anybody else a passive person?

visa

New member
I don't really like the idea of activeness... although I suspect if I learned to do it right I might love the sound.

I just like the idea of you know, a 4 string p/j or similar bass with two or three knobs (one each pickup, one volume?) and that's it.
 
Me. I have 3 passive basses and 1 active that I only keep as a backup.

Spector NS2 with passive Bill Lawrence P/J
Custom Jazz with FSR overwound 70s Jazz p/ups
CIJ '62Precision with stock p/up

Godin SD Pro Ltd with SPB-2 and SJB-2 with Basslines 2-band eq

I like passives way more and nothing is worse than running flat halfway thru a gig. Besides when you play 3-4 nites a week, passives is cheaper :P
 
I think it's EMGs that kinda turned me off actives. They're great recording pickups but somewhat sterile. I had a pair of 40DCs on my Warmoth Jazz V and P/J set on the Spector. Couldn't really get into that tone, but it was great for recording. The Spector was very Pat Badger.
 
i've got 1 active and 1 passive...
somehow there's always something about a good passive precision and jazz that an active bass will never emulate.
 
Me! Marcus Miller Jazz Bass run in passive mode and a stock '57 Pbass. \m/

But I'll be leaving the passive side soon.. Lakland by the end of the year ;)
 
I tend towards active as I prefer the sound "brighter", at least to my ears lah...

Also have a passive - old Gibson Ripper, but haven't used it in quite a bit... but i remembered the sound to be a lot "mellower".

Well, to each his/her own eh?
 
I don't necessarily think that one is better than the other. It really depends on the situation. I think an active bass is more 'convenient' tonewise especially in Singapore where backline is provided, and you don't know what amps you might get, or if you record a lot direct.

On the other hand, I like the simplicity of passives, and I always gig with my own rig so the preamp on my Eden suffices.

What I don't understand is bassists who have a bass with every conceivable cut and boost and then spend an entire set tweaking their bass-tone controls when the solution could just be a parametric tweak away. Then "The preamp on this bass is so good I don't even have to tweak my amp!". Isn't that what the preamp controls are for?

IMO, I think that a lot of 'active-phobia' can be attributed to cut-cost preamps in mid-range basses. After all, the preamp is one of the first corners cut in budget instruments.

Just my 2-cents worth.
 
Possession said:
I don't necessarily think that one is better than the other. It really depends on the situation. I think an active bass is more 'convenient' tonewise especially in Singapore where backline is provided, and you don't know what amps you might get, or if you record a lot direct.

On the other hand, I like the simplicity of passives, and I always gig with my own rig so the preamp on my Eden suffices.

What I don't understand is bassists who have a bass with every conceivable cut and boost and then spend an entire set tweaking their bass-tone controls when the solution could just be a parametric tweak away. Then "The preamp on this bass is so good I don't even have to tweak my amp!". Isn't that what the preamp controls are for?

IMO, I think that a lot of 'active-phobia' can be attributed to cut-cost preamps in mid-range basses. After all, the preamp is one of the first corners cut in budget instruments.

Just my 2-cents worth.

sorry bro,my english not good,kinda confused when reading the last few lines,so in simple english,you're trying to say...? :wink:
 
I'm gonna join the passive ranks for the first time soon... really excited about it. Will keep you guys posted!
 
reyrey said:
Possession said:
I don't necessarily think that one is better than the other. It really depends on the situation. I think an active bass is more 'convenient' tonewise especially in Singapore where backline is provided, and you don't know what amps you might get, or if you record a lot direct.

On the other hand, I like the simplicity of passives, and I always gig with my own rig so the preamp on my Eden suffices.

What I don't understand is bassists who have a bass with every conceivable cut and boost and then spend an entire set tweaking their bass-tone controls when the solution could just be a parametric tweak away. Then "The preamp on this bass is so good I don't even have to tweak my amp!". Isn't that what the preamp controls are for?

IMO, I think that a lot of 'active-phobia' can be attributed to cut-cost preamps in mid-range basses. After all, the preamp is one of the first corners cut in budget instruments.

Just my 2-cents worth.

sorry bro,my english not good,kinda confused when reading the last few lines,so in simple english,you're trying to say...? :wink:

Rather buy a cheap passive bass than an equivalently priced active one because the preamp is usually not very good.
 
I've trodden on both paths before and I still prefer to stay on the passive side of things.

Just did a studio recording recently and went through three different basses. Ended up recording the final track with a passive MIJ '75 reissue Jazz Bass.

The passive route will definitely present some problems like single coil hum and less tone shaping, but I personally like the transparency and warmth that I'm able to get with passive basses.

I still love my active Frankenstein, but if given a choice, I would swap out all it's pickups for a good set of passive ones. Unless of course they were active barts, then I might reconsider.... :twisted:
 
Eh... nothing beats a good ol' J or P for recording! They sit so well in the mix and they're really easy for the sound engineer to tweak if need be.

However! When playing live, anything goes :twisted:
 
Back
Top