Jump to content


Photo

The Sound Is Different When I Record Via Usb

hd500 pod record usb

  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#1 vilo1968

vilo1968

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 24 posts

Posted 06 September 2013 - 06:13 AM

Hello.

 

I have a little problem with my POD HD500.

 

I notice that the sound of the preset, when I hear it on the speakers, it sounds one way, and when I record via USB sounds a little less quality. There is a small difference.

 

Someone has been the same? Can be resolved?

 

I have the latest drivers installed and the last firmware.

 

Thank you very much from already.


  • 0

#2 GTLazer

GTLazer

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 215 posts

Posted 06 September 2013 - 06:37 AM

What's your signal chain?


  • 0

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


#3 vilo1968

vilo1968

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 24 posts

Posted 06 September 2013 - 07:00 AM

GTLazer:

 

My signal chain "physical" is: guitar - pod hd500 - PC (usb).

 

Thank you very much from already.

 

(excuse my poor English)


  • 0

#4 silverhead

silverhead

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 11422 posts
  • LocationOttawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 06 September 2013 - 07:03 AM

Which signal from the HD500 are you recording: the L channel, R channel, or stereo?


  • 0

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

 

 


#5 vilo1968

vilo1968

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 24 posts

Posted 06 September 2013 - 07:16 AM

When I record via USB with the pod hd500, I do in MONO


  • 0

#6 silverhead

silverhead

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 11422 posts
  • LocationOttawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 06 September 2013 - 07:44 AM

Check your DAW setup, as well as the HD500 mixer panning. It's possible you are recording only half of the HD500 output signal.


  • 0

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

 

 


#7 vilo1968

vilo1968

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 24 posts

Posted 06 September 2013 - 08:03 AM

I use Samplitude and configure the channel as "mono mix". I tested with Reaper and the result was the same.There is little difference in quality between what I hear through my monitors and I record via USB. Not big but noticeable difference.


  • 0

#8 vilo1968

vilo1968

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 24 posts

Posted 08 November 2013 - 07:12 AM

Hello everyone!I was doing some testing on this and I have managed to identify the problem. This is the famous "fizz"'s so much talk in the forum.

 

To better explain what I'm experiencing, two files attached mp3.The file "fizz.mp3" corresponds to a recording made ​​using the POD HD500 as a USB audio interface, with the guitar connected to the POD. In this file you can hear the fizz perfectly.The second file ("no-fizz.mp3") corresponds to a recording in which the POD was used to clean reamplified 2 guitars. In this file there is no fizz.

 

Something happens when the guitar is connected directly to the POD.

 

The pickups in my guitar are at normal height (are Bill Lawrence XL500).

 

The Pod is configured with the entry "GUITAR" and the second entry as "Variax", which according to the forum, allowing less noise and Fizz.Recording levels do not saturate, and the application "Line 6 Midi-Audio Devices" level is set to-3dB.

 

The firmware and driver are the latest.

 

I also reflashed, resetting to factory parameters and no change.

 

Thank you very much from now.

 

Attached File  fizz.mp3   481.22KB   85 downloads

 

Attached File  no-fizz.mp3   481.22KB   66 downloads


  • 1

#9 silverhead

silverhead

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 11422 posts
  • LocationOttawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 08 November 2013 - 07:50 AM

I really can't hear any difference. All really hi-gain stuff sounds fizzy to me. Maybe just my ears/age?


  • 0

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

 

 


#10 MartinDorr

MartinDorr

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 234 posts
  • LocationArizona, U.S.A.

Posted 08 November 2013 - 09:32 AM

I hear different sounds and yes, the fizz one has more fizz ;-)
Not clear to me how your HD input ignal is generated and what the interface setting is for the path that does not 'fizz'. Can you explain?
What is the recoding level you see in your DAW for both recordings (w/o DAW adjustments)?
If you trun off your amp model (bypass volume 100%) and all following effects, what is the recording level of those signals for both cases?

I can't tell, but there may be some distortion going on in the fizz generating model chain and it might be worth checking what each modelling step does as it gets added starting with nothing (i.e., just the input signal level) for both cases.
Use your DAW meter and check peaks. Anything above -12dB may compress, anything above -6dB may cause some unwanted distortion, and above -3dB thing usually get nasty.
Make sure to add models 1 by 1 from input to output as a later model may hide that your signal level hit the ceiling in between.
Good luck.
  • 0

#11 vilo1968

vilo1968

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 24 posts

Posted 08 November 2013 - 11:07 AM

Thanks for your answers.

 

For the recording of "non-fizz.mp3", first recorded two guitar tracks connected to my Presonus AudioBox VSL, without any effect.Subsequently, these tracks were reamplified with the POD HD500.Apparently, the optimal level of signal (low?) Applied to the POD achievement does not appear the fizz.

 

Then to "fizz.mp3", recorded two guitar tracks, connected to the Pod and using the same preset. Now appears the fizz.

 

In the DAW, everything is around-12dB.

 

I attach a screenshot of the preset.

 

Thank you very much from now.

 

Attached File  cap1.jpg   210.9KB   8 downloads

Attached File  cap2.jpg   162.78KB   6 downloads

Attached File  cap3.jpg   189.83KB   3 downloads


  • 1

#12 MartinDorr

MartinDorr

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 234 posts
  • LocationArizona, U.S.A.

Posted 08 November 2013 - 01:55 PM

I can't be sure but I would be surprised if your Treadplate at 75% Drive and 100% Channel Volume is not pushing you higher than -12dBFS between the Amp output and the Mixer. Turning the Mixer down by -7dB would not save you. The damage may already be done. Also, not sure what the Screamer does to your Amp input.

If you want to make sure that your gain staging is reasonable (less than -12dB between blocks) you need to turn everything off and see what every block adds to your signal level. This will also tell you how different the 2 types of input signals are and probably be a first check point for why one of them generates 'fizz' that other does not.

If you want more than -12dB as output, put the Mixer at the end and add a clean boost of up to 12dB. Recommend to stay away from signal levels higher than -12dB between blocks if you want no artifical compression/distortion produced by the models. I certainly have not checked all of them, but everyone I measure showed this behavior except the mixer.
  • 0

#13 vilo1968

vilo1968

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 24 posts

Posted 08 November 2013 - 02:14 PM

I understand what you say about this preset, but when the pod re-amplifies a clean signal, it works ok. Produce fizz when you connect the guitar to the POD.

 

The preset is the same as this but modified.

 

You can see it in action here: http://www.youtube.c...h?v=6M-We-yw7hw


  • 0

#14 MaxZavtur

MaxZavtur

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 08 December 2013 - 02:15 AM

I understand what you say about this preset, but when the pod re-amplifies a clean signal, it works ok. Produce fizz when you connect the guitar to the POD.

 

The preset is the same as this but modified.

 

You can see it in action here: http://www.youtube.c...h?v=6M-We-yw7hw

So what is solution for that fizz?


  • 0

#15 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 08 December 2013 - 05:11 AM

Lower "Input Z" setting is the solution for FIZZ.

 

 

It seems to me that the issue is the difference between a track recorded with

1-guitar > audio interface other than POD >Pod input reamplified >recorded using POD USB    verses

2-Guitar>....................>Pod Input                   >Recorded using USB

 

This to me indicates that in case/track 1: Using an audio interface to record a direct signal then sending it to the pod isn't sending an identical signal as in track 2. Using the other audio interface is exposing the file to an additional AD/DA conversion which will almost always result in losing a little bit of high frequency. When Re amplifiying this track less fizz will appear due to the high frequency loss from the additional AD/DA conversion.

 

Solution:  there are several options to mitigate undesirable fizz.  My favorite is using the POD HD own input Z option. Using lower values instead of auto will do the trick looking at the patches in this thread we see that, as it should be , the noise gate is first in the signal chain which is optimal for most situations, but this creates a problem for the input Z set to "Auto". The input Z setting of auto is following the first effect in the signal chain which is the noise gate so no change is happening as the noise gate has the same input-Z setting for amp without effects.  I would use the input Z setting for the tube screamer which is 250K and this will reduce so much of the undesirable high frequencies responsible for most undesirable fizz (There's desirable fizz also and we want to keep that). You can use other values to get the optimal sound and the Input Z setting will make a night and day  difference from my experience in many patches where using auto will render the patch otherwise unusable.

 

Another option would be to put an external physical compressor in front of the pod and that will remove some high frequencies from the guitar signal...


  • 0

#16 MaxZavtur

MaxZavtur

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 08 December 2013 - 01:52 PM

Lower "Input Z" setting is the solution for FIZZ.

 

 

It seems to me that the issue is the difference between a track recorded with

1-guitar > audio interface other than POD >Pod input reamplified >recorded using POD USB    verses

2-Guitar>....................>Pod Input                   >Recorded using USB

 

This to me indicates that in case/track 1: Using an audio interface to record a direct signal then sending it to the pod isn't sending an identical signal as in track 2. Using the other audio interface is exposing the file to an additional AD/DA conversion which will almost always result in losing a little bit of high frequency. When Re amplifiying this track less fizz will appear due to the high frequency loss from the additional AD/DA conversion.

 

Solution:  there are several options to mitigate undesirable fizz.  My favorite is using the POD HD own input Z option. Using lower values instead of auto will do the trick looking at the patches in this thread we see that, as it should be , the noise gate is first in the signal chain which is optimal for most situations, but this creates a problem for the input Z set to "Auto". The input Z setting of auto is following the first effect in the signal chain which is the noise gate so no change is happening as the noise gate has the same input-Z setting for amp without effects.  I would use the input Z setting for the tube screamer which is 250K and this will reduce so much of the undesirable high frequencies responsible for most undesirable fizz (There's desirable fizz also and we want to keep that). You can use other values to get the optimal sound and the Input Z setting will make a night and day  difference from my experience in many patches where using auto will render the patch otherwise unusable.

 

Another option would be to put an external physical compressor in front of the pod and that will remove some high frequencies from the guitar signal...

What is input Z? I dont ge it


  • 0

#17 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 08 December 2013 - 02:29 PM

What is input Z? I dont ge it

It's a parameter that you can change in any of the patches. In the HD Edit window using the PC or Mac editor, in the left panel you will see  setting for input 1 source, input 2 source, guitar in-.Z and input set up (can be set to global so you don't change it per patch)

This is really a great feature and it involves having the hardware that's already part of the HD 500  but not in the HD300 or 400.

 

In summary older fuzz peda, corus etcl and effects have a very low impedance level which means if you plugged your guitar into a big muff or fuzz face , due to these effects having low impedance, your guitar pickups are  "loaded" which means the equivalent or something similar to having a tone control on your guitar with low impedance (250k popular with fenders and 500k with lesspaul type guitars). So alot of high frequencies are rolled off, so the guitar will sound warmer or darker.

POD HD simulate this  and it has the hardware on board. So in your POD HD signal chain you have a tube screamer, the real world tube screamer that line 6 modeled had a 250k impedance. To get this effect you can manually choose input z to to 250k. Now your guitar pickups are loaded and high frequencies are rolled off.  If this ini-z setting is set to auto, POD HD will only change based on the first effect in the signal chain. This setting is not ideal since most people put the noise gate first (which if you look up in the manual) has an impedance of 1 mg same as amp without effects. 

 

Hope this helps clarify..


  • 0

#18 MaxZavtur

MaxZavtur

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 08 December 2013 - 03:09 PM

What is input Z? I dont ge it

 

Lower "Input Z" setting is the solution for FIZZ.

 

 

It seems to me that the issue is the difference between a track recorded with

1-guitar > audio interface other than POD >Pod input reamplified >recorded using POD USB    verses

2-Guitar>....................>Pod Input                   >Recorded using USB

 

This to me indicates that in case/track 1: Using an audio interface to record a direct signal then sending it to the pod isn't sending an identical signal as in track 2. Using the other audio interface is exposing the file to an additional AD/DA conversion which will almost always result in losing a little bit of high frequency. When Re amplifiying this track less fizz will appear due to the high frequency loss from the additional AD/DA conversion.

 

Solution:  there are several options to mitigate undesirable fizz.  My favorite is using the POD HD own input Z option. Using lower values instead of auto will do the trick looking at the patches in this thread we see that, as it should be , the noise gate is first in the signal chain which is optimal for most situations, but this creates a problem for the input Z set to "Auto". The input Z setting of auto is following the first effect in the signal chain which is the noise gate so no change is happening as the noise gate has the same input-Z setting for amp without effects.  I would use the input Z setting for the tube screamer which is 250K and this will reduce so much of the undesirable high frequencies responsible for most undesirable fizz (There's desirable fizz also and we want to keep that). You can use other values to get the optimal sound and the Input Z setting will make a night and day  difference from my experience in many patches where using auto will render the patch otherwise unusable.

 

Another option would be to put an external physical compressor in front of the pod and that will remove some high frequencies from the guitar signal...

Oh, i get it. It is really worked well. I put 22K, is it to small? how much i need to put?


  • 0

#19 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 08 December 2013 - 08:31 PM

Oh, i get it. It is really worked well. I put 22K, is it to small? how much i need to put?

They say the Fuzz face is 22k , if it sounds and feels good then it's good. Many of the old treble boosters had 22 to 32k and that's basically most of the early classic metal sound, sabbath, deep purple , qeen etc. You can hit the amp with the midfocus eq by maxing the level of the Mid focus EQ , setting the low pass at 50 percent and the high pass at 100% into a Plexi 100 with drive at max, and you have Sabbath Paranoid album sound in an instance.


  • 0

#20 MaxZavtur

MaxZavtur

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 08 December 2013 - 11:15 PM

They say the Fuzz face is 22k , if it sounds and feels good then it's good. Many of the old treble boosters had 22 to 32k and that's basically most of the early classic metal sound, sabbath, deep purple , qeen etc. You can hit the amp with the midfocus eq by maxing the level of the Mid focus EQ , setting the low pass at 50 percent and the high pass at 100% into a Plexi 100 with drive at max, and you have Sabbath Paranoid album sound in an instance.

But i generally play modern metal, and i noticed difference in sound when  i switched to lower input Z. I need to find optimal one. Before that i played with 1M and it was fizzy on recording. But you know what, sound is not fizzy if i play live with speakers ( even with 1M input Z), it is fizzy only when i record.


  • 0

#21 vilo1968

vilo1968

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 24 posts

Posted 09 December 2013 - 09:55 AM

Lower "Input Z" setting is the solution for FIZZ.

 

 

It seems to me that the issue is the difference between a track recorded with

1-guitar > audio interface other than POD >Pod input reamplified >recorded using POD USB    verses

2-Guitar>....................>Pod Input                   >Recorded using USB

 

This to me indicates that in case/track 1: Using an audio interface to record a direct signal then sending it to the pod isn't sending an identical signal as in track 2. Using the other audio interface is exposing the file to an additional AD/DA conversion which will almost always result in losing a little bit of high frequency. When Re amplifiying this track less fizz will appear due to the high frequency loss from the additional AD/DA conversion.

 

Solution:  there are several options to mitigate undesirable fizz.  My favorite is using the POD HD own input Z option. Using lower values instead of auto will do the trick looking at the patches in this thread we see that, as it should be , the noise gate is first in the signal chain which is optimal for most situations, but this creates a problem for the input Z set to "Auto". The input Z setting of auto is following the first effect in the signal chain which is the noise gate so no change is happening as the noise gate has the same input-Z setting for amp without effects.  I would use the input Z setting for the tube screamer which is 250K and this will reduce so much of the undesirable high frequencies responsible for most undesirable fizz (There's desirable fizz also and we want to keep that). You can use other values to get the optimal sound and the Input Z setting will make a night and day  difference from my experience in many patches where using auto will render the patch otherwise unusable.

 

Another option would be to put an external physical compressor in front of the pod and that will remove some high frequencies from the guitar signal...

 

DeanDinosaur thanks for your answer. A true Tube Screamer could serve instead of a compressor?


  • 1

#22 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 09 December 2013 - 10:49 AM

DeanDinosaur thanks for your answer. A true Tube Screamer could serve instead of a compressor?

I't s my pleasure. I think anything analog will shave some of the highs and would work. The real world tube screamer will also load your pickups and reduce highs.


  • 1

#23 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 09 December 2013 - 10:56 AM

 ...But you know what, sound is not fizzy if i play live with speakers ( even with 1M input Z), it is fizzy only when i record.

That makes a lot of sense specially if the speakers are guitar speakers.  Most guitar speakers start rolling highs starting at 5hkz and above!


  • 0

#24 MaxZavtur

MaxZavtur

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 09 December 2013 - 11:33 AM

That makes a lot of sense specially if the speakers are guitar speakers.  Most guitar speakers start rolling highs starting at 5hkz and above!

I have ussuall speakers for PC, nothing fancy. So i wonder when i adjust my preset and i really like the sound, and then i record it and its sounds like sh*t((


  • 0

#25 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 09 December 2013 - 12:31 PM

I have ussuall speakers for PC, nothing fancy. So i wonder when i adjust my preset and i really like the sound, and then i record it and its sounds like sh*t((

A good investment would be Studio Speakers. For direct recording all modeler are intended to be used with Full Range Flat Response (FRFR).

 

Most stereos and speaker system color the sound by boosting bass or highs to improve the sound. When you use such systems you might be able to get away if you replay on the same system but when you play it on other systems it doesn't translate well. For recording Yamaha HS50M at $ 300 for pair are probably the most neutral speakers anywhere from my experience and many others. If it sounds good on them it usually translates very well on most other system.


  • 1

#26 MaxZavtur

MaxZavtur

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 09 December 2013 - 11:09 PM

A good investment would be Studio Speakers. For direct recording all modeler are intended to be used with Full Range Flat Response (FRFR).

 

Most stereos and speaker system color the sound by boosting bass or highs to improve the sound. When you use such systems you might be able to get away if you replay on the same system but when you play it on other systems it doesn't translate well. For recording Yamaha HS50M at $ 300 for pair are probably the most neutral speakers anywhere from my experience and many others. If it sounds good on them it usually translates very well on most other system.

I had changed my DAW from Reaper to Cubase 5. You know, there is huge differents in recording quality, I dont know why. Even without changing Inpu-Z


  • 0

#27 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 10 December 2013 - 03:49 AM

Make sure the project options in Cubase is set to something higher than 16 bit, preferably 32bit float.


  • 0

#28 MaxZavtur

MaxZavtur

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 11:59 AM

Make sure the project options in Cubase is set to something higher than 16 bit, preferably 32bit float.

Pod hd 500 cant handle only 24 bit


  • 0

#29 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 12:33 PM

Pod hd 500 cant handle only 24 bit

Cubase has a file system of 32 float that works with 24 bit sound cards, so you definitely can use the 32 bit float for better results. This comes very handy after the file is recorded. The major advantage is that  32bit file can' be clipped by editing.


  • 0

#30 gckelloch

gckelloch

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 135 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 12:01 AM

Sheesh...where do I begin? ;)

 

Changing the input-Z will not make the tone from each output sound different. The "auto" setting will configure the Z for certain pedals only if they are first in the chain...and to 1M for all other models. Technically, lower than ~1M IN-Z actually compromises the guitar's dynamic range and attenuates the highs, but the pedals will sound more like the hardware versions with their "authentic' input Z setting.  So, there's no harm in leaving the Z to Auto.

 

It doesn't sound like there is anything wrong with the "Fizz" version. It doesn't seem to be clipping. It just sounds like it has more upper harmonic content. That would indicate that the 1/4" output switch on HD500 face is not set to "line" like it should be when you are recording a line level signal. You should also make sure you are connected to the line ins on your Presonus A/I device from the main outs on the HD500, and not the Hi-Z guitar inputs. When reamping, you should connect from a line level out on the A/I unit to an FX return (set to line) on the HD500, and not to the HD500 Guitar or Aux Ins.

 

Also, the amp is the least spongy with the Sag at 0. That seems a bit extreme. Somewhere around the middle would be more amp-like. Same deal with the Bias X, but regarding amp distortion: amp distortion is the hardest sounding and least dynamic when at 0. It makes sense to boost the mids on the amp with the 4x12" Hiway cab. You may want to back it down after setting the Master DEP up higher. The Dyn 57 mic has a lot of presence and not much bass, so you may want to back the treble and/or presence off a bit. You might try one of the ribbons mics, the U67 or Dyn 409 instead. Just something to be aware of. The 57 may be just fine. They quite often are.

 

Regarding FX, you have the Output at 100 and the Drive at 0 on the Tube Screamer. I don't see a point in using the TS at all with those settings. TS's somewhat kill the dynamics and frequency range of the sound. They have their purposes, but I don't think it will help with the huge metal tone you seem to be going for. Moving along, the Gain on the last eq is at 0. I'd think that would drop the signal output a lot? Once you get your signal levels and amp set up right, you probably won't need the extra eqs.

 

Not that it will hurt to leave it, but I'm not sure why to aim for a -12dBFS internal peak signal level? Pro digital recording level is actually -18dBFS. You could aim for -6dBFS peaks all the way through to the recording without any problems. I always record around there. Recording to 32bit Float has no real advantage, but it doesn't hurt. The 24bit A/D converter would clip way b4 the file does, so you'd still essentially have a clipped file if it did. 32bit Float is useful for post processing.

 

For ~$380/pair shipped, I think the Equator D5 are the best "bang for buck" home studio monitors. Mix, SOS and EM mags all gave them stellar reviews. They are a ported coaxial design with internal DSP compensation. Bass extension, midrange clarity, and phase accuracy is outstanding. You'd really have to spend over a grand for anything more accurate. They are sold direct from Equator with a 60 day refund policy. I keep the input trim on my monitors down to -15dB, so I absolutely never distort the inputs. You either need to do that, or keep your A/I unit master output down ~halfway to be sure you don't get distortion. Break them in as with any monitors for a day facing each other with 180 degree channel inverted white noise up loud, but not distorting. Use them a lot in those 60 days to make sure they are OK.  Power switching amps are less tolerant in some ways of spec anomalies than analog amps.  If they were constructed OK, they should last many years if plugged into a surge protector.  Don't buy balanced cables unless you need some more quality cables -- you won't notice the noise difference with short cable runs. Run signal cables perpendicular to power cables for the lowest noise. Make sure you plug your gear into a surge protector, or even a SP/PC/UPS combo unit. I got a Belken combo unit for ~$70 several years back -- good investment. Use the same outlet for all your gear to avoid ground loop hums.

 

Monitors should be elevated ~1' above the desk up to ear level when seated. I mounted ~1'x1' shelves of criss-crossed glued 5/8" thick finished poplar onto the back corners of my desk ~3' apart at the outer edges. I just use thick mouse pads under my monitors. I have a very complex shaped top floor carpeted bedroom area with a bed, thick folded linens and hanging clothes, and other absorbing junk, so there aren't obvious resonances. I hang a heavy blanket on the wall behind my head to kill high-end slap back. It all works fine. You could spend some money treating your room. It may not be necessary when close monitoring, unless you have significant echoes and resonances. A decent room is as least as important as decent monitors. You can check mixes with adequate studio headphones, but you should use a stereo monitor sim plugin if you plan to mix on them -- it has become a more common practice lately.

 

Guess I got on a roll and had to cover everything under the sun. Hope it all helps.


  • 1

#31 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 04:04 AM

Sheesh...where do I begin? ;)

 

... Technically, lower than ~1M IN-Z actually compromises the guitar's dynamic range and attenuates the highs, but the pedals will sound more like the hardware versions with their "authentic' input Z setting.  So, there's no harm in leaving the Z to Auto.

 

It's not about harm or no harm!  The POD HD doesn't fully provide for input impedance that matches real world. Anything but "auto" will be closer to real world tube amps. Tube themselves act as capacitors that roll high frequencies. So even when you plug directly into a real world tube AMP   , your guitar pickups will be changed (high frequency rolled off ) not compromised since most players prefer tubes over solid state and that's how tubes behave.  A true tube amp input Z would be 1mg + Cap  (the cap will roll off highs).

 

Pod HD doesn't have caps, so anything under 1mg would better simulate real world tube amps because it would be similar to 1mg+Cap.  Eleven Rack and AXE FX II (not I) has the capacitors option and this is a hardware feature not software because software EQ can't predict what kind of pickup you use, but a hardware capacitor will work the same way regardless of the pickup to simulate pluging into  a real world tube amp.


  • 0

#32 gckelloch

gckelloch

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 135 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 04:35 AM

Thanks Dino. :D  I'm not an electrical engineer, but from what I know, tubes squelch the highs when overdriven, which of course is programed into the modeling.  Wouldn't the amp model have said any tube traits designed in, attenuating any highs as the preamp would?  Perhaps the A/D front end is somehow configured to act like tubes when they aren't being driven? Couldn't such a thing be incorporated into an op amp design?  I'm not sure what is used as the analog guitar preamp circuitry.  Also, I think excess impedance loading limits dynamic response. It all sounds like something to look into.


  • 0

#33 Akeron

Akeron

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 337 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 05:14 AM

I was under the impression that

 

3.5M = 1M + Cap

 

In fact I've never seen anywhere a use of that value describing amp input impedance, so that could be an explanation of what's that and why I find everything below that "dead" sounding...


  • 0

#34 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 06:01 AM

I was under the impression that

 

3.5M = 1M + Cap

 

In fact I've never seen anywhere a use of that value describing amp input impedance, so that could be an explanation of what's that and why I find everything below that "dead" sounding...

3.5m has less high frequency roll of and more of the guitar signal which can be very useful and give a more open sound so I doubt that it has cap.


  • 0

#35 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 06:35 AM

Thanks Dino. :D  I'm not an electrical engineer,

Neither am I. I just read this thread from those who first started using input Z in their product and then other companies followed.

I thought it was an interesting read

http://community.avi...out-true-z.aspx


  • 0

#36 gckelloch

gckelloch

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 135 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 09:27 AM

I completely rewrote this entry since I first posted it. I think it's worth a re-read.

 

An important factor to consider is that a PUP's Rdc value (often incorrectly labeled "DC R" or some variation) has nothing to do with its Z (impedance). A PUP can have a Z of 10x or more its Rdc value. A mixer I had once considered has 10M Hi-Z inputs. It makes much less difference on the tone above ~1M, because the pots factor into the total load, and they have usually have much lower values. As I mentioned b4, to get the flattest and most extended frequency response, it's best to use a low C (Capacitance) cable. ~200pF is a good value combined with the recommended pot values for the H value of the PUP's on a given guitar. It's best to use PUP H values within a ~1:2 ratio on the same guitar, so the pot values will work well for all PUP's. If you have appropriate pot values for your PUP's, you won't have sharp resonance peaks.
 

It's not actually any more consistent to rely on the simulated "Miller Capacitance" affect of the Eleven Rack units, because different PUP's, pots and cabling will produce different results when combined with the Miller C...and that Miller C is different depending on the tube circuitry design. Some designs may have more C than others. Furthermore, the Eleven Rack examples of the PUP with the 1M load do not appear to include the pot values, which would put the load at ~110k for a guitar with 250k pots -- reducing the peak to the same level as the 1M+Cap example. That strikes me as intentionally misleading.

 

For most guitars with ~2H-4H PUP's you want a pretty flat response on the bridge PUP out to ~4kHz. Presence peaks tend to sound too bright at the bridge unless up at ~6kHz+, which is sweet and sparkly through a Fender Twin, but can be fizzy with a lot of gain. High gain preamps often roll off the highs anyway, so it could be just fine. A ~3dB peak at ~4.3kHz or ~6kHz for the middle or neck PUP works well. A few other peak values will work, but picking articulation suffers as ~4kHz is lost, and peaks around the 3kHz range accentuate the dreaded "ice pick" tone. With ~8H+ PUP's, 500k pots and a ~200pF cable, the added Miller C won't have as much affect. The roll off would be down near 2kHz and wouldn't change much unless a lot more C is added. It's just the way that stuff works.

 

Incidentally, rolling the tone knob down a bit smooths off the peak just like the 1M+cap. It just doesn't lower the peak location as much. Funny that the Eleven Rack example has the 1M+cap peak located at the ~3kHz "ice pick" zone. Did he even listen to the PUP example he gave? If you have a fairly flat extended response on your guitar PUP's, you can dial in a peak with a LP filter. Peaks in the ~1.5-2.5kHz range on the bridge can be useful for a sweet vocal lead to a defined mean rock/metal tone.
 

I learned a lot from the late Bill Lawrence about all this stuff. His company, Wilde USA, produces the most consistent, efficient and refined PUP's on the market. Quite affordable as well. The appropriate series H value is available for each PUP model. It's definitely worth trying particularly the MicroCoils -- if nothing else than to hear what your guitar really sounds like, and maybe as references to judge other PUP's by. Nuff said on that. I won't push other product brands here.


  • 1

#37 RIblues

RIblues

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 174 posts
  • LocationRhode Island

Posted 15 December 2013 - 10:55 AM

gckelloch, another interesting post to read.

 

I'm glad that Line 6 included this adjustable setting and I don't know if users actually try to determine their pup's value  and match with the Input Z settings, but it's certainly worth it to try and listen to how it affects the tone. Personally, I lower the Input Z setting when I am creating patches for my strat because it seams to exchange some "thinness" with some "fatness" if that makes any sense. I still hear the sparkle and chime when using the Bf Lux model, but it's nice and fat and thick with the Input Z low.


  • 0

#38 Akeron

Akeron

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 337 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 11:51 AM

Very interesting explanation gckelloch but I  have some questions:

 

1) Since "1M" value seems the standard amp input value, what do you think "3.5M" is exactly? I can't seem to find any reference anywhere. In the circuit schematics I've seen there is 1M only. I wanted to know that because I prefer 3.5M most of the time...

 

2) How can you determine (apart from judging by ear) which is the correct "Guitar In-Z" setting? For example I've got a Gibson SG with everything stock. See 1)


  • 0

#39 gckelloch

gckelloch

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 135 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 11:52 AM

Sure thing, RIBlues.  Yeah, it's really just lowering the peak a little.  Seems like there should be a 500k Z option.  You'd be surprised how rich and meaty your guitar can sound with a  ~200pF cable through certain amps.  The extended highs and flatter overall response really adds depth and nuance.  It also makes the tone knob more useful by extending the range it affects.  I prefer more vintage amp models myself, like a good mid 60's Deluxe, Twin or SR, a '59 Bassman, a JTM45 or S100, Vox, etc.   

 

Akeron, 3.5M is just a value they chose for some more flexibility.  You might prefer the slightly more emphasized presence you get with 3.5M.  In all honesty, I don't think there is any difference between lowering the HD500 IN-Z and turning the guitar tone knob down a bit.  You should consider a low C cable to see if it gives you more of what you want from your guitar.  Planet Waves Cable Station packs of 50' of 19pF/foot cable with 10 screw on plugs are ~$60.  Best deal I've seen.  An 8-10 foot cable of that would be ~200pF.


  • 0

#40 Akeron

Akeron

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 337 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 01:29 PM

Ah it's a random value :) Regarding cables, I've seen endless debates. Some say they notice a difference changing cables, while some others not. It's a confusing subject. Thanks :)


  • 0





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: hd500, pod, record, usb

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users