Discussion in 'Effects, Pedals, Strings & Things' started by gpro34, Mar 10, 2006.
For those of you who have been fortunate enough to hear these pedals which do you prefer?
I thought there would be some fans of these? No one has heard both of these?
I have both. I`ll get back to you in some minutes with a refreshed memory on how they compare.
Thank you, I think this will be a good comparison.
Hi, at the risk of sounding a bit "obvious" there are so many differences between the 2.
Same = analog - and that's about it!
THey're totally different beasts - one is a simple to use analog delay, needs a bit more "juice" than your typical delay pedal and one's a (physucally) large box of tricks, with tap-tempo, and the ability to effect repeats, space for an expression pedal etc.etc.etc....I am not sure how you could compare the 2 realistically? ( again not trying to be a ....)
It's like saying a need a kitchen knife to a Swiss Army knife - it really depends what you're looking for as far as I'm concnerned.....(both great units by the way but SOOOOOOOOOO different).
a bit of clarity around the last remark - sorry ......
what i MEANT to say was
"It's like comparing a kitchen knife to a Swiss Army knife -they're both knives - but that's where it ends. It really depends what you're looking for as far as I'm concnerned.....(both great units by the way but SOOOOOOOOOO different)."
Sorry - should have re-read it first i guess
I've got an AD-900...
Which is darker?? I wish my AD-900 wasn't so dark... Still love it though.
My AD900 is quite `bright` compared to other analog delays I have. I haven`t messed with the internal trimmers yet but there was an interesting thread about this where Zadiqof described in detail how he `tuned` his AD900.
"So I started tampering with them, and so far I've completely changed the tone of this pedal. I will admit it used to be rather dark, but after adjusting the two pots sr3 and sr4, I've eliminated the darkness and it was like taking a blanket off of the delayed signal that was shielding it from shining through."
I agree 100% and the vast difference in features should really be the deciding factor which one to choose.
I have just compared the two soundwise and here`s my conclusion;
(Btw my AD900 is modded with expr pedals for time and repeats)
The AD900 is brighter, has more of a linear full frequency sound, more bass.
The ML has more mids, with the EQ knob in the middle position it has less bass and highs than the AD900.
The highs on the AD900 suffers on max time setting; the treble strings get thin with some typical clock artifacts.
The punchy bass on the AD900 is often too much with my amp settings and use of multiple repeats. Having several repeats going some bass roll off is usually a good thing when the dry sound/the amp itself has enough bass on its own.
Playing the more mid heavy ML for some time and turning to the AD900 the last one sounds somewhat scooped in the mids.
The treble strings sounds much fatter on the ML.
The sound of the ML gives it more of a personality than the AD900. The repeats find more of a pocket on their own where the linear AD900 may mess with the dry sound. The more pronounced character of the ML makes it fun to play and can be closer to the Echoczar in this respect.
The ML goes quicker into self-oscillation and the sound of this isn`t as smooth as the self-oscillation of the AD900. This can be compensated for by turning the EQ knob of the ML towards darker repeats.
Turning the EQ knob for a brighter sound makes the ML spin into a nasty self-oscillation after a few repeats.
If I should choose one I`d go with the ML even compared to the modded AD900s I have. But I keep the AD900 for a couple of reasons (sounds);
the gradual onset of self-oscillation and the way you can have lots of repeats going into these smooth tapelike pads (using the expr pedal). And when playing with a clean sound the punchy bass is cool for those palm muted sequencer-like bass runs. But for most people and common sense this would be of marginal interest.