Jump to content


Photo

Pod Hd 500 - 500x *new* Routing Schematics

routing signal routing effect block gain input settings hd500 hd500x mono summing unity gain

  • Please log in to reply
62 replies to this topic

#21 cz-milan

cz-milan

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 19 November 2013 - 07:31 AM

hi Milan
 
I'd like to check your re-drawings before you publish them
 
and I'd like to use them in this thread (of course with credits to you as the "digital artist" ;-) )

O.K. Lorenzo,
I will try to redraw the schematics as soon as possible and give them to you at your disposal. 
Milan


  • 0

#22 perapera

perapera

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 113 posts

Posted 20 November 2013 - 01:14 AM

thanks edstar, I really enjoy helping when I can,

reading your story I thought:

1 - since you have many speaker oprtions why not using the pod in "stereo"?

stereo is in quotes because using both XLR outs does not mean you are in stereo

it's the kind of effect you use that create the stereo image

2 - if you are using a mixer as an additional gain stage you can avoid Y cables and connect both pod outputs to the mixer, pan them both to center

or maybe both to left for example and then take the left out of the mixer and connect the two linked speakers

3- a 12" speaker works better on guitar than a 10" speaker even if it's a PA, so if you can try that too

4- the pod XLR outputs carry a balanced microphone level signal, it's a little hot for a microfone level but it's definitely NOT a line level, it could be something like 30dB softer than the jack outputs;

the only benefit of XLR is the balancing which helps with noise interferences ON LONG cables

I mean over 10 meters, you don't need that

AND using a jack out will mix to mono internally

 

 

but, as I see from your edit, you discovered this by yourself ;-)

 

5- many guitarists know that a valve power amp has a way of treating dynamics that gives it more volume and cut-thru even with low wattage, your 200+200W system should be enough to balance maybe a 30-40W valve amp

 

Thank you very much Lorenzo! I really appreciate all your time and effort in giving me such a comprehensive reply.  I have clicked on the links you gave me about Y cables and now understand that I have been doing the wrong thing!  In fact I am now concerned that maybe I have damaged my gear because of this misuse of the Y cable - I hope not.  I have also read your other thread where you and hurghanico describe in great detail the difference between the balanced (XLR) and unbalanced (jack) connectors on the back of the HD500.  And I have also read through the HD500 ADVANCED GUIDE V2.10 specifically looking at detail about signal paths and also the connectors.  I think that finally I understand the signal routing paths of the HD500.   If it was not for your post here, I would never have got to the bottom of it, so thank you very much for sharing and for answering my questions!

 

Today, I will put into practice everything I have learnt, and will hopefully get a great sound out of my HD500 at GIG volumes with any gear.  I will rework my powered PA speaker connections (STOP USING Y CABLES!) and then rework my HD500 patches to work with the correct connections.  I will then repeat the process with my other patches for direct amp connections and for DT25 with L6Link to ensure the signal paths are correct.    UPDATE: Removing the Y cable and taking the L/mono jack unbalanced out from the HD500 into my mixer channel, plus on HD500 setting using Global Option STUDIO/DIRECT and for each patch setting mixer pan controls to 100% for L and 100% for R, made a big difference. Everything sounds much better already!  :)

 

Background:

Why did I start using a Y cable in the first place?

I had a V700 and an X3L.  The X3L never cut through at gigs - always sounded very thin when amplified at volume. I thought it was because I was only using one half of the output signal, so decided to try using a Y cable to capture both L+R outputs and it certainly did seem to improve things, however, it still did not provide sufficient signal level to drive my STUDIOMASTER GX12A powered speaker at sufficient volumes to compete with the band at gigs. So I then introduced a BEHRINGER B105D, and took this combined XLR L+R signal and put it into one of the mic/line inputs. I only had to boost that signal by a few db's, with the trim control on the channel set to between 8 and 9 o'clock. The THRU output from the B105D was at line level and went into the input of the GX12A and bingo, I had the gig volume I needed and depth of tone I was after, although it was still not perfect and compared to a real guitar through an amp did lack depth and punch - in other words still sounded "thinner".  I then got my JTV59 and used the same setup, and everything was improved with the better sounds produced from the JTV59.  Then I got the HD500, and it took me many months to migrate from the X3L to the HD500. Many many hours of tweaking etc., and I am still doing it now as I have just bought 2x BEHRINGER B210D active powered speakers, so needed to get the sound adjusted for them. The HD500 seemed to have an even weaker output than the X3L when using the same PA setup, so I carried forward the idea of using the Y cable to capture both L+R outputs to avoid a thin "live" sound and also found that the HD500 output still needed a bigger boost before heading to the powered PA speakers to generate the correct volumes. So, I started using my XENYX 802 for this purpose. The XLR outputs from HD500 went into a Y cable and then a single XLR went to the XENYX 802 into a mic channel with trim set to about 9 o'clock - and then a little adjustment on the HIGH and MID EQ controls, set the CHANNEL volume to 0db (12 o'clock) and the MASTER mixer output to 0db (12 o'clock) - take both L+R master outs (jack connectors) combine with yet another Y lead (oh no!) and then into a jack to XLR converter and then XLR into the B210D and then link that to the next B210D with the THRU connector and another XLR.  Both B210D's had their trim control's set to 9'oclock.  That seems to produce a nice loud volume that is OK for home usage but will not be loud enough for gigs. However, I still have the ability to turn up the MIXER channel volume, the MIXER MASTER out and the B210D trim controls which should get me there, BUT, I have not had the chance to try that yet.

What now?

After reading all your information I now realise that ALL of what I have done to overcome the "live" thin sound of the POD at GIG volumes is WRONG!  I will have to start again from scratch with the correct knowledge of how the HD500 signal routing works and work at getting a good "full" tone from the POD at gig volumes using other means! 


  • 0

#23 perapera

perapera

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 113 posts

Posted 20 November 2013 - 01:17 AM

as soon as possible

don't be on a hurry my friend ;-)


  • 0

#24 edstar1960

edstar1960

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1104 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 20 November 2013 - 03:44 AM

Thanks again Lorenzo.  I do have lots of options and I will try some different configurations.  The simplest one is what I have now got working. It allows me to just take one speaker to rehearsal and then move up to two for gigs when more volume is needed.  Having two speakers also allows me to go "stereo" if I want to.  I chose the 10" speakers because of price (2 for less than half the price of l2m), flexibility (stereo or mono) and size (portability) and because I thought 200W+200W would be enough power and headroom.  However, I am now wondering if I should have chosen the B212D instead - twice the power (400W) and the 12" speaker for about 30% more price.  I may yet change up.    I was also considering upgrading to the Stagescape L2m as it has had such great reports and integrates with L6LINK and has 800W of power - even though it would remove any "stereo" option unless I bought two of them, but that is highly unlikely at their price.  I believe the l2m only has a 10" speaker.

 

Thanks once again for all your help and advice!   :)


  • 0

#25 perapera

perapera

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 113 posts

Posted 20 November 2013 - 05:42 AM

yeah the lm2 has a 10" speaker

but don't compare a 10" DSP powered speaker to a 12" one that costs 3 times less...

... well you can compare it, using your ears if you can try out one!

I've never tried one

don't buy before try!

 

I personally use an unusual setup that has worked great for me with normal-tuned, baritone and synth guitar:

pod L-jack out > ART DPSII valve preamp/DI > markbass F1 return (used as a Class D 500W linear power amp with comprehensive eq) > one or two Gallien Krueger neo112 (passive 12"x1 bass cabinets with the tweeter switched off)

maybe it wouldn't work for an acoustic guitar

but for my use sounds great from super clean to super distorted and it's light, modular and loud

 

I think the main positive role has to be given to how that speaker, designed for an instrument, works on transients and dynamics (one of the aspects that the pod DO NOT model) in comparison to a PA speaker


  • 0

#26 cz-milan

cz-milan

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 20 November 2013 - 11:06 AM

don't be on a hurry my friend ;-)

Hello, have a look at the first scheme.
Does it suit you?

Milan

Attached Files


  • 0

#27 Nick83Weasel

Nick83Weasel

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • LocationTorino, Italy

Posted 28 November 2013 - 04:56 AM

So, assuming I set inputs this way: 1.Guitar - 2-Guitar/Same: do I have to worry about what meambobbo says in his guide about "some comb filtering" that makes "the tone sound looser and slightly out-of-phase"?  Can anyone quantify this loss of tone quality?


  • 0

#28 cz-milan

cz-milan

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

Posted 01 December 2013 - 10:54 AM

Hello Lorenzo,

 

Here are the next schematics.

 

Milan

Attached Files


  • 0

#29 perapera

perapera

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 113 posts

Posted 22 December 2013 - 12:57 AM

Hi Milan

I'm VERY sorry for my delay

I've been too busy in the last month...

You did a great job, man!

I like your drawings

the only details that I would change are in the pan section:

1. if you want to insert the volume fader, that should be a separate block from the pan and it should be before it

2. I would call the pan "pan (balance)" just because it IS a balance but it's labelled pan in the HD500

3. (this is difficult to explain in words, but it's important: I'll try my best)
the lines which represent the signals that output from the pan should not start from the same point but should be separated

the concept that must be represented is "two signals go into the balance and two signals come out of the balance"

4. if you want you can add a "+" sign (which is not present in my drawings) where the left signals from A and B are summed and another where the right signals from A and B are summed

again I know I'm late but if you can put theese mods into your drawings they would become perfect

thanks again
and merry christmas!!
Lorenzo

p.s.
please, let me know how to quote you as the drawer when I'll put your drawings in my original post in this thread
 


  • 0

#30 perapera

perapera

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 113 posts

Posted 22 December 2013 - 04:49 AM

So, assuming I set inputs this way: 1.Guitar - 2-Guitar/Same: do I have to worry about what meambobbo says in his guide about "some comb filtering" that makes "the tone sound looser and slightly out-of-phase"?  Can anyone quantify this loss of tone quality?

 

my short answer to your question is "if you don't hear the problem yourself, don't worry"

 

meambobbo is definitely "devoted" to precision and other users in this forum reported the same "feeling" that something is wrong when using both inputs, so I do not doubt they hear something,

but I never read more than personal opinions on this matter and no scientific test

(simply switching between one or two inputs in the same patch is not even to take into consideration due to gain differences)

 

If the phase issue between input-1 and 2 was true, then it should be ascribed to a serious bug in the POD HD signal routing

 

I did a quick test (I think more than a year ago) and I posted the results in the old forum which unfortunately is not searchable now...

 

I remember I tried the two inputs whith sine waves and there was no sign of phase issues...

 

anyway you can try it empirically:

 

- recall a default "new tone"

- set-up a fixed volume pedal (de-assign it from any expression pedal) in the pre path

- set the volume to 71% (this is approximately -6dB)

- select an amp

- save the patch and then save a copy of it in a new memory location

- in the new patch bypass the volume pedal and set Input-1 to Guitar and Input-2 to Variax

- save (if you're using the pc editor, also save on the pod itself and disconnect the usb cable)

- now switch between the two patches with the footswitches and listen for differences

 

I did it:

- I did put a looper before the pod (the internal looper IS affected by the input selections)

and tried the above with different riffs and some different amplifiers (twin vib, plexi brt, mesa) and I don't hear ANY difference (with headphones)

- I even tried it with parallel paths putting a mono-summing fx block (the noise gate with 100% decay and 0% threshold) after the volume pedal in the single input patch and two identical amps on the two paths

(by the way, the dual path with two with identical amps and settings, sounds exactly as the single path with only one amp and with identical amp and settings; I used the default amps settings to be sure)

- I then tried a "real" dual path with different amps: same result

 

...I'd like to have the time to run more tests and record the results to permanently confirm or deny the issue...

but sorry, for now I'm done... for me it's not an issue


  • 0

#31 gckelloch

gckelloch

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 135 posts

Posted 22 December 2013 - 05:22 AM

Yeah, I don't see how there could be a phase issue, but there could definitely be an internal clipping issue.  I wouldn't be surprised if max input b4 A/D clipping is 6dB lower than the internal clipping of  FX,  I wouldn't use "same" input settings at all.  I wonder if you can drive the amp model inputs more than the FX without clipping?  If this hasn't been covered already, I'd also keep the amp block Channel Outputs down, and avoid boosting the Mixer block levels or centering the pans if running a mono summing FX post amps to ensure against post FX or D/A clipping.  Line 6 should really clear all that up in the documentation.


  • 0

#32 perapera

perapera

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 113 posts

Posted 22 December 2013 - 11:37 AM

- internal clipping is surely possible but not at default settings and only using one amp (being it at default settings too),

 

in the test above, if the guitar doesn't clip the A/D converter (you can hear it with all amp/fx bypassed), then using Guitar/Same will not clip;

 

If engineers at line6 designed a dual path unit which, at its default settings, is unable to receive the same signal on both inputs, without internal clipping, they would be crazy or unqualified (if you start adding eq, comp, etc of course you can clip it)

 

- my understanding of the POD HD500 routing, as explained in my schematics, simply says that the "normal" level to send to the first effect is with both inputs active (Guitar/Same),

this is proved by the fact that putting the same distortion/amp in the pre-path or in one of the dual paths gives the same distortion ONLY if the inputs are on Guitar/Same (see the last part of my original post, which has been edited to be even more clear);

 

as I already wrote, this doesn't mean that using only one input (Guitar/Variax) is wrong,

on the contrary, it is perfectly reasonable if you want cleaner tones:

it gives exactly the same result as adding a fixed volume pedal at -6dB, but it's better, because you don't waste an fx block!

 

in the same way you just can't say that using both inputs is wrong or that it's causing problems on its own (unless you prove it);

 

on the contrary, if you want to use a dual amp setup and you choose only one input (Guitar/Variax) then you have to waste an fx block (noise gate 100%-0%) to send the signal to both paths!

This doesn't make sense to me at all

(unless you need to attenuate the input because the amplifiers' drive pots are already low but you want an even cleaner tone from both amps).

 

- we arrived at the point that many people think to solve the so called "problem" of the two inputs by giving away their ability to use two signal paths and putting every effect (and amp) on path A only!

 

This choice is unfounded for 2 reasons:

1- you have a machine able to do complex routing and you give this possibility away because you think it is flawed (if it's true, return it)

2- worse: by putting everything on Path A, you are actually sending to your effects exactly the same signal * as if you did put everything in the pre path and select Guitar/Same so it just CAN NOT sound different, but, as someone else said that not using input-2 and path-B sounds better, you just do it without properly testing it and against the default settings of the unit

 

I'm aware that all of this confusion comes from the official documentation: I think that the manuals are guiltily incomplete on purpose, to avoid to make you think that it's a complex machine because it has a complex manual.

 

that's why I posted all of this: to explain how this unit really works to people who are interested in using it at it's full potential

 

* look at the last 2 pictures in my original post

if you use those two setups with Guitar/Same you get EXACTLY the same result

if you use those two setups with Guitar/Variax you get less distortion in the second one


  • 0

#33 talwilkins

talwilkins

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 154 posts
  • LocationNetherlands

Posted 22 December 2013 - 12:14 PM

 

- we arrived at the point that many people think to solve the so called "problem" of the two inputs by giving away their ability to use two signal paths and putting every effect (and amp) on path A only!

 

This choice is unfounded for 2 reasons:

1- you have a machine able to do complex routing and you give this possibility away because you think it is flawed (if it's true, return it)

2- worse: by putting everything on Path A, you are actually sending to your effects exactly the same signal * as if you did put everything in the pre path and select Guitar/Same so it just CAN NOT sound different, but, as someone else said that not using input-2 and path-B sounds better, you just do it without properly testing it and against the default settings of the unit

 

Actually I have another reason for putting everything in path A and using guitar/variax input settings.

The reason is that this way I only need to change the volume setting on one channel in the mixer when I need to tweak the volume. I don't like using the amp volume because sometimes when I want to lower the volume on a patch the knob on the POD is near max. If you then turn the knob the volume will first jump to max. This can result in som scary lollipop (pardon my French).

Using the mixer volume, by turning the little knobs works great because these just adjust the volume frome wherever it is set.

I wish all the knobs on the POD worked like that.

Anyway, using both channels would mean adjusting both channels in the mixer so when I don't need the two paths I put everything in Path A for this reason.


  • 0

Music is the best (FZ)

the Zombywoof


#34 boyce89976

boyce89976

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 22 December 2013 - 06:17 PM

One way to get unity gain that seems to work for me is to use an SPL meter to check the level of a straight tone with no amp block, then build the tone from there checking the level with each added effect. I'll usually turn off each effect after adding it so I'm only getting the gain of the new effect being added and can adjust to parity with the original dry signal measurement.

I'm not sure it matters whether you turn off each effect before you add the next one, but it works for me.
  • 0

#35 gckelloch

gckelloch

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 135 posts

Posted 22 December 2013 - 08:21 PM

Hmm...that's a good idea.  Glad I thought of it! :lol: Thanks boyce.  There are SPL meter apps for cell phones.  Unity gain can be checked through an audio system, but internal clipping can not.  Monitoring should be reasonably loud for better meter accuracy.  I don't think you need to turn off each previous effect when checking each successive one.  Once you've checked the previous effect, all that matters is whats after it.

 

I finally read through your original post perapera.  It all makes sense now.  Mono FX sum the 2 same signals to +6dB, and drop the output back -6dB, so they won't initially sum +6dB if one output is set differently.  To achieve unity gain with unique  inputs on either signal path, I guess the first mono FX block output on either pre path should actually be boosted +6dB.

 

I just checked the peaks on some of my guitar recordings.  It's not uncommon for the top ~6dB of the transients to fall within a few ms.  If that were clipped, it may be too brief to be perceived at all if masked under various gain inducing FX.  However, a much longer portion of the signal following the few ms clip is altered as an A/D or D/A circuit recovers.  For that matter, internal digital signal clipping of a few ms before an amp may not be an issue, because there is no real circuitry involved to recover from it.  Still, a few ms clip after the amps could definately cause ear fatigue and irritation in the listener.


  • 0

#36 nicjw

nicjw

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 23 December 2013 - 05:29 AM

Hello everybody,

 

I'm getting a little bit confused. Can somebody help me with my setup?

 

I usa a JTV59p guitar using the VDI cable.

- What input settings do you suggest?

 

Next, i'm only using one amp. I need to send the same sound to both my stagewedge (XLR or Jack) and to the FOH mixer.

What I do, is centering the Mixer and send XLR left to my wedge en XLR right to the FOH

 

Is this the way to go? Or can you give me some advice?


  • 0

#37 edstar1960

edstar1960

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1104 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 23 December 2013 - 06:10 AM

Hello everybody,

 

I'm getting a little bit confused. Can somebody help me with my setup?

 

I usa a JTV59p guitar using the VDI cable.

- What input settings do you suggest?

 

Next, i'm only using one amp. I need to send the same sound to both my stagewedge (XLR or Jack) and to the FOH mixer.

What I do, is centering the Mixer and send XLR left to my wedge en XLR right to the FOH

 

Is this the way to go? Or can you give me some advice?

 

For input settings simply use VARIAX for input 1 and SAME for input 2.  If you find that those settings are overdriving your amp model too much and you want a cleaner sound then try setting input 2 to GUITAR (which will reduce the input gain by 6db) and see if you prefer the sound.   Keep whatever you prefer.

 

Centering the Mixer on both L and R channels will effectively double the output volume, but as long as that is not overdriving the stagewedge or FOH mixer then that is not an issue, so you can continue doing that.


  • 0

#38 nicjw

nicjw

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 23 December 2013 - 06:53 AM

Thanks!

Another question. Do i have to put the effects in path A only between the amp and de mixer or after the mixer?
  • 0

#39 boyce89976

boyce89976

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 23 December 2013 - 07:30 AM

Thanks!
Another question. Do i have to put the effects in path A only between the amp and de mixer or after the mixer?

Path A & B are "combined " at the output of the mixer into a summed stereo feed (L/R from path A + L/R from path B ). So if you want the effects in Path A with a dual amp setup, you'll need to place them before the mixer in Path A. If only using one amp block, you can place them post mixer. In this case you might want to center the pan control on the mixer so you are getting the output from both the L/R channel of Path A and mute Path B.
  • 0

#40 edstar1960

edstar1960

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1104 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 23 December 2013 - 07:32 AM

Thanks!

Another question. Do i have to put the effects in path A only between the amp and de mixer or after the mixer?

 

It depends which effects you are using and what you want to do with them.  For a basic one amp setup, I would place effects as if it was a physical setup.  So if I was using a distortion pedal or chorus or flanger, I would place it on the common pre path before the amp.  I would then place effects like reverb and delay in the post path after the mixer.   I have not had need to place effects post amp but before the mixer in paths A or B, but there are some demo patches that do this. 

Also, if you ever set up a patch where you want to use some effects that don't use an amp or if you want to blend variax model (eg: acoustic)and mags sounds and utilise the different Inputs, you may wish to have different effects on paths A (pre amp) and B with no amp, which are then MIXED at the mixer stage.  The routing options are very flexible but you don't have to make use of them if you don't need to. If you just need one path then just use one path reflecting a typical physical setup - or at least start with that and then when you are confident you understand how things work together - then you can start experimenting and put things anywhere to get the tone you want - but be careful, if you don't understand the routing or how an effect will behave when placed in different positions then you may get very undesirable results or results you did not expect such as not getting the desired effect output or clipping etc etc.

 

Hope that helps.


  • 0





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: routing, signal routing, effect block, gain, input settings, hd500, hd500x, mono summing, unity gain

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users