1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

Tech21 Landmark Bass Head

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by cetera, Aug 3, 2004.

  1. cetera


    Apr 29, 2004
    Surrey, England
    Endorsing Artist: Spector Basses & Cort Basses

    Has anyone out there got (or tried) a Tech 21 Landmark 300 or 600 Bass Head? If so, please let me know your opinions!

    Thanks! :)

  2. snailplow

    snailplow Leon Phelps Wanna Be

    Nov 1, 2001
    Maryville, Tennessee
    I've never tried one,but I owned the rack mount preamp for about two months.It sounded good,but there was not enough tonal controls to keep it around.Of course,you won't have that problem with the head version,for obvious reasons.
    I also saw one of the bass players at Ozzfest with 600 watt version in his rack.It sounded good through the mains.Sort of an Ampeg meets GK type of sound.
  3. Mcrelly


    Jun 16, 2003
    Minnesota, USA
    I copied this from my review of the 300 head.....

    Well, I tried the Tech21 Landmark 300 head this past weekend. I like the tone choices, but disappointed in other aspects.

    again the 300 is 300w into 4 ohms min. its basically an BDDI and Acoustic DI in one box with the power amp, solid state. I really liked the sounds I got out of the acoustic DI channel. you could also combine the two channels to get a unique tone. with my Aguilar GS-112s the sound was pretty heavy with the bass at 12 o'clock. the BDDI channel had a fatter warmer sound than channel two. the first channel had drive, bass, treble, presence, blend and level. channel two had drive, bass, mid, mid shift 170-3.5k, treble and level.

    I preferred the acoustic channel because it was brighter and had the mid shift adjustment. I used the 1st channel on slower heavier songs.

    THINGS I DIDN'T LIKE: the 300 watts with my G&L Pbass SB-1 was maybe not as loud as I could possibly need in the future. I ran the volumes about 3/4 most of the time and the drives about 1/4. the guitar was almost wide open. I still seemed to have alot of volume, but it felt like I was close to running out. I experienced a weird snapping sound through my amp and cabs. the room is, however, notorious for static in the electrical and PA. Unlike my RBI the LM300 did NOT have a XLR level control OR dry output to xlr or 1/4".

    OVERALL: a great SS amp for medium and lower volume gigs or small rooms. Flexible tone. nice variable fan. I'll have to try it again on stage before I'd buy.

    THINGS I'D CHANGE: add XLR level control, add dry out option tied into level control. Beef up amp or gain circuit a little...400w? the 600w head is WAAAY to heavy for me, but I think would be nice amount of power.

    ---end review----

    I much prefer using my RBI or RPM with a stewart 1.2 power amp, gives me same flexibility at greater power...although with the rack, RBI, RPM and stewart it almost weighs as much as the 600 (40 LBS) and the 600 might be great for most peoples needs anyhoo.
  4. cetera


    Apr 29, 2004
    Surrey, England
    Endorsing Artist: Spector Basses & Cort Basses
    Thanks for the review. Could you tell me a little more about your experiences with the RBI and RPM? I was under the impression that the RPM is more suited to string bass and acoustic instruments whereas the RBI is a dedicated bass pre-amp. :confused:

    I'm after that cutting rock growl i.e. Eddie Jackson (Queensryche) + many other rock bassists... :bassist: :)
  5. Mcrelly


    Jun 16, 2003
    Minnesota, USA
    Yes, Yes, the RPM is suitable for acoustic bass guitar and acoustic guitar AND electric bass. Not sure about string bass.

    RBI is a rackmount version of the BDDI tube emulator bass pedal from tech21.

    RPM is a rackmount version of the Acoustic DI tube emulation pedal from tech21.
  6. cetera


    Apr 29, 2004
    Surrey, England
    Endorsing Artist: Spector Basses & Cort Basses
    Thanks for the reply. So, which of the RPM and RBI is better in your opinion, or at least which would be more likely to give me the sound I'm looking for? :confused:

    I can also get a REALLY good deal on a used but mint Landmark 300. Does it have a Pre-Amp out in case I wanted to link it to a more powerful Power Amp for larger gigs? :bassist:
  7. Mcrelly


    Jun 16, 2003
    Minnesota, USA
    I hate to do this to you....

    Better overall: RBI

    Better for your sound "growl" : RPM


    try 'em both before you decide.
  8. cetera


    Apr 29, 2004
    Surrey, England
    Endorsing Artist: Spector Basses & Cort Basses
    :help: B*ll*x!! haha! Typical eh?

    Oh well, maybe I should just go with the Landmark head? It has both the RBI and RPM built into it and you can combine them as well... :)

    What say you?! :bassist:
  9. McHack


    Jul 29, 2003
    Central Ohio!
    Hey Mcrelly,

    If you HAD to pick,, JUST ONE of the two pre's you've listed,,,,, the RPM or RBI... AND, you wanted a rig to play rock & could still manage some pop stuff too... which do you think is more suitable,, and why?

    Cetera, maybe its just me, & keep in mind, I have no experience w/ these pres, or the landmark heads... but, if the 300 is a lil weak in the knees... I'd go w/ one of these two pre's, & add in a QSC power amp.

    This lets you decide how much power you want/need.
  10. cetera


    Apr 29, 2004
    Surrey, England
    Endorsing Artist: Spector Basses & Cort Basses
    Mcrelly, does the Landmark 300 have a Pre-Amp out for linking to a larger power amp if necessary? :bassist:
  11. Mcrelly


    Jun 16, 2003
    Minnesota, USA
    Cetera: Yes, pre out, you can also combine both pre's, but need to buy pedal separately or manually switch pre's on front.

    McHack: If ***I*** had to use only one pre I'd go with the RPM because I don't use the "presence" control on the RBI much, I like a darker sound, usually, I like the mid-sweep alot, and the extra drive is cool compared to the RBI drive.
  12. cetera


    Apr 29, 2004
    Surrey, England
    Endorsing Artist: Spector Basses & Cort Basses
    Well, I've taken the plunge. I tried one out and I'm getting a mint s/h but hardly used Landmark 300 (boxed with footswitch) for UK£400. The retail is UK£600. :)

    The RBI and RPM preamps are UK£330 EACH here so I figure UK£400 for both preamps plus power amp all in one is a good deal! :smug:

    If it is not powerful enough for louder gigs (though I normally crank through the PA) I'll just get a rack power amp to beef it up... :bassist:

    Thanks for your help everyone :)
  13. Mcrelly


    Jun 16, 2003
    Minnesota, USA
    CEtera please be sure to give us your review. :hyper:
    Jaynird likes this.
  14. Remember, for those who want more volume, they make a Landmark 600 as well.

  15. I own a Landmark 600. Gigged with it for over a year. Still have it, but the band is no longer. I played it through the old Ampeg 1540 (1x15 and 4x10 in the same tall cab). My band played modern blues (SRV, Clapton, Kenny Wayne), some funk, rock and classic rock. As an axe I played my original Tobias Killer B 5 sting (my baby).
    I like bottom end, big but not mushy, and the setup delivered. In most instance I used the pedal to run both channels at the same time. I got a terrific sound that way, and never changed up through the night. I also loved the mute on the foot pedal. As others have said, there are many,many sounds that can be had from the SansAmp DI build in. I found my sound, and was very please with my decision to get the rig. We played small and mid sized clubs. At the bigger venues I ran thru the PA as well, just for a focused band sound out of the PA, but didn't really need it. My guitar player was terrific, and loud, but there was never an issue with not enough bass. I like to hear myself on stage, and my 1540 was able to get teh sound to my ears even with a tight stage and I had to stand directly in front of it. I hate cabs the play to the back of your knees.
    I got a tremendous variety of sounds from my 600, and plenty of power. It could actually overdrive my 1540 - rated at 400 watts - but I rarely needed to push that hard. I had buds come out to hear the band, musicians, and they loved the sound. "Great bottom end, yet distinctive and not marshmallowy muddy". "Tons of Bass"."Nice Sound" were some of the comments I heard.
    I put the head in a light plastic 6 space rack case, and had no issues hauling it around by myself. The 1540.... well thats a beast, and definitely a 2 man cab! I would love to find a different cab setup, maybe seperate cabs (1x15 and 4x10). I also want to check out the ampeg 410 tiltback. I love sound coming at my head rather than my feet (don't we all?!?).
    Sorry I am not very technical on this post. Go to the website for spec's.
    I am very pleased with the Landmark 600, and will keep it for awhile.
    I am moving to Lansing, MI from Grand Rapids. Now I just have to find a band!
  16. barroso


    Aug 16, 2000
    I own the LM600 with matched 410 TECH21 cabinet.

    huge sounding, old school ampeg type of tone. great freature for me is the footswitch which allows to use both channel at same time. i set channel 2 to a "portaflex" tone and the channel one to a gritty SVT aggressive tone. and mix together.

    i like it.
  17. my Landmark 300 review...

    I've owned one of these for about a year now (after first reading this very thread), and it has served me well.

    Tone - The two channels are fairly versatile, however, I feel there is something lacking about the second channel. I just cant dial in that 'close, round, big' sound i'm after. I've been using the first channel primarily, and it provides a lot of power, all the bass your bound to need, and can give you a good chunky driving sound. However, I wont succumb to 'Harmony Central' syndrome where I say its great just to boost my ego. The treble on both channels sounds a bit harsh, and when you drive the amp (obviously as its SS) it breaks up in an unpleasant fashion. It's not so noticeable live, but I first picked up on this when recording. Now I have to say i'm being picky here, and trying to write as good a review as possible without being biased. I'm comparing this to a high end tube amp, and I know i'm not going to get the same results, but I feel if i compare them to such amps then you can maybe get an accurate feel of how good this amp is.

    When I'm recording I run a pre (either an FMR RNP or a Universal Audio LA-610) into the power amp on my tech 21, which gives me a much more satisfying recorded sound. When playing live I don't strive for as much 'mid' and so the amp does me fine, but recorded that extra little bit of mid makes all the difference, and this amp struggles to produce them.

    The big thing about my rig however, which makes the sound, is the fact that I run it through an ampeg 6x10. I've never played it through anything else, so don't know how the amp ACTUALLY sounds.

    I regularly have people commenting on my tone at gigs, which is obviously nice, and I would definetly recommend this amp to anyone looking for something midrange. It does the job perfectly well, however - as many of you will be familiar with - I just can't be happy until I have an all tube SVT or 400+.
  18. CamMcIntyre


    Jun 6, 2000

    I'll vouch for it w/String bass. Back home-i used the RPM for my DB & my RBI for my BG. I gotta say that the RPM has been the closest thing to "My bass" tone that i've gotten. I spent about 10mins trying to get the most unamped tone i could, and it worked really well.

    However, on the flip side, i also preferred the drive/distortion of the RPM compared to the noticeably brighter RBI.