Emg 81 vs. 85

[mop]

Has anyone here tried an 85 in the bridge? How would you describe it in relation to an 81?
I've got both so thought I'd whack one in the bridge of my schecter blackjack and one in the bridge of my tremonti se and disconnect the neck pups (don't really use the neck pup on those guitars). Just trying to decide which to put in what guitar.
They're both mahogany body, rosewood fb guitars although the blackjack is way heavier than the tremonti so I suspect the tremonti isn't really what it claims to be
The blackjack is my drop-c/d-standard guitar for kse/chimaira etc. style songs and the tremonti is in drop-c# or Eb-standard used for stuff more like disturbed and three days grace.

The other thing is has anyone tried one of the above pups with just a single vol. control? Would it sound different to having the tone turned right up all the time? I was thinking about not bothering to wire a tone pot because I leave it turned up all the time anyway.

[DaNextSlash]

Killswitch Engage use 85 in the bridge exclusively as do most of the bands that they produce/influence...I hate EMGs myself however.

[AmpShop]

My experience is that the 85 will sound fatter, the 81 will have more cut (tried both in my SG).

[mop]

I think I'll have to try them both ways. Pita as ones got a quick connector and the other doesn't.
What about the no tone control thing, any thoughts on that?

[Ironbird13]

dunno about active PUps, but my little experience with PUps, removing the tone pot makes it slightly brighter, like turning the tone pot to 11