Tech 21 Club

[GwenOnBass]

The VTBD is the first serious pedal I ever used beyond a simple volume pedal. Working to understand, as I commonly read posts about the VT's midrange dip ... are players using additional tone shaping pedals with the VT series? I can see the merit in an HPF even as my cabs are not pushed terribly hard.

 

[Rickter]

The VTBD is the first serious pedal I ever used beyond a simple volume pedal. Working to understand, as I commonly read posts about the VT's midrange dip ... are players using additional tone shaping pedals with the VT series? I can see the merit in an HPF even as my cabs are not pushed terribly hard.

In my research/observations have seen most people only running effects/comps with a VTBdi and not many of those, most don't seem to want/need additional tone shapers. There have been a few though. Lately have seen a few running an MXR M80 in conjunction with a VTBdi.

 

[Kro]

The VTBD is the first serious pedal I ever used beyond a simple volume pedal. Working to understand, as I commonly read posts about the VT's midrange dip ... are players using additional tone shaping pedals with the VT series? I can see the merit in an HPF even as my cabs are not pushed terribly hard.

The VT actually doesn’t have an insurmountable midrange dip by default – it has to be dialed in. With all knobs at noon, including character, the VT’s mid-response is actually fairly even (not entirely, but slightly scooped), though there will be either a large high boost via “bite”, or a small high boost if you’re able to deselect the bite option.

Character is a pre-drive mid knob, which is pretty nifty. It allows for some cool changes in tone by altering the frequencies that saturate upon attack, and then how the overall response changes as the note decays and saturation decreases. Check out this video for a visual representation of how pre and post drive EQ affects tone. IME things work a little differently with bass, but the concept is similar.



Then you have the option to EQ post-drive via low, mid, and high. IME my VT pedal isn’t a hard pedal to get punchy mid-forward tones from.

And as far as the HPF goes, the “subsonic filter” of the unit is very gradual. It’ll be helpful to decrease super-low rumble, but it isn’t as potent as something like the F-Deck or Broughton HPFs, or even other variable HPFs available on some amps. FWIW, I think it works just fine for my needs as is.

 

[GwenOnBass]

Thank you for helping me understand my VT

 

[MDBass]

Well, that sure was short lived

Let's see if we can revive it

 

[Kro]

Well, that sure was short lived

Let's see if we can revive it

Ha, these things come and go in waves, but that sounded awesome as always!

Let’s see, since my last posting I’ve done a respectable number of shows – all with my VTDI being my primary preamp for sending my signal FOH. No additional recording… yet (soon). I was messing around with some tones last night though – exploring just how far I want to go with bringing down highs.

I’ve finally figured out why all of the more clean-ish users like the super-low treble settings on the VT versions without defeatable bite. I didn’t notice it as much with my StingRay just due to the nature of that bass (I found it sounded best with more distortion), but with my Precision I started bringing down the drive as I didn’t need as much – and whoah, it gets piercing.

It looks like Tech 21 assumes that the default use for these VT products is with heavy drive, as the pre-drive highs boost via bite is so strong that it honestly only really sounds good when the highs are being clipped off and distorted – or with a heavily decreased highs setting.

Thing is, I like that clipped treble distortion, and so I find myself bringing highs down to like 9:00-10:30 to compensate. The right amount for me is somewhere in that range, but I just haven’t quite yet settled on what’s generally optimal for my mixes yet, since it turns out I’m a highs junkie (but a self-aware highs-junkie).

And so the trial and error continues!

 

[GwenOnBass]

Ha, these things come and go in waves, but that sounded awesome as always!

Let’s see, since my last posting I’ve done a respectable number of shows – all with my VTDI being my primary preamp for sending my signal FOH. No additional recording… yet (soon). I was messing around with some tones last night though – exploring just how far I want to go with bringing down highs.

I’ve finally figured out why all of the more clean-ish users like the super-low treble settings on the VT versions without defeatable bite. I didn’t notice it as much with my StingRay just due to the nature of that bass (I found it sounded best with more distortion), but with my Precision I started bringing down the drive as I didn’t need as much – and whoah, it gets piercing.

It looks like Tech 21 assumes that the default use for these VT products is with heavy drive, as the pre-drive highs boost via bite is so strong that it honestly only really sounds good when the highs are being clipped off and distorted – or with a heavily decreased highs setting.

Thing is, I like that clipped treble distortion, and so I find myself bringing highs down to like 9:00-10:30 to compensate. The right amount for me is somewhere in that range, but I just haven’t quite yet settled on what’s generally optimal for my mixes yet, since it turns out I’m a highs junkie (but a self-aware highs-junkie).

And so the trial and error continues!

Treble at 9:30 - 10:00 is a flat response on the VTBD with the Speaker Sim engaged, so sayeth @tech21nyc here (post 10). Imagine the response on the VTDI is likely close.
https://www.talkbass.com/threads/vt-bass-deluxe-questions.966004/
VT Bass Deluxe questions

 

[Kro]

Treble at 9:30 - 10:00 is a flat response on the VTBD with the Speaker Sim engaged, so sayeth @tech21nyc here (post 10). Imagine the response on the VTDI is likely close.
VT Bass Deluxe questions

So... it's all very interactive. The relative level of highs takes into account a ton of variables including bass signal strength, drive level, and character level as well.

Assuming that highs aren't hitting the distortion/limiting ceiling from drive (basically drive off), and that Character is adjusted for no scoop... that might be true... or close.

But as soon as any of those other variables are messed with, all bets are off. I will see if I can post a few pics tonight to illustrate what I'm talking about, if for no other reason that I think it's pretty interesting.

 

[Kro]

TL;DR - thanks to the huge pre-drive highs boost from "bite", highs are the first to saturate and be limited as signal levels hitting drive, or drive itself increases. Full post below:

Alright, I just got back from rehearsal, and figured following up on my post above might be a nice way to unwind for the night.

Back on the topic of pre- and post-drive EQ, see below for a graphic that illustrates the concept as it pertains to VT units and the substantial pre-drive highs-boost from "bite" when engaged (or by default on units without the option). This might be a no-brainer for some as it's pretty logical, but I was still interested in seeing it with my own eyes to better understand what's going on.

The plot shows how the drive circuit saturates/limits/distorts frequencies boosted by "bite", starting with green which is the least saturated signal, to orange which is slightly distorted, on down to blue which would be significantly distorted. Since bite is such an enormous pre-drive boost, those frequencies are the first to saturate.

The change in signal could come from either increasing drive, or from increasing the strength of the signal hitting the drive circuit. Again, this might seem obvious, but what this means is that harder/softer playing has the same effect, as does note decay. The difference between the green and orange sweeps is just a 2dBu increase in amplitude for each increment with no changes made to the pedal. This is easily all within the realm of typical playing dynamics, and even changes between the attack and decay of a single note.

Note: levels have been adjusted to show the relative change in highs. In reality, for each 2dBu adjustment, the entire curve would shift 2dB as you'd expect. Also, as a brief disclaimer, these frequency sweeps tend to not tell the whole story, as generally those saturated frequencies create additional harmonic content above the point of saturation - but given the steep roll-off that the speaker sim imparts, much of those higher harmonics are drastically limited.

For reference, this is how I had my VTDI dialed in when I ran the sweeps above. I'd characterize the yellow line to be relatively equal to that of a note with a hard attack from my Precision.

 

[Al Kraft]

As always Kro....very interesting and informative post! Thanks for investing the time and sharing your findings.

 

[GwenOnBass]

Taking a bit to soak in properly, and trippy as I see more how the VT Bass works. Thank you for what you do!

 

[tech21nyc]

The VT platform is quite flexible and is designed to work well with clean or distorted settings. The architecture of the pedal is such that the Character Control and Drive are pre Level, Low, Mid and High controls. Usually high end needs to be attenuated with higher Drive settings as there is more upper harmonic content. The Character Control and Drive are interactive. Once you get a handle on the pedal it gets easier to find your sounds quickly.

With the VT Bass DI you can disengage the Bite and Speaker sim for a flat full range sound if desired. The will work best with lower Drive settings.

 

[Kro]

With the VT Bass DI you can disengage the Bite and Speaker sim for a flat full range sound if desired. The will work best with lower Drive settings.

For the record, I did an A/B sound test with my relatively low drive setting (it's still a little crunchy):
A: Bite off / moderate "high" setting
B: Bite on / decreased "high" setting to balance

I preferred B, with bite being on with decreased to tame it. I guess I prefer the high end sizzle that bite imparts when it saturates the drive circuit, even if I do end up decreasing highs in general afterwards to still balance it out.

 

[Domespeed]

For the record, I did an A/B sound test with my relatively low drive setting (it's still a little crunchy):
A: Bite off / moderate "high" setting
B: Bite on / decreased "high" setting to balance

I preferred B, with bite being on with decreased to tame it. I guess I prefer the high end sizzle that bite imparts when it saturates the drive circuit, even if I do end up decreasing highs in general afterwards to still balance it out.

In my funk/soul/disco cover band I'm using A, whereas in my rock trio B fits better

 

[Kro]

One of my past bands currently on hiatus hit a nice Spotify plays milestone the other night, and along with having a toast of whisky with my remote band-mates, it motivated me to try dusting off a few of those old songs out of nostalgia.

While I was at it, I was fiddling around with my VTDI and sitting in front of my computer, so I figured I might as well take some reference recordings to see how my fiddling translated. The results were interesting.

The only difference between these two clips is that one has significantly less of a dialed-in mid-scoop from where I'd normally set it. While playing, I could feel an obvious difference - but upon playback I can't hear it. My prevailing theory is that I adjusted my attack for each setting (I could feel myself doing it) in order to better coax out the tone that I wanted, proving once again that tone really is all in the hands.

Am I just listening back on sub-par monitoring systems (true), or am I crazy because I can't tell the difference? Can you?

Take A
Invalid Link Removed

Take B
Invalid Link Removed

Also, while I don't believe Tech 21 products had anything to do with it, this is the full track for any who are interested. Still haven't figured out a satisfactory 4-string arrangement for the bridge intro yet, which is why I stopped the clips above where I did!

 

[vvvmmm]

They do sound different to me. I like #2 better, what I would venture is less scooped?

 

[Kro]

They do sound different to me. I like #2 better, what I would venture is less scooped?

That's the most interesting thing about this. This is one of those times when you're both right and wrong... but mostly right.

First off, the tracks do sound slightly different to me, but not nearly as different as I would have expected given the EQ adjustment, and certainly not in the way I was expecting. For what it's worth, I have a slight preference for "2" or Take B as well.

Take A is actually the version that has additional mids dialed in via my VTDI's EQ.

However, if you run a frequency analysis of both tracks, or any particular segment of each, comparatively you'll see that Take B somehow wound up with stronger mids.

In my previous post I noted that I could feel my playing was slightly altered by the change in EQ real-time as I was playing. I believe it's possible that the less naturally prominent, more scooped tone of Take B actually forced me to dig in harder to compensate. That stronger attack is primarily the difference that I hear between the two, but there must be extra harmonics or something generated by the stronger attack that increases the relative level of mids in that take.

It isn't at all what I expected, and really hits home the personal nature of EQ/settings to individual players.

 

[Arthur U. Poon]

Both A and B sound really good to me, Kro. I think the tone on Take B is closer to how I would personally eq my bass.

 

[vvvmmm]

OK, so A has added mids via the pedal, but it might be that because you played B harder it has more mids and sounds less scooped.

My old gurrlfriend was right - a lot if it is in the fingers.

 

[Kro]

OK, so A has added mids via the pedal, but it might be that because you played B harder it has more mids and sounds less scooped.

My old gurrlfriend was right - a lot if it is in the fingers.

Correct.

That’s awesome that you could talk to your girlfriend about bass tone though. As soon as I try to start talking about bass tone with my wife her eyes start to glaze over. Sometimes she tries to look interested, but I can tell she really isn’t. I’m not thick.