|
|
EMGs
Jul 10, 2014 7:39:49 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 7:39:49 GMT
I actually love the cleans of EMGs more than I do most passives. For me, all the ones I've tried don't work for my tone when distorted (though I have yet to try the 57/66 combo) but for cleans they are sublime.
Plus you know, Devin. Devin is a good endorsement of anything in my books.
|
|
|
|
EMGs
Jul 10, 2014 18:52:37 GMT
Post by slartibartfarst42 on Jul 10, 2014 18:52:37 GMT
When I said they're good at what they do, I didn't specifically mean Metal. I was actually referring more to their sound, which has always seemed quite distinctive to me. I'm aware they were designed for jazz and I'm aware they don't have to be used for ultra high gain. Furthermore, I quite like the sound of the 57/66 set. All I was saying was that they have a particular sound that isn't really 'me' but for some people they will work really well. They are, in fact, good at what they do if you happen to like what they do.
Sorry if that wasn't clear.
|
|
|
|
EMGs
Jul 10, 2014 18:56:26 GMT
Post by Tony on Jul 10, 2014 18:56:26 GMT
For years I thought that the EMG sound wasn't for me. That was when I was using crap guitars into crap amps.
Despite what people tell you EMGs vary wildly between guitars.
|
|
|
|
EMGs
Jul 10, 2014 19:11:49 GMT
Post by MDV on Jul 10, 2014 19:11:49 GMT
When I said they're good at what they do, I didn't specifically mean Metal. I was actually referring more to their sound, which has always seemed quite distinctive to me. I'm aware they were designed for jazz and I'm aware they don't have to be used for ultra high gain. Furthermore, I quite like the sound of the 57/66 set. All I was saying was that they have a particular sound that isn't really 'me' but for some people they will work really well. They are, in fact, good at what they do if you happen to like what they do. Sorry if that wasn't clear. Thanks for the clarification. They do, as all pickup manufacturers seem to, have a family sound. Some like that sound and some don't. Many try to claim that they are good only for ultra-high-gain metal, and do so with much the same words you used, so apologies for jumping the gun there. Tony is right, as well - it's often said they sound the same all the time. They quite obviously don't. I have 3 guitars here with an 81 in the bridge, all with the same strings on the same scale, but all different woods and hardware. They sound as different with EMGs as they have with 3 of the same BKs in them before. Its a little ironic that a certain (very nice) person who shall remain nameless (though its pretty obvious) has said publicly that EMGs sound the same all the time (I believe it was 'put them in a cricket bat and they'll sound the same), but he's made at least 3 pickups 'inspired by' sounds that EMG 81s made to begin with. |
|
|
|
EMGs
Jul 10, 2014 19:55:15 GMT
Post by slartibartfarst42 on Jul 10, 2014 19:55:15 GMT
Agreed. If they're so awful, why copy the tone? Obviously I'm not speaking as an EMG fan but of the efforts he's made, I'd say one is an improvement (for me that's possibly because it's the least like an EMG!) and the others are simply different but certainly not better.
|
|
Mattayus
New Guy
Sir Groove-A-Lot
Posts: 13 
|
EMGs
Jul 10, 2014 22:30:54 GMT
Post by Mattayus on Jul 10, 2014 22:30:54 GMT
Indeed they are great for everything non-metal, and they can really make an amp sing. I prefer to refer to the 'lack of dynamics' as 'consistency', which is of the utmost importance for both live and studio environments. They just work, quite simply, and I don't actually think there's a pickup out there, active or otherwise, that can do all types of tones so masterfully. I mean, shit, one of my best hard rock tones I've ever captured was for my own band's EP, where I used a late 80's Korean-made Squier strat with EMG SA's. It was ridiculous.
Also, EMG 57/66 review coming soon. I'll even be doing a video for it, showing their full range of capabilities.
In short though; they're bloody fantastic. Very very tight, and VERY fucking hot! Do NOT put them right up to the strings like you would a standard 81. I made that mistake when I first installed them and they just howled at me microphonically at band practice. It wasn't until I tinkered about with pickup height and brought them down to where you would put a hot passive (about 5-6mm away on the bass side) that I realised these are no standard active pickup. Very passive characteristics, masses of dynamics and lush cleans, very open and classic sounding, but tight as anything, quite a rolled off bass, and highs too, for that matter, they're almost entirely all mids with little else (but in a good way). Very pushy, no need for a boost what so ever (Andy James uses an OD808 with his and I have absolutely no idea why) and I don't just mean for the amount of gain, I just mean they're EQ'd in such a way that using one simply detracts from their characteristic. I love being able to get away with going straight into an amp (can't get away with it with my JB, unfortunately!) and you can definitely do that with these. But, don't let that put you off. As I said, they're hot, but still very usable for non metal, you just have to play with height and don't overly push your amp!
|
|
|
|
EMGs
Jul 11, 2014 0:59:41 GMT
Post by MDV on Jul 11, 2014 0:59:41 GMT
Are you saying that the 57/66 are hotter than an 81? Or just for whatever reason more susceptible to noise?
because that would be odd, given that they're supposedly EMG PAFs, or whatever.
Also, which is supposed to be the bridge?
|
|
|
|
EMGs
Jul 11, 2014 9:32:00 GMT
Post by Blankplank on Jul 11, 2014 9:32:00 GMT
The fact they're touting them as the closest cross between actives and passive makes sense if they need to be backed right off.
|
|
Mattayus
New Guy
Sir Groove-A-Lot
Posts: 13
|
EMGs
Jul 11, 2014 20:17:03 GMT
Post by Mattayus on Jul 11, 2014 20:17:03 GMT
Are you saying that the 57/66 are hotter than an 81? Or just for whatever reason more susceptible to noise? because that would be odd, given that they're supposedly EMG PAFs, or whatever. Also, which is supposed to be the bridge? They are indeed, quite a bit hotter. It's either that or the simple fact that they're a hybrid of sorts. I mean, imagine any passive that has the hotness of an 81, they'd need to be backed off quite a way, so it might not be that they're hotter per se, just that their characteristics are making them appear so. When they were first installed and I had them up against the strings, I recorded a DI and the waveform was hiddiously massive hahaha, practically clipping on input 100% of the time. In any event, they are fucking tight. And again, that sounds odd given that they're meant to be PAF-types, but they just are. I mean, they're somehow open and tight at the same time. Open in that they've got quite a gritty gnarly mid-rich growl to them, and feel very 'lively' and responsive, but tight in that they're very rolled off in the lows, so playing fast gallops into an unboosted Rectifier is absolute heaven. |
|
|
|
EMGs
Jul 11, 2014 20:26:13 GMT
Post by MDV on Jul 11, 2014 20:26:13 GMT
Interesting. Very interesting. Have you tried the het set?
|
|
Mattayus
New Guy
Sir Groove-A-Lot
Posts: 13
|
EMGs
Jul 11, 2014 20:55:15 GMT
Post by Mattayus on Jul 11, 2014 20:55:15 GMT
I have not, but I've heard that they're also ridiculously tight (some say TOO tight, and hot). I've also heard that the 57/66 are a set that Hetfield rejected when he was trying out prototypes for the Het Set.
|
|
|
|
EMGs
Jul 11, 2014 21:25:15 GMT
Post by MDV on Jul 11, 2014 21:25:15 GMT
I haven't heard the last part. I have tried tonys het set and they are very tight. Not too tight. Can't be any such thing.
|
|
Mattayus
New Guy
Sir Groove-A-Lot
Posts: 13
|
EMGs
Jul 14, 2014 15:18:29 GMT
Post by Mattayus on Jul 14, 2014 15:18:29 GMT
I dunno, I think there can... It depends of course, but I'm coming from the school of thought that it's easier to make something tighter, than it is to make something looser. If something's tight 100% of the time it can only ever be used for that one thing, where as there are ways to make loose pickups tighter, so could be perceived to be more versatile.
|
|
|
|
EMGs
Aug 8, 2014 14:13:00 GMT
Post by witeter on Aug 8, 2014 14:13:00 GMT
Chrys Johnson from EMG (now of Dunlop) had this to say about the 57/66 set
"The 57/66 is NOT one of the versions that Hetfield turned down. It also had NOTHING to do with the rumored EMG Mustaine sig ...all lies. This set was developed by myself, Scott Wunschel and Rob Turner with Richie Falkner (Judas Priest) and Andy James."
I have the Hetset and I love it! and would love to try the 57/66
|
|
|
|
EMGs
Aug 8, 2014 19:25:25 GMT
via mobile
Post by vanhayden on Aug 8, 2014 19:25:25 GMT
I actually quite like them, it's not cool I know. But through the right rig they can sound pretty fine, and I'd take an SA over a noiseless passive.
The no solder harnesses are crap though.
And they're picky about amps.
And they do sound different in different guitars, not as much difference as a low output passive but you definitely can't put one on a crap guitar made of MDF and expect it to sound the same as one in a well made guitar of proper wood.
|
|
