Jump to content

procletnic

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About procletnic

  • Rank
    Just Startin'

Profile Information

  • Registered Products
    1
  1. And you're not alone on that. If you match the volumes, the POD HD sounds better. My conclusion: I'm not buying the Helix :) Instead, I'll buy an used Torpedo CAB, pair it with the POD HD and have a device better than the Helix :)
  2. Go for the Mackies, the KRKs are great for listening purposes but are dishonest, especially in the lower frequencies.
  3. I'm interested to see what will happen as well. I'm just thinking that it won't be easy (if possible at all) to get certain tones. I have the HD Pro and I love it. The problem is that the IRs that are inside the unit are too limited. The HD really shines when you use custom IRs (bypass cab/mic and add IR from the DAW), especially for high gain tones. I would gladly throw few hundred bucks for a custom IRs feature, it will really unlock the potential of the unit.
  4. I personally think that you will fail to achieve what you guarantee. I will explain why and maybe someone can throw some arguments in to change my mind. If we are set to "tone match" tones from AXE2 to POD HD (using only the unit and nothing more), we are going to have a huge obstacle on our way - impulse responses. While the AXE allows for custom impulse responses to be used, the POD is stuck with what's inside the unit (it ain't the best either). There's no going around this issue imho.
  5. I'd rather do it manually of course (I have several XT patches that I use on my Pod XT) but it would've been nice to have such implementation, although after reading your comment I can now fully understand why they didn't choose to go that way.
  6. Yes, that was my 2nd plan as well :) Umm, I understand your comparison but it's not quite accurate. I'm pretty sure I can code a converter for pod xt to pod hd patches considering I have documentation about the data structure and all necessary specifications (sure, the tone would be a bit different but essentially it will save me the effort to manually copy the whole chain from one editor to the other). Also, both Windows and Mac can run Java applications ;)
  7. Try this tutorial and use less gain: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39rvm-peVMg . I'm getting pretty close to the tone in the video you posted. Use short cable and go straight to USB.
  8. Hello friends, I'm sorry if this has already been answered (I searched for the topic but couldn't find an answer). After the new firmware update (and considering you have the new metal amps), would it be possible to now load pod XT patches to the pod HD?
  9. I have seen the other posts related to the problems with the SPDIF connection loop on the Pod Pro. In my case (I'm using a Fast Track Pro as an external interface) the SPDIF output of the pod is connected to the SPDIF input on the FTP and that's working (I can record both the wet and the dry signal in a stereo channel). But the SPDIF output on the FTP connected to the PODs SPDIF input isn't working (at least not when the SPDIF output of the POD is connected to the FTP). I don't want an extra A/D conversion stage when I reamp but I can't figure a way to send the dry signal and then record the wet signal again strictly in the digital realm. Is that even possible if not utilizing both SPDIF connections? Is there any point of trying with AES?
  10. TubeScreamer (or OD808) with output set to 100% and the drive set to 0% is the most common setting used to boost an amp in modern metal history. OD808 with the said settings going into a dual rectifier is the definition of "huge & tight" so I don't know what you're talking about dude.
×
×
  • Create New...