The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Bob Clearmountain talks about the Pod! Effects Pedals, Units & Accessories
Old 15th September 2007
  #241
Lives for gear
 
paterno's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by paterno
...........
The notion of posting samples is weak because with mixing everything is so context related. ................
Quote:
Originally Posted by SK1 View Post
Really ???

It's got to be better than just blah, blah, blahing about it.

I'd rather hear the samples, then decide for myself.

Yes. Really. Because if you are mixing it comes down to the decisions you make personally to achieve what you think is a good mix. Someone throws up a 'guess which one is the Pod' solo'd guitar post, and it is completely not the point.

The only way to make a valid decision is to do the work and see for yourself. Whatever is posted, you have absolutely no idea how much or how little work was needed to get it to where it is. I'm sure the tracks Clearmountain has mixed that have Pod distorted guitars on it sound OK to the listener, but that's not the point here now, is it? The point is that for some people it is a complete pain in the ass to get them to sound like anything useful once you've got an entire mix going.

Look -- in the end, as a professional, you mix whatever is handed to you, and you do the best job you can with it. It sounds like a guitar. It just never sounds like the guitar I imagine it should sound like -- no matter how much EQ/compression, blah, blah, blahing, and I can never seem to get it loud enough.

JP
Old 15th September 2007
  #242
Lives for gear
 
paterno's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeronimo View Post
colinmiller and paterno: You know, it's kinda funny that you guys (and many others) have missinterpreted what I said. The thing is, I allways respected Bob as an engineer, as most of you do, and this time I didn't like the way he put his opinion. I think it was too ofensive, and most people will just think (because Bob said) the tool is a piece of ****. I think every tool has it's place, maybe not in my room, but someone, somewhere will do something sound amazing with it.

That's the whole thing. But if you think you're so smart to loose your time writing useless stuff over the internet... think again.
What part of this :

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by paterno
who exactly lost your credibility?
Bob Clearmountain...


did we as readers misinterpret?

Like I said -- GO TO HIS WEBSITE AND READ HIS QUOTE, IN CONTEXT IT WAS WRITTEN IN.
Old 15th September 2007
  #243
Harmless Wacko
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by loudmusic25 View Post
Slippy, So you're still finding a better tone through the amp simulator in your Roland VS1680?

Each to his own. You're still the better 'chess' player.
This is probably a very good joke/roasting/beatdown... Unfortunately, I'm so friggin' dense it's soaring RTF over my soggy melon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paterno View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by paterno
...........
The notion of posting samples is weak because with mixing everything is so context related. ................

Yes. Really. Because if you are mixing it comes down to the decisions you make personally to achieve what you think is a good mix. Someone throws up a 'guess which one is the Pod' solo'd guitar post, and it is completely not the point.

The only way to make a valid decision is to do the work and see for yourself. Whatever is posted, you have absolutely no idea how much or how little work was needed to get it to where it is. I'm sure the tracks Clearmountain has mixed that have Pod distorted guitars on it sound OK to the listener, but that's not the point here now, is it? The point is that for some people it is a complete pain in the ass to get them to sound like anything useful once you've got an entire mix going.

Look -- in the end, as a professional, you mix whatever is handed to you, and you do the best job you can with it. It sounds like a guitar. It just never sounds like the guitar I imagine it should sound like -- no matter how much EQ/compression, blah, blah, blahing, and I can never seem to get it loud enough.

JP
Oh man. Did you say it ALL there... or what?

SM.
Old 15th September 2007
  #244
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver Sonya View Post

All that being said, one of the coolest sounds on my band's next record was achieved with this embarrassingly cheesy tool. When people hear it, they ask "Wow, how did you get that sound?"

After telling the truth once or twice, I learned that the truth is unromantic and not very rock'n'roll. Nobody wants to know that the guitar sound they love comes from software. Everybody has a Pete Townshend/Jimmy Page/[insert your favorite guitar hero here] fantasy.
Aside from the possibly subjective opinions of whether these emulations and imitations sound good (or good enough), or whether they are easy or difficult to mix because of the bizarro low end and the tin can high end or the fantabulous skills of the almighty POD masters, or whether, no matter which amp you're imitating, there is some sort of weird similarity between them all....

there is something to be said for that (dead) fantasy....
Old 15th September 2007
  #245
SK1
Lives for gear
 
SK1's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by paterno View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by paterno
...........
The notion of posting samples is weak because with mixing everything is so context related. ................

Yes. Really. Because if you are mixing it comes down to the decisions you make personally to achieve what you think is a good mix. Someone throws up a 'guess which one is the Pod' solo'd guitar post, and it is completely not the point.

The only way to make a valid decision is to do the work and see for yourself. Whatever is posted, you have absolutely no idea how much or how little work was needed to get it to where it is. I'm sure the tracks Clearmountain has mixed that have Pod distorted guitars on it sound OK to the listener, but that's not the point here now, is it? The point is that for some people it is a complete pain in the ass to get them to sound like anything useful once you've got an entire mix going.

Look -- in the end, as a professional, you mix whatever is handed to you, and you do the best job you can with it. It sounds like a guitar. It just never sounds like the guitar I imagine it should sound like -- no matter how much EQ/compression, blah, blah, blahing, and I can never seem to get it loud enough.

JP
I'd like to hear the top 1% of direct guitar sounds out there. Not that I don't agree that the pod by itself direct is a pain in the ass. I'd prefer to keep an open mind as I continue on my path, because I'm greedy for info.

Also, understand that I'm interested in tracking better direct guitar sounds. Not that I don't love micing amps. But wouldn't it be great to get some awesome direct tones ?

I can understand that it's frustrating mixing pod sounds that you had nothing to do with tracking ....... bummer.

As far as context, listening to sounds always works better than just talking about them ....... for me at least.
Old 16th September 2007
  #246
Lives for gear
 
paterno's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SK1 View Post
I'd like to hear the top 1% of direct guitar sounds out there. Not that I don't agree that the pod by itself direct is a pain in the ass. I'd prefer to keep an open mind as I continue on my path, because I'm greedy for info.

Also, understand that I'm interested in tracking better direct guitar sounds. Not that I don't love micing amps. But wouldn't it be great to get some awesome direct tones ?

I can understand that it's frustrating mixing pod sounds that you had nothing to do with tracking ....... bummer.

As far as context, listening to sounds always works better than just talking about them ....... for me at least.
How do you qualify the 'top 1%'? How do you define 'direct guitar sound' for that matter?

To me, a direct guitar tone is one that comes from the output of the guitar, into a DI, a pre, and then whatever. That's the way most of those great Motown records were done fron the 50's until the mid-late 60's or so.

If you are talking amp-simulated/ no speaker tones, there are a lot of options, from HoT Plates and Palmer Speaker Emulators, to NI Guitar rig and that software Chad [Silver Sonya] linked to before. I'd download demos of those things and see what they can do. With the speaker emulators, sometimes it's finding the right head or combo amp out combination. The software, again, it's a lot of experimentation. And with the software [and even Pod-like devices], at least from a playing perspective there is the feel aspect.

I still have not found anything that can sound more 3 dimentional than a mic'd guitar amp. Straight guitar into a DI can sound pretty great too. [If you are really adventurous, try putting a fuzz in the chain !!] If you have a cruddy sound coming out of the amp, that is a completely different ballgame. And even with a cruddy sounding mic'd guitar track, I've had better luck turning that into something useful than a Pod track. But that's me...

Cheers,
John
Old 16th September 2007
  #247
Quote:
Originally Posted by SK1 View Post
Hey RCM !!
You started this thread, so I think it's only fair that you post some examples of your stuff that you consider to be great guitar sounds. That way, we can see where your coming from.
Sure, I will apprehensively set myself up to take a beating

I never said I was great. Remember I am the guy that started this thread admitting that I am not a good enough mixer to make Pod tracks sound great!

I looked to see what I had here on my laptop that I had mixed that prominently features electric guitar. Not sure if any one will count the mixes or even guitar sounds as great, but I strung together a few 30 second clips of guitar sounds from a range of styles. that I think are interesting and were easy to work in the mix. There is everything from SSL to mackie mixes (a couple are roughs in progress). warning: one of the singers cusses if that's a problem around your kids or something.

So if you want a few minutes of guitar noise in the background while you post on GS click this link. Just don't beat me up too bad.

http://www.homerecordingbootcamp.com/lessons/gs-gtr.mp3

+
+
Old 16th September 2007
  #248
Han
Lives for gear
 

No, I haven't read all nine pages of this thread. Everytime I have to record an amp like Line 6 it seems that the sound gets lost in the mix, which I never have with real guitar amps. It might be me, dunno.

Last week there was a father with his 17 year old son visiting the studio in order to get some info and experience the atmosphere. This proud father told me his son has a Line 6 guitar amp, great amp he said.

After a while I took a 46 year old Gibson SG from it's stand, put it in a 25 year old JCM800 with a 4*12 V30's cabinet. The dude played a couple of power chords, took a deep breath and said : sssjjjjjeusesss!!!!!, which is Dutch for something like: ssjjjeeesshh and actually means Jesus.

That was really funny and I hope he wasn't to much dissapointed about his Line 6 when he got home.

No Pod for me please.
Old 16th September 2007
  #249
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
nice! no pods there.....plenty of fat organic natural amp tones though.
Old 16th September 2007
  #250
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Han View Post

After a while I took a 46 year old Gibson SG from it's stand, put it in a 25 year old JCM800 with a 4*12 V30's cabinet. The dude played a couple of power chords, took a deep breath and said : sssjjjjjeusesss!!!!!, which is Dutch for something like: ssjjjeeesshh and actually means Jesus.
you have provided a public service. good work.
Old 16th September 2007
  #251
Gear Head
 

Obviously someone doesnt know how to set the POD.

There are uses for this thing believe it or not. I would never use it for my main dirty tone. I mean a whole record of it would probably not be good but it does have its uses.

I have used it lightly on recordings and got good results. Very mixable. I have a first generation pod. I sometimes use it for effected cleans. I mix them with amp sounds of course. I also use it for semi dirty plexi type sounds.

I think used in moderation it can be a useful quick tool.

I prefer real amp sounds but sometimes it can be a desired tone. Running it thru a great mic preamp also helps out the quality of the POD.

Stay away from the grinding heavy tones with it. Those are the worst. Cleans, Combo dirties and plexi sounds arent bad on it if tweaked properly.
Old 16th September 2007
  #252
Gear Maniac
 
Firefox's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcm View Post
Sure, I will apprehensively set myself up to take a beating

I never said I was great. Remember I am the guy that started this thread admitting that I am not a good enough mixer to make Pod tracks sound great!

I looked to see what I had here on my laptop that I had mixed that prominently features electric guitar. Not sure if any one will count the mixes or even guitar sounds as great, but I strung together a few 30 second clips of guitar sounds from a range of styles. that I think are interesting and were easy to work in the mix. There is everything from SSL to mackie mixes (a couple are roughs in progress). warning: one of the singers cusses if that's a problem around your kids or something.

So if you want a few minutes of guitar noise in the background while you post on GS click this link. Just don't beat me up too bad.

http://www.homerecordingbootcamp.com/lessons/gs-gtr.mp3

+
+
these tones all sound GREAT! My favorite is the super heavy clip about 3/5ths of the way thru.... but everything sounds like guitars should - meaty, fat, emotive and basically kick ass!!!
Old 16th September 2007
  #253
Lives for gear
 
studjo's Avatar
 

wasn't the last Porcupine Tree record recorded with Line6 stuff exclusively


I like the music but the guys should hire Bob for mixing (and use real amps)

Jo
Old 16th September 2007
  #254
Quote:
Originally Posted by studjo View Post
wasn't the last Porcupine Tree record recorded with Line6 stuff exclusively
How do these rumors get started. This was posted earlier in the thread.

Quote:
In current issue of EQ: Wilson mentions that he uses a pod for all his demos and that he actually likes the pod sounds, but......

"Although Wilson tends to include many of the guitar tones from the demo stage on the albums final mixes, he also mics actual amps while doing overdubs to create punch, clarity and sonic diversity. "

When you listen to the record you can hear there's an incredible range of different textures - particularly from the guitars" he says. "A lot of the more heavily overdriven riffs are all done through real amps" EQ Magazine September 2007
Old 16th September 2007
  #255
Moderator
 
Oroz's Avatar
 

I'm surprised that Meshuggah's last albums haven't been mentioned in this thread. They all have been done with POD's and Veta II's and although I like their older sound better (back when they used marshall's, mesa's with t.c. electronic line boosters, gates, etc.) I must admit that they manage to get a good guitar sound.

Old 17th September 2007
  #256
Lives for gear
 
DAWgEAR's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcm View Post
Sure, I will apprehensively set myself up to take a beating ...
...
http://www.homerecordingbootcamp.com/lessons/gs-gtr.mp3

+
+
Thanks, Ronan. That says it better than any amount of posts.

Hearing Steve Morse made me smile. thumbsup
Old 17th September 2007
  #257
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAWgEAR View Post
Thanks, Ronan. That says it better than any amount of posts.
ditto. that was a really cool collection of guitar sounds.
Old 17th September 2007
  #258
Gear Addict
 

I didn't read this whole thread so maybe what I'm saying has been touched on already. While I think Amp Farm sounds pretty good I have never been able to get the same quality result out of any of the Pods I've owned. This has led me to form the conclusion that the weak link on the Pod is the input stage and convertors. This is alleviated somewhat by using something like a VHT Valvulator between your guitar and Pod input, but still can't measure up to sending the Valvulator output through a nice high end pre and HD convertors when using Amp Farm.

The other guitar sound "hate" issue is one of distortion sameness. I find this to exist even using amps, but to a much lesser extent. Distortion sameness is the buildup of similar sounding distortion and eq when using the same distortion generator on a number of tracks. This happens even when using cleaner less distorted sounds. The more tracks you cut with the same source even if you are changing the sound of the amp, the more this buildup occurs and it's something you just can't eq or compress out of your mix. Apparently not Bob Clearmountain either. Since Pod users are generally using it instead of an amp, there is also more of a tendency for these players to use it on every track they cut. Used for only a track or two the Line 6 stuff sounds fine.

If you want to cut guitar tracks that mix themselves just use a different amp and guitar on every single track. With the exception of a little filtering and some added bite here and there, you rarely have to do anything drastic to make it all gel together. Sort of the same difference you might find listening to 20 violins playing together compared to 1 guy playing the violin part 20 times.
Old 17th September 2007
  #259
Well, can I just hijack this thread a little? Sorry...

One thing that makes real mic'ed amps sound really bad is TOO MUCH distortion, in my opinion.
If some of you guys agree with this, what do you do to make a guitar player track his parts with less drive/distortion?

I have SEVERAL guitar players coming to my studio (most of them are used to play with digital distortion boxes, like PODs, GT-8s, V-AMPs, or pedals like SansAmp, Metalzone, etc) and feeling like the Triaxis running the Mark IV mode with gain and drive on 10 is not enought.........

To them, there is not enought gain to play, and to me it's fuzzy as hell already...

What should I do? Track a clean DI channel to reamp later and leave them with what they fell confortable with?
Old 26th September 2007
  #260
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
I wonder if this sounds better or worse than a pod



http://www.voxamps.co.uk/amplug/
Old 26th September 2007
  #261
Lives for gear
 
superburtm's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mixerguy View Post
I wonder if this sounds better or worse than a pod



VOX amPlug - Headphone Guitar Amplifiers
those things look cool! I gotta try that for homethumbsup
Old 26th September 2007
  #262
Lives for gear
 

This thread is depressing me.

I've been doing gtr over 30 years and have never tried or heard one of these PODS until this thread. Rock & roll isn't just a sound...it's an attitude. And that attitude doesn't come in a little pink box.


I'm getting old...

Sorry for the pointlessness.
Old 26th September 2007
  #263
POD works ok on a Rhodes. i agree it's a PITA on guitar.


Quote:
I wonder if this sounds better or worse than a pod

VOX amPlug - Headphone Guitar Amplifiers
the tonelab sounds pretty damn good & mixes well. based on that i'd guess the other vox products are worth a listen.
Old 2nd October 2007
  #264
Gear Addict
 
andygomez's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mixerguy View Post
I wonder if this sounds better or worse than a pod



VOX amPlug - Headphone Guitar Amplifiers
Sweet could work with a small diaphram cond up to my headpones
Old 9th November 2007
  #265
Gear Addict
 
skygod's Avatar
Wait a minute! Hold those wild horses!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcm View Post
I have always said that I think the Line 6 Pod is the single biggest set back in recording quality in my life time and that the guitars just do not work in mixes. I have gone so far as to turn down some mix jobs where the guitars were cut with Pods or at least asked my manager to double my mix fee because of all the work that will go into trying to overcome how bad the Pod had screwed up the record. Lots of people think I am nuts, but it looks like I am not the only one:

Quote from Bob Clearmountain's web site <http://www.mixthis.com/bobframeset.html>


NO PODS IN THE RECORDING STUDIO!!!! Normally, I don't like to comment on how to record stuff, the general rule being "there are no rules". In this case, I'm making an exception as I've recently had to try to deal with guitar tracks recorded through The Pod (from Line 6). These are the most unmixable sounds I've ever encountered. I'd say they're probably fine for demos, but quite often demo tracks appear on final master recordings, then end up on my mixing table! Don't get me wrong, Line 6 makes some great products - I use Amp Farm all the time. I think the Pod is really for blasting your Strat, Les Paul or whatever through headphones so your mom/girlfriend/wife/bus driver doesn't get annoyed. PLEASE beg, borrow or steal a goddamn guitar amp!!

...and whatever you do, DON'T fall asleep next to one

Line 6 ... can't put my finger on it. It doesn't work to tape or live for me since their inception, and even now with theor flagship generation 'n' whatever latest and greatest. It's all the same mush to my ears.

I have been doing a lot with the Boss GT8 that is an amazing piece of technology live and in studio for quite some time now with this series, and since the GT5, then GT6 now the GT8 dual chipset. I toured for an entire year with the GT5 feeding the back of two 5150 armored cavalry war heads LOL into dual Mesa 4x12 G12-30V cabs and it rocked bypassing the front ends of the heads.

This GT8 is another creature altogether. Its fvvking amazing and I play and own every high end piece of analog guitar gear every produced by everyone and anyone who ever engineered and MFG'd any guitar/preamp/amp piece, and this thing rocks. Caveat: Line/Out mode, and either play it into the back end of a JC120 setero thru the JC120 flat EQd speakers in the combo, or an external 2x12 or 4x12 stereo AVATAR eminence RED Coat Tonespotter/Wizard speaker combination for example, or into Marshall 50/50 or 100/100 EL34 power amps out into Marshall G1275 4x12 cabs. Never run this or any multi effect pedal into ANY front end of any preamp or anything else or else you get the layered EQ effect that is just that - a tonal disater.

What can this do? Well push real air for one and sound really amazing both to tape and live mic'd. I never DI guitar sounds, and although I use DIs like the palmer soaks 03 and 05, then I take that signal out to power amps and EFX racks, I still let it pass through air thru mics to tape. Always capture the air! Folks, this thing seriously rocks.

Robert Marcello is an avid Roland/Boss user and you shuld listen to his demos on youtube sometime. Neoclassical 1, 2 &3, and GT8 patches he created as well. The 5150 and Plexi and Fender 'The Twin' models alone are worth the price of admission, as well as the analog delay and chorus. A bud of mine did created a perfect dumble patch. You kidding me? Fuggedaboudit!

~skygod~

BTW. I listened to the Meshuggah vid further down this thread, and you guys think that the Line 6 Pods and Vettas used produced great guitar blends? Really? I mean seriously? Are you guys doing heroin, estacy, speed, vaginal duchy What? getthefuggouttahere ... it sounds like total and absolute mierda. C'mon guys. If your ears are that seriously fvvked up, and you are the future of this business ... I'm hanging it up F A A A K!!! fuggedaboudit -

~skygod~
Old 9th November 2007
  #266
Airwindows
 
chrisj's Avatar
I've been beating this dead horse and wiring it to electrodes to try to make it get up and eat Tokyo, too, and here's where I got with it. I fixed the buried-in-the-mix problem and got it to where POD lovers really hate it, but I'm still stumbling over something that's not going to get fixed THIS go-round. It's heard more on the 'twin heavy' guitars here than anywhere else.

http://www.airwindows.com/temp/AirwindowsDemo.mp3

More than any other tone, the heavy guitar tones (all these are using a variation on impulse modeling for speaker cabs, and the heavy guitars are a V30 type) are producing a sustained wash of color. They all do this, using raw impulses does it even more unvaryingly, it's part of the guitar sound that makes the heavy guitars not sound like classic rock guitars. I've had it described as 'like a trace of resonant white noise' which is better than 'like a ring or cabinet honk' but still accurate.

Here's the catch: with a real amp, you're going to have some of this (too much and the real amp sounds bad, too little and things get 'classic rock' or maybe Van Halen-y, not HEAVY) but it's a physical phenomenon and it does NOT always ring the same, any more than a real ride cymbal always decays with the same waveform when struck. And this is deadly to even full-on cabinet impulse users. It's like putting a gel on the camera to make 'blue lighting' for the stage.

What I'm doing to fight this is synthesizing a speaker impulse on the fly based on what the waveform is doing, and this does do a lot to break up that sameness, but it's absolutely not enough, it's just better. To me it's usable, partly because it's not convenient for me to be working with Marshall stacks in my house. You make sacrifices while trying not to lose too much. Right now, what I sell is better at classic-rock tones and just sorta different for superheavy tones, more functionally better than tonally. That's because it is successfully solving the not-loud-enough problem, to the extent that I had to bury it in the example mixes because people were insisting I had it unfairly louder than the other sims, even though it was peak AND RMS quieter than them by measurement.

This taking-up-excess-space of sims is WEIRD, man. I was testing out the idea of playing stuff from this thread while playing my demo at the same time. I did it with the real-amps link above, and it was awful but you could pick out the different instruments. I then did it with the guy who posted a PODfest (which was actually mixed incredibly loud to boot) and playing my stuff under it, EVERYTHING died horribly. You couldn't make out anything, not my stuff, not his. I turned his stuff way down to where you could hear mine, and it STILL covered everything up. All his sounds seemed nice enough but they smothered anything around them...

I'm not even sure what's causing that, but I know for certain that my stuff doesn't do that at all- you can listen through it, and I've heard complaints about that fact, but I know what I like and it's staying that way. Everybody can already get a POD sound cheaply if they want, but it's not so easy to find something else if you're trying to get it digitally. I like being the polar opposite of PODs, even if that has to mean PODs sound 'nice' and my stuff sounds 'wha?' heh

It's all about WHAT WORKS FOR THE SONG in my opinion and every other consideration has to lose...
Old 15th December 2007
  #267
Here for the gear
 

What is a stupid pod anyway...

(my first post here-- be gentle)

Line 6 came up with some 2-dimensional way to take a "snap-shot" of certain obvious qualities of amps & cabs (perhaps by creating a simple distortion profile, an EQ profile, and/or an impulse response under some specific conditions). Then rather than expanding that process to make a few high-quality 3-D models (that are realistic with attacks, chords, dynamics, etc.), they chose to cram a bunch of these low-quality snapshots together and sent their marketing team forth with a mission to "make them (i.e. us) slober over 'EVERY GREAT AMP EVER MADE MATCHED WITH ANY CABINET YOU WOULD EVER WANT!'" (or words to that effect). Hence, the pod is a box trying to do 100 tasks with somewhat mediocre results.

To some extent they pulled it off. Pods get mostly reasonable reviews and sell pretty well to the average Joe's & Josie's out there. I bought one, too. But let me say right now, I've never owned a tube amp. I have my range of likes and dislikes with tone, and I do have to find just the right settings for things.

I guess the pod represents amp modeling in its infancy. And IMHO, pods sound better than some simulators (like COSM) and worse than others. And they don't do what the real deal does.

Now I'm trying to decide whether it would be worth a couple hundred to get the X3 (not because I think the mic pre models are worth a crap), but because there's the ability to have two paths, and more flexible routing. And it seems like a box that could be used easily on keyboard, bass, guitar, vox to do some interesting crambangling or crimdingulating, or derflefluating to.

I guess what it comes down to for me is that for fairly few dollars, it's a reasonable tool for creating unusual tones-- not that necessarily recreate all the glory of something else, just to make colors. If I don't like the tone I'm hearing, I'll fix it or try something else... like I always do.

If some company had figured out a way to use some kind of super-dynamic-convolution-matrix to create a completely real tube-amp hologram, I suspect some die-hards would still hate it. But yea, the pod is what it is.
Old 15th December 2007
  #268
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by stubbsonic View Post
(my first post here-- be gentle)

Line 6 came up with some 2-dimensional way to take a "snap-shot" of certain obvious qualities of amps & cabs (perhaps by creating a simple distortion profile, an EQ profile, and/or an impulse response under some specific conditions). Then rather than expanding that process to make a few high-quality 3-D models (that are realistic with attacks, chords, dynamics, etc.), they chose to cram a bunch of these low-quality snapshots together and sent their marketing team forth with a mission to "make them (i.e. us) slober over 'EVERY GREAT AMP EVER MADE MATCHED WITH ANY CABINET YOU WOULD EVER WANT!'" (or words to that effect). Hence, the pod is a box trying to do 100 tasks with somewhat mediocre results.

To some extent they pulled it off. Pods get mostly reasonable reviews and sell pretty well to the average Joe's & Josie's out there. I bought one, too. But let me say right now, I've never owned a tube amp. I have my range of likes and dislikes with tone, and I do have to find just the right settings for things.

I guess the pod represents amp modeling in its infancy. And IMHO, pods sound better than some simulators (like COSM) and worse than others. And they don't do what the real deal does.

Now I'm trying to decide whether it would be worth a couple hundred to get the X3 (not because I think the mic pre models are worth a crap), but because there's the ability to have two paths, and more flexible routing. And it seems like a box that could be used easily on keyboard, bass, guitar, vox to do some interesting crambangling or crimdingulating, or derflefluating to.

I guess what it comes down to for me is that for fairly few dollars, it's a reasonable tool for creating unusual tones-- not that necessarily recreate all the glory of something else, just to make colors. If I don't like the tone I'm hearing, I'll fix it or try something else... like I always do.

If some company had figured out a way to use some kind of super-dynamic-convolution-matrix to create a completely real tube-amp hologram, I suspect some die-hards would still hate it. But yea, the pod is what it is.
don't waste your $

buy an amp



heh
Old 15th December 2007
  #269
Lives for gear
 
popmann's Avatar
Quote:
Pods are not as damaging on single note stuff. Single note stuff does not screw up all the other tracks the same way chords with a pod will.
Can I get an "amen"? a "Halleluja"?

Part of the key there other than "single note vs chords" is that rhythm/chordal work is meant to gel into a track--which is what modeller tracks have a hard time doing, and no doubt what Bob is frustrated with--no amount of EQ or compression gets them to really gel the way any tube amp+Royer will.

For LEAD guitars, that are supposed to stand out, it works better because they're not intended to "blend in" with everything. That, and I think it freaks out the digital model when there is more than one note, as mentioned. There is a single lead gtr on my record I'm mixing that's a modeller (albeit Amplitube)...it's taken the most work of all the leads. But, the demo take had "the vibe", which is the most important thing. Since then, I've uninstalled it, and don't even use modellers for demos, because you never know when you're gonna want to keep a take...
Old 15th December 2007
  #270
Lives for gear
 
popmann's Avatar
Pods are great...for beginners to get experience with the ballpark of all those different sounds and learn what FX/amps/chains make them. But, once they find "theirs"...they should graduate to the real deal. I don't hate PODs. They have their place...which just doens't happen to be in the recording studio, IMO.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Jules / Podcasts and Interviews
24
Silver Sonya / So much gear, so little time
0
JFK Chopper / So much gear, so little time
4
Alexi / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
1
sofa / So much gear, so little time
24

Forum Jump
Forum Jump