Jump to content


Photo

500 Is Now 400


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 toneman2121

toneman2121

    Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2774 posts
  • Locationphilly

Posted 11 July 2013 - 01:00 PM

http://www.guitarcen...om/-i1540622.gc


  • 0

I'M SO HAPPY!


#2 hurghanico

hurghanico

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1397 posts

Posted 11 July 2013 - 01:19 PM

fun thing they offer also a used one for the same price

 

http://www.guitarcen...929-i3241559.gc


  • 0

#3 GTLazer

GTLazer

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 215 posts

Posted 11 July 2013 - 11:47 PM

Out of the following, which would you choose? (Take your time, mind, cos it's a tough choice)

 

New HD500: $399

Used HD500: $399

New HD400: $399

 

lol


  • 0

You like my answer? Hit the up arrow. You no like my answer? Hit the down arrow. Sorted.


#4 toneman2121

toneman2121

    Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2774 posts
  • Locationphilly

Posted 12 July 2013 - 03:21 AM

Out of the following, which would you choose? (Take your time, mind, cos it's a tough choice)

 

New HD500: $399

Used HD500: $399

New HD400: $399

 

lol

that's a tuffy


  • 0

I'M SO HAPPY!


#5 silverhead

silverhead

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 11459 posts
  • LocationOttawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 12 July 2013 - 04:02 AM

It actually could be a toughie......... for those to whom dual output is a critical feature, the clear choice is the HD400.

 

(I've heard conflicting opinions about whether the reference to 'routing options' in the HD500x means dual output. I don't think it does, but would welcome clarification on this point.)


  • 1

Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans.
.... John Lennon

 

 


#6 hurghanico

hurghanico

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1397 posts

Posted 12 July 2013 - 06:24 AM

(I've heard conflicting opinions about whether the reference to 'routing options' in the HD500x means dual output. I don't think it does, but would welcome clarification on this point.)

 

according to what is written in the new downloadable manual both the HD500X input routings and the output features are identical to the HD500


  • 0

#7 Guitarwildman

Guitarwildman

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 13 July 2013 - 05:22 AM

What is the BEST POD for me to purchase if I want dual output also keeping the modeled amp/cab, etc?

My main goal is that I want output to go directly to the mixer AND I want output to go directly to the AMP at the same time without dropping cab/amp/etc modeling...

 

Also, I want to keep the sounds as close as possible (In other words, I want to have the output that goes to the AMP keep the cab and speaker modeling, NOT drop it).

 

I also will initially/very temporary be using an old Line6 FLex III cabinet sending the pod output to the effects loop inputs (only using this amp and cab because I already own it... but want to replace one that is cleaner, no hum - ground loop issues that won't go away).

 

In any case, I would also like to know the best cleanest amp to purchase to have the cleanest output (behave like a mixer, clean amp, clean speaker - so that I can continue to use live output to amp and keep modeled amp, cab, speaker - while at the same time having the other output from the pod going to the mixer/pa).

 

My apologies for being redundant.. but I wanted to get the point across.

 

Any help?


  • 0

#8 StephenSLR

StephenSLR

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 237 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 14 July 2013 - 06:07 PM

http://www.guitarcen...173-i3193464.gc

 

500x = $499.99

 

s


  • 0
Listen to my band here:
 

#9 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 14 July 2013 - 06:26 PM

What is the BEST POD for me to purchase if I want dual output also keeping the modeled amp/cab, etc?

My main goal is that I want output to go directly to the mixer AND I want output to go directly to the AMP at the same time without dropping cab/amp/etc modeling...

 

Also, I want to keep the sounds as close as possible (In other words, I want to have the output that goes to the AMP keep the cab and speaker modeling, NOT drop it).

 

I also will initially/very temporary be using an old Line6 FLex III cabinet sending the pod output to the effects loop inputs (only using this amp and cab because I already own it... but want to replace one that is cleaner, no hum - ground loop issues that won't go away).

 

In any case, I would also like to know the best cleanest amp to purchase to have the cleanest output (behave like a mixer, clean amp, clean speaker - so that I can continue to use live output to amp and keep modeled amp, cab, speaker - while at the same time having the other output from the pod going to the mixer/pa).

 

My apologies for being redundant.. but I wanted to get the point across.

 

Any help?

QSC K10 Powered PA Speaker or any powered speaker to use as FRFR . This will reproduce the modeling better than guitar amp and your sound will be identical (for all intended purposes) to the one you send to FOH. You might also want to investigate the speakers line 6 just introduced about a year ago. I know QSC are widely used among those who use modeler but Line 6 speakers have more options.

 

Regarding what POD to buy, it's best to find a deal on the HD500X. You might get something else and save a $100, but it won't be worth all the features that you would loose. Don't buy the HD400 or 300, they don't have input impedance matching. I find input impedance to make a huge difference in adding realism to the amp models. 


  • 0

#10 Guitarwildman

Guitarwildman

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 15 July 2013 - 11:04 AM

Great help... Now, I need to figure out the best way to split the modled/cab, mixer outs from the HD500X (y cables or some other direct box way?).

Why?

So that I'm getting one set going to Mackie 1604 mixer like every other instrument in the band then it hits' the Mackie SRM 450 powered speakers, etc.

And,

The other two (stereo) outputs will suffice as my clean amp (I'll toss the old dirty amp, and use my two smaller Mackie SRM 350's self-powered rather clean as my new amp)

 

I just need to figure out what you guys recommend as the best way to split the output/fully modeled to the PA as well as my new clean amp alternative (2 SRM350's).

 

Thoughts?  Is it just 2 y cables?.. or will I lose half the sound, and it will turn out thin...

 

Thanks for your help.. I'm almost there brother...

 

John


  • 0

#11 Guitarwildman

Guitarwildman

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 15 July 2013 - 11:09 AM

I think that I just don't fully understand the dual output/'routing options in the HD500x.

1 - The best way to output to a PA

2 - And use the same type of output (fully modeled) to a clean-self powered speaker at the same time

Simple Y-cable?  Or a better way that won't lose/cut signal in half, etc.

 

Thx

 

John


  • 0

#12 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 15 July 2013 - 11:38 AM

there are two sets of output in the hd500 and hd500x. 1/4 inch pair, you can send those to your Powered speaker and the XLR pair can go to FOH. Very simple.


  • 0

#13 Rewolf48

Rewolf48

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 392 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 16 July 2013 - 03:36 AM

or use XLR from HD500(x) to the SRM350 and another XLR from the "through" on the 350 to the PA  ;)

 

The SRM350 includes a built in splitter so that you can daisy chain them together, just like my FBT MaxX 2a's do.

 

 

The realistic answer is use whatever set-up requires least cable runs that get in the way.  If the FRFR is backline then you run the cable to the PA same as you would had you miked it without crossing the stage floor which you would have to if you took it from the HD500(x) directly. But every stage is different - if you use the SRM350 as monitors (pointing at you from the floor) then there really is very little in it at all


  • 0

#14 Guitarwildman

Guitarwildman

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 07:12 AM

Perfect solution...

Also, extremely important question here...

will my tones from my Pod XT Live be able to be used in the HD500X?  If so, will they sound the same?

 

The important reason I ask is that all of my tones that I use in the bands songs are in there... I sort of have to keep them, otherwise I have to start from scratch again (about 30-40 tones)?

I know over time I can create new tones for other songs in the HD500X that will be better, etc.

 

Thoughts?

 

John


  • 0

#15 jws1982

jws1982

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 297 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 07:23 AM

No, the tones won't transfer and won't sound exactly the same.  It's worth the effort to re-create them though.

 

The POD HD400 has one leg up on the 500's, in that it easily can feed a guitar amp and FOH with the different appropriate modeling options on for both.  The HD500 has to use a workaround with dual amp models to accomplish this.  This is more of an advantage over just the 500, as it caused the CPU limit to be easily reached.  The extra CPU of the 500x should negate this.


  • 0

#16 Guitarwildman

Guitarwildman

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 09:00 AM

Thanks for the reply...

 

To recreate the old XT Live tones in the new POD HD500X what do you think is the best method?

Has anyone tried to use XT Live tones as a reference to create the tones on a new HD500?

 

I'm thinking that maybe I could open the bundle of XT Live tones and look at it, and create them while having a new HD500X attached in Gearbox, and go one-by-one and

Try to re-create (one monitor looking at the old  XT Live, one other monitor looking at the new HD500X?  I was thinking I could try to use these old tones as reference for tones on my HD500.

 

Am I nuts?  Has anyone tried to do this?

 

Thanks for listening!


  • 0

#17 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 09:06 AM

You'd be wasting your time. If it was possible line 6 would have provided a translator. The amps are completely different.  you're better off Starting from scratch.


  • 0

#18 silverhead

silverhead

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 11459 posts
  • LocationOttawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 16 July 2013 - 04:04 PM

Thanks for the reply...

 

To recreate the old XT Live tones in the new POD HD500X what do you think is the best method?

Has anyone tried to use XT Live tones as a reference to create the tones on a new HD500?

 

I'm thinking that maybe I could open the bundle of XT Live tones and look at it, and create them while having a new HD500X attached in Gearbox, and go one-by-one and

Try to re-create (one monitor looking at the old  XT Live, one other monitor looking at the new HD500X?  I was thinking I could try to use these old tones as reference for tones on my HD500.

 

Am I nuts?  Has anyone tried to do this?

 

Thanks for listening!

I can understand your motivation - it takes a lot of time to create tones that you like. But if you are completely happy with your Pod XT  tones, just keep your Pod XT.

 

The reason for going to the Pod HD is that you want to improve your tones - and you can certainly do that. But nbot by trying to recreate/reproduce your XT tones. That approach wastes a lot of time and ultimately defeats the purpose. You would be doing yourself a great disservice to use the Pod HD to recreate inferior tones that you already have. If you purchase a Pod HD, keep your XT for gigging until you have spent the time you need to create superior tones with the HD - and you won't do that by limiting yourself to XT thinking. Experiment - start from scratch and let your ears guide you. It will take time, but you won't be disappointed in the end, and you won't waste time on trying to get back to where you already are (XT tones).


  • 0

Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans.
.... John Lennon

 

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users