Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
Moderator: Ghost Hip
- Ancient Astronaught
- IAMILFFAMOUS
- Posts: 7202
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:14 pm
- Location: Bear Country
Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
So lately I've been having a few issues with my setup as of late. I currently use a P-Bass Tuned BEAD using an EMG alnico P-bass setup for pickups. It sounds great and is uber quiet but the lower notes (d# down to B) don't resonate and are not as powerful as any notes above them. I understand this is a 34" scale bass so the B will never be as great as a 35" bass. So our guitar player brought me his EB MM5 HH to clean up and setup so i decided to try it at band practice yesterday. It fixed many of the issues I've had, such as volume before clipping (the output is huge in comparison to my P) but that was mainly when I had the low eq on the bass cranked. Great tone clean, but it did not play well with my pedals at all (aside from the megalith). So I've been pondering what i could do to my P to get it like the EB but have it play well with pedals, here are my ideas.
1) Convert the P back to being a passive bass (i have everything to do this prewired and ready to slap in). Then pickup an MXR 10 band EQ (it has the frequencies I would want to sculpt more then the 6 band) to crank the low end and increase the level of the signal to that of an active bass, without changing the impedance, thus maintaining the interaction with my pedals. I would also with this setup sell / trade my megalith for a verellen big spider (I love the ML but it just doesnt blend as well with my band as the BS did).
2) Buy an EMG BTC to replace the tone pot on my P so i can crank the bass and output level. This would render the EQ pointless, but at the same time make my tectonic shift pretty much useless (the super fuzz side does not like active basses at all). So I would keep the ML and replace the TS with the BS and probably a bluebeard (to keep mah muff tonezes).
Option 1 would keep me from having to replace batteries in the bass, and definitely have a more vintage tone. Option 2 would have more upkeep but have a high output more modern tone....
What say ye ILF?
1) Convert the P back to being a passive bass (i have everything to do this prewired and ready to slap in). Then pickup an MXR 10 band EQ (it has the frequencies I would want to sculpt more then the 6 band) to crank the low end and increase the level of the signal to that of an active bass, without changing the impedance, thus maintaining the interaction with my pedals. I would also with this setup sell / trade my megalith for a verellen big spider (I love the ML but it just doesnt blend as well with my band as the BS did).
2) Buy an EMG BTC to replace the tone pot on my P so i can crank the bass and output level. This would render the EQ pointless, but at the same time make my tectonic shift pretty much useless (the super fuzz side does not like active basses at all). So I would keep the ML and replace the TS with the BS and probably a bluebeard (to keep mah muff tonezes).
Option 1 would keep me from having to replace batteries in the bass, and definitely have a more vintage tone. Option 2 would have more upkeep but have a high output more modern tone....
What say ye ILF?
Iommic Pope wrote: Skip, you rule. You hate people so much, you're willing to discredit all human progress, its awesome.
- skullservant
- IAMILFFAMOUS
- Posts: 16575
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 12:55 am
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
Option one dude. No batteries, an EQ will shape AND boost anything you want, and that's essentially what your bass would be doing if it was active!
- D.o.S.
- IAMILFFAMOUS
- Posts: 29875
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 8:47 am
- Location: Ewe-Kay
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
Ancient Astronaught wrote:What say ye ILF?
Dibs on the Megalith.

- Ancient Astronaught
- IAMILFFAMOUS
- Posts: 7202
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:14 pm
- Location: Bear Country
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
D.o.S. wrote:Ancient Astronaught wrote:What say ye ILF?
Dibs on the Megalith.
Communarchy is first on the list my friend, but you got 2nds.

Iommic Pope wrote: Skip, you rule. You hate people so much, you're willing to discredit all human progress, its awesome.
- D.o.S.
- IAMILFFAMOUS
- Posts: 29875
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 8:47 am
- Location: Ewe-Kay
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
I find that completely... acceptable!
- ural
- involved
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 4:20 am
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
Ancient Astronaught wrote: P-Bass Tuned BEAD using an EMG alnico P-bass setup for pickups. It sounds great and is uber quiet but the lower notes (d# down to B) don't resonate and are not as powerful as any notes above them. .
That's point where cab also start to play role. Fundamental of B0 is 30.87 Hz while most of 8x10 bass cabs have significantly drop of frequencies below 80 Hz... You might look for custom tuned cab. (As I did.)
- Ancient Astronaught
- IAMILFFAMOUS
- Posts: 7202
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:14 pm
- Location: Bear Country
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
ural wrote:Ancient Astronaught wrote: P-Bass Tuned BEAD using an EMG alnico P-bass setup for pickups. It sounds great and is uber quiet but the lower notes (d# down to B) don't resonate and are not as powerful as any notes above them. .
That's point where cab also start to play role. Fundamental of B0 is 30.87 Hz while most of 8x10 bass cabs have significantly drop of frequencies below 80 Hz... You might look for custom tuned cab. (As I did.)
There was a noticeable difference in the presence of the low notes between the EB MM and my p-bass through the exact same rig, so right now my concern is more with the bass then the amp setup. I currently use a 2x12 with speakers that are effective down to 53hz, and will hopefully soon also be getting a 1x18 thats good down to 38hz. I played my pedal setup and amp head through an 8x10 a few weeks ago and had even less low end then my current setup. 10's just arent for me. I could go fEARful for dually and get a true "tuned" cab but I've had no issues with my emperor's and since every cab i own is all ready an emperor might as well keep everything similar.... damn OCD....
Iommic Pope wrote: Skip, you rule. You hate people so much, you're willing to discredit all human progress, its awesome.
- ural
- involved
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 4:20 am
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
Ancient Astronaught wrote:ural wrote:Ancient Astronaught wrote: P-Bass Tuned BEAD using an EMG alnico P-bass setup for pickups. It sounds great and is uber quiet but the lower notes (d# down to B) don't resonate and are not as powerful as any notes above them. .
That's point where cab also start to play role. Fundamental of B0 is 30.87 Hz while most of 8x10 bass cabs have significantly drop of frequencies below 80 Hz... You might look for custom tuned cab. (As I did.)
There was a noticeable difference in the presence of the low notes between the EB MM and my p-bass through the exact same rig, so right now my concern is more with the bass then the amp setup. I currently use a 2x12 with speakers that are effective down to 53hz, and will hopefully soon also be getting a 1x18 thats good down to 38hz. I played my pedal setup and amp head through an 8x10 a few weeks ago and had even less low end then my current setup. 10's just arent for me. I could go fEARful for dually and get a true "tuned" cab but I've had no issues with my emperor's and since every cab i own is all ready an emperor might as well keep everything similar.... damn OCD....
aha. a work-around might be to use some filter with low fundamental (like sherman) in layers during post-production if recording, or use FOH PA system possibilities to boost lows when in live situation.
perhaps you should try different mics as "EQs"? as you know they have different freq. response characteristics, I'm using Shure Beta52 (in pair with Senheiser MD 421 for bass (what is tuned down to A)). with beta 52 you can get lows and.. highs, with 421 - mids. i think shure sm57 also could work for mid layers. But otherwise EQ pedal is also flexible solution.
- Ancient Astronaught
- IAMILFFAMOUS
- Posts: 7202
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:14 pm
- Location: Bear Country
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
ural wrote:aha. a work-around might be to use some filter with low fundamental (like sherman) in layers during post-production if recording, or use FOH PA system possibilities to boost lows when in live situation.
perhaps you should try different mics as "EQs"? as you know they have different freq. response characteristics, I'm using Shure Beta52 (in pair with Senheiser MD 421 for bass (what is tuned down to A)). with beta 52 you can get lows and.. highs, with 421 - mids. i think shure sm57 also could work for mid layers. But otherwise EQ pedal is also flexible solution.
FOH PA is under control with no issues, I've got a custom made preamp / DI on the way that will definitely cover that ground with no issue. And as far as mics at the studio we've got a good selection of heil, audix, and shure mics that have no problem grabbing the lows. It's more the actual bass I'm trying to sort out, luckily its a fender so i can mod the hell out of it with ease.
Iommic Pope wrote: Skip, you rule. You hate people so much, you're willing to discredit all human progress, its awesome.
- MEC
- HERO
- Posts: 4651
- Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:04 pm
- Location: Old North State
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
I'd switch the P Bass back to passive then add the EMG BTC with a toggle to switch between that and your regular tone pot.
You could also sell the P and get an G&L L2000 (MIA or Tribute) since they come stock with a Active/Passive toggle.
You could also sell the P and get an G&L L2000 (MIA or Tribute) since they come stock with a Active/Passive toggle.


http://youthministry.bandcamp.com/
http://remainstheband.bandcamp.com/
Achtane wrote:FUZZ ALL DAY MAN FUZZ IS GOD ALL OTHER EFFECTS ARE SHIT
Caesar wrote:Dude, can you get the fuck out of my b/s/t thread with your bullshit.
PumpkinPieces wrote: This isn't America, this is I Love Fuzz.
Mudfuzz wrote:Remember when we were all just a bunch of weirdos that liked fucked up shit and not just a bunch of nerds buying bling to impress each other online?
- Ancient Astronaught
- IAMILFFAMOUS
- Posts: 7202
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:14 pm
- Location: Bear Country
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
MEC wrote:I'd switch the P Bass back to passive then add the EMG BTC with a toggle to switch between that and your regular tone pot.
You could also sell the P and get an G&L L2000 (MIA or Tribute) since they come stock with a Active/Passive toggle.
I actually had an L2000 at my disposal a few months ago, it was waaaaaaayyyy too high output for my setup. If i needed more growl and grind i would have rocked that but in my current band I'm basically trying to emulate a synth bass so i need smooth and clean as a base tone, and then I add in some dirt for flava. Adding the BTC in on a toggle isn't a bad idea actually, I'll have to look into that. But wouldnt the EQ pedal first in the chain achieve similar results without having to majorly hack the wiring in the bass?
Iommic Pope wrote: Skip, you rule. You hate people so much, you're willing to discredit all human progress, its awesome.
- Jwar
- Cosmic of BILF
- Posts: 18238
- Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:18 pm
- Location: The edge of existence
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
I play actives, so I'm going to say stick with them. Why? Because they sound better IMO. More aggressive and better EQ options. Now that being said, you could always have it wired up passive/active so that both are an option. I have 1 passive bass, and love the tone, but my active stomps it's dick in as far as tone.
One thing about actives though is that some fuzz pedals just do not work well with them. That's kind of shitty. Other than that, I see no negatives. The battery thing is a non issue for me really. You replace that bitch like once or max twice a year.
One thing about actives though is that some fuzz pedals just do not work well with them. That's kind of shitty. Other than that, I see no negatives. The battery thing is a non issue for me really. You replace that bitch like once or max twice a year.
"I do not have the ability to think rationally 90% of the time and I also change my mind at the drop of a hat".
-JWAR
-JWAR

- Ancient Astronaught
- IAMILFFAMOUS
- Posts: 7202
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:14 pm
- Location: Bear Country
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
jwar wrote:I play actives, so I'm going to say stick with them. Why? Because they sound better IMO. More aggressive and better EQ options. Now that being said, you could always have it wired up passive/active so that both are an option. I have 1 passive bass, and love the tone, but my active stomps it's dick in as far as tone.
One thing about actives though is that some fuzz pedals just do not work well with them. That's kind of shitty. Other than that, I see no negatives. The battery thing is a non issue for me really. You replace that bitch like once or max twice a year.
Yeah my main concern is how they interact with my superfuzz, which is a tone i use in atleast 2 songs we play out regularly. My EMG equipped p-bass has no issues with my SF, but the ernie ball and it did not get along at all. I'm thinking I'm going to try out the BTC and play with the pickup height first, if that doesnt work out well then I'll sell of the EMG's, throw the passives in there, and get the EQ pedal. I do love how quiet and how much low end the actives have, so I'm gonna try process of elimination with the bass since i know its not the amps or pedals that are lacking what I'm looking for (since the EB and our microkorg have the low end I'm looking for run through my rig).
Iommic Pope wrote: Skip, you rule. You hate people so much, you're willing to discredit all human progress, its awesome.
- Jwar
- Cosmic of BILF
- Posts: 18238
- Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:18 pm
- Location: The edge of existence
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
What kind of superfuzz? I've found actives don't play as well with superfuzz as much as other fuzz variations.
"I do not have the ability to think rationally 90% of the time and I also change my mind at the drop of a hat".
-JWAR
-JWAR

- Ancient Astronaught
- IAMILFFAMOUS
- Posts: 7202
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:14 pm
- Location: Bear Country
Re: Bass: Passive vs Active EQ pedal interaction.
jwar wrote:What kind of superfuzz? I've found actives don't play as well with superfuzz as much as other fuzz variations.
The left side of my monolith Tectonic shift, and yup i've heard that as well. But I love the octave tone sooooooo much and I use it quite a bit in our sets as of right now so I don't want to lose it and then start the gear search for a replacement. I wonder how the superpuzzle does with active basses, that would be the first one i would go to too see if it would work since its a heavily modified superfuzz. Then i would probably pickup another LSTR to cover me muff tones. But I'm tired of endlessly flipping gear, I'm finally 100% satisfied with my guitar setup and that took almost 2 years, don't have the time or patience to do it again for bass.
Iommic Pope wrote: Skip, you rule. You hate people so much, you're willing to discredit all human progress, its awesome.