EMG Het Set Question

W

webrthomson

Member
So being an active pickup guys I decided to check out the EMG Het set recently and dropped it into my Luxxtone blackout which is an alder body, maple neck and ebony fingerboard with a floyd rose.

While I love the neck pickup I'm pretty meh about the bridge one - it's almost like its not really got the output I was expecting - has anyone else found the bridge unit lacking? I realise that Hetfield is using this almost exclusively in Mahogany guitars (Iron Cross / Truckster / Snakebite) and I've stuck it in an alder one but even so it sounds thinner to me that I was expecting?

Anyone else got any experience of this pickup in an alder guitar, or just in general? Let me know your thoughts - thanks!

Ross
 
I felt the same way about the set. I absolutely love the neck pickup, and for leads and cleans I really like the bridge. However for metal rhythm the 81 is easily the better pickup.
 
I played them for awhile, and while I do like them, I went back to the 81. The low end of the hets had a thud sound I could never dial out. I didn't have an issue with the output though.
 
I was less than impressed by the Het set. Didn't like the low end of it, and after setting up the amp to work with that pickup, the sound didn't work with any of my other guitars. Out they came and back in went the 81/60a.
 
Thanks for the feedback guys - I think I'm going to pull out the bridge pickup and drop an 81 back in and see if I'm happier with that.

I also like the Blackout in the bridge on Alder guitars so I might try that too :)

Odd thought as the Het set seems pretty unbalanced to me, neck seems way louder?

Ross
 
I was able to get the volume to balance just fine so other than adjusting pickup height I'm not sure what could be going on there. I just didn't get along with the voicing of the Het bridge.
 
The low end of the Het Set is a bit bloated, kind of like James nowadays.

For new EMGs, the 57/66 set is much better IMO.
 
I got a Ibanez IC400 that got the Het-set.
It did match the guitar quite well. However, it's not as tight and precise as the 81-85 set I've had in it before.
The Het-set does sound big, and the low end is a lot more pronounced than with the 81, but not as tight.
With this guitar and the VH-4 the Het-set sound really good.
 
I think that one thing to consider with the Het Set is that it is my understanding that it was tested and augmented to ultimately be "voiced" to James' main rhythm sound....The Diezel VH4 Chan 3. The standard EMG 81 does not match well with this amp (I have tried this with mine) at all....The VH4 seems to strongly favor more traditional passives such as a Duncan JB. As many of you are aware, the VH4 is impossible tight, very compressed somewhat "boxy" in the palm-mutes. It is by no surprise that the Het Set bridge is rounder, warmer and fuller by design to match up correctly with the Diezel....But it may sound loose and a bit "bloated" with other amps, and to those who strongly favor the laser beam tightness of the EMG 81 in the bridge position.
 
Agreed with the above posts. I have it in a LP, and it's not working for me. I do like the neck but I'm gonna switch back to an 81 in this guitar, just seems to sound better.
 
angelspade":2saxauca said:
I think that one thing to consider with the Het Set is that it is my understanding that it was tested and augmented to ultimately be "voiced" to James' main rhythm sound....The Diezel VH4 Chan 3. The standard EMG 81 does not match well with this amp (I have tried this with mine) at all....The VH4 seems to strongly favor more traditional passives such as a Duncan JB. As many of you are aware, the VH4 is impossible tight, very compressed somewhat "boxy" in the palm-mutes. It is by no surprise that the Het Set bridge is rounder, warmer and fuller by design to match up correctly with the Diezel....But it may sound loose and a bit "bloated" with other amps, and to those who strongly favor the laser beam tightness of the EMG 81 in the bridge position.
Click to expand...

Hmmm thats weird. Anytime I played a EMG 81 equipped guitar thru my VH4 it sounded great.
 
Yeah I agree with a lot of what's being said here:

thegame":14113mmc said:
For new EMGs, the 57/66 set is much better IMO.
Click to expand...

victim5150":14113mmc said:
Another vote for the 57/66 set. I have them in an Edwards and they sound great.
Click to expand...

I recently stuck a EMG 57 another of my guitars and I agree it's a much better rounded pickup!

And these are both good point too - I'm using a Diezel Herbert, so not as tight as the VH4, but the same kind of Diezel sound:

SBlue":14113mmc said:
I got a Ibanez IC400 that got the Het-set.
It did match the guitar quite well. However, it's not as tight and precise as the 81-85 set I've had in it before.
The Het-set does sound big, and the low end is a lot more pronounced than with the 81, but not as tight.
With this guitar and the VH-4 the Het-set sound really good.
Click to expand...

angelspade":14113mmc said:
I think that one thing to consider with the Het Set is that it is my understanding that it was tested and augmented to ultimately be "voiced" to James' main rhythm sound....The Diezel VH4 Chan 3. The standard EMG 81 does not match well with this amp (I have tried this with mine) at all....The VH4 seems to strongly favor more traditional passives such as a Duncan JB. As many of you are aware, the VH4 is impossible tight, very compressed somewhat "boxy" in the palm-mutes. It is by no surprise that the Het Set bridge is rounder, warmer and fuller by design to match up correctly with the Diezel....But it may sound loose and a bit "bloated" with other amps, and to those who strongly favor the laser beam tightness of the EMG 81 in the bridge position.
Click to expand...

And I think this pretty much sums up where I am:

Steinmetzify":14113mmc said:
Agreed with the above posts. I have it in a LP, and it's not working for me. I do like the neck but I'm gonna switch back to an 81 in this guitar, just seems to sound better.
Click to expand...

I may go Duncan Blackout rather that EMG 81, but I do definitely feel a pickup swap coming on!

I'll report back how I get on :rock:
 
Tone Monster":w6i71pbc said:
angelspade":w6i71pbc said:
I think that one thing to consider with the Het Set is that it is my understanding that it was tested and augmented to ultimately be "voiced" to James' main rhythm sound....The Diezel VH4 Chan 3. The standard EMG 81 does not match well with this amp (I have tried this with mine) at all....The VH4 seems to strongly favor more traditional passives such as a Duncan JB. As many of you are aware, the VH4 is impossible tight, very compressed somewhat "boxy" in the palm-mutes. It is by no surprise that the Het Set bridge is rounder, warmer and fuller by design to match up correctly with the Diezel....But it may sound loose and a bit "bloated" with other amps, and to those who strongly favor the laser beam tightness of the EMG 81 in the bridge position.
Click to expand...

Hmmm thats weird. Anytime I played a EMG 81 equipped guitar thru my VH4 it sounded great.
Click to expand...

MY VH4 HATES the EMG 81....Herbert gets along with it very well however. That has been my experience.
 
angelspade":3lttnqi1 said:
Tone Monster":3lttnqi1 said:
angelspade":3lttnqi1 said:
I think that one thing to consider with the Het Set is that it is my understanding that it was tested and augmented to ultimately be "voiced" to James' main rhythm sound....The Diezel VH4 Chan 3. The standard EMG 81 does not match well with this amp (I have tried this with mine) at all....The VH4 seems to strongly favor more traditional passives such as a Duncan JB. As many of you are aware, the VH4 is impossible tight, very compressed somewhat "boxy" in the palm-mutes. It is by no surprise that the Het Set bridge is rounder, warmer and fuller by design to match up correctly with the Diezel....But it may sound loose and a bit "bloated" with other amps, and to those who strongly favor the laser beam tightness of the EMG 81 in the bridge position.
Click to expand...

Hmmm thats weird. Anytime I played a EMG 81 equipped guitar thru my VH4 it sounded great.
Click to expand...

MY VH4 HATES the EMG 81....Herbert gets along with it very well however. That has been my experience.
Click to expand...

Could you describe the sound it made? Hetfields VH4 rig sounded badass even before he switched to the Het Set.
 
Tone Monster":2luvezi2 said:
angelspade":2luvezi2 said:
Tone Monster":2luvezi2 said:
angelspade":2luvezi2 said:
I think that one thing to consider with the Het Set is that it is my understanding that it was tested and augmented to ultimately be "voiced" to James' main rhythm sound....The Diezel VH4 Chan 3. The standard EMG 81 does not match well with this amp (I have tried this with mine) at all....The VH4 seems to strongly favor more traditional passives such as a Duncan JB. As many of you are aware, the VH4 is impossible tight, very compressed somewhat "boxy" in the palm-mutes. It is by no surprise that the Het Set bridge is rounder, warmer and fuller by design to match up correctly with the Diezel....But it may sound loose and a bit "bloated" with other amps, and to those who strongly favor the laser beam tightness of the EMG 81 in the bridge position.
Click to expand...

Hmmm thats weird. Anytime I played a EMG 81 equipped guitar thru my VH4 it sounded great.
Click to expand...

MY VH4 HATES the EMG 81....Herbert gets along with it very well however. That has been my experience.
Click to expand...

Could you describe the sound it made? Hetfields VH4 rig sounded badass even before he switched to the Het Set.
Click to expand...

Only half agree with you here. Hetfield is one of my all time favorite players...Love the guy. That being said, his tone was always bigger, thicker and more aggressive when he was using more Mesa and Wizard gear. I love the VH4 for certain applications, but not necessarily for straight "metal" rhythm playing of the traditional sort with EMGs (Metallica). The marriage of active pickups (EMG) and an already hyper-compressed, Hi-Fi and very tight amp like the VH4 is not a great combination (IMO). This is particularly evident in palm mutes,where it tends to present as "clicky, tinny and very boxy"....Generally lacking size, thickness and punch. I like Duncans with my VH4...Whole the Herbert takes well to actives, as does the D-Moll. If I were Hetfield, I would lean more in the direction of the Mesa Tri-Axis and Wizard MC100. All highly subjective thoughts of course.
 
Hetfield has never to my knowledge used just a Diezel as his amp. His sound is always mixed with the mesa, which is his "main" sound. Now they are using axe fx, which is a travesty of sorts, but before he used 2 sounds in the triaxis, one emulating a mark 2c+, and one emulating a recto vintage channel on top of the diezel, all blended.

The Het set is looser and more bloated in the bottom end than the 81, but works perfectly for Hetfield as his picking hand is super tight and it's all downpicking. Hetfield's sound has never been super tight in the bottom end. If you are used to going into an amp with a tube screamer, you will find his sound loose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top