Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Active vs. Inactive
- Thread starter BSGBass
- Start date
Nothing wrong with liking EMG actives
Agree, they have a distinctive sound that I have loved since those pickups came out in the mid eighties (even though I only use passive instruments those days but I wouldn't mind owing a Jazz with first gen EMG pickups)
In fact few people understand the concept of active pickups (not active basses, it is totally different):
Adding a little preamp inside the pickup allows you to use a lot less winding in your pickup, therefore you get a much clearer sound. The built-in preamp makes up for the lesser output you get from less winding.
My favorite example of the EMG active pickup sound can be heard on Mishell N'degeocello's first albums. It sounds incredible and surprisingly warm and funky. Same with Victor Wooten but I don't like his sound as much as Mishell.
An "active bass" is just "regular pickups with regular winding + preamp" so provided your preamp is totally transparent, it sounds quite close to the passive sound. Just a bit more headroom due the lack signal degradation through the cable.
Last edited:
- Apr 18, 2008
- 16,019
- 1
- 31,734
- Disclosures
- I'm highly opinionated and extremely self-assured
Part 2:
Regarding what people refer to as “the EMG sound”, I’d like to point out:
So the next time somebody says “I don’t like how active EMGs sound”, you can be sure that they are ignorant of the huge variety of tones available from all of these different variants of the same basic concept.
Regarding what people refer to as “the EMG sound”, I’d like to point out:
- As stated, active EMG pickups contain both a coil/magnet assembly and an internal battery-powered preamp
- There are a number of different coil architectures used:
- Dual side-by-side coils
- Stacked single coils
- Split coils
- There are several different magnetic architectures used:
- Ceramic
- Ceramic and steel
- AlNiCo
- (Possibly others I’m not aware of...)
- There are a number of different physical form factors (shapes) used, all of the familiar ones:
- Soapbar
- P
- J
- MusicMan
- Thunderbird
- When you combine these three different axes of variability, you wind up with a large array of active EMG pickups:
- Dual-coil ceramic soapbars
- Ceramic and steel Jazz pickups
- AlNiCo Precision pickups
- Etc.
- Additionally, many of these models are available with either the original or the X series internal preamp
So the next time somebody says “I don’t like how active EMGs sound”, you can be sure that they are ignorant of the huge variety of tones available from all of these different variants of the same basic concept.
I don’t feel like reading this whole thread. I hope someone said non-active basses are called passive.
I'm not sure you got the quotes exactly right there, but did you read the original post?
Once or twice.
From a semantic view point, is there a state between active and passive? Like the neutral between + and -? It would be much a more interesting debate for a change. Like "he is not a very active person but one can't say he is passive either" so...what is he?
I'm not sure you got the quotes exactly right there, but did you read the original post?
Once or twice.
I'm not sure you got the quotes exactly right there, but did you read the original post?
Once or twice.
I didn't write this "No, not discussed yet. I don't see any reasons." some one include.I'm not sure you got the quotes exactly right there, but did you read the original post?
Once or twice.
having played passive basses all my life until the last 18 months - I find the actives divorced from the instrument. I have a Sadowski MV.. and a Carvin SB4000 - beautiful instruments very playable but... I am still in the passive camp as the tone is more beautiful -
Having said that has anyone taken a bass built for slapping - the 2 above - and put flats on them and if so - sounds...?
Having said that has anyone taken a bass built for slapping - the 2 above - and put flats on them and if so - sounds...?
I played passives for years mainly P basses with flats. I have always dug that warm thumpy tone and hate a hi-fi bass tone that gets lost in the guitars.
I stayed away from actives since most I tried were brash very hi-fi and anything but warm. My whole outlook on passive basses changed a few years back. I needed A five string bass for the country bands I was playing in.
The main thing I found out was the lower end active basses were the culprit and most were made with noisy pups and preamps.
Today I can dial in any tone from warm to aggressive with the Laklands I play. They provide me with all the tones I need in an active bass. The other thing was string choice. For me getting the tone I needed made me switch back to nickel and SS rounds. Both passive and actives have their place but for me it actives all the way.
I stayed away from actives since most I tried were brash very hi-fi and anything but warm. My whole outlook on passive basses changed a few years back. I needed A five string bass for the country bands I was playing in.
The main thing I found out was the lower end active basses were the culprit and most were made with noisy pups and preamps.
Today I can dial in any tone from warm to aggressive with the Laklands I play. They provide me with all the tones I need in an active bass. The other thing was string choice. For me getting the tone I needed made me switch back to nickel and SS rounds. Both passive and actives have their place but for me it actives all the way.
I was kidding.
In practice I mostly run my active bass with its treble knob at about 50-70% and its bass knob at about 80%. I mostly run my passive bass with its tone knob at around 60%.
Wrong.
What? What is a "better" sound?
This is the kind of argument that people who don't change the oil in their car or the filter in their AC bring up. Maintain your stuff and you don't have to worry about it. Change your battery once a year - that's really all you have to do.
I've got a pretty large collection of basses both active and passive (no big deal), and I don't recognize an inherent "tone" to either; they all sound as varied from themselves as any other. A lot of people like to get hung up on putting things into categories and making associations with them that aren't really true. Unless you are specifically trying to solve a problem (wanting EQ control if you DI, reduced noise, whatever) you should just judge the next bass you want to buy on it's own merits instead of getting hung up on how the wires are arranged inside.
I don't like active basses at all. Nothing against it, nothing againt its sound. I just prefer to always start with an instrument whose sound is always the same and doesn't depend on batteries (in the same way that a painter prefers to start painting with a canvas that always has the same shade of white).
YMMV, of course.
BTW, I do have a couple of active basses (A fretless, given to me by a dear friend, and an used bass that I bought to restore it). Great instruments.
.
YMMV, of course.
BTW, I do have a couple of active basses (A fretless, given to me by a dear friend, and an used bass that I bought to restore it). Great instruments.
.
It's a preference thing. I have had both, but now only play passive (inactive) basses, for these reasons:
• I have found that, for the most part, I prefer the tone and response of passives. I haven't obviously A/B'd all passive and active basses, so maybe this is just an inaccurate mental model. But none-the-less, I usually prefer passive vs preamp.
• I don't like having another stage of EQ in the chain. Leads to questions like; do I add bass at the bass, or add it at the amp, or a little of both? Does adding bass at the bass make it hit the amp too hard? Is it better to add highs at the bass level, or at the amp level, or a little of both? Prefer the simplicity of passive for this reason. Just take the raw signal and eq once, downstream.
• I find that I fiddle endlessly with the bass, mid and treble knobs of active basses, making it harder to keep a consistent tone.
• As silly as it sounds, batteries stress me out. Is it fresh? Is it half-dead and messing with the tone? Will it die during gig? Crap, I left the cord plugged in! Do I have a backup battery? Do I have a fresh battery in my backup bass? These thoughts plague me and stress me out. I like to never have to worry about it. I like to leave my basses plugged in sometimes.
• Also, and I know this is laughable to some, I want to my basses as light as humanly possible. Preamp and battery adds a little weight. NBD on its own, but like a mountain climber choosing his gear, each tiny bit of weight adds up.
Just here to say there's something hilarious about "inactive basses"
All of my basses just kind of lay there when I'm not plunking on them. Maybe I need to get them on a treadmill?
All of my basses just kind of lay there when I'm not plunking on them. Maybe I need to get them on a treadmill?
My active bass's sound is not noticeably less consistent than my passive bass's sound.
Would it change if the battery ran down? Yes, of course. Do I let the battery get that run down? No I don't. But changing it twice a year is more than sufficient so it's not much of a burden.
Does it add weight though? To put a preamp in you have to take some of the wood out, maybe the weight evens out by the time you allow extra space for wiring.
You have just given me another reason to prefer basses without pickguards though, the weight saving.
