share your thoughts on active v.s. passive pickups

  • Thread starter Thread starter cobrahead1030
  • Start date Start date
im really an EMG man...but like you said both styles of pickups have their place. the EMG tone and feel fits me, and gives me the tone that i have in my head every time. i know what works, and if i have a problem with a pickup i usually know what i can replace it with that will work...the old standby EMGs.
however, i LOVE the Duncan Distortion. it has a great open aggressive tone and is really thick, with a great singing lead tone. and cleans up well when the volume is rolled down! however, i like EMGs with teh volume rolled down a bit too, and i do use that technique a bit, and they work for me there. but Passives do sound a big thicker when the volume is rolled down, i agree.

they both have their place, and their own sound, and one is NOT better than the other. just different. but, i know the EMGs work for me and my tone, so i usually stick with them. easy as pie for me :)
 
How do the Tom Anderson pickups stack up against EMGs? I'm really interested in the H3 or H3+, I wanted to try something a little different from the EMG-81..
 
i've heard andersons compared to EMG's many times, and while they're both great pickups...i really don't see anything similar between EMG's and the andersons i've tried (h3, h3+, h1, and h1-)

andersons are balanced probably better than any pickup i've played...the h3's are very big but smooth sounding, didn't have enough bite for me...the h1's are a great neck pickup voiced toward clean tones
 
I love both really but lately I have been more into passives since they kind of have that woody quality I can't get with EMG's. The 85 is still one of my all time favorite bridge pickups but lately I am loving the JB (250k pot of course) in my Custom 22. I do agree that it sucks how much trouble it is to try new pups and the fact that they all sound different in different guitars doesn't help either!
 
I much prefer a good passive over any EMG. I think passives sound much thicker than EMG's. The 81 sounds good recorded, but I hate how it sounds in person. I like medium output passive pickups for high gain stuff.
 
I had SD's in my M-II. Just terrible. The JB had this Icepick treble and was no where near as thick as the EMG's i replaced it with. Either the dumb japs @ esp didnt wire it properly or they dont suit the guitar. he EMG's dont have the Icepick treble.
 
>|<>QBB<
metalpoida":634c0 said:
I had SD's in my M-II. Just terrible. The JB had this Icepick treble and was no where near as thick as the EMG's i replaced it with. Either the dumb japs @ esp didnt wire it properly or they dont suit the guitar. he EMG's dont have the Icepick treble.
Click to expand...

IMO the JB sucks with anything other than a 250K pot. The 250k pot tames that icepick treble!
 
I like EMG's for metal on just about any guitar, BUT, I don't think I could play them at only 9 volts. 18 volts are a must for me in my EMG loaded guitars. I like the "woodiness" that passives give me, but they just don't sound as in your face with my guitars/rig. Running my 81's at 18 volts bridges the gap between picking dynamics and tone from active to passive.

Over the summer I went through 81's, 85's, a JB, a Duncan Distortion, Bill Lawrence 500XL and ended up back with 81's, only this time with 18 volts. I couldn't ever go back to just 9 on actives.
 
>|<>QBB<
metalpoida":41107 said:
I had SD's in my M-II. Just terrible. The JB had this Icepick treble and was no where near as thick as the EMG's i replaced it with. Either the dumb japs @ esp didnt wire it properly or they dont suit the guitar. he EMG's dont have the Icepick treble.
Click to expand...

in an alder/maple guitar like the m-II the JB is bound to be bright and shrill sounding...are you running an 81 or 85 in the bridge now?
 
>|<>QBB<
nwright":ff19a said:
I like EMG's for metal on just about any guitar, BUT, I don't think I could play them at only 9 volts. 18 volts are a must for me in my EMG loaded guitars. I like the "woodiness" that passives give me, but they just don't sound as in your face with my guitars/rig. Running my 81's at 18 volts bridges the gap between picking dynamics and tone from active to passive.

Over the summer I went through 81's, 85's, a JB, a Duncan Distortion, Bill Lawrence 500XL and ended up back with 81's, only this time with 18 volts. I couldn't ever go back to just 9 on actives.
Click to expand...

i may try running my mv300 @ 18 volts, as soon as i get a single coil to put in the neck
 
>|<>QBB<
metalpoida":30850 said:
I had SD's in my M-II. Just terrible. The JB had this Icepick treble and was no where near as thick as the EMG's i replaced it with. Either the dumb japs @ esp didnt wire it properly or they dont suit the guitar. he EMG's dont have the Icepick treble.
Click to expand...

Curious as to your current EMG pickup configuration as well. JB isn't quite doing it for me in my M-II as well.
 
I prefer passives and i dont like super high output pickups. They sound more organic to me.
 
emg 81 with 18 volt mod = best of both worlds imo

everything has its place.
 
>|<>QBB<
flying_high":c26c8 said:
emg 81 with 18 volt mod = best of both worlds imo

everything has its place.
Click to expand...

That's a good compromise between most pickups and how EMGs compress, but I think that it still just sounds like EMGs. It's more on whether you like the particular sound of their pickups or not.

I can't really add much to the active vs. passive thing. The only actives I have ever played are a few EMG humbuckers and of course, since most pickups are passive, they're all over the place and I haven't tried very many of even the more well known ones yet.

It could be a nice feature to have something that you could switch on and off that would give you the effect of the compression from EMGs, but I don't know how in the world you could do that, as I'd imagine you can't design an active pickup like that and just make it switchable between passive and active without some radical difference between the two, if it's even possible at all.
 
I like both for different reasons. EMG's are great for cutting rhythm work. I love passives all around.

If someone put a gun to my head and said choose I would say passive pickups.
 
>|<>QBB<
cobrahead1030":add97 said:
>|<>QBB<

to my ears, the super heavy dense maple you speak of when matched with a mahogany body is tone heaven...my old teacher had a tom anderson with that combination and the sound was just beautiful, even unplugged that guitar just sang! it was so crisp yet warm thru the lows and highs
Click to expand...

You sure? Tom Andersons were known for using super flamed or quilted western tops, not eastern. Eastern, the dense stuff is not usually very figured at all.
 
>|<>QBB<
Megadeth7684":6c395 said:
I much prefer a good passive over any EMG. I think passives sound much thicker than EMG's. The 81 sounds good recorded, but I hate how it sounds in person. I like medium output passive pickups for high gain stuff.
Click to expand...

+1
I'm exactly the same way.

I think EMGs sound better for rawer and dryer sounding amps. I loved my emgs with a mesa recto, marshall TSL, vht UL, and VHT 50 cl. I hated EMGs with Engls especially with my 1st savage 120. I thought it was too much with the Engls. I did not try the 85 in the bridge which I hear is the way to go if you don't like how the 81 sounds. Overall, I'm happy with my Jb and '59 combo in my king v.

I guess my philosophy is: Use emgs with lower gain or dryer voiced amps and use passives with higher gain and/or saturated gain voiced amps. The higher the gain on the amp, the lower the output on the pick up should be to compansate. I've been happy with these results.
 
>|<>QBB<
thegame":78f75 said:
>|<>QBB<

You sure? Tom Andersons were known for using super flamed or quilted western tops, not eastern. Eastern, the dense stuff is not usually very figured at all.
Click to expand...

i was talking about the neck of the guitar, not the top

i can't say if it was western or eastern...but it was a very dense and kinda dark maple, like i've seen on some old fenders
 
>|<>QBB<
OneArmedScissor":4d97e said:
>|<>QBB<

That's a good compromise between most pickups and how EMGs compress, but I think that it still just sounds like EMGs. It's more on whether you like the particular sound of their pickups or not.

I can't really add much to the active vs. passive thing. The only actives I have ever played are a few EMG humbuckers and of course, since most pickups are passive, they're all over the place and I haven't tried very many of even the more well known ones yet.

It could be a nice feature to have something that you could switch on and off that would give you the effect of the compression from EMGs, but I don't know how in the world you could do that, as I'd imagine you can't design an active pickup like that and just make it switchable between passive and active without some radical difference between the two, if it's even possible at all.
Click to expand...

The bassist in my band has a Ken Smith bass where the volume pot is push pull to switch from active to passive modes. I'm not sure how it works or whether it is even meant as a tonal option or more of a backup.
 
>|<>QBB<
Inearthed":1cf6b said:
>|<>QBB<

Curious as to your current EMG pickup configuration as well. JB isn't quite doing it for me in my M-II as well.
Click to expand...

I had the 81B and 85N... then tried out the 85 in the bridge trend. Didnt like it and put the 81 back in. I love the 81. :love: :love:



The 18V mod is overexageratted IMO. Bit of a Placebo effect. :x
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top