Active Tone controls, what's the point?

amigarobbo

Hero Member
Messages
958
I've spent literally less that 10 minutes on a plugged in bass with active tone controls, a Peavey Dyna bass, back in the late 80s (showing my age there), and something struck me regarding the Bass Mid Treble add/cut controls, which worked fine, but

Peavey-MiniMax-Bass-Head-620x186.jpg


I've already got these controls. Why duplicate them on the bass?

:icon_scratch:

Educate me.
 
Dunno.  As far as a device to create music, I think it's pretty useless. 

Case in point:

a58679cea0ead4faa8f22d5a8b7f3b4f.jpg
 
Passive tone controls are subtractive. That is, you can only cut certain frequencies or frequency ranges. Active controls will not only let you cut certain frequencies or frequency ranges, you can boost them as well.
 
In my experience, active controls on a bass, also introduces a small amount of compression.
 
The idea is to provide on-the-fly control, for when you need to make a tweak without running over to the amp. Unfortunately, a lot of people misuse the onboard controls on basses, thinking that they are to be used all the time. With that being said, this misuse can be good or bad, depending on the player. If it works for you, and makes you happy, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. On the other hand, if we want to get technical, there are some theoretical reasons why onboard preamps' EQs are inferior to quality outboard gear. Good outboard EQs often run on higher voltage rail power supplies, and can make use of very current-hungry components, for the best sound quality, highest headroom, and lowest noise. Onboard preamps, on the other hand, are restricted to a 9V battery (or two), and favor ultra low current opamps/transistors, to get the most life out of it. This is not ideal, but it works fine for the purpose of quick on-the-fly fixes.
 
Good point, but I guess I am lazy.

Its a lot easier for me to dial in a good sounding patch with my bass in passive more, then kick it into active mode for a different tone. The T and B controls are touched, it is the impact of a M boost ant a certain Q of freq.

Basically a less aggressive tone is my passive. Pull a knob to active, and its a much more aggressive tone with no change in volume (as I have it set up right now).
 
I'm not a bass player but I do have a guitar that has active EQ controls from EMG.
I used one of their bass guitar systems but if you look at the spectrum range of these systems they also cover guitar's range.
I put in the flattest, transparent pickups I could find ( Bill Lawrence L500) & can adjust the freq response to add or deduct treble or bass freqs. FYI I tried EMG89s and they sounded horrid in this guitar.
By any means it's not perfect, but it helps add variety of tone in a body,neck wood selection that is a tad bit too edgy and sterile sounding. (Maple body, maple neck with ebony fretboard).
This addition of EQ controls has turned the guitar from a dumpster candidate or failed project, to a workable guitar. Add in a pickup blend control instead of a toggle/lever switch and it has a large palette of tone between the two pickups.

OH, btw, the control lay out is as follows..(Jazzmaster Body, top routed)
Upper bout : Blend control instead of toggle/lever
Lower pickguard: Output socket, Treble EQ, Bass EQ
Lower bout/rounded horn: Master volume.

It doesn't look like a spaceship control panel, very much in keeping with body design.  :icon_thumright:
 
amigarobbo said:
I've spent literally less that 10 minutes on a plugged in bass with active tone controls, a Peavey Dyna bass, back in the late 80s (showing my age there), and something struck me regarding the Bass Mid Treble add/cut controls, which worked fine, but
:blahblah:

Well, it was eBay it, was near me, it cheap(ish) it was White ( :eek: ) I now own a Peavey Dyna-bass with active tone controls,  :eek:ccasion14: and 5 strings!

I've turned into everything I hate!  :rock-on:
 
What's that Sensational Alex Harvey Band song about Truth from Guitars.  ???

[youtube]Qns_LJRqOJI[/youtube]

Anyway, having spent some time on this new (c1992) Peavey bass, I think I can see a good use if you want to go from a passive normal to a really bright or whatever sound, in case you want to a ear wrecking slap bass solo.  :icon_scratch: then go back again. You know, to something musicial*.

Sure you could use a graphic equaliser pedal or something.

(actually, that's not fair the the Active even when flat, does have a very slighly more 'modern' tone, maybe it's less effected by the cable capiance,  :dontknow: )

And I'm surprised by the sound of the Low 'B' String. I wasn't expecting it to be quite that bad.  :dontknow: Still handy 34" thumb rest. Changing from, knackered whatever they were, strings to Rotosound PSD 99** bass strings helped, but I can't say I have a urge to convert my 4 stringers into 5.

* :evil4:

** Piano String Design, Blimey that ball and cone adjustable ball ends was hard work, make it a bit off and thats it, try to bend the cores again, and it's snap city. It's one of those things that's easy when you've done it a couple of times, which of course you only do once every couple of months at best, by which time you've forgotten how to do it. Also the wonderfully 80s sparkly white finish really shows off the blood stains.  :sad1:

Right, I think I've made enough enemy in this post.
 
GENESIS P-ORRIDGE said:
Mark Perry started 'sniffing glue,' made the first xeroxed fanzine at the same time. And he printed this page, learn 3 chords, form a band. Then, in the next issue, he interviewed me and I said, why learn 3 chords? Why learn any chords?


From quite an interesting interview http://www.ziaspace.com/ZIA/sections/news/interviews/Genesis_2000.html that's deeply effected my fretless playing. It's not painfully out of tune, i'm making microtonal music you heathen.  :sad:
 
I'm both a luddite and a techno-nerd/tinkerer.  After waxing back and forth on this my take is - it's not whether it's active or passive. It's function - what do I need to control on the fly from my hands - or alternatively - what needs to be on ALL the time and not tying up my amp controls? RC LPF are ubiquitous only because they're traditional and dirt cheap (which is why they're traditional).  I don't really think it's a super useful on the fly adjustment.

I'm mulling over a piezo build. I've about decided that the 30Hz HPF and 5khz LPF will be built into the bass. I'm not sure what else. I don't want to duplicate a 4 band fully parametric EQ at the instrument. But I *might* consider a shelving bass control for fattening or tightening on the fly.  I was pondering a "P-bass" mode notch or something but I think that belongs in the patch I'm using (Eleven Rack) Same with roll simple LPF -that's kind of a "patch" level decision made for the song.
 
amigarobbo said:
I've spent literally less that 10 minutes on a plugged in bass with active tone controls, a Peavey Dyna bass, back in the late 80s (showing my age there), and something struck me regarding the Bass Mid Treble add/cut controls, which worked fine, but

Peavey-MiniMax-Bass-Head-620x186.jpg


I've already got these controls. Why duplicate them on the bass?

:icon_scratch:

Educate me.

You aren't duplicating them on the bass. You're making the mistake I see a lot of people make which is to assume that somehow the concept of a signal chain doesn't exist out side of GUITAR > PEDALS > AMP > SPEAKERS.

It's much more complex than that. By adjust the EQ prior to amplification you are changing the frequencies that the amplifier will be... well... amplifying. This serves the same effect as a boost or EQ pedal, or even changing pickups. You know how your P90's never sound the same as Tele singles? There you go. The frequencies going into the amp are completely different and the EQ in your amp most likely sits between the preamp and the power amp. What this means is that your preamp has already amplified the frequencies available. It takes a proportional amount of EQ in the opposite direction to remove those frequencies.

The signal chain is much better approached as if it's STRINGS > PICKUP (first EQ and amplification) > PEDALS (further tonal alteration) > PREAMP > AMP EQ > POWER AMP. Depending on the design the EQ and preamp may be inextricably linked. Think of a Mesa Mark series and how the knobs change the gain structure of the amp while the graphic EQ behaves more like the tone shaping you expect.

There's also the likelihood that the onboard bass EQ and the EQ on the amp are voiced differently and you would not be able to get the same range of adjustment on your amp.

So basically feeding a different looking signal into the front end of the amp does not produce the same result as simply turning the knobs on the amp.
 
I had a set of DG20's (second hand from ebay) installed on my squire strat over a decade ago. A little rediculous I know but at the time I wanted to try the active pickups and I could afford not a new set nor a "bona fide" stratocaster.

I remember liking them, especially for the 2 & 4 positions. A sort of honky/blocky sound. I was getting images of an explosive chain, if that makes sense (almost literally a metal chain/links) through an old overdrive pedal. Probably does not make sense  :icon_scratch:. Anyhoo, I remember a time when I just loved to play that guitar, 21 frets, crappy used fretwire and all, and what had been my first electric guitar (of dubious quality by other highbrows)followed by 2 les pauls (epiphone with 81/85 and then a dynamite Heritage with blackbacks E.R proprietary god rest his soul) became once again my number 1, with my uber CO59 Heritage collecting dust i the closet.  :doh:

Not an afficianado by any means (in fact if you tested me aurally, I probably would not even be able to identify subtle differences between pups), you would probably have more difficult time engineering a pickup that I would not like or find unusable than you would engineering a favorite pickup: I guess the range of what I like is much bigger than the range of what I dont like. But...one or two, or three things I did manage to notice about the EMG's was that first they do require a battery, second I found the tone (whatever that was in my mind) to be pretty consistent. And lastly, this realization only just came to light recently of what kind of baby I have become over the years, my muscles, tendons and ligaments struggling sometimes to bend notes to the correct pitch if I my grip does not find purchase on that high e string with enough leverage sometimes the bend with be flat. Its like wtf mman? I used to bend the bejeebus out of my old squire, which leads me to believe that the active pickups may have had something to o with it. I thought I read somewhere that active pickups do not pull the strings as hard as passive, magnets and whatnot.

You know, that Mr. Seymour seems like a nice guy, knowledgeable and all, and I saw a recent A/B demonstration of his blackouts vs. the SA's and they did seem a little brighter, maybe even more clear. But in my heart of ears, I know from my own experience what it was about those active pickups that I loved and seek to find again: SA 2&4 position, and the effortless chiming bell-like pinch harmonics of the 81 and I sucked worse back then than I do now!  :guitaristgif:
Does EMG make s/s/h set of SA SA SA/81 with the 81 splittable to an SA/
Maybe someone out ther can do better!
 
Heh...You know whats crazy is that practicing on that squire is where I developed the bad habit of not turning knobs.
Not only would I leave the Fat boost on all the time, I would practice mostly unplugged so there was never any need to roll the volume off.

If you saw me play live today (which is rare these days) you'd think me a complete n00b when I take my guitar off, set it down in the guitar stand and as I walk away the open strings ring out because I forgot turn the volume off!  :laughing8:
 
DustyCat said:
Does EMG make s/s/h set of SA SA SA/81 with the 81 splittable to an SA/
Maybe someone out ther can do better!

Quick Answer is "Almost".

EMG make a 81TW. In humbucker mode it is an EMG 81, but when it is single coil mode it isn't clear whether it replicates the SA tone qualities. I'm guessing it splits into a more aggressive single coil tone, maybe like the EMG S?

http://www.emgpickups.com/guitar/humbucking/dual-mode/81tw.html

EMG's other 'dual mode' humbucker - the EMG 89, does split into a SA single coil but it's humbucker mode is the more mild EMG85 style.

The differences are caused by the magnets used. The EMG81 (and the TW version) use ceramic magnets for the higher output. The EMG85 & 89 use Alnico. The SA pickup you are fond of also uses an Alnico magnet.

Here's a link to the EMG81TW .pdf file which shows the pickup specs.

http://www.emgpickups.com/media/productfile/8/1/81tw_0230-0118re.pdf

And here's the EMG89 specs...

http://www.emgpickups.com/media/productfile/8/9/89_0230-0114rf.pdf

You can see from both of those pdf's that EMG is keen to market the single coil mode of the 89 as a SA, but less clear about the 81TW in single coil mode - and the 81TW says steel as the second magnet (but I'm guessing the voicing would come from the ceramic magnet) where 89 says Alnico.

As far as Sets go, there is none using a 81TW yet.

Maybe contact EMG and ask them what the single coil mode in the 81TW is voiced like? BTW, I have had to contact EMG several times over the years and every time they have replied promptly. Worth a shot?  :dontknow:

http://www.emgpickups.com/contacts
 
Back
Top