Amp Gain vs Volume with Active or Passive Bass

[Al Krow]

I was sensing last night at band rehearsal that I could have done with my passive Yammy P/J bass punching through the mix a little more, and thinking that probably the quickest way to get there (given that I'd already given the low and high mids a little boost) was by adjusting the balance between the gain and the master/volume but keeping the overall volume the same.

Be interested to hear what my fellow BCers preferences are with your amp settings for gain and master/volume settings on your amps and particularly how it changes when you're swapping from an active to a passive bass, if at all?

Are you finding you're going for a different gain / volume mix on your amp with passive basses to give it a bit more of kick in the mix and vice versa with active basses?

Or are you dealing with all of this on a dedicated preamp / pedal and keeping the amp's preamp settings pretty neutral?

Be great if you share what your signal chain is in terms of bass / pups and amp or what your preamp / pedal is, if that's your preference.

Edited October 9, 2018 by Al Krow

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

Running higher gain with lower volume gives less clean headroom, for a dirtier sound. Running lower gain with higher volume gives a cleaner sound. As for active versus passive, active has higher output, so it tends to clip more easily when played through the passive input. All the active input does is to lower the input gain, also giving more headroom and cleaner tone.

[Saved]

I use to have volume at maximum and set tbe desired level from the gain knob

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

That's OK if you want the cleanest sound possible. You'd do the opposite for the dirtiest sound possible.

[itu]

Usually I try to set the gain as high as possible without distortion to fill the channel and lessen the noise. If overdriven sound is needed my amp (Soul) can make that happen, too but I use a fuzz or a tube OD for that. Very low preamp and high power amp level is the key to produce excessive noise that I find unnecessary.

Active does not equal louder by definition. My active single coils (Benedetti) are not as loud as passive humbuckers (Delano, Q-tuner).

But the big difference is the impedance: active is low Z and passive is high Z. This has a lot to do how the first pedal (or in case of just cable, the first amp stage) behaves. And this is the reason why an OD or fuzz has different sound with different electronics. Nowadays I have one pedal board for passive basses and another for active ones. Amptweaker tight bass fuzz for low Z and Spruce effects Old growth fuzz for passive. Other effects that seem to be pretty Z-dependent are compressors. Side-by-side comparison showed so many issues that now I have tce Hypergravity (for low Z), Daring Audio Phat beam and Fairfield Accountor. Especially these passive bass compressors are not transparent but that is something I just happen to like. I try to set (pedal) gains so that the levels are all the same.

[Al Krow]

2 hours ago, Bill Fitzmaurice said:

Running higher gain with lower volume gives less clean headroom, for a dirtier sound. Running lower gain with higher volume gives a cleaner sound. As for active versus passive, active has higher output, so it tends to clip more easily when played through the passive input. All the active input does is to lower the input gain, also giving more headroom and cleaner tone.

I appreciate this maybe a bit of newbie point, but

• Gain is pre EQ
• Master / Volume is post EQ

So if you want to maximise the impact from your amp's EQ e.g. if, like me, you want to boost the mids, does it make any difference which of Gain or Volume is given preference (whilst maintaining the overall output level the same)?

I'm guessing you'd set the signal that was pre EQ low i.e. a relatively low gain and then amplify the signal that had been modulated by the EQ i.e. a relatively high volume?

Or is the clean / distortion impact of low / high gain the dominating factor?

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

The EQ has the same effect either way. A decibel is a decibel.

[Al Krow]

1 minute ago, Bill Fitzmaurice said:

The EQ has the same effect either way. A decibel is a decibel.

I'm definitely being slow on the conceptual uptake here.

Are there any decent charts you could point me to?

[Woodinblack]

My TC450 has quite a high impedance input so it doesn't make any difference if it is passive or active. I also just set the gain to as high as it goes without clipping, and then adjust the volume with the volume, but this is because it is a clean linear amplifier in effect.

However, if I was using something valvey, then it would make a difference where I set it. But I don't use that currently, so I will answer again in a few weeks! 

[Al Krow]

20 minutes ago, Woodinblack said:

My TC450 has quite a high impedance input so it doesn't make any difference if it is passive or active. I also just set the gain to as high as it goes without clipping, and then adjust the volume with the volume, but this is because it is a clean linear amplifier in effect.

However, if I was using something valvey, then it would make a difference where I set it. But I don't use that currently, so I will answer again in a few weeks! 

You're definitely teasing about this new valve amp you've got coming! Looking forward to hearing all about it! 😎 

[chris_b]

If my EQ was set as usual and I wasn't "punching through the mix" I'd start by getting the other guys to turn down. If that didn't work I try turning my master volume up.

I use one bass per gig, so I don't swap between active and passive basses. I can't see any advantage in doing this.

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

I've used the same bass for 20 odd years, don't quite understand the need for more than one. Whatever tone changes I make from song to song I do with my hands.

[Al Krow]

6 hours ago, chris_b said:

If my EQ was set as usual and I wasn't "punching through the mix" I'd start by getting the other guys to turn down. If that didn't work I try turning my master volume up.

I use one bass per gig, so I don't swap between active and passive basses. I can't see any advantage in doing this.

I also use just one bass per gig, but the bass I'm using will change depending on the band / genre. In particular I've started to use a passive P for one band and an active J with the other. The active J seems to be able to cut through more easily, whilst being at the same volume. 

 

[LukeFRC]

My passive and active inputs have different impediences. My G&L L1000 is passive but super hot pickups, but if I stick it in the active input, while the volume is lower it messes up the (passive) bass and treble controls. 

[Al Krow]

22 minutes ago, LukeFRC said:

My passive and active inputs have different impediences. My G&L L1000 is passive but super hot pickups, but if I stick it in the active input, while the volume is lower it messes up the (passive) bass and treble controls. 

That can make all the difference, I agree.

My LM3 Markbass head doesn't have an active / passive switch; whereas both my DG M900 and Mesa M6 Carbine do. 

[Woodinblack]

1 hour ago, Al Krow said:

I also use just one bass per gig, but the bass I'm using will change depending on the band / genre. In particular I've started to use a passive P for one band and an active J with the other. The active J seems to be able to cut through more easily, whilst being at the same volume.

Pretty grown up. The bass I use depends on what I want it to look like and what I feel like playing

[Vinny]

I have a passive PJ Yam (BB415) and find the signal a lot louder than my active Ibanez. I tend to dial in a touch more drive to dirty up the Ibanez, but that's about it.

[scalpy]

14 hours ago, LukeFRC said:

My passive and active inputs have different impediences. My G&L L1000 is passive but super hot pickups, but if I stick it in the active input, while the volume is lower it messes up the (passive) bass and treble controls. 

You beat me to it! My ASAT has the loudest pickups so the gain on my LM tube is barely on. I still prefer to do that than back the bass’ volume off and raise the gain. However, my LB100 has a much lower output, the gain is much higher and I think this does more to bring the amp’s tone out. 

[Woodinblack]

22 hours ago, Al Krow said:

You're definitely teasing about this new valve amp you've got coming! Looking forward to hearing all about it! 😎 

Its here! 

 

[Al Krow]

1 hour ago, Vinny said:

I have a passive PJ Yam (BB415) and find the signal a lot louder than my active Ibanez. I tend to dial in a touch more drive to dirty up the Ibanez, but that's about it.

The BB415 I'm guessing has similar pups to the BB425, which I know is a beast!

Which Ibby do you have is it a Standard with Barts or a Premium with big single Nords? The Nords cut through the mix like a knife through butter, but I think the Standard Barts are little more tame. 

But my question is less just about volume and more about being able to cut through the mix in a band setting. 

[Vinny]

49 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

The BB415 I'm guessing has similar pups to the BB425, which I know is a beast!

Which Ibby do you have is it a Standard with Barts or a Premium with big single Nords? The Nords cut through the mix like a knife through butter, but I think the Standard Barts are little more tame. 

But my question is less just about volume and more about being able to cut through the mix in a band setting. 

I'm pretty sure the 415 and 425 are the same electrics-wise, though the 415 obviously sounds better as it has a matching headstock.😀

I have a BTB675 with the small-logo'd Barts in (which I think means they are made under licence) and the Bartolini pixie-wrangling gubbins as opposed to the Ibanez one. The Yam has fairly dark-sounding flats on, but still somehow manages to growl like a muthafunkster, whereas the BTB needs that extra bit of overdrive to get anywhere near, even with rounds on. I've been undecided as to whether it's the pickups or the EQ/pre that can be a bit clean. (not that it doesn't have its place)

Oh, and I pretty much never play without a BB-1X in there. 

Edited October 10, 2018 by Vinny
cos I forgot me pedal.

[fleabag]

Some play a fretless as well as a fretted, so 2 basses would be a necessity in that case. Otherwise,  i'm with those who use one bass.  If i need an EQ change, i just stomp on a preset graphic on my Zoom B3.

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

On 09/10/2018 at 17:29, Al Krow said:

I'm definitely being slow on the conceptual uptake here.

Are there any decent charts you could point me to?

No chart required. When you change the signal level or EQ by 1dB at any point in the signal chain, be it the bass itself, a pedal, in the amp pre or amp EQ or anything plugged into an effects loop, the change at the amp output will also be 1dB. A 2dB change in the signal chain is a 2dB change at the output, a 3dB change in the signal chain is a 3dB change at the output, and so forth. 

Quote

But my question is less just about volume and more about being able to cut through the mix in a band setting. 

Turn up the mids.

Quote

I've started to use a passive P for one band and an active J with the other. The active J seems to be able to cut through more easily, whilst being at the same volume. 

That's because the configuration of the JBass pickup give less low end than the PBass pickup, which translates into more mids compared to lows with the JBass.