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

Main :: POD HD


Support forums for all POD HD products


DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by fox_hellraiser on 2013-01-05 16:02:45

Hi folks!

I'am owner of POD HD Desktop, its a great device, but I'm thinking about buying a HD 500 model, because, my dual-amp presets in Desktop reached DSP limits (with EQ, reverb and other sweety things). So, i need to know, what DSP limits has the more "powerful" pods: hd 300, 400 and 500, what's the difference between them in this case?



Re: DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by hurghanico on 2013-01-05 16:10:31

POD HD Desktop has the exact same DSP power/limits of the HD500 and the HD Pro....
all the other models are less powerful



Re: DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by fox_hellraiser on 2013-01-05 16:29:01

So, if my preset does not work on Desktop, it's not work also on HD500?

HD500 positioned as a device with advanced routing and configurable, but...configuration with two amps, two noise gate, studio eq, tube compressor and dist pedal - its limit for them? In my situation, i have this combination of "devices" and need to add delay or reverb - and I can not: catch the DSP limit!

Hard to believe, but, if this is thuth - I am upset. Is there any confirmation of your words from any official sources, documentation, blog, line6 team members etc.?



Re: DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by spaceatl on 2013-01-05 16:42:13

There are actually a lot of ways to acheive the same result and save DSP...many many threads about that...

Dual tones...While dual amps is a cool thing, depending on the amp models you select, you can find yourself running out of DSP fast....Dual tones is a novelty...you need two HD500s or HDPros running together to be able to do whatever you like with true dual tones...

Spring Reverb, is expensive...pitch is expensive...Some of the EQs are too...If you have not updated your firmware in a while, there have been DSP optimizations...also, addtional amp models have been added...

I also have a HD Desktop...I have tones that use all 8 blocks...multiple delays, pitch...rarely, if ever need EQ...I get my centered response corrected by choosing the cab and mic that gets me closest without rad EQ on the amp tone stack...

The amp and cab DEP parms allow even more tone shaping...I rarely use any of the defaults...generally prefer the 409 over most of the mics...the 57 models don't sound very good to my ears...Some of the EQ's will cost you DSP...Also, on some clean tones, a PRE model can actually work quite nicely and is a great way to save on DSP...good luck sir...



Re: DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by fox_hellraiser on 2013-01-05 17:02:43

Thanks, I know about this "dsp-save" methods, but, my question is not about it: i need more DSP with pod hd top device without change quality of my sound. But, all this methods is very compromise, and in bad side: i dont want to use "same" eq or "same" reverb, because its only "same" (captain Obvious, yeah), not 2 studio eq's for my EMG's or spring reverb with delay with so nice sound, etc.



Re: DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by CairnsFella on 2013-01-05 20:18:32

spaceatl wrote:

Dual tones...While dual amps is a cool thing, depending on the amp models you select, you can find yourself running out of DSP fast....Dual tones is a novelty...you need two HD500s or HDPros running together to be able to do whatever you like with true dual tones...

Interesting. I wouldnt say I disagree with this, but I'm not sure the powers that be would be so eager to refer to dual tones this way, after all it is a 'feature' and a USP of the product. (im not saying this is unique to this product... how many food items say 'serves 2' and only have one worthwhile portion within... so again you would need to buy 2 to service the claims of the one).

Having said all that, I do find some simple dual tone patches are pretty good, so the feature IS useful as it stands.

Fox_Hellraisers point has been discussed in the past though, and I see both sides of the arguments. My first reaction was to question why a unit would be released that did not allow all of its promise to be fulfilled. Eventually, however, I decided that I prefer the option to use all of the DSP available in preference to having the number of slots limited or any of the fx placed in restrictive groups. My preference may of course change if I start to become more imaginative with my dual tone patches, though this is my perogative, and neither preference will change anything anyway.

One could of course argue that more DSP should have been provided in the first place so that we could have all the flexibiity and routings we wanted. In this situation, however, the goalposts would have merely been moved (whilst obviously incurring more DSP cost) but we would in most instances not be using all the DSP even with fully populated patches, and again we could argue that more slots should be available to use that DSP.. Catch 22.

I have no doubt bored or irritated some forum members with my repeated mention of an old (very old) modelling and effects unit I purchased. This has no such limits in so much as  there ARE groupings and predetermined sections, but there are numerous slots, and no combination is 'disallowed' through DSP overload. Phsycologically it feels better - more natural perhaps - to have this freedom, but I am still grateful I can maximise the use of the DSP provided in the HD, regardless of the potentially valid argument that there should be more.



Re: DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by hurghanico on 2013-01-06 03:41:15

my opinion on the DSP issue:


POD HD at an acceptable price offers above all an excellent (and much improved compared to the past modelers) modeling quality that is comparable (if not better) to that of other far more expensive current modelers ..


the DSP power available is absolutely proportional to the price of the unit, to get more for the same price you should sacrifice the quality of the models, which I personally would not want to, I sold a XTL fully equipped with all model packs because I prefer definitely quality over quantity .. and in that the HD is a great invention .. you can not expect more than that at that price, and I am grateful to Line6 ..


the dual amp tone is a little luxury with the available DSP resources, which in that case do not allow to add a lot more things, patience, that's it ..
we are already enough lucky to have also that dual amp tone possibility..


those people who can not do without more DSP power with the same quality, should spend more money and buy something more powerful, there are several offers on the market ..


having said that, and wanting
instead to be a little constructive, I would like to report a useful old (and maybe a little outdated) thread: http://line6.com/support/thread/50339that contains some nice ideas for taking DSP usage measurements and a couple of useful tables in PDF on the DSP percentage used by the various models, so you can get an idea of what and how many things you can put together..

DSP usage.JPG

FX-DSP.JPG



Re: DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by jimsreynolds on 2013-01-06 04:25:21

I think your original point is covered but it is worth pointing out that some people use an M-series FX box alongside their Pod (e.g. M5) as a tool to cope with the most greedy FX, thereby giving over more DSP to the amp models and less greedy FX on the Pod HD.  Reverbs are a good candidate.



Re: DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by CairnsFella on 2013-01-06 15:53:15

Hurghanico,

I recall seeing that chart. It is certainly potentially useful, but it reminds me more of the limitations that exist. Wheras if I just create patches without thinking of the limitations I have found I rarely hit the limit (actually I think I have only hit the limit on one occassion where I was actually 'trying' to create a DSP intensive patch.

Thats said, for those people that often hit the limit, this would be an indispensible tool for planning their patch designs.



Re: DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by hurghanico on 2013-01-06 16:26:30

CairnsFella ha scritto:

...I have found I rarely hit the limit (actually I think I have only hit the limit on one occassion where I was actually 'trying' to create a DSP intensive patch...

me too, seldom I hit the DSP limit and I never use those tables when I do my patches..

however I think it's useful to see the above tables al least one time, just to have a general idea of how much DSP hungry are the various models..



Re: DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by Ed_Saxman on 2013-01-06 16:58:50

I have problems with the DSP limit even without using any amplifier!

I like to use my horn with the
pod and "Smart harmony" to recreate a saxophone section, but to fine tune the intervals I found necessary to use the pitch glide to make adjustments +-0.1, or even +-0.2.

It's actually a problem of the harmonizer, because it should have its own parameters to fine-tune the pitch without having to use the pitch glide to fix it.

In any case I do not like these limitations. I hope that when the HD1000 (or whatever it's called) is ready, these DSPs have evolved enough to not pose such a problem. Although I probably will not have the money to buy ... But you, line 6, then you can be proud of your machine, finally!. Try to improve chorus and EQs too, please. Or even better, build these effects from scratch!




Re: DSP limits comparison for all POD HD models
by gunpointmetal on 2013-01-07 12:06:45

it is what is in this instance.....you get what you paid for. Why would it make any sense to complain about a guitar/bass modeling device that doesn't work with your saxophone? Digitech makes some vocal specific harmonizers that would probably work much better in that regard, as the pitch shift effects are designed to react to a microphone type signal.




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