Swapped out the stock EMG 81's in my JK-1 and dropped in a 57/66 set...made some quick comparison clips. Runs through heavy rhythms, cleans and leads. Check it out!
Last edited by a moderator:
YT: EMG 81 vs 57/66
- Thread starter Jaymz
- Start date
Spectivum
DisMember
nezvers
Beast
Rex Rocker
Call me Hugo!
I liked both in this clip, though I must admit I like the added chunk of the 57.
I'm starting to think the Hets might be a touch too bright for my already bright-sounding rga121. Thinking about dropping a 57 in. Don't know if I want the 66 as well, though.
I'm starting to think the Hets might be a touch too bright for my already bright-sounding rga121. Thinking about dropping a 57 in. Don't know if I want the 66 as well, though.
Save your money. I've had both the 81 and 81X, and the 81X is such a waste of time and a disappointment, IMO. The X just sounds like a slightly lower-output 18V-modded standard 81.
JeffTD
Senhor Testiculo
Agree with everything here. I don't care for 18v, the X series are useless IMO, and the 57 is amazing.
He's Dead, Jim
Member
I just switched from a guitar with an 81/85 set to the 57/66 set. I much prefer the 57 for most purposes. The high end is much less brittle and the articulation you can get out of it feels more natural. I do prefer the 81 for chug-a-lug-lug music though, and it sounds a little better in the context of the example in the video.
Vice//Versa
Dude among dudes
I had trouble hearing much of a difference between the 81 and the 57 in the high gain clip. I've been thinking about swapping the 81 on my Schecter Hellraiser but finding well executed comparisons like this seems hard. Could the marginal difference be due to the guitar? should I look into the Het set?
I've also considered passives (like bareknuckles), but because they are a smaller company its hard to find quality comparisons. Sorry if its a bit out of the scope of the OP.
I've also considered passives (like bareknuckles), but because they are a smaller company its hard to find quality comparisons. Sorry if its a bit out of the scope of the OP.
The pickup difference will react the same in any guitar. The 81 was a bit too bright for this guitar....IMO
Manicompression
doing it for the kids
Awesome comparison, thanks for doing it. Ive been debating giving the 57/66 set a spin in one of my guitars.
No worries man! I nearly didn't do it...but im glad I did. There's a few other comparisons but I wanted something a bit more fast paced to really hear what's going on (if anything)...and if I had made the right choice for my guitar 
Matt-Steele
Member
Spectivum
DisMember
Thanks for the 'X' comments, I will stick with the 85 (9V) then that I currently use in the bridge. Actually an 57/85 comparison would be interesting as both seem to have similar sonic differences vs the 81.
typo in the vid: @2:42 it says 81/60
typo in the vid: @2:42 it says 81/60
Agreed, I`m was very disappointed, when got 81X.
It seems that EMG just reduced preamp amplification factor (which, of course, gives more dynamics) and reduced output impedance to 2 kOhm, which gives about 3 db of peak output level, compared to 10 kOhm output impedance (it`s also a reason why blackouts are hotter, because of 1 kOhm output impedance).
Rex Rocker
Call me Hugo!
What I find kinda interesting is that if I 18V-mod the Hets in one of my guitars, when I record DI's, it peaks at exactly the same level as another guitar with the Blackout AHB-1b running at 9V. I prefer the sound of the Hets running at 9, though.
Gotta swap that Blackout out. Never really liked it, TBH.
Gotta swap that Blackout out. Never really liked it, TBH.
Mago
Austrian Blech Machine
I have to yet play a 57/66 set. Considering the pricing they seem to do a bit less than you'd think compared to the 81, but I have a gut feeling that this is one of the things that although the immediate difference is rather subtle, it can have a huge impact on the overall sound of an production, if you listen to it for a while...on an LP for example.
Sweet video dudester!
Sweet video dudester!
81X was definitely weak, exchanged for AHB-1b. Peak level of active pickup depends on Op-amp and output impedance (because it forms voltage divider with input impedance, including pots in guitar). So normal EMG (in my case it is 85) is around 3 db less peak level, proportion stays the same at 18 V.
X-series and normal EMGs using the same Op-amp (according to power consumption in pickup specifications), so at the same voltage clipping level will be the same, rest depends on output impedance.
I`m also did not liked AHB-1, so I`m traded it for SH5
Later that AHB-1 was dissected, so schematic is now known.
http://imglink.ru/show-image.php?id=6f55bf7364c54b0053a553209127ae98
Just more complexity than EMG...
No worries man! I nearly didn't do it...but im glad I did. There's a few other comparisons but I wanted something a bit more fast paced to really hear what's going on (if anything)...and if I had made the right choice for my guitar
That's why I did the 81 vs AHB-1 vid, everything else I could find on online was either terribly recorded or so low-tuned that I couldn't get hear anything appropriate for my style.
Rex Rocker
Call me Hugo!
It's weird how the first impressions of the 57 seems to be "yeah, less highs".
To me, when listening closely, it doesn't really seem like there's actually less airy highs, just less less empahsis on the characteristic cutting upper-mids of the 81 because the 57 actually has stuff going on in the lows and low-mids, unlike the 81, lol, but not going to such extremes as the 85 where there's so much more low mids than high mids.
I'm guessing there's the inherent EMG low-end tightness and focus to all their non-x designs, which is cool for us that do like the EMG character. I agree with Mago in thinking the 57 might yield a less fatiguing tone without losing the focused and controlled low-end.
These are like 25-30% more expensive than the standard EMG's, though. I really do want to try them because I feel the biggest difference is probably on how they react to one's playing, but damn... I really wish they were cheaper, lol.
To me, when listening closely, it doesn't really seem like there's actually less airy highs, just less less empahsis on the characteristic cutting upper-mids of the 81 because the 57 actually has stuff going on in the lows and low-mids, unlike the 81, lol, but not going to such extremes as the 85 where there's so much more low mids than high mids.
I'm guessing there's the inherent EMG low-end tightness and focus to all their non-x designs, which is cool for us that do like the EMG character. I agree with Mago in thinking the 57 might yield a less fatiguing tone without losing the focused and controlled low-end.
These are like 25-30% more expensive than the standard EMG's, though. I really do want to try them because I feel the biggest difference is probably on how they react to one's playing, but damn... I really wish they were cheaper, lol.
Interesting. I tried running my BO at 4.5V using AA batteries to see if I could get it closer to the EMG JH-B, but it just didn't work, lol.I`m also did not liked AHB-1, so I`m traded it for SH5
Later that AHB-1 was dissected, so schematic is now known.
http://imglink.ru/show-image.php?id=6f55bf7364c54b0053a553209127ae98
Just more complexity than EMG...
