Dry Z vs dry 1982

[jimmypringles]

I have a set of dry z's that are 7.4 bridge and 7.6 neck and I have a set of dry 1982's that are 7.6 bridge and 7.96 neck and after ABing them back and forth for a half hour through an old twin reverb and through a kemper I have to say- I'm not sure which I prefer. The difference is the dry 1982's are a little hotter. Aside from that, they have the same tone and are very musical and natural sounding. Plugging into an old twin reverb on 4 I can keep the dry 1982's clean or hit them harder and get them to break up a little where no matter how hard I hit the dry z's with the same settings, they don't break up, which is good or bad depending on what you're playing. If I played jazz, I'd definitely prefer the dry z's but playing classic rock, blues, etc, then I prefer the dry 1982's. Dry 1982's are great to get tube breakup from a vintage amp.

I have some gibson classic 57 paf's in an orville by gibson that I compared to them and the classic 57's suck in comparison. sound too sterile and digital, a little brash and overbearing. not nearly as musical. If you didn't know better and just went by common stereotypes then you'd think the classic 57's were the japanese pickups and the dry z's were made by gibson. The classic 57's are 7.96 in the neck and bridge