Active or Passive?

[Lfalex v1.1]

Whilst I realise that active EQ can add a lot of flexibility to a bass, it never seems to alter the fundamental (sorry!) tonal characteristics of the instrument in question.
I've been favouring my 2 passive tone monsters recently (A Yamaha Attitude w/Elixirs and a Squier 70's VMJ w/ DRs and a BadAssII)

If I bypass the active circuits on 4 of my instruments (Warwick Infinity SN IV, Streamer LX VI, Vigier Passion V, Iceni Zoot Chaser) they all sound bland and gutless, with the exception of of the Vigier, which sounds "cleaner"

The passives just sound and feel more "immediate" in the way they respond to the player's input.

So... The question.

Do you gain the flexibility and lose the tone, or have the tone and forego the active EQ?

OR... Is there a sonic Nirvana out there that I've missed, where both co-exist?

Thoughts, opinions and examples, folks!!

[neilb]

Passives for me.....only because in the past I have been caught out mid gig with a flat battery in a Status I once had (Artist Eclipse I think).

[Machines]

Active - have never got the sound I like for my band from a passive bass yet.

[bass_ferret]

With the exception of my very first bass (a framus!) all my basses have been active, so I cant really comment. My current crop dont have a bypass so I cant tell what the sound like bypassed. My Ibanez Musician and Roasdster had bypass and sounded OK passive but I never really used them bypassed - didn't see the point.

[ARGH]

For me the answer is situational. And like others Ive been there when an active has died on a gig or has had an electrical fault. Essentially you are playing the same notes on either instrument so its probably a psychological question on like vs dislike.

If I walk into a wedding,by instinct,I take a passive,because I dont want to be the one that had a crapout and spoilt the big day,yet on a normal gig,I take active because i can tweek the sound onstage via the onboard eq.


My only nightmare is a G-K rig....ugh

[Kiwi]

Passive basses are convenient and practical but all the basses I've liked the sound of have been active. The active eq will not change the inherent character of your bass significantly it will just emphasise or cut whatever is already there. If the bass sounds good in the first place, being active or passive will make less of a difference. My Smiths sound as good whether active or passive.

[warwickhunt]

The Jazz I have sounds great with the original passive stacked-knobs in. However, with the J-Retro fitted the tone just opens up and has more... life; even with the tone controls set flat.

[Lfalex v1.1]

[quote name='Crazykiwi' post='41506' date='Aug 5 2007, 10:31 AM']Passive basses are convenient and practical but all the basses I've liked the sound of have been active. The active eq will not change the inherent character of your bass significantly it will just emphasise or cut whatever is already there. If the bass sounds good in the first place, being active or passive will make less of a difference. My Smiths sound as good whether active or passive.[/quote]

The same is true of My Vigier. It's just that I'm not too keen on the boost/cut (+/- 15 dB at any frequency between 80Hz and 5kHz) being of a fixed value. If you could vary [i]Q[/i] as well as [i]F[/i] it'd be awesome.

I'm inclined to think that too many active EQ's add a little something (try zeroing the bass / treble etc. and bypassing the active circuit to compare)
And some circuits genuinely introduce gain of their own. It's a pity that more don't come with trim pots to tame it.

Perhaps that's why I like the two passive basses - They're [i]already[/i] good in the first place. Which sounds like I'm slating the Warwicks... maybe it's the MEC electrics (bleugh!)

I do like having a passive tone control on active instruments. They add a whole extra dimension, and they're an inexpensive addition. I'm surprised that you don't see more of them. How good would a Marcus Miller Jazz be if you fitted stacked Vol/Tone (passive) controls in addition to the active ones. And then threw out the evil fender active circuit and replaced it with a J-retro or Aguilar system!

[BigRedX]

A good question and one that's made me think about the signal path from strings to speaker.

Firstly unless you're strictly old school in your amp choice then the tone circuit on it will be active, so what's the difference between having it in the bass or on the amp?

Active controls will give you cut and boost, while traditional passive will simply give you treble roll-off. The right active tone circuit in a good sounding bass will enhance but the tone has got to be there in the first place so to be honest it most likely sound just as good with a passive circuit. One thing I do think that active circuits in the bass give more consistently is a fully functioning volume control, whereas too many passive basses have only functioning volume control for less than half the knob's rotation, the rest is just an off-on switch.

Could be useful if you play several different basses live and need to tweak each one to get the best tone to go with the overall sound of the your amp/speaker combination, but if you think about what you are doing it's compromising the sound of your amp and your bass to find something that is efficient in terms of minimising fiddling with control settings between songs.

Plus what about all thos cut/boost frequency interactions between what is happening in the bass's active circuit and what's happening at the amp. From a sound shaping purists POV you should really only be modifying the frequencies once (and then as little as possible). However there's always possibility that with the right combination of active bass pre-amp and the amp's own tone circuit something magical will happen to give you the tone you're after.

Really there's no hard and fast rule. Certainly with less going on in a passive bass there's less opportunity to ruin the tone (provided you've got a good one the start with), but you can't simply say that actives are or are not better than passives. You have to consider all parts of the sound producing a shaping chain from your fingers all the way through to the speakers (and the room and your ears) and the way each link in that chain is interacting with the others.

[JPJ]

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='41520' date='Aug 5 2007, 11:21 AM']The Jazz I have sounds great with the original passive stacked-knobs in. However, with the J-Retro fitted the tone just opens up and has more... life; even with the tone controls set flat.[/quote]

Snap, my thoughts exactly! Both of my five stringers have John East active eq's in them and I love the sound with everything flat (or perhaps a little mid cut depending on the room). My Ibanez Musician fretless is active with a bypass and a passive tone, but the levels between active and passive are just too great to make it feasible to change mid-gig.

As to batteries dying, I dont gig regularly, I dep with a local covers band a couple of times a year so its fresh batteries before each outing. Same for any other deps that may come up. But with the East circuits, you get a ridiculously long battery life so it really isnt an issue.

[barneythedog]

+1 to that JPJ

All my current basses are active, yet I play them all set flat and tweak my head so I'm not really sure? - maybe I should just buy a passive bass ????

[Alun]

I've mainly used actives for the past 11 years, but am leaning towards passive these days. I always used had the bass and treble boosted on my Washburn ( as I didn't really know any better!) but these days often run it flat or with only a little boost to keep the volume consistent with my other basses when I switch live. I rarely use the actives on my Curbow other than maybe a little bass or mid boost to cut through when the band gets louder.

I also run my amp pretty much flat on most gigs so am giving serious consideration to going down the Anthony Jackson "volume control only" route, or getting a passive pickup and a switch for the EQ ( at the moment my Curbow has an active Bartolini so needs a battery regardless of the EQ). I like having the option of EQing but rarely do, I tend to treat the instrument acoustically and make changes with my playing position, etc ( as per Alex Claber's tip in Bass Player), probably because 99% of my practicing is donw on an unplugged bass so I'm concentrating on trying to get a good tone without the pickups, amp, etc

Cheers,
Alun

[Basszilla]

I use both active and passive basses for both recording and live work. It all depends what the song needs really and how you want the bass to sound within the song. I'm with Alun in that I never practice through an amp in the house and prefer to move my playing position to get what I want out of the bass be it with fingers or pick. As a result I find there's not much of a difference between my active and passive sounds.

I usually run my active flat or with just a touch of bass boost. I never touch the treble pot, preferring to add a minute touch of low mids at my amp. In general I try to keep everything as close to flat as possible between my guitars and amp as I mostly use my pedals to shape my sound and very rarely play with a totally clean signal.

[MB1]

MB1.

Activia with added biffidus digestivone!

[ped]

[quote name='Lfalex v1.1' post='41521' date='Aug 5 2007, 11:23 AM']The same is true of My Vigier. It's just that I'm not too keen on the boost/cut (+/- 15 dB at any frequency between 80Hz and 5kHz) being of a fixed value. If you could vary [i]Q[/i] as well as [i]F[/i] it'd be awesome.[/quote]

Hi mate

I am with you there - the standard package is a bit limiting, however I have been talking to the folk at Vigier and the Passion model will be re-launched in November NAMM and promises to be a blinder..

Mine has Marleaux electronics (and the f/l a j.east) and it is a marked improvement, but that said, with everything flat, it sounds the same as in passive. Just what you want, really!

When I do use my onboard EQ it is usually to boost the treble - one of the things I love about the Marleaux pre is the 8khz centered top end control which sounds lovely.

[martthebass]

Strange as it sounds I prefer the sound of my WW (Thumb) passive, I find it too much of a beast with the active in (the 60's/70's band I'm in doesn't play much Mudvayne). OTOH I don't think the active on an MM Sterling is too obtrusive (but then how would I know I can't switch it out?). I've just picked up a US precision so I'll be giving the old (proper) passive a run for its money again.

[funkle]

Passive.

I spent years playing active basses because they were meant to be 'better'.

However, I have gradually found the sound of passive pickups to be more 'airy', 'open', and 'natural' to me. Your mileage may vary, though.

Once I experimented with a variety of pickups, I found the ones which sounded/were voiced 'the best' (i.e. for me), and I haven't looked back since.

Took me a long time to get over my own prejudices - I personally owned a Warwick Thumb, a Streamer Stage II, Peavey G-Bass.....also playing every bass I could lay my hands on, including Sadowsky, Zon, Musicman, Pedulla, Sei, and many others (I am a freak...didn't like Sadowsky!! ).....eventually I got over my own prejudices and bought a Hamer Cruise with 2Tek bridge - it had an active system (EMG) which I disliked for its 'unnatural' sound and replaced with Fender CS60's (single coils) - bam!, that was me, totally happy.

Keep in mind though, eventually all bass signals go through some kind of EQ - I just happen to like mine offboard, as opposed to onboard.

BTW, these days I own a Lakland DJ4, the Hamer Cruise, and a Fender Jazz fretless with a Status neck. I have just modified the Jazz to accept Graphtech piezo pickups at the bridge + it needs a preamp to buffer that signal - it sounds wonderful! .....So, there are situations where active electronics are a necessity, as piezos won't sound right without it. Hasn't altered the magnetic PU tone at all, so it's doing its job perfectly, as far as I am concerned.

Pete

Edited August 7, 2007 by funkle

[funkle]

Also remember that EQ on most bass amps can be more flexible than those found on onboard EQ.......

Pete

[Alun]

I've been thinking about this, and I think the amp makes a certain difference. It dawned on my earlier that I used to use my active EQ a lot more when I had the Hartke amp as I could never get the sound as I wanted - I was after the same sound as I got recording DI'd and was always blaming the room, the cab, etc not realising how much the amp was colouring the sound. Now I have the Markbass head, I'm getting the sound of the bass so don't tend to tweak anywhere near as much.

Cheers,
Alun

[silverfoxnik]

[quote name='funkle' post='42590' date='Aug 7 2007, 07:12 PM']Passive.

I spent years playing active basses because they were meant to be 'better'.

However, I have gradually found the sound of passive pickups to be more 'airy', 'open', and 'natural' to me.

Pete[/quote]
+1

That's my view in a nutshell. I've owned so many active basses over the last 20 years or so, including top-end Tobias, Ken Smith, MM, Yamaha, Warwick, Wal, Goodfellow etc, etc and in the end I find myself coming back all the time to passive basses.

The only active circuit I've liked the sound of and have stuck with over the years is the one in my Wal Pro 2e bass and that has a very 70's vibe to it and it isn't too 'hi-fi' sounding. What is it with all this emphasis on +18db cut/boost anyway - it's way too much! Having said all that, I'm totally aware of my own bias towards certain bass sounds and certain recording techniques etc that are definitely 'old school' and that what works for me is probably anathema to another person's ears!

My main gigging bass at the moment is the MM SUB5 that The Beedster modified and had John East put in a very specific active circuit that makes it sound like an early SR4..It's really good but even that sounds just a little too synthetic tonally for me, though it is very versatile!

Maybe that's what it comes down to; passive basses are more authentic tonally but active basses give you loads of variation??

Nik

[Beedster]

[quote name='silverfoxnik' post='42700' date='Aug 7 2007, 11:58 PM']...but even that sounds just a little too synthetic tonally for me, though it is very versatile![/quote]

That would be my point on this issue. I find that when I play active I can't help thinking that what I'm hearing includes some artifacts introduced by the active electronics not necessarily present in the passive tone of the bass. As such I would disagree with CK's point above that EQ can only add or subtract from what's already there (I think that was the point, apologies if I'm misquoting you Steve). I keep going back to my Fender Precision with a J/P combination strung with flats on which I simply never have to touch the controls (well actually I do use the blend pot but rarely the volume and never the tone which is always rolled back 50%). Yes, I loved the East Preamp Nick was referring to above, it gave a huge range of tones, amd yes, I love to occasionally do a slapfest on the Modulus, but, like my GF says, it doesn't sound like a bass when I do
Chris

[silverfoxnik]

[quote name='Beedster' post='42740' date='Aug 8 2007, 08:45 AM']That would be my point on this issue. I find that when I play active I can't help thinking that what I'm hearing includes some artifacts introduced by the active electronics not necessarily present in the passive tone of the bass. As such I would disagree with CK's point above that EQ can only add or subtract from what's already there (I think that was the point, apologies if I'm misquoting you Steve). I keep going back to my Fender Precision with a J/P combination strung with flats on which I simply never have to touch the controls (well actually I do use the blend pot but rarely the volume and never the tone which is always rolled back 50%). Yes, I loved the East Preamp Nick was referring to above, it gave a huge range of tones, amd yes, I love to occasionally do a slapfest on the Modulus, but, like my GF says, it doesn't sound like a bass when I do
Chris[/quote]
Hi Chris

Have to say I agree with your comments there, though certainly, I'm not anti active basses at all as I've got three of them. It's just about realising what you like best for certain situations I suppose......

Are you coming to the Bash on the 18th - I'd love to hear your Fender P with the J/P combination and flats!!

Nik

[Beedster]

[quote name='silverfoxnik' post='42769' date='Aug 8 2007, 09:54 AM']Are you coming to the Bash on the 18th - I'd love to hear your Fender P with the J/P combination and flats!! [/quote]

I shall indeed mate, and Kylie's most certainly coming with me (the Oly White Fender PJ version, not the diminutive Aussie I'm afraid). Looking forward to catching up then
Chris