Signal paths - bass/treble controls with Q's & filters

[gare]

Yer confused ?
I think 5 x 2 is a nomial size, comes from an-alog.
Lets take that tape, cut er into lil pieces, toss it in the air, paste it back together..might sound ok.  
Good point Keith..I'll use that one next time I cant make chiropractor appointment.
I vote for Joeys terminology..has a nice ring to it.
It's early, no caffine yet..think I'm going to rip out all the stuff in my bass's control cavity and run straight from the pickups to the amp, which I'll modify to just have a volume control..I'm feelin a need to simpilfy my life lately.    
 
Gary

[kmh364]

Just my two cents:
 
I have both EMW and Series (I) electronics and an SF-2.  
 
Getting back to the question as to whether the relative complexity of Alembic tone-shaping controls (i.e., filters) is/are overkill is a matter of perspective.  
 
If you are from the set it and forget it crowd, then Alembics are not for you. Depending on the electronics package, Alembics are amongst the most versatile instruments out there tonally. That flexibility comes with a price: repeatability of settings on any Alembic (with the possible exception of the Europa switches) is frustratingly difficult at best.  
 
Passive stuff (of which I mostly own) is easy...volume off or all the way up and tone controls wide open (unless you need a jazz guitar tone). On a Strat, for example, your real tone control is the 5-position p/u selector, LOL! Since attenuating volume on a passive instrument loads the p/u's,  frequency response suffers, so I don't bother. Yes, I know you can add a cap (or a blaster), but bear with me here, LOL! Passive tone controls with their subtractive effects are equally useless to me. A passive instrument sounds as good as it gets with everything wide open...tweek knobs and the sound goes downhill from there. They are easy to operate though, LOL!  
 
Bottom line of my diatribe: You gotta give something to get something! Alembics are superior, IMHO, to just about anything out there. The BUT is that you gotta love to tweek knobs in order to find that holy grail tone(s) on an Alembic. Add to this that active filters do not necessarily behave in a manner that is intuitive can be very frustrating. Anybody that owns a Series or has a SF-2 knows what I mean, LOL! The plus in all this is that it's hard to get a bad tone out of an Alembic. Finding the tone or tones that you need or want, however, can be frustrating and duplicating same can be an exercise in futility.
 
I'd add that Alemic's active stuff allows you to set and forget your amp (once you adjust for the room) and then you can go silly and controll everything directly from the instument. On passive stuff, the tone shaping on the instrument is sheisse, so I have to continually tweek the amp in order to get the sound(s) I need.
 
Cheers,
 
Kevin

[David Houck]

I'm guessing the tape is mil-spec.

[terryc]

Kevin
      All makes sense to me..passive does suck..a bad compromise at the best of times and it is an apprenticeship learning all the tone functions on an Alembic but once learned they are a joy to use..I cannot vouch for the guitar side but the basses(their forte) are the dogs gonads.
Alembics are quiet(electronically), sound great, play great and look the biz..but at a cost but you pay for what you get

[terryc]

whoa..I have jumped from junior to member..me at the tender age of 48

[george_wright]

Dude!  I was a junior at 61!

[terryc]

Ah yes George..with age comes wisdom, cheap bike insurance & crap eyesight..once left my reading glasses at home and couldn't see notes on manuscript..had to borrow a pair from lady in the audience..should increase the rastral size on the printer but then you end up with 20 pages of bass stave for a three minute song.
 
Right..any conclusions on this signal path thing then or just use our ears which is really the best way!!!!

[keith_h]

Based on Mica'a update on the 24th it doesn't make any difference as both sets of controls are multiplicive.  
 
Keith