I, too, started with Digitech (RP5, then RP10) then switched to Zoom (Player 3000 and then GFX 8) but like you said, I'd set them and forget them.  If I needed to tweak I had to consult the manual as I would forget how! Finally got the HD500 and it is miles ahead of the competition with no brainer features such as low Imp out to PA (Hello?!)

To be fair, each unit had its advantages (on the RP10 you could step on a patch change button, play a fill riff, and step on the same button again to go back to the previous patch without having to look. I still miss that and the Zooms had seamless patch change with spillover of echo and reverb carried on into the next patch. Even they don't have this feature anymore!)  But the current models of these companies in the same price range pale in comparison to the HD500! Very excited to own and use it live, however I am starting to get "option anxiety" over all the possibilities!

I agree...very good sounding POD...I've been making comparisons to my other multieffects units...HD 500 is the best one yet.

I agree, the only thing really lacking from Line  is better communication....

I agree.  Very well said.

I am very happy with my HD500 and I rarely encounter the DSP limit.  I also own a zoom GFX8 but quickly moved to a digitech GNX4.  My GNX4 started to freak out so I needed a new processor. I looked at the digitech RP line and they moved backwards not forwards IMO. I also looked at the X3 live and that had everything I needed too but they were discontinued.  In the end this processor is the only one on the market that has anything like my GNX4 and that's why I moved to Line 6 because the POD HD500 has it all. Plus more. I like it.

I'm certainly happy with my HD500. But do not confuse those that "moan" about specs limitations (e.g. no vocal preamps, only 16 amps etc) and those that report/complain about issues with the existing features. The number/choice of amps, as well as the number of available slots etc. are clearly indicated, and anybody who isn't happy with them didn't research enough before getting hold of the product. But once your volume spikes between patch changes, that's an issue that's certainly not "by design" -- people report (or downright complain) about it here (this is a support forum), line6 takes notice and fixes it, as indeed it did. It does not scare me to see problems being reported where it's due, i.e here.

alsithi wrote:

 

I really don't know what all the fuss is about. IMHO the HD500 does exactly what it is designed to do, ie provide guitar players with enough hardware to create the sound you've always dreamed of. What you get out of it is directly proportional to the effort you put in- what's wrong with that? If you have any kind of imagination it delivers the goods. Well, it does for me anyway.

 

Yes of course there are bugs- in modern technology there always are because there are so many variables. In the old days of discrete fx units the box only had one job to do, but with the HD there are millions of possible permutations and with the best will in the world they can't think of everything!

 

I cannot believe people are moaning about the limits of the fx slots when you consider the dazzling amount of possible combinations which ARE possible within the DSP limit. The routing and switching options are just out of this world!! Only 16 amps??? I'd have settled for ONE!!!

 

I've been using multifx for 20 years and finally I have a device that makes me WANT to play with it. First off was a Digitech RP1- lovely piece of kit but once I had a set of basic patches I never touched it again. Next came a Zoom GFX8- much better sounding than the RP, and in fact still sounds good, but again the patches I used in 2010 were the exact same ones I used in 2001.

 

My next buy was gonna be another Digitech, probably the RP1000, another unit which would have gone the same route, of 'ok, that'll do....' but I wanted more!

 

With the HD500, I got it!!!

 

 

end of rant;-)

cheers

John

I agree 99% well said.

the other 1% does respect that some people may want to use their device in a certain way, and if a bug is stopping them, then that's a pain... BUT there's very few big bugs that are show stoppers if any at all, and I think in some circumstances people have seen that it says you can run 8FX at once, so they've stacked up 8FX, and it hits the limit... so on principle they complain... but when you actually get down to using it, how many patches can you say you'd use more than 1 or 2 high DSP FX at once... honestly?  I'm guessing rarely if at all. But I personally think having a DSP monitor saying the % of the DSP in use would be helpful, and I guess publishing the % of each FX would be helpful too... as even if L6 didn't publish it, as soon as you have a DSP % monitor, you can find out by adding each FX individually and seeing the DSP % used... at least that would help people say, ok my priority is using a dual recto model and a JCM800 model... and I want some reverb, so what reverb has low enough DSP that I can fit it into what's left after the amps are in use... would seem like a cool idea for tone builders...

anyway that's just me waffling on