I don't really have enough stage experience to back up my statement. I've just read and heard enough about the active pickups/electronics failing to make me nervous enough to avoid them. You got me thinking though.
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.
My thoughts....
- Thread starter Low town
- Start date
Bryan R. Tyler
TalkBass: Usurping My Practice Time Since 2002
Staff member
Administrator
Gold Supporting Member
Supporting Member
- May 3, 2002
- 28,948
- 20,932
- Disclosures
- Reviewer: Bass Player Magazine
I guarantee that you'll see vastly more strings breaking, speakers farting, amps overdriving, lyrics forgotten, out of tune instruments, late band members, bad PA and lighting, hear crackling jacks and a bunch of other stuff before you'll see active electronics fail. If you change your battery 2-3 times a year, you really can just forget about it if you don't treat your instrument like trash. Spectors and MusicMans and the countless other basses that use active preamps and/or pickups would get railed daily at TB if it was a regular issue. It's also why nearly all basses with an active preamp come with a push/pull active/passive option, just in case something goes wrong or your battery dies. I had half a tooth fall out while I had the worst flu ever at a single crappy gig once (which I subsequently gave my whole band)- SOOO much more can and will go wrong 
Function vs fashion or whats "in" or hip at the time.
Ned Steinberger is/was a visionary, same as Leo in his time. The headless tuning system, composite construction, use of active electronics, minimalist approach to shape. These are all things he used at once in one instrument. Typically people shunned it, not because it was without merit, it just wasn't widely used then.
Yes in the 90's the trend of "vintage" took focus off the "Steinberger" styled instruments. When you look at the XL2, L2 bass, it will be played by people continuously into the future, Why? because it was designed to be an exceptional bass. It wasn't made by a marketing group to garner a market share, it was made by an insightful engineer/artist to try and over come short comings in previous designs.
Those that play off the design because they once picked up a Cort/Arbor knock off and didn't like it, is ignorance when compared to a XL2 or L2 model.
Technology in the last 10yrs has allowed so many raw ideas to become feasible and mainstream. The old thoughts of graphite being brittle and sterile, clearly have never played a all graphite Status bass. My Stealth II has warmer sounds than my P-bass with Qrt pounders. Ask any musician that uses graphite necked or full instruments in a live setting and they all will tell you how stable they are. Its why the Ox had Status build his Buzzard out of Carbon fiber, and why FOH asked Flea to put down his vintage Jazz and start playing the Modulus live. Lee Sklar said during the Phil Collins whole tour, that he thought he only tuned his L2 twice.
No single bass design is going to make all players happy, same with any tech development is going to be embraced by all players.
But to deny them because of "personal" opinion or lack of understanding, then your handicapping yourself to evolve and grow as a player and person.
So to the OP, Yes there have been developments, just people choose not to see it or embrace them. Maybe it's fear, Maybe it's ignorance?????
I just say it ALL GOOD, and I'll try anything at least once, just to try and expand my understandings.
Ned Steinberger is/was a visionary, same as Leo in his time. The headless tuning system, composite construction, use of active electronics, minimalist approach to shape. These are all things he used at once in one instrument. Typically people shunned it, not because it was without merit, it just wasn't widely used then.
Yes in the 90's the trend of "vintage" took focus off the "Steinberger" styled instruments. When you look at the XL2, L2 bass, it will be played by people continuously into the future, Why? because it was designed to be an exceptional bass. It wasn't made by a marketing group to garner a market share, it was made by an insightful engineer/artist to try and over come short comings in previous designs.
Those that play off the design because they once picked up a Cort/Arbor knock off and didn't like it, is ignorance when compared to a XL2 or L2 model.
Technology in the last 10yrs has allowed so many raw ideas to become feasible and mainstream. The old thoughts of graphite being brittle and sterile, clearly have never played a all graphite Status bass. My Stealth II has warmer sounds than my P-bass with Qrt pounders. Ask any musician that uses graphite necked or full instruments in a live setting and they all will tell you how stable they are. Its why the Ox had Status build his Buzzard out of Carbon fiber, and why FOH asked Flea to put down his vintage Jazz and start playing the Modulus live. Lee Sklar said during the Phil Collins whole tour, that he thought he only tuned his L2 twice.
No single bass design is going to make all players happy, same with any tech development is going to be embraced by all players.
But to deny them because of "personal" opinion or lack of understanding, then your handicapping yourself to evolve and grow as a player and person.
So to the OP, Yes there have been developments, just people choose not to see it or embrace them. Maybe it's fear, Maybe it's ignorance?????
I just say it ALL GOOD, and I'll try anything at least once, just to try and expand my understandings.
In answer to the OP's original premise...
No, the problem is that a lot of people have never moved on from the ideal of the original Fender basses and a lot of other equipment that originated in the fifties/sixties. Yes, a lot of what was designed during this period was essentially good, but a lot of us have moved on with preamps, new materials like carbon fibre, ceramic neodymium pickup magnets, well balanced headless designs, light weight chambered instruments and lighter speakers, again made from neodymium.
True, the basic design hasn't changed a huge amount, but it has been refined in so many ways that it's sometimes unrecognisable.
As with many designs, the evolution of the bass is going to be a gradual process of improvement and refinement. And lest we forget, our electric basses were designed as a more portable alternative to our double basses, which have been an almost static design for 300 years. So the basics don't need to change much, because they're sonically sound, but some of those special engineers and luthiers keep making it better and better for us.
No, the problem is that a lot of people have never moved on from the ideal of the original Fender basses and a lot of other equipment that originated in the fifties/sixties. Yes, a lot of what was designed during this period was essentially good, but a lot of us have moved on with preamps, new materials like carbon fibre, ceramic neodymium pickup magnets, well balanced headless designs, light weight chambered instruments and lighter speakers, again made from neodymium.
True, the basic design hasn't changed a huge amount, but it has been refined in so many ways that it's sometimes unrecognisable.
As with many designs, the evolution of the bass is going to be a gradual process of improvement and refinement. And lest we forget, our electric basses were designed as a more portable alternative to our double basses, which have been an almost static design for 300 years. So the basics don't need to change much, because they're sonically sound, but some of those special engineers and luthiers keep making it better and better for us.
Last edited:
I tried to move on past Fender and moved right back. Sometimes improvements aren't.
