I swear by my RC Booster because it is so transparent and doesn't make your bass sound "active"!
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.
Passive bass + boost pedal = active bass sound?
- Thread starter Phaidrus
- Start date
I haven’t bothered trying it, but I saw a suggested setting in my SansAmp Para Driver DI manual called something like “active bass emulation,” with all three active EQ knobs dimed. So at the very least, Tech 21 NYC thinks you can get close with a pedal.
I also feel compelled to note that “active” doesn’t automatically mean “higher output.”
I also feel compelled to note that “active” doesn’t automatically mean “higher output.”
Because of the cable run. Also there might be something to having two pre-amps in series, some additional gain stages.
I think the general answer to your question is that a pre-amp pedal would do this better than a clean boost. A shot cable from bass to pedal, then a longer run from pedal to amp, will help keep more highs in your signal.
But in the end the sound may be due to a number of factors in concert and trying to reduce it to one might be missing the point.
nice, very cool...
there's a whole slew of threads on this site dedicated to the circuit on the epiphone Jack Casady basses... as they've been dealt notoriously sub par components (my bass is already on set #3 of pots, 2.5k and it's an '02-03) and the schematics etc out there are questionable etc...
if you are so inclined, bored or whatnot I would think your take/input would be appreciated if not even be the missing link as it were... I'm not an circuit guy by any stretch and know enough to know I don't know crap and look for much smarter folk than I.....
How do the Epiphone Jack Casady electronics work?
A boost pedal won't turn your bass into an active bass. An active onboard EQ is what does that. An active EQ has both cut and boost adjustments with straight up being flat (no boost or cut to the signal).
Passive bass EQ's are typically all cut because they don't have any power to boost it. Like my passive Jazz bass. If it turn the tone knob all the way up, it puts out everything my bass puts out. If I cut it to halfway it's a lot bassier sounding because it is cutting out the treble signal from the bass. With an active bass you usually have at least two or three tone knobs (bass and treble, or bass, mids, treble) and besides cutting the signal from any of those you can boost them because you have batteries powering your active onboard preamp.
You don't have that ability with a passive bass. If you have more tone knobs on a passive bass, you can have finer control over your sound, but that doesn't come by boosting any of the frequencies. Instead it is cutting the ones you don't want to use. If you add a "Boost" pedal, all that will do is give you a stronger overall signal or perhaps add overdrive and distortion with it. It won't turn a passive bass into an active bass because it won't turn you onboard bass EQ into a cut/boost EQ, it just boosts the signal of whatever you passive bass is putting out.
My primary bass is a passive Jazz and my inexpensive 5-string is active, but can also be played in passive mode. In active mode I can boost or cut the bass or the treble, plus I can balance between the two pickups (Jazz style neck pickup and MM soapbar style bridge pickup). In passive mode I only have control over the the pickup balance and nothing else. That's OK with this particular bass because if I need more treble, I'll adjust the balance a little towards the bridge pickup. If I want a darker sound I'll adjust the balance towards the neck pickup a bit. I actually usually play it in passive mode because it sounds better and the adjusting the tone by adjusting the balance between the two pickups works fine. Like I mentioned above it's an inexpensive 5-string and although it works fine for the few times I need to use it, it doesn't really have the really nice preamp that a more expensive active 5-string does.
Understood, I think. Part of my question was, why can't one get the "active bass" thick and punchy tone with a passive bass by boosting/cutting frequencies with the EQ knobs of the pre amp of the amp head, just like one would do with the EQ controls on an active bass. People in the know here on TB replied that this is not really possible due to signal loss through the length of the instrument cable that connects the bass to the amp, if I understood it correctly.
Yes. That was something Les Paul talked Gibson into doing back around 1970 for the Low impedance series. There was even an acoustic guitar and an amp offered with a low impedance input....never seen one in the flesh. It was a total marketing disaster.
It got reused in the Les Paul Signature series which is what the Casady is based on.
That helps. The point is to have as short a cable as possible so that the signal loss due to the inductance, resistance and capacitance is as little as possible. Obviously putting the preamp in the body with the pickups is optimal.
Last edited:
I disagree with that cable stuff. You will lose a little top end from a 20 or 30-ft cable, in fact both my Line6 wireless have switches to emulate that loss if you want to because the wireless doesn't lose anything. That's more important for a guitarist who doesn't want his highs so edgy using a wireless. So they put in a switch to emulate no cable, 10-ft. cable, 20-ft. cable, and 30-ft cable.
So my opinion would be yeah you can adjust the EQ on your amp to get the sound you want, depending upon the amp. Some amps have very specific voicing and some have a high-fidelity very flat response across the spectrum. It's easier to do the adjustments with one that has a flat frequency response instead of a baked in sound that some amps have, but if you know how your amp works, you can figure it out. I still don't understand what settings are actually "flat" on Fender amps, but those who use them have no trouble getting what they want out of them.
Using my passive Jazz into my Eden amps running my DNS cabs (by DNA) I'll run my EQ flat for the most part but dial in just a little bit of Low-Mid boost at ~250Hz. Anywhere between there and 550Hz will work. If you dial in too much your sound will honk at you, so just dial it back until it stops honking. I get a very nicely thick and punchy tone with that setting when the controls of my bass are dimed (VV&T turned all the way up). Then if I need a darker, warmer, smoother sound, I pluck the strings up closer to the neck. If I need more brightness and bite, I'll pluck the strings closer to the bridge pick-up. And, if I want my Jazz Bass to growl, I'll dig into the strings right over or even behind the bridge pickup. That set-up gives me all the sound changes I need.
The advantage of an active EQ on the bass is that you can boost frequencies as you want when you want without changing where you pluck the strings or fiddling with the amp's controls. Passive electronics can only cut, active electronics can cut and boost. Plus different active EQ's have characteristically different baked-in sounds and some folks like EMG's others like Nordstrand or Lakland, or whoever. Active EQ's just give you more options on your bass because you can boost and cut instead of just cutting with passive bass.
All of my active basses have the same output as a regular passive bass. It's not about volume. It was a bit of a consistent difference in volume, sorta of, way way way back in the old days when the stingray came out, because many passive basses back then weren't particularly high output. But manufacturers stopped boosting actives too much, and passives are generally higher output over the past 3 or 4 decades than they used to be, so there isn't really a standard of "actives are louder" from my experience.
Just pointing that out. All an active bass is is a passive bass with the iput buffer and tone controls from a typical bass amp's preamp section built into the bass, and it outputs the ideal signal and impedance to send through a patch cord without loss compared to the output of a passive bass, which degrades with cable length.
Just pointing that out. All an active bass is is a passive bass with the iput buffer and tone controls from a typical bass amp's preamp section built into the bass, and it outputs the ideal signal and impedance to send through a patch cord without loss compared to the output of a passive bass, which degrades with cable length.
There's a reason why G&L preamps have a buffer-only mode. It is a neutral buffer (which ALL buffers are, pretty much, it's not rocket science). And that allows makes your bass active, so it's impedance and level work great without loss regardless of the cable used and length. To be an active bass, that is the requirement. Active tone controls are an option, but not a requirement, to be an active bass.
Also, of course, there are active basses with active pickups... famously Alembic, and EMG created some of the first ones that could replace normal pickups (with a battery and switch etc isntalled) in a size that you could put into precision or jazz basses pretty easily.
Nearly all active basses we come across have passive pickups, passive volume(s) and/or volume and blend controls, optionally followed by passive tone control(s), and then an active input buffer, followed optionally (but commonly) by active tone controls, followed by an output stage designed to work ideally through any cable and into a regular bass amp.
Also, of course, there are active basses with active pickups... famously Alembic, and EMG created some of the first ones that could replace normal pickups (with a battery and switch etc isntalled) in a size that you could put into precision or jazz basses pretty easily.
Nearly all active basses we come across have passive pickups, passive volume(s) and/or volume and blend controls, optionally followed by passive tone control(s), and then an active input buffer, followed optionally (but commonly) by active tone controls, followed by an output stage designed to work ideally through any cable and into a regular bass amp.
just checking ... anyone emulating an 'active bass sound' with a digital wireless and preamp pedal?
A P bass is not at all wired the way it needs to be done to sound more like an active bass. In many cases, the pickup could be used (rewired for parallel), and then you'd need.... all new electronics to load it to where you want it. It's not horribly expensive, but you do need to know what you're doing to make it work right. None of the schematics you'll find on line for a P bass are done that way. Leo was concerned about getting a decent amount of output (the amps of the day needed that for decent signal to noise), and he also wanted to do it with minimal parts - my circuits add a few parts.
There are two different basses associated with Jack. The one I spoke of earlier was an Alembic - an early active bass. To understand what's going on with the Epiphone (recent) bass, I'd need to know something about the transformer they're using - turns ratios and the like. Otherwise, it's a crap shoot.
Man I mean I know you believe what you’re saying. I just don’t know if I believe what you’re saying.
Like maybe if I had golden ears and was listening in a room with $10000 worth of treatment and signal chain.
But I’d still hear the clams first.
Perhaps what you are missing is the engineers artistic intent. By this I mean the engineer made specific choices in either pairing the pickup and preamp, or designing the pickup(s) and preamp to work specifically with each other produce a specific effect.
Sure if you put a preamp between your passive bass and your amp, it pretty much does the same thing on a macro scale, but you combining components somewhat randomly, rather than using components that were specifically designed to work together. So you don't get the same miro-effects or nuances.
Of course you might really like the way a random preamp sounds with a certain random pair of pickups.
the ol' trial & error method. i got to record a few days ago and used my 80s p-bass to track with. the studio had an avalon preamp/d.i. for bass direct. loved the sound i got with that setup! if i felt i could get that sound with an onboard preamp, i might be compelled to switch ... but i am pretty sure that's not possible.
So I guess this was a case where passive bass + external preamp sounds better/more appropriate than active bass with onboard preamp. What style of music was the recording? I only own two passive Pbasses by the way.
