why an active bass?

[PaulWarning]

maybe I'm being a bit thick here, don't know whether this question been asked before but why do you need an active bass or even tone controls on a passive? (never touch my on/off P tone knob, always full on) when an amp or FX pedal does the job so much better, it's not like you can easily alter any of the bass controls mid song.

Edited December 30, 2014 by PaulWarning

[stingrayPete1977]

Im more likely to adjust the treble, slap, fingers, pick, near the bridge, near the neck, thumb but with different treble settings covers most genres ime.

[dincz]

If you ever do need to adjust tone mid-song, it's easier to do on the bass than on the amp. But I agree that amps are likely to have much more comprehensive tone controls than are normally provided on a bass.

[Cameronj279]

The thing I prefer about having tone control on my bass than on the amp is consistency. I use a lot of "in house" amplification when gigging and find if I get the source tone as good as possible it's better than editing a bad tone on many different branded amps boosting/cutting slightly different frequencies.

[icastle]

I rarely find the need to even touch my tone controls, but I did have to when I first got the bass to get the default sound I wanted.

[discreet]

I was passive for decades (fnarr) but I'm finding my active bass a revelation. You can indeed change tone on the fly as the controls are right there on the bass and I'm finding I can change my sounds as much as the amp EQ, if not more so.

I use my own rig when possible, but on those occasions when I don't (auditions, etc) I know I'm going to get 'my' sound from the active EQ.

There are two types of active bass too (AFAIK): One has passive pickups with an active EQ, and the other has active pickups also with an active EQ... I believe you can have active pickups without EQ as well... OK, that's three types...

Edited December 30, 2014 by discreet

[dincz]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1419969360' post='2644493']There are two types of active bass too (AFAIK): One has passive pickups with an active EQ, and the other has active pickups also with an active EQ... I believe you can have active pickups without EQ as well... OK, that's three types...
[/quote]

"Active" pickups are really just passive pickups with the preamp electronics built into the same casing rather than on a separate PCB. Same principle, different geography

[JTUK]

In an ideal world you wouldn't want active for the most part but since most of us run
far from ideal rigs, or rather far from ideal situations/stages/rooms then passive
needs quite a bit of help there, IMO, and it is easier to have it onboard.
I spend most of my time at home running them in passive and the active sound
is as close to that as possible... maybe just a tad more spikey, but fundementally
the same sound with a boost option if req'd and to hand.

[Lozz196]

I`m not keen on changing eq on basses too much, as for me you can end up with volume jumps/drops. I prefer to get bassier or treblier by playing nearer or further away from the bridge. Just about the only thing I do like for variation is the P/J set-up, and when I depped I used a bass with that on it and found it worked well. That said, I`m sure the punters never noticed any difference at all.

[HowieBass]

Isn't it the case that an active bass also buffers the signal so you don't need to worry about long guitar cables or cable capacitance which can affect the tone from a passive bass.

[PaulWarning]

yeah I understand the problems with using other amps when doing a multi band gig but I've got an FX pedal for that and I think they cover all the arguments for using an active bass, plus you can change your settings mid song with your foot.
And I do apologise for the spelling error in the title of the thread doh!

Edited December 30, 2014 by PaulWarning

[uk_lefty]

It's the volume control on a passive bass that I don't understand!!!

[Sean]

[quote name='uk_lefty' timestamp='1419976591' post='2644612']
It's the volume control on a passive bass that I don't understand!!!
[/quote]

Once you start to use it, you'll start to understand it.

[Ben Jamin]

I was always under the impression that active basses were developed for busy session musicians who would bypass amp/pedals and plug directly into the desk/DI - such as Marcus Miller etc. Gives you a lot of control in a simple set-up.

Edited December 30, 2014 by Ben Jamin

[zero9]

Nobody needs an active bass, but a lot of people prefer it. In your case, it seems you don't need one. I've found that with an active bass I have all the tone shaping I need, without needing to touch an amp or preamp. Very useful when recording / DI'ing.

Edited December 30, 2014 by zero9

[discreet]

[quote name='PaulWarning' timestamp='1419976285' post='2644609']
yeah I understand the problems with using other amps when doing a multi band gig but I've got an FX pedal for that and I think they cover all the arguments for using an active bass, plus you can change your settings mid song with your foot.
[/quote]

I used a SansAmp-type preamp pedal with a passive bass for years with no issues - I like to keep things simple live and thought that active basses just represented more to go wrong - but actually it's a lot simpler to carry your God with you (so to speak) and now I really like being able to just plug and play with my sound onboard. No need to carry pedals, extra leads and mains adaptors or deal with their associated problems and issues...

Edited December 30, 2014 by discreet

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='PaulWarning' timestamp='1419976285' post='2644609']
yeah I understand the problems with using other amps when doing a multi band gig but I've got an FX pedal for that and I think they cover all the arguments for using an active bass, plus you can change your settings mid song with your foot.
And I do apologise for the spelling error in the title of the thread doh!
[/quote]
[quote name='Ben Jamin' timestamp='1419978863' post='2644635']
I was always under the impression that active basses were developed for busy session musicians who would bypass amp/pedals and plug directly into the desk/DI - such as Marcus Miller etc. Gives you a lot of control in a simple set-up.
[/quote]
[quote name='zero9' timestamp='1419979696' post='2644643']
Nobody needs an active bass, but a lot of people prefer it. In your case, it seems you don't need one. I've found that with an active bass I have all the tone shaping I need, without needing to touch an amp or preamp. Very useful when recording / DI'ing.
[/quote]
[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1419982842' post='2644690']
I used a SansAmp-type preamp pedal with a passive bass for years with no issues - I like to keep things simple live and thought that active basses just represented more to go wrong - but actually it's a lot simpler to carry your God with you (so to speak) and now I really like being able to just plug and play with my sound onboard. No need to carry pedals, extra leads and mains adaptors or deal with their associated problems and issues...
[/quote]

I have found using a Sansamp, multi FX or similar is good but it doesn't have the same effect as an OBP and if anything they are far more complex than any preamp, you cant really fine tune with your foot either, that is fine for going from patch to patch and I used to use auto wah with fuzz back in the day for the chorus on a few songs we did, the OBP is more about tweeking the patch you already have setup to suit any variables like a full or empty room, guitarist swapped to a Les Paul and robbed your space etc.

As the others have said I find where it excels is live or recording, DI into the desk and you are away, I used my old pre EB Ray in a studio a while ago, the engineer had the stuff setup from a previous band using some form of clever box and a preset mix on the computer for bass but he was not happy with the bass sound so he just patched the bass into the interface and started a fresh bass track set flat and well there it was, a fine adjustment on the stingray and everything else could be mixed later.

I do the same live too, DI the bass and set my own amp flat, mix the OBP rather than my amp and the engineer is normally happy with that, my passive Jazz into a DI would be lacking for me hence my outbourd pre but putting that in the signal chain live, remebering not to tread on it etc isnt for me. I have not decided how to use the Jazz through a big PA yet, the preamp is in my FX loop so probably go post EQ on my DI out but I think that is where the trouble starts, this "my sound" is great in the bedroom or even a practice room but it might not be what is needed out front.

[JTUK]

[quote name='Ben Jamin' timestamp='1419978863' post='2644635']
I was always under the impression that active basses were developed for busy session musicians who would bypass amp/pedals and plug directly into the desk/DI - such as Marcus Miller etc. Gives you a lot of control in a simple set-up.
[/quote]

Any decent studio will have way more options than you'd get from an active bass..IMO
Companies like Aguilar and Demeter were studio pre amp solutions and many players
would take one of those in a rack. What you don't want is a complicated and noisy
signal chain and the idea was to get the cleanest purest signal. Once you get there,
you can mess with it, but they tended not to want to before it went down onto tape.
How much you can and do mess with a signal is down to how much you want to spend
on it... and for a session player take, they want your job done and you out of there.

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1420018554' post='2644802']
Any decent studio will have way more options than you'd get from an active bass..IMO
Companies like Aguilar and Demeter were studio pre amp solutions and many players
would take one of those in a rack. What you don't want is a complicated and noisy
signal chain and the idea was to get the cleanest purest signal. Once you get there,
you can mess with it, but they tended not to want to before it went down onto tape.
How much you can and do mess with a signal is down to how much you want to spend
on it... and for a session player take, they want your job done and you out of there.
[/quote]

I see this the same for live gigs, a high end PA has far better knobs and dials than my kit even though it is decent gear, give them a good sturdy clean signal and let them fatten it up or compress it etc, that is their job IMO. I have heard a Ricky into an Ampeg with a floor mounted box of tricks, it sounded epic but mic'd up as per the users request the sound crew could not get it into the mix out front, the guy would not let them use a clean DI off the bass even for a blend and the gig went on like that and I never heard a note he played, great. I used a 1x12 combo with the DI off the back of my head pre EQ and had me in my monitor, slight bass boost on the bass and it sounded great on stage and out the front

Edited December 31, 2014 by stingrayPete1977

[cytania]

I've a feeling this is one of those questions that needs to be split down into various types of active and passive. Just as some passive tone controls quickly introduce a muddy tone and some have useable sounds all round the dial there's a wide range of active circuits. With actives part of the question is whether the frequency points at which the controls cut and boost match your mental idea of where a bass sound matters.

If you play in a band with one consistent genre then you're likely to only need one bass tone but in a covers/function band you'll be switching styles rapidly between songs. Active allows you to tweak quickly without turning back to the amp, which is often shoved somewhere less than accessible.

[JTUK]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1420021879' post='2644857']
I see this the same for live gigs, a high end PA has far better knobs and dials than my kit even though it is decent gear, give them a good sturdy clean signal and let them fatten it up or compress it etc, that is their job IMO. I have heard a Ricky into an Ampeg with a floor mounted box of tricks, it sounded epic but mic'd up as per the users request the sound crew could not get it into the mix out front, the guy would not let them use a clean DI off the bass even for a blend and the gig went on like that and I never heard a note he played, great. I used a 1x12 combo with the DI off the back of my head pre EQ and had me in my monitor, slight bass boost on the bass and it sounded great on stage and out the front
[/quote]

I now have a very clean signal straight into the amp..
I am wary of even adding bass boost on the pre-amp after soundcheck as that is a pre
signal that can't be adjusted so the compensation..if need be..has to be further down
the line and for good or bad.
After I have my sound up on stage, the engr will probably want my signal pre my EQ
so in that sense, the only character I can give him is off my bass, which what ever
my style and technique can do to influence that.
So, anything off the bass if what he has to work with..but he wants ...mostly.. to work
with the cleanest signal to get his work done.

[Skol303]

All of the above.

Plus... I prefer the 'compressed' tone of active basses. To my ears they just sound better/fuller/fatter when recorded DI.

That's not to say that passive basses don't sound good. I have a passive P-bass and its tone is lush. But generally speaking I have to do more EQ'ing post-recording to make a passive bass sound how I want it to.

[discreet]

[quote name='dincz' timestamp='1419971132' post='2644524']
"Active" pickups are really just passive pickups with the preamp electronics built into the same casing rather than on a separate PCB. Same principle, different geography.
[/quote]

So essentially two types of active bass, then..? I'm fairly new to the active world me, so every day's a school day.

Edited December 31, 2014 by discreet

[chris_b]

As far as I know Alembic were the first to put active electrics in a bass. That was probably in the early 70's, to raise the sound bar for the Grateful Dead's live shows. Active bass would have given the bass a much wider and varied range of tones. That would have been a very interesting development back then, and for many players today.

Active basses would have had more options because you could add tone rather than just taking it away. Gear is better designed these days so many of the reasons for active have moved on. I believe that most active basses have passive pickups and a pre amp, which is why they can run passive at the flick of a switch if the battery gives out.

There's no point in speculating that one is better than the other. My passive Precision and active Lakland compliment each other and each can do better job in the right situation.

[mcnach]

[quote name='PaulWarning' timestamp='1419968478' post='2644479']
maybe I'm being a bit thick here, don't know whether this question been asked before but why do you need an active bass or even tone controls on a passive? (never touch my on/off P tone knob, always full on) when an amp or FX pedal does the job so much better, it's not like you can easily alter any of the bass controls mid song.
[/quote]

I don't think you *need* one. I see it simply as just another flavour, one you might like, or not. I'd never choose a bass because it is passive, or active, I choose a bass because I like how it plays and sounds.
For sure, you can argue a preamp in a pedal makes more sense, as you can apply it to every one of your instruments, and some do just that. I kind of like having the controls at my fingertips (although lately I've been playing a passive Precision, so...). The preamps I really like have a semiparametric mids control, which I find very useful (John East). Well, very useful... they often stay flat, doing nothing! But when you need a little tweak on the mids, to cut through better or eliminate honk... I love having the ability to control and tweak that easily on my bass.

Just a matter of preference, really.

I do use the tone controls on passive basses, 'though.

It just doesn't do the same as the controls on my amp.