Why people hates Line & and POD????????

[Prive]

I have a big amp and i understand why some people love big amps but, i don't know why there are people who hates the POD stuff, they say it's thin sounding and things like that.
I think POD XT is an incredible box, all that pedals and amps and everything you need in a single, programable, easy and more BOX.
What they need?

I love my Marshall but i'd love to have one POD too.

Saludos, Marcelo.

[lvs]

I think it will always be a bit different from "real" but differences will become marginal, since modelling gear gets better and better, thanks to increasing processing power and improving knowhow.

The POD sounding thin is something I heard also, from someone who tried out various modellers and eventually bought a Johnson.

Another guy I know was given a pod to try out on a gig, and right after that he bought one. His amp stands in the rehearsal room gathering dust. He just plugs his pod into the PA. It's that easy... no stack, no roadies, no transportation. It's probably roadies that are spreading bad words about the POD  :wink:

[GM Arts]

As a PODxt owner for over year, I know the "thin and fizzy" issue well.  It's also discussed at length (too much length, really) on the Line 6 POD forum.

Bottom line is that the PODxt is designed to sound like the mike in a room in front of a guitar speaker, which comes from a guitar amp.  Most people who know what that really sounds like agree that the PODxt does that exceptionally well.

Trouble is, most players want the PODxt to sound like what they hear from a guitar amp, and not the sound the mike "hears".  This is generally much thinner and fizzier.  As a simple experiment, compare the typical 45 degree off-axis sound most players listen to about 6 feet away, to the sound 3 inches away in front of the speaker.

Live use into a real guitar amp & cab generally becomes even more difficult with their different and variable frerquency responses, although players using a flat PA system with the PODxt in direct mode will get far more predictable results.

Many players (me included) use a post EQ to sort out tone problems between the PODxt and different live systems, and the good news is that the PODxt gives a bit more of everything you need, so it's easy to filter out the bits you don't want with an EQ, leaving you with great tone.  I use the post EQ merely to get a balanced tone from my patches, while others use it for detailed tone "sculpting".

Either way, it's all good fun, and I agree the PODxt is a great unit, and with so many powerful options, it just takes more time to tune it into the tones you're looking for.

GM Arts

[Ge_Whiz]

I have a friend who plays a Strat through a Fender Deluxe 85 (transistor) amp, and owns a POD. At low-to-moderate volume levels, the Fender amp lacks punch, and the POD helps with the sound. At high levels, it's the other way about - the Deluxe yells cheerfully all by itself, and the POD just seems to detract from the overall sound. I have other chums who say the same thing, and it's also true for my Digitech unit with my HH VS Musician (SS) combo. I guess this is the reason for the arguments for and against - generally, how loud you're playing.

Putting a POD through a PA, preferably with a competent sound guy attached, sounds like the best way to use one to me when playing live.

[csj]

GM Arts,
I, along with many others here, have enjoyed your site for years. It's nice to have you here.
Clay Jones

[primalphunk]

If you're in the mood for real tubes but want to be able to haul around a smaller and lighter cabinet there is always the zvex nanohead.  Not exactly the same as a pod or j-station since it really has tubes at a raging 1/4 watt output.  As for me.  My j-station and VG-88 with keyboard amp are good enough for me.  Now if I could get my hands on a 2x12 combo plus a nice horn that was a hybrid keyboard amp and nicely voiced for guitar tube amp I might jump on that.  I want a magical anything amp.

[Ansil]

unfortuneatly the sad truth is i haven't heard the new pod but i have heard all the other ones and well they are great for covers or if you want to sound like your favorite band.. but after some listening to there just wasn't any soul to any of them.

personally i enjoyed my johnson for gigging and for walkin studio work but after a while it was just too predictable,  turning down the guitar didn't respond like a real processor or amplifier which really turned me off to them forever.

the best one i ever saw was this tube preamp into this no name fx modeler into a tube poweramp.  this thing kicked butt  no quams about it. i loved there amps  1000 bucks  every effect i needed  real tubes.. beefy responsive sound  i coudl turn it down without it cutting ou t. on me.

i was in love with it. but alas it was a demo and well the noname comanpy.

JOHNSON

was an early prototype when pod first come out. this has been many moons ago.

[GM Arts]

I think there's a good reason the POD (or any other modeller) works well with an amp at low settings and not at high levels:

The boxes model the sound of amps working hard, and you need to amplify that sound through a clean amp to hear the full detail of that modelled sound.  That means the amp needs to be set at a level below the poiint where it starts to break up itself.  When that happens (at loud volumes), you have the both the modeller and the amp producing overdriven sounds.  This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but they'll generally detract from the clarity and character of each other.

And thanks for the compliment, csj.  The site's pretty old now.  It's just as well us guitarsits love our vintage gear, so hopefully the info's still relevant.

rgds,
GM Arts

[Eric H]

And thanks for the compliment, csj.  The site's pretty old now.  It's just as well us guitarsits love our vintage gear, so hopefully the info's still relevant.

rgds,
GM Arts

It's very relevant --one of the clearest versions of "distortion 101" available, IMHO. My compliments, as well.

-Eric

[Doug H]

And thanks for the compliment, csj.  The site's pretty old now.  It's just as well us guitarsits love our vintage gear, so hopefully the info's still relevant.

rgds,
GM Arts

It's very relevant --one of the clearest versions of "distortion 101" available, IMHO. My compliments, as well.

-Eric

I'll second that. GM Arts has been a favorite site of mine for years. Truly one of the bright spots in DIY guitar electronics. It is pretty old, but I still find myself referring back to it from time to time.

Thanks for all your effort!

Doug

[petemoore]

Some of my favorite pedals are build from GM Arts schematics.
 I've always wondered why Boss pedals have all that extra 'stuff' under what's on the GM Arts schematic 'partials'...which I think work just fine the way they are...or with added buffering..
 I'm just too lazy or unadventurous [read 'willy'] about those complete Boss schematics...also I have no use for the Jfet bypass section [whatever that is], and no real questions about it as a result...
 I'm on my way back to point 'A' [purchasing a factory DS-1 or SD-1]...seems the easiest, most sure fire, and least expensive way to get a Full workup of a Boss effect schematic...then take it from there with the mods.
 Just the bottom parts, and where the signal appears to go into the drain of the Jfet...what the heck is all that for??? Does it serve any purpose to altering the function of the Distortion when it's on?
 Can someone describe the differences between the GM Arts Boss partial schematics, and the Boss effect schematics at Fuzz Central?

[Lonestarjohnny]

first off, when you open that big old fancy line 6 chassie up and all you see is empty space and a 1 lil ol momma board that has traces so small that the Tooth Fairy would have a hard time repairing, you'll understand the word ( Throwaway ) and I'm not saying this to be naughty, I'm saying it from an average repairman's view.
JD :roll:

[cd]

Some of my favorite pedals are build from GM Arts schematics.
 I've always wondered why Boss pedals have all that extra 'stuff' under what's on the GM Arts schematic 'partials'...which I think work just fine the way they are...or with added buffering..
 I'm just too lazy or unadventurous [read 'willy'] about those complete Boss schematics...also I have no use for the Jfet bypass section [whatever that is], and no real questions about it as a result...
 I'm on my way back to point 'A' [purchasing a factory DS-1 or SD-1]...seems the easiest, most sure fire, and least expensive way to get a Full workup of a Boss effect schematic...then take it from there with the mods.
 Just the bottom parts, and where the signal appears to go into the drain of the Jfet...what the heck is all that for??? Does it serve any purpose to altering the function of the Distortion when it's on?
 Can someone describe the differences between the GM Arts Boss partial schematics, and the Boss effect schematics at Fuzz Central?

The only reason Boss and other companies (DOD, Digitech, etc.) use that mess of JFET switching because it's cheaper (and in their boxes, more durable) than a regular stomp switch.

[jsleep]

i don't know why there are people who hates the POD stuff, they say it's thin sounding and things like that.

I've actually never heard that they sound thin.  I think they are severly over-priced, but obviously my thinking doesn't enter into the line-6 equation and rightfully so if they can sell 'em.

Behringer V-Amp Pro is more like it.  Got mine for $140 on ebay ($199 new)  Rack mount, everything a pod has at one-third the price (compared to the rack pod).  Haven't had a chance to compare it face to face with a pod, but it sounds pretty good to me for what it is.

JD

[casey]

It is rather silly that anyone would think they can adequately
model the hot glowing tube loveliness of a Matchless amp,
or a Mesa Boogie peeling the paint off the walls.
There are too many variables involved.  It's like when
Antares came out with a microphone modeler that could
turn your sm-57 into a 4000 dollar telefunken Ela M251.
yeah right.

with that said, i think that the idea is a decent one for
apartment recording where your neighbors may not
like all of the noise, or for an 80 year old man with
a bad back that still gigs....

but i cant imagine someone that would leave a perfectly
good tube amp at home and play through a pod.
just my opinion i suppose.

[runmikeyrun]

I think their okay for certain applications, i.e. industrial music like fear factory and maybe even some nu-metal that borders on industrial.  I think they might work well with death metal too, their so high gain and compressed to begin with you really can't hear their tube amps breathe or feel their punch.  

I have seen an industrial/nu-metal band play with one live, same thing they just plug it into the pa. It sounded good for the band he was playing in.   No heads, no cabinets, nothing but a guitar and a little piece of plastic.  As a bass player who carries a rackmount power amp, an ampeg 8x10 and a 2x15 i really envy that!  But for rock and roll, most metal, and most other types of music nothin replaces the sound of a good amp and lots of speakers moving lots of air!

[Bluesgeetar]

The musical, harmonic, organic content is just not there.  They will never ever ever get a digital modeller job to react like a vintage amp.  I mean a real vintage amp, not one that's been modernized to ruduce hum and crap.  The POD can not react the way tube circuitry can.  For example:  Here is one most folks know- the solo on stairway to heaven.  the little part where he does an extreme bend up and the Supro starts to howl and scream with the bend as if the amp is in the most unbelievable heart aching pain and sadness.  Ain't gonna get that from no POD  Xt or otherwise.

On the flip side I own a Line 6 BASS POD pro.  I swear by the thing.  Super fat and kickin on some settings.  My favorite is it's Acoustic 360 Bass amp setting.  So rich and bassy.  A feller can't go wrong with a BASS POD pro.  

Mic?  Do what Page did and many other British Gods!  Every one was always dumbstruck how Page could get such a huge sound out of a little Supro.  He has bragged in many a interview of his studio prowess with micing and said he put's one at the speaker and one 3 feet or so back and blend to flavor.  Not to mention he played through an echoplex most of the time whether it be just a hair for thickning or long for ambient.  I have a 67 echoplex and I can tell you, what ever goes in comes out twice as thick.  

It is really sad that there is no book out on vintage recording tricks and techniques.  I hate the modern sound, so lifeless and dull.
Like the vocalist trick.  So many greats from the 60's and definately Robert Plant for a fact used to sing through a mic'd guitar amp so many times.  

Things are getting better on the mastering front though with things like the PSP vintage warmer and Tracks.  Then you have to do your homework and find out the strange stuff.  Like the best dithering is now owned by Izotope.  Amazing!  And much cheaper than than Waves.  The Russian genious that designed the famous dithering program now works for Izotope.  It is an updated and better version of the one used in TC elec sparks.  He don't work for TC anymore.  Amazing sounding!  Check it out for yourself.  http://www.24-96.net/dither/
If any of you plan to record pro your gonna need to know about dithering.

Best rule of thumb I have heard from to many "old" pro engineers is to stay analog as much as possible outside the box then with good a/d conversion you should be ok.  

All of Zeppelins CDs have been remastered in the digital domain and they still sound great!  Why!  All analog then into the box with good A/D conversion.  I got's lots lots more but my knuckles are cramping.

[Steve C]

I have a POD XT and I use it everyday.  It' great for practicing with headphones and I take it with me when I go out of town.  

I use it all the time for recording because it sounds warmer than my amp does with a mic.  That's solely because of the volume issues of apartment living.  

I've tried it through my amp and was not happy with the results and I've used it through a couple of P.A. systems and wouldn't recommend it for that either unless you have a lot of power.  I wouldn't get rid of any gear to get one, but it is a nice thing to have.

[davebungo]

All I need is my (relatively) simple and straightforward 2X12 valve combo perhaps mic'd up for larger gigs.  WHY would I need a POD and all of its complexity.  Its fine to plug a POD into your P.A. but where is your backline that you need to provide all that nice warm feedback - it does not work through a P.A.  AND you need bloody good monitors to hear yourself playing.  You won't convince me to buy one and I am NOT biased, I have tried one out at a gig and at rehearsals and I didn't get on with it.  BTW have a quick search on Ebay for PODs - you can currently take your pick from about 14 for sale in the UK alone!  Does that say anything?

[cd]

I borrowed a POD XT from a friend for a week (since I was thinking of buying one) and didn't end up getting one.  It's a nice quiet recording tool, but too complicated (IMHO) for live performance (even with the footboard).  I suppose if you needed 7-10 COMPLETELY different tones at a gig, it would be useful - personally, I can get away with my Twin Reverb and 2 pedals (3, maybe 4 different sounds.)