emerald bridge for les paul?

[ZECK]

have a great sounding 2011 les paul with a wolftone marshallhead, alnico5, 8.0k in the neck.

the current bridge pickup in there is a bit too bright for me, an alnico2 ~14.5k. 

i want to replace it, thinking a tad more output than the bridge Blackdog leading me to the Emerald clips. might be a good fit, though wanted to ask around prior to buying.

i play bluesy tunes mostly and like a bridge to heat that up when needed, but not high-screech torch it so to speak. something a bit more than say the standard PAF sound bridge wise. thinking the Emerald might be it?

[Dave Sloven]

The Emerald bridge is probably the brightest pickup in the vintage hot BKP range.

[ericsabbath]

crawler


maybe the abraxas, but I'd guess that's on the bright side as well

[Telerocker]

Yeah Crawler or Abraxas. The latter one has a little less midrange and a bit more chime than the Crawler. The Crawler is mediumoutput, has a huge midrange and a round, but not dull topend, There is enough treble. Solonotes keep beef higher upon the fretboard. Tone is smooth, but the Crawler has a unique growl way when pushed. No other BKP sounds like this one. You can reach some agressiveness by finetuning the amp to the Crawlers voicing. It does clean to hardrock very well. Even metal is possible, though this one is not the tightest of BKP-family.
Mine is in a swampashstrat, so if your LP is very bright by itself, the Crawler will fit the bill, but if it's balanced from bottom to top, than the Abraxas might be a good alternative.

[ZECK]

The Emerald bridge is probably the brightest pickup in the vintage hot BKP range.

that could well be too bright a pup then, maybe.  glad you put it into that perspective. thx

[ZECK]

Yeah Crawler or Abraxas. The latter one has a little less midrange and a bit more chime than the Crawler. The Crawler is mediumoutput, has a huge midrange and a round, but not dull topend, There is enough treble. Solonotes keep beef higher upon the fretboard. Tone is smooth, but the Crawler has a unique growl way when pushed. No other BKP sounds like this one. You can reach some agressiveness by finetuning the amp to the Crawlers voicing. It does clean to hardrock very well. Even metal is possible, though this one is not the tightest of BKP-family.
Mine is in a swampashstrat, so if your LP is very bright by itself, the Crawler will fit the bill, but if it's balanced from bottom to top, than the Abraxas might be a good alternative.

their respective sound clips sound good to me. are you speaking of tone when you ask about "balanced from bottom to top"? its mahogany body with rosewood finger board. split coil setup. warm but not dark warm i would say.  it isn't as bright as my strat. 

the lead from the sound clip on the Crawler sounded clearer to me than the Abraxas, which i liked. has a lot of mids too which i like. 

glad i asked as i just didn't "hear" the Emerald being *that bright*. and that wouldn't have been a goo fit in this particular guitar with the wolftone neck pup.

appreciate the help. tonight, leaning strongly on the Crawler

[Dave Sloven]

Crawlers have a reputation for being dark in Les Pauls.

You might be happiest with the Abraxas.

[Telerocker]

I meant a good balance from top to bottom. Remember, the Emerald is on one side of the spectrum, the Crawler on the other end. Those are night and day. The Abraxas could be the best option here.

[gepetto33]

Yeah Crawler or Abraxas. The latter one has a little less midrange and a bit more chime than the Crawler. The Crawler is mediumoutput, has a huge midrange and a round, but not dull topend, There is enough treble. Solonotes keep beef higher upon the fretboard. Tone is smooth, but the Crawler has a unique growl way when pushed. No other BKP sounds like this one. You can reach some agressiveness by finetuning the amp to the Crawlers voicing. It does clean to hardrock very well. Even metal is possible, though this one is not the tightest of BKP-family.
Mine is in a swampashstrat, so if your LP is very bright by itself, the Crawler will fit the bill, but if it's balanced from bottom to top, than the Abraxas might be a good alternative.

glad i asked as i just didn't "hear" the Emerald being *that bright*. and that wouldn't have been a goo fit in this particular guitar with the wolftone neck pup.

appreciate the help. tonight, leaning strongly on the Crawler

Hi. The crawler is something i've never tried, due to the fact it seems more on the darker end of the spectrum tonally. I have however tried both the Emerald and the Marshallhead bridge pickups.

If you're familiar with the MH bridge, then we have a basis of comparison. Think of it as being equally as bright as the Emerald, but with more aggression, more high mids. The Emerald has what i would call an "extended top end" moreso than i would just call bright. If you're guitar is bright, or has no bottom end, then yes, this will be very bright. If it's a more balanced guitar, then you can really utilize it's upper-spectrum detail. The tone chart is VERY accurate on this one. It stays flat/tame across the bass and mids, and then cascades up up up into very detailed highs. Between the two - the emerald only lost out because of the compression, as i pretty much only run pickups 10k < output as a preference.

So to summarize - If the Marshallhead bridge is too bright, then so too would be the Emerald. Think of it as a more compressed PAF, with an extended and extremely detailed top end. I've also had the Abraxas and can say it's fairly dark-ish... not very detailed on the top end, but certainly has enough there not to make it sound dark-dark. I'm surprised none of these dudes recommended the Rebel Yell yet!..... it's been extremely in vogue lately, but i would also throw it in there as a more "full-spectrum" option. Full - as in it has mids and highs, with little enough low end not to sound modern or Djent-y-chugga-chugga.

[ZECK]

Hi. The crawler is something i've never tried, due to the fact it seems more on the darker end of the spectrum tonally. I have however tried both the Emerald and the Marshallhead bridge pickups.

If you're familiar with the MH bridge, then we have a basis of comparison. Think of it as being equally as bright as the Emerald, but with more aggression, more high mids. The Emerald has what i would call an "extended top end" moreso than i would just call bright. If you're guitar is bright, or has no bottom end, then yes, this will be very bright. If it's a more balanced guitar, then you can really utilize it's upper-spectrum detail. The tone chart is VERY accurate on this one. It stays flat/tame across the bass and mids, and then cascades up up up into very detailed highs. Between the two - the emerald only lost out because of the compression, as i pretty much only run pickups 10k < output as a preference.

So to summarize - If the Marshallhead bridge is too bright, then so too would be the Emerald. Think of it as a more compressed PAF, with an extended and extremely detailed top end. I've also had the Abraxas and can say it's fairly dark-ish... not very detailed on the top end, but certainly has enough there not to make it sound dark-dark. I'm surprised none of these dudes recommended the Rebel Yell yet!..... it's been extremely in vogue lately, but i would also throw it in there as a more "full-spectrum" option. Full - as in it has mids and highs, with little enough low end not to sound modern or Djent-y-chugga-chugga.

appreciate the insights. still think i'm going with the bridge Emerald. i consider this particular Les Paul quite balanced.  going to give it a try. thanks all.

[darrenw5094]

The Emerald is quite bright though, if that is your original problem, then this might not work for you. The Abraxas would be a safer bet.

[Slartibartfarst42]

From what you've said, I wouldn't be in a rush to put an Emerald in there. I tried an Emerald in a PRS SE Custom 24 and I found it way too bright in there. If you're after a Mule after a course of steroids, you'd be better off looking at the Abraxas.

[gepetto33]

its mahogany body with rosewood finger board. split coil setup. warm but not dark warm i would say.

You should be fine with this wood combination + the Emerald. From what feedback we've given in the forum, you're aware this pickup will feature the high end of the spectrum more than most pickups... and probably in a far more tasteful way than what's in there currently. The thing about Bare Knuckles is that whatever 'emphasis' is designed within the pickup's voicing - it's never obtuse. It's always tasteful. The only reason i've ever changed a BK pickup in my guitar is because they catered to different tastes than what i play - every single one has been brilliantly engineered.

Another thing to throw out there is the fact that the Emerald and Marshallhead bridge are very similar in terms of voicing, as i stated earlier in this thread. Both are brighter voiced, with the MH sounding a bit more aggressive/open, and the Emerald a bit more balanced/compressed. If you're matching up a similar sounding bridge pickup to it's neck counterpart, then that's another consideration towards making the decision towards Emerald. You should be fine, and perhaps even check with Tim/Ben @ BK too if you haven't already.. just for the hell of it. They know their stuff 

[JimmyMoorby]

I have different taste in music from you.  With my Les Paul I was after more Zakk Wylde/John Sykes/Doug Aldrich tones.  Off my own back I bought an Emerald set and I thought the hi end was fantastic.  The brightness was lovely but the problem was a lack of girth/bottom end but for blues and rock this may not be an issue.....

Just my proverbial 2 cents

[Dave Sloven]

A friend of mine had this issue with running an Emerald equipped LP Studio through a Laney Lionheart 20W A-class tube head.

He fixed it by adding a clean boost