SD Nazgul vs JB(sh4) sort of VIDEO ADDED(bkp)

mchn13

mchn13

Well-known member
Its just a simple comparison between the two. I have been using nazguls for several years now, but put a jb/‘59 set in my jackson mainly out of nostalgia, and was surprised at how much i like it in this format. Anyone just go back to the tried and true? Also anyone find a great take on the jb? I just had an Aldrich and didn't really like it as much..
charvel 3dr-nazgul
Jackson slsmg-jb
 
Last edited:
In my baritone, I prefer the Nazgul. But in any guitar tuned above B, I prefer the JB between those two.
 
SFW said:
In my baritone, I prefer the Nazgul. But in any guitar tuned above B, I prefer the JB between those two.
Click to expand...
Thats my only concern is that the bottom wont be tight once i get it to volume at practice. I would love a pup with the jb mids with a tight low end. I liked the aldrich, but it sounded more like a duncan custom than the jb in the mids.
 
I think the JB does lower tunings better than what most people give it credit for.

I mean, Arch Enemy. 'Nuff said.

I also don't get it why people call it harsh or bright. Yes, I get it, it's got lots of high mids. But's also super chunky in the low mids. A bit much for me at times. And if you compare it to anything lower DCR (in the same guitar with the same settings), you immediately notice it has like NOTHING going on above that high-mid spike. Not to say that's a bad thing, TBH.
 
Last edited:
I have the 7 string version of the JB in a Mayones Setius tuned to A, I think it does very well with low tunings. I don’t know how it differs from the 6 string version though.

It’s a picky pickup though, I’ve had it in a few guitars and it sounded really bad in some, and really good in others.
 
Rex Rocker said:
I think the JB does lower tunings better than what most people give it credit for.

I mean, Arch Enemy. 'Nuff said.

I also don't get it why people call it harsh or bright. Yes, I get it, it's got lots of high mids. But's also super chunky in the low mids. A bit much for me at times. And if you compare it to anything lower DCR (in the same guitar with the same settings), you immediately notice it has like NOTHING going on above that high-mid spike. Not to say that's a bad thing, TBH.
Click to expand...
Most people use 500K pots and don’t see the relationship.
 
I've always used 500K pots with mine. The only humbucker I've ever used with a 250K pot was the Black Winter, but that's because I wasn't using a tone knob at the time. I normally don't, except on Les Pauls just because they look right being there, LOL.

I still think the JB is more of a "cutting" than a truly "bright" pickup. It has the high-mids, but if you swap it out for pretty much any of those PAF-y inspired 8K-something humbuckers, the JB sounds super fat and almost dark. I realized that when I once tried it in the neck position. Just unusable mud.

But if you're comparing it to EMG's, yes. It's got more highs (and lows) because it doesn't have the bandpass from the preamp going on. But any passive is going to have more highs and lows than any of the classic EMG's running on the standard preamp.
 
Hard to say since they are in different guitars. I prefer to feel more snap in the lows than the jb typically provides, but the jb always sounds great to me.
 
Detroit1973 said:
What would the prefered pot rating be? 300K?
Click to expand...
It was designed for 250k pots. I just add a 333k resistor from the hot output to ground with 500k’s. Been wanting for more hair so I’ll prolly increase it next. 300’s sound about right.
 
Rex Rocker said:
I think the JB does lower tunings better than what most people give it credit for.

I mean, Arch Enemy. 'Nuff said.

I also don't get it why people call it harsh or bright. Yes, I get it, it's got lots of high mids. But's also super chunky in the low mids. A bit much for me at times. And if you compare it to anything lower DCR (in the same guitar with the same settings), you immediately notice it has like NOTHING going on above that high-mid spike. Not to say that's a bad thing, TBH.
Click to expand...
They’re definitely guitar specific it seems. Ive never felt like it was bright either. It def has more low mids than the nazgul, which sounds like it has a notch around 3-400hz. Besides that the high end sounds really similar. Ill get to run it through my stereo metal rig tomorrow and see how loose or tight it feels. I have a painkiller set im going to try right after them. I just got the slsmg, so im swapping pups and seeing wht i like in it. Was surprised how the jb responded.
 
dave74 said:
Hard to say since they are in different guitars. I prefer to feel more snap in the lows than the jb typically provides, but the jb always sounds great to me.
Click to expand...
Sames. I like how hard the nazgul hits in the low-end but the mids on the jb are killer. Ive tried the aldrich and the holy diver in the past; looking for an alternative, but they dont have the snarl of the jb imo. The nazgul was the closest as far as the high mids, and where i landed for metal several years ago.
 
mchn13 said:
Sames. I like how hard the nazgul hits in the low-end but the mids on the jb are killer. Ive tried the aldrich and the holy diver in the past; looking for an alternative, but they dont have the snarl of the jb imo. The nazgul was the closest as far as the high mids, and where i landed for metal several years ago.
Click to expand...
Try the Seymour Duncan Alternative - 8. SH-15. I think that will cover all that you're looking for.
 
I've got an underwound Motor City Afwayu that is pretty much the JB sound in high def. I also liked the Holy Diver, but the underwound Afwayu is a Goldilocks pup for me in some applications.
 
Might also be worth checking out the Arcane 13. It's in a similar voicing, but has Alnico 8 magnets, and feels a bit leaner/tighter in the bottom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top