TC Helicon Perform VG / Play Acoustic

[riverroots]

Been reading through a bunch of the old posts... and thought i'd see if any of the people who tried these out still would recommend them?

So I'm deciding between the perform VG and the Play Acoustic

I'm a semi professional musician and I play festivals/gigs where I have a sound man... and small gigs/busk where I don't

Originally i thought definitely VG...but....
Am I correct in what I think that all the guitar effects are mixed in the same output as the vocals? therefore making it useless in a gig with a soundman?
I can only imagine the face of one if I say... yeah I'll just give you the mix of everything and you just set the volume

Which may mean I might as well get the perform V and a separate guitar pedal

I'm not really bothered about all the harmonies or pitch correct as we play acoustic and have a raw sound. mainly interested in the reverbs, tone and feedback buster.. and to mess around with effects for guitar.

Is there anything else on the market I could also look into?

[Per Burström]

I have the Perform-VG, although I haven't really gigged with it. It's awesome though, the effects for both voice and guitar is great.

The Perform-VG has a "Thru" output for the guitar channel to be able to send out the original guitar signal to an amplifier. By default the guitar sound is removed from the main output when you do this, but this can be enabled again.

Hope this helps a little!
Per in Sweden

[gfirob]

You can send the guitar and voice out by separate outputs (XLR) with the Play Acoustic. I send mine into a mixer so I can control voice and guitar levels separately. You can also combine them. I think the Play Acoustic is a great device IMHO.

[riverroots]

Originally Posted by Per Burström

I have the Perform-VG, although I haven't really gigged with it. It's awesome though, the effects for both voice and guitar is great.

The Perform-VG has a "Thru" output for the guitar channel to be able to send out the original guitar signal to an amplifier. By default the guitar sound is removed from the main output when you do this, but this can be enabled again.

Hope this helps a little!
Per in Sweden

Ah cool thanks, yeah from what i see that's what is drawing me the most to it... they sound great!

What a silly thing to not give the option to send the guitar effects down that guitar thru channel... it renders it useless for any gig with a soundman.
I don't see the point in having all the effects for guitar but then sending it out as it was orignally... unless you don't want the guitar effects.... in which case why not just get the perform V instead?

Edit: I see probably for the harmonies

[riverroots]

Originally Posted by gfirob

You can send the guitar and voice out by separate outputs (XLR) with the Play Acoustic. I send mine into a mixer so I can control voice and guitar levels separately. You can also combine them. I think the Play Acoustic is a great device IMHO.

Great to know cheers

Anyone know if the tone settings are different between the play and VG?

[Per Burström]

Originally Posted by riverroots

What a silly thing to not give the option to send the guitar effects down that guitar thru channel... it renders it useless for any gig with a soundman.
I don't see the point in having all the effects for guitar but then sending it out as it was orignally... unless you don't want the guitar effects.... in which case why not just get the perform V instead?

Edit: I see probably for the harmonies

I guess it's all about "product differentiation", if you want more flexibility you need a more expensive product, like the Play Acoustic.

The guitar thru is, I guess, meant to be used for example if you only want the effects of the Perform-VG for your voice, and use a guitar amplifier for your guitar (or send the guitar signal in the raw format to the mixer). The reason you connect the guitar at all to the Perform-VG in such a setup is to get the harmonies, right.

[AndyC]

I'd go with the Play Acoustic - it gives you much more control and flexibility over how you do things.

[Per Burström]

I love the format of the Perform-VG, that is why I bought that instead of the Play Acoustic. I just wish it was battery powered out of the box, but I'm building myself an external battery pack for it.

[riverroots]

Originally Posted by Per Burström

I guess it's all about "product differentiation", if you want more flexibility you need a more expensive product, like the Play Acoustic.

The guitar thru is, I guess, meant to be used for example if you only want the effects of the Perform-VG for your voice, and use a guitar amplifier for your guitar (or send the guitar signal in the raw format to the mixer). The reason you connect the guitar at all to the Perform-VG in such a setup is to get the harmonies, right.

it does have a body rez and guitar effects like reverb echo etc

[riverroots]

Originally Posted by AndyC

I'd go with the Play Acoustic - it gives you much more control and flexibility over how you do things.

I think this is what I will do... just sad it doesn't have the anti-feedback feature.

[mikealpine]

I posted in the general section about the Play Acoustic or the Tech 21 Acoustic Fly Rig. I probably should have posted in this sub forum. At any rate, the Flu Rig might be a good option if you don’t want the vocal processing.

[Hinto]

Hi, I have both, and I'll highlight a few of the major differences.

Ease of use - The Perform is much easier to use. The manual is clear and there is also a video manual on YouTube which is helpful. In the space of day you can easily explore all of the options and get to your best vocal and guitar tone. If you play with the Play for a day you'll get a great tone, but it will take a lot more fiddling than Nero did to explore all of the options and get your 'best' tone.

Build quality - The Perform is all plastic, it looks and feels a bit like a toy. The Play has the typical 'built like a tank' quality you'd expect from a stomp box. This is all probably OK given their intended uses. But if I was gigging with the Perform, I'd get a small gig bag of some sort to move it around.

Patches - Patches! We don't need to stinkin' patches! At least if you're using the Perform. That said you can use the Switch 3 or 6 to store some settings and in some cases this might be more versatile than the Play. The Play has patches, lots of them. You can probably create one for each of your songs if you want.

Effects - The Perform has the basic effects you'll likely use most of the time. Harmonies, Reverb and Echo on vocals and Chorus, Reverb, and Echo for your guitar. The Play has lots of effects, many of which you'll probably never use to perform with, but they're fun to play with.

DI Out - The Perform only has 1 DI out and it's of course blended. There is a guitar thru but it defeats the purpose if you want to use the Body Rez function or any of the guitar effects. The Play has 2 DI outs, one for vocals and one for guitar. This is pretty nice.

For now I'm sticking with the Play.

[Hurricane Ramon]

¿ If money's not an issue why not go whole hog ?



Since you mentioned liking the idea of guitar FX - The VL3 X is loaded big time with state of the art FX for both
electric and acoustic guitars .

One more thing -

• You can use/swap electric guitar FX and play them on your acoustic
• You can use the vocal FX on either electric & acoustic guitars

I have one This includes a looper too heh heh heh .

EZ :

HR

[Kindness]

OMG I love the simplicity of the Perform VG and the switch 6 is awesomeness. If anyone has these for sale PM me!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtWWP8iGiNQ

Ok waiting for Kramster to tell me he has this...

[DavefromHull]

Does anyone know, please, is the Body Res in the VG as good as that in the play? Thanks.