Dismiss Notice

Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

which tech 21 is for me?

Discussion in 'Effects [BG]' started by ryan morris, Feb 10, 2002.


  1. ryan morris

    ryan morris Supporting Member

    Sep 11, 2000
    Chicago, IL
    Ok, I want something extra for my sound. Maybe just a little bit of compression, but not much. Something that doesn't add extra noise to my signal and something that just sounds good. I was first looking at the BDDI then the Bass Compactor and then the Comptortion. Which one of these is a better investment? Thanks, Ryan
     
  2. The BDDI hands down, it's a magic little box. The Comptortion and Bass Compactor are just tinker toys that don't do much in my opinion, I'd rather invest my money in a DBX (or other quality rackmount) compressor.
     
  3. eli

    eli Mad showoff 7-stringer and Wish lover Supporting Member

    Dec 12, 1999
    NW suburban Chicago
    Also listen to the Tech 21 Acoustic DI. Adds a mid-shift to boost/cut the all-important midrange. May not suit you but it MAKES the fretless growl. Does same for frets too -- I'll noever play without mine again. The kink is, it does not have a stomp switch, but I have it on "set-it-and-forget-it" mode -- it's always on, making my tone sparkle 100% of the time.
     
  4. Seconded, for clean tone the acoustic DI it's very useful. Also good for when you start recording, have an acoustic bass or a bass with piezo pickups too.
     
  5. ryan morris

    ryan morris Supporting Member

    Sep 11, 2000
    Chicago, IL
    You know..the Acoustic DI might be real good for me because I've been looking for something to help my Englehardt be heard a 'bit more and I love my mids. I'll have to check into that one a bit more. Thanks for the heads up.
     
  6. eli

    eli Mad showoff 7-stringer and Wish lover Supporting Member

    Dec 12, 1999
    NW suburban Chicago
    It also has the same "speaker emulator" drive circuit found in the BDDI -- but on the Acoustic, it seems to affect only the mids, which is what makes it so awesome for fretless. This is a cool box!
     
  7. top028

    top028

    Dec 14, 1999
    Lancaster, PA
    does the BDDI and the acoustic DI have the same bass control. I would gladly give up the drive knob for a mid shift. I cant seem to find a place that has both that I can mess around with. I liked how the BDDI cleaned up and added some punch to the low end. I also play frettless and I would appreciate mid control.
     
  8. eli

    eli Mad showoff 7-stringer and Wish lover Supporting Member

    Dec 12, 1999
    NW suburban Chicago
    Both units hav the BASS knob.

    I went to the site ( www.tech21nyc.com ) and here's what I found:

    The Acoustic and BDDI both have the LEVEL and BLEND knobs; BLEND adds the speaker emulator (drive) effect to the dry signal. Both have BASS and TREBLE. Where the Acoustic has MID (level) and MID-SHIFT, the BDDI has DRIVE and PRESENCE. Looks like what the Acoustic doesn't have is a drive setting. I've noticed this; it is pretty much set by the volume knob on the instrument, so if you turn down at the bass, you do lose some drive. That's the same with the BDDI, but the BDDI gives you the option of adjusting it at the unit after you set the instrument's volume. I can't comment on the PRESENCE knob -- I hate high clicky treble, so I doubt I'd use it much.

    I have also been told that on the Acoustic, the drive only affects the midrange. This is what makes the great "Growl" this thing gives a fretless -- the lows stay clean while the mid is overdriven. Ya gotta believe me, this is an AWESOME sound for fretless and it's the reason I bought it.

    Another difference is the in/out jack structure. The Acoustic has two inputs and two outputs. The Acoustic's two outputs are 1/4" and XLR, set up for amp or board driving. One of the itwo 1/4" inputs is dedicated to the XLR output. The two inputs means you can actually patch an effect into a loop (it's in the manual) with this box. The advantage is that you can get standard stomp-box effects into the signal after the Acoustic's tone stage but before the XLR so you can record with them.

    The BDDI has only one input but three outputs. The 1/4" and XLR are like the Acoustic, but the 3rd 1/4" (in the location of the XLR-dedicated 1/4" input on the Acoustic) is an output on the BDDI -- and it is always the direct dry signal. This allows the flexibility of sending two signals to the mixer -- actually a pretty cool feature. This is the whole point of the speaker emulator circuit -- to simulate a miked SVT in a little box -- so it does make sense to allow that and a clean direct signal to be blended at the board. I don't miss it playing live through just my amp, but this makes tons of sense for recording.

    My whole point: Whenever someone extols the virtues of the BDDI -- and it is a cool box -- I feel the need to mention the Acoustic. Not saying one is better than the other; they are different and suit different needs. I believe anyone interented in either should listen to both, that's all.