Falloffthebonetone
New member
Re: Why are active electronics more popular with bassists than guitarists?
HA! Nice.
HA! Nice.
Why are active electronics more popular with bassists than guitarists?
- Thread starter Jeremiah
- Start date
Falloffthebonetone
New member
Re: Why are active electronics more popular with bassists than guitarists?
I know what you mean, check out that [citation needed] and the fact that the word "headroom" has quotes around it. This is skeptical.
I know what you mean, check out that [citation needed] and the fact that the word "headroom" has quotes around it. This is skeptical.
BlueTalon
New member
Re: Why are active electronics more popular with bassists than guitarists?
Also for the record, I didn't say anything that wasn't true.
Also for the record, I didn't say anything that wasn't true.
F
Funkfingers
Guest
Re: Why are active electronics more popular with bassists than guitarists?
Active electronics were originally a way of matching a low impedance pickup/transducer device (built for DI recording) to an amplifier designed to accept regular medium-to-high impedance pickup signals. I suspect that the idea was borrowed from studio mixing console electronics. It would come as no surprise if the culprit turned out to be one Lester William Polfuss. He certainly championed low impedance guitar pickups in his own work. On the first low impedance LP guitars, the buffering/matching electronics came in a separate box and required special cables. On the later Personal, Recording and Triumph models, the output value is selectable via a switch on the control panel.
Active electronics were originally a way of matching a low impedance pickup/transducer device (built for DI recording) to an amplifier designed to accept regular medium-to-high impedance pickup signals. I suspect that the idea was borrowed from studio mixing console electronics. It would come as no surprise if the culprit turned out to be one Lester William Polfuss. He certainly championed low impedance guitar pickups in his own work. On the first low impedance LP guitars, the buffering/matching electronics came in a separate box and required special cables. On the later Personal, Recording and Triumph models, the output value is selectable via a switch on the control panel.
vinta9e
New member
Re: Why are active electronics more popular with bassists than guitarists?
I just like the way active basses fit into a dense mix effortlessly. Less processing sounds better to me in most cases. Moreover, I do like the easy "power steering" feel on a bass, while preferring "direct drive" kind of feel on a guitar.
I just like the way active basses fit into a dense mix effortlessly. Less processing sounds better to me in most cases. Moreover, I do like the easy "power steering" feel on a bass, while preferring "direct drive" kind of feel on a guitar.
Last edited:
ginormous
Understatmentologist
Re: Why are active electronics more popular with bassists than guitarists?
That's why Lester, the man from Waukesha, remains such a wizard. :bigthumb:
All of which is quite true... but the Recording/Triumph models are low-impedance without active power. No phantom power, no on-board battery.
That's why Lester, the man from Waukesha, remains such a wizard. :bigthumb:
post toastie
New member
Re: Why are active electronics more popular with bassists than guitarists?
i think bassists may want a more refined tone and guitarists want a rawer sound...depending on the style of music of course.
i think bassists may want a more refined tone and guitarists want a rawer sound...depending on the style of music of course.
Bass_Medic_05
Purveyor of Low End
Re: Why are active electronics more popular with bassists than guitarists?
I agree, and the post below are also correct
James Rock
New member
Re: Why are active electronics more popular with bassists than guitarists?
As a guitarist and engineer (not a bass player), active electronics give a more finished tone and therefore sound fine through most rigs and DI'ed into the PA and I totally understand that for live use. But when I listen to recorded tones I like (usually in more vintage styles I guess) they are usually passive bass tones with a bit of extra niceness added via valves and/or compression and I really am not a fan of modern bass sounds (prefer jazzes, precisions, rickenbackers and semi-hollow basses). For guitars outside of metal and a few kinds of sounds I don't really like active pickups but I prefer guitars to have a quite distinct sound (as opposed to the more balanced even/flat sound of actives). How do bass players compare active pickups to passive with a preamp because in my mind these would sound quite different.
As a guitarist and engineer (not a bass player), active electronics give a more finished tone and therefore sound fine through most rigs and DI'ed into the PA and I totally understand that for live use. But when I listen to recorded tones I like (usually in more vintage styles I guess) they are usually passive bass tones with a bit of extra niceness added via valves and/or compression and I really am not a fan of modern bass sounds (prefer jazzes, precisions, rickenbackers and semi-hollow basses). For guitars outside of metal and a few kinds of sounds I don't really like active pickups but I prefer guitars to have a quite distinct sound (as opposed to the more balanced even/flat sound of actives). How do bass players compare active pickups to passive with a preamp because in my mind these would sound quite different.
