Not a poll, but do you prefer active or passive & why,,

[JRA]

i really like both for what each can do: and i'm critical (disappointed?) of both for what each can't do.
passives: i tend to be with the posters who don't like worrying about the battery issues.
actives: i tend to be with the posters who favor all of the tone/control options.

(by history: i'd get a bass and immediately 'upgrade' the pickups to active (usually EMG's). but in the last couple of years i've enjoyed passive (stock) set ups --- not having to think about batteries for gigging is it's own kind of 'fun' (liberation!). recording: i don't have a preference: whatever instrument feels the best to me at the time is the likely choice.)

but i really do like both and wouldn't want to be without both: just to have the myriad of options is it's own kind of fun. recently i've been experimenting with coated rounds on the actives and steel and nickel rounds on the passives, but i'm still playing with those set ups so i don't have any hard/fast preferences yet (maybe never!). they're fretless instruments, and i'm usually getting similar playability from all of them, anyway. i have one fretted bass --- it's active --- and i've thought about changing it out to passive as i rarely play it, but i keep changing the battery once a year: so i'm thinking why bother with batteries if it mostly hangs on a wall?!

if i was 'forced' to choose: it would be tough: maybe passive for convenience.

 

[BassHappy]

Mix and match - use both depending on the songs, situation and project.

 

[jlepre]

I get the first reason, but I have trouble understanding the second. Batteries don't just die on the spot. Like they were working and then all of a sudden it doesn't. You can hear batteries starting to die plenty of time in advance before you need to replace it.

OK so when the tone starts to wain I can switch to passive in the middle of the set, and change the batteries later. Does that make sense?

 

[Wolfenstein666]

To me it's quality vs variety.
Generally speaking I prefer the tone and simplicity of passive basses, but the convenience of onboard EQ means I often use active basses on gigs.



Nope. They're still putting out an instrument level signal, not what a power amp is designed to receive.



I've never seen a bass that takes C batteries, only 9V and CR2032. And the CR2032s are a relatively new thing in acoustics.

Wait...what? Every active EQ I've seen for the last 20 years has been 9 volt.

C batteries, 9 volt batteries, D batteries, AA batteries, AAA batteries...

I meant 9 volt, the little box shaped ones.

I'm an idiot.

 

[el_Bajo_Verde]

Passive for the simplicity.

 

[khutch]

I don't see any fundamental difference between them. Either one can get you to the same place with the external tone shaping circuits that nearly everyone uses. For maximum on bass control versatility an active bass should have an active/passive switch and a passive tone control that is functional in both modes. If all active basses were made this way we would not be having this discussion!

 

[Ewo]

Active, with a passive tone control and a switch to bypass the preamp. I always check the battery when I'm packing for the gig (McMillan battery tester), but the bypass switch is just in case a batt would go down during a set. And that config gets me the best of both worlds.

A big benefit of active, IMO, is that the pickups are buffered against whatever comes after the bass's output jack. I don't have to be concerned about the length of my guitar cord or the input impedance of a pedal or of the amp itself. Nothing can load down the pickups.

The active EQ is handy, for quick tweaks during a set. And I like having the passive tone control with it; when a fresh set of strings sounds too clangy, I just roll a bit off. In practice, it doesn't just duplicate the treble EQ.

 

[Dp1363]

I played an active for years but recently purchased a passive P bass, and like it much better. The more I played my active bass over the last years I noticed it was a bit harsh sounding. EQ didn't seem to help the situation. I just lived with it for awhile, until I tried out a passive Fender P, I was immediately smitten with the passive sound. Very smooth like expensive scotch. And as many others have said in this thread, simplicity. My one tone control gives me all the range I need.

The active sound was more aggressive, not neatly as smooth. Plus the fact I had to always remember to remove my cord from my active bass or the battery would drain down, was a PIA. No issues with that with passive.

 

[BigEarl]

I do like the idea of having tonal shaping at my fingertips on the bass with active pickups and a preamp, but I PREFER the passive sound and feel. That said, since I've rarely liked the tone shaping capabilities of most amp heads out of the box, I found one that is close (GK MB800), set it to noon, and do all my basic adjustments with a SansAmp BDDI on the floor, then if I need some fine tuning I just reach back and make slight adjustments on the nooned tone controls on the head. Been working great for me and I no longer am tempted to jump into the 9v camp(batteries are another reason for me to stay away!)

 

[bassliner50]

Passive. Simple. Predictable. Dependable. Bells and whistles are not for me. You can have 'em all.

 

[pappabass]

Active, I like having some highs /sparkle in my tone, that I can roll off if need be, but not necessarily.
Active with a passive switch is the best. I can have all your passive tones with my active bass ; but you can't even get close to mine with a passive

Yes, I am the same way, the touch of highs keeps me from getting lost in the muffled/muddied bass mix.

 

[MultiScaleMale]

I prefer active because it gives me more control right there at my bass, but if I could have only one bass, it would probably be a solid, passive 5 string P bass. (Or maybe same thing with active electronics if it had a active bypass. I'm assuming it can only be one or the other for sake of argument.)

 

[1954bassman]

While the simplicity of a passive bass is attractive to me, I do like having the option that active electronics gives you. That is, being able to tweak EQ right there on the bass. I normally run the three band on my EBMM basses flat, but if a certain passage needs the massaging, the EQ is right at my fingertips.

 

[opivy3056]

I have a jazz bass with an audere jz-3 preamp. I've never thought it sounded sterile or lacking in dynamics. I really like being able to blend the pickup volumes as opposed to the normal vol vol tone setup. I mostly leave the eq flat but will sometimes add some bass if I'm using the bridge pickup. The battery lasts forever and has an indicator. It's never failed me on countless gigs.

I've also got a peavey t-40 which is passive. I find no more "air" or simplicity to the circuit (lol)

 

[KevInDaBassment]

...For distortion passive basses are better...

This is one of the less mentioned reasons that steers me to passive. A passive P bass into my Tall Font Russian or Blower Box just sounds better. I can get some good sounds out of my Ibanez SRX3EX, but that's when I run it passive. Without knowing it, I think I've pretty much moved over to passive lol

 

[gregmon79]

I prefer active almost always. I just like the treble content and hotness and clarity of an active beast. Passive is good too, I just prefer active because it suites my bands music better. There are some passive setups that are way hotter than actives, and I could go for those too. I guess I'm just used to the active sound and response. If I was playing like Motown or some oldies stuff though, I would go passive all the way. But most times, active is my poopie

 

[gregmon79]

I have a jazz bass with an audere jz-3 preamp. I've never thought it sounded sterile or lacking in dynamics. I really like being able to blend the pickup volumes as opposed to the normal vol vol tone setup. I mostly leave the eq flat but will sometimes add some bass if I'm using the bridge pickup. The battery lasts forever and has an indicator. It's never failed me on countless gigs.

I've also got a peavey t-40 which is passive. I find no more "air" or simplicity to the circuit (lol)

I wants a T40.. So bad

 

[PauFerro]

Passive because I don't have to worry about the battery failing. The advantage of active EQ just doesn't compensate for the risk and hassle of going dead on stage. Now, I do have one bass that has an active/passive switch, and that is cool, but I like the simplicity of a passive bass.

 

[Wesley R]

At one time I scoffed at active. Currently I almost prefer active.

Similarly to the Tube vs SS debate I fall firmly in the camp of " If you want passive, play passive. If you want active play active".

 

[dave64o]

I have and like both so I don't see it as an either/or thing. But, if I had to choose, then I choose active. Since I usually adjust my amp to give me a good sound for the location with my bass set flat, I then use the controls on my bass to tailor my bass sound for a given song if I want to, and an active EQ (especially with 3 or even 4 bands) and multiple pickups give me more options.

Having said that, do I adjust before EVERY song? Nope. Do I ever kill the flow just to make an adjustment? Never! But there are some songs that sound better with some adjustment and, if I've worked out that adjustment ahead of time when practicing at home, then I'll make that adjustment. I don't need or use extreme settings of any kind, so it's a subtle thing for me and if can use the capability to add a little bit of special sauce, then I like adding it. If I don't adjust or if I forget to do it, then no musicians or listeners will accidentally be harmed as a result and the sun WILL still come up tomorrow. No big deal.

That's my preference but, as I said, I a) have , b) like, and c) use both active and passive basses. I like having the option of pulling different spices from the rack to be able to tweak my bass recipe in different ways as the mood strikes. EDIT: But feel free to enjoy your unique preference(s) for your own unique reasons. Having enough options out there to satisfy everybody is a good thing!