Jump to content


Photo

Any Plans For Custom Ir Functionality?

ir impulse responses pod hd

  • Please log in to reply
112 replies to this topic

#1 zkkzkk32312

zkkzkk32312

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 22 April 2014 - 12:41 PM

still loving my Pod HD Pro to this day.

but i can't help to realize the built in impulse responses just doesn't work well.

and since i have about 500 IRs in my hard-disk, i can't help to wish the HD family will one day be able to use those IRs.

even if its only 1 slot for custom IR would be great if memory space is an issue.

 

or maybe come out with a new product like the Torpedo loadbox and named it POD HD BOX ?

custom IR is the last missing piece for all POD units IMHO.

 


  • 0

#2 smrybacki

smrybacki

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 500 posts
  • LocationCarlisle, PA

Posted 22 April 2014 - 12:56 PM

I'm stumped.

I have no earthly idea what you're talking about here.


  • 0

#3 cruisinon2

cruisinon2

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 775 posts

Posted 22 April 2014 - 02:00 PM

I'm stumped.
I have no earthly idea what you're talking about here.



Dogs barking can't fly without umbrella!

....anxiously awaiting a translation myself.
  • 0

#4 nikoniablue

nikoniablue

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 88 posts
  • LocationSt Albans, England

Posted 22 April 2014 - 02:06 PM

IR=Impulse Response = a method of computer modelling acoustic spaces that is often applied also to modelling speaker cabinets.


  • 0

#5 cruisinon2

cruisinon2

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 775 posts

Posted 22 April 2014 - 02:20 PM

IR=Impulse Response = a method of computer modelling acoustic spaces that is often applied also to modelling speaker cabinets.


Fair enough...wouldn't it have been easier to just ask for new cab models?...lol
  • 0

#6 DarrellM5

DarrellM5

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 87 posts

Posted 22 April 2014 - 02:38 PM

More is always better but I think he's saying that if there were a way to use his 500 IR's, he would have a huge selection of cabinets available.


  • 0

#7 duncann

duncann

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 207 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 22 April 2014 - 04:04 PM

Couldn't you do this now? At least for recording, anyway. Just set the cabinet to none on the POD and load your IRs in whatever DAW you use. Of course, this probably isn't very practical for live use. Another thing to consider is the built in IRs are a little more than just IRs (see the deep edit parameters).


  • 0

#8 smrybacki

smrybacki

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 500 posts
  • LocationCarlisle, PA

Posted 23 April 2014 - 02:15 AM

Well at least I'm clued in now :)
  • 0

#9 cruisinon2

cruisinon2

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 775 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 04:46 AM

Personally, I don't want to audition 500 of anything. Limitless options might look good on paper, but at some point it becomes a roadblock. As it is, there's enough stuff in the 500X to keep me busy until at least 2 weeks into my next life...how much more do ya need?

Does anybody really want a model of every amp and cab thats ever been made? Even the ones that suck, like those little novelety amps that they used to build into an empty packs of Marlboro Reds, with the 2 inch speaker and a 9V battery?


  • 0

#10 TheRealZap

TheRealZap

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 15722 posts
  • LocationClemmons, NC USA

Posted 23 April 2014 - 04:55 AM

I'm always surprised by how people so fervently promote IR's etc....

i mean options are nice... I just don't see this being a strong selling/buying point for but a few people....

of course it'd be a huge increase in sales for people selling IR's... but for me... Yawn....

many others disagree including at least one other expert...

but i could take it or leave it... especially with the deep edit parameters on the cabs.


  • 0

#11 radatats

radatats

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1040 posts
  • LocationOrange County, NY

Posted 23 April 2014 - 05:07 AM

unfortunately, even if this were offered it would simply result in another group of tone searchers complaining about a different as yet undiscovered failing that is keeping them from finding the Holy Grail of Tone...  if you can't find a workable tone with this gear, the problem may not be the gear, it may just be the user...

 

That said, there are plenty of ways to use IR's within your DAW for recording and there are ways to do it live but you will have to spend the money to get there...  In the end it really is all about the cost point... to my ears the current bang for the buck is off the charts and anything else we get is pure gravy...


  • 0

Picture4.png


#12 joel_brown

joel_brown

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 443 posts
  • LocationVirginia

Posted 23 April 2014 - 05:34 AM

Although I'm very happy with the tone I get out of the PODHD, I'm also looking for user installable IRs.  I've used this in my DAW and it makes a very nice difference.  It would be great to have this live.  Atleast for me it made getting the tone I wanted easier to build and sounded better in the end.


  • 0

#13 loreweaver

loreweaver

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 05:42 AM

i'm not an expert...... but........

 

you have to agree that perhaps cabs native into the pod are probably not the best....... is simple to demonstrate....... (i think you know how)

 

the fact is.... even if line6 will allow us to use custom IRs, the size of this IRs would probably be extreme smaller than the same IR used into what you want inside the DAW......

 

if you check size of IRs that you can use into a DAW or into AXE-fx..... is dramatically smaller........ so....

 

dep cab parameter could help a lot live........ but if you use a full custom IR..... is different........ i have a relly satisfiyng live sound (no real amp and cab... dirct to FOH) but i can cleary hear the difference recording.........

I'm always surprised by how people so fervently promote IR's etc....

i mean options are nice... I just don't see this being a strong selling/buying point for but a few people....

of course it'd be a huge increase in sales for people selling IR's... but for me... Yawn....

many others disagree including at least one other expert...

but i could take it or leave it... especially with the deep edit parameters on the cabs.


  • 0

#14 cruisinon2

cruisinon2

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 775 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 05:47 AM

unfortunately, even if this were offered it would simply result in another group of tone searchers complaining about a different as yet undiscovered failing that is keeping them from finding the Holy Grail of Tone...  if you can't find a workable tone with this gear, the problem may not be the gear, it may just be the user...

 

That said, there are plenty of ways to use IR's within your DAW for recording and there are ways to do it live but you will have to spend the money to get there...  In the end it really is all about the cost point... to my ears the current bang for the buck is off the charts and anything else we get is pure gravy...

 

LOL...But how else am I gonna get the exact tone at 2:37 into "Rime of the Ancient Mariner" unless I have 27,153 cabinets to choose from? Maybe the next one will finally get me there...


  • 0

#15 cruisinon2

cruisinon2

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 775 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 05:51 AM

 

 

you have to agree that perhaps cabs native into the pod are probably not the best....... is simple to demonstrate....... (i think you know how)

 

 

No I don't.


  • 0

#16 TheRealZap

TheRealZap

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 15722 posts
  • LocationClemmons, NC USA

Posted 23 April 2014 - 05:51 AM

unless something has changed, I'm reasonably confident that this will not happen with the current pods.

so probably an idea better suited for future models... in other words you'll probably die bitterly disappointed if you're waiting for this to happen on any current pod.


  • 0

#17 smrybacki

smrybacki

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 500 posts
  • LocationCarlisle, PA

Posted 23 April 2014 - 05:51 AM

I have seen and experienced one simple fact in my own musical journey:

Choice is great to a point, but after that point choices paralyze my creativity because I spend far too much time obsessing with parameters and whatnot and far too little time actually playing and being truly creative.

YMMV, of course but for me this is true to the point that my next phone will NOT be a smart phone because I don't need to be doing 754 things (badly) at once in life when I could do one thing very well and then move to the next.


  • 0

#18 loreweaver

loreweaver

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:00 AM

No I don't.

 

you really think that the internal cab has a better resolution than a full custom IR? have you ever tried to do a simple test with a spectrum analyzer, recording the same section with internal cab or IR? because here we are not talking about wihat i feel or what you feel....... is math...... and is difficult that nuumbers are wrong......


  • 0

#19 TheRealZap

TheRealZap

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 15722 posts
  • LocationClemmons, NC USA

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:10 AM

do you really think that someone listening to the tune cares about the resolution?

not so much...

whats it sound like? that's what matters.

 

not to mention once a track is mixed and mastered etc... the resolution will be blended and for the most part lost...

about like asking for the eggs back after you've already baked the cake....

it's now part of the cake.

does it matter that the cake has more cholesterol? or is the cake simply delicious?

 

 

you really think that the internal cab has a better resolution than a full custom IR? have you ever tried to do a simple test with a spectrum analyzer, recording the same section with internal cab or IR? because here we are not talking about wihat i feel or what you feel....... is math...... and is difficult that nuumbers are wrong......


  • 0

#20 radatats

radatats

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1040 posts
  • LocationOrange County, NY

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:13 AM

you really think that the internal cab has a better resolution than a full custom IR? have you ever tried to do a simple test with a spectrum analyzer, recording the same section with internal cab or IR? because here we are not talking about wihat i feel or what you feel....... is math...... and is difficult that nuumbers are wrong.

Even if you are right, and I am willing to conced the point, I don't believe the current architecture is capable of allowing you to install or store these files, let alone integrate them into the software signal chain.  I am also not willing to pay the extra money necessary to perhaps achieve a small increase in cabinet resolution.  If I do decide to upgrade in the future, it will be to gain better hardware such as footswitches and increased DSP as in the 500X.  Perhaps a future offering will incorporate things like this along with the X upgrades, better EQ's, new distortion and OD models and even amp switching and dedicated 4 cable method support. 

 

However, I also hope they keep it at the current >$500 price point...


  • 0

Picture4.png


#21 TheRealZap

TheRealZap

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 15722 posts
  • LocationClemmons, NC USA

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:18 AM

to further the point... the cabs are probably at the highest resolution that they can be at now to reasonably maintain DSP for other parts of the sound...

meaning your higher resolution IR's would either need dumbed down... to the point of being the same resolution...

or you'd only be able to run an IR and a noisegate before running out of DSP :D


  • 0

#22 cruisinon2

cruisinon2

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 775 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:19 AM

you really think that the internal cab has a better resolution than a full custom IR? have you ever tried to do a simple test with a spectrum analyzer, recording the same section with internal cab or IR? because here we are not talking about wihat i feel or what you feel....... is math...... and is difficult that nuumbers are wrong......

 

"you have to agree that perhaps cabs native into the pod are probably not the best" is an entirely subjective statment.

 

"better resolution" is an entirely subjective statment....better than what?

 

I don't need a spectrum analyzer to tell me if I like the way something sounds, nor will my opinion change about how something sounds because I look at a god-damned graph or something flashing across a p-scope. This is not a course in calculus, differential equations, or the physics of sound. All that matters is whether my rig sounds good to me or not.

 

Tone A is not "better"  than Tone B because a friggin' equation says it is.

 

And we are talking about feel...that's what 99.97% of every discussion on here is about...what your axe sounds like, and how that makes you and the audience (maybe...) feel. That's what music is...reduce it to cold, hard numbers if that's your thing, but I fail to see where the joy is in that.


  • 0

#23 loreweaver

loreweaver

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:21 AM

Even if you are right, and I am willing to conced the point, I don't believe the current architecture is capable of allowing you to install or store these files, let alone integrate them into the software signal chain.  I am also not willing to pay the extra money necessary to perhaps achieve a small increase in cabinet resolution.  If I do decide to upgrade in the future, it will be to gain better hardware such as footswitches and increased DSP as in the 500X.  Perhaps a future offering will incorporate things like this along with the X upgrades, better EQ's, new distortion and OD models and even amp switching and dedicated 4 cable method support. 

 

However, I also hope they keep it at the current >$500 price point...

 

in my first post  i wrote that i have a satisfiyng live (studio direct) sound....... i probably never spend money for custom IRs (also because if i want to record with is not so difficult)...... the point in the discussion was the cabs....... yes we have cabs, with IR would be better? for sure yes.......

i care about this? no because i'm happy with my pods hd (i have 2), and no second time because if i want to use external IR i can.....


  • 0

#24 loreweaver

loreweaver

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:25 AM

do you really think that someone listening to the tune cares about the resolution?

not so much...

whats it sound like? that's what matters.

 

not to mention once a track is mixed and mastered etc... the resolution will be blended and for the most part lost...

about like asking for the eggs back after you've already baked the cake....

it's now part of the cake.

does it matter that the cake has more cholesterol? or is the cake simply delicious?

 

perhaps you don't ..... but if your primary job was to make the thing sound better you should........ for the same reason you mic a kick with a proper microphone, for the same reason that you don't listen to out of phase instrument in a record.....


  • 0

#25 TheRealZap

TheRealZap

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 15722 posts
  • LocationClemmons, NC USA

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:28 AM

i'll concede this.... but it does not matter what the technical resolution is.... only that i can make it sound better....

and that does not contradict what i was saying at all...

i know guys that can make a squier strat sound better than i can make a 50,000$ custom shop Gibson sound...

sometimes its not the tools... it's the person using them.

 

but if your primary job was to make the thing sound better you should


  • 0

#26 loreweaver

loreweaver

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:31 AM

"you have to agree that perhaps cabs native into the pod are probably not the best" is an entirely subjective statment.

 

"better resolution" is an entirely subjective statment....better that what?

 

I don't need a spectrum analyzer to tell me if I like the way something sounds, nor will my opinion change about how something sounds because I look at a god-damned graph. This is not a course in calculus, differential equations, or the physics of sound. All that matters is whether or my rig sounds good to me or not.

 

Tone A is not "better"  than Tone B because an friggin' equation says it is.

 

And we are talking about feel...that's what 99.97% of every discussion on here is about...what your axe sounds like, and how that makes you and the audience (maybe...) feel. That's what music is...reduce it to cold hard numbers if you like, but I fail to see where the joy is in that.

 

if for you sounds good is ok........ and also for me sounds really good...... in fact i have one for main rig and a bean for spare....... but......

 

difference in resolution are not subjective....... are real and demonstrable........ if we don't care for live sound is different...... but in a record you can appreciate.... also whe mixed and mastered.......

 

and for a recording situation........ physic of sound frequencies and phase make the difference.......

 

i don't want to troll...... nor to be banned...... but i think that music production is not only feeling.........


  • 0

#27 TheRealZap

TheRealZap

    Uber Guru

  • Line 6 Expert
  • 15722 posts
  • LocationClemmons, NC USA

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:34 AM

yeah not subjective if your discussing the technical aspect...

but fully subjective if you are discussing the proceeds... AKA tone created....

 

 

difference in resolution are not subjective....... 


  • 0

#28 loreweaver

loreweaver

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:35 AM

you are right.......

 

is not personal for me...... is a discussion on a product..... and if we talk about this i'm sure that with a complex IR you have more chance than with the dep param..... because i tried ......perhaps is more difficult to find the tone you are looking for than with the pod cab.....

 

and if you ask me what i woul from the pod is just a change in the EQ ....... that for me is the most lacking feature of the pod.......

 

i'll concede this.... but it does not matter what the technical resolution is.... only that i can make it sound better....

and that does not contradict what i was saying at all...

i know guys that can make a squier strat sound better than i can make a 50,000$ custom shop Gibson sound...

sometimes its not the tools... it's the person using them.


  • 0

#29 loreweaver

loreweaver

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:36 AM

yes..... but i take this thread only in the technical aspect :-)

 

 

yeah not subjective if your discussing the technical aspect...

but fully subjective if you are discussing the proceeds... AKA tone created....


  • 0

#30 cruisinon2

cruisinon2

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 775 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:47 AM


difference in resolution are not subjective....... are real and demonstrable........ if we don't care for live sound is different...... but in a record you can appreciate.... also whe mixed and mastered.......

 

and for a recording situation........ physic of sound frequencies and phase make the difference.......

 

 

I understand that resolution can be measured...along with just about everything else under the sun. We're obsessed with quantifying practically everything today, as if some universal objective truth on every topic known to man can somehow be determined, and cataloged into the Big Book of Right Answers. Much of the time, this is a pointless exercise, especially when the end result is totally a matter of individual perception...magic numbers therefore rendered meaningless unless you're authoring a textbook.

 

If I prefer the way the tone with the "worse" resolution sounds, then why on earth would I care what the numbers are in the first place?


  • 0

#31 loreweaver

loreweaver

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:58 AM

as i told you before, is not important if you are a guitar player who plug the cable...... is a bit more complicated when you have to do the job......

 

or even if you are a guitar player, who plug the cable and go straight to the foh and monitoring from wedge monitor....... the guy at the desk cut completely everything under 250 hz in your sound...... and when you ask him he will tell you "who care"....... are you sure you'll don't care? because is the same field.....

 

 

I understand that resolution can be measured...along with just about everything else under the sun. We're obsessed with quantifying practically everything today, as if some universal objective truth on every topic known to man can somehow be determined, and cataloged into the Big Book of Right Answers. Much of the time, this is a pointless exercise, especially when the end result is totally a matter of individual perception...magic numbers therefore rendered meaningless unless you're authoring a textbook.

 

If I prefer the way the tone with the "worse" resolution sounds, then why on earth would I care what the numbers are in the first place?


  • 0

#32 cruisinon2

cruisinon2

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 775 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 07:05 AM

as i told you before, is not important if you are a guitar player who plug the cable...... is a bit more complicated when you have to do the job......

 

or even if you are a guitar player, who plug the cable and go straight to the foh and monitoring from wedge monitor....... the guy at the desk cut completely everything under 250 hz in your sound...... and when you ask him he will tell you "who care"....... are you sure you'll don't care? because is the same field.....

 

Never mind. You win. I gotta go buy a spectrum analyzer...keyboard player said he heard some substandard resolution lurking somewhere in my rig last night, and I will conquer it if it takes all the calculus in the cosmos. :P


  • 0

#33 loreweaver

loreweaver

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 07:09 AM

:-)  

 

you should...... but don't forget to buy it with a lor of coloured leds........ it will improve your show!!!!!!!!!!!

 

by the way...... for play i'm very very happy with my tone........ with NO spectrum analyzer or IRs..... but i prefer to have better cabinets for the studio :-)

 

 

Never mind. You win. I gotta go buy a spectrum analyzer...keyboard player said he heard some substandard resolution lurking somewhere in my rig last night. :P


  • 0

#34 gunpointmetal

gunpointmetal

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 512 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 07:19 AM

If you have not used IR's at all, load up your favorite patches from your POD turn the cabs off, run them through LeCab with some of the free God's Cab impulses. I guaran-f'in-tee it sounds a hundred times better. The longer cab IR's nearly eliminate any left over "fizz" from the preamp that the stock cabs don't cut, the lows and highs are even more "guitar" like, and some of them even included a little tube power amp response....There is no comparison between whats on the POD and what longer, higher resolution IRs can do.....

 

I see it was something that people who know about, are adamant about, and everyone else is unfamiliar. If they started using something akin to Fractal's Hi-Res IRs in the next POD generation people who didn't even know they wanted it would be applauding the differences.


  • 1

#35 radatats

radatats

    Power User

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1040 posts
  • LocationOrange County, NY

Posted 23 April 2014 - 07:35 AM

I see it was something that people who know about, are adamant about, and everyone else is unfamiliar. If they started using something akin to Fractal's Hi-Res IRs in the next POD generation people who didn't even know they wanted it would be applauding the differences.

 

I agree with what you are saying, I have them for my DAW... Problem is I am not sure I would be willing to pay up for them in a future upgrade...  Maybe if they include all the other upgrades that have been discussed across the boards but I kind of like the current price point...


  • 0

Picture4.png


#36 gunpointmetal

gunpointmetal

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 512 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 12:36 PM

I wouldn't pay for them in an upgrade to the HD500 I have now, thats for sure, as I can already use them for recording and currently I use a regular cab live, so I have no need. I would more than a little disappointed if the next gen DIDN'T have at least some great stock IR cabs, if not user-loadable cabs.


  • 0

#37 DeanDinosaur

DeanDinosaur

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 733 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 03:05 PM

If you have not used IR's at all, load up your favorite patches from your POD turn the cabs off, run them through LeCab with some of the free God's Cab impulses. I guaran-f'in-tee it sounds a hundred times better. The longer cab IR's nearly eliminate any left over "fizz" from the preamp that the stock cabs don't cut, the lows and highs are even more "guitar" like, and some of them even included a little tube power amp response....There is no comparison between whats on the POD and what longer, higher resolution IRs can do.....

 

I see it was something that people who know about, are adamant about, and everyone else is unfamiliar. If they started using something akin to Fractal's Hi-Res IRs in the next POD generation people who didn't even know they wanted it would be applauding the differences.

I say this same thing every time I read a similar thread: to my ears disabling the POD cab doesn't just disable an IR, it sounds like there are other things that get lost. Replacing with another IR never sounded right to me. Unless line 6 officially says that they support external IRs and indicate that disabling the cab can be replaced by another IR, I won't consider using it even in software. Line 6 Cab doesn't tell you whether the IR mic  is off axis, on axis,  etc; so line 6 cab can be a combination of several IRs as far as I know. No one from line 6 chimed in and said anything about the topic.

 

If line 6 opens up their cabinet at the software level and give the option of replacing just the IR and not the whole cabinet, I would consider. On the other hand, I also use Eleven Rack and the cabs are called off Axis and on Axis so when I replace those with IR using software VST etc, I get amazing varieties and results but one it comes to POD HD, Line 6 cabs always sound superior to IRs because , I believe, they're not just an IR. I'm personally not complaining as, I personally think I have enough with the Line 6 cabs and don't want to bother spending countless hours auditioning other IRs, but if they ever officially support the IR thing, I would be all over it and would spend the hours to find the best possible IRs.

 

It's really puzzling to me why they never supported external IRs yet, as it would extend the power and useablity of the PODs and take them to a new level as you are certain to stumble on the perfect speaker simulation (IR) that would suite your guitar,pickups/body, neck etc better than the internal IR that's in the LINE 6 Cabinets (not because it's better, just because it would suite the specific guitar better)


  • 0

#38 stumblinman

stumblinman

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 573 posts
  • LocationPacific Northwest

Posted 24 April 2014 - 08:41 AM

Another shot for me! Where you been Dean? I've been sober far too long! ;)


I say this same thing every time I read a similar thread: to my ears disabling the POD cab doesn't just disable an IR, it sounds like there are other things that get lost. Replacing with another IR never sounded right to me. Unless line 6 officially says that they support external IRs and indicate that disabling the cab can be replaced by another IR, I won't consider using it even in software. Line 6 Cab doesn't tell you whether the IR mic is off axis, on axis, etc; so line 6 cab can be a combination of several IRs as far as I know. No one from line 6 chimed in and said anything about the topic.

If line 6 opens up their cabinet at the software level and give the option of replacing just the IR and not the whole cabinet, I would consider. On the other hand, I also use Eleven Rack and the cabs are called off Axis and on Axis so when I replace those with IR using software VST etc, I get amazing varieties and results but one it comes to POD HD, Line 6 cabs always sound superior to IRs because , I believe, they're not just an IR. I'm personally not complaining as, I personally think I have enough with the Line 6 cabs and don't want to bother spending countless hours auditioning other IRs, but if they ever officially support the IR thing, I would be all over it and would spend the hours to find the best possible IRs.

It's really puzzling to me why they never supported external IRs yet, as it would extend the power and useablity of the PODs and take them to a new level as you are certain to stumble on the perfect speaker simulation (IR) that would suite your guitar,pickups/body, neck etc better than the internal IR that's in the LINE 6 Cabinets (not because it's better, just because it would suite the specific guitar better)


  • 0

#39 gunpointmetal

gunpointmetal

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 512 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:54 AM

I mean, disabling the cabs in the POD your probably also loosing a high-pass EQ, and whatever exactly the "Thump" and other paramters are doing, but I see those DEPs as add-ins to compensate for the overall shittiness of the included cab models.


  • 0

#40 stumblinman

stumblinman

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 573 posts
  • LocationPacific Northwest

Posted 24 April 2014 - 02:22 PM

Aren't those just like the mic models, where they only matter in studio/direct mode?

I mean, disabling the cabs in the POD your probably also loosing a high-pass EQ, and whatever exactly the "Thump" and other paramters are doing, but I see those DEPs as add-ins to compensate for the overall shittiness of the included cab models.


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users