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

Main :: POD X3



Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by TheRocketeer on 2009-04-28 15:36:24

Hi,

I have my 212-50 now, but I'm not too happy with it. I don't know, the X3 sounds just so much more articulate trough headphones. Trough the Atomic it sounds, "muffled", also maybe too compressed if that's the right word for it. It' like listening to something that has been recorded with a too low sample-rate, like parts of the tone are missing. No problem with my sennheiser headphones.

Maybe I'm overlooking something, an option switched off that really needs to be on in a situation like this, or something like that.

I have a manual here for biasing atomics, which I'm planning to do. (I remember an old thread where user Ustrat71 said that his was biased way too cold and fixing that made quite a difference, sent him a pm but no response, too bad )

So, I'd really to hear you Atmomic users out there before I upon the atomic up. I read quite a lot of times that this is really the best thing to amplify besides a good pa, so something is off here. Hope you guys can help me out here. Thanks.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by phil_m on 2009-04-28 16:29:18

What output mode are you using?  Studio Direct isn't the best for the Atomics, at least not in the sense that patches that sound good through headphones will automatically sound good through the Atomic.  You should try stack power amp for starters.  That will take away the "under a blanket" sound, but it can sound harsh without proper tweaking.  The main thing is that it's going to take a little work to get it to sound like you want it.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Hey_Joe on 2009-04-28 21:11:00

This might help you out a bit.

Here is a link to Vettaville's Bundle Barn this is for 128 specially designed patches for use with the Atomic 112 amp.

They were made with a Pod XT but might get you close enough to learn what he did.

http://www.vettaville.nl/page.php?id=51#78

Maybeyou will find something that works for you or at least learn the tweak parameters that tone craftsman Andy Z used.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by TheRocketeer on 2009-04-29 01:30:36

Thanks for these tips.

phil_m: I always start of with really down to earth things like a JCM800 with a booster pedal in front. The under the blanket thing is indeed this muffled effect I have. Id did place a Sonic maximser between the pod and the amp, but it didn't really help, made it even sound more processed (while I never overuses the "process" nob on tese things). It did a great job for removing the blanket effect in the ADA MP-1 Mesa 50/50 combination I owned. The articulation problem is another thing... I hope biasing can do something here for me. I used both outputs, the live was a tad better indeed (and a lot louder). Are there any presets in the x3 software I should really look at ? Not patch stuff but general output settings ?

Hey_Joe: Thanks for this link! great stuff, patches made for Atomics! Cool, no problem they are XT, I didn't get to the dual amp stuff for now, first nail those base tone stuff rules here.

So you guys didn't do any biasing of the powersextion of your Atomics ? it's just set to factory ?



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Hey_Joe on 2009-04-29 08:22:57

I think our forum members Karl and Rowbi talked about biasing and I believe they both changed out the stock speaker to the more FR/FR 70/80.

I wish they would chime in here.

Here is a link to Rowbis pdf doc on Atomic Reactor 112-50 biasing guide.

http://www.rowbi.myzen.co.uk/Resources/resources.htm

Ithink Karl Housekecht has a site too, but I didn't understand his link http://line6.com/community/people/KarlSnarl

Theseguys have offered very helpful posts when it comes to Atomic info here on the this forum.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by TheRocketeer on 2009-04-29 09:26:12

Thanks for these very interesting links! Cool

Yeah, hope these guys join in the discussion here.

I was eyeballing a used Tech21 PowerEngine60 around here, is has the Seventy80 inside. Would be an interesting comparison.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2009-04-29 09:50:01

That's actually an old profile for me.  Anyway, I no longer have a dog in this fight, so to speak.  But for a good explanation of the Atomic, X3 and Spider Valve, see below:

From:  http://line6.com/community/message/3824#3824

__jive_macro_name="quote">

Okay, here's the deal.

The
Atomic Reactor is probably the best tube amp solution out there for
getting loud with an amp modeler.  Period.   Well, wait.  Let me
qualify that statement.  An amp modeler with good live cab models.

The
problem is the POD.  The Atomic speaker and cab is reasonably flat, but
not necessarily full range.  It has guitar speaker and cab
characteristics.  King and Kolbe were trying to strike a balance, and
they did a decent job at that.  The original idea was to use the POD in
Studio Direct mode with the Atomic.  What we users found there after
much experimentation is that in comparison with some other output modes
that sound GREAT through a PA is that they end up sounding compressed
and unnatural by comparison on the Atomic.

So
we tried Stack Poweramp where the mic models are disabled and the cabs
are revoiced.  Sounds better than Studio Direct.  More natural, less
compressed.  Breathes more.  Actually, sounds pretty darn good.  Until
you put it in the room with a real tube amp.  Then you start to notice
that there are still characteristics there that sound a little
plastic-y.

Okay,
so the natural progression here is to turn cab models off altogether.
Let the Atomic cab be the cab.  Whoa, big mistake.  The Atomic cab
isn't a regular guitar cab, remember?  Flatter response, not quite full
range.  Sounds like *** without a cab sim.  The problem here, I
believe, is that the POD's revoiced cabs in the live output modes are
revoiced to match standard open and closed back GUITAR cabs.  Because
if you run it that way into a real guitar cab, it sounds much better.

So
now you buy yourself a real guitar amp with a real cab and run your POD
into the effects return in Stack or Combo Poweramp mode with the
speakers engaged.  Sounds good.  But you just bought a real cab, and
hopefully a good one.  Why are you trying to emulate something
different?  So now you turn the cab model completely off and it sounds
heavenly.  Like a real amp.  The Spider Valve by itself convinced me
that Line6 nailed preamp modeling a long time ago...with the POD 2.0
!!!  POD X3 amp models, minus the cabs, sound just as great into this
amp.  As they would into just about any real amp and cab.

Wait
a second...what about my Atomic?  Is it all of the sudden no good?
No.  You've probably noticed that Atomic has joined forces with
Fractal.  That's no accident.  Remember what I said about good cab
models?  And remember how Atomic has just come out with an "FR" version
of the amp with a tweeter and redesigned cab?  They are going after the
Fractal community's need for a good amplification solution, and from
what I've heard, it works.  What I'd like to hear is how one of these
FR amps does with a POD in Studio Direct.  I bet it does well.
Unfortunately, they aren't shipping yet.  And they only have a 112.
Not an option for me.  I need a 412.

To
answer your question about how the power sections compare...I'm not
quite sure.  The Atomic power section is designed to be as close to a
linear amplifier as is possible.  Meaning that you're not going to get
power tube distortion from it, at least not in any meaningful amount
like you would when you crank, say, a Marshall's power section.  You'll
still get a subtle compression from it owing to the tube amp's nature.
The only reason the Atomic is powered by a tube amp is because it turns
out that's the least expensive way to make a high quality, near linear
amplifier.  With today's tech, it could be done with solid state, but
it would cost a fortune by comparison.

Now,
I'm not 100% certain on this, but I don't know that the Spider Valve
power section is much different.  Cranking loud on the clean models, do
you hear any power tube distortion early?  I guess a little, but not a
lot.  I do hear a bit, or at least I think I do, with some of the other
models.  But it's a 6L6 based amp and they break up differently than an
EL34 would.

Anyway,
sorry for the encyclopedia article.  But I think this is the first time
I've gone on the record with this.  Hope it made sense.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by
TheRocketeer on 2009-04-29 14:29:26

Hey Karl, thx for the info, but....

aaaaaaaarg! So you say Pod models, the cab models aren't meant to go trough a FR amp/cab ?

Well, I'll try the pointers you gave. to start.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2009-04-29 14:34:25

TheRocketeer wrote:

So you say Pod models, the cab models aren't meant to go trough a FR amp/cab ?

No, they ARE meant to go through a full range cab.  The problem is that the Atomic isn't full range.  The new Atomic FR will be, though.

Well, let me qualify that a bit.  The revoiced cabs in the Live modes like Combo and Stack Poweramp are meant for real guitar cabs.  The Studio Direct stuff is meant for a FR system.  That's what Atomic FR should be good for.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by TheRocketeer on 2009-04-30 01:20:12

Ok. didn't fiddle around with these live modes, so gonna give that a try.

I was wondering, is a Tech21 Power Engine more FR ?



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by cactuseskimo on 2009-04-30 05:08:28

I disagree with this. Actually, I think I disagreed with you a long time ago when you originally posted findings of the atomic sounding better when the Pod was in pwr amp/stack mode. I posted recordings of my pod patches direct to the computer and then with a sennheiser e609 mic on the atomic with my pod in studio mode . . .  the two recordings sounded almost identical except for a slightly more analogish sound from the atomic being mic'd up.

This test was done for medium gain stuff, and I usually play the ac30tb model, so maybe the atomic doesn't like high gain pacthes or something, but my findings were that the atomic represented my pacthes pretty spot on. The one thing I did find was that I needed to use the sennheiser e609 mic. A sm57 sounded really bad on the atomic cab.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2009-04-30 05:24:54

I think I actually agree with you on this.  For medium gain and cleans, the effect isn't as pronounced.  As you move into the higher gain territory, it gets worse.  And I definitely recommend using the 609 with the Atomic.

Again, I'm not saying the Atomic sounds bad.  It's only when you put it in the room with a real amp that you start to notice the difference.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2009-04-30 05:25:36

TheRocketeer wrote:

I was wondering, is a Tech21 Power Engine more FR ?

Nope.  Still a guitar speaker.  You need something with a tweeter in it.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by TheRocketeer on 2009-04-30 08:01:32

cactuseskimo: Aha okay, antoher mic, I will try that as well.

The patches I used were mostly high gain stuff. Well I'm surprised that no one did rebias his Atomic.

I was looking at a used PE60, but then I guess that wouldn't help me much when I already have the Atomic 212.

Thanks for all the input so far guys. I will try some of these adjustments and let yuo know what the effect was.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2009-04-30 08:07:04

I biased my 212 to factory spec when I retubed it.  Honestly, it was pretty close anyway.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by jcosta_sr on 2009-04-30 11:15:20

Do you think adding a monitor cab with a tweeter horn to the Atomic, via the external speaker, will improve the the sound?



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2009-04-30 11:23:52

Maybe.  This seems to be what Tom King is doing with the new Atomic FR.  It is a tube power amp into a cab with a woofer and tweeter.  That would allow for using Studio Direct with the Atomic.  Keep in mind, that is still going to give you a different sound than a traditional guitar amp.  It is going to be the mic'd sound through the PA.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by frenchfries on 2009-05-01 09:06:29

I take the freedom to chime in because I own an Atomic 112 50 for several years now. I've tried it with eight modelers: POD.2, XT, X3L; TL desktop and LE; Boss GT8 and 10; Zoom A2. I've done countless tests, infinite tweaking, and can now share what I have discovered...

1-FACTS: as mentioned above, the Atomic is not exactly FRFR. It reacts largely like the power section and cab of a Fender guitar amp. Nevertheless, its loudspeaker is cleaner, heavier in the bassrange, with a flatter midrange, as expected with a high power/heavy magnet 12'. Below, a picture meant to illustrate what I say by showing (from left to right and top to bottom):

- A cheap solid states FRFR, miked through two mics in the same time. The nasty peak in the high range is due to the position of the second mic in front of the tweeter (center, on axis). A much flatter response must be expected in a "real life situation".
- My Atomic 112 50 (yes, it sounds like that, through most microphones).
- A regular guitar tube amp (Marshall) with its tone controls set to zero.
- A tube power amp (with EL34's, volume and presence controls only) through a Rocktron S112 cab.

http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/4759/frrespzc8.jpg

2-SOLUTIONS:the best thing to do IMHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHO with the Atomic is to blend a cab emulation with a part of direct sound. The cab emulator will provide the body and upper midrange expected from a guitar cab, + the peaks and dips of the cab emulated. The part of direct tone will add enough low and high end to make the thing sounding "open", like a real guitar amp, and no more like "an amp miked from the next room".

To do that with the X3, just select the same amp model on the two channels. Enable the cab on the left side, disable it on the right side. Send the mix to your Atomic as a mono output signal. Play with the levels of your two blended channels until you are satisfied by the tone. If necessary, add a post EQ (example: boost 250 and 2500 hz for Fender emulations, scoop 8khz if it sounds harsh and so on).

This solution mimics the cab imaging used in Vetta amps. It's the trick that I use myself with my Atomic (fed by another modeler than yours but it's irrelevant). I can say that it sounds as natural as my real guitar amps and better than many modeling devices...

Now, you're free to believe me or not. I post it just to be useful. :-) Good luck!

FF

EDIT: BTW, with my trick, you don't need to add a tweeter in your Atomic... and from my POV, it will sound more natural . I use various modelers through a PA sometimes and although it can sound good, it's never as "amp like" than my "Atomic + tweaked modeler with semi cab emulator"... !-)



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by HeavyChevy on 2009-05-01 12:10:48

You are slowly getting there.

Time for a "real" live playing fully tube amp yet ?  You can deny it, but that is exactly what you need, and that is what you are verbalizing.

Good luck with the plastic shite, my friend !!!

Scott



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2009-05-01 12:16:34

HeavyChevy wrote:

Time for a "real" live playing fully tube amp yet ?  You can deny it, but that is exactly what you need, and that is what you are verbalizing.

LOL.  Probably.  If money weren't an object, that's surely what I'd have.  Bogner Ecstasy would be cool.  But let's face it, I'm not that good.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by HeavyChevy on 2009-05-01 12:32:39

You are way better than I am, but I would never be hamstrung with a .......modeler !!!



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Radley on 2009-05-01 15:58:42

I doubt that rebiasing will make a discernible difference - if you could send me a PDF schematic, I could suggest some simple mods to get more of the sound you're after.... it's basically just a tube power amp.

~Rad~



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Karl_Houseknecht on 2009-05-01 16:05:32

Hey, Rad!  Long time.

Problem is that Tom doesn't provide the schematics.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Radley on 2009-05-01 21:45:54

Karl_Houseknecht wrote:

Hey, Rad!  Long time.

Problem is that Tom doesn't provide the schematics.

Yo Karl - imagine meeting you here!   That's too bad about the schematics.  If I had the amp in front of me I could devise the mods without a schematic - oh well, I tried.... 

~Rad~



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by TheRocketeer on 2009-05-01 23:26:13

Wow, really good input here guys. And Thx for you elaborate opinion FrenchFries! I'm going to have a low tryout session here

Radley: wel moding... just as FRFR as possbile I guess... hmm wait, why didn't I just get a flat PA-ish solution in the first place. Seduced by the glow of tubes I guess...

HeavyChevy: Yeah well, other dicussion I guess. I had my share of tube amps, and a lot of them sounded like crap as well. Every solution has clear advantages, we're passed that here no ?



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by TheRocketeer on 2009-05-02 05:00:30

FrenchFries: When I look at these spectrums you have there, I would conclude the Marshall is the closest to a FRFR system... or not ?



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by frenchfries on 2009-05-02 06:14:54

In fact, not exactly: the apparent flatness of its spectrum is due to its tone controls set to zero for this test (settings which are not much useable musically, because they lower the volume and tend to kill the dynamic). With the same controls set at noon, the Marshall is at least as midscooped as any other amp.

Furthermore, its Celestion loudspeaker, having a light magnet, creates a dip around 1,5khz and a boost before, among other "midnotching" phenomenons. It colors the tone much more than the Eminence MegaTon of (y)our Atomic.

Last but not least: its EL34 tubes and the design of its output transformer make the Marshall distort much sooner than the Atomic, which contains a high performance toroïdal transformer and cleaner sounding 6L6 tubes...

IOW, you wouldn' be satisfied by a Marshall amp for your X3 - unless you love Marshall (dirty) tones, which is my case :-)

Also, keep in mind that a "close miking" like mine tends to scoop the spectrum. If I had set the microphones far from the cabs tested, their curves would be flatter than that (!).



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Radley on 2009-05-02 09:29:33

Yo Frenchy,

Your suggestion about using modelers with the Atomic or guitar amps is very good - you accomplish a 'full range tonality', but still have the 'goodness' of a guitar speaker and tube power amp.  It seems like any time you involve a tweeter, the sound just isn't as tweet , er I mean sweet!

~Radbot~



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by frenchfries on 2009-05-03 10:42:23

Vay to you say tat te sount isn't tweet wit a tweeter?

Seriously: IMHO, the use of "hybrid" responses is a really good way to achieve a satisfying cab emulation through an amp. That's why I'd love to find more FX's like these "Resonators" available in the last Boss GT's: for me, it's a good way to disguise a regular speaker in another one, without the usual downsides of cab modeling (=distant and dark tones, at least on stage).



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by TheRocketeer on 2009-05-05 08:01:40

Aha! I'm happy to say I getting somewhere:

1. Rebiased the amp with Rowbi's exellent guide. A 0.800v reading should be a correct bias for 2 6L6's valves. Mine measured 0.666 at first (yeah, one evil to low bias), so I managed (by accicent after only 2 turns lol) to hit exactly 0.800

I don't know 'how cold' this is for a bias, maybe it's between my ears, but after this I already felt a sound with more definition. I had less the feeling of listening to a tone that was sampled at a too low rate.

2. Set the output mode to stack power amp. This indeed removed quite a lot of the muffled blanket effect, but a bit too much maybe, resulting in a tone that was a bit too harsh just like phil_ pointed out, but dailing down some ot the treble and presence of the model helped quite some.

In fact, both actions helped already for the exact 2 complaints I mainly had. Cool ! Thx to you guys

So next is

1. Tweaking the 2-3 patches I use mostly through my headphones a bit more, like stompboxes and extra EQ I did put in.

2. Checking out these XT-Live Atomic presets Hey_Joe pointed me to.

3. Push my patches to the next level by using this mix technique of FrenchFries.

Still 2 other things I was wondering about.

1. I use the Live Out jacks at the back of the X3 Live. Is that okay or are the Direct Out XLR's (where I would need an adapter to jack) better ? I've read once this made quite a difference on the Tech21 Sansamp PSA preamp.

2. The 3 buttons on the of they X3 Live, how do you guys recommend these ? Especially Live out level (Line or Amp) in case of Live out in 1.

Thanks again!



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by dwwave on 2009-06-26 02:02:45

Not sure why you are unhappy, could be a personal sense of what you expected versus what you have, I bought my Atomic ( 18 watt 1x12) when you could still buy them from  online gear shops (I bought mine from Sam Ash ) and then bought another dock and template (one from Sam Ash and one from AMS, and later bought the individual temlate for non docking modelers from BAL , I really dig mine, I have a Podxt (3 model packs) a desk top model of the Vox Tone Lab (each has their own dock and template) and I have run a Roger Linn Adrennalinn II (now a III afer the 2 chip update and face plate change(though I do not use the drums while in the Atomic) I use some presets and created my own and often just tweak away, I use a Variax 500

among other guitars and occasionaly add a pedal in line (Boss Slicer Or EH Stereo Memory Man wiwth Hazari) visa versa I also record direct in to my Mac and A Daw and by pass the amp, just to mix things up, I mic using a Shure SM57 and to me I could not be more happy, I would like to get the higher wattage one (with dual speakers) but they are always back logged and for home use the 18 watts is just fine and more than loud enough.

I checked in to other items recently (Tech 21 Power Engine but see no reason to buy one, maybe if I was rich and could fill a room full of amps etc

I might ry others, I sld a Flextone III XL and the Atomic(with either The PodXt or Vox Tonelab (IMO) blow that amp away, every amp change required a volume turn down to way low as they were all modeled/ enetered at such various and odd (to me) sound levels it drove me bats but my bad for not trying it out more, but hey if its not for you there are folks looking for the Atomics so sell it and find the one for you, I will never spend 2 grand for Fractal product thats for sure ... Peace

dwwave



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by albertojgg on 2009-10-18 22:03:01

Nice article.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by dwwave on 2010-03-05 20:35:24

albertjog,

a belated Thank You

dwwave

not sure why lines are through the first three lines (sorry)



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by wscottd16 on 2010-03-12 07:28:08

I've done TONS of experimenting with the X3 Live going into many different types of amps and pa configurations.

My high level summary is you can most always get good tones by tweaking, but some guitar amps are more difficult to work with than others.

The results you get are not always logical either, you can be really surprised. Example, one of the very best tones I have heard is plugging into an old 1953 Gibson BR-6F 10watt amp, using the Combo Front Mode and leaving the cab sims on .. It sounds amazing and all tones work. This amp has 0 eq knobs, only one knob for volume.

EVERY amp sounds different and requires it's own set of tweaks. There is no ONE univeral setting that will work for everything, forget it.

Once you lock in on one amp, you can generally tweak all of your patches to work well with it. It takes time and effort. I've found that it's much better to use a tube amp for output .. skipping the preamp is fine, but getting those tubes in the output chain really seems to help a lot .. especially as you get louder and louder on stage.

Another great result has been plugging into an tube fx loop return on a silverface Bassman 50 tube amp (mod'd with the fx loop).

Seems to be that the less eq "coloring" from the amp, the better. The more eq coloring you use from the amp, the more tweaking you need to do on the pod.

The output eq settings on the pod can make a huge difference. (highs, mids, lows changes)

I've also found that using much less "gain" than you would think on your patches can make a huge difference. Crank the output volume though to get a good strong signal going out of the pod (signal to noise ratio improvement)

The pod's amp eq settings can make a huge difference with subtle changes (small tweaks work)

The TONE knobs on the pod's fx's make a huge difference. (esp on the distortions, just like in real life)

Mic's and Cabs make a huge difference.

Turning off the cabs works very well if you already have some good speakers in your amp.

Turing off the amps on the pod (set to No Amp and crank the volumes) works really well and gives you an M13 so to speak .. works great on old Marshall Heads especially.

Start with just the amp models first, don't get a bunch of mod, delays, reverbs in the loop to start with. Get the amp sounding great, then add the fx.

As for PA's .. some sound absolutely great .. wow .. and some don't. It really boils down to the quality of your PA system. The PodX3 sounds great .. it is NOT the problem if you have a crappy sound through your PA (unless of course you have crappy sounding patches created). You do need to tweak your X3 depending on the PA. One size does not fit all. The PA speakers and monitors make a huge difference.Your soundman needs to know what you expect your sounds to sound like! Otherwise, they just tweak away at eq's on their own. A good soundman goes a loooooonnnng way. Your best bet is to stick with one system and get to know it well, then you can set it and forget it so to speak. (only volume changes required) tell your sound man NOT to add reverbs, delays, compressors, etc to your sound.

Headphones: I have not been able to find any good sounds with headphones of any type plugged into the X3. No comparison to the sound through a good PA, not even close. I hate the headphones out on the x3. I have also not found any good headphone sound out of a mixing board. I don't think that it's possible to get good headphone sounds.

Recording = Perfect .. easy .. wonderful, amazing ... great tones everywhere ... asio dry tones are a must , copy em, open the pod farm, choose whatever you want, add layers and layers .. too easy and cool .. wow

OK . I hope this can be helpful to some of the new owners. Cheers   I think the X3 sounds amazing . and for recording .. Perfect



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by Jeremy_Shirland on 2010-03-16 11:16:56

An old topic... But did anyone try...

...replacing the speaker in the Atomic?!!

We know the Atomic is really a nice ported Cab with a tube amp in it (still a nice value). Most high-powered speakers (200-watt in this case) are going to suppress the natural highs. The speaker is sorta like a PA or bass speaker. Not a "bad" pure guitar speaker, but not a great one either. Maybe trying something like a Wizard, Red Fang, or Celestion Lead 80 would help thigs a bit.

I bet 2 Atomics with a Red Fang/Wizard combination would knock anyone's socks off:)



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?+?
by dwwave on 2010-03-16 13:48:41

jerry_shirland

re:

An old topic... But did anyone try...

...replacing the speaker in the Atomic?!!

We know the Atomic is really a nice ported Cab with a tube amp in it (still a nice value). Most high-powered speakers (200-watt in this case) are going to suppress the natural highs. The speaker is sorta like a PA or bass speaker. Not a "bad" pure guitar speaker, but not a great one either. Maybe trying something like a Wizard, Red Fang, or Celestion Lead 80 would help thigs a bit.

I bet 2 Atomics with a Red Fang/Wizard combination would knock anyone's socks off:)

I take it that You have two single speaker Atomics? or one 2 speaker combo ?

Either way, I do not think that experimenting changing the speaker(or speakers) is wrong. You are unsatisfied with the sound and feel its the speaker(s)

Other than Celestion I am unfamiliar with Red Fanf Or Wizard speakers , You may want to check Gerald Webers web site (as he builds amplifiersfor sale, has amp building clinics and ? sells kits as well. He is also a Guitar Manufaturer , I do not have the web address but use his name in a search engine and his site or sites will come up. I am unsure if You are using Pod's and what type ( I have a Podxt with 3 model packs (except bass expansion, but the update through Line 6 awhile back added Guitar amps from Pod 2.0 (a Dumble (great!) and another, plus 3 or 4 bass amplifiers and microphone preamps (unless I get a Bass Guitar I will not add that pack) The speaker choice can be complex as You have so many amplfier models to select from

as well as cabinets and effects . A speaker that will handle all A-Z and do it well will be tricky, but if you have particular amplifiers or styles of music that you play then that will help narrow it down , Guitar amp kits come with usually a choice of speakers and there are great books on amplifiers (some deeper than others that get down to the scematics and tubes, rectifier (if there is one) and speakers utilized ( look up on line Vintage Amplifiers

and there are huge sites that must have taken months to put together let alone research (Vox amps, Fender amps, Mesa Boogie, Hi-Watt, Watkins

(which made and makes guitar, bass, accordian and ? amps and also solid state amps versus tube/valve amps and hybrd  amps (example the Vox Valvetronix for one) and see if the same brands of speakers are used, the size, the materials they are made of etc are the same or different based on

the technology of the amplifiers. I have a 15 watt solid state Vox Pathfinder (non Reverb model but has gain on/off and tremelo) and it has a 8" Vox Bulldog (with a Blue Back) the amp is half open in the back and it roars (and with a external cab (will shut down the internal speaker) the manual says

it will drive a 4x12 and givess the ohm's of the cab if you went that route (I have not)

I have heard that from some that the Podx3's sound different (and the descriptions vary on what is different) than a Podxt (I like the dual rig ability and the use of simultaneous effects .. but I am happy with the podxt and have $$ in it as bought new and $99 dollars for buy two and get one free model packs so I added classic and metal amps and the FX Junkie effect pack as well and it was well worth it, I had  Pod 2.0 that I sold for $199.99 about

6 weeks prior to Line 6 dropping the price on the Pod 2.0 (new) from $299.99 to $199.99 (felt bad but I had no idea)  I also use a Vox Tonelab (desktop unit that was discontinued ? why, it sounds great in the atomic (? as it helps having the 12X7 tube or tubes in it) and a Roger Linn III (updated from a version II (by buying the two chip upgrade kit and opening the unit up and with a included chip remover changing out two tubes (and ading a new face plate to match the new settings (some where different) it was well worth it and sounds compltely different. It went from being sometimes used to a go to for sounds that are normal to the outer limits (I do not use the drums though as I am concerned about the speaker in The Atomic) I have a Korg Pad-Kontrol that helps out there via USB (the software that came with the Pad Kontrol was fabulous as well

Korg Abelton Live Lite 4 (I am at version 7 now and no cost for updates and add ons) Reason Adapted by Propellerhead ( not my favorite but I do mess with it) its (to me complicated) Sample Tank 2 Korg edition by IK Media , UVI Korg Edition and MDE-X (effects from Korg Legacy Collection by Korg (I also have M-Audio's Version of abelton Lite and keep it updated as well (all are licensed as well) I picked up (free) Tracktion 1 (by luck) by Mackie while surfing online (They were giving it away (licensed and a full edition no limitations etc) when they were introducing Version 2

I think just Version I is fine (it was a down load) from Mackie ) I think they re at Version 3 but its either being DC'D or on its way out (I could be wrong) I have sen very low prices for version 2 and 3)

I use primarly Apples Garageband (which alot of people think is a toy DAW) but once Yu learn the ins and outs there are so deeper cababilities to the program (I am using Version 2 (from Ilife 05) Version 3 added ssomething with vocals I thinks and Version 5 a visable stage and a visible set up of amp of choice, cabs and efects chain and microphone placement. I hope to get a new Imac some day as I am unning Panther OSX 10.3.9

and after Panther is Tiger 10.4, Leopard 10.5 ans Snow Leopard 10.6 and the processsor speeds since switching to Intel have gone past 3.0+ and dual core, ram (up to 16GB or ? more) and even a 2TB har drive , I would really like to get Logic Studio 9 (its $499.99 but it used to be over $1,000

their is a Logic Express for $199.99 or $299.99 and You can buy a update package to equal the Full Logic Studio 9 (and without a $ penalty either (which is rare) where you buy a light edition (though Logic Express does not seem that light) then pay the differeance to get the remaing parts to =

Logic Studio 9 (** Just be careful if You use a educational discount and buy The Logic Express , that version (Educational Store on line) I read many many reviews where You can not buy the Logic upgrade to = Logic Studio 9 (why I have no idea) but the Express versions used to be $499.99

so Apple made a great program with improvements at 50% less huh...I have only used Mac's at home though we have one PC Tower and Monitor

and I used PC's at work but I have never used a PC based DAW. I started on a Tascam Porta 2 4 track cassette and still have it (and before that

a dual cassete recorder with microphones, until one night (I had a old upright piano (a 1923 Waltham from Milwaukee WI , paid $50.00 at a wharehouse when buyin g some  furniture (a friend has a friend who stock piled stuff and bought and sold and we decided to remove the front board off the piano (to see the hammers hit the strings and better recording (and thought we could do it without removing the top panel (with a Marantz receive

a dual cassette and a turntable and they all crashed to the floor and were toast(except the speakers which were floor based, bummmer

After that I used a old Radio Shack preamp and Am-FM and speakers and a Boombox that recorded (live and learn)

Sorry for rambling

I would check out Geral Webers site

Peace

dwwave



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?+-
by dwwave on 2010-03-16 14:30:18

Jeremy_Shirland

Hey

Probably bored or thinking oh no not him again and a 2,000 word reply (oops)

I saw this Speaker Thread (4 pages) in the Community (on the sidebar) regarding

changing speaker in a Spider Valve (which while I am not real familiar with then

? the Bogner + Line 6 Amp (so will have amp models effects and ? cabs

of various  nature and used in different genres of music (I hate labeling music)

Here is the link=

http://line6.com/community/thread/1806?tstart=0

Hope it helps or offers some ideas (Geral Weber really knows his stuff

and re: his Guitars he says they rarely come up for sale used

I don't look that ofetn but I have not seen one either

New= $1500- $2500

Peace and Hope

dwwave



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?++?
by dwwave on 2010-03-16 14:41:22

Jeremy_Shirland

  Hey again

I checked that same area where U found the link above and using the search mode in " Community" typed in Spider Valve and Speaker"

(though You posted changing speaker(s) in a Atomic (this search came back with 137 results (from A-Z) some were about Spider Valve amps

(Head or Combo and speakers to use in combo (change to) or cab to use with a Spider Valve Head as well as sorts of other discussions on speakerrs

speaker cabs , extension speaker cabs and changing speakers in Line 6 Amps as well as Line 6 cabs and 3rd party cab changes its a long link hope it

works *  if not type Spider Valve and Speaker  I did not include change or type (hope the link shows up as a hyperlink)

http://line6.com/community/search.jspa?resultTypes=BLOG_POST&resultTypes=DOCUMENT&resultTypes=MESSAGE&resultTypes=BLOG&resultTypes=COMMUNITY&resultTypes=TASK&resultTypes=PROJECT&resultTypes=SOCIAL_GROUP&resultTypes=COMMENT&q=Spider+Valve+and+Speaker&peopleEnabled=true&start=0

Later

dwwave



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by gotenks82 on 2011-01-10 01:45:01

Hi guys,

i know that the topic is old but i didn't feel my problem needed a new topic...

i have had an Atomic Reactor 112-18 with a Pod XT for less than a year and never used it in rehearsal until yesterday (only played at home)...

i always had the feel that the amp was too dark and a bit muddy, but anyway the sound was pretty close to what i heard throught the headphones...

anyway when i tried it yesterday in a mid-sized garage with my drummer the thing did not cut through the drums... at FULL volume on the podxt, with a distorted JCM800 patch with the channel at full volume, we still had trouble hearing it properly...

when i set the pod output to stack poweramp it cleared out a bit but still not enough and still volume-wise was very low...

I tried to connect the pod so the input of a Peavey Classic 30 that was in the room... and it was another planet altogheter... MUCH clearer, MUCH more open sound, it would cut through the drums better and the volume was way higher, with the peavet i could set the pod output to a little less than a half, and the classic 30 volume to little less than 3 (out of 10) and still have way more volume than the AR112 with the pod at full volume...

Is there any problem with my amp? could it be that i need to change the valves or rebias it?

I know that is 18w and the other 30w, and that i also used the pre-amp section of the peavey... but shouldn't the amp be made for this? Is 18w too low in this case?

if that's the case i guess i'll buy directly a classic 30 since i like how that sounds with the pod, it colors the patches a lot, and i'll have to tweak them and set them with the amp and not in the headphones, but the difference was obvious...

any hint is HIGHLY appreciated

Alex.



Re: Not so happy with my Atomic Reactor... what's wrong?
by MikeHolmes on 2011-01-31 13:24:09

Hi - surprised to here that you cant get the required volume out of your Atomic. I also have an 18 watt 112 which I use with a PODxt Live. Even with very loud drummers I have no problem to cut through in a small rehearsal room - very rarely do I exceed half volume on the POD.

Is the POD set on AMP or LINE? That makes a big difference to volume?




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