Is there a reason for the apparent dislike for active basses...

[Musicman20]

Re: Battery - I go through my basses once every 9 months or so and tune them, clean them down, play them for a while and if they are active, check the battery situation. If the bass isn't going to be played for some time then I take the battery out.

[No lust in Jazz]

I go through phases of preferring one sound over another, but 'issues' present themselves, if for instance, I'm playing a passive bass for any length of time and change to an active bass without thinking about the EQ and its various options, I can rapidly lose patience with the active system, I accept that this is down to me, not the bass.

If you can't manage the battery, have spares etc. Active basses may not be for you.

Edited January 19, 2017 by No lust in Jazz

[BigRedX]

[quote name='mcnach' timestamp='1484783293' post='3218504']

Do you find you like the EQ sections in all preamps? I don't. The preamp on my Stingray is nothing like the EQ section on my LMIII or my Streamliner 900 which is again different. And there's a good reason why they're different. So no, onboard preamps do not necessarily duplicate the controls on your amp. That's like saying that all basses sound the same.
[/quote]

TBH apart from a GK amp in the rehearsal room that had a generally confusing control layout, I don't think I've ever come across an amp that I couldn't get EQ'd to give me the sound that I wanted out of my bass.

And for me, in a band mix (and lets face it, that what really matters) most basses do sound the same. Although I think that's mostly down to me adjusting my playing technique and amp EQ settings to get the sound I want.

Maybe other people will play up the strengths and weaknesses in sound of different basses. I find myself tending to play them down. These days my choice of bass to use is entirely down to image and how easy it is the play the songs on it.

[lowhand_mike]

dont get the 'tone is all in the fingers' comment, what a load of tosh, some of it is yes but not all of it. i cant add bass or treble just by moving position or plucking harder.
i like my basses, i like their sound, one is active one is active/passive which i use in active mode and i have a passive jazz that i rarely use.
i set my core sound at the amp and then tweek for each song if neccesary on the bass adding or cutting were needed.

[Ghost_Bass]

[quote name='lowhand_mike' timestamp='1484820313' post='3218676']
dont get the 'tone is all in the fingers' comment, what a load of tosh, some of it is yes but not all of it. i cant add bass or treble just by moving position or plucking harder.
(...)
[/quote]

Sure you can! Moving the right hand closer to the neck will produce a bassier sound and close to the bridge the mids/highs will be more predominant. I do it all the time. Combine this with the way you attack the strings and you get a pretty decent tonal variety without touching the controls.

[quote name='Jazzjames' timestamp='1484810925' post='3218568']
In my experience of using a bass equipped with a Glock preamp, the battery would last 6-9 weeks. That's practise plus rehearsals plus gigs as it was my only bass at the time. I was obviously doing something wrong... Too much practice? Too many gigs? Please advise.

In all seriousness though, I think I made my point much earlier in the thread- I prefer the sound of passive instruments right now. That's the main reason for me.
[/quote]

If you were going through a battery evry 6-9 weeks then either you played really a lot for long periods and good job for that or something was wrong with your setup - the preamp might been faulty or something that most people might not know is that to completely disconnect the battery when not using the bass they need to remove the jack, flipping the preamp to passive doesn't take the battery out of the circuit.

[mcnach]

[quote name='Jazzjames' timestamp='1484810925' post='3218568']
In my experience of using a bass equipped with a Glock preamp, the battery would last 6-9 weeks. That's practise plus rehearsals plus gigs as it was my only bass at the time. I was obviously doing something wrong... Too much practice? Too many gigs? Please advise.

In all seriousness though, I think I made my point much earlier in the thread- I prefer the sound of passive instruments right now. That's the main reason for me.
[/quote]

That sounds extreme. I heard of preamps eating up batteries but usually there was a bad connection that drained the batteries. Some preamps have higher consumption than others but 6-9 weeks? I owned a bass with a 3-band Glockenklang preamp... not sure what model, it was around 2007, the one that in passive mode still allowed a passive tone control to be used. I can't say how long it'd take to die, but it was certainly in the "many months" range and that bass got a lot of use too. But your preamp may be different. I'd change battery at the beginning of every month if I had that bass, to avoid worrying... but if I were you I'd check whether that is normal behaviour for that preamp. It may be absolutely fine and it's just a high consumption design, but as those are relatively rare I'd check, just for peace of mind.

And agreed completely: whatever we personally prefer is fine, there's no absolute better or worse here.

[mcnach]

[quote name='hiram.k.hackenbacker' timestamp='1484820243' post='3218673']
....and under no circumstances should you be allowed to own a torch!
[/quote]

what about a solar powered torch...

oh...

[mcnach]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1484820306' post='3218675']
TBH apart from a GK amp in the rehearsal room that had a generally confusing control layout, I don't think I've ever come across an amp that I couldn't get EQ'd to give me the sound that I wanted out of my bass.
[/quote]

Of course. I always get a reasonable sound too, but that's not to say I like every preamp and/or that I don't have preferences, and some sound nearly right out of the box and others require more work and their design make it harder to get the right sound I want. I found the GK preamps generally to my taste (lots of options, but I tended to leave them quite flat, so it was easy), the LM3 works quite well for me to allowing me to modify exactly what I want to. The Streamliner 900 is a bit of a struggle by comparison. I make it work, but I don't enjoy it. Similarly, the preamps on my Stingrays (2EQ and 2EQ + semiparametric mids) are a breeze to use for me and I much prefer to deal with that.

There are differences. I care.

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1484820306' post='3218675']
And for me, in a band mix (and lets face it, that what really matters) most basses do sound the same.
[/quote]

my Stingray will never sound the same as my Precision or P/JJ. They all work. But some do certain things better than others. They most certainly don't sound the same to me, which is why I have different basses. I use just one at any given gig, because they all work, and the onboard controls (some active, some passive) give me the differences I need. Some songs require a deeper woolier tone and I may cut down treble and play closer to the neck, others a more middy and well defined sound so I may cut down bass a bit and leave treble neutral and play over the bridge pickup... etc. Some require a trebly "clang"... I adjust that on my bass. I don't touch the amp controls after the first song. Of course it's my preference and neither better or worse than anybody else's approach, it just tires me to hear comments that essentially say "well, I think this approach that I use works just fine so it's a little ridiculous to do anything else" even if they use nicer words

[Grangur]

[quote name='hiram.k.hackenbacker' timestamp='1484820243' post='3218673']


....and under no circumstances should you be allowed to own a torch!
[/quote]

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B005DQ78OW/ref=pd_aw_sim_200_2/255-2160427-6461542?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=ZN9F8XQVJ9WQGETCJSK9

I wonder what it would take to have a wind up bass?

[markstuk]

My dingwall charging through the Jack socket.. Simples... P-retro... ABZ made active

Edited January 19, 2017 by markstuk

[lowhand_mike]

[quote name='Ghost_Bass' timestamp='1484826101' post='3218772']
Sure you can! Moving the right hand closer to the neck will produce a bassier sound and close to the bridge the mids/highs will be more predominant. I do it all the time. Combine this with the way you attack the strings and you get a pretty decent tonal variety without touching the controls.
[/quote]

like i said some of it, but you cant do both positions at the same time so you are limited, on-board eq does that instead

[stingrayPete1977]

Passive basses are totally fine......














for beginners

[lowhand_mike]

[quote name='hiram.k.hackenbacker' timestamp='1484832625' post='3218881']
Forgive him. He knows not what he says

Hopefully blue will never read this thread!
[/quote]

Hah!

[Chienmortbb]

[quote name='TrevorR' timestamp='1484613942' post='3216927']
Personally I love active basses. All my basses have been active or very soon became active. Why? Well, I personally like to have the ability to drive my tone from the bass and a smooth pickup pan facility. I love Jazz basses but can't get on with the two volume set up. Pan pot every time.

And I change batteries regularly enough that sudden battery death isn't an overriding worry.



And my approach is the opposite of this. My amp is adjusted at sound check (simply any necessary room based tweaks to a largely flat EQ setting) and then tonal changes all come from the bass - from changes in pickup pan, EQ or plucking style and position. Horses, courses etc. Neither approach is right or wrong.
[/quote]I think your way is right. Adjust your amp for the room, set and forget. Use the EQ on your bass to make changes per song.

[Jazzjames]

[quote name='Ghost_Bass' timestamp='1484826101' post='3218772']
If you were going through a battery evry 6-9 weeks then either you played really a lot for long periods and good job for that or something was wrong with your setup - the preamp might been faulty or something that most people might not know is that to completely disconnect the battery when not using the bass they need to remove the jack, flipping the preamp to passive doesn't take the battery out of the circuit.
[/quote]

4-6 hours' practice 6 days a week plus classes 3 times a week (playing there too), plus rehearsals, plus gigs every week. It all adds up I guess. I still loved that bass. A first generation Sandberg California 5 string Jazz. i don't think anything was wrong with it, it was just being played very often.

When you have a bass that responds how you like and sounds great on every song without fiddling with the amp etc., it's a keeper.

[Low End Bee]

[quote name='Jazzjames' timestamp='1484839825' post='3218987']
4-6 hours' practice 6 days a week plus classes 3 times a week (playing there too), plus rehearsals, plus gigs every week. It all adds up I guess. I still loved that bass. A first generation Sandberg California 5 string Jazz. i don't think anything was wrong with it, it was just being played very often.

When you have a bass that responds how you like and sounds great on every song without fiddling with the amp etc., it's a keeper.
[/quote]

There's your battery problem. I doubt I do 4-6 hours practice a year. Plus jazz. All those notes.

Edited January 19, 2017 by Low End Bee

[BigRedX]

[quote name='Chienmortbb' timestamp='1484839415' post='3218982']
I think your way is right. Adjust your amp for the room, set and forget. Use the EQ on your bass to make changes per song.
[/quote]

Two problems with this approach:

1. You can't fix what is mostly a time domain problem (bad room acoustics) with a frequency domain solution (EQ).

2. And if you could, then every time you make an EQ adjustment on your bass, you are potentially negating the correction you've applied at your amp.

[Ghost_Bass]

[quote name='Jazzjames' timestamp='1484839825' post='3218987']
4-6 hours' practice 6 days a week plus classes 3 times a week (playing there too), plus rehearsals, plus gigs every week. It all adds up I guess. I still loved that bass. A first generation Sandberg California 5 string Jazz. i don't think anything was wrong with it, it was just being played very often.

When you have a bass that responds how you like and sounds great on every song without fiddling with the amp etc., it's a keeper.
[/quote]

Ah, good for you. Nice to be that busy playing Now i clearly see where you're comming from in your opinion.

Well, i must say it's really normal to go through batteries like you did. The cool thing with that bass you had is that you allways had the choice to flip it to passive when needed and Glock preamps are excelent at reproducing the same sound and volume flat as they are active with knobs at centre position. In adition it offers passive tone control in passive mode, really great preamps and my choice of preference for a natural non-colouring tone.

If i was in your position i would probably use it in passive for classes and most rehearsalls leaving the tonal goodness for gigs thus saving battery life... hell! no i wouldn't! i would end up buying half dozen batteries a year and have great tone allways!

Cheers

[mcnach]

[quote name='Low End Bee' timestamp='1484840180' post='3218994']
There's your battery problem. I doubt I do 4-6 hours practice a year. Plus jazz. All those notes.
[/quote]

"All those notes"



Glad I had just finished my drink...

[Jazzjames]

[quote name='Ghost_Bass' timestamp='1484844806' post='3219043']


Ah, good for you. Nice to be that busy playing Now i clearly see where you're comming from in your opinion.

Well, i must say it's really normal to go through batteries like you did. The cool thing with that bass you had is that you allways had the choice to flip it to passive when needed and Glock preamps are excelent at reproducing the same sound and volume flat as they are active with knobs at centre position. In adition it offers passive tone control in passive mode, really great preamps and my choice of preference for a natural non-colouring tone.

If i was in your position i would probably use it in passive for classes and most rehearsalls leaving the tonal goodness for gigs thus saving battery life... hell! no i wouldn't! i would end up buying half dozen batteries a year and have great tone allways!

Cheers
[/quote]

It was a lovely bass that one. A little heavy, but it will always be the bass I got my chops together on. That was before my P bass days though. Once I started gigging with a P bass, I never used it anymore.

[blue]

I've been gigging my G&L ASAT bass with active pre-amp lately.

I really like it, solid and quiet.

I had one if those a active Fender Jags, noisy as hell. I got rid of it.

Blue

[TrevorR]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1484843585' post='3219030']
Two problems with this approach:

1. You can't fix what is mostly a time domain problem (bad room acoustics) with a frequency domain solution (EQ).
[/quote]

Ooooooh, not sure that I buy that from a physics point of view. If a room has resonances which artificially amplify certain frequency ranges to cause those to "bloom" and "boom" then reducing the input signal into the room in those frequencies (i.e. eq-ing them out/reducing at the amp) will reduce the level of the resonant frequencies in the room - the amount of boom. That is surely what people mean when they say they "adjust the EQ to suit the room"? That's why sound engineers/designers measure the frequency response of rooms in which they install PA systems with white and pink noise and then set graphic EQs to reduce (or enhance) frequencies which are dominant (or phase cancel a bit).


[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1484843585' post='3219030']
2. And if you could, then every time you make an EQ adjustment on your bass, you are potentially negating the correction you've applied at your amp.
[/quote]

If step 1 normalises the sound in the room to approximate what you expect to hear from the amp in a more neutral environment all you are doing is then varying the desired tone from the bass around your approximate bass amp colouration. As anyone does when changing the tone from your amp. It's a bit like saying "Why on earth would you set up your amp with a certain setting for your P-bass and then for some songs roll back the tone knob...? You're ruining the sound you set on your amp."

What you are suggesting is, say, reducing the amp EQ at 100hz by 20db (with a Q width of say 30hz) to correct for a room resonance and then boosting the signal from the bass at 100hz by 20db (with a Q width of say 30hz)... only in that circumstance are you undoing the amp correction... and, let's face it, that's not how changes in tone from the bass works.

Edited January 19, 2017 by TrevorR

[Skybone]

For me it's about the sound. My first few basses were passive. They sounded alright at the time, but I traded up.

My first active, a Westone Thunder 1a, really did sound good and played really well (weighed a ton though!). So I started working my way through numerous active basses, including a couple of StingRay's. The last 3 or 4 active's I owned played really well, looked great, [i]but[/i], try as I might, I couldn't get a sound I liked out of them. I played with the EQ's, changed strings, tweaked pre-amp settings etc., etc. I could not find a sound I was happy with. They sounded OK in the shop when I tried them out, but were a massive let down when I got them home.

After getting more frustrated, I tried someone's passive bass. Loved it, got a great sound out of it with my gear, so, went out to the local music shop, tried a number of different basses out, cam away with an MIM Jazz. Kept that for a few years until I got my hands on a 4003. I don't think I'll be in a hurry to go back to active's.

[BigRedX]

[quote name='TrevorR' timestamp='1484861091' post='3219269']
Ooooooh, not sure that I buy that from a physics point of view. If a room has resonances which artificially amplify certain frequency ranges to cause those to "bloom" and "boom" then reducing the input signal into the room in those frequencies (i.e. eq-ing them out/reducing at the amp) will reduce the level of the resonant frequencies in the room - the amount of boom. That is surely what people mean when they say they "adjust the EQ to suit the room"? That's why sound engineers/designers measure the frequency response of rooms in which they install PA systems with white and pink noise and then set graphic EQs to reduce (or enhance) frequencies which are dominant (or phase cancel a bit).
[/quote]

The problem is that the frequencies that are enhanced or reduced by the acoustics of the room depend to a certain extent on the position of the sound source and also that of the listener. So using EQ correct the problem may well make it go away at some points but can also be too much correction or make it much worse at others. EQ will get you some of the way towards correcting room acoustic problems but it's not a consistent solution for the whole room.

Remember that if you could sort out the acoustics of the room completely by using EQ then recording studio control rooms wouldn't need lots of expensive acoustic treatment to give the engineer and producer the ideal listening environment. They could simply slap a 31 band graphic in front of the control room speakers and use a spectrum analyser to set it up. In fact this was actually fashionable for about 15 minutes in budget studios in the mid 80s until everyone realised that it only worked at the point at which the sound was being sampled and that the required correction changed every time the something in the room moved.

[TrevorR]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1484867220' post='3219352']
The problem is that the frequencies that are enhanced or reduced by the acoustics of the room depend to a certain extent on the position of the sound source and also that of the listener. So using EQ correct the problem may well make it go away at some points but can also be too much correction or make it much worse at others. EQ will get you some of the way towards correcting room acoustic problems but it's not a consistent solution for the whole room.

Remember that if you could sort out the acoustics of the room completely by using EQ then recording studio control rooms wouldn't need lots of expensive acoustic treatment to give the engineer and producer the ideal listening environment. They could simply slap a 31 band graphic in front of the control room speakers and use a spectrum analyser to set it up. In fact this was actually fashionable for about 15 minutes in budget studios in the mid 80s until everyone realised that it only worked at the point at which the sound was being sampled and that the required correction changed every time the something in the room moved.
[/quote]

Indeed, but we all do it, don't we? Especially to get an acceptable sound from our backline amps on "stage" which we can live with/perform with ("stage" in inverted commas given the huge range of positions/structures that pass for a stage in the course of a gigging life) . Any room will have its acoustic quirks and, as you say you'll maybe get massive cancellation in one spot and massive reinforcement in another. You'd be hard pressed to get perfect sound dispersion from a twiddle on a three or four band amp EQ stage (esp at a "backline only" gig or with a non-permanent/non-calibrated sound system). But still... most of us will check to see whether we can at least partially address the most gross elements which present either on stage or in the room to get a sound which is livable with. Any further EQ tweaks from the bass will be done for "artistic" rather than acoustic/corrective reasons, taking that compromise amp/PA EQ setting as the baseline sound.