I never felt like active bases were as sensitive to finger input as my P bass. Now with SD pickups I don't feel the need anymore for the pre amp.
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.
Anyone going back to passive basses?
- Thread starter kirkm24
- Start date
Wow, I'm a little sad I'm late to this party too!
Being that I'm primarily a vintage gear nut, I've got a big appreciation for classic, passive tones, but it wasn't always this way.... I went through an EBMM SR5 /w piezo, a 5 string deluxe fender P, an Ibanez 5 string active, and more before I got my first passive bass. I'd convinced myself that more sounds was better always, but I was never satisfied with any of the sounds I could get.
So the story goes... I got a '69 precision all beat up, and this was to be my 'vintage sounding' bass. I cleaned it up, sourced vintage pickups for it and really liked it (for awhile, it didn't play great). Then I found a clean '73 Rickenbacker and that's when my mind was made up... it was louder, grittier, filled more space sonically, but most important of all- it sounded less sterile and sat right in the mix. All my active basses left my hands and I made the switch over to vintage passive basses.
Then..... I got a Wal. Holy Moly. It sits however I want it to in the mix, but has very much it's own sound- nothing generic about it. Amazing range of control, but no matter how extreme I get it sounding in one position, I feel like I can blend in the second pickup and smooth things out to sit better in the mix while still retaining the qualities I like about the more 'intense' sounds.
Then... I had to move the Wal to fund the purchase of my (passive) Carl Thompson. Most boutique basses I've found are active, and it bothers me to put even a $500 preamp+pickup set in a $6000+ bass. It's THE BIGGEST determiner of how that bass is going to sound and it's less than 10% of the total cost. I opted for the absolute best pickup I could dream up and the best passive components I could find, and the passive electronics in my bass give a huge range of tones without sounding like a set of EMGs, or Bartolinis, or Nordstrands. They all make great stuff, but I wanted a pickup and electronics that were first and foremost passive, and also created a range of sounds. The results are perfect for me. Subtle changes, and my bass always sounds like my bass.
Then I started missing my Wal... I was able to find another one that I traded for and I'm ecstatic about owning one again- for me it's the perfect active circuit.
...Then my girlfriend bought me a 1980 Musicman Stingray. Wow- maybe I've come full circle and I really like actives again. This bass is creamy and thick and has everything I like about a passive bass, but I don't see he need in the extremes of the preamp. I find the usable tones all to be within the first 'half' of the boost for bass and treble, and I love both of them rolled right off. It's another example of a great pre- subtle enough to sound passive.
There's my rant. Moral of the story? My favorite basses are passive, and if the bass is going to be active, it better not sound digital or stand out too much in the mix or have too much boost/cut- and it had better allow for subtle changes and still sound like the bass those electronics are in.
Being that I'm primarily a vintage gear nut, I've got a big appreciation for classic, passive tones, but it wasn't always this way.... I went through an EBMM SR5 /w piezo, a 5 string deluxe fender P, an Ibanez 5 string active, and more before I got my first passive bass. I'd convinced myself that more sounds was better always, but I was never satisfied with any of the sounds I could get.
So the story goes... I got a '69 precision all beat up, and this was to be my 'vintage sounding' bass. I cleaned it up, sourced vintage pickups for it and really liked it (for awhile, it didn't play great). Then I found a clean '73 Rickenbacker and that's when my mind was made up... it was louder, grittier, filled more space sonically, but most important of all- it sounded less sterile and sat right in the mix. All my active basses left my hands and I made the switch over to vintage passive basses.
Then..... I got a Wal. Holy Moly. It sits however I want it to in the mix, but has very much it's own sound- nothing generic about it. Amazing range of control, but no matter how extreme I get it sounding in one position, I feel like I can blend in the second pickup and smooth things out to sit better in the mix while still retaining the qualities I like about the more 'intense' sounds.
Then... I had to move the Wal to fund the purchase of my (passive) Carl Thompson. Most boutique basses I've found are active, and it bothers me to put even a $500 preamp+pickup set in a $6000+ bass. It's THE BIGGEST determiner of how that bass is going to sound and it's less than 10% of the total cost. I opted for the absolute best pickup I could dream up and the best passive components I could find, and the passive electronics in my bass give a huge range of tones without sounding like a set of EMGs, or Bartolinis, or Nordstrands. They all make great stuff, but I wanted a pickup and electronics that were first and foremost passive, and also created a range of sounds. The results are perfect for me. Subtle changes, and my bass always sounds like my bass.
Then I started missing my Wal... I was able to find another one that I traded for and I'm ecstatic about owning one again- for me it's the perfect active circuit.
...Then my girlfriend bought me a 1980 Musicman Stingray. Wow- maybe I've come full circle and I really like actives again. This bass is creamy and thick and has everything I like about a passive bass, but I don't see he need in the extremes of the preamp. I find the usable tones all to be within the first 'half' of the boost for bass and treble, and I love both of them rolled right off. It's another example of a great pre- subtle enough to sound passive.
There's my rant. Moral of the story? My favorite basses are passive, and if the bass is going to be active, it better not sound digital or stand out too much in the mix or have too much boost/cut- and it had better allow for subtle changes and still sound like the bass those electronics are in.
If you have a 80 Ray set Half way. That's neutral,,no boost. It's a boost/cut system.
I'll confess one of the mail reasons I don't want the knobs on the bass is I know I'll be tweaking them. Driving the poor sound guy nuts.
I'll confess one of the mail reasons I don't want the knobs on the bass is I know I'll be tweaking them. Driving the poor sound guy nuts.
That's actually up for discussion.... some say the 2 band EQs were cut/boost, some say the bass was boost only and the treble was cut/boost, some say the whole thing was boost only. It seems there is some discrepancy from instrument to instrument as well, and even though a catalog from one year may say one thing, the next year it may have been different.
Glad to see I am not the only one. I'm no pro and reckoned part of my choice was to whittle the herd down to the few. I do own a pair of very audiophile ears they tell me, and frankly have never met a preamp I loved. Some I like, some I dont at all, but none to love. Even tried a Sadowsky as they are all the rage here.
Its comfortable to like my ash/maple Aero pupped simple arse axe. She does exactly what I need, no more, and sure as heck no less!
If anything, I would go to ONE pickup, no knobs and still be simplistically happy.
Its comfortable to like my ash/maple Aero pupped simple arse axe. She does exactly what I need, no more, and sure as heck no less!
If anything, I would go to ONE pickup, no knobs and still be simplistically happy.
Nope. When I first played a bass with active electronics, I thought to my self, "This is the best friggin' thing since sliced bread!" I even use an old-school Sadowsky clip-on pre with my vintage basses.
IMHO, it's like a blanket is lifted off the speakers when I play through a preamp.
IMHO, it's like a blanket is lifted off the speakers when I play through a preamp.
I have and play both. I'm not really good with accepting the "one or the other" when in fact I can have both. Just me being greedy I guess 
The two basses that get the most love are my Squier P-Bass Special and Carvin LB76. Two different animals completely but that's ok. Plus I can bypass the active portion of the LB76 and go passive with it. My guitars are all passive though.
The two basses that get the most love are my Squier P-Bass Special and Carvin LB76. Two different animals completely but that's ok. Plus I can bypass the active portion of the LB76 and go passive with it. My guitars are all passive though.
I'm thinking about making an eq pedal/direct box out of a bass preamp. That way if I buy a passive I can make it sound like an active if I want to, without actually modifying the instrument. Not sure how well it would work, but for a few bucks and a little work I could have the best of both worlds.
That's not really the case.That first cable needs to be really short to maximize the effect of the buffer.
I've been using a Fender deluxe active jazz 5 string for a couple of years and having all that EQ that's so easy to tweak mid song is a godsent but at the same time I miss some of the simplicity of having a passive. I might buy a Fender P bass or another J in passive format (still a V) as a backup sometime but for the moment money's too tight.
Your Kung Fu is strong, I must return to shaolin and train!
Any way I always found a ray to sound best about center. Setting it that way also tends to help out the weak G string.
Any way I always found a ray to sound best about center. Setting it that way also tends to help out the weak G string.
I'm actually in the midst of revamping my stable to be primarily passive.
I've been drifting this way for a couple years, primarily after an eye (or rather ear) opening experience of a recorded live show with my old band.
I would tweak my tone between songs with what I thought were subtle changes - favor the back pickup with a touch of low mid boost for articulation, roll to the front with a touch of bass boost and the treble and high mids rolled down a bit etc.
On the recording some of these tweaks worked as expected, some were not really noticeable and a few times it was a very negative effect on my tone and how it slotted in the mix. Part of it was obviously that I was using my rig for monitoring and what was recorded was primarily FOH and how the soundman had me set, but the fact is he did a good job with my basic tone and then my tweaking altered everything more than I intended.
There are a lot of players that are far more skilled with EQ'ing a preamp than I am I'm sure but for me it was far simpler to strip away the controls at my fingertips, dial in a sound at my amp and then count on my hands to make the changes I want. So far it's worked really well for me.
That said, it's just what works for me and my tonal goals. We play ELECTRIC bass and the only thing a preamp does is make that first EQ stage further upstream rather than a preamp pedal, your amp's preamp or the sound guy's board.
I'll also say that I make an exception for ACG basses since Alan's (and John East's) filter based preamp is not a "tone shaper" but a "tone changer" and an entirely different animal than most 3 or 4 band on board pres.
As a side note, here are my upcoming passive basses that I sold off all but one other bass to fund. Two fivers and two hollowbody fours, one fretted and one a piezo only fretless.
I've been drifting this way for a couple years, primarily after an eye (or rather ear) opening experience of a recorded live show with my old band.
I would tweak my tone between songs with what I thought were subtle changes - favor the back pickup with a touch of low mid boost for articulation, roll to the front with a touch of bass boost and the treble and high mids rolled down a bit etc.
On the recording some of these tweaks worked as expected, some were not really noticeable and a few times it was a very negative effect on my tone and how it slotted in the mix. Part of it was obviously that I was using my rig for monitoring and what was recorded was primarily FOH and how the soundman had me set, but the fact is he did a good job with my basic tone and then my tweaking altered everything more than I intended.
There are a lot of players that are far more skilled with EQ'ing a preamp than I am I'm sure but for me it was far simpler to strip away the controls at my fingertips, dial in a sound at my amp and then count on my hands to make the changes I want. So far it's worked really well for me.
That said, it's just what works for me and my tonal goals. We play ELECTRIC bass and the only thing a preamp does is make that first EQ stage further upstream rather than a preamp pedal, your amp's preamp or the sound guy's board.
I'll also say that I make an exception for ACG basses since Alan's (and John East's) filter based preamp is not a "tone shaper" but a "tone changer" and an entirely different animal than most 3 or 4 band on board pres.
As a side note, here are my upcoming passive basses that I sold off all but one other bass to fund. Two fivers and two hollowbody fours, one fretted and one a piezo only fretless.
Just bought a beater p bass for 40 bucks. Was gunna tear it apart but it sounds amazing. Making me consider turning my vm jag passive.
There is something about a passive I guess. I really tried to go that route, and everyone generally liked the sound I got from my Geddy Lee. I did to. I still have my Geddy Lee but it is for sale. I just love the feel and sound of my Roscoe 5's so much I doubt I'll play the Geddy much at all.
Fortunately, I don't have a gig where I need to have a passive P or J to please some producer or band leader. People ask me to play for me, not my bass. They must like my sound or they wouldn't ask me to play. I think I use an appropriate tone for any gig I play.
One guy even commented that "my sound" was "burned" into a combo amp I traded in a while ago and used for a workshop. The sound that he was hearing was me going back to a Bartolini pup and pre equipped bass. That's my sound I guess.
Fortunately, I don't have a gig where I need to have a passive P or J to please some producer or band leader. People ask me to play for me, not my bass. They must like my sound or they wouldn't ask me to play. I think I use an appropriate tone for any gig I play.
One guy even commented that "my sound" was "burned" into a combo amp I traded in a while ago and used for a workshop. The sound that he was hearing was me going back to a Bartolini pup and pre equipped bass. That's my sound I guess.
- Jan 12, 2011
- 4,578
- 2,460
- Disclosures
- Artist, Trickfish Amplification Bartolini Emerging Artist, MTD Kingston Emerging Artist. Artist, Tsunami Cables
It's not really that big of a deal for me. The active basses I have because I like them as basses. The passive basses I have as well because I like them as basses. Because I like each one of my axes it makes no difference in my mind. I will add that both of my passive basses are JBs. That may just be a coincidence.
I'm getting ready to take the J-Retro out of my Lull and have it rewired to passive. I just prefer a passive tone control.
I have been back and forth...I currently have 2 Lakland 55-01's, but prior to that I played a Lakland DJ4 and a Geddy 4. Both of those being 4 string passive J-basses. Funny thing is, I played a classic funk gig this weekend with my 55-01 in passive mode the whole gig......loved the sound. I do however like the 5th string for adding a little more oomph to the classics. Active or Passive, you have to find the sound that works for you.
I don't have a lot of basses, so I just modify my 5-string Schecter all the time. I didn't expect this bass to become Frankenbass, but it kinda has. I ripped out the active preamp it came with and added a varitone circuit. I love the way it sounds. 
