Hammeron
All the guitars I have had have had passive pups, except for the Rock bass which was active.
What is your esteemed opinion regarding the pros and cons of the 2 systems?
VellaJ
Actives are awesome for the high gain, very distorted sound. I've got them on my Ibby, which I'm using for some of the hard rock sounds that are needed for some of the stuff I play. My Strat can't match the sound for that.
Cons... I don't find them as versatile as passives. Firstly, I don't often get some of the screaming harmonics that seem to come through with passives. I also desperately miss the quality of the cleans that one gets from the passive humbuckers, which is why I've been looking around for a Les Paul.
For metal, actives are awesome, as long as you aren't looking for the clean sounds in the same song...
Scorched
I've got two EMG 81s in my ESP and to be honest, don't like them at all. To my ears, they sound very sterile. I probably have no idea to make them sound good though... :-[
However the high gain players swear by active pups.
Malkav
I hate actives so much it makes my face hurt...
They lack dynamics, tend to be way too Hi-Fi and have a very undefined sound to the actual attack. (If that makes any sense)
They sound horrendously sterile with gain as well which tends to up their naffness factor, and they get super compressed.
The only thing I like about actives are their cleans, and even then that's a taste thing...
Also in this day and age pickups are made so well with regards to potting/waxing that the noiseless benefits of active are basically negligible...
AlanRatcliffe
I've always appreciated the benefits for Bass (although even there, they are not for me), but have yet to find an active I like on guitar. Having said that, one or two of the Blackout sets in the Seymour vid I posted yesterday sound like they might be interesting.
MikeM
The blackout is very similar to the jazz set, just run through the SD preamp.
LooneyAtTheGate
I also prefer passives, better for response and dynamics, pinch harmonics and everything else that gives playing a 'personal' feel.
You can get your power with the amp and effects.
For bass in a heavy band situation actives are very necessary to cut through the mix, from my experience. But for bass solos and classic rock I prefer passive bass.
BMU
My two main recording guitars have DiMarzio PAFs in the one and EMG707s in the other.
I prefer the actives. I find them easier to bed in a mix, less fizz.
I also love the super tight modern low B thump, think Nevermore/Loomis. You can get it with passives too of course, I just get a little extra satisfaction with actives. That's after turning the amp gain DOWN, they're a little too hot if you ask me. I'd like a slightly lower gain EMG707, that would be cool.
(Loomis is a good argument for why actives can't possibly sound -so very bad- as people carry on about. Not people here. Other people)
By the way a lot of high gain players hate actives, like CAB says.
I also think they have a nicer lead tone. High notes maintain a very singing, melodic quality whereas actives scream more. Question of taste but I prefer the former.
If you have one of those types, there's no reason to switch to the other except to satisfy curiosity. Agree passives are probably more versatile, but clearly both types can do the job. All Metallica cleans are EMGs after all.
LooneyAtTheGate
Yes Loomis rocks! ? He definitely epitomises a good active pup sound. And the Metallica cleans are legendary.
I wouldn't mind having a 7 string with good actives in one day...
At the moment i like passives. Off right now to jam with a rather loud drummer, will be bringing with 2 guitars, one with actives, one with passives, to see how they cope in the mix.
Clint-Green
BMU wrote:
My two main recording guitars have DiMarzio PAFs in the one and EMG707s in the other.
I prefer the actives. I find them easier to bed in a mix, less fizz.
I also love the super tight modern low B thump, think Nevermore/Loomis. You can get it with passives too of course, I just get a little extra satisfaction with actives. That's after turning the amp gain DOWN, they're a little too hot if you ask me. I'd like a slightly lower gain EMG707, that would be cool.
(Loomis is a good argument for why actives can't possibly sound -so very bad- as people carry on about. Not people here. Other people)
By the way a lot of high gain players hate actives, like CAB says.
I also think they have a nicer lead tone. High notes maintain a very singing, melodic quality whereas actives scream more. Question of taste but I prefer the former.
If you have one of those types, there's no reason to switch to the other except to satisfy curiosity. Agree passives are probably more versatile, but clearly both types can do the job. All Metallica cleans are EMGs after all.
+ 100 on Loomis, I absolutely love his tone and I think that if you're playing high-gain, downtuned stuff, actives are awesome for keeping things from sounding muddy. Don't be deceived by Metallica's clean tones though, enough chorus can give an otherwise lifeless pickup a passable clean tone (One, Sanitarium, Call Of The Kutulu). I know for a fact that for albums from at least The Black Album onwards they haven't shied away from using Strats, Les Pauls and even hollowbodied Jazz guitars for their clean tones in studio. Kirk even hauls out a strat every time they play The Unforgiven live ?
LooneyAtTheGate
That's true about chorus, probably the most over-abused of all effects, especially in the 1980s.
AlanRatcliffe
Effects are the spice, not the meal... Should be used to enhance something already good, rather than fix problems (with the possible exception of compressors).
What was it Zappa said? "Try get the best sound possible before you flange the piss out of it". Same applies - just substitute "chorus" for "flange".
ZarK
There are so many factors to consider... I've had the EMG 81/81 combo sound terrible to my ears in the alder-bodied ESP KH-2 while the 60/81 combo in my ESP Truckster sounded warm and full with excellent cleans as well... Very warm in tone but I suspect that has more to do with the guitar's construction and tonewoods than anything else. In another guitar I have EMG SA's and a 85. In this instrument they produce tones very similar to my US Strat but again, I suspect this has much to do with the guitar's tonewoods... It's all about pairing the pups with the guitar + your amp to create the tone you're after.
You can easily play the heaviest of metal with medium output humbuckers and a decent high gain amp setup. Similarly this can be achieved with high output active EMG's or similar pups combined with a lower gain amp or high gain amp at lower gain settings. I almost never dialled the gain on my Spider Valve and Mesa Dual Rectifier past 12 o'clock to get the heaviest tones from them when using my EMG equipped guitars.
Generally I prefer high gain active EMG's in a mahogany bodied guitar and a warmer sounding amp. To just say a pup is sterile sounding isn't enough to dismiss it. For example the same 'sterile' pup would probably breath life into a very dark sounding instrument where more conventionally voiced pups would just muddy up the tone. Try the same pup in different guitars and amp set-ups and you just may be surprised at how fantastic a pup can sound that previously didn't impress. It boils down to personal taste in the end. The one is not better sounding than the other. They definitely have different tonal characteristics that can either be enhanced or degraded by the natural tone of the instrument even before the signal gets to the amp...
If I had only one guitar, it would be fitted with Dimarzio medium-high output pups and a 5 position switch. You can get a massive variety of usable tones from such a setup, from blues all the way to metal. If I was into metal more than anything else, I'd be very tempted by the EMG 81/60 combo. They can be found being used on countless metal albums -and with good reason...
I also whole-heartedly agree that the natural tone of the instrument should be preserved and matched with the right amp before the adding of fx is even considered...
If you already have passive guitars and you're into metal as I know you are, you must get your hands on a mahogany bodied axe with EMG 81/60 combo (or similar) and live with it for a year or two. You already have passive axes which can presumably offer more versatility, but for dedicated metal mayhem you can't go wrong with active EMG's. (In the right axe; with the right amp...)
BMU
I ❤ mahogany too. Both the axes I mentioned are mahogany. I have actives in alder too - Loomis's sig in fact- that works too no problem, sounds good, but I lurve that mahogany sweetness.
For cleans admittedly I'd probably reach for the UV - passives, 5 way switch on an HSH guitar, posititons 2 and 4 have a transparent nearly acoustic sound. The Sisters tone on passion & warfare, verry nice.
VellaJ
Ok, although I stand by my first post, there is one thing I didn't mention, and I haven't noticed anyone state it explicitly. I think the sound quality of actives depends, ultimately, on the price of the guitar...
For example, I tried the Ibanez ART120 with actives, didn't like them much at all. They were fairly good for the heavy distortion stuff, but very "thunky" when on the clean channel. My RGA32 (moving up the price range) has much nicer pickups. Awesome for distortion, with bassy but decent enough cleans.
I haven't had any experience with ESPs, but I would imagine their actives are much better than what I could get on my budget...
Hammeron
I remember someone saying that he could switch from active to passive on his bass. I suppose it was equiped with both which he could choose to select?
AlanRatcliffe
Hammeron wrote:
I remember someone saying that he could switch from active to passive on his bass. I suppose it was equiped with both which he could choose to select?
That only works with passive pickups mated with a seperate active tone or circuit - you can bypass the tone and go passive. With active pickups, the preamp is part of the design of the pickup itself and they don't work without it.
majestikc
Active Pups sound like ass, get some Seymour Duncans and be done with it, the Dimarzio D-Activator I got (which is passive trying to be like active) sounds really crap along with every other DiMarzio I've heard/tried. Everybody from Slash to Slipknot to Dimmu Borgir to Avenged Sevenfold and Arch Enemy and Yngwie Malmsteen use Seymour Duncans.
Most of the guitar "sound" is the amp anyway, plug an amazing guitar into a crappy amp and it will sound bad, plug a crappy guitar into an amazing sounding amp and you're going to still have something sounding pretty good.
BMU
majestikc wrote:
Active Pups sound like ass, get some Seymour Duncans and be done with it, the Dimarzio D-Activator I got (which is passive trying to be like active) sounds really crap along with every other DiMarzio I've heard/tried. Everybody from Slash to Slipknot to Dimmu Borgir to Avenged Sevenfold and Arch Enemy and Yngwie Malmsteen use Seymour Duncans.
Most of the guitar "sound" is the amp anyway, plug an amazing guitar into a crappy amp and it will sound bad, plug a crappy guitar into an amazing sounding amp and you're going to still have something sounding pretty good.
So let's see, all EMGs and all Dimarzio sound like ass and only SDs are used by anyone important. I'm so glad you cleared that up for us. ?
MikeM
Lol I LOVE pickup "debates"
