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.
Curiosity
- Thread starter countrybass5
- Start date
I predict passive will win but I'm sure you'll find out that many people actually like both. So your poll should feature at least three choices.
I only own active now a days. I like being able to sculpt my tone rather than just having a tone knob cutting treble.
mark beem
Wait, how does this song start again??
The majority of my basses are active but I find myself more often than not using them in passive mode. My new custom Valenti (currently in the works) will be passive.
it's great to have them switchable for a depth of options
Absolutely no need to waste time deciding either-or when you can have both.
I use this in passive mode most of the time, but I can go active if I have to.
This was probably the best bass decision I've ever made, and that's after reading here for the past four years just how good these things are.
It totally depends on the gigs you play, and how you approach the instrument. Some have no love of, or use for active. Others get frustrated with a passive instrument.
I only have active basses, in part because I want to be able to tweak my sound without touching the amp (which I may or may not be able to get to, and may or may not be giving a post-eq DI feed). I've run my basses passive from time to time and there is an attraction ("purity of essence") but at the end of the day, I want an active mid and bass control, ideally along with a passive tone rolloff.
I only have active basses, in part because I want to be able to tweak my sound without touching the amp (which I may or may not be able to get to, and may or may not be giving a post-eq DI feed). I've run my basses passive from time to time and there is an attraction ("purity of essence") but at the end of the day, I want an active mid and bass control, ideally along with a passive tone rolloff.
I prefer passive because I am not responsible enough to remember to bring extra batteries, nor am I smart enough to remember where I like all my knobs. I max out at 1 vol and 1 tone.
As far as versatility goes, active is the way to go.
As far as versatility goes, active is the way to go.
i like both - it really depends on the individual bass and sometimes what music i'm playing. of my own basses, the ones i've liked the most tonally were a passive (fender mustang P/J) and an active (ibanez SR500).
Thanks for the remarks...I'm learning a lot from Talkbass...I'm looking to order a bass in October.It will be my last chance to get a bass so I want to get one I can play a few years then pass down to my grandson. I am into Country...he is into rock and metal. I hope I can find a bass that will cover both.
luckily most basses can be used for any kind of music, although a lot of country players say that country nowadays requires 5 strings if you play in a band - i always used a 4 string in drop D.
are there any basses you're considering?
are there any basses you're considering?
I am considering a choice between 3 Kiesel guitars...LB75,PB5, or an Icon 5.
I think most Kiesel are active/passive so you can pull the vol knob up for a passive sound. That being said, i really like the 2 band eq on my pb5. If i was ordering anything from kiesel today, thats the preamp id choose regardless of the model. Ive had some older carvin active electronics, with sweepable mids, that just didn't do it for me.
I voted active just because my basses I play most are active. EBMM SR5 kinda has to me active. I converted a passive Jazz bass to active with an Audere pre amp just because I could. I like it. I can still get “tone rolled back” tone with it. I have a bias that 5 stringers ought to be active. I dunno, I could be wrong about that, but if the B string isn’t excellent, you can always boost the bass on your active EQ. I have a AVRI P bass, and it obviously has to be passive, with flats...
Philosophically, as soon as you plug in to an amp’s pre amp or pedal, your signal is active, so I guess it’s a matter of whose coloration of pre amp you like.
Philosophically, as soon as you plug in to an amp’s pre amp or pedal, your signal is active, so I guess it’s a matter of whose coloration of pre amp you like.
I keep preamp and other tone-altering devices on the pedal board, powered by a Strymon power supply. I don't like messing with onboard stuff, the performance of which is dependent on the state of an onboard battery(s).
I voted passive because I am in a "passive phase" right now. But I have owned, and enjoyed, several active basses over the years.
Hate active. I prefer a good pre amp into my rig. Just me. Lol
Active at the moment because I primarily play six-strings.
The one issue I have with active at the moment is line level from the pre when you change EQ settings. Ideally I'd be able to sculpt tone from the bass only and change it on the fly when needed, but since the EQ boosts the output I'm not sure about changing line level out to the amp (or worse, FOH). Passive avoids this by being cut-only.
The one issue I have with active at the moment is line level from the pre when you change EQ settings. Ideally I'd be able to sculpt tone from the bass only and change it on the fly when needed, but since the EQ boosts the output I'm not sure about changing line level out to the amp (or worse, FOH). Passive avoids this by being cut-only.
