What Passive Bridge Pickup Is Closest To An EMG 81?

  • Thread starter Thread starter angelspade
  • Start date Start date
angelspade

angelspade

RT Kimg
Question: Fans of the EMG 81 in the bridge position...In your experience, what passive is closest in tone and response? Thanks guys!
 
There just isn't, IME.

There is no way of replicating the extreme focus of the 81 by passive modes. It's the hipass/lopass that the preamp gives EMG's that makes them sound the way they do.

That being said, I'd probably throw the DiMarzio Dominion, Duncan Black Winter, and maybe EMG H4 in there. But none really do the same thing if you A/B them directly to the 81. But what you want in a passive to resemble the 81 is extreme low-end rolloff and high-mid focus. The DiMarzio D-Ac doesn't really do that. It's much broader EQ-wise than any of the ones I mentioned.
 
I can't answer your question directly but there are several Duncan comparison videos on Youtube that are really good. I'm thinking you will be in the Black Winter realm.

Edit: Rex beat me to it with a much better answer :lol:
 
You’d want a passive with blade pole pieces. Also a voicing that naturally rolls off lows and highs, leaving mostly mids and upper mids.
 
Last edited:
I though the DiMarzio Transition is supposed be this
 
I honestly went down this rabbit hole once myself because I wanted to try something new, and always just dug EMGs.

There’s no replacement. Just stick with the EMGs if they make you happy.
 
The Duncan Black Winter sure seems to have a lot of fans here...Keep seeing it mentioned in threads as a winner. Isn't the BK Miracle Man supposed to kinda mimic the EMG sound as well?
 
japetus said:
OG one, I had one in a 1994 Ibanez Sabre mij with a tune o matic and it sounded massive. Miss that guitar everyday.
Click to expand...
I kind of wish you knew who the maker of your L500XL bridge pickup was. Both Bill Lawrence USA and Wylde USA (Bill & Becky) were making the same pickup. I used to own a Bill & Becky L500XL pickup. It definitely sounded massive to me and I foolishly traded it away. Thanks for responding to my inquiry.
 
Hamer95USA said:
I kind of wish you knew who the maker of your L500XL bridge pickup was. Both Bill Lawrence USA and Wylde USA (Bill & Becky) were making the same pickup. I used to own a Bill & Becky L500XL pickup. It definitely sounded massive to me and I foolishly traded it away. Thanks for responding to my inquiry.
Click to expand...
I wish I did too. I just remember it sounded crushing! Edit: I am figuring it was made in the early 90's because the guitar was a 94 and I bought it in around 96. I know that doesn't help much but yeah. That pickup just sounded like a sledgehammer.
 
Last edited:
I have experience with EMG 81’s and have BKP Miracle Man and Dimarzio D-Activator in my parts drawer. The closest passive I’ve found to the 81 is a Duncan Skolnick sig. it’s A5, but it rolls the lows and highs off and is dominant in the high mids. Killer pup if you are going for that. I initially loved it and then found it too much for M style amps as my ears adjusted.

I also found the X2N in the ballpark…..but more lows
 
I still think the 81 was originally geared towards being an improved X2N. At the time the 81 was being designed the X2N was the ultimate hot ceramic passive on steroids. The upper mids emphasis and compressed highs are very close on both, but as posted above the lows are not as neutered on the X2N.
 
I agree to an extent...

However, big difference is the X2N is kinda dark and bassy.

The 81 is actually kinda dark as well if you consider the fact that it has sort of a lopass effect to it. However, it has a SEVERE low-end rollof too, so it actually comes across and biting and cutting. It doesn't really have a very detailed top-end, much like the X2N, but the voicing of the low-end (or lack of) makes it come across are REALLY focused.

However, they do have a similar voicing to the attack.

I just sold my X2N. Honestly, I couldn't get rid of it fast enough. That pickup has been the biggest disappointment (for me). I was expecting brigth, sizzly, and cutting (ala Chuck), but all I got was dark and tubby. I heard the original ones with the nickel baseplate were better.

dave74 said:
I still think the 81 was originally geared towards being an improved X2N. At the time the 81 was being designed the X2N was the ultimate hot ceramic passive on steroids. The upper mids emphasis and compressed highs are very close on both, but as posted above the lows are not as neutered on the X2N.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top