Why Volume/Volume?

[Ernieballer]

Is there any advantage to being able to adjust the individual volume on a pickup instead of a balance and master volume option? I have a fender jazz bass in mind.

 

[Hollow Man]

Just personal preference. I prefer the volume/blend configuration because it allows me to change the blending of the pickups without changing my overall bass volume. A lot of people like having individual pickup volumes because they can dial one pickup in or out without changing the amount of signal coming from the other pickup.

 

[KJung]

Lot's of threads and posts on this if you do a search. I find that many volume/blend circuits act more as an 'on/off' type switch, with most of the blending happening in the very first, small turn of the control, and then one pickup totally overwhelming the other.

However, in the volume/volume circuit, IME, there is a lot more 'play' in the amount of true blending of different ratio's of each pickup. The downside is, you don't have a 'master volume' anymore.

I know there are some very excellent technical descriptions of why this is the case if you search.

 

[Mark Wilson]

I like my vol/vol knobs. I PERFER blend, but you need to be as precise with vol/vol. You can just roll back the neck volume and you've got a jaco tone. Roll the bridge volume back, and you've got a rocco tone.


-Mark

 

[Philbiker]

There's one less potentiometer in a VOL/VOL/TONE setup. When you do VOL/BLEND/TONE, basically the Blend is just two Volume controls stacked on top of each other with both on FULL for one half of the travel, detented in the center.

I prefer VOL/VOL/TONE, I find it a simpler setup.

 

[v-12]

i personally couldn't ever get used to vol/vol. i use a weird ratio of the two pickups (mostly neck) and it would take more time than i am willing to spend to get the tone back to how i liked it. i would spend nearly the whole second set on a gig playing with the knobs to get the tone right; if only they made a vol/vol/ master vol.........
its just something you're going to have to experiment with to see which you prefer.

 

[superbassman2000]

as far as i can see they are the same difference as a twelve-pack of soda of a dozen cans of soda
my thoughts are that a blend pot works a ratio or neck pickup to bridge pickup, with the center being an equal ratio of of neck/bridge...with Vol/Vol its setting a ratio with two pots instead of one, when you turn them both on full volume you have the same ratio as the center of a blend pot, and in a vol/vol setup if you turn up the neck pickup and turn the bridge pickup down, its the same effect on your sound as turning the blend back to the bridge pickup side...its just personal preference

 

[Ernieballer]

So it's all about the ratio of the two pickups? So, disregarding volume, a jazz bass with both pickups on 5 will have the same sound(tone) as the same bass with both pickups up all the way?

 

[KJung]

as far as i can see they are the same difference as a twelve-pack of soda of a dozen cans of soda
my thoughts are that a blend pot works a ratio or neck pickup to bridge pickup, with the center being an equal ratio of of neck/bridge...with Vol/Vol its setting a ratio with two pots instead of one, when you turn them both on full volume you have the same ratio as the center of a blend pot, and in a vol/vol setup if you turn up the neck pickup and turn the bridge pickup down, its the same effect on your sound as turning the blend back to the bridge pickup side...its just personal preference

That's unfortunately not what I experience in comparing volume/volume to the volume blend circuits I've owned (MTD, Pope, Sadowsky, etc.). I greatly prefer the logic and ease of use of the blend control vs. the volume/volume, but again, could never get the range of blending from the blend control circuits vs. a more classic volume/volume.

The best I can do with the blend controls I'm familiar with is both on / one on, on off/ and a very limited true blend with one mostly on and one mostly off before one pickup totally overwhelms the other. With the volume/volume, I seem to be able to achieve a more 'infinite blend' situation, very easily dialing in various ratio's of neck and bridge pickup. In other words, with the bridge pickup all the way on, there is a variation in tone through virtually the entire range of the neck pickup volume as you reduce the volume of the neck pickup, and hence the ratio between the two pickups. After using volume/blend for all these years, it was a real eye opener to get a volume/volume circuit again.

I wish I could find a blend circuit that works this smoothly, allowing for full, easily controlled blends between the two pickups across the entire range of movement of the blend control.

 

[Philbiker]

That's unfortunately not what I experience in comparing volume/volume to the volume blend circuits I've owned (MTD, Pope, Sadowsky, etc.). I greatly prefer the logic and ease of use of the blend control vs. the volume/volume, but again, could never get the range of blending from the blend control circuits vs. a more classic volume/volume.

The best I can do with the blend controls I'm familiar with is both on / one on, on off/ and a very limited true blend with one mostly on and one mostly off before one pickup totally overwhelms the other. With the volume/volume, I seem to be able to achieve a more 'infinite blend' situation, very easily dialing in various ratio's of neck and bridge pickup. In other words, with the bridge pickup all the way on, there is a variation in tone through virtually the entire range of the neck pickup volume as you reduce the volume of the neck pickup, and hence the ratio between the two pickups. After using volume/blend for all these years, it was a real eye opener to get a volume/volume circuit again.

I wish I could find a blend circuit that works this smoothly, allowing for full, easily controlled blends between the two pickups across the entire range of movement of the blend control.

This has been my experience as well, not sure why technically, other than the additional potentiometers in the circuit. That's why why I replaced the VOL/PAN/TONE circuit on my Palaedium with VOL/VOL/TONE. I believe that better pickup blending was one of the main goals of many of the early preamps. I remember reading about that in the booklet for my Bartolini TBIBT.

 

[davpal]

I recently aquired a Yamaha fretless with 2 pup's set up like a Jazz bass - v/v/t and found it very awkward to keep the pickup balance I liked when changing volume. Looking around I found the blend concept and it sounded like the solution. The first blend pot I purchased was actually a stereo volume pot (stacked audio taper pots) being sold as a blend (discovered when I tested the pots using an ohmmeter). The seller replied to my correspondence that this was how they did it.... I found what I wanted at another vendor and it works GREAT! I think it is a far better method of controlling the the volume and maintaining the sound than 2 volume knobs. Since I was psyched about setting up the bass I decided to also make a series/ parallel switch. This proved to be a little tricky with the blend in the circuit but I did manage to do it with a dpdt push/pull knob. No extra holes or knobs on the bass but I have to have the blend on 5 or less to not lose any volume. A 3pole double throw would have avoided this but I could only find one of those in a toggle switch.

 

[KJung]

I recently aquired a Yamaha fretless with 2 pup's set up like a Jazz bass - v/v/t and found it very awkward to keep the pickup balance I liked when changing volume. Looking around I found the blend concept and it sounded like the solution. The first blend pot I purchased was actually a stereo volume pot (stacked audio taper pots) being sold as a blend (discovered when I tested the pots using an ohmmeter). The seller replied to my correspondence that this was how they did it.... I found what I wanted at another vendor and it works GREAT! I think it is a far better method of controlling the the volume and maintaining the sound than 2 volume knobs. Since I was psyched about setting up the bass I decided to also make a series/ parallel switch. This proved to be a little tricky with the blend in the circuit but I did manage to do it with a dpdt push/pull knob. No extra holes or knobs on the bass but I have to have the blend on 5 or less to not lose any volume. A 3pole double throw would have avoided this but I could only find one of those in a toggle switch.

I can understand that if you use your on-board volume control to control volume. I always run my two volumes on the VV circuit all the way open, in general, and only pull back the neck pick up control to add 'punch' to the sound. So, volume control is a moot point for me.

However, as you point out, if you use the volume control on the bass often in a gigging situation, then it seems volume/blend is the only way to go.

Also, on basses like the MTD, Lakland, Fodera, etc... in other words, fat, mid punchy boutique style basses, I find the whole volume/blend vs. volume/volume thing kind of moot, since I typically run those types of basses with both pickups wide open, and can add mid punch through the active mid control on the on-board preamp.

It's J style instruments with two band EQ's or passive (especially 70's era style J instruments) where the volume/volume works better for me, since backing off the neck pickup to varying levels is the way I get the mid boost that is sometimes needed for certain tunes and playing techniques.

Interesting discussion

 

[ArwinH]

So, Ken, Do you find taht on the sadowsky's that the blend knob still works ok, given it does have a two band eq? does rolling the blend knob back achieve the same results for you as the vol/vol setup does.

I also find myself rolling back on the neck pickup to add that mid punch on my passive jazz, and I think I'd miss that on a Sadowsky, for example, because of the vol/blend/bass/treble controls. Whereas a vol/vol setup would seem more preferable.

 

[KJung]

So, Ken, Do you find taht on the sadowsky's that the blend knob still works ok, given it does have a two band eq? does rolling the blend knob back achieve the same results for you as the vol/vol setup does.

I also find myself rolling back on the neck pickup to add that mid punch on my passive jazz, and I think I'd miss that on a Sadowsky, for example, because of the vol/blend/bass/treble controls. Whereas a vol/vol setup would seem more preferable.

I do use the blend control on the Sadowsky that way. It works OK... no better or no worse than any other volume/blend I've had. There's a very, very small amount of 'blend' capability with it that is within the first 5% of 'off center'. It works OK.... and I many times just move the blend very slightly off center favoring the bridge pickup to add some fingerstyle definition. It just doesn't have the precision and variability as the volume/volume circuit in my Celinder.

It's definitely not a deal breaker or anything, and it is nice to have that single volume control to turn off between sets, etc. But the blending capability of the volume volume sure is nice, and again, very superior to the volume/blend IMO.

Edit: Also, even though I'm an ash/maple guy through and through, I ended up getting a rosewood/Alder Sadowsky, given the very bright and somewhat scooped sound of the Sadowsky J type basses with the standard hum cancelling pickups. That wood combination still has plenty of sizzle and pop, but it does seem to bring out more mid punch than the very bright maple/ash versions. The VTC really is usefull also for warming it up and taking off the sizzle when needed. Kind of off topic... but you brought up the Sadowsky, so thought I would throw it in!

 

[vision]

if only they made a vol/vol/ master vol.........

+1!!! I wonder why noone has done this yet...I'm not a big fan of using the amp to adjust my volume while playing, I like to just set it and never touch the amp. Which is why I always use the master volume on my bass...but it would be nice to have more usable tonal options with a vol/vol setup...

 

[Ernieballer]

I'm ordering a Sadowsky real soon and was curious as to how the blend works on the sads. Do you encounter this on/off effect even with a Sadowsky?
(Sorry for changing the topic but I did start the post so I guess thats okay)

 

[Tbirdbassist]

I pretty recently (Januray or Febuary of this year)had my Ibanez wired Volume-Blend-Tone. I have a set of Dimarzio Ultra Jazz pups in it.

I usually have my pan knob set may be one or two "notches" towards the bridge. If I swing cut either pickup there is a volume raise, significantly louder than it with both on in the center position. It only occurs though when the knob is one way or the other, never while I'm panning.

I prefer having basses with a blend knob. I like doing volume swells and thats kind of difficult to accomplish on a V-V-T/EQ bass. I'm pretty sure that my future passive basses will be this way and all my basses with onboard EQ's will have blend pots.

Although I wouldn't mind trying a bass that had a master volume along with individual pickup volume knobs.


My $0.02

 

[KJung]

I'm ordering a Sadowsky real soon and was curious as to how the blend works on the sads. Do you encounter this on/off effect even with a Sadowsky?
(Sorry for changing the topic but I did start the post so I guess thats okay)

See my previous post talking about that on this thread. The Sadowsky blend works similarly to all others. It's not a big problem or anything, and I probably gig with my Sadowsky more than any of my other basses. I just prefer the volume/volume thing if I had a choice (and the lack of a 'master volume' is a negative on the vv circuit... everything is a trade-off). I would not let my personal preference for volume/volume put your off on the wonderful Sadowsky basses.

If you are getting a Metro, I would highly recommend the VTC option.... VERY nice with those basses IMO.

 

[NOLA Bass]

I bought an EMG blend pot for one of my Spectors. I just hate having to turn off two volumes between songs when playing live. I usually play with both pickups on full anyway, so I really go for the convenient route of the blend pot. I'll be curious to see if it affects the tone of the bass at all.

 

[thepontif]

The issue is that with 4 250k elements in parallel with each other, the impedance of the circuit is 62.5k ohms where with 3 250k elements the impedance is is about 83.3k ohms. Just like with 4 8 ohm speakers in parallel vs. 3 8 ohm speakers. The amp will behave differently into 3 speakers than 4. Having a balancer and a master volume is electrically the same as having a volume for each PU, a master volume, and a tone control (which might be a solution for some of you, actually). The master volume "loads" the balancer and can make it behave strangely. Another issue is that most balancers are LINEAR taper from center to full which is only a half a turn anyway, where a volume control has an audio taper and a full rotation. Of COURSE vol/vol is more sensitive. I've found that in a Fodera with Barts, the balancer is really frustrating. With SD's or Aeros it's fine. In my bass, with SD's, the path when active is balancer-preamp-volume-output driver. The preamp buffers the balancer from the volume control. In my bass I don't have any difficulties with "fine tuning" the blend control.

The new Fodera preamp now actually exists. There are two in service and one more on my bench. One of the big improvements we made was a double bypass situation. The bypass switch switches 2 separate active stages in and out at the same time. So the signal goes...
PU's-balancer-tone-gain/buffer/EQ-volume-output driver

This way, the volume control's position has no effect on the sound, it doesn't load the balancer, and the ouput impedance is a nice, steady 600ohms regardless of volume, which is WAY lower than most, if not all internal preamps. It'll swamp out cable capacitance even in a cheap cable. The better news is that noise is reduced because we actually have a driven active ground and ground planes which help to hold ground good and steady in the even that noise picked up by the cable tries to move ground around, and even better is that the whole circuit only draws MICROamps of current. Considerably less than 1mA. This means about 650 hours WORST CASE battery life.
There's a lot more that's improved in it, but this "balancer issue" is one we addressed. My $0.02.