yt: EMG81 vs. BKP Aftermath (Soldano, Bogner)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lasse Lammert
  • Start date Start date
You should post that clip on sevenstring.org and wait for the flame war :D
 
haha, yeah.
I actually like BKP, there's one thing that I REALLY REALLY HATE about them...and that's their fanbois.
Even if you make a very neutral statement based on facts (like "EMG has a quicker and tighter bottom end") they feel like you just insulted their mother after having had violent unlubed anal sex with her....
You have no idea about the stuff the fanbois threw at me...."you just don't know how to set them up", "it was just too close to the string", "it was too far away from the strings", "your guitar's wood is not tight"....the next thing would have been "you have to record when the moon is 3/4 full and you have to be standing under an oak tree drinking 2 sips of diet coke and one sip of merlot every 3 and a half minutes....everyone knows that, of course it's not tight in this recording, but it's YOUR fault"

Really the BKP deciples are just ridiculous...the pickups are good though!
 
Yeah, its really ridiculous sometimes. But I think on rig-talk people are usually a lot more relaxed compared to other places ;)
 
Lasse Lammert":30gxbwhv said:
haha, yeah.
I actually like BKP, there's one thing that I REALLY REALLY HATE about them...and that's their fanbois.
Even if you make a very neutral statement based on facts (like "EMG has a quicker and tighter bottom end") they feel like you just insulted their mother after having had violent unlubed anal sex with her....
You have no idea about the stuff the fanbois threw at me...."you just don't know how to set them up", "it was just too close to the string", "it was too far away from the strings", "your guitar's wood is not tight"....the next thing would have been "you have to record when the moon is 3/4 full and you have to be standing under an oak tree drinking 2 sips of diet coke and one sip of merlot every 3 and a half minutes....everyone knows that, of course it's not tight in this recording, but it's YOUR fault"

Really the BKP deciples are just ridiculous...the pickups are good though!

What is the difference between praising BKPs highly and praising EMGs highly, though? :aww: You can't accuse someone of being a fanboi just because they don't agree with you. It is not correct to say that EMGs have a "quicker and tighter bottom end" to BKPs (the Aftermath in particular) - if anything, the Aftermath is tighter. For me, BKPs have sounded infinitely better than EMGs - for metal - in every guitar I've used them in. And, to be fair, your recording is absolutely not a typical representation of how an Aftermath sounds. It just isn't. I've always experienced much better "tightness" and crispiness with an Aftermath than with an EMG 81 and none of the lower definition evident from your clip. Further, it's difficult to deny that EMGs aren't warm pickups. Perhaps I went a bit far with 'sterile' but they simply do not sound as organic as BKPs.

ALSO, it's not incorrect to say that the tone of BKPs is heavily dependent on distance from the strings. There is a definite 'sweet spot' that you have to work to find, and they might require some EQ tweaking on the amp. I find EMGs are more forgiving in this respect and don't require as much effort to set up. So the reason people bring all these things up is that your clip DOES NOT sound like a typical Aftermath tone, and the most likely reason is that you didn't set the BKP up properly or it's not a good combination with your guitar's wood. I'm not saying the former is what actually happened but it's reasonable to come to that conclusion first given how good BKPs normally sound. EMGs are far less picky!

-C
 
spirit7":s9p7k431 said:
What is the difference between praising BKPs highly and praising EMGs highly, though? :aww: You can't accuse someone of being a fanboi just because they don't agree with you.
I think you've just proven my point...
please show me where in this thread I said that the EMG is better?
Where was I praising it highly over the BKP?
Where have I been "defensive" about EMGs?
Nowhere!
But that's what you wanted to read into it, and that's EXACTLY what I was saying two posts earlier...I never said anything negative about the AM in this thread, nor was it my intention to compare the AM and 81 in terms of "better" or "worse".
That's just what you WANTED to read into it, and that's the problem with the BKP fanbois, they WANT to be offended.
ALL I said is that EMGs are "tighter" ("tighter does not have to mean "better"!!!!) and if you wanna argue or not, EMGs ARE tighter (that means the bottom end is a bit leaner and quicker, less boomy) that does NOT mean they're better...really depends on what you're looking for.

spirit7":s9p7k431 said:
You can't accuse someone of being a fanboi just because they don't agree with you. It is not correct to say that EMGs have a "quicker and tighter bottom end" to BKPs (the Aftermath in particular) - if anything, the Aftermath is tighter.

It's perfectly fine to not agree with me, why would I have a problem with that (at least if it's about a mater of taste)...If I like red more than blue and you disagree because you think blue is a much nicer colour...fair enough.
But if someone says 3+4=7 and you don't agree it's a different thing.
I was not talking about your taste or my taste, but about a simple and easy to prove FACT...there's nothing to agree or disagree, it was just plain and objective measurable fact..EMGs are tighter (again, I'm not saying "better", cause that would be a matter of taste).


spirit7":s9p7k431 said:
And, to be fair, your recording is absolutely not a typical representation of how an Aftermath sounds. It just isn't.

well, it's the pickup in a 2k$ guitar played into an amp.....thatis EXACTLY how the pickup sounds in that guitar and through that amp.
but still...it wasn't my intention to get the best or "typical" tone for each pickup, I could has well have set all the dials to 10, IT DOESN'T MATTER cause I used the same settings for both pickups, so they still can be compared objectively, regardless of the settings or whether or not it's the "best possible" tone.
It's really not that hard to understand


spirit7":s9p7k431 said:
ALSO, it's not incorrect to say that the tone of BKPs is heavily dependent on distance from the strings. There is a definite 'sweet spot' that you have to work to find

of course, I've been setting up guitars for about 20 years now! The distance in this case was 5mm btw

spirit7":s9p7k431 said:
and they might require some EQ tweaking on the amp.

Yes, if you read the discription you'd know that I set the amp to sound good with the aftermath and recorded the EMG clip afterwards....
BUT even that doesn't matter, cause this test was NOT about better or worse (I didn't try to get the best possible tone for either of the pickups) , but about an objective comparison, it doesn't matter how the amp is dialed in, as long as it's the same for both pickups..it might not show the best tone, but you can still compare tightness, high end etc relative to the other pickup in the test....it's not like if I'd reduced the bass on the amp that the BKP all of the sudden would have been tighter but the EMG would have been boomier..the tone would have been tighter for BOTH pickups in that case.


spirit7":s9p7k431 said:
and the most likely reason is that you didn't set the BKP up properly or it's not a good combination with your guitar's wood.

I've actually tried the Aftermath in about 6 different high end guitars at various distances...I kept it in the San Dimas RR1 cause it was the first guitar I really liked it in (was too boomy in all the other guitars).
And btw, that's exactly what I meant by my "under an oak tree" reference...I'm using 2000-5000$ guitars here, the pickup is set between 3 and 6mm (I've been setting up guitars professionally for more than a decade now).....if it doesn't sound good (I'm not saying it doesnt), it's NOT the guitars fault....(and to be honest it's probably also not the fact that I wasnt recording it under an oak tree at 3/4 moon).


Summed up: I like the aftermath, really do...I never said in this thread that one is better than the other, not even that I personally preferred one, I just stated (and PROVED!) a fact 3+4=7...if you don't believe your ears have a look at the screenshot, that's neutral evidence and has nothing to do with amp settings (cause it's comparing both with the same settings) or oak trees and diet coke with wine.
EMGs have a tighter bottom end, fact, but one could also say BKP have more meat and low end punch....I never in this thread said one is better than the other.
The ONLY thing I did say in this thread that was reflecting my personal opinion (don't confuse opinion with facts) was that BKP fans are easily offended, and are always looking for something that they can interprete as offending to them.
But thanks for your post, it explained nicely what I meant.
 
Lasse Lammert":1cwl6u9i said:
spirit7":1cwl6u9i said:
What is the difference between praising BKPs highly and praising EMGs highly, though? :aww: You can't accuse someone of being a fanboi just because they don't agree with you.
I think you've just proven my point...
please show me where in this thread I said that the EMG is better?
Where was I praising it highly over the BKP?
Where have I been "defensive" about EMGs?
Nowhere!
But that's what you wanted to read into it, and that's EXACTLY what I was saying two posts earlier...I never said anything negative about the AM in this thread, nor was it my intention to compare the AM and 81 in terms of "better" or "worse".
That's just what you WANTED to read into it, and that's the problem with the BKP fanbois, they WANT to be offended.
ALL I said is that EMGs are "tighter" ("tighter does not have to mean "better"!!!!) and if you wanna argue or not, EMGs ARE tighter (that means the bottom end is a bit leaner and quicker, less boomy) that does NOT mean they're better...really depends on what you're looking for.

spirit7":1cwl6u9i said:
You can't accuse someone of being a fanboi just because they don't agree with you. It is not correct to say that EMGs have a "quicker and tighter bottom end" to BKPs (the Aftermath in particular) - if anything, the Aftermath is tighter.

It's perfectly fine to not agree with me, why would I have a problem with that (at least if it's about a mater of taste)...If I like red more than blue and you disagree because you think blue is a much nicer colour...fair enough.
But if someone says 3+4=7 and you don't agree it's a different thing.
I was not talking about your taste or my taste, but about a simple and easy to prove FACT...there's nothing to agree or disagree, it was just plain and objective measurable fact..EMGs are tighter (again, I'm not saying "better", cause that would be a matter of taste).


spirit7":1cwl6u9i said:
And, to be fair, your recording is absolutely not a typical representation of how an Aftermath sounds. It just isn't.

well, it's the pickup in a 2k$ guitar played into an amp.....thatis EXACTLY how the pickup sounds in that guitar and through that amp.
but still...it wasn't my intention to get the best or "typical" tone for each pickup, I could has well have set all the dials to 10, IT DOESN'T MATTER cause I used the same settings for both pickups, so they still can be compared objectively, regardless of the settings or whether or not it's the "best possible" tone.
It's really not that hard to understand


spirit7":1cwl6u9i said:
ALSO, it's not incorrect to say that the tone of BKPs is heavily dependent on distance from the strings. There is a definite 'sweet spot' that you have to work to find

of course, I've been setting up guitars for about 20 years now! The distance in this case was 5mm btw

spirit7":1cwl6u9i said:
and they might require some EQ tweaking on the amp.

Yes, if you read the discription you'd know that I set the amp to sound good with the aftermath and recorded the EMG clip afterwards....
BUT even that doesn't matter, cause this test was NOT about better or worse (I didn't try to get the best possible tone for either of the pickups) , but about an objective comparison, it doesn't matter how the amp is dialed in, as long as it's the same for both pickups..it might not show the best tone, but you can still compare tightness, high end etc relative to the other pickup in the test....it's not like if I'd reduced the bass on the amp that the BKP all of the sudden would have been tighter but the EMG would have been boomier..the tone would have been tighter for BOTH pickups in that case.


spirit7":1cwl6u9i said:
and the most likely reason is that you didn't set the BKP up properly or it's not a good combination with your guitar's wood.

I've actually tried the Aftermath in about 6 different high end guitars at various distances...I kept it in the San Dimas RR1 cause it was the first guitar I really liked it in (was too boomy in all the other guitars).
And btw, that's exactly what I meant by my "under an oak tree" reference...I'm using 2000-5000$ guitars here, the pickup is set between 3 and 6mm (I've been setting up guitars professionally for more than a decade now).....if it doesn't sound good (I'm not saying it doesnt), it's NOT the guitars fault....(and to be honest it's probably also not the fact that I wasnt recording it under an oak tree at 3/4 moon).


Summed up: I like the aftermath, really do...I never said in this thread that one is better than the other, not even that I personally preferred one, I just stated (and PROVED!) a fact 3+4=7...if you don't believe your ears have a look at the screenshot, that's neutral evidence and has nothing to do with amp settings (cause it's comparing both with the same settings) or oak trees and diet coke with wine.
EMGs have a tighter bottom end, fact, but one could also say BKP have more meat and low end punch....I never in this thread said one is better than the other.
The ONLY thing I did say in this thread that was reflecting my personal opinion (don't confuse opinion with facts) was that BKP fans are easily offended, and are always looking for something that they can interprete as offending to them.
But thanks for your post, it explained nicely what I meant.

Nah, I'm not at all offended - my post was simply intended to continue debate :)

I don't think it's a 'fact' that EMGs have a tighter bottom end than BKPs at all. My Aftermath definitely sounds tighter in the bass to my 81 through the Herbert. But everybody's ears are different, I guess!

-C
 
spirit7":gzjxftak said:
Nah, I'm not at all offended - my post was simply intended to continue debate :)


fair enough ;)

spirit7":gzjxftak said:
My Aftermath definitely sounds tighter in the bass to my 81 through the Herbert. But everybody's ears are different, I guess!


*sigh* I don't really know what to respond to that tbh, not even for the sake of debating.
it has nothing to do with ears and subjective listening "amount of bass" is a measurable thing...thats like saying "my Herbert is at 106 dBspl louder than my Recto at 123dBspl, that#s just what my ears are telling me"....IT's WRONG, the recto at 123dBspl is exactly 17dB louder than the Herbert at 106dBspl!
and it's the same with the bass response of a pickup, it's a measurable objective value, there's no room for debate. The low end of an EMG81 is tighter/quicker/leaner than the lowend on the AM, which is a bit fatter and has more subsance to it (the screenshots actually show it quite nicely (and in an objective and neutral way!).
The Aftermath is rather tight for a passive pup, and I think it sounds great in some guitars.
The EMG is and will always be the tighter pickup...an ANY guitar, ANY amp, ANY speaker cab, that's a fact and always will be...the frequency response of the pickup is very clearly measurable, there is no room for debate!
That does NOT mean it's the BETTER pickup. I wish people would understand that.


the AM is a very tight and articulate pickup (in some guitars), and I think it has a very unique frequency response, it doesn't sound like an SD or DiMarzio or anything...I really like it.
I also like EMGs, especially for things tuned lower than D.

the clip I posted was not to show one is better than the other, it was also not meant to show the best possible tones...it's just an objective comparison, I actually didn't mean it to even cause an argument, cause it's totally pointless...I was just stating a fact


Either way....
totally unrelated.....
I was thinking about getting a Diezel, I hate the Einstein, but I'm interested in the VH4 (especially cause of its 3rd channel) and Herbert.
Which one would you recommend?
 
Lasse Lammert":1pm6z5ja said:
spirit7":1pm6z5ja said:
Nah, I'm not at all offended - my post was simply intended to continue debate :)


fair enough ;)

spirit7":1pm6z5ja said:
My Aftermath definitely sounds tighter in the bass to my 81 through the Herbert. But everybody's ears are different, I guess!

*sigh* I don't really know what to respond to that tbh, not even for the sake of debating.
it has nothing to do with ears and subjective listening "amount of bass" is a measurable thing...thats like saying "my Herbert is at 106 dBspl louder than my Recto at 123dBspl, that#s just what my ears are telling me"....IT's WRONG, the recto at 123dBspl is exactly 17dB louder than the Herbert at 106dBspl!
and it's the same with the bass response of a pickup, it's a measurable objective value, there's no room for debate. The low end of an EMG81 is tighter/quicker/leaner than the lowend on the AM, which is a bit fatter and has more subsance to it (the screenshots actually show it quite nicely (and in an objective and neutral way!).
The Aftermath is rather tight for a passive pup, and I think it sounds great in some guitars.
The EMG is and will always be the tighter pickup...an ANY guitar, ANY amp, ANY speaker cab, that's a fact and always will be...the frequency response of the pickup is very clearly measurable, there is no room for debate!
That does NOT mean it's the BETTER pickup. I wish people would understand that.


the AM is a very tight and articulate pickup (in some guitars), and I think it has a very unique frequency response, it doesn't sound like an SD or DiMarzio or anything...I really like it.
I also like EMGs, especially for things tuned lower than D.

the clip I posted was not to show one is better than the other, it was also not meant to show the best possible tones...it's just an objective comparison, I actually didn't mean it to even cause an argument, cause it's totally pointless...I was just stating a fact


Either way....
totally unrelated.....
I was thinking about getting a Diezel, I hate the Einstein, but I'm interested in the VH4 (especially cause of its 3rd channel) and Herbert.
Which one would you recommend?

Specification-wise, you are right - but to my ears the Aftermath sounded tighter. I'll see if I can put a clip together to show you what I mean.

Re: your Diezel question, it completely depends on what kind of music you play! What do you hate about the Einy? I didn't think Diezels could inspire hatred - dislike, certainly (if their unique tone is not your thing) - but not hate! I'd say if you don't get on with the Einy to try the Herbert, as the VH4 is closer to the Einstein. Still doing it's own thing (the VH4 is supremely tight, Einstein more open), but certainly closer than the Herbert.

The Herbert, for modern metal, is in my opinion an unparalleled amp. It's got a massive but focused bottom end, great tightness and chug (whilst still being quite forgiving), no hiss or fizz (a la 5150 or Recto), fantastic cleans and a great (if very compressed) lead channel. Try it out!

-C
 
well, hate might be too strong, I was just heavily disappointed...cause for me it was unusable.
I really liked the tone/the general character of the eini (like a less raw/more controlled 5150 flavor..but still different), there was just this one boomy frequency in the low mids/high bass that was impossible to dial out.
The bass knob's and depth knob's frequency both didn't attack the problematic resonance-spike, so to control that boomy spike I had tu turn Bass and reso so low that the entire tone got very thin, as soon as I started dialing in some more bass or depth again that spiked popped up again...I tried it through different cabs.
so while I liked the general character of the amp that one boomy frequency poking out made it absolutely unusable for me (at least without an additional EQ in the loop), so I was very disappointed with it.
But since I liked the character overall I thought perhaps one of the other amps might do it for me
 
I would recommend the Herbert aswell. The other good thing is that Peter Diezel is always willing to fine tune the amp to your taste if you visit him ;)

PS: Wenn du Interesse hast, könnte ich dir auch gerne mal meinen Herbert und/oder Hagen zum Test ausleihen.
 
spirit7":36iw519x said:
Specification-wise, you are right - but to my ears the Aftermath sounded tighter. I'll see if I can put a clip together to show you what I mean.

-C

Please do share some clips! I have an Herbert too and I am very curious how this combo would turn out.

And to Lasse, thanks for all your efforts and explanation. I really appreciate it.
 
spirit7":2fx81vrq said:
Lasse Lammert":2fx81vrq said:
haha, yeah.
I actually like BKP, there's one thing that I REALLY REALLY HATE about them...and that's their fanbois.
Even if you make a very neutral statement based on facts (like "EMG has a quicker and tighter bottom end") they feel like you just insulted their mother after having had violent unlubed anal sex with her....
You have no idea about the stuff the fanbois threw at me...."you just don't know how to set them up", "it was just too close to the string", "it was too far away from the strings", "your guitar's wood is not tight"....the next thing would have been "you have to record when the moon is 3/4 full and you have to be standing under an oak tree drinking 2 sips of diet coke and one sip of merlot every 3 and a half minutes....everyone knows that, of course it's not tight in this recording, but it's YOUR fault"

Really the BKP deciples are just ridiculous...the pickups are good though!

What is the difference between praising BKPs highly and praising EMGs highly, though? :aww: You can't accuse someone of being a fanboi just because they don't agree with you. It is not correct to say that EMGs have a "quicker and tighter bottom end" to BKPs (the Aftermath in particular) - if anything, the Aftermath is tighter. For me, BKPs have sounded infinitely better than EMGs - for metal - in every guitar I've used them in. And, to be fair, your recording is absolutely not a typical representation of how an Aftermath sounds. It just isn't. I've always experienced much better "tightness" and crispiness with an Aftermath than with an EMG 81 and none of the lower definition evident from your clip. Further, it's difficult to deny that EMGs aren't warm pickups. Perhaps I went a bit far with 'sterile' but they simply do not sound as organic as BKPs.

ALSO, it's not incorrect to say that the tone of BKPs is heavily dependent on distance from the strings. There is a definite 'sweet spot' that you have to work to find, and they might require some EQ tweaking on the amp. I find EMGs are more forgiving in this respect and don't require as much effort to set up. So the reason people bring all these things up is that your clip DOES NOT sound like a typical Aftermath tone, and the most likely reason is that you didn't set the BKP up properly or it's not a good combination with your guitar's wood. I'm not saying the former is what actually happened but it's reasonable to come to that conclusion first given how good BKPs normally sound. EMGs are far less picky!

-C
You just completely made his point for him :lol: :LOL: :thumbsup:
 
madrigal77":3skes2hq said:
spirit7":3skes2hq said:
Lasse Lammert":3skes2hq said:
haha, yeah.
I actually like BKP, there's one thing that I REALLY REALLY HATE about them...and that's their fanbois.
Even if you make a very neutral statement based on facts (like "EMG has a quicker and tighter bottom end") they feel like you just insulted their mother after having had violent unlubed anal sex with her....
You have no idea about the stuff the fanbois threw at me...."you just don't know how to set them up", "it was just too close to the string", "it was too far away from the strings", "your guitar's wood is not tight"....the next thing would have been "you have to record when the moon is 3/4 full and you have to be standing under an oak tree drinking 2 sips of diet coke and one sip of merlot every 3 and a half minutes....everyone knows that, of course it's not tight in this recording, but it's YOUR fault"

Really the BKP deciples are just ridiculous...the pickups are good though!

What is the difference between praising BKPs highly and praising EMGs highly, though? :aww: You can't accuse someone of being a fanboi just because they don't agree with you. It is not correct to say that EMGs have a "quicker and tighter bottom end" to BKPs (the Aftermath in particular) - if anything, the Aftermath is tighter. For me, BKPs have sounded infinitely better than EMGs - for metal - in every guitar I've used them in. And, to be fair, your recording is absolutely not a typical representation of how an Aftermath sounds. It just isn't. I've always experienced much better "tightness" and crispiness with an Aftermath than with an EMG 81 and none of the lower definition evident from your clip. Further, it's difficult to deny that EMGs aren't warm pickups. Perhaps I went a bit far with 'sterile' but they simply do not sound as organic as BKPs.

ALSO, it's not incorrect to say that the tone of BKPs is heavily dependent on distance from the strings. There is a definite 'sweet spot' that you have to work to find, and they might require some EQ tweaking on the amp. I find EMGs are more forgiving in this respect and don't require as much effort to set up. So the reason people bring all these things up is that your clip DOES NOT sound like a typical Aftermath tone, and the most likely reason is that you didn't set the BKP up properly or it's not a good combination with your guitar's wood. I'm not saying the former is what actually happened but it's reasonable to come to that conclusion first given how good BKPs normally sound. EMGs are far less picky!

-C
You just completely made his point for him :lol: :LOL: :thumbsup:

By stating that my experience is different? Uh huh :lol: :LOL:

-C
 
Lasse Lammert":16lx0cxc said:
spirit7":16lx0cxc said:
BKPs are much pickier ...

this is quite true, I've tried the BKP in like 6 different guitars and hated it in all of them (flubby mess), this San Dimas Rhoads is the first guitar I really like it in

spirit7":16lx0cxc said:
...unlike EMGs, which take over the tone of any guitar they're in with - yes - their machine-like sterility)

sorry, but that's total nonsense, I have about 11 high end guitars with EMGs, and they all sound EXTREMELY different, even with identical specs (for example FR trem, maple neck through alder body). EMGs DO pronounce the little differences in those guitars quite well...they still all have the same tight quality of course (and that's why I love them...but they sound different in every guitar).
And of course they do, if you're thinking about how the pickups work it's quite obvious that the wood HAS to have a big influence on the EMGs and passives alike..the principal physics behind it are the same,
this "EMGs are sterile and sound the same in every guitar" is just internet bullshit and quite easy to prove wong.

I always enjoy your recordings and you NAILED my EXACT opinions on these 2 brands of pickups. :yes:
 
Back
Top