• 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.

Wal and other filter-based preamps

#21
All EQ's are filters, they generally just have a fixed Q and F3. While not a true HP or LP filter taking the signal to 0db after F3 at a fixed slope, the Noll's bass and treble are still 15db shelving and will give a pretty similar sound. They just won't have the Q peak like a passive tone or "filter" EQ. Plus, most filter based pre's don't have any mid or low end adjustment.
 
#26
winegamd said:
Bunch of Sith's on Talkbass...always dealing in absolutes.
Click to expand...
And people like you who don't actually understand how they work, or why.

Sad attempt at a pejorative.

winegamd said:
The thread title is Wal and OTHER filter based EQ's.

The Noll qualifies as "other".
Click to expand...
Not in this case unless you want to include every other single preamp that shapes the FR, because they're also 'filters'.
 
#27
Seriously, that Noll looks really nice. I don't think I've ever seen another traditional band-type EQ with adjustable frequency centers for all of the bands.

It's just not specifically a HPF/LPF arrangement, which is explicitly what this particular thread is about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GR7G5TER, SuperFunkyPete and Snert
#28
To offer my take on the original posters question...

I just don't think we have had enough famous songs with bass tones specific enough to the basses on which these types of preamps typically occur. Stanley Clarke and Phil Lesh are really the only bassists (I am sure there are others, like Jack Cassidy) the general public may have heard whose tones are specific to a filter based pre equipped instrument. Geddy Lee's Wal tone is definitely "Wal'ish" to a trained ear, but not enough so for the layperson to know and specifically seek out that sound. Same goes for Justin Chancellor. For those who do realize that tone is specific to a certain brand of instrument, the cost and rarity are usually prohibitive. Plus, its takes time to know your sound, how to get that sound, and how to get that sound out of "complex" electronics. I think a lot of bassists will pick up an Alembic or Wal and not instantly get that tone in their head, look at the price, and move on to something with which they are more familiar. Similar tones to Justin's and Geddy's can be gotten from other much less expensive instruments, especially when effects are taken into consideration.

Most producers are also looking specifically for a "Fender" sound, so most bass tones on albums are using a Fender pickup arrangement. We can find many basses to get that sound for entry level prices up to the extreme, but there is enough range that this configuration is profitable. There is no entry level filter equipped bass, or even mid level. This leaves the filters as a top shelf option to which most bassists will just never have the pleasure of being exposed (especially when a filter based pre and pickups is usually more expensive than many entry to mid level instruments).

Many bassists are also not fiddlers. Take Anthony Jackson for a famous example. That dude has been searching for one specific tone for most of his career and his bass configuration shows it. How many famous slappers are just a Jazz (or dual pickup bass), blended 50/50, with a bass and treble boost? Pretty much all of them. Or the P-bass with flats cult. Most players look for a certain response and that becomes their tone...forever. The flexibility and capability of the filter pre is just not widely necessitated.

I have also read (I think it was on ACG's website) one of the original selling points for the filters is that you could match the response of your favorite bass's pickups and essentially have a one bass solution to many popular tones. As stated above it is usually just more economical to buy that type of bass, or many basses, to cover that range of sounds. This leaves the filter equipped instruments to the true aficionados who must have the Alembic/Wal sound but may occasionally need something similar/close to Fender tones (as we have seen "similar" or "close" sometimes just are not good enough).

That leaves the filter pre (and associated brands) to the very niche market they currently occupy.

I will say though, a Wal with the neck pickup filter to its lowest freq setting, with the bridge pickup running full range, combined with the stereo blend, offers one of the fullest most unique bridge pickup tones I have heard/played. So much so that I am installing a stacked tone pot in my Zon so that I can have individual passive tones (pre dual band buffer to make so each pickup is unaffected) on each pickup to emulate what I got on that Wal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Galaticmonkey, Arjank, Goatrope and 2 others
#29
I think it is a shame that there are not more filters being used, though. Having a blendable neck pickup with most of the high mids and highs rolled off allowed a bass boost that did not effect the original tone of the bridge pickup. It is a different response that is far superior to just boosting the lows. It adds a broader range fullness without losing the tightness of the bridge pickup or mucking up the growl. It is definitely preferable IMO.

I think having a dedicated filter for the neck pickup, with a conventional passive tone for the bridge with a conventional bass and 3-way selectable mid, I think, would be a really nice configuration. Especially if we are talking tapable dual coils.

I also see a possible resurgence in Alembic popularity as real bass becomes more popular in R&B, Lofi Hip-hop, and electronic music. Those styles seem to be embracing the retro eras when the filter equipped basses we're most popular. The smooth bassy tones just seem suited to those styles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveCS, Kinkh and ctmullins
#30
winegamd said:
I think having a dedicated filter for the neck pickup, with a conventional passive tone for the bridge with a conventional bass and 3-way selectable mid, I think, would be a really nice configuration. Especially if we are talking tapable dual coils.
Click to expand...

That does sound delicious. I think I have the right units on hand to try that out; might have to break open the toolbox and get modding!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Passinwind
#31
ctmullins said:
That does sound delicious. I think I have the right units on hand to try that out; might have to break open the toolbox and get modding!!
Click to expand...
If you have a buffered blend this could work, otherwise I would expect the neck pickup to easily overpower the bridge in this case due to the impedance imbalance. On a dual filter pre if you simply use a lighter Q boost on the bridge pickup the filter will sound pretty close to a passive tone (just much more linear/versatile) and accomplish basically the same thing IME
 
Last edited:
#32
winegamd said:
If you if you maxed the mid and sweep it to it's highest freq, then fully cut the treble and sweep it in the same band, it would give the Q boost like effect. Would it be exactly like the Alembic/Wal? No. Would it give similar results? Yes.
Click to expand...
The biggest difference (apart from the LPF distinction) between a semi-parametric boost and what the Alembic/Wal filters do is in the Q width. The peak of the Alembic/Wal is a very narrow Q of frequency that results in a much peakier tone, while a typical semi-parametric EQ uses a much wider Q that sounds much smoother (a narrow Q on a typical bass preamp wouldn't be a desirable feature). I have had good luck getting Alembic-esque tones using a fully parametric EQ where I can set the width of the boosted Q to be quite narrow
 
#33
I read the Noll specs again and you're right, the ramp rate is 6db per octave. It would definitely not be very peaky. Passive tones are usually 12 db per octave after the cutoff freq., So the leading edge may be about right, but the trailing/cutoff slope would be too gentle.
 
#34
winegamd said:
I think it is a shame that there are not more filters being used, though. Having a blendable neck pickup with most of the high mids and highs rolled off allowed a bass boost that did not effect the original tone of the bridge pickup. It is a different response that is far superior to just boosting the lows. It adds a broader range fullness without losing the tightness of the bridge pickup or mucking up the growl. It is definitely preferable IMO.

I think having a dedicated filter for the neck pickup, with a conventional passive tone for the bridge with a conventional bass and 3-way selectable mid, I think, would be a really nice configuration. Especially if we are talking tapable dual coils.
Click to expand...

Cool idea. I have a bass coming in for a preamp retrofit that might be a perfect candidate for that. Maybe with the whole format reversed thouh, because the owner doesn't want the bridge pickup's original tone and craves more high end without messing with the bassiness of the neck pickup.
 
#35
Passinwind said:
Cool idea. I have a bass coming in for a preamp retrofit that might be a perfect candidate for that. Maybe with the whole format reversed thouh, because the owner doesn't want the bridge pickup's original tone and craves more high end without messing with the bassiness of the neck pickup.
Click to expand...
I know for me I use filter on the bridge pickup and keep the neck pickup pretty much full range with no boost point. I blend the neck pickup in more when I want a fuller "conventional bass" sound and less for my usually snottyburpy tone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chickenwheels and SteveCS
#36
kesslari said:
I know for me I use filter on the bridge pickup and keep the neck pickup pretty much full range with no boost point. I blend the neck pickup in more when I want a fuller "conventional bass" sound and less for my usually snottyburpy tone.
Click to expand...

Cool. This "customer" has genuine hearing issues and knows it. Not sure exactly how he ended up owning this particular bass, with would be perfect for dub music, but I've done preamps for him that he loves in other basses, and he's game to try a filter based solution for this one.

BTW, for those of you who mght want to cop an Alembic-ish knob format but in wood, an Etsy vendor called PickKnobs has done a few different sets of pointy ones for me, and he is a great guy to work with. Here's the current set on my Bass/Mid/LPF Marco Bass:

SC5P_NK2.jpg



That bass has the next gen version of my open source freebie preamp but the original one fits just fine too. I finally managed to source some custom pots that'll fit in back routed control cavities and am really enjoying this bass set up this way. Current format is Vol-Vol-Bass-Mids-LPF Frequency-LPF Resonance.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rumblinbass, mdalamond, mikezimmerman and 6 others

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back