panca

I don't understand. I made a reply: maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong. In any case, an answer/explanation/example would be gentle, and from me very appreciated. Thanks m.p.

Hello Scottyo, what is your advice if I need to make a choice between, for example, three different delays at 800 ms, with about the same dry/ratio? Or: chorus vs. flanger vs. phaser at 2.5 hz? In my opinion, the computer interface has some advantage because you can see more parameter in a single screen, but it is not faster in any way than the onboard programming (the only real difference: you can write to input a value). Thanks, m.

While several points of HD series (500, 500X, Desktop) are very smart and powerful (the "block"-based new logic), the effect editing appears designed from someone that never edited an effect in his entire life. More: good, strong points in machines of past (XT, X3) are lost. This is (for me, a long time Line6 aficionado) very disappointing. Or maybe I'm the only one to have this problem: are you happy with the effect edit logic, or do you think that something different is necessary? m.p.

If M13 uses the same logic as POD HD (every time you select an effect you have to restart from the same preset, losing all settings: delay time, modulation speed, dry/wet ratio etc, so that make comparisons between different effects can be a nightmare), "workflow" in my opinion is a dangerous word. Every time you change, you start from scratch; you can't copy an effect or amp setting; you can't save YOUR fx or amp setting to later recall. I see lot of "work" and very little "flow". m.

I know it's difficult, but I wish to know if someone made comparison on fx quality (tone, low-level definition etc.) between HD500 and M13. As side note, I perfectly understand the versatility and power of HD500 + M13, but we are using in this case 3 AD/DA sections in cascade. Thanks again marco

Hello jandrio, thanks for your answer. The Pod progams use normally a gate in first position block, so the gate can "analyze" the clean guitar dynamics to gate the gain devices as distortion pedals or amp. This configuration is very smart as you can keep a very low gate threeshold to control the noise from a very gainy/hissy/humming device. In other words, you don't lose sustain or sensitivity using an high threeshold setting. I'm afraid that using a gate after the FX loop block hasn't this advantage. Can you comment? Many thanks again marco

If a machine has stereo send and stereo return hardware jacks NO mono summing is allowed. If it is the case: 1 - the hardware designer OR 2 - software designer OR 3 - project manager is at fault. m.p. P.S.: please note that FX blocks selection (before and after) should be correct for stereo use. And yes, the answer is pathetic.

The X3 Live is about 1.5 ms with all blocks bypassed. The HD desktop about the same. It is very simple to mesure: split a signal, one half directly in a soundcard input, the other half thru the POD in the other input. Send a signal and verify time difference. 7 ms is a ridiculously long time for a HW machine,,,it is probably when is hooked to the computer as a USB soundcard. The new HD Xs being slightly different, I'd wish to be sure about it. thanks m.

Hello, the program is in my HD Desktop at moment, I need to charge it in the HD Edit to share...a little patience please. m.

compressor + volume pedal + digital mod. delay + chorus/flanger/leslie + cave reverb use the expression pedal to control (from min to max) volume pedal 0 - 100 delay feedback 40 - 100 reverb short to long (depending to taste) play a chord with exp pedal @ min after strum, while the chord is ringing, raise exp. pedal the pad will play as long you keep the exp pedal to max repeat for the next chord the tone is more "organ" that "strings", but the pad is perfect I use a parallel path to make a pad and improvise guitar lines marco

The obvious things: - POD HD500: 8 fx + AMP - M13: 4 fx - NO amp - POD HD500: line level + level control (even on FX loop) - M13: 4 fx - instrument level - NO level control - POD HD500: 1 integrated pedal + external optional pedal - M13: 2 external optional pedals - POD HD500: guitar + AUX inputs - M13: stereo inputs - POD HD500: NO true bypass - M13: true bypass (NOT if you wants delay and reverb tails when switch off fx) - POD HD500: "instant switching" to up to 8 fx block. - M13: "instant switching" to up to 12 fx block. SO: from my point, the POD wins hans down, BUT is not clear if the processing quality and latency is different between the two machines. Please correct me if I'm wrong on some point, and add your experiences. Thanks m.p.

Hello, I'd wish to setup the "X" models with "4 cable" method, using a noise gate block after the FX loop block to reduce the external amp noise. Is it possible? My X3 Live (different architecture of course) can't reduce any noise in the FX loop (in both PRE and POST modes). Thanks! m.p.

Hello, I'd wish to know in-out processing latency for the "X" models (is it different between 500X and PRO X?), with FX loop disabled AND activated (double AD-DA conversion). Thanks m.p.

Hello, made some other tests: my statement that the knob response is not "dynamic" to speed rotation is not completely correct: the response is dynamic, but in a not very accurate way (in my opinion, it was better in the XT and X3 model). Whit fast rotation, the value can "jump" several hundred ms and balance coarse and fine dialing is not very easy. This is the exact problem to consider (I have a POD HD Desktop). Hello Phil: sorry, but I can't understand the difference in flexibility you describe: in all models (XT, X3 and HD) you put in a tempo value (tapping or dialing) for the preset, then you can set a note value to lock delay time to tempo (and tempo changing, in case). POD X3 was very smart because the ms value was updated in real time following the note value delay for "that" tempo. You can set a quarter note delay: the ms value is updated, and you can dial some ms more (for example) for a sligtly different feel (the bpm locking to tap tempo is in this case lost, of course). With HD the same thing is not so simple: you need a pocket calculator and continued jumping between ms and "note" setting. This is a backstep, for me, not compensated from the only upgrading I understand: the "global" tempo mode in the HD. Thanks m.p.

Hello Nick, thanks. Your advice is clear, but try to pass from a 500 ms delay to "note value" mode...and I can't be forced to use a PC editor (I play live without a PC) with a stand-alone device to solve a problem that in the X3 and XT generation was non existent. I can't understand how the beta testing can't notice a problem as delay time management. I hope in a new firmware release. Thanks. m.p.