their setup best and understanding that not all pickups work with all guitars REGARDLESS of the company.


And didn't Gilmour use the EMGs on the whole Pulse recording?

RANALLI is dead right about this!
i know guys that tried ONLY the dimarzio tone zone and hated it then went round bashing ALL of their pups!

 

[Erlend_G]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

Well, back to the topic. I have a brand new EMG 85 in white in my hand rigth now, and i almost ripped the guts out of my Ibanez just to try it, but that'll wait.

What's up with all the wierd wiring on the EMG's? No grounding on the battery or pickup or what the schematics now say..... I wish it could have good old fashioned wiring hehe .

Cheers,
-Erlend

 

[MikeS]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

Erland, you'll find the EMG is a breeze to wire. The schematic is simple. But, if memory serves, the pup does get grounded at the volume pot, unless they've changed their wiring in the last couple years (my 60 isn't more than 3 years old - has the quick change plug and everything).

As far as EMGs being "sterile," I think you're confusing sterile with clear. They are very trasnparent, accurate pups that do, contrary to seemingly popular believe, do have a voice. Someone made a comment about them not working in cheaper guitars, and I beg to differ. Because of teh transparency and high output of the EMG actives, body construction has a lesser impact on the overall tone than it would with lower output passives. For that reason, I think EMGs work great in cheaper imports.

 

[Erlend_G]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

Erland, you'll find the EMG is a breeze to wire. The schematic is simple. But, if memory serves, the pup does get grounded at the volume pot, unless they've changed their wiring in the last couple years (my 60 isn't more than 3 years old - has the quick change plug and everything).

As far as EMGs being "sterile," I think you're confusing sterile with clear. They are very trasnparent, accurate pups that do, contrary to seemingly popular believe, do have a voice. Someone made a comment about them not working in cheaper guitars, and I beg to differ. Because of teh transparency and high output of the EMG actives, body construction has a lesser impact on the overall tone than it would with lower output passives. For that reason, I think EMGs work great in cheaper imports.

Oh yes. I just started wiring up the Emg stuff together with my uncle. I'm just waiting until i get to make the pickguard and get a nut, and then it's going to be rock 'n' roll all the time!

Thanks alot by the way, MikeS! It's always nice to hear an intelligent and helpful review (im not implying that you other ones are stupid, i really appreciate your help too!).

I'll post clips as soon as i can!

Cheers,
-Erlend

 

[Imp]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

85 is my favourite active bridge pickup.. very very versatile voice, and a great little stage pickup. no noise, no feedback, great stuff! i think the 81 has a place, but it is a very specialised pickup. you wouldnt use a floating neck pickup for black metal now, would you?

and the wiring is very easy - as long as you relax, do it a bit at a time, and check you've met the schematic, you'll have no sweat

tom

 

[MikeRocker]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

Actually, a 2" tape is infinitely more accurate than digital.
Anything below 192khz has HEINOUS phase angle distortion and wolf tones.
Open up Cool Edit and run a sine sweep from 20hz to 25khz.
Above 20 khz 44.1 disintegrates into worthless garbage quite spectacularly after various wolf tones appear.
A square wave(useful, as distorted instruments and synths have alot of harmonic content) will be 90% wolf tones.
Triangle doesn't do much better than square.

A white noise signal(to simulate a complex music signal) sound simultainiously harsher while having less high end content(low frequency waves completely dominate the samples, not allowing the highs to even be recorded) in 44.1.
In 92 things are alot closer to the true white noise.


Overall, 44.1 is a joke, 92 is a great deal better but not perfect, and 192 is very close.


Tape introduces EQ curves, digital does WEIRD shizzo.

WARNING: fftopic:
The reason that 44.1 kHz was chosen as the CD standard sampling rate is that the highest frequencies the format can reproduce are half of the number (the Nyquist theorem). Hence, CDs are supposed to accurately reproduce up to just above 20kHz (specifically, to 22.05 kHz), which is the upper limit of the human hearing range. Now there is some thought that higher frequencies and harmonic content can influence the overall sound, even if they are not in the range that humans are able to hear (192kHz is great for dog music). The 16 bit/44.1 kHz spec was also arrived at based on the capacity of a compact disc. In other words, CDs or digital recorders running at 44.1 kHz were not meant to sound accurate or even good much above 20 kHz. The generally accepted theory is that the higher the kHz number, the more accurate the reproduction. Digital does produce a more clinically accurate reproduction of a source, but this is with the assumption that high quality components (A/D converters, preamps, word clock, etc.) are used. A $200 digital recorder is not going to be very accurate, nor sound nearly as "good" as a quality analog device. All things being equal (primo quality gear), digital is going to present a more accurate reproduction of a recorded source than analog. I actually prefer the analog sound.
fftopic: FINISHED
I still also prefer passive pickups. I think of pickups in some ways as an EQ, and I don't want it to be hyper-accurate. I want the magic EQ curve that good quality passive pickups introduce.

 

[fatigueofheart]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

this should be vault material not because of the EMG discussion but the off topic sampling rate explanation! :-D

 

[TheGZeus]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

Because of teh transparency and high output of the EMG actives, body construction has a lesser impact on the overall tone than it would with lower output passives.

That's....oxmoronic.

if they were transparent, wouldn't the body woods and construction show through MORE?

They are HEAVILY voiced and VERY compressed.

Also they ARE low output pickups. Just with a bosoted, EQed and so on preamp inside of them.

 

[TheGZeus]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

WARNING: fftopic:
The reason that 44.1 kHz was chosen as the CD standard sampling rate is that the highest frequencies the format can reproduce are half of the number (the Nyquist theorem). Hence, CDs are supposed to accurately reproduce up to just above 20kHz (specifically, to 22.05 kHz), which is the upper limit of the human hearing range. Now there is some thought that higher frequencies and harmonic content can influence the overall sound, even if they are not in the range that humans are able to hear (192kHz is great for dog music). The 16 bit/44.1 kHz spec was also arrived at based on the capacity of a compact disc. In other words, CDs or digital recorders running at 44.1 kHz were not meant to sound accurate or even good much above 20 kHz. The generally accepted theory is that the higher the kHz number, the more accurate the reproduction. Digital does produce a more clinically accurate reproduction of a source, but this is with the assumption that high quality components (A/D converters, preamps, word clock, etc.) are used. A $200 digital recorder is not going to be very accurate, nor sound nearly as "good" as a quality analog device. All things being equal (primo quality gear), digital is going to present a more accurate reproduction of a recorded source than analog. I actually prefer the analog sound.
fftopic: FINISHED
I still also prefer passive pickups. I think of pickups in some ways as an EQ, and I don't want it to be hyper-accurate. I want the magic EQ curve that good quality passive pickups introduce.

You didn't really read the whole thing did you?

There are wolf tones all through the audible range.
A low frequency signal and a high one that occur at the same time can cuse one to be screwed up for lack of a technical term.

Run a square sweep in cooledit. Just LOOK at the resulting waveforms in various formats.
TERRIBLE.

A sine sweep is full of wolf tones above around 10k. Slight ones but they are all over in 44.1.

If you have accuracy outside the audible range that deteriorates far above it, then you have more accuracy within it.
I'm not mastering below 96 any more if I can help it.

 

[MikeRocker]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

You didn't really read the whole thing did you?

Maybe you didn't read my whole thing where I said "Now there is some thought that higher frequencies and harmonic content can influence the overall sound".

 

[TheGZeus]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

Maybe you didn't read my whole thing where I said "Now there is some thought that higher frequencies and harmonic content can influence the overall sound".

My focus was on the audible range.
THAT is what you seem to have missed.

IN the audible rnge 44.1 is full of inancuracies wolf tones, and as signals become more comples, these problesm get worse.

 

[TheGZeus]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

Just because he didn't actively endorse them doesn't mean they weren't made for him. Just like the JB in "you know who's" Tele-Gib.

Actually, they WEREN'T made for him.
They all existed, and he uses them.
The set is a repacaging of pre-existing products that he put in his strat.

 

[brisk]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

You guys should've come to UGD to find out a life is meant to be more than fighting over EMGs ... bunch of gear trekkies ... :fing25:

 

[TheGZeus]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

You went to an event for people who frequent an online forum about gear.
You DO realise the oxymorinicity here, right?

 

[brisk]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

You went to an event for people who frequent an online forum about gear.
You DO realise the oxymorinicity here, right?

regarding the event, I hung out with great guys and saw great musicians. The differences we had before are gone because we have bigger things in common ... love for life, love for good friends and love for music. I was there and you gotta believe me that it wasn't gear junkies version of stra trek convention.

Based on that exprience, I am pretty sure that once you get together and share few hours of your lives, you would feel that it is ridiculously childish to raise voice over a little difference in opinion.

Just my two cents.

 

[presa_tito]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

People that say EMGs are sterile, or are completely artificial sounding don't really know what they're talking about. EMGs do impart alot of their personality onto a guitar but then again so does a JB. EMGs are the clearest sounding high output buckers I have ever come across....not to mention the quietest.

Play some nice mellow leads with an EMG60 in the neck then tell me they are sterile and not versatile.

Sorry.....but EMGs are GREAT pickups. The 81 *can* be a bit brash in some guitars/setups but hell...so can any pickup. What EMG really needs is more tonal options that work with more setups IMO.

And David Gilmour uses EMGs.....tell me his tone is sterile.....yeah.....

And one battery will last a LONG TIME in your guitar....who cares if you need to put a nine-volt in their guitar....does it really matter?


With all that being said, I do think the EMGs excel at high gain stuff and I would rather use Duncans or Dimarzios for lighter vintagy type stuff. But EMGs do completely fine for hard rock as well....they're a little more than a one trick pony.

This saves me the typing because it's basically my exact thoughts. I have had the same battery for 7 months. Is it that hard to undo a couple tiny screws off and change the battery. It takes 60 seconds.

 

[HenryGab]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

And one battery will last a LONG TIME in your guitar....who cares if you need to put a nine-volt in their guitar....does it really matter?

Once I tested an 85 set on my Epi LP. Since I didn't want to drill my guitar (to open room for a battery), I had a crazy idea and installed a stereo jack on it to send the 9-volt signal by the third conductor. :bandit:

Back to the main topic... EMGs are nice options. They're not better or worse than their passive cousins, just some more on the bunch. Very well built, good definition, killer leads... yep, they don't have that same "vibe" commonly associated with good passives, but they got their own, a damn good vibe BTW.

 

[nahfuten]

Re: Your opinion about EMG's?

Once I tested an 85 set on my Epi LP. Since I didn't want to drill my guitar (to open room for a battery), I had a crazy idea and installed a stereo jack on it to send the 9-volt signal by the third conductor. :bandit:

I am planning on putting the Zakk Wylde set on my LP... Is it always neccessary to drill out for the battery? Is it common to not have enough room in there?