Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About snegdirb

  • Rank
    Just Startin'
  1. Maybe that's the way to go - trying to build a model that sounds similar to the mags. As I said, the main reason I'm getting this guitar is for the ability to access the alternate tunings on the fly, not necessarily for the models themselves, so I really do have to get it to sound as consistent as possible.
  2. Thanks for this - I'm not sure what 'the tone control cap value' is. Is it the position of the actual tone control on the guitar? Given that we cannot eq in workbench - I can see 2 scenarios in order to compensate for EQ: 1. Changing the EQ on the pre-amp model itself when switching guitar models. 2. Given that I mostly will not use the amp models on the HD5000, I guess, inserting an EQ into an FX slot when switching models would be the way to go. Is that about right? Are there other ways to do this?
  3. Hi all - just drank the kool aid and have a jtv59 coming. Have a quick question, though. When I tried the guitar out in the store, I set the tone on the amp to the mag pickups so that it sounded really good. However, when I flipped to the lester models they seemed to have a lot more bottom end than I prefer and I found myself having to re eq. Because I'm going to be using the axe for alternate tunings and will be flipping back and forth between the mags and the models, is there a way for me to even out the eq so that there is not such a big change? Is this something that workbench will let me do? Thanks.
  4. Hi jandrio - thanks for chiming in here. I see how you're running your HD500. I have done some reading and it turns out that the level of the FX send is low and it looks like no one has been able to find a way to get it up to a level where it will really drive an amp or even drive overdrive or dirt pedals fully - so this doesn't seem to be an option. To your knowledge, is this possible: Send mags to mono 1/4" out left Send models to mono XLR right This may be a way around some of the shortcomings of the HD500
  5. Hi everyone - almost at the point where I want to pull the trigger on this potential setup. I currently have an M9 which I really like for delays/reverbs. However, the overdrive/dirt models aren't was good as the pedals I own and I see that others on this list and other forums feel the same way. So, I was hoping to build a rig that looks like this: JTV69 > dirt pedals > HD500 > amp + house PA (for acoustic models). But is has occurred to me that if I do this, I cannot use the HD500X to separate the models from the magnetic pickups because I would need to connect to the HD500 via VDI cable. Is this logic correct? I have tried to think of workarounds for this and I have come up with 2 possible scenarios but I don't know if they are even possible, so I'm hoping you all could chime in. #1: I use my dirt pedals in the FX loop of the HD500. Has anyone done this? How well does this work? I'm wondering how well the D/A > A/D process will do in this scenario. #2: I use both the VDI and the 1/4 inch out from the guitar. From the VDI I choose only to use the Variax input to the HD500. I run the 1/4 cable out of the JTV into the dirt pedals and into the HD500. Theoretically with either of these scenarios, I can send the 1/4 out of the HD500 to my amp and the XLR out to the PA for the acoustic models. Will any of this actually work? Are there better ways to do this? I'm open to suggestions. Thanks.
  6. We're off track here with the dictionary silliness. While a controller is certainly a controller the bottom line is this: My original question was: has the MIDI implementation been improved? The answer is no. To those of us who were hoping that that the HD500 would finally be able to control external devices this is a big disappointment. I had been hoping to buy in to the eco-system - Tyler variax and the HD500, but I can't do that if it has to stand on its own - I need it to play with well with others.
  7. This is just semantics - you would expect that it could control and map all its own functions. Its really not a "fully assignable MIDI controller" until it can actually interface with other devices like every reasonable synth has been able to do since the 1980's. That was the whole idea behind the MIDI protocol and the reason it was standardized - so that devices could "talk" to each other and you could harness that power and recall it night after night when you played. The manual should state that the HD500 has a limited ability to interface with other devices vis MIDI. It would at least be more honest.
  8. Hi Stevie Thanks for posting. I'm very disappointed to hear this. For me this is a deal breaker because I'm running an Eventide Time Factor and Space - I really need to be able to map patches. I don't understand how they can say this (from the Line 6 website "Overview"): It’s a fully assignable MIDI controller, so you can use the footswitches and expression pedal to control all kinds of external hardware and software If what you say is true then this is completely misleading!
  9. Hi everyone I have searched this forum to see if anyone has tested the MIDI implementation on the HD500X and can't seem to find anything. In the blurb it says: "The MIDI I/O can turn the POD HD500X into a fully assignable MIDI controller, so you can use the foot switches and expression pedal to control all kinds of external hardware and software" Is this actually true? The HD500 would only allow us to step through MIDI program changes sequentially on another device. Does the HD500X allow us finally to map to other devices? Thanks for any input
  • Create New...