Fishman - why aren't they working for me?

sb-SG

sb-SG

Inspired
It's possibly just personal preference but I can't seem to get much joy from a set of Fluence Modern pickups installed as OEM on a Schecter.
Whilst I could swap them out for my usual PU preferences ( EVH Wolfgang's or DiMarzio D'activators) it's a fair bit of work and I just wonder whether I am somehow not optimised into my AF III? To me they just sound clinical and uninteresting, not like an EMG (not a big fan of those either) and more like a passive that lacks character.
Am I the only one that thinks that way or is there something I could do to tease some life out of this before the soldering iron is involved....
And if it's just a personal preference thing then that's fine as they clearly work wonders for some folk.
 
I had a set of those that I installed in an SG a while back. This was before I had my Axe and was running into amps or my interface. They did nothing for either. The were a little bit of a pain to install as well. I think it was mainly the fact that they didn't have the output I liked. I generally go for SD JB's or P-Rails.
I think they may be more for people who like a PAF sound and output.

just my $0.02
 
I don’t know pickups that well, so I wasn’t sure what PAF stands for. Quickly found out: Patent Applied For. Cool! 😀🎸🎹🎤✈️
 
I'm not a fan of the Moderns either, too hot / compressed / "modern" for my tastes. I absolutely love the Abasi set though, and I'm really keen to try the Javier Reyes ones since they are supposed to be very low output and articulate.
 
I have the fluence open core that came in my charvel. I have never had, nor been a big fan of active pickups- I have to say I really like them. They are very clean/clear and dynamic sounding to me. I had never tried the moderns to compare though...
 
I tried the Fluence Classics in a PRS 594. To me, they sounded good, but not any better than the BareKnuckle Mule's that was there before. I was also hoping that there would be more of a difference between the two different modes. The ones I had didn't have the single-coil option so if that would be excellent then maybe that's something that would make it worth it. As it was, I didn't think it was really an upgrade, especially also having to deal with batteries.
 
Thanks for the responses - preference clearly a big part of it .
I bodge wired in a DiMarzio 220 ( a jack on the end of the PU cable - not exactly "stage ready"...!) in the bridge and far prefer it so adding a Liquifire to the neck as I have used this previously too.
Will use the opportunity to ditch the push pull pots and do the coil tapping (which works well on both the 2 passives) on a new 5 way blade switch.
I will probably hang on to the Fluences but eBay also a possibility.
 
You do know that passives will need a set of different value pots. Sorry if that's obvious but you mentioned the push pulls and they have to go for 500Ka .
 
I have a set of open core classics. Definitely a tiny difference between the humbucker modes. They're ok, but nothing special. If I wasn't so lazy, they'd already be sold. Single coil mode is the best feature, but I play humbucker WAY more than singles.
 
Andy Eagle said:
You do know that passives will need a set of different value pots. Sorry if that's obvious but you mentioned the push pulls and they have to go for 500Ka .
Click to expand...
Yeah, thanks tho. It's easier to just pull the entire electrics wired together and replace the pots anyway. If I am lucky the PU connectors will slip thru the cavity holes and it means if I change my mind (unlikely) it goes back real easy.
I've listened carefully and am sure I prefer DiMarzio passives.
It's not the most stable host (Schecter Evil Twin) either but looks good to my eyes and now sounds better.
 
Anyone had any experience with Fluence for strat? I'd like to lose the hum and buzz, and I'm also interested having in an alternative more humbucker-ish tone available.

Much less interested in the sterile, boring thing some folks here have mentioned...

Thoughts?
 
Dave Merrill said:
Anyone had any experience with Fluence for strat? I'd like to lose the hum and buzz, and I'm also interested having in an alternative more humbucker-ish tone available.

Much less interested in the sterile, boring thing some folks here have mentioned...

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Dude, just from the demos online, I'd go for ZexCoils in a second. From everything I've read, they retain greater strat character than any other noiseless single-coil. I was just on the edge of getting their Tri-Bucker for myself.
 
warlockII said:
I have a set of open core classics. Definitely a tiny difference between the humbucker modes. They're ok, but nothing special. If I wasn't so lazy, they'd already be sold. Single coil mode is the best feature, but I play humbucker WAY more than singles.
Click to expand...
I have two guitars with Moderns, and they're... eh.. better than EMGs, but very lifeless and glassy.

However, the OC Classics are some of my favorite pickups, passive or active. Maybe it's because they happen to be in swamp ash guitars, but I just absolutely adore the way they sound, and how present they are. Very raw.

But the Moderns... OP nailed it when they said "clinical". They feel great, they're full and saturated, but just... a bit boring. No character.
 
I’ve got the Devin Townsend set in one of my guitars. I LOVE the split-coil and Classic settings, but the Modern setting can be a bit bright. It actually replicates adding a drive in front of an amp rather well, it’s doing almost the same thing by slamming the input a little harder. I’ve been dialing back the Input Trim just a bit and it reduces some of that annoying high end.

I like them more than EMG’s in that they don’t have that mid-range I hear in all EMG’s, but the high-end can be a pain in the ass to deal with. If they were just dialed back a couple db’s, it probably wouldn’t be that big of an issue.
 
sb-SG said:
It's possibly just personal preference but I can't seem to get much joy from a set of Fluence Modern pickups installed as OEM on a Schecter.
Whilst I could swap them out for my usual PU preferences ( EVH Wolfgang's or DiMarzio D'activators) it's a fair bit of work and I just wonder whether I am somehow not optimised into my AF III? To me they just sound clinical and uninteresting, not like an EMG (not a big fan of those either) and more like a passive that lacks character.
Am I the only one that thinks that way or is there something I could do to tease some life out of this before the soldering iron is involved....
And if it's just a personal preference thing then that's fine as they clearly work wonders for some folk.
Click to expand...

Fluence modern sets have very little bass, in my experience, and a very exaggerated upper mid focus combined with a super high output. Not far from EMG 81, but less controllable, and even more "TS" sounding.

One thing you can do is reduce the output via the relevant PU setting. You can also try reducing the high end via the HF tilt PU setting. If you look at the back of the PU, you will see quick-connect outputs for all this. These settings can be wired for push-pull pot, other switching options, or to be permanently engaged as well.

Ideally, you'd solder more quick connect cables to test all this though (I'm assuming the guitar is wired for the dual voices only).

Low gain option turned on plus HF tilt made for a more tolerable experience for me. But at the end of the day, I much prefer passives, but also other actives, like EMG 57, which have a great amount more bass and much less of a "cocked wah" response.

Fishman moderns felt a bit like I was trying to polish a turd, and too much energy went into that. Just not to my taste. I can see why some others like them though.
 
Last edited:
^ yep - felt very much the same. They got replaced with DiMarzios and I love the result - gave the guitar a lease of life but its all about personal taste. I have an ESP with an EMG 81 / 85 that sounds fine - kinda suits it so I'll leave that alone but generally passives work best for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom