GTLazer

Out of the following, which would you choose? (Take your time, mind, cos it's a tough choice) New HD500: $399 Used HD500: $399 New HD400: $399 lol

The files are exactly the same because the software is exactly the same, as the manuals are exactly the same.

Yes.

In the medium term, it's definitely a good thing; they wouldn't bother with a face-lift model if they didn't think it had probably another couple of years in it. By then they'll be ready for the Pod VHD as a cheaper alternative to the Axe-FX3 and the KPA2, if you see what I mean.

I'm certainly not complaining; I was just providing information to quell the rumours of things like improved signal routing. Like I've said in another thread, it's exactly the same as when Boss replaced the RC-20 with the RC-20XL. A couple of years after releasing the original model, the memory (or, in the case of the 500x, the processor) is so much cheaper that you can release an improved model for the same price. As I've also said elsewhere, those of us who already own a 500 are not the target market at all; they're just keeping things fresh for new customers, which is fair enough. Off the top of my head, I think the only time I've really had any problems with the DSP limit is when trying to use twin Bogners with delay and reverb. As I've been umming and ahhing about swapping the 500 for a Pro, I'd certainly be interested in trying twin Bogners on a 500x to see if it sounds as cool as it does in my head. If it does, maybe that'll tip the balance and I'll get a ProX when it comes out.

GuitarGuitar have them in stock. I'd've been able to wander into their Newcastle store on my lunch break to check one out if they hadn't moved my office out of the city centre a week ago. :-(

OK, so we know the 500x has a new processor and fancy buttons, but what else is new? Well, someone had to do this, and I had nothing better to do, so I've just been right through the respective Advanced Guides, page-by-page, side-by-side, and, as far as I can tell, they're pretty much exactly the same. So, to answer my own question: nothing.

Andertons have got the 500x up for £420, due in a couple of days, which is marginally less than the 500 at £429. http://www.andertons.co.uk/multi-fx-units/pid29665/cid693/line-6-pod-hd500x.asp Seems to confirm what we thought - that the only differences are the switches and the processor.

As such it sounds like there's very little difference between the 500 and 500x, so I would imagine (or at least hope) that any future firmware upgrades would still apply to the 500 as well.

Indeed. "Off" was meant in the 'DSP sense'.

I would rather they just changed the pre/post option to pre/post/off.

XLR outs are at instrument level, so I would use a twin TS to twin RCA lead, as the TS outs are at line level and the RCA inputs on the receiver will be expecting a line level signal (except the Phono input, which you should avoid, as you could overload it). The 500 certainly won't produce any latency and there's no d/a conversion in the receiver if you're using analogue inputs, so you should be good to go. Make sure you're using CD or Tape input or similar, and not something digital, like SPDIF. When you say there's no delay with headphones connected, do you mean the headphones are connect to the 500 or the receiver?

The really disappointing thing about this is that, if they had plans to fix things like the EQs in the near future, you'd have thought they would've got it sorted in time to be on the spec sheet for the 500x. This suggests to me that a fix is probably not forthcoming. Maybe it's time to have a closer look at the 11R.

I can understand why they've done what they've done; it's exactly the same as when Boss replaced the RC20 with the RC20XL. Processors and memory get so much cheaper so quickly that within a couple of years of releasing a unit, it actually becomes cheaper to manufacture with a faster processor or more memory as the older (in decreasing demand) parts lose the benefit of economies of scale. So what do you do? Make a few basic cosmetic changes and flog the new, improved version for the same price. I can't imagine many 500 owners (myself included) will see it as enough to upgrade, but it'll keep the product fresh for new customers - I bought an RC20XL when they came out, as I'd always seen the limited memory in the RC20 as a bit of a weakness so I hadn't bought one.

I'm still tempted to call BS on this. Perhaps there is something new coming at NAMM, but all the specs bandied about in various forums suggest that the only noticeable difference for the 500X would be the DSP chip and some pretty lights. Seems a bit of a crappy upgrade to me. Cheap to do, but not sure many customers will be convinced by it. Personally, I've been umming and ahhing about swapping my 500 for a Pro, but I can't really justify the cost. If, however, they made a ProX with the extra DSP, a more customisable signal path (1 amp with 2 cabs would be a start) and proper EQ, without significantly increasing the cost, then I'd be tempted (despite the fact that a new 500X would decrease the resale value of my 500).

There has been much discussion about the fact that there is no 5150 on the HD range. Try meambobbo's tone guide and downloads. I'm sure there was a 5150-esque tone in there somewhere.

Just start with a blank patch and add effects to either side of the split path. It should only sum the signals if you put effects before the split. Then just make sure the mixer is centered for both paths. I think that's basically it. P.S. That instrument looks cool. I'm gonna YouTube it when I get home this evening.

That all sounds about right for the mic. There's a vintage preamp on the 500 which is pretty handy.

+1 for phil_m. You have to monitor from your interface (the HD500) in order to hear your guitar playing in real time (without the latency delay from your DAW's d/a conversions). Make sure you turn the monitoring off on the track in Cubase that you're recording to, otherwise you'll duplicate the guitar sound.

If you haven't already, try some of the Satch tones from CustomTone and if you find one that's fairly close, see if you can tweak it.

Can I have it on my watch?

I have one where I use two delays (there's actually 3 in the patch to make it work) and the pedal is set so that it blends between delays in series and delays in parallel. I don't actually use it; it was made in response to a query on the old forum. I have one where the pedal creates a sort of lasting choral effect, which you can play over. The idea was based on this >

You haven't bought a looper, so don't expect a fully-functioned looper. You bought an amp/fx modeller, so expect it to be good at modelling amps and fx. Anything else is a happy bonus as far as I'm concerned.

Path A and Path B refer to the two halves of the dual signal path on the HD500. If you leave both signals panned centre, you actually get two stereo signals (depending on the effects you've used) as each path can carry its own stereo signal. Yes; you can set the mixer on the HD500 to either hard left or hard right. You can then either change the mixer to the other side or you could have a pre-prepared patch set up for the same sound but with the mixer already adjusted. Careful if you're using stereo effects, though; you might inadvertently miss out half your signal. This just sounds like you need to balance your volume controls. On my setup, my laptop automatically changes to 100% volume when I plug the HD500 USB lead in and it changes to ASIO drivers. I then control the overall volume of everything with the HD500's master volume control, having already set the levels on my monitors so the master volume gives me a good range without blowing anything up or annoying the neighbours too much. I then play back something from my DAW and set the individual HD500 patch volumes so they play nice with the DAW. I also then set iTunes to a similar volume for when I want to just noodle along with something. I don't use Logic, but I would suggest if there's a significant volume difference between your recorded tracks and your bounced tracks, something is set up wrong. My first thought would be the setup of the software you're using to play the aiffs and mp3s (like my need to attenuate my iTunes volume to match my DAW. Hope this helps.

I'm afraid 3 patches is going to be your best option. You can only have two amps in any one patch, regardless of whether you use them both at once or one at a time.