active > passive

[chris_b]

The problem with continually unplugging your bass to save the battery on a bass with a barrel-type jack, is that this type of jack wears out too soon as it is, not even counting the additional wear of plugging and unplugging.
I do not like barrel jacks.
Just my $.01.

I've never had a jack socket fail and I unplugged my active US Lakland thousands of times over the 13 years I played it.

I probably unplugged my passive Precision bass even more times over the 25 or so years I was gigging it, again without a failure.

 

[RhynoRock]

What's the saying? "Variety is the spice of life?"

There's no better OR worse, just different. I have both, I thoroughly enjoy both. I use the EQ on my actives extensively for quick adjustments on the fly, or a flat out tonal overhaul before a song at the flick of a switch. You don't get that with a passive bass, what you get instead is simplicity and ease of use.

 

[DTRN]

I think unplugging is always a good habit. I don't get the 'time saving' reason to keep them plugged in... if the time it takes you to plug in detracts from your playing time... I don't know. I see a cable plugged into a bass left on a stand or whatever as a trip hazard. To me that's a more serious risk: dropping the bass, maybe damaging the socket/jack...

But I'm with you about the barrel jacks. They're not the most long lasting ones. Still, they last a good while, and they're trivial to replace when the time comes.

I always unplug. Had a friend back in the 80's trip over my cord causing a disastrous fall to the stage floor that dinged my beloved 6 string.

 

[Smooth_bass88]

Passive only for me, because:

1. Less to worry about
2. "set it and forget it"
3. no battery stress
4. To me they just sound better

full disclosure: I actually own a couple active electronics basses but very very rarely use them, although they're absolutely great basses.

 

[TheDirtyLowDown]

Way back in the 80's I started out with a passive P-bass, but I converted it to active once I tried a friend's bass with EMGs.

Today the basses I gig with are all active (still EMG) plus an EUB that uses an active NS preamp. For me, it's the right solution. I like the extra headroom and the range of onboard tonal control. I use lithium 9v batteries, change them every two years or so, and always unplug a bass before I set it down. No worries, no problems.

For recording I set everything flat and use the active preamp, but I've wondered about changing things so I could pull a switch and get a passive pickup mode. That would probably be the most ideal, because having the preamp out of the circuit would give the most freedom downstream during mixing. But I've not tried that.

 

[ezstep]

I started out on passives, and I changed in the early 90's to my first active, then added a few more. But I found that most of the time (90%, maybe) I had the bass(es) switched to passive. My latest bass, built for me by KnuckleGuitars, is passive. Killer.

Both serve a purpose, but I cannot be convinced that one is "better" than the other.

 

[CHYC]

Can I please query the terminology and ask what it means for a bass to be active?

I have two basses. Both have batteries and both have a pull/push knob to allow a passive preamp. However one does not work without the battery whereas the other does. In fact the one which can work without (a Sandberg with Glockenklang preamp) sounds pretty much identical between the active and passive mode when the tone is wide open.

I'm going to guess that at least one of my basses is an "active" in the context of this thread, but are both of them?

 

[jd56hawk]

hi top guys, i am lurking for a very long time, and now i will post something.
i do not understand why to go for a passive bass today if you can have active and bypass to passive if that is better at the time. not so much more expensive and gives you something back. it seems the correct thing to do for a bass today. why passive??

Play something like this and you might understand.

 

[SteveHeissner]

I have actively looked for a passive bass before.

 

[ElectricBass72]

4 of my 6 basses are active. I like both active and passive... they both get the job done, IMO. The passive ones are a Rickenbacker and Fender P.

 

[squarepeg]

My Jazz Bass Plus V is both active and passive. One of the knobs is a 4-way switch: Off, active with mid-boost, active, and passive.

 

[Frenchy-Lefty]

I've always disliked active basses for a bunch of reasons already mentioned but I had this interesting experience:
I once saw a used lefty bass in a store (pic on my avatar) and noticed it had a battery and rear cavity for active electronic. I tried the thing thinking "wow! that's the first time I like an active bass!". I bought the bass, took it home, unscrewed the rear cavity cover and...the previous owner had apparently ditched the active electronic and wired it passive. Oh well!

 

[/\/\3phist0]

I have actively looked for a passive bass before.

And I have passively found active basses.

 

[Kevorargh]

I started with passive, and moved to actives when I started playing 5 strings. What I eventually noticed was the output of my active basses always seemed to quieter live, and I struggled to cut through like some of the passive basses other people were playing were able to. Also, dealing with EQ and onboard preamps is a learning curve, and it can almost be too much to deal with between onboard settings and amp settings. Trying to find the right tone between all of that often made my sound more sterile. When I get my second Ric I realized that the simplicity of the set up allowed for better live tone - less stuff in the signal chain so to speak. I still have my active 5 string Warwick but it hasn't seen any live work for years. If I sell it and get another 5, it will be passive.

 

[neddyrow]

i prefer passive.

i understand its necessity as i have one 6-string bass.

all things equal, i would take a passive jazz over an active jazz bass any day.

i have no further comments.

 

[thebreakman]

The reason I stick with passive because I can't stand active pickups or electronics

 

[MoeTown1986]

I own many of both. I find myself usually gigging with my passive basses more than the active ones. When I have an active bass, I spend more time tweaking knobs than I do playing. A simple volume and tone gives me tonal variety in a simple form.

 

[And I]

both my 5ers are active, one with active/passive, one with preamp always on. i do very little with the preamps. a tiny mid boost and treble cut. my next bass will most likely be a fully passive jazz-style.

 

[40Hz]

Hey, I have a question that maybe doesn't need its own thread now that y'all are right here. I have owned two active basses. But it's my inclination to run them with their active EQ settings flat. Like, religiously. I do not move them, ever. So my question is: Is there any benefit to having an active bass if you never use the EQ? Does it give higher signal strength even if you leave it all flat? And what's the benefit of higher signal strength anyway?

Why am I better off with my Fender Jazz being active rather than passive? If I am...

I think with 5 and 6 string basses it’s easier to get better string to string balance with an onboard preamp even if you leave the EQ set flat. That’s where I usually leave it on my Spector fiver.

Other thing is that “flat” usually just means your settings. Very few preamp/EQs are actually totally flat. There’s almost always some midrange voicing to the circuit which is what’s called it’s “baked in” or “signature” tone. It’s one way the makers distinguish their products from their competition. And why one make of preamp won’t sound just like another even when both are set flat.

A preamp also really comes into its own (IMO anyway) if you want to use a pickup balance knob. On a passive bass a balance knob is subtle and doesn’t make that dramatic a difference. On an active bass you can really hear significant differences with different balance settings.

Back in the stone age I used to wire my basses with a Tillman preamp, which is just a simple 3 dB FET boost circuit. Even without an EQ stage (i.e. a permanently “flat” setting) it made a significant difference in the tone. Probably because a lot more of the string harmonics got boosted and became more audible and therefore contributed to a “livelier” (for lack of a better word) sound.

 

[brianrost]

I just play the bass and if I like the way it sounds and feels I could care less if it's active, passive or solar powered.

I went through a period of mostly active basses but by 2000 it was mostly passive. Today it's 50-50.

BTW, both my current actives do not have passive bypass.