duncann

I would say because old digital gear IS old. That's not to say it doesn't sound bad. But in the analog world, there is nothing being modeled. In the digital world, sound is being modeled (in most cases I think) from an analog way of producing sound. So as digital processing gets faster over time, so the quality or ability of digital processing becomes closer to an analog way of making sound. No better advice than actually engaging with the guitar directly for sure, because that's the first point of contact of creative spark from the human brain to the real world. But for me at least, there are times when practicing just doesn't work because of physical fatigue, emotional state, or any other number of reasons. But I still have the desire to do something related to music. That where chasing the latest software version or Uber HD product comes in sometimes. Got to do something. Besides technology is fascinating and watching it evolve over time is fun fun fun.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find any guitar processor that doesn't have some kind of lag during preset changes. Some have spillover of reverb and delay which helps to 'cover up' the change. If you can design your patches and any functions you might need within a single patch, any changes (turn effects on/off for instance) will be instantaneous as well as having tails for delay and reverb.

I went from a 500 to 500x basically for more dsp while still contained within a single device (I like things simple that way). I use dual amps as well (but use the full versions) and with the 500 there just wasn't enough dsp left over for other basic things like delay, reverb, wah, etc. The 500x was quite satisfying in this way.

There's no way to explicitly tell the unit to output x input at y output. But you could make use of the dual paths to achieve what you want. Set input 1 to guitar and input 2 to mic. Make sure the mixer balance controls are 100% left and 100% right and also that the mixer block is the last thing in the chain. Then the left output will be the guitar and the right output will be the mic. Here's a screenshot of a possible setup:

As long as none of the patches are changed to exceed the hd500 dsp limit, it should be fine. If you do change them, the only way to know this is to try it.

Didn't mean to invoke an axe fx vs pod hd thread. I apologize for that. Luckily, nothing bad seemed to happen. :) What you posted above is pretty much it as I see it too. I went with the hd500x because that's all I can really afford. But ... if money weren't an issue, I would be stupid not to go with the axe fx. It's simply a more powerful and versatile guitar processor. Whether it sounds better or not is subjective.

I wonder now if we're experiencing the same issue or a different one. I've never had anything happen by itself without any external actions. What you just described almost sounds like an internal short, possibly even a trace on one of the PCBs. If that's the case, I hope wherever Line 6 is having their circuit boards manufactured isn't having a quality control problem. Let us know how this turns out for you. I know I'd be interested to find out what the problem is/was.

Just an idea I had about this switching presets thing. It's been happening on my 500X unit a bit more lately with just the unit on and no hd edit open, so it can't be because of hd edit. But the patches I've been using are just about at the limit of the DSP. I think in one patch at one time I couldn't even add a noise gate. Maybe the programmers forgot to consider this situation? In other words, how much DSP, if any, does switching patches take?

I use headphones daily and while I notice things I wish weren't there, they are things so subtle that they might as well be non-existent. One in particular is on a higher gain tone I use with the solo-100 overdrive amp, there is a kind of subtle sizzling (not fizz) that I can't seem to get rid of. I finally just gave up. A casual listener wouldn't even notice it. In fact, I can recall reading about this and came to the conclusion that it is part of the actual amp itself which the pod models. So perhaps that might be what you're hearing as compared to older generation pods? Higher resolution algorithms modeling not only the tone from an amp (older generation pods might stop here), but also the sound characteristics that might not be so desirable but may contribute to the 'feel' of the amp? I should also mention that I don't use the headphone output on the pod. I use the digital output to an internal soundcard, and from there I use the analog headphone output. The headphones (sony mdr-v6) are low impedance (63 Ohms). Anyway, maybe either (or both) of you could post a clip demonstrating the sounds you are getting. Or even better, post a patch for which you get quirky results.

I always have trouble reading the numbers on reverb fx types. Black on red isn't exactly good for readability.

The tri chorus is a stereo effect, so I'm not sure I quite understand the question. The greater the mix, the more stereo it will sound. But more importantly, make sure there are no mono effects after the tri chorus. If you can spare the dsp, try using a pitch glide in one of the paths (A or B), set the pitch to +0.1 and the mix to 100%. It's more natural sounding as a chorus, and has a bigger stereo separation too.

Do you use the cabs emulations with the vetta? Reason I ask is because one thing I've found is turning up the resonance to around 80 really brings the tone to life in an aggressive and pleasing (to me) way. I've come to think of it as a wet/dry mix for the cabs. And the higher the resonance is the more effect the thump and decay values have. I know a lot of people aren't pleased with the pod's cabs, but I've tried various IR plugins with many IRs and haven't noticed much if any improvement. I only record and don't play live so I don't know how turning up the resonance would be at loud volumes though. Might be too much or too harsh. The pods are certainly a powerful piece of equipment. However, if I had the money, I would drop the pod in one unit of planck time for an axe fx and subject myself to even more endless patch editing.

You can assign any/all of the parameters of the smart harmonizer to the expression pedal. Although you could have more than two setups per patch per harmonizer doing this, realistically you could have two harmonizer setups per patch per harmonizer by setting the min/max values appropriately.

Here's what it says in the Line 6 Model Gallery: The direct result of long nights developing HD Amp Models, our Sound Designers (fueled by copious amounts of energy drinks) brought together forbidden combinations of their favorite aspects of classic amplifers, plus a few secret ingredients - kind of like a Mary Shelley novel - to come up with these Line 6 custom creations. “High gain†is simply an understatement here. Try tweaking the Master Volume parameter to experience the true versatility of these amps. Line 6 Elektrik: This high-voltage, face-melting original has interactive presence & mid-range controls, with more gain than you can shake a stick at. Line 6 Epic: A metal-freindly beast that provides sustain for days at virtually any playing dynamic, giving up gobs of distortion with ease. Line 6 Doom: Here’s a hybrid to fll a void for doom/sludge players. It’s a JCM800 preamp going into a Hiwatt® power amp with some additional tweaks, to give you large amounts of gain and a rich, sag-induced reaction with a whole lot of bass. I remember a while back I used to use the Line 6 Epic and liked it quite a bit, but have since moved to the Solo-100 overdrive.

Don't use it at all. Never have. The only thing I use is the guitar input. However, an optical output would be useful. Hell, maybe even an optical input.

As others have stated, I believe it is an investment depending on what you do with it. If you plan to make money with it, it's an investment. If it's just a hobby I suppose it's debatable. Maybe just an investment in your hobby. A little off topic maybe... One thing I find interesting, that probably many on this forum can relate to, is a person's age and today's digital processors. I'm old enough to remember a time before any internet, and playing Scott Adam's adventure games on cartridges or cassette tapes (yea, information used to be stored on audio cassette tapes) on a TI99/4A computer. I remember paying hundreds of dollars for an hour's worth of studio time (failed endeavor) and having to hall hundreds of pounds of equipment to gigs. Today you can have an entire studio with a laptop and a single guitar processor, and set up a gig with only one or two trips to the car without breaking your back. If only I had what's available today 20 or 30 years ago. So I think people of around that age have a different perspective on music than younger people. Older people have more of a sense baked into them that the music comes from them rather than a device. Younger people, I think, tend to think that if a guitar processor sounds really good, their guitar chops are automagically really good too. And there's probably a lot of this class of person. I'd bet that any of today's world class guitar players could make any guitar sound good through any amplification. But that's today's world and perhaps a negative effect of technology on societies that like to make music. I apologize for any offense (none intended) to younger people. It's all good. :D

You'll have to check each place in your patch where there is some gain going on. The most obvious places would be the amp channel volume and the mixer block. There is also the Line 6 Audio-MIDI Devices control panel, which has a record send level and +18dB boost. I doubt if this is it.

Not all the delays have the bass and treble controls, so it could be that, or couldn't. Most don't. Another way to achieve a stereo separation is with the stereo delay after the mixer. Put the left delay (or right) at 20ms and the right (or left) more than 20ms, both feedbacks at min, and the mix at 100%. I think this effect can also be achieved with the ping pong delay. Doing it this way, you can eliminate the need for any dual path configuration, simplifying things a little.

If you're just after the stereo sound of adding a delay in one of the paths, you could try adding a stereo delay as the last effect, adjust the left time to 20ms, the right to something slight more than 20ms, both feedbacks to zero, and the mix to 100%.

I have noticed something similar to this, but only while using the edit software, and like you say, only the right channel. To fix it, I had to move the volume slider on the mixer tab; didn't matter how much or increase or decrease, the effect of increased volume was immediately noticeable. Unfortunately, I have no clue what causes this and happens seemingly randomly, and rarely too. It seems like you experience it all the time, so maybe something else is going on. Could it be something with the in-ears? Plug the in-ears into something else entirely. Another way to get a nice stereo effect, if you can spare the DSP, is the pitch glide set to +0.1, mix 100% in one of the two paths.

I'll chime in here and agree with this, being the owner of both the HD500 and HD500X. The 20% increase in DSP is more significant than at first glance. Twenty-percent, when looked at as just a number, doesn't seem like a very big deal. But when looked at in terms of increased sonic creativity and increased tonal possibilities, it it nothing to just scoff at. Going back to using an HD500, for me, would be difficult at best.

Hmm. I just tried this and didn't run out of DSP. Tried with two soldano overdrive amps. Most of the delays will work (auto-volume and multi-head won't). And depending on the delay chosen, you even have some DSP left over for a noise gate or tube comp and a wah/some filter/some mod.

This is the main reason I really try to avoid using EQs post position. I believe it is clipping. And it happens way too easily. I suppose turning down the amp volume sort of works, but the clipping, although decreased, is still there when you compensate for the loss of volume by turning the gain on the EQ up or the mixer. And this whole notion of trying to avoid the clipping with a dual amp setup is particularly nightmarish. One of the more undesirable 'features' of the HD series that should be at the top of the list to fix.

I doubt if any Line 6 software engineer will answer you. Perhaps Digital_Igloo (Line 6 employee) might know something if he happens to read this thread. But as you know this issue occasionally comes up on this forum and I think the unverified consensus is it's some sort of synchronization issue when editing using hd edit and the actual device during a single session.

Absolutely. I have no doubt that any differences because of impedance are real. For me, though, it's not enough of a difference (in fact, I don't hear any difference with my equipment) to matter. So I don't worry about it. Would a casual, non-musician listener notice a difference? But I definitely know about becoming obsessed with guitar tone. I've lost count of the number of sessions where I sit down with the purpose of writing music but end up tweaking the guitar tone, and most times with results I'm not happy with (a terrible feeling!). I guess that would be one definition of obsessed. Also, differences in loudness can be interpreted by the human ear/brain processor to carry other sound characteristics besides just being louder, even though a sound in reality is only louder. Your brain can play some pretty nasty tricks on you.