So EMG 81-7 vs passives

[Oceandrinksboat]

I know that the masses are going to say any passive is better than actives but..

since I already have EMG 707tws in my guitar , I don't want the Hassle of the whole switch from active to passive (maybe when I have more money so I can do it right) so I just want to know how would an 81-7 (specifically the 7-string version) would stand up to a D-Activator, Nazgul, or illuminator, etc.

and don't compare to the Bare Knuckle Master Race.
because come one.

 

[Emperoff]

More compressed, more "processed" sounding, brighter, tighter.

There you go

If you don't want to convert to passives you could try the 57/66 as well.

 

[akinari]

Wouldn't you rather compare the 81-7 to the 707 instead of 3 *completely* different sounding passives?

 

[bzhan1]

I don't have a $3k amp but from what I can tell EMGs with 18v mod are very comparable to most high output passives. Much louder output with less noise, slightly different tone that can be compensated by pedal/amp settings. Honestly if you're tight on cash and already have 707s installed I wouldn't even bother switching pickups.

 

[Garlic Owl]

I have found this video comparing the D Activator 7 bridge and the 81-7 using a Kemper ProfilinG amp: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX7NSCcrPJA

I don't have experience with the 7 string standard EMGs, but I do with their 6 string X series, the 6 string 57/66 set, and the D Activator 7 set. I really like the X series for their openness, added headroom, and improved cleans. However, I was sold on their 57/66 set. They were just clear enough for my taste, responsive, and very clean. The 57 sounds like a mix of the 81-X and the 85-X, while the 66 reminds me of a calmer, sweeter, cleaner alnico version of the 60-X. For the D Activator 7 set, the neck is brightish, but very chime-like and clean, while the bridge is very bright, tight and present, and can have an ice-picky lead tone if you don't EQ your amp carefully; the set is very versatile, but it simply excels in metal.

With that being said, what exactly are you looking for? What are the 707TW's not doing for you?

 

[Oceandrinksboat]

Wouldn't you rather compare the 81-7 to the 707 instead of 3 *completely* different sounding passives?

Well I already have the 707s and I know how much better the 81-7s sound.

So I'm curious how would the 81-7s stand up to a Well known Passive

 

[Oceandrinksboat]

I have found this video comparing the D Activator 7 bridge and the 81-7 using a Kemper ProfilinG amp: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX7NSCcrPJA

I don't have experience with the 7 string standard EMGs, but I do with their 6 string X series, the 6 string 57/66 set, and the D Activator 7 set. I really like the X series for their openness, added headroom, and improved cleans. However, I was sold on their 57/66 set. They were just clear enough for my taste, responsive, and very clean. The 57 sounds like a mix of the 81-X and the 85-X, while the 66 reminds me of a calmer, sweeter, cleaner alnico version of the 60-X. For the D Activator 7 set, the neck is brightish, but very chime-like and clean, while the bridge is very bright, tight and present, and can have an ice-picky lead tone if you don't EQ your amp carefully; the set is very versatile, but it simply excels in metal.

With that being said, what exactly are you looking for? What are the 707TW's not doing for you?

Excellent Response.

Well the the 707TWs bridge just sound too compressed,its not bright enough imo.
Ive tweaked until I have a nice tone, but A better pick up will also do me justice.

I love the Split Coil option but mainly on the neck pup

 

[Garlic Owl]

Thank you! By the way, what kind of guitar do you have?

Personally, I think you should try out the 57-7 for the bridge. I don't think it will be able to be split though. If you like the tone on the neck pickup, and maybe just want more dynamics, I'd go for the 707TW-X. However, that's if you want to stay with active pickups.

 

[Oceandrinksboat]

I'll probably switch the neck for a 57-7 and Bridge with a 81-7, and just remove the split coil. I have a schecter Hellraiser c-7

 

[oneblackened]

IME, the 81-7 is a much better sounding pickup than the 707. It's a lot tighter and considerably clearer and brighter.

 

[Emperoff]

IME, the 81-7 is a much better sounding pickup than the 707. It's a lot tighter and considerably clearer and brighter.

It depends on the guitar. A friend of mine has one of the new Jackson SLATs (mahogany) and the 707 sounded muffled and dead. On mine (older model, alder) the 707 sounds much better. In fact, I traded the 81-7 for a 60-7 and put the 707 on the bridge, because the 81-7 sounded characterless and boring. Tight, defined and clear, but boring.

I'll probably switch the neck for a 57-7 and Bridge with a 81-7, and just remove the split coil. I have a schecter Hellraiser c-7

This explains it all. Full mahogany guitars + 707 = Not the best combination.

If you don't like 707's compression, the 81-7 is MUCH worse. You'd better off with passives, or perhaps this:

http://www.seymourduncan.com/products/electric/humbucker/high-output/retribution_78/

 

[oneblackened]

It depends on the guitar. A friend of mine has one of the new Jackson SLATs (mahogany) and the 707 sounded muffled and dead. On mine (older model, alder) the 707 sounds much better. In fact, I traded the 81-7 for a 60-7 and put the 707 on the bridge, because the 81-7 sounded characterless and boring. Tight, defined and clear, but boring.

Funny you mention that, I had one in an Alder ESP NT7 and I thought it sounded tubby and crappy. I went passive, though looking back I should have just bought an 81-7X and a 60-7X (or maybe an 85-7X) and called it a day.

 

[Oceandrinksboat]

IME, the 81-7 is a much better sounding pickup than the 707. It's a lot tighter and considerably clearer and brighter.

Ive heard that alot and seen the comparisons, the 81-7 is better than the 707 by far

 

[Oceandrinksboat]

Funny you mention that, I had one in an Alder ESP NT7 and I thought it sounded tubby and crappy. I went passive, though looking back I should have just bought an 81-7X and a 60-7X (or maybe an 85-7X) and called it a day.

I'll forsure try a 81-7 before making the switch

 

[Emperoff]

Ive heard that alot and seen the comparisons, the 81-7 is better than the 707 by far

Says who?

There is no "better". Try both and decide which one you like the best.

 

[All_¥our_Bass]

It depends on the guitar. A friend of mine has one of the new Jackson SLATs (mahogany) and the 707 sounded muffled and dead. On mine (older model, alder) the 707 sounds much better.

Makes sense, since the 707 is a relatively flat pup, so putting it in a bassy/thick sounding wood can be a problem.

You need to match it to the tone of the guitar.
Something thinner or more neutral would sound better with the 707.