• Security notice: Ernie Ball staff will never send you a direct message about a prize or giveaway, and will never ask you to click a link to "claim" anything.
    If you receive a message like that - even from an account whose name looks official - do not click the link. Please report it using the Report link on the message so the moderators can act. A scam campaign impersonating admin accounts was blocked on 29 July 2026; those accounts are banned and their messages have been deleted.

LUKE II with EMG 89 IN THE BRIDGE

Dariothery

Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Messages
12
Hello everyone.
I recently purchased a lefty LUKE II from the UK. Nice guitar indeed but with a few weak points, at least from my point of view.
So far I had experienced a very tough time trying to deal with the EMG 85 that comes in the bridge: it's a very strong pickup, with a lot of signal, but nothing more than that in my opinion.
It's good if you're looking for a huge distortion but (IMHO) not a very good option if want to use the LUKE as your maing gigging axe and you need a few more tones (mostly in clean field).
What got me upset the most is the tone of the 2nd position, where the middle and bridge pickups work in parallel togehter. This position, along with the 1st position (EMG 85 alone) has way more volume than the other 3 positions.Even using a compressor there's no way you can use it for clean arpeggios, strumming and clean work in general.And if played with distortion, it doesn't say anything interesting in both the 1st and 2nd positions.
After a little research I decided to change it with an EMG 89 + push pull volume knob for "splitting" and it was like night and day. Now I can finally use ALL the tones of the guitar + 2 more tones that are very usable for different stuff.
For those who don't know, the 89 is basically 2 pickups in 1: a stacked humbucker and an SA Sincle Coil, with separate internal preamps.
When the SA is engaged, it works alone.Since it's placed is on the bridge side, in the 1st and 2nd position it takes away a lot of low tones and is very usefull for funk tones or even to emulate a Telecaster/old strat bridge tone.
When the humbucker is engaged, instead, it works perfectly by itself as traditional bridge humbucker because has more highs than the 85 and is more "clear" and less "muddy" than the 85 and doesn't have THAT MUCH volume, even in the 2nd position (combined with the middle pickup), making the guitar sound with more or less the same volume, basically, in 4 positions.
I don't often play the bridge humbucker in clean mode but I bet it will surely be used in the future.

I had got very used to play with single coils in the last 3/4 years so I was missing the versatility of this kind of configuration. I used to think my Luke was good but not good enough as my strat now they are very much on the same line.
I truly recommend this modification to all LUKE II users.
Of course, this post just reflects personal opinions that can vary from player to player.
 
Last edited:
Glad you're happy - I've seen quite a few folks do the same thing, or mod the 2nd position with a cap+resistor to achieve a similar thing.

That said ... the pickup config was what Lukather wanted (and used), so that's why it was that way.
 
Sorry to bump an older thread but I did the Suhr mod with a cap and resistor and the 2nd position is much more usable..
 
Glad you're happy - I've seen quite a few folks do the same thing, or mod the 2nd position with a cap+resistor to achieve a similar thing.

That said ... the pickup config was what Lukather wanted (and used), so that's why it was that way.

Tell me more about this mod if you would. Any videos or demos to be found. I hate how the second position does basically nothing to change the sound. It's a wasted pickup position and it makes no sense whatsoever.
 
I guess this might explain why the LIII has the volume compensation in some positions. They may not have been able to do that with the EMG electronics.
 
Tell me more about this mod if you would. Any videos or demos to be found. I hate how the second position does basically nothing to change the sound. It's a wasted pickup position and it makes no sense whatsoever.
Check out this thread:

http://forums.ernieball.com/ernie-b...od-emg-85-mid-pickup-combination-luke-ii.html

I'd heard John Suhr saying he did that, way back when. Made position 2 more usable with a non-splittable bridge.

I guess this might explain why the LIII has the volume compensation in some positions. They may not have been able to do that with the EMG electronics.
Different thing- the volume leveling doesn't really affect the tone of the split positions. But it's a common complaint when going from humbuckers to single coils or splits. (Personally I don't like the levels to be even- it makes it easier to get a clean tone by just switching to a single coil with lower output, driving the amp less.)
 
I'm reviving the thread!

I've actually come across this issue recently, managed to get my hands on a Luke 2 PDN in True Gold and I could;dnt work out why I was losing some big end when using the position 2. Now I've done my research I realise why. I think I'm gonna swap out the 85X with an 89.

89 or 89X?

Does the Luke 2 use the EMG quick connect system? Is it completely solder less? I'm just wondering If I can do it myself or if I need to get a tech to install it all.

Many thanks

Paul
 
Last edited:
Interesting. Long ago, when I had a Luke II, I played with the idea of swapping the 85 for an 89, as to me position 2 was kind of useless (maybe that's too harsh -- certainly not my cup of tea), and I liked having the option to go into single-coil mode for the bridge pickup. But I really fell in love with the sound of the distorted 85, so I couldn't bring myself to do it.
 
Looks like True Gold huh? EBMM does not use the EMG quick connect system.

Glenn |B)
Yep True Gold! I'm quite lucky to get my hands on that guitar!

I didn't think MM did use the quick connect system. After chatting to my tech today, he says it could be wired to auto split on position 2 without the push pull knob which I prefer anyway.

I guess the next thing to decide is what to go for the 89 or the 89X! Anyone got any thoughts on that at all? The X has more headroom so I'm told!
 
Interesting. Long ago, when I had a Luke II, I played with the idea of swapping the 85 for an 89, as to me position 2 was kind of useless (maybe that's too harsh -- certainly not my cup of tea), and I liked having the option to go into single-coil mode for the bridge pickup. But I really fell in love with the sound of the distorted 85, so I couldn't bring myself to do it.
Interesting, I use the split positions quite a lot for my clean tone and sometimes on my slightly overdriven tones on my L4! I'm not trying to compare them but they do have that Strat quality quack sound lol
 
Last edited:
Back
Top