These forums are read only, please use our new forums here.

Main :: POD HD


Support forums for all POD HD products


Future HD Amps suggestions
by rodney13 on 2010-10-17 19:39:16

Well as the new Pods have only 16 amps at this stage that might suggest that they have left the option for more updates in the future so plesae line 6 how about the Soldano SLO 100



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Nick_Mattocks on 2010-10-18 01:20:35

You should submit a Feature Request with your suggestions for product development using Product Feedback which you will find under the Contact Us link at the foot of the page.  Good idea though regarding the Soldano - I suspect there are a few other amps too that users would like to see for the HD range



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2010-10-18 04:48:54

Right there with you. SLO-100 is a must-have.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Mr_Arkadin on 2010-10-18 05:09:58

Maybe we can get a poll set up for amp models. Me? I'd like a couple of bass ones (an Ampeg and anything British) and the Citrus (Orange) in HD format.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Misie3k on 2010-10-18 05:41:20

gimme my orange back!



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by TS5150 on 2010-10-18 07:09:54

Urgently needed: Diezel (Deity Lead) and/or 5150/6505



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Tones2 on 2010-10-18 07:42:42

My list would include those wonderful sounding metal oriented amps from the X3 / XT series:

Peavey 5150 (2002 Criminal)

Diezel VH4 (2003 Deity Lead & Deity's Son)

Marshall JCM2000 (2003 Brit Gain J-2000)

Marshall J-900 (1992 Brit J-900 Dist)

Soldano SLO-100 (1993 Solo 100 Head)

Mesa Boogie Mark II-C (1985 Cali Cruch - a much better Mesa than on the HD series)

.....as well as some of the Line6 originals:

Agro

Big Bottom

Chemical X

Insane

Lunatic

Spinal Puppet

Now that would be a great model pack!

Tony



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by TS5150 on 2010-10-18 07:54:01

ich would pay 50 bucks for it, when they come quick.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Tones2 on 2010-10-18 08:18:12

Note that almost every Line 6 competitor in the price range offers pedals whith exceedingly more amp models than the 16 the HD series offers. It's weird that there are only 16, and somewhat weird choices at that. It would seem that something's gotta give here.

Tony



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Mr_Arkadin on 2010-10-18 09:23:55

Maybe you haven't been around here long - but I remember countless posts requesting fewer amps but of higher quality. Now that Line 6 have listened and actually done that everyone is demanding more amps.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by TheRealZap on 2010-10-18 09:31:56

i also don't view the amp choices as weird so much.... diverse... which i think is the point....

i'm glad we don't have 13 great metal amps and 3 classics....

i also happen to think that the metal amps that are there are great and cover alot of ground...

sorry they don't work for you....



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by ReverendLove on 2010-10-18 09:34:50

Yes. +1

And if I would suggest something, I would like to see some end 50s Framus or a big Orange.

What I want to say is: Tastes are so different.

The 16 amps with all their glory have a very lage range. This selection is definetely exemplary.

My 2 cents.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by fester2000 on 2010-10-18 09:38:16

Definitely enjoying the amps that are in there, for sure.  But if L6 were looking for guidance on what other amps to put in there, I'd say:

Modern Hi Gain (the Soldano preamp)

Soldano SLO-100

Orange/Citrus (best clean sound on the XT/X3, IMHO)

JM Pre (Eric Johnson city)

Cornford Connor 50

5150

Zen Master

Cheers,

Fester2k



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by cactuseskimo on 2010-10-18 09:44:52

It always seems to me that that metal players are never happy with the number of metal amps they have, and always the most vocal about getting more. I mean we all want more amps, but it seems some guys will come in and say "The Orange amp and Vibroking would be nice" while the Metal guys say "I think the best model pack would be a: Splawn, Soldano, Randall Warhead, Mesa boogie MkIIC+, Mesa Boogie MKIV, Peavey 5150, Engl P-Ball . . ."

Anyway . . . yes I'm looking forward to more model packs. For an original suggestion - how about a Watkins Dominator, or Vox Supreme/Defiant .



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by ReverendLove on 2010-10-18 09:59:58

Yeah and an Ampeg.

I used to play guitar when I started with an Ampeg and a 4x12" cab. That was huge.

And I am also for an the Vibroking and a muddy Bluesbreaker.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2010-10-18 10:54:47

Mr_Arkadin wrote:

Maybe you haven't been around here long - but I remember countless posts requesting fewer amps but of higher quality.

Yes, that was an often repeated wish.  Everyone chimed in saying they wanted fewer amp models, but make the ones they get higher quality.  Many commented on how some of those ~80 models were redudant, too similar, or just plain bad.

This is a case of the users getting everything they asked for, but not what they wanted.

I defintely want a couple of choice models added, but I will settle for just the SLO-100.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by phil_m on 2010-10-18 11:09:05

That's because metal is such nuanced music and the people that listen to it have such discriminating ears - it is a known phenomenon that members of the audience will quit banging their heads if they do not hear the dulcet, distorted tones that they have come to savor.  Ah, yes, the metal listener - they're like the sommeliers of the pop music world... 



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by fester2000 on 2010-10-18 11:20:47

phil_m wrote:

That's because metal is such nuanced music and the people that listen to it have such discriminating ears - it is a known phenomenon that members of the audience will quit banging their heads if they do not hear the dulcet, distorted tones that they have come to savor.  Ah, yes, the metal listener - they're like the sommeliers of the pop music world... 

Phil, you owe me the Diet Dr. Pepper I just spat all over my monitor, hahahaha!!!

Cheers,

Fester2k



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by aloymetal on 2010-10-18 19:45:57

i've done my request at Line 6's page.

my request for future amp:

1. Line 6 Big Bottom
2. Diezel (lead & son)
3. Soldano (preamp)



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by variableresults on 2010-10-18 21:07:09

Guytron GT100.  Seriously Line6, if you want a challenge, try modeling an 18watt power section run full out with enough plate voltage to fry a pair of EL84s with moderate use in less than three months, and then slaving it to a clean 100watt EL34 power section for volume.  With one channel that can do Silverface Fender through Vox AC30 with the turn of the gain and tone knobs, and another that will do Dumble overdrive to Eddie to modern metal (admittedly, with a boost in front).  If Line6 could pull that off, I would be unbelievably impressed.

Also on my list:

Bad Cat Hot Cat

Wizard Modern Metal

Mad Professor

Bogner Ecstacy 20th Anniversary

Bogner Shiva 20th Anniversary

VHT Pitbull Ultralead (I still can't fathom why anyone hasn't modeled this yet)

Mesa Mark IV Lead channel

Mesa Mark IIC+ Lead channel



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by cGil on 2010-10-18 22:29:58

Ditto on the Marshall 18watt.  Please please please Line 6, please!   And yes, I can also testify that the 18watt amp is especially tasty when the plate, screen, and bias voltages are pushing the el84's beyond their limits into the redplate zone.  But don't you dare even think of trying to get away with doing a model of just one input jack!  There are four inputs, two per channel, and they're all different.  Please be sure to get models of the high impedance input of the tremolo channel, as well as models of both low and high gain inputs (single or parallel input triodes) of the "mic" channel as it's labeled on the Wattkins Dominator.  I'm sure we'll all manage to forgive you if you skip the low impedance trem channel input, but only of you skip just that one.

Since Jim Marshall totally had to go and misappropriate Charlie Watkins' Dominator circuit design, they're virtually the exact same amp with only very minor circuit layout differences and different cabs; so don't forget to model a 1x12 combo cab with G12H30 55Hz Fs bass cone, a closed back 1x12 Greenback, a 2x12 with either pair and/or Alnico Blue's to cover all the Marshall variations.

But most definitely do not forget to model the 2x10 El.Ac.'s in the Dominator's v-front cab.   Those 15w ELAC-10's are the perfect compliment for Charlie Watkins' v-front cab, and the tone is just too exquisit to ignore; and that includes the new reissue ELAC-10's that Britamps is putting in the new Watkins Dominator Reissue.  The new reissue ELAC-10" speakers are slightly more efficient and consequently a couple db's louder than the originals, but that's okay cuz they totally nailed the same incredibly smooth and balanced signature tones from 'em.    And consider the fact that it was THAT speaker tone from THAT amp in THAT Watkins 2x10 v-front cab that got Jim Marshall excited enough to go steal it in the first place!

Definitely do the Dom!

Gil...



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by rodney13 on 2010-10-18 22:34:07

I just hope when Line 6 designed the new Processing unit for the Pod HD they allowed its capacity to be able to have more amps updated in the future.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by echirouze on 2010-10-19 02:19:40

i think the SLO100 is a must......

but for exemple, with the amps already in the HD500, i can't make my own preset for a sound like "sultans of swing", the HD terribly need some good amp for clean sound.

A big choice for lead sat sound or crunch, but where are the big clean sound we had before on the podXT or X3.

I think line 6 wanted to reduce the number of the amps in the HD500, they gave us practice to have a bigger choice before with othe pods.

A jazz chorus will be a good amp to complete a large sound.

and i 'm not sure to found a autowah anywhere....i gonne seek it..

but my little list of suggestion:

sin chorus

for amps:

Jazz chorus

fender pro reverb ( for sound like sultans of swing...it's perfect)

peavey 5150

JCM 900

Mesa Boogie Mark II-C

and a good amp for really clean sound with big attack...like we can find with a old fender amp

I think LINE6 Team will listen to us.......i really hope!!!

for the moment i prefer to continue to play with my X3, because i no succeded to make also good sound with the HD500



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Crusty_Old_Rocker on 2010-10-19 04:17:59

I want the Marshall 1974X, I just dig that amp.

Cheers,

Crusty



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Tones2 on 2010-10-19 08:22:11

As you can see from this thread, so many people want so many DIFFERENT amps, that the reason the X3 / XT seies was so great because they had most of them so that everyone is happy, not just a select few. The HD series really needs a LOT more amp models.

Tony



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by phil_m on 2010-10-19 08:49:51

I really don't have any doubts that there will be more amp models for the HD series.  It's just that it's at the very beginning of it's life right now.  When the PODxt was first released, it only had 32 amp models.  Through updates and model packs, that was expanded to 78.  I don't know if they'll release that many in the future, but I would be surprised if there aren't some.

Personally, I'm in the school of thought that says one very good amp model is worth a dozen OK ones.  I think with having a lot of different models available to them people start thinking that each model can only do one sound.  A well-modeled amp should be able to offer a wide range of tones, though.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Mr_Arkadin on 2010-10-19 09:10:34

Maybe expansions will take the form of replacement, so those that want metal can have 16 metal amps (yawn) - due to the expanded modelling there may not be room for more amps.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by silverhead on 2010-10-19 09:47:56

Mr_Arkadin wrote:

Maybe expansions will take the form of replacement, so those that want metal can have 16 metal amps (yawn) - due to the expanded modelling there may not be room for more amps.

I'm inclined to agree. I'm not sure how many (if any) more amps the HD DSP/hardware will support at one time. Depends on the architecture I suppose - whether an amp model definition is just a little memory, and the real work gets done after it's loaded into a signal chain and processed (in which case probably lots more amps can get stored until needed), or whether the amp model definition is itself a memory intensive thing (in which case it might already be nearly maxed out at 16).

If it is a replacement scenario I'm hoping the replaceable pack will be granular - in other words you won't need to swap out all 16 original amps to load a new pack of 16. I would hope you will be able to buy model packs in smaller increments - say 4 amps, maybe even down to individual amps - and decide which one(s) you want to swap out to make room.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Tones2 on 2010-10-19 09:48:07

phil_m wrote:

I really don't have any doubts that there will be more amp models for the HD series.  It's just that it's at the very beginning of it's life right now.  When the PODxt was first released, it only had 32 amp models.  Through updates and model packs, that was expanded to 78.  I don't know if they'll release that many in the future, but I would be surprised if there aren't some.

Personally, I'm in the school of thought that says one very good amp model is worth a dozen OK ones.  I think with having a lot of different models available to them people start thinking that each model can only do one sound.  A well-modeled amp should be able to offer a wide range of tones, though.

Yeah, but my point is everyone has a different idea of what that one or two good amps should sound like. I didn't find even one really great amp in the HD300. The more amp models that are available, the more you can find those 3 or 4 go to amps that you in particular can use. I love my POD XT primarily because I love maybe 15 of the amp models out of the 80 or so I had, not because it had 80 models. If it had 65 models and didn't have te 15 I liked, I would hate it. If it had just those 15 models, I would love it.

Get it?

Tony



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Mr_Arkadin on 2010-10-19 09:55:29

To be honest it seems like your tonal palette is quite specific - why not just buy the one amp that gives you that tone? I mean I can't believe you didn't like any amps in the 300 - there are amps in there that are outside my usual tonal remit - the Gibtone for example - that I just can't stop playing and force me to maybe write something a bit different. I realise your musical remit is narrower, so surely something that fits that bill is better than a modeller which, by its nature, has to have a wide variety of tones to appeal to many users.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Tones2 on 2010-10-19 10:15:06

Mr_Arkadin wrote:

To be honest it seems like your tonal palette is quite specific - why not just buy the one amp that gives you that tone? I mean I can't believe you didn't like any amps in the 300 - there are amps in there that are outside my usual tonal remit - the Gibtone for example - that I just can't stop playing and force me to maybe write something a bit different. I realise your musical remit is narrower, so surely something that fits that bill is better than a modeller which, by its nature, has to have a wide variety of tones to appeal to many users.

Huh? I'm saying the exact opposite. I want a LOT of different amp models to choose from in order to find the 15 or so I actually do like. I've used modelers all my life. My go to's right now are the XTL in hardware and Amplitube 3 in software.

Some may like the 16 models in the HD series and that's great. They didn't do it for ME but if I had more choices, I might had found several. It doesn't have anything to do with the "HD" technology per se, as obviously a more powerful DSP is better, but rather the specific amp models chosen.

Tony



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by echirouze on 2010-10-19 10:38:07

It's true, on the podxt there are many amps , but i can say too, i use only 13 or 14, and many miss in the HD, i don't use metal amp. for exemple.

I really think the soldano was  great in the previous pod, and it's a pity to stop this amp in the HD. I'm sure line6 Team is already work for it.

but, don't forget, it's just "suggestions" from already users.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by mdmayfield on 2010-10-20 09:21:46

I think it would make sense for them to just recompile the old XT amp models for the new DSP and offer them as expansion packs. It would probably take less effort than creating new "HD" style amp models from all those amps, and they could have a sale -- $29.95 for each of the old Expansion Packs, remade for the Pod HD.

The marketing could continue the whole HD-TV analogy and talk about how even though they're not quite as detailed as the HD amp models, they're still good and they'd be "standard definition" amps "upconverted" to run on the HD Pod, and with the M-Series effects they can still sound great, so if you just have to have that particular amp sound, you can use the old models for now, etc. etc. etc.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by silverhead on 2010-10-20 11:37:23

mdmayfield wrote:

I think it would make sense for them to just recompile the old XT amp models for the new DSP ...

Somehow I don't think it's as simple as that......... but Line 6 isn't about to tell us their proprietary methodologies.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Rowbi on 2010-10-20 11:53:59

silverhead wrote:

mdmayfield wrote:

I think it would make sense for them to just recompile the old XT amp models for the new DSP ...

Somehow I don't think it's as simple as that......... but Line 6 isn't about to tell us their proprietary methodologies.

lol.

I realise the OP wasn't parhaps one of them, but I've lost count of the number of threads saying "why can't line 6 make new amp models... the XT ones have been re-used too many times".. so now they listen to the many people saying that, and someone still sayd we want the old ones back..  not having a did, just making an observation.

Line 6 have designed a whole new way to model amps in HD.  they've sampled 16 amps, and some of them like the recto was in the XT and X3, but they went back and did it again.  so I think they'll need to do that for any amps they want in the HD... start from scratch.  otherwise they'll sound like XT models just with more horse power behind them, rather than proper HD models... kinda like getting a ford focus and putting a V12 engine in it... sure it may well be able to race super cars, but it aint a lambo or ferrari is it

I'm sure as L6 have now discontinued a lot of the older PODs, like XT and X3L, that they'll be concentrating on these POD HD's now.  if everyone puts in requests for more models I should think we'll get them

Cheers

Rowbi



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by mdmayfield on 2010-10-20 12:15:51

silverhead wrote:

mdmayfield wrote:

I think it would make sense for them to just recompile the old XT amp models for the new DSP ...

Somehow I don't think it's as simple as that......... but Line 6 isn't about to tell us their proprietary methodologies.

Oh I'm sure it wouldn't be completely simple. I've never written software for embedded systems like the Pod, but I've done some programming here and there, in C++ and old school 8-bit assembly language, and have a good grip on the underlying concepts. It would be tough if it's written in low level DSP code, but if they wrote it in any kind of high level language it should be practical, even if it's not exactly easy.

But I'm just shooting the breeze about this; I wouldn't personally buy or use such model packs. I think the HD500 offers more than enough tonal coverage with all the effects and the 16 amp models. If someone can't get the sound they want out of it, it's probably experience/ears/imagination, not hardware, that is the limiting factor. Most of the tone is in the player, anyway. To some extent (some), the equipment is just window dressing.

I think it's gone now, but there used to be a YouTube video of Joe Satriani playing in his son's friend's dad's (yes it does make sense) basement, on a crappy $100 Squier Affinity or something through a tiny fizzy practice amp. He sounded fantastic. (Though he made a negative comment about the action on the guitar, understandably.)



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Tones2 on 2010-10-20 12:37:49

mdmayfield wrote:


But I'm just shooting the breeze about this; I wouldn't personally buy or use such model packs. I think the HD500 offers more than enough tonal coverage with all the effects and the 16 amp models. If someone can't get the sound they want out of it, it's probably experience/ears/imagination, not hardware, that is the limiting factor. Most of the tone is in the player, anyway. To some extent (some), the equipment is just window dressing.

I think it's gone now, but there used to be a YouTube video of Joe Satriani playing in his son's friend's dad's (yes it does make sense) basement, on a crappy $100 Squier Affinity or something through a tiny fizzy practice amp. He sounded fantastic. (Though he made a negative comment about the action on the guitar, understandably.)

Man, no offense, but I really hate statements like these.

First off, the HD does have a wide but shallow tonal range. And if your in a wedding band or a 70's cover band something similar, then yes, you probably need just a little bit of everything. But those who specialize in one genre of music almost exclusively have a lot more tonality nuances and need more than one or amp types that are particular to the range within that genre itself. That's why the X3 was so great - it gave us enough models for BOTH the wide tonal range and the more in depth specialization of one genre of sound.

Secondly, yes great players sound great playing through anything, even a crappy rig, but they sound a LOT better playing through a much better rig. In absolute terms - yes, Joe Satriani is going to sound better than most of us when he plays thru crappy equipment than we would playing through great equipment. But me, you and Joe Satriani are gonna sound a LOT better playing through good equipment relative to our own playing ability than we would on bad equipment.

For both of those reasons, we need more better sounding amp models.

Tony



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Tones2 on 2010-10-20 12:46:31

mdmayfield wrote:

I think it would make sense for them to just recompile the old XT amp models for the new DSP and offer them as expansion packs. It would probably take less effort than creating new "HD" style amp models from all those amps, and they could have a sale -- $29.95 for each of the old Expansion Packs, remade for the Pod HD.

The marketing could continue the whole HD-TV analogy and talk about how even though they're not quite as detailed as the HD amp models, they're still good and they'd be "standard definition" amps "upconverted" to run on the HD Pod, and with the M-Series effects they can still sound great, so if you just have to have that particular amp sound, you can use the old models for now, etc. etc. etc.

Wow - this is a fantastic idea! Those like me who think these old X3 amp models were great would be very happy, especially if this was available in a smaller footprint of the HD300, and those who don't like them woudn't have to buy them. And it would presumably take significantly less time to develop as well as justify the discontinuance of the X3 Live pedal. No one loses here, assuming that it's actually possible to update the HD series with model packs.

Tony



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2010-10-20 13:06:50

mdmayfield wrote:

I think it would make sense for them to just recompile the old XT amp models for the new DSP

Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way.  If you read their press, the HD modeling uses an entirely new set of hardware, upwards of something like 20 new devices they had to construct and a whole slew of new software.  Modeling an amp for the HD platform requires building it from scratch.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by silverhead on 2010-10-20 13:14:20

Tones2 wrote:

mdmayfield wrote:

I think it would make sense for them to just recompile the old XT amp models for the new DSP and offer them as expansion packs. It would probably take less effort than creating new "HD" style amp models from all those amps, and they could have a sale -- $29.95 for each of the old Expansion Packs, remade for the Pod HD.

The marketing could continue the whole HD-TV analogy and talk about how even though they're not quite as detailed as the HD amp models, they're still good and they'd be "standard definition" amps "upconverted" to run on the HD Pod, and with the M-Series effects they can still sound great, so if you just have to have that particular amp sound, you can use the old models for now, etc. etc. etc.

Wow - this is a fantastic idea! ...assuming that it's actually possible to update the HD series with model packs.


I would be EXTREMELY surprised if it's possible - not just maybe a difficult programming feat - but impossible. I think, like Rowbi, that the technology is entirely new from the ground up and will require modelling any amp from scratch again. The previous modelling data is likely useless.

I've done a little more than mdmayfield's 'a little programming here and  there'. Having earned a computer science degree and done  industrial-level software development on large scale telecommunications  systems for decades, I know that the old adage 'garbage in, garbage  out' applies in this case. I'm trying to think of an illustration - so while the following probably does not at all describe the actual situiation Line 6 would face, I thinhk it might still be a useful illustration.

Suppose you have a legacy software system that uses, say, a 10x10 element matrix to define some modelling data. You redesign your system to implement a much more sophisticated and powerful modeller - and in order to do so your previous 10x10 matrix has becomes a 100x100 matrix (we've been told that the HD models use about 10 times the amount of modelling data).That's what makes the new modeller more powerful. You NEED huge amounts of additional input data to make it work. So how do you get it?

One idea would be to 'recompile' your 10x10 matrix values into the new system; that's 100 values. What values are you going to use for the remaining 9,900 input data elements in the new matrix? My guess is that trying to extrapolate the missing values from the original  matrix will result in the 'garbage in', and the result will in all  likelihood be a meaningless mess. It's those additional input data elements that define the new model - and the only way you get them is to resample the source.

But, as I say, I may be way off base, and maybe Line 6 can work miracles.............we'll see.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by phil_m on 2010-10-20 13:16:38

I guess all this talk of nuance makes me wonder how much nuance actually comes across in a recorded guitar tone.  A very good amplifer combined with good effects can cover a whole lot of ground.  Probably one reason Line 6 thought they could reduce the number of amp models available was that there is a lot more in the way of effects available on the HD series.  In addition to the overdrive and distortion stomps, there are also a whole slew of EQ models.  It just seems to me that there a lot of different ways to get the tones you want with the tools in the HD series.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by spaceatl on 2010-10-20 13:31:26

+1

They shot the amps using a new process that captures at least 10 times more data...It might be that they are capturing even more than that and it won't fit in the HD hardware yet...maybe it takes a while to do this stuff...I have no idea...I imagine if it was easy, we would have gotten 300 mediocre models

The thing is, they still have all these amps at HQ...I bet they are shooting amps everyday...

I guess Line 6 is "re- modeling"

The more the merrier...



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Tones2 on 2010-10-20 14:10:23

silverhead wrote:

Suppose you have a legacy software system that uses, say, a 10x10 element matrix to define some modelling data. You redesign your system to implement a much more sophisticated and powerful modeller - and in order to do so your previous 10x10 matrix has becomes a 100x100 matrix (we've been told that the HD models use about 10 times the amount of modelling data).That's what makes the new modeller more powerful. You NEED huge amounts of additional input data to make it work. So how do you get it?

One idea would be to 'recompile' your 10x10 matrix values into the new system; that's 100 values. What values are you going to use for the remaining 9,900 input data elements in the new matrix? My guess is that trying to extrapolate the missing values from the original  matrix will result in the 'garbage in', and the result will in all  likelihood be a meaningless mess. It's those additional input data elements that define the new model - and the only way you get them is to resample the source.

But, as I say, I may be way off base, and maybe Line 6 can work miracles.............we'll see.

It would seem that data interpolation would work with an intelligent interpolation routine. Take a look at the on-the-fly upscaling of standard analogue TV to HD that HD TV's used to do before it all became digital - it worked pretty darn well and actually looks better then the old non-HD version. I would guess a similar routine could be employed - it's just math.

I'm a programmer as well and I'd have to think through a bit what is actually going on in the pseudo-HD "processing" and what would make it so different that data just couldn't be converted easily. It would seem it's all just data about harmonics - i.e. turn the treble knob and these harmonic / frequency increases by this amplitude, as an example. Sound can always be broken into a combination of base level sine waves and amplitudes that can be represented by data. The "HD" just implies there are a greater number of values to represent that amplitude and frequency - right?  I think the reason it took them a lot longer to develop the HD models was not anything related to the increased DSP power or new data processing routine, but just the amount of data analyzed and accumulated to better represent what happens when each parameter is changed. That's the "ground up" portion - spending more time on the ANALYSIS of the sound, not the data stream to represent it (other than increasing the possible values).

Tony



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by silverhead on 2010-10-20 14:23:33

Well, maybe it is just analysis rather than data sampling. But I'm guessing that new sampling is required. Otherwise, I'm guessing Line 6 would already have all those legacy models available for a price. I doubt that they'd need us to point it out to them.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Tones2 on 2010-10-20 14:27:51

phil_m wrote:

I guess all this talk of nuance makes me wonder how much nuance actually comes across in a recorded guitar tone.  A very good amplifer combined with good effects can cover a whole lot of ground.  Probably one reason Line 6 thought they could reduce the number of amp models available was that there is a lot more in the way of effects available on the HD series.  In addition to the overdrive and distortion stomps, there are also a whole slew of EQ models.  It just seems to me that there a lot of different ways to get the tones you want with the tools in the HD series.

A couple of things here:

In terms of nuance, I could argue that the same amp model that exist in the X3 and the HD, like the Brit J-800, sound a LOT more similar than two completely different metal amps. So using your logic, can the differences the the Brit J-800's models be heard in an actual recording? Maybe, but it would be a lot less apparant than the differences between the 5150 of the X3 and the ENGL on the HD, as an example.

Secondly, effects should not be used to cover up for bad sounding amps, especially when you talk about distortion, Distortion by definition is clipping the sound wave that have amplitudes over a threshhold. It's hard to get that back with effects. It's like putting on perfume if you have body oder instead of being clean from the start.

Tony



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Tones2 on 2010-10-20 14:30:42

silverhead wrote:

Well, maybe it is just analysis rather than data sampling. But I'm guessing that new sampling is required. Otherwise, I'm guessing Line 6 would already have all those legacy models available for a price. I doubt that they'd need us to point it out to them.

Maybe. But they might just be considering these to be "lo-fi" and thus bad marketing to put them on their "hi-fi'" device. Just in case it might be good knowledge for them to know there are some of us who still love the old amp models, especially in light of them actually discontinuing the X3L and XTL.

I do get REALLY excited about the possibility of this though. I'd love to have the X3 / XT amp models with the HD500 effects and HD500 flexibile routing. That would be awesome!

Tony



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by fester2000 on 2010-10-20 15:13:15

Tones2 wrote:


It's like putting on perfume if you have body oder instead of being clean from the start.

Tony

Wait - that doesn't work??!?!  Guess I'll have to return this 2 gallon bucket of Old Spice I bought at Costco. 

Cheers,

Fester2k



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by mdmayfield on 2010-10-20 15:35:28

Karl_Houseknecht wrote:

mdmayfield wrote:

I think it would make sense for them to just recompile the old XT amp models for the new DSP

Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way.  If you read their press, the HD modeling uses an entirely new set of hardware, upwards of something like 20 new devices they had to construct and a whole slew of new software.  Modeling an amp for the HD platform requires building it from scratch.

I am not suggesting that the data from the model can simply be applied to the HD's modeling routines.

If you took the source code for, say, the Pod XT Live's firmware (specifically, the routines that access the A/D converter to get the guitar signal, other routines to apply the amp and effect modeling, and finally the code to output the final modeled sound out the D/A converter), you could - at least theoretically - compile it for the DSP chip in the HD. Then you would have an XT Live (software) in an HD box (hardware).

That's what I meant. Take the entire amp model algorithm section from the XT/X3 series. Of course no one is actually going to do this so it is moot.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by mdmayfield on 2010-10-20 15:38:18

silverhead wrote:

One idea would be to 'recompile' your 10x10 matrix values into the new system; that's 100 values. What values are you going to use for the remaining 9,900 input data elements in the new matrix? My guess is that trying to extrapolate the missing values from the original  matrix will result in the 'garbage in', and the result will in all  likelihood be a meaningless mess. It's those additional input data elements that define the new model - and the only way you get them is to resample the source.

As I mentioned above, I don't mean recompile figuratively like that, as in upsample & interpolate. I meant LITERALLY recompile, as in take the source code for the XT's firmware and compile it into object code for the HD's chip.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by mouzermusic on 2010-10-20 17:14:11

Agreed 100% about the SLO.  A cornerstone amp that defines lead tone, in my opinion.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by phil_m on 2010-10-20 17:26:24

I'm not saying effects can make a bad sounding amp sound good.  I'm saying that effects can make a great sounding amp even more versatile than it would be otherwise.  Virtually every review I've seen of the HD amp models says that they're more responsive and react more like a real amp.  If that's the case, the wide variety of effects on the HD along with the 16 amp models should be able to get at least close to a very large range of tones.  I'm not saying that I'm against future amps being modeled.  I just am skeptical of those who are acting as if none of the amp models currently on the HD sound good.

The fact is that many of the amps that are modeled are sort of "patient zeros" as far as guitar amplification is concerned.  There are certainly a whole bunch of other amps that could be modeled, but in many cases, newer amps are really variations on existing designs.  That's why I still say I would rather have a smaller set of excellently modeled amps than lots of ones that aren't as detailed.  Now, I know those aren't mutually exclusive things, but I don't think having a limited collection of amps at the moment should prevent anyone from getting good, working tones.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by spaceatl on 2010-10-20 17:48:21

HD is a different animal...when I first started using it, I said a lot of the same things that I read here...I need another EQ...Basically, I was looking for the hooks that I had used in the XT, Flextone III XL and the SVs to get my tone...The thing is, HD just isn't the same...One stark difference to me is how the tonestacks works model to model...On XT, radical tonestack settings rarely if ever worked for me on any model...

The tonestack seems more real to me in the HD hardware and after taking some time to learn that the knobs do some radically different things model to model...I started to really get it...One model that I totally hated the first time I tried it was the Dr. Z...Once I learned that the bass control is actually a second gain control and that the rest of the stone stack is sorta like an AC30 that work the opposite of what you think they would (It's close to the real amp control from what I understand)...Well, I found a new fav lead patch...

The interactive tonestack is not new for Line 6 models...It's just that it works differently and I think it's more effective than before...radical settings don't detract from the tone like it did in the XT stuff...

basically, I am pretty certain that if one makes the assumption that tonestack settings will translate model to model in HD, well then I can completely understand why they would hate it...I hated quite a few of the models at first...Even making the assumption that it works like XT is an incorrect assumption in my opnion...Took me a bit to get under it...But I like it more everytime I use it...



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by whiteop on 2010-10-21 00:16:53

I think the amps they included in the HD500 cover a lot of ground. Personally I'd like to see some better dirt stompbox models. Not very impressed with most of what I've heard tho I have a tendency to like the tubescreamer and Classic Distortion best.

Some amp models I've used in the past on other units that have sounded great are:

Bad Cat <insert model name here>

Soldano

Peavey 5150

Mesa Mark IV



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by toasterdude on 2010-10-21 04:30:42

Tones2 wrote:

As you can see from this thread, so many people want so many DIFFERENT amps, that the reason the X3 / XT seies was so great because they had most of them so that everyone is happy, not just a select few. The HD series really needs a LOT more amp models.

Tony

Bingo. That nailed the problem. Would I be happy with 16 amp models? You bet. BUT. . . only if I get to pick the 16;-) I nver understood the people saying they wanted less models to be available.

They often said I only use 5-6 of them. Yeah oK, but there are TONS of POD users and I am pretty sure we would all pick a different 16 amps.

If memory or resources was an issue I would love to have 16 amps that are of higher quality, but allow me to pick which 16 I UL to the POD. Anything gainier than a SLO I ditch, while others would consider a SLO "mid gain".

MY HD500 has arrived but I am out of the country for at least 2 more weeks so I haven't touched it yet. To me the biggest weakspot is the area covered by SLO. I don't play metal and used the SLO as my main rock rythm tone sometimes combined with a plexi. I hate the JCM800 as I could never get it to sound warm and less bitey. I hate the Dual Rec type amps as well while I am sure tons of people love em.

Give me:

SLO

Matchless

Cornford

JCM900 Clean channel

Boogie Lead channel

Dumble

DRZ zwreck

Fender Vibro

pre amps for acoustic

and what the heck an ADA MP1

I think they should do model packs:

Metal

VIntage

Boutique

Some FX packs would also be great

I am sure I would buy em all.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Islandboy on 2010-10-21 04:47:12

I've always said that I'd like to see a Trace Elliot 100W Super Tramp.

Now there's a lush amp

And the Soldano 100 wouldn't be a bad choice either....



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by beteasta351 on 2010-10-24 09:20:44

Lets get:

METAL AMPS:

Bogner Shiva, Engl Power Ball II, Diezel VH4, Mesa Boogie Mark V, Krankenstein + Krank Cab, Peavy 5150

Clean Amps:

Roland Jazz Clean, Marshall JMC 900,

Mid Gain:

Marshall JMC 2000, Orange Amps!

DISTORTION PEDALS:

KRANK DISTORTUS MAXIMUS!!!!

EQ:

IS it just me, or does the HDxxx need a FULL 3 BAND PARAMETRIC EQ with Q controls and all that stuff?



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by graemeguitar on 2010-11-26 12:36:40

I agree ........ I really miss the SOLDANO  and the MESA BOOGIE Mk2c. Regards, Graeme



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by amgamg on 2010-11-26 14:02:09

I'm one of the ones who's pretty happy right now with the current lineup.

But if they did think of adding some....

Carr Slant 6 both channels

Bogner Shiva

Train Wreck not sure what model..maybe the Liverpool...maybe the Express I dunno.

I'd like the lead channel of the Boogie Mark IV

Honestly as was mentioned above by some...the HD500 is probably flexible enough to already get many more sounds than people think it can.

While I surely tried all the models on the other POD's...I mainly stuck with Modern High Gain and JTS.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by cactuseskimo on 2010-11-26 22:38:27

ABSOLUTELY. None of the included eq's can do what the lowly XT eq could do (although I find I don't quite need as much eqing with the HD).

Oh yes -  Watkins Dominator.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by jdolby on 2010-11-26 23:11:26

Wouldn't it be great if you could go to Line 6's web site and create/download your own custom 16 amp model pack?  EVERYONE would be happy.

You're welcome, Line 6.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by victim5150 on 2010-11-27 01:18:41

5150 III



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by desso on 2011-01-10 11:49:11

Here's one for ya.  A Peavy Renown with 1 15 inch Black Widow speaker. 160 Watts.  Pure digital distortion grind and TONS OF VOLUME!!

My first amp, 1983 or so.  (Actually, I'd love ANYTHING that's modeled as well and sounds as good as the DR. Z!  That thing is KILLER).



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by toasterdude on 2011-01-10 15:38:24

desso wrote:

Here's one for ya.  A Peavy Renown with 1 15 inch Black Widow speaker. 160 Watts.  Pure digital distortion grind and TONS OF VOLUME!!

My first amp, 1983 or so.  (Actually, I'd love ANYTHING that's modeled as well and sounds as good as the DR. Z!  That thing is KILLER).

Renown. Not digital though. . .solid state baby. 260 watts. . . .I had one with 2 Scorpion speakers. Loud is an understatement. Just to show that I always leaned towards having a variety of tones rather than clean and dirty. From the renown I went to a Peavey Programax. 10 recallable by midi patches in solid state glory! Unless the battery wigged out during sound check and you ahd to whip up the 10 patches in 3 minutes. Luckily the battery only wigged out 50% of the time.

Did a gig at a place that was a dance club all week but one night had bands. I had my Peavey on 1.5 and the bouncer came back and had me turn down. Played the gig on 1. . . .couldn't hear a damn thing, which mad playing slide on the dimly lit stage an adventure with my tin ears. . . ..

The good ole days!



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by NetherSpirit on 2011-01-10 15:52:58

I'm less bothered about more heads and preamps and would quite like a few more cabs! Maybe a Purple Chili 412?



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by desso on 2011-01-10 16:19:37

OOps!  Yeah Solid State, just meant to say it wasn't a tube amp.  GOSH I had it on 2!! one time.  My ears rang all week (still do, but they're just old and wore out now). LOL  They WERE the days!  Trying to play "Dreams" as done by Molly Hatchet and of course "Freebird".  We had a 14 y/o girl singer in my first group and she did a fine job of "Gimme Three Steps."

The days indeed.  I was 18 or so.  50 now.

:(  or :) depending on how you look at it!



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by litesnsirens on 2011-01-10 16:42:33

Desso, you must be coming from the same place I am then.  I'm 49.  Single channel amps and some stomp boxes back in the day, and now we gripe that we only have 16 amps to choose from and only 100+ effects at our disposal and we need more and better eq's.  I don't know about you but coming from those days to this, I'm in dreamland.  Now there is something to be said for all that old gear and that's probably why it took me so long to warm up to modelling devices.  For a long time I just don't think they had it right and I was never satisfied with any of the modelling stuff I tried and stuck to a good tube amp and a few nice pedals.  I always thought a couple of good tones was better than a hundred crap tones.  But I have to admit the HD500 has made a believer out of me.  I can't really say when modelling got good, when you try a few and think they are crap you tend to stay away for awhile. Never tried the X3 or any of the more recent Line 6 offerings, the HD is the first one I thought to try after reading they started over from the ground up. I'm totally impressed.  Since I don't know about the sounds on the recent predecessors, it wouldn't be fair for me to comment regarding adding some of those models to the HD500, but my personal opinion is that they have a winning formula and if they are going to offer more models in the future I would prefer those models to be new offerings done HD style.  Not that I need them, I can get tons of mileage from what is already offered, but let's face it new stuff is always fun.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by tommy1170 on 2011-01-10 17:11:50

I can't resist adding my two cents here.  If I were in L6 product development, I would SERIOUSLY CONSIDER asking the customers to put their money where their mouth is.  And by that, I mean create additional amp models that can be purchased individually.  I would be more than happy to pay for the amps I want.  A bonus would be to receive credits for those I don't.  They could create a "standard amp pack", a "metal amp pack" a "clean amp pack" and so on, in goups of 16 or whatever.  Find the pack that suits your needs and you or golden.  Want more?  Fine, pay for them.  Want them all?  Fine, pay for those too.  I am totally OK with L6 looking for a return on the R&D costs to procure, model and pefect the various amps we all clamor for here on the forums.  But I do NOT expect them to go through all this time and expense for no commercial return.  The bonus from them is more choices equal happier customers, which drive more sales.  Pay for what you want, get credited for what you don't.  Find the balance that meets our needs and provides a fair ROI for L6 and EVERYONE wins.  My two cents....



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by toasterdude on 2011-01-10 17:30:04

desso wrote:

OOps!  Yeah Solid State, just meant to say it wasn't a tube amp.  GOSH I had it on 2!! one time.  My ears rang all week (still do, but they're just old and wore out now). LOL  They WERE the days!  Trying to play "Dreams" as done by Molly Hatchet and of course "Freebird".  We had a 14 y/o girl singer in my first group and she did a fine job of "Gimme Three Steps."

The days indeed.  I was 18 or so.  50 now.

:(  or :) depending on how you look at it!

Should have had her sing "Don't misunderstand me" ;-)  I was too stupid to realize a Reknown doesn't sound like a Mace. Interestingly the Mace had a SS preamp and tube power amp. Skynyrd, Hatchet, 38 special and Outlaws all had those Maces. . . . .lol. . .



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by jeffwatt on 2011-01-10 19:46:11

+1, tommy... great idea!



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by litesnsirens on 2011-01-10 20:10:43

Great idea, and personally I would be happy to pay for extra packages or individual amps.  I think the one downside to this would be if the competition isn't doing this.  Line 6 would have to be pretty confident that what they are offering is far superior to similarly priced units that are offering lots of models and also have confidence in their clientele that they would be able to notice the difference. In reading these forums so far I don't know that I would have that confidence.  I think the models are top notch quality, but not everyone agrees.

So, I'm with you, but based on history, everyone may say that sounds great lets do that, and then when Line 6 offers it, there will threads with people complaining about having to pay for extra amp models while this company and that company offers the same number for free.  Just an issue I could see popping up, might be more of a headache than just offering free updates for the life of the product.  I'd be happy either way cause I'm happy now.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by amgamg on 2011-01-11 03:15:20

This brings to mind the model packs sold for the XT. They upgraded the XT with certain amps and effects and than made the rest of what later became standard on the X-3 an option for the XT. I bought the packs ...all of them except for the Bass pack. A little much? Maybe....but I didnt regret it. Now in as much as you thinking not everyone feels like me about having to purchase them......of course. If they did it again would I buy the packs for the HD...depends but probably..cause chances are the cost wouldn't be that bad.

Moving on...if they were to model some old SS amps...cant leave out Acoustic. Brings back memories of my old 150 with its 6x10 cab. Pretty decent amp. I remember well those old Don Kirshner Shows with a serious back line of 270's and 360's. In the end..I became a Marshall guy. The old Acoustic guitar amps werent bad though. 



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by dftpunk on 2011-01-11 04:29:50

Orange?))))

Concerning the model packs for HD... I'd rather buy FX pack than Amps Pack... There're so much cool effects that doesn't exist on HD yet..

You don't need 100+ amps.. 1-2 clean, 1-2 Crunch and 1-2 HiGain - that's all what you need I suppose.. But effects!!! ))) It worth to have a lot of them)))



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Hambuich on 2011-01-11 14:06:07

my wishlist:

Gibson GA400

Polytone Baby Brute

Mesa Boogie MkI

Fender 5E3

Stimer M6

Jim Kelley Reverb



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Lukcv on 2011-01-11 14:47:09

I would really like some of the Matchless amps... it would be soo cool!

Thanks



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by porcytree on 2011-01-11 16:49:40

would like to see a old faves from my flextone days

Budda (Zen Master)

Matchless (Master Chief)

Cornford (Connor 50)

Marshall Super Lead (Plexi Lead 100)

Marshall Silver Jubilee (Brit Silver)

Soldano (SLO 100)

and maybe an Orange amp (not sure which)

would also love a few extra OD/DS choices such as

Marshall Blues Breaker or Boss Blues Driver

Boss Dyna Drive

Marshall Guv'nor

OCD/Timmy

don't want much do I ?? !!!



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by rodney13 on 2011-01-23 04:13:26

Ahhhh yes one amp i forgot about and they sound awsome  please click on the link to read about http://www.kometamps.com/



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by KozMcCharlie on 2011-01-23 16:19:59

How about these:  Matchless Cheiftain Fender TWEED Twin or Deluxe (or both) Orange Rockerverb 100 Roland Jazz Chorus Mesa Boogie Mark I



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by richardwhite2009 on 2011-01-23 16:23:44

Yes - on the Matchless suggestion... Also a Roland JC-120 is a stock amp thats missing



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by jscomposer on 2011-01-23 19:26:22

A couple more bass models and an acoustic simulator would be nice. Other than that, it's pretty well-rounded. The only other amp I have personal experience with is the VHT UL. And I certainly wouldn't mind having that on the HD500! But another bass amp or two is higher up on my list.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by laszlov2 on 2011-01-24 01:35:48

I bought the HD500 some months ago and I'm still discovering all the possibilities of this board. I got rid of allmost every preset, except for 4 or 5 of them, and now I'm building every tone from scratch. Because I play a lot of styles(pop-rock to melodic death metal) I need a lot of sounds. The HD500 covers everything perfect. I can get warm clean sounds, metal, funk, rock, blues, synth.

But!

I would love to see a Roland JC-120. It would be awesome if a good HD model was made of this amp.

And if it would be possible, a Mark II+c, or a Mark V(but with al the tonal possibility hehehe).



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by mrasmodeus on 2011-01-24 09:49:02

I'm with a number of the others here about 'amp packs'.  I think they could be an incredibly useful addition to the line since it would essentially let each player tailor the pedal to his needs. Even better would be roll your own amp packs, meaning you can buy each amp separately and jam it in any open 'slot' in the pedal (there's 16, right?).

now, for my amp wish list...

Roland JC-120 (naturally!)

Marshall Silver Jubilee

Marshall JCM 900

Mesa Triple Rectifier

Peavey 5150 MkII

Of course, the heretic in me also would love to see some solid state goodness, like an old and new Crate amp model as well.

Heck, if there was a good library of high quality amp models to purchase from (Picture it like the virtual guitar store of the music gods), I'd happily go down to 4-8 slots, especially if I can keep them on my computer and swap them out as needed, if needed.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by alpiel91 on 2011-01-24 21:32:39

This article should be a poll.

I'd really like to see (better said, to hear) the MESA/Boogie Mark IIc+ Lead Channel (a.k.a. Mark III Red Stripe's Lead Channel), all that chunky, "lead pipe against a brick wall" tone I love.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by knightage on 2011-01-25 12:07:08

alpiel91 wrote:

This article should be a poll.

Your wish is my command...just kidding.  Part boredom, part being between day jobs, and part finding this thread interesting, here are your results.  Although it's not really empirical, it really just shows, if anything, the general trend.  I rolled up a few things.  For instance, I took out specific channel requests, and some model requests.  For example, 11 people suggested the Soldano, SL-100, and 2 people said Soldano Pre.  6 people just said "Orange", and 1 person said Rockerverb.  For Matchless, 3 people said just Matchless, 1 said Chieftain, and 1 said Master Chief.  etc, etc, etc.  Hopefully it's just a broad picture of the thread.  Oh yeah, and I took out anything that just had one request.  Since I only have real world experience with a few of these amps/models, please forgive any naming errors.

13Soldano SLO-100
8Peavey - 5150
7Orange
6Roland - JC-120
5Matchless
4Marshall - JCM-900
3Bogner - Shiva
3Diezel (Diety Lead)
3Mesa Boogie - Mark IIC
3Mesa Boogie - Mark IIC+
3Watkins Dominator
2Bad Cat - Hot Cat
2Budda - Zen Master
2Fender - Vibroking
2Marshall - JCM-2000
2Marshall - Silver Jubilee
2Mesa Boogie - Mark I
2Mesa Boogie - Mark IV
2Mesa Boogie - Mark V
2VHT Pitbull (Ultra Lead)



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by guitarcal on 2011-01-25 14:01:29

68 Marshall Plexi, 50 & 100 models

I'm still not the biggest fan of the Park 75 Model.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by alpiel91 on 2011-01-25 20:39:34

good job, productive boredom then... lol

about the Mark stuff, well the classic metal suitable tone is the Mark IIc+ lead, if the posts about Mark IIc were talking about chunky rythm tones then it was actually Mark IIc+ they were talking about (otherwise they were speaking about vintage tones). in the case of the most wanted Mark III, the tone is also the Mark IIc+ lead channel, same as with the Mark IV Lead Channel...

lol i guess we metalheads are never satisfied with one amp of each kind/brand



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by longi17 on 2011-01-25 22:32:56

Soldano SLO 100 and maybe the Carvin Legacy too. The lack of a British type high gain is killing my love for the HD500 very quickly and if an amp pack or patch with one isn't available soon, my HD500 is going up fore sale!



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by tommasi on 2011-01-25 23:52:14

I'd love a princeton reverb. I concede there's a lot of fender 'ground' covered on the HD, but I love that amp. Maybe I should try the deluxe reverb with a 1x10 cabinet (is there such a thing on the HD?)



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by matt34500 on 2011-01-26 01:29:57

I Want Roland Jc 120 , Mesa Triple Rectifier, Peavey 5150, Marshall Plexi lead 100. Or a system to choose only the amp you want in your POD. In a list of a all classic line6 classic amp from all product. Ok it's a crazy dream.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by ianblackburn on 2011-01-26 04:35:47

Just a Soldano and I'd be happy, but a 'modded' Marshall like a Cameron or a Marsha (Friedman) would be nice.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by richardwhite2009 on 2011-01-26 15:54:32

I'd like an HD version of the "1968 Plexi Variac’d" from the Pod X3 Live library..



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by OliverCaspers on 2011-02-02 03:08:09

Just posted this as RFE: I would like to have the master volume controling the power amp simulation of the amp models. That way I could have e.g. a almost clean pre amp and let the power amp do the distortion. This is not possible at the moment. The master at the moment simply controls the volume of the patch. You can still control overall volume of a patch by using the mixer. The pre models could stay as they are for DT 50 users.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by litesnsirens on 2011-02-02 05:07:16

Are you talking about the master volume in the amp section (which is simply labelled "volume") or the over-all "master" volume of the HD 500.  The latter is the output volume of the unit and is independent of the patch itself.  So if you adjust that volume lower or higher it will affect all patches uniformly.  To re-assign this as a master to the power amp section of the amp models would leave us without a way to globally adjust volume from the HD500, which would be a huge problem for players who are going direct to PA.

If memory serves, the "Volume" controls the over-all pre-amp output of any given amp model. So leaving the gain low and cranking that should theoretically achieve what you are asking for since amps that don't have an over-all master volume basically use this control as the final output.  So in essence the difference between an amp that does have a master volume and one that doesn't is that the one that doesn't is equivalent to turning the master volume on the amp that does to 10 (or 11 if your amp goes that high) so the more you turn up that "volume" the more you are hitting the power amp section of the amp.  Amps with a master volume basically use that as a final attenuation so that you can set channel volumes relative to each other and then globally adjust the volume with one knob.

I know this is probably a roundabout way of explaining this but the bottom line is that you can already do what you want to do.  It's just easier because there is one less step.  If you add a master volume function to the amp you have to crank both the volume of the preamp and the master.  When the master isn't present the default is full power so you only need to use the volume of the preamp.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2011-02-02 06:35:06

litesnsirens wrote:

If memory serves, the "Volume" controls the over-all pre-amp output of any given amp model. So leaving the gain low and cranking that should theoretically achieve what you are asking for

It won't have any effect on the power amp saturation.  That isn't currently modeled.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by litesnsirens on 2011-02-02 07:04:12

Interesting, so is it just the way the power amp colours the eq of the tone that is modelled, thus requiring the need for a pre and full version of each amp model.  I have noticed that with the Fender Twin for example, you can crank the Gain way higher on the pre version before it starts to break up than you can on the full version, so that's definitely going beyond just a difference in EQ but I definitely wouldn't chalk that up to modelling power amp saturation, it could simply be that the gain structure in the pre-amp section was modelled differently in the pre and full version of that amp.  That said, you could easily see how one could come to the conclusion that there is more detail in the modelling of the power amp section than just eq.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by TheRealZap on 2011-02-02 07:07:16

its all in the flavor of the amp... those signature sounds...

some of them are pre-amp driven and others are poweramp driven

that's why it's nearly impossible to volume level the pre's



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by litesnsirens on 2011-02-02 07:57:07

OK, but I'm still not getting what aspect of the power amp section has been modelled. Of course I understand that in real life the there are some amps that get most of their "flavour" from the pre amp section while others get it from the power section, that's why they make hotplates.  In fact to a degree all amps get a portion of their flavour from the power amp section and whether they use EL84's, EL34's or 6L6's etc.  Karl has pointed out that the saturation  of the power amp section hasn't been modelled, so I could see how they would still be able to model the effect that specific tubes have on the tone.  But you seem to be saying that depending on the model, that if it's a power amp driven amp model that the power amp section will affect the saturation.  So there's either a conflict in the info I'm getting or, there is some detail that is missing in the info that could account for both explanations. ie; that the power amp saturation is modelled but it's a fixed setting and isn't modelled from zero to 10 dynamically based on how you hit it.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by SteveFromBerlin on 2011-02-02 10:26:07

Defenitely two or three bassamps and much more importand: Bass FX!!!

I am dying here as a bassplayer!



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by variableresults on 2011-02-02 12:02:06

litesnsirens wrote:

OK, but I'm still not getting what aspect of the power amp section has been modelled. Of course I understand that in real life the there are some amps that get most of their "flavour" from the pre amp section while others get it from the power section, that's why they make hotplates.  In fact to a degree all amps get a portion of their flavour from the power amp section and whether they use EL84's, EL34's or 6L6's etc.  Karl has pointed out that the saturation  of the power amp section hasn't been modelled, so I could see how they would still be able to model the effect that specific tubes have on the tone.  But you seem to be saying that depending on the model, that if it's a power amp driven amp model that the power amp section will affect the saturation.  So there's either a conflict in the info I'm getting or, there is some detail that is missing in the info that could account for both explanations. ie; that the power amp saturation is modelled but it's a fixed setting and isn't modelled from zero to 10 dynamically based on how you hit it.

Here is the lowdown:  on all amps that are non-master volume, the Drive knob should effectively be the same as the Volume control on the actual amp.  The only difference is that the actual dB level is normalized, so the Drive knob acts as more a saturation control on these amps.

In the case of the high-gain amps, the drive knob acts as the Gain control.  The master volume is, I assume, locked at one position on the dial.  While these amps (especially the JCM800) will get some tone from the power section, most of it is coming from the preamp.  The reason a lot of us would like to see a power amp saturation control for these is that, in many cases, the setting of the actual amp's master volume can drastically alter the overall tone.  In many cases, high-gain amps don't sound that good at all cranked because they're designed around preamp distortion, not poweramp. 



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by litesnsirens on 2011-02-02 13:02:49

It's not that I don't understand the theory of how these amps work, I've been playing guitar for 38 years and owned a lot of different gear over all those years through the 70's 80's 90's etc.  What I am trying to understand is how the HD500 works in context to what Karl posted.  I trust what Karl has to say, as he has over 2500 posts, is an expert user and from I can tell, knows a lot about Line 6 gear.  If I remember correctly he was a beta tester for the HD500, so he has logged alot more hours on it than most of us.  So given that there are pre and full versions of all the amp models and Karl had stated that the saturation in the power amp section hasn't been modelled, I had some questions relating to that.  If saw what I wrote in post 91. you will see that I was already under the impression that what you have posted was true.  I stood corrected in post number 92.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by vcuomo on 2011-02-02 21:17:07

Another vote for the SLO 100



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by variableresults on 2011-02-02 21:24:20

litesnsirens wrote:

It's not that I don't understand the theory of how these amps work, I've been playing guitar for 38 years and owned a lot of different gear over all those years through the 70's 80's 90's etc.  What I am trying to understand is how the HD500 works in context to what Karl posted.  I trust what Karl has to say, as he has over 2500 posts, is an expert user and from I can tell, knows a lot about Line 6 gear.  If I remember correctly he was a beta tester for the HD500, so he has logged alot more hours on it than most of us.  So given that there are pre and full versions of all the amp models and Karl had stated that the saturation in the power amp section hasn't been modelled, I had some questions relating to that.  If saw what I wrote in post 91. you will see that I was already under the impression that what you have posted was true.  I stood corrected in post number 92.

What Karl said about poweramp saturation not being modeled doesn't make any sense to me.  Most of the models in the HD are non-master volume; how could you model them without modeling poweramp saturation?  Did he mean that the master-volume wasn't modeled on the amps that have one, like the Recto and the Uber?



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by tommasi on 2011-02-02 21:51:04

Maybe he just meant that the channel volume does not affect power amp saturation (or that the power section is nod modeled separately from the pre, but both are fused together in the 'full' versions of the amp, I don't know) . I, for one, am grateful that the chan vol works the way it does, so I use it as a volume control assigned to the external expression pedal without taking up an fx slot. While I care more about the resulting tone than how exactly the modeling works, it would simplify the tweaking process to know how the models react wrt their real-life counterpart. It's true that many amps without a master volume have power section saturation without which they'd sound pretty puny.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by OliverCaspers on 2011-02-03 02:47:28

My request was meant, that you can change the sound of an amp with different power amp volumes. For me the sound of the high gain amps is too creamy. I want it more rough. You can achieve that with a real tube amp, by lowereing the gain of the preamp and increasing the volume of the power amp - using the sturation of the power amp tubes. Pre amp distortion and power amp distortion sound completely different. BTW, a lot of hard rock guitar players are not using a lot of gain in their preamps, but using the distortion of the power amp. This also results in less compressed sounds.

Take for instance the AC/DC sound. It's not much pre amp distortin, but a fully cranked power amp. This also effects the speakers. If the speakers are driven at high volumes they will also add saturation to the sound and sound different.

BTW, I was talking about the (master-) volume of the amp model, not about the master volume knob on the Pod HD device.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by tommasi on 2011-02-03 08:57:13

Absolutely: when I said "he" I was referring to Karl. He is saying that "power amp saturation" isn't modeled, and I was just speculating on whether it isn't modeled at all or whether the channel volume just doesn't affect it. For models of amplifiers that are able to generate both pre and power amp distortion by interaction of gain and master volume, this would represent a limitation.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by maqaf1 on 2011-02-03 16:37:10

vcuomo wrote:

Another vote for the SLO 100

and another!



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by maqaf1 on 2011-02-03 21:31:26

richardwhite2009 wrote:

I'd like an HD version of the "1968 Plexi Variac’d" from the Pod X3 Live library..

and another +1



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Dime13 on 2012-03-10 22:37:27

I have seen requests for a long time but no new HD Amps.  Where are all the new amps that were expected to be added to the HD series?  I really need them in my Pod HD500.   \

And can somebody at Line 6 please improve that wretched parametric EQ?  There is no reason why the EQ cannot be more on par with the good quality of the amps and FX.. and if not at least modify so the controls have more flexibility and range in their Q parameter for bandwidth for crying out loud!  Please help.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by meambobbo on 2012-03-11 11:51:34

Why do you EXPECT amps to be added?  Line 6 traditionally improves their products, but if you are expecting lots of new amp models, you're going to be dissappointed.  I wouldn't expect more than 2-3 more high gain amps over the platform's lifecycle, if that.  We might get a SLO-100 by year end since it is so commonly requested, but I wouldn't put any stock in that.  yeah, I want a 5150, a Mark IV, a Mark IIC+, some Diezel, etc, etc.  But the HD modelling is much more intense compared to previous Pods, and Line6 isn't going to spend a lot of time and money pleasing small market margin users.

What's wrong with the Parametric EQ?  It's my favorite EQ.  The Q can be very wide or very narrow.  It'd be nice if Q and freq weren't displayed in %.  Also, it'd be nice if the max frequency was higher than 5 kHZ.  But otherwise, I don't see what's so wretched about it.



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by robbec2012 on 2012-03-11 17:26:52

With you on that 100% E.Q is very important in the pod hd

i want the piezo amp from the x3 =/ i use to get some glassy cleans now the closest thing i can get is bypassing the amp lol

6150+ would be nice also a krank rev and vht would be great.

im sure line 6 will update the numbers of amps but dont expect 50+ lol i would be happy with 32 hd models couldnt ask for more honestly and were gunna get a couple bass amp models and tools in 2.0 !



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by Phoenix on 2012-04-30 12:14:55

i got lost reading this thread and couldn't find the answers i was after, maybe someone can fill me in...

Do the HD's have the capability to install more amp models? (enough memory, or are the 'desires' dependant on new hardware?)

Do the 'Line 6' amp models (such as Spinal Puppet, Big Bottom, Agro etc) require much modelling/memory? Are they a 'hope' for the HD's?

I agree that having less amp models is better, but yesm with the diversity of players its hard to choose the best amps to keep everyone happy. Maybe the ability to overwrite amp models so each person can have 16 of the amps they want? (thats if memory is an issue) or be able to store all amp models on a computer and copy them over with patches? As a previous Vetta user, scrolling through 78 amp models did take its toll (However, it became like a 'creative artform' in its-self, to create a great tone. Oh, how i miss the Vetta's hint hint)

Im sure i can feel the Deisel VH4 being modelled in HD right now

Maybe a Framus Cobra as well?



Re: Future HD Amps suggestions
by chimp_spanner on 2012-05-01 04:43:50

Less interested in new amps than I am in a decent 4 band parametric EQ, or at least low shelf, 2 band parametric, high shelf, all with Q. That'd do nicely!

But anyway, as far as amps go, the only ones I really miss are the Criminal, and the Big Bottom. I would love to see those amps make a return in full HD glory!

I still keep my X3 Pro for this reason, though. You know what'd be amazing? If they released an X3 with an HD style signal chain. Phase out the POD 2, Floor PODs and all that other stuff they're still selling, and do one last revision on the X3. So then we've got the choice of more (but less detailed) models or less (but more realistic models) both with the flexibility we've gotten used to with the HD.

*sigh* Hey I can dream right




The information above may not be current, and you should direct questions to the current forum or review the manual.