A Question About Active vs Passive and the Value of Toggling Between Both

[CheshireCatFun1]

I'm sure this subject has been touched upon at length at various times before, but not sure if it's been addressed the way I'm going to ask it with various caveats . . . so, that said . . .

I keep hearing about the benefits of being able to toggle between active and passive, and a lot of pre-amps and EQ's on the market today have that option.

While on my various guitar builds I was fond of combining a Seymour Duncan Jeff Beck (passive) with an EMG-85 (active), each with their own dedicated vol pot, and then running them through a combo of an EMG-BTC circuit and an EMG-VMC circuit, when it comes to bass, I've only ever used EMGs. So, given that, all of my systems were either completely active or mostly active.

With this current bass build, however, all the pickups are passive (something new for me), and then will likely run through the EMG EQ combo listed above, and then probably go through a GraphTech Ghost System, so we basically have passive pickups and active EQ. (I've looked at other EQ systems, but in the meantime, I have the EMG EQ circuits, so I'll work with them first.)

So, given that, how exactly do you define "active vs. passive" in this regard (vs. the totally active systems that I'm used to), what are the advantages and disadvantages of toggling between the two vs. not, and if a tone circuit just bleeds off trebles, wouldn't I be able to just roll off some trouble on my EMG-BTC circuit and basically get the same result? I really don't want to have to figure out all sorts of ways to wire bypasses and so on and have spare tone controls when I could've in fact just accomplished all of this with the EQ.

And let me caveat this by saying that while I definitely welcome all responses and would love a good discussion on this, what I don't want to get into the weeds on is any nostalgia talk about "that classic vintage sound" or "that mysterious x-factor" or "passive is more alive" or "you just have to feel it" or "it's just not the same". While I'm not looking for an overtly technical answer, I'm definitely looking for something a bit more concrete than "passive just breathes better" or something to that effect.

Thanks!

PS - space is definitely at a premium so I'm trying to be very judicious in my control allocation.

PPS - the EMG-BTC has two micro-switches on the circuit board allowing for four treble options, so I could in theory select it for the same treble range as what I normal tone circuit would cover.

 

[Lo-E]

There are a couple of reasons why switchability is desirable and a couple why it's not, IMO.

A very common argument for switchability is as a backup in case your battery dies. It's always best to change your batteries early and often but even with fastidious maintenance and proper planning, I have had batteries die on the bandstand. It's a bummer.

Another advantage is that the output impedance is markedly different between active and passive circuits so the way they interact with the inputs of other devices (pedals, amps and even cords) will have an impact on your tone; mostly your treble. Active is mostly immune to that behavior but passive is not and, depending upon what the bass is interacting with, some players like that muted treble response that they get with passive basses and, say, long cords. Rolling off the treble on an active EQ can get you in that ballpark but it's not really the same because the impedance interaction isn't there. I'm sorry I'm not being more specific, but it's a real thing, not just an imagined "more mojo" kind of phenomenon. Anyway, an active/passive switch allows you to have that interaction or not.

The advantage to not having a passive option is mostly simplicity. Both in wiring the darned thing and playing it. If you know you're never, ever going to play the bass passive there's not a strong argument for making it switchable.

Passive tone controls are a whole other issue in that they can exist happily in a bass with or without a switchable preamp. They go before the preamp in either case and they behave differently than the active preamp's treble control. While a preamp typically buffers its tone controls so that they are not interactive, passive tone controls are very interactive with volume controls and with the resonant frequency of the pickups themselves. Deciding whether or not to put your volume before or after your preamp (and/or a passive tone control) further complicates the issue because passive volumes are interactive, too!

As you can see, it's a deeper pool than it looks at first. The good news is you don't have to decide now. You can always decide to rewire things later if you feel you need or want to. For now, stick with simplicity and go from there.

 

[Geri O]

From the contrarian side....

I love the tone from my active basses. The only value I see in a passive option is if a battery failure occurs. I've had only one battery die during a gig. It was brand new. The bass stopped working, I grabbed the other bass and finished the set. When I had a chance, I looked everything over and the brand new battery was very hot to the touch. Most unusual. I replaced it and went on. Otherwise, I replace batteries every 3-4 months.

I do kinda wish my Stingray has a passive option, but again, I don't intend to let the battery go that long to risk failure on a gig. That can be really bad for job security in some cases.

And I don't pursue basses based on whether they are active or passive. I look for basses based on their tone. The Stingray, 'nuff said. My Lull M5V (Jazz style) is a wonderful active bass. My Lull P5 (Precision-style), also a most wonderful bass, is completely passive.

This subject is not going to be that complicated for me. It's because I'm not a builder, I reckon. I do perform my own electronic work on my basses, but only for a pickup or preamp replacement, as my recent installation of a Trickfish IPA preamp (Most wonderful preamp, BTW....).

(I know, not much help here....)

 

[Lo-E]

From the contrarian side....

That doesn't seem contrarian to me at all; an honest assessment from an experienced, working player.

Like you I use a variety of passive-only, active-only and switchable basses and choose them based upon more than just their electronics.

I guess it's also worth noting that three of my favorite switchable basses, early Ibanez Musician, early Ibanez Studio and G&L L2000s are basses I usually (almost always)play active. When I read about those same 3 basses here on TB I see that quite a lot of members here play them only passive, so it's definitely a matter of personal taste.

 

[Reedt2000]

I've never seen a value in toggling back and forth from active to passive, though in theory you could set your preamp up for a boost during a bass solo, or some other tonal variation like a bass boost for reggae tunes, and be able to switch to it when you want. I've got a Warwick bass with active/passive switching and it sounds great passive so often I just run it that way, no need for sound shaping at the bass.

 

[brianrost]

if a tone circuit just bleeds off trebles, wouldn't I be able to just roll off some trouble on my EMG-BTC circuit and basically get the same result?

A passive tone control acts like a resonant low-pass filter. There is a slight bump in the response at the rolloff point, so not only does it reduce the highs it gives a slight boost to particular frequencies as you adjust the control. The resonance is affected not only by both the capacitance and resistance of the tone circuit itself, but the resistance, capacitance and inductance of the cable and the amplifier input.

Most active EQs are of the shelving variety that acts totally different than a resonant low-pass filter. They are unaffected by cables and amp input impedance.

 

[40Hz]

For me, "active" means an onboard preamp and/or powered pickup(s) in any combination.

Whether or not an active bass has a passive operating mode largely depends on the design of the preamp. Preamps that are referred to as "active mixer" designs do everything inside the active preamp electronics. It's an "always on" all or nothing proposition.

Audere is one popular preamp that works this way. With a preamp of this type, there's no passive signal path. So it isn't practical to provide a passive mode because you'd need to duplicate a passive tonestack and switch it in before the preamp. You'd also need to automatically switch off the preamp if you wanted to run in passive mode. None of this is impossible. But it's unnecessarily complicated and better handled by a different type of preamp.

Active pickups were quite the thing at one time. But their popularity has waned somewhat over the years. Possibly because most players didn't see enough of an advantage in having them. And a bass with an onboard preamp and regular pickups didn't suffer from not having active pickups installed. So standard pickups into an onboard preamp is pretty much what most people refer to as an "active" bass whether or not it has a passive mode.

If I wanted to switch back and forth between an active and passive sound I'd forgo an onboard preamp and just use a regular passive bass and run it through a preamp, EQ, or boost pedal to give me an active bass sound when I wanted it. A good choice for that would be a programmable EQ pedal like the Source Audio Programmable EQ or the newer EQ2. You could save up to four tone and gain presets and easily switch back and forth among them with this type of box.

Here's a demo of some of the things you can do with the older model:

 

[Killing Floor]

As I see it there are some TB members who live in fear of active electronics suddenly failing in a gig. 40 years on and hasn't happened to me so I don't think about that.

There's another sect here that believes a preamp in a bass is somehow slightly different than a preamp in a pedal, amp, or PA or studio.

There's no difference to anyone other than the bass player, not even the legendary TB "producer" can tell. So if you want to toggle or stick to one type, be true to yourself. It's just bass.

 

[Andre678]

More tonal options and a failsafe if needed. Personally I prefer what a tone knob does than what the treble knob does. But I also like what a 3 band active EQ can do as well. I thought I preferred passive but have come to realize all my best sounding basses I have had over the years has been active so maybe that is my preference. But at the end of the day I prefer a tone knob still to an active setup. Like has been mentioned earlier it isn't just cutting treble, it also changes the resonant frequency and does some other tonal magic.

 

[SunByrne]

I have a couple basses that are entirely passive, some that are entirely active (StingRay), and a bunch that are switchable. I believe all the actives are passive pickups with a preamp, that is, I don't think any are actually active pickups.

It's not a strong driver of my decision to buy. I'm not afraid of some additional knobs, and when I don't want to deal with the complexity, they can all just be set to 12 and left alone. Sometimes I feel like fiddling with them, sometimes not.

Why switchable? As @Lo-E noted, the active EQ controls and a passive tone knob are not the same. Nothing wrong with a little extra flexibility.

 

[CheshireCatFun1]

So, a few thoughts.

What if I have some lo-bats so I'll know well in advanced if I'm having battery issues or if the battery is dying? Also, the CAL Redeemer preamp has a default passive mode if power dies. I'm looking at installing that.

Also, I was wondering if there was anyone who has various pedal controls that are within arms reach. Like, having a pedal board and then having an array of remote controls a few feet above the pedal board so that they can be adjusted easily, and then just foot-switched on and off as desired. I'm potentially open to having everything be passive, short of a simple Redeemer at the end of the magnetic pickup chain, and it would free up two spaces.

Also, I've often wondered about having different EQ presets on a pedal board for different songs, kinda like what the Digitech iPB-10 iPad Powered Pedal Board was (as I best understand it . . . never had one myself). If I could do all the active stuff, especially from a "room-balancing" (?) standpoint and an "in-the-mix" standpoint, then I'd be free to do all passive stuff on the front end early in the chain, whether that was having everything wide open or rolling off a bit of this and that. That would make a lot of sense. If I think of the offboard, at-my-fingertips (literally) EQ stuff an integral counterpart to the onboard stuff, much the same way the accompanying Leslie speaker was considered as a unit to the Hammond organ it came with, then that would work, and definitely simplify things immensely.

Thoughts?

 

[Jefenator]

The passive tone knob has long been my favorite tone shaping control. I like it for old-school material where any amount of string or fret noise is an unwelcome distraction.
IME active treble cut just isn't quite the same thing. Maybe the frequency band is too narrow - seems like there's usually still a lot of upper mid clutter. I suppose I could go farther down the rabbit hole with more sophisticated onboard or outboard controls. But I hate doing that sort of thing - especially when a good passive tone knob "just works".
OTOH, when available, I've found a bit of onboard active bass boost can be very addicting. Maybe that's why I have never once found a sonic use for passive mode on an active bass. I can rock a passive bass all night with total satisfaction, but when there's that onboard preamp that can be switched in or out, I leave it in every. Single. Time.
I do enjoy having a bypass for critical redundancy (i.e. backup).
I understand your concerns about keeping a simple layout. Push/pull on the master volume is a nice way to go for passive bypass. As for tone knob vs active treble, I've never tried this yet but Dingwall used to have one knob would boost treble actively in one direction and cut passively in the other. Freaking brilliant IMHO. (As is their 4-way neck/series/parallel/bridge pickup switch which I have tried & absolutely love. But that's another thread...)

 

[G On Bass]

One of my basses has the Sadowsky 2 band A/P pre in it with tone control. With everything set to default, there is really not much difference that I can hear between A/P. It really only makes a difference with I wanna start fiddling with tone controls. Despite this bass permanently wearing flats, I run it active 99% of the time as I like the separate bass/treble control. If I need something really muted/thumpier sounding, that tone is nailed in passive with the tone control dialed down. All my other basses are active and I have never had a battery die on me as I check all that stuff and change it religiously once a year or so.

But most of my basses are set flat and tones are changed from the pedal board with just subtle room-tweaks made from the bass itself.

 

[kgbeast]

As far as tone goes, I have found that I can easily match the passive setup with active 3-band preamp. It is important to note that passive tone, does not just cut treble, but mids as well, so you have to use two knobs on 3-band EQ to get the tone of the passive tone adjustment.
Passive tone does not shift resonant peak by the way, the value of the capacitor is way too high to do such a thing. It simply acts as a low pass filter, no magick in that.
Also in passive instruments with passive pickups, the volume knob interacts with pickup in a negative way and besides lowering volume, also removes high frequencies. This perhaps is a nice side effect of a passive system as I think it produces more (IMO) "magical" volume swells (be it a volume pedal or the volume knob).
In active systems, the swells ends up (IMO) more lifeless, it is however a fairly minor nuance and is more of a guitar thing and not really applicable for bass.
To my mind active setup is the way to go and the only way that is needed. Of course you have to maintain the batteries which can be an added expense and inconvenience, but with Li-ion rechargeables available today it is becoming a no issue as you can simply have one battery in charger and one in the bass and just rotate them regularly like once a week and it is not a big deal.
So for now a days, active bass is a best choice especially if it is fully active (pickups and preamp). This is the least sensitive to noises and is also works predicably with any pedals and amps. And of course something like 3 band EQ offers a large tonal variety. These also slightly higher output so the input stage if the amp can set lower and thus reduce the noise of the amp as well. Seems like an around a winner.

 

[Lo-E]

So, a few thoughts.

What if I have some lo-bats so I'll know well in advanced if I'm having battery issues or if the battery is dying? Also, the CAL Redeemer preamp has a default passive mode if power dies. I'm looking at installing that.

Also, I was wondering if there was anyone who has various pedal controls that are within arms reach. Like, having a pedal board and then having an array of remote controls a few feet above the pedal board so that they can be adjusted easily, and then just foot-switched on and off as desired. I'm potentially open to having everything be passive, short of a simple Redeemer at the end of the magnetic pickup chain, and it would free up two spaces.

Also, I've often wondered about having different EQ presets on a pedal board for different songs, kinda like what the Digitech iPB-10 iPad Powered Pedal Board was (as I best understand it . . . never had one myself). If I could do all the active stuff, especially from a "room-balancing" (?) standpoint and an "in-the-mix" standpoint, then I'd be free to do all passive stuff on the front end early in the chain, whether that was having everything wide open or rolling off a bit of this and that. That would make a lot of sense. If I think of the offboard, at-my-fingertips (literally) EQ stuff an integral counterpart to the onboard stuff, much the same way the accompanying Leslie speaker was considered as a unit to the Hammond organ it came with, then that would work, and definitely simplify things immensely.

Thoughts?

There's absolutely no reason why you couldn't take your active EQ off-board. If you stick with a short cable (under 10' would be great but under 15' would probably still be fine) between the bass and the EQ it's very unlikely you'll hear any significant difference between that and running the EQ onboard. The only difference might be where you decide to put your volume control. If your EQ is separate than you are committing to a passive volume before the EQ. If you choose an onboard EQ you can choose to put the volume before or after the EQ. The results are subtly different but are they so functionally different that it's worth losing sleep over? Nah…. Not really.

Another advantage to having a separate, off-board EQ is that you can use it with any bass at any time. It's a totally viable solution and it's a popular set-up for a lot of members here on TB.

As far as having controls at hand level, I'm sure it could be worked out but I haven't ever had the need, personally. I adjust for the room and the rig and then I usually just leave things alone. If I really need to adjust on the fly I can always do that at the amp.

 

[J Wilson]

While I could see using switchable active/passive as an A/B pair of sounds (i.e., a much lighter tone going to passive without the bass +/- of the active side), it wouldn't be for me, and here's why:

A true EMG setup with their low impedance pickups through any of their tone networks is just fine with me, and more. Great native tone, quiet as a tomb normally, just no real downside or anything lacking for me. I can get where I need to go with any of their setups. These can't be wired passive, or a switch inserted in the circuit.

Now IF I can have an active/passive switch, electronically we're in a different ballpark:

For it to be switchable, then the pickups have to be traditional high impedance ganged to an active tone network with cut and boost, and the switch to go back to passive. Now this, if done carefully, and everything matched properly can work pretty well: The BB735A Yamaha is wired like this, and works great. But too often, it can be a crapshoot matching these components yourself, you can wind up boosting any inherent noise from the pickups or the rest of the electronics, etc. I've heard basses like this (too many) and I just don't like it. For me, it's just unneccesary complication under the hood.

For many who have the 'Grown Men in Mortal Fear of a 9v Battery' syndrome, it's a sop, an emergency exit as they worry the battery will go dead suddenly. Silly, but true. I played active basses for years, learned to put new 9v's in every New Years and 4th of July and never got caught out once.

Ultimately it's up to you. For me, all-EMG is just fine, and I'd not be interested in the passive switch.

 

[ctmullins]

I don't see the allure of the passive tone knob.

I love the immediacy, clarity, and fullness of a good active circuit.

A battery box makes swapping in a fresh battery super fast and easy.

So yeah, the vast majority of my basses are active and stay that way 24x7.

 

[DRay521]

Maybe I overthink this, but when I play with cover groups, I change my onboard tone based on the tune to try and match the recorded sound of the bass. That just means if I'm doing Motown I'm on the neck pickup, passive, with the tone rolled back. If we then switch to an 80s MJ tune, I'm going bridge pickup, active, treble up to try and get that Louis Johnson Stingray tone. But cover gigs aren't about having MY sound, they're about having the RIGHT sound, IMHO. An active/passive option just gives me more versatility without having to switch instruments.

All that said, if I'm playing original music, I use what I want to get MY sound, and don't have a real preference. I like 'em all.

 

[micguy]

The two advantages that an active bass can have are:

1) Being buffered, your bass will sound the same even if you change cables.

2) You can have onboard eq (or, like the DarkRay), other effects on board. Some folks like that.

A lot of folks associate active basses with more treble/definition. It is very possible to do that with a passive bass, if you have hum cancelling pickups that can be wired in parallel - indeed, that strategy can let you dial in one or more very specific tones - something you can't do with most active basses. On a bass with active pickups, there is a buffer in the pickup itself, meaning that the self resonance of the pickup is locked in (unchangeable). On an active bass where the pickups are wired in series and then buffered, you have some flexibility in loading the pickup, but not as much as if it were wired in parallel.

I recognize that this stuff is beyond most folk's grasp, but in my case, it's the way I wire my basses, and it has allowed me a lot of flexibility in dialing in my sound that just doesn't exist in most basses.

 

[Turnaround]

First off, you need to understand active pickups. They are passive pickups with an onboard preamp. That means the preamp is baked-in. Often you will use an active tone circuit with active pickups, but you can never run such as system totally passive.

A passive pickup with a separate preamp is the same deal, but with more flexibility. Now you have the option to go fully active or fully passive, with active tone controls or passive controls. I certainly prefer the flexibility of a separate preamp, especially because there's a lot of flavours out there. So you can have:

Passive pickup(s) with passive tone
Passive pickup(s) with active tone
Passive pickup(s) with active and passive tone. Don't discount this combination - there are some good tones in there.

My preference when I am assembling a bass is to use passive pickups with a preamp and selectable passive mode with passive tone control.