favourite pickups for your V?

[joka07]

Could be an old worn out topic but what is the optimal pups for a V, if you would decide?

[cabba2203]

I currently have a set of EMG active pups (85/81) but I also like the sound with a Gibson Iommi signature

and the old Gibson PAF style covered pups that have the sticker or stamped PAT number that was actually for the TOM Bridge.

I've also used an X2N in my old tobacco burst reissue that was most brutal.

 

You may have to experiment to find what sounds good to your ear.

If you're not sure, start off with someone's tone you like who plays a V and try that pup.

[Morten M]

It depends on the assignment. I'm using several different combos in my V's.

 

Neck/bridge:

My fave is the Rio Grande Texas/BBQ.

Seymour Duncan Antiquities. For that classic Les Paul/rock sound.

Gibson Classic '58. Doing some vaudeville at the moment and the leader likes the warm sound of my CS.

Gibson 496/SD '59. For my TechnoMetal project.

Dirty Fingers in my '85. Perfect for D/C# tuning - they really work great/transmits the added bottom.

 

I'm not against EMG's. But case is, you can install them in plywood and they'll still sound like EMG's ie you only get the sound of EMG's - not the fine wood a Flying V is made of.

[cabba2203]

 

I'm not against EMG's. But case is, you can install them in plywood and they'll still sound like EMG's ie you only get the sound of EMG's - not the fine wood a Flying V is made of.

 

Amazing, as I've installed the same set of EMG's that are in my flying v in 2 different SGs and an Explorer and they sounded different. (Even amongst the SGs)

I guess I've got the magic set of EMGs!.

 

I've used EMG's on and off since the early 80's and each guitar still had it's own tone, characteristics and dynamics.

 

This EMG myth goes on and on and on and on....many forums. I guess if you say something long enough, it becomes truth regardless of facts.

 

Things to know about EMGs that are true:

The EMG is a rail type magnet, so it picks up each string evenly.

EMG's have a unified volume, so when you roll back on the volume knob the level of the sound is reduced without effecting the tone.

An EMG, even though it is active, is not a high output pup (most models, like 81/85).

The attack and response is very clean and tight.

You still hear the tone of the wood, woods like maple still sound bright, darker tone woods still sound darker.

The natural sustain of the guitar is still there.

 

Some players don't like those features, thinking the sound "sterile" as they like/ears are used to the uneven string volume and the way the tone changes on rolling back the volume.

I agree, it does sound good too, that's why I have passive pups on some guitars as well for when I am going for that kind of response.

The clarity and uniformed response of an EMG is nice as well, especially for the kind of percussive string attack I use playing types of music.

EMG's do NOT "steal your tone" or make the "tone wood of the guitar useless".

 

 

Experience the sound for yourself and don't believe everything you read on the internet.

[Morten M]

 

Amazing, as I've installed the same set of EMG's that are in my flying v in 2 different SGs and an Explorer and they sounded different. (Even amongst the SGs)

I guess I've got the magic set of EMGs!.

 

I've used EMG's on and off since the early 80's and each guitar still had it's own tone, characteristics and dynamics.

 

This EMG myth goes on and on and on and on....many forums. I guess if you say something long enough, it becomes truth regardless of facts.

 

Things to know about EMGs that are true:

The EMG is a rail type magnet, so it picks up each string evenly.

EMG's have a unified volume, so when you roll back on the volume knob the level of the sound is reduced without effecting the tone.

An EMG, even though it is active, is not a high output pup (most models, like 81/85).

The attack and response is very clean and tight.

You still hear the tone of the wood, woods like maple still sound bright, darker tone woods still sound darker.

The natural sustain of the guitar is still there.

 

Some players don't like those features, thinking the sound "sterile" as they like/ears are used to the uneven string volume and the way the tone changes on rolling back the volume.

I agree, it does sound good too, that's why I have passive pups on some guitars as well for when I am going for that kind of response.

The clarity and uniformed response of an EMG is nice as well, especially for the kind of percussive string attack I use playing types of music.

EMG's do NOT "steal your tone" or make the "tone wood of the guitar useless".

 

 

Experience the sound for yourself and don't believe everything you read on the internet.

I've had EMG's in 3 instruments over the years A Steinberger XM2AT like Tony Iommi's included (which by the way didn't fit my percussive way of playing).

If you have positive experiences with the interaction between the wood characteristics and EMG's, I see no reason to doubt that. Seems the product has become better since I gave up on it about 15 years ago.

[brundaddy]

My V came with 498/496. I put a 57 Classic+ in the bridge and couldn't be happier... best of both worlds.

[cabba2203]

I've had EMG's in 3 instruments over the years A Steinberger XM2AT like Tony Iommi's included (which by the way didn't fit my percussive way of playing).

If you have positive experiences with the interaction between the wood characteristics and EMG's, I see no reason to doubt that. Seems the product has become better since I gave up on it about 15 years ago.

 

My apologies if I came off like a d!ck, I get on a soapbox sometimes.

[Morten M]

My apologies if I came off like a d!ck, I get on a soapbox sometimes.

You didn't