Jump to content


Photo

What A Dissapointment


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 gumby3bh

gumby3bh

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 01:20 PM

I just went through a lot of grief to trade in my 1-week-old Pod HD500 for the HD500X, because I was frustrated with the "DSP Limit Reached" message.

 

So I get my new toy home, hook it up and open an existing patch. I added the PhD Motorway amp, went to FX and deleted an EQ and went to add Reverb and "DSP Limit Reached."

 

What did they upgrade? I see ZERO difference so far!

 

 


  • 0

#2 phil_m

phil_m

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 5505 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis, MN

Posted 18 July 2013 - 01:27 PM

Are you saying you added the PhD amp model to a patch with an amp model already and then added reverb? I believe the Dr Z. model is one of the most DSP intensive amps, and if you used the Spring or 63 Spring reverb model, those are some of the most DSP intensive effects. So depending on what all you have in your chain, yeah, it's still possible. The added DSP headroom is about 20% or so I believe, so it's not unlimited by any means. The one thing I found with the HD500 is that if you can live without a spring reverb and even use the plate model or one of the other reverbs, it does let you do other stuff.


  • 0
Time is a train
Makes the future the past
Leaves you standing in the station
Your face pressed up against the glass

 


#3 spikey

spikey

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 460 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 03:08 PM

Phil, The Dr. Z may be one of the most intensive power grabbing DSP amps, but remember that we just got an upgrade after many years of DSP limitations among other things. All excuses aside , had I upgraded this guitar processor in a world of nothing but black and white limits knowing what we know about it now, I would have added enough horse power to "fix" this so that we could see a difference and then some. After thinking on it some, I question why a brand new unit has only a 20 % headroom increase in the 1st place?!?.  I personally have my HD Pro dialed in to my liking now after many years of frustrations, so unless it blows up in the near future I wont upgrade because 1st I don't feel the need atm, and after seeing the "limited" amount of DSP added on the new one Im probably not alone here... And this is NOT what I wanted to think about the new unit, at all! 

 

YMMV of course....


  • 0

#4 EnzoHeavenly

EnzoHeavenly

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 29 posts

Posted 18 July 2013 - 04:43 PM

Phil, The Dr. Z may be one of the most intensive power grabbing DSP amps, but remember that we just got an upgrade after many years of DSP limitations among other things. All excuses aside , had I upgraded this guitar processor in a world of nothing but black and white limits knowing what we know about it now, I would have added enough horse power to "fix" this so that we could see a difference and then some. After thinking on it some, I question why a brand new unit has only a 20 % headroom increase in the 1st place?!?.  I personally have my HD Pro dialed in to my liking now after many years of frustrations, so unless it blows up in the near future I wont upgrade because 1st I don't feel the need atm, and after seeing the "limited" amount of DSP added on the new one Im probably not alone here... And this is NOT what I wanted to think about the new unit, at all! 

 

YMMV of course....


I think I can explain why this happens. Do you remember the cellphones that appeared 3 years ago? Me neither... Technology moves too fast, so... those Sharc chips that the HD500 had, are not in production any more (most likely cos there are more powerful chips out there now.

So, the X, is not really a new model, but an upgrade. It's pretty much like replacing a Tegra 2 processor for a Tegra 3. Why would you try and get a Tegra 2 nowadays?

20% might not be a lot, but if you can live without reverbs (or use an external one) then you must be able to use Dual Tones more often, and that it's important for some.

This is not a real new model, this is not the HD1000, this is just the replacement of the HD500 which components might not exist anymore.


  • 0

#5 Rul0r

Rul0r

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 19 July 2013 - 04:21 PM

I think it's ridiculous to advertise this device as NEW or something. It's the same ol' pod with it's limitations and a few more leds. And the differences between a tegra and a pod is, that the pod is 5 years old...the fist tegra was sold 3 years ago...now we have the 4th generation with 12x the power of the first tegra...
  • 1

#6 brue58ski

brue58ski

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 530 posts

Posted 19 July 2013 - 04:36 PM

That's progress. I am disaapointed it's not a no DSP limit upgrade but I think it's good of Line 6 to have upgraded the product when they could while keeping the price the same. What were they supposed to do? Just not do it? Keep selling the HD500 as is, even though they had something that would improve it for the same price? To me, that would be ridiculous. At the very least I'm going to guess it didn't increase Line 6's profit margin on the HD500. I think they did it soley to improve their product and nothing more. How can you fault them for that. Sure the advertising guys will hype it a bit but that's what they do. It's why I waited until I knew exactly what was being offered. What's being offered currently, is not enough for me to sell my HD500 (got it about a year ago) but I don't hold any grudge toward Line 6. I'm waiting for the HD (and am wiling to pay more for it) that won't ever give me any DSP limit. 20% more isn't enough.


  • 2

#7 Rul0r

Rul0r

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 19 July 2013 - 04:46 PM

It's ok to replace an old model with a slightly newer one. I'm just so disappointed that the last updated I got for my hd pro was nearly a year ago, and than they release this thing. And again not even one new Amp model for the HD pods. The maintenance for their products is horrible in my opinion.
  • 0

#8 spikey

spikey

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 460 posts

Posted 19 July 2013 - 06:16 PM

What were they supposed to do? Just not do it? Keep selling the HD500 as is, even though they had something that would improve it for the same price? To me, that would be ridiculous.  DSP limit. 20% more isn't enough.

 

They (Line 6) were suppose to do what ever it is they want to do. Its their product and their future at stake here. Their decision... The new more hefty buttons on the X are welcome, the rest ive seen leaves me underwhelmed compared to the Pro. What were they supposed to do? I would have gone the way Fractal Audio is headed for example, in using the best  A to D and D to A converters  money can buy . While increasing the cost of course (at the expense of better tones and more power for the FX chains), instead of settling for a mere 20 percent increase in DSP (and only because the vendor couldn't get the older chips any longer im hearing).  But even if thats a line o bunk too, I think we all wanted more and didn't get it. And that, is what has caused disappointment for many.

 

But hey, they didnt increase the cost any, and they did increase the DSP power by 20% or so. So all isn't so bad especially for the new Pod buyer... 

 

 

Guess it could be a lot worse huh...


  • 0

#9 partytrain

partytrain

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 25 posts

Posted 20 July 2013 - 11:47 AM

It's the same as a change from the iPhone 4 to the 4s. Slight upgrade, same price, big advertisements from apple.

Upgrade if you need the better switches or the slightly higher dsp, but no need for outrage or "extreme disappointment."
  • 1

#10 brue58ski

brue58ski

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 530 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 12:44 PM

 And that, is what has caused disappointment for many.

 

But hey, they didnt increase the cost any, and they did increase the DSP power by 20% or so. So all isn't so bad especially for the new Pod buyer... 

 

 

Guess it could be a lot worse huh...

 

I will admit to being very disappointed as well.  If it provided no DSP limits, even if it cost more, I would have gotten it.  But whadaya gonna do.


  • 0

#11 rodney13

rodney13

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 245 posts

Posted 21 July 2013 - 10:43 PM

Get a decent amp and a TC electronics Nova system You won't look back
  • 1

#12 stumblinman

stumblinman

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 545 posts
  • LocationPacific Northwest

Posted 22 July 2013 - 03:55 AM

Get a decent amp and a TC electronics Nova system You won't look back

That's funny.  My other guitarist uses a Nova into an Egnater Renegade and he complains my tones with my HD500 and DT25 beat his by a mile.  Got any pointers for him?


  • 1

#13 rodney13

rodney13

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 245 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 04:31 AM

Well yes the HD and the DT amps were made for each other, as for your other guitarists envey for your tone it just may be that he doesn't like his amps tone as the Nova doesnt model any effect or amp. has he plugged the HD into his amp?
  • 0

#14 EnzoHeavenly

EnzoHeavenly

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 29 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 07:46 AM

What we need for now, it's a rough estimate of when will the Next-Gen POD HD be released. So far all our HD models fit into a 'budget-friendly' multi-effects. As most of us think, it IS the time to think a little outside that point of view and maybe release 2nd line of PODs, Think of it as Toyota and Lexus (cars). I think to have the 'alternative' to have a special POD on the $1000 mark (as long as it's worth it) would be REALLY appealing to many, specially the gigging musicians.

But again, I got no idea how they decide this things.

Another idea I had is for them to release Expansion Packs. I really miss some FXs and amps from the X3 Live and POD Farm.


  • 0

#15 stumblinman

stumblinman

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 545 posts
  • LocationPacific Northwest

Posted 22 July 2013 - 08:17 AM

Well yes the HD and the DT amps were made for each other, as for your other guitarists envey for your tone it just may be that he doesn't like his amps tone as the Nova doesnt model any effect or amp. has he plugged the HD into his amp?


I'm just busting your chops. He's just got a terrible ear for tweaking his tone. I've set it up for him twice and he loves it until he starts making adjustments and loses it.
  • 0

#16 silverhead

silverhead

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 11414 posts
  • LocationOttawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 22 July 2013 - 02:25 PM

I see the "DSP Limit" is still being reached in the HD500x, albeit at a 'higher' level. Not surprising, really, because of the device design. This argument has been going on for years, and you either like this design or you don't. There ARE Pod HD models that do not have any apparent DSP limit - the Pod HD300/400.

 

The following snippet is from a post I just made in another thread.

http://line6.com/sup...d-x3/#entry9493

 

It is not intended to ignite the old debate - it's just intended to clarify (for new readers) two design approaches to the reality that ANY processor has DSP limitations. The options are: hide the limitation and prevent users from using all available DSP in most situations, or expose the limit by putting the user in control of DSP management. Your choice - but there is NO DSP processor that is unlimited. The debate really is whether or not the Pod HD dual-path devices (all models, including the 500x) have 'enough' DSP - but of course there's never enough. The real question is: do you want to be able to use all that is available, or not?

 

Re: DSP overload - the X3 has its DSP limitations too, as does any processor. Most processor manufacturers guarantee that you will never observe those limits by constraining your selection and placement of FX. In the X3 you can't use both a distortion and overdrive in the same Tone. You are limited to 3 FX blocks from which you can only select one instance from that group of FX.  The same constraining design applies to the HD300/400 - you will never encounter the DSP limit because it is engineered away. With this design model, in any preset that uses DSP-light selections for the FX slots, there is a LOT of technically available but actually wasted DSP I prefer the HD500/Pro/Desktop design model. The user is in control of all available DSP, and the selection and placement of all FX is entirely at the user's discretion - up to the point that all available DSP is being utilized; that's when the DSP Nanny steps in and prevents you from doing any more.


  • 0

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

 

 


#17 hansvaneven

hansvaneven

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 374 posts

Posted 22 July 2013 - 11:15 PM

Get a decent amp and a TC electronics Nova system You won't look back

 

I just did that, got myself two very good tube amps and now adding the Nova System to it ...

 

cheers,

 

Hans


  • 0

#18 rodney13

rodney13

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 245 posts

Posted 23 July 2013 - 12:16 AM

Enjoy. Hey line 6 do make fantastic products but for me its been a long journey of many pedals and amps including Line 6 M13 HD 500 , hey if Line 6 had made the M13 with true analog overdrive ciircutry just like the nova system then I would have got one and as and I finally got my dream amp the 1959handwired and I didn't want to change its tone with amp modelling / digital the Nova system leaves my amps tone as is and I am more than impressed just like. I'd hope you will be , I believe that if you want to run amp modelling into the front of a good tube amp then either your not happy with your amps tone in the first place or maybe you want multiple sounding amps all from your own. Cheers and all the best with your new rig
  • 0

#19 phil_m

phil_m

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 5505 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis, MN

Posted 23 July 2013 - 05:50 AM

Well, good luck with your Nova Systems guys... I tried one myself for a little while, but after a few months on my smaller board, but I got frustrated with the interface and got an M9 instead.  I also didn't think the OD/distortion section was anything to write home about even though it was analog. Then after that, I figured I didn't really need two pedalboards, so I got rid of my smaller one, and just focused on the M13 board.

 

Personally, I do like using analog dirt pedals, but I've had more luck with just using the actual pedals I like. I've got to say that even thought I own all the components of the Dream Rig, I'm a pedal junkie at heart, and I still will gig most of the time with my M13 board and a tube amp.

 

pedalboard1.jpg


  • 0
Time is a train
Makes the future the past
Leaves you standing in the station
Your face pressed up against the glass

 


#20 spikey

spikey

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 460 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 02:48 PM

I see the "DSP Limit" is still being reached in the HD500x, albeit at a 'higher' level. Not surprising, really, because of the device design. This argument has been going on for years, and you either like this design or you don't. There ARE Pod HD models that do not have any apparent DSP limit - the Pod HD300/400.

 

The following snippet is from a post I just made in another thread.

http://line6.com/sup...d-x3/#entry9493

 

It is not intended to ignite the old debate - it's just intended to clarify (for new readers) two design approaches to the reality that ANY processor has DSP limitations. The options are: hide the limitation and prevent users from using all available DSP in most situations, or expose the limit by putting the user in control of DSP management. Your choice - but there is NO DSP processor that is unlimited. The debate really is whether or not the Pod HD dual-path devices (all models, including the 500x) have 'enough' DSP - but of course there's never enough. The real question is: do you want to be able to use all that is available, or not?

 

Re: DSP overload - the X3 has its DSP limitations too, as does any processor. Most processor manufacturers guarantee that you will never observe those limits by constraining your selection and placement of FX. In the X3 you can't use both a distortion and overdrive in the same Tone. You are limited to 3 FX blocks from which you can only select one instance from that group of FX.  The same constraining design applies to the HD300/400 - you will never encounter the DSP limit because it is engineered away. With this design model, in any preset that uses DSP-light selections for the FX slots, there is a LOT of technically available but actually wasted DSP I prefer the HD500/Pro/Desktop design model. The user is in control of all available DSP, and the selection and placement of all FX is entirely at the user's discretion - up to the point that all available DSP is being utilized; that's when the DSP Nanny steps in and prevents you from doing any more.

 

I agree there is never enough dsp to suite many including me, but I just don't get why they didn't double it's power in the design phases of a new Pod... With size decreasing and power increasing in chipsets it makes no sense, unless this was just a production run change because the old chip was no longer available.  But that is "pure" speculation, once again... Yes I'll go back to my corner now....


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users