Jump to content

Hd500x Dsp Limit


mralmostpopular
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ok guys,

 

There is a discussion going on over at thegearpage.net about the new DSP on the HD500X. I don't have an HD500 available at the moment to test the difference, but I posted some of my results in testing the DSP limit on the new unit, and some users are reporting that it isn't much different than what was occuring on the older units. I've included a screen-shot, which shows the DSP limit being reached if I try to add more than what is already there. Maybe some of the other HD500X users could try to re-create the patch (Blackface 'Lux Nrm and Tweed B-man Brt), and see if they're hitting the DSP limit in the same spot. Some HD500 guys could try it too. I'm curious to see if this is a problem across the board with the 500Xs or if perhaps some bad units went out. If we're hitting the DSP in the same place as the older units, as is being reported, that is a problem.

 

Thanks guys.

 

post-1232591-0-30188000-1373922867_thumb.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own a HD500 and when I found your post i wanted to try to reproduce the same problem to see what would happen.

Setted amps as you said and then inserted stomps, I didn't care about order, and had the same "DSP LIMIT REACHED" message while adding the Volume pedal so, apparently, my HD500 has a little bit less CPU power then the new HD500X, this means I will probably not buy the new one and keep my old one. B)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried with the HD500. I couldn't get the reverb in, which uses quite a lot op DSP.

So, it seems the HD500X does indeed have more headroom in that department.

Where did you see those reports?

I just bought my HD500 three weeks ago so I went back to the shop and told them L6 just introduced an upgraded version.

I'm getting my money back and will buy the HD500X.

Are the switches really better as far as you can see?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried with the HD500. I couldn't get the reverb in, which uses quite a lot op DSP.

So, it seems the HD500X does indeed have more headroom in that department.

Where did you see those reports?

I just bought my HD500 three weeks ago so I went back to the shop and told them L6 just introduced an upgraded version.

I'm getting my money back and will buy the HD500X.

Are the switches really better as far as you can see?

 

The switches definitely feel like an upgrade from the HD500. The new switches feel like what you'd find on a standard boutique pedal, whereas the old ones felt a bit light/springy. I didn't have a complaint about the old switches, rather my point is that if you liked the old ones, these are even better. They feel like they'll hold up to more abuse. The LED surrounds are also much brighter and easier to see.

 

I don't have a 500 here to compare patches to at the moment, hence why I asked if anyone would be willing to give the patches a try. It would seem that while there is a DSP upgrade, it's not quite as much as some were hoping for. There were a lot of people claiming twice the DSP. I don't think that's true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely it must be possible to hit the HD500 DSP limit on a single path with no more than 4 effects, is it not?

 

If we can find a way of doing that, for example a Bogner with 4 reverbs or 4 smart harmonies or something, then we should be able to just about repeat the same pattern on a 500x on twin paths if it really has double the DSP.

 

See what I mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to now exactly but it looks to me there is about 20 - 25% more headroom in the 5oox. They say they can put 5 '63 spring reverbs, a plate reverb, a V Tron in the 500X. At that point it won't even accept a volume pedal so it's pretty much maxed out.

I tried it on a 500 and found I could get the same result adding the volume pedal with 4 '63 spring reverbs. The estimation that the '63 spring reverbe uses about 20 - 25% DSP gets me to my conclusion.

I really think the 500X is more an update than an upgrade. It's a continuation of the 500 with a bit better specs, hence the name (it's still a 500). I don't think this is bad since it also sells at the same price as the 500, which to me is also a sign that it is essentially an update.It does mean L6 will be supporting the HD line for the time to come.

I also feel that there is a chance there could be updates on the 500X that won't go to the 500 because of the different patch-file extensions. This seems to point to a future incompatibility between them (they seem to be compatible at the moment). 

It could be that the 500X will at some point get amps, effects or features the 500 won't get. Nobody knows the memory limit in these things. Maybe the memory of the 500 is now about filled up and can't get many more amps and effects. It could be that they also extend the memory of the 500X in order to be able to give us more HD amps.

Anyways these are just my speculations, nothing I got from the rumor mill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it did become a memory issue, I don't suppose it would be a huge leap in terms of software to be able to choose a list of amps/effects from HD Edit.

 

For example, memory capacity might allow 30 amps from a list of 40, so you can just choose the stuff you like and remove the stuff you don't, just like when your iTunes library is bigger than your iPod (other mp3 players are available).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it works that way with the POD. it would probably mean reflashing the whole thing with a custom flashfile and might not be such a good idea.

It would be a major software change, a totally different concept. Of course I could be wrong. :)

If they do release more amps to the 500X that would make it more appealing. Otherwise many people would just as well get the 500 for a lower price (they must drop the price on the 500 now). Unless they stop selling the 500 altogether of course.

I still have the feeling L6 will have some nice updates in the future that might not apply for the 500. which is not saying they won't deliver anymore updates to the 500. Just maybe a bit different ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it wasn't even hype... it was a leaked ad that was incorrect.

 

and your analogy is off...

more like putting a 3.6ghz cpu to replace a 3.0ghz (about 20% improvement if what i'm hearing is correct)

So the hype "double processing power" was just a hype?

This is more like upgrading memory sticks on a pc from something like 4 gb to say 6 gb..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

they never claimed it was.... so they are not likely to give you any evidence.

 

Line6 needs to provide actual evidence that it is in fact DOUBLE the processing power or they are in some deep lollipop with regards to false advertising...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it wasn't even hype... it was a leaked ad that was incorrect.

 

and your analogy is off...

more like putting a 3.6ghz cpu to replace a 3.0ghz (about 20% improvement if what i'm hearing is correct)

Here's a link to the relevant Analog Devices page:

 

http://www.analog.com/en/processors-dsp/sharc/products/index.html?gclid=CIPehIvKtbgCFUlp7Aodc1oAxw#SHARC_Processors

 

I've read that the HD 500 has a SHARC ADSP-21369 @333MHz.  The same proc now shows a clock speed of 400MHz.  A 20% increase.

Maybe that's the whole story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think, perhaps, we need to keep a bit of perspective here.

 

Us 500 owners aren't the target market for the 500x; it's just a way of freshening things up for new customers and getting another couple of years out of technology they've already covered their R&D costs on.

 

More is more, at the end of the day; whether it's 20% more or 100% more is neither here nor there if you weren't already a 500 owner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also feel that there is a chance there could be updates on the 500X that won't go to the 500 because of the different patch-file extensions. This seems to point to a future incompatibility between them (they seem to be compatible at the moment). 

.

Will 500X users be able to import their saved presets from the 500?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think, perhaps, we need to keep a bit of perspective here.

 

Us 500 owners aren't the target market for the 500x; it's just a way of freshening things up for new customers and getting another couple of years out of technology they've already covered their R&D costs on.

 

More is more, at the end of the day; whether it's 20% more or 100% more is neither here nor there if you weren't already a 500 owner.

I totally agree with you.

Here's a link to the relevant Analog Devices page:

 

http://www.analog.com/en/processors-dsp/sharc/products/index.html?gclid=CIPehIvKtbgCFUlp7Aodc1oAxw#SHARC_Processors

 

I've read that the HD 500 has a SHARC ADSP-21369 @333MHz.  The same proc now shows a clock speed of 400MHz.  A 20% increase.

Maybe that's the whole story.

So what you are inferring is that the processor used in the HD500 production is now clocked at 400mhz and thus an increase in processing power and now with new foot switches the 500X.

I presume this is unconfirmed but is a little "Sherlock'ing" on your part. You may be right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a link to the relevant Analog Devices page:

 

http://www.analog.com/en/processors-dsp/sharc/products/index.html?gclid=CIPehIvKtbgCFUlp7Aodc1oAxw#SHARC_Processors

 

I've read that the HD 500 has a SHARC ADSP-21369 @333MHz.  The same proc now shows a clock speed of 400MHz.  A 20% increase.

Maybe that's the whole story.

Could you please provide the sources of information you have for:

- what processor the HD500 has

- what clock speed the HD500X is running at

 

This could be significant. If it's literally just an overclock of the same exact processor, HD500s could be easily overclocked with a firmware update to match the same DSP power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could you please provide the sources of information you have for:

- what processor the HD500 has

- what clock speed the HD500X is running at

 

This could be significant. If it's literally just an overclock of the same exact processor, HD500s could be easily overclocked with a firmware update to match the same DSP power.

Here's the guy who identified the dsp inside the HD500:

 

http://forum.musicradar.com/showthread.php?68920-Info-on-POD-HD-v-POD-XT-X3-and-Axe-FX-DSP-chips

 

fwiw, I beleive there is an error in his chart.  The 333 GHz should be rated, I think,  at 2.0 GFLOPS (billion floating point operations per second) instead of 2.4.  The 2.4 rating is for the 400MHz version.

 

I'm just speculating about the clockspeed of the HD500X based on the dsp limits people are reaching that suggest something like a 20% increase in dsp capacity.

 

If line 6 just used a newer, faster version of the dsp chip then they probably wouldn't need to change the motherboard and software.  It may be that Analog Devices stopped making the 333MHz version so line 6 had to change.

 

I have no direct experience with dsp chips, but if they can be compared with CPUs in PCs, then I'll say this:

The increase in speed seems to be due to a higher mulitplier (12 instead of 10, or 6 instead of 5).  If the multiplier is locked in these chips, then you're probably out of luck in trying to make the HD500 run at a higher speed.  There's still no guarantee that a 333MHz rated chip will even run at 400MHz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if you ask me this is a big mistake. I love my line6 gear and have many of their products. To say they have always been a bit quirky when it comes to information would be an understatement for sure, but just exactly how much they had to do with the "leaked" advertising is something I would really like to know.

 

I was stunned when I saw what maxed the DSP in the "x". That would NEVER get me to upgrade, actually nothing with regard to DSP has offered a problem for me. The tones I am able to get and the available effects for use in a single chain is more than adequite for most, unless you're Robert Fripp or someone similar.

 

Very dissapointed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To say they have always been a bit quirky when it comes to information would be an understatement for sure, but just exactly how much they had to do with the "leaked" advertising is something I would really like to know.

 

Why in the world would they intentionally leak information that explicitly said something they knew they could never deliver? I really can't imagine any scenario where they would think something like that was good.

 

If I had to guess what happened, I would bet that a sales rep heard about the new unit, misinterpreted data about the DSP and sent the bad info off to a retailer somewhere.

 

It's unfortunate that the 2X DSP rumor was spread, and I have to admit that I believed it too. But it is what is now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

I was stunned when I saw what maxed the DSP in the "x". That would NEVER get me to upgrade, actually nothing with regard to DSP has offered a problem for me. The tones I am able to get and the available effects for use in a single chain is more than adequite for most, unless you're Robert Fripp or someone similar.

 

Very dissapointed.

Again, the HD500x market is NOT current HD500 owners. There's no reason for existing HD500 owners to be disappointed because they were not targeted for a vast improvement. Also, as you say, you are not having any problems with DSP. Why are you disappointed that a problem you are not having may not be fully resolved?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's also notable that the leak site was not English as a primary language... perhaps it simply got mixed up in translation.

 

 

Why in the world would they intentionally leak information that explicitly said something they knew they could never deliver? I really can't imagine any scenario where they would think something like that was good.

 

If I had to guess what happened, I would bet that a sales rep heard about the new unit, misinterpreted data about the DSP and sent the bad info off to a retailer somewhere.

 

It's unfortunate that the 2X DSP rumor was spread, and I have to admit that I believed it too. But it is what is now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just bought the HD500x today and havent played it yet. If it's not even that much more power, I still find it a decent upgrade for me personally, even though I am upgrading from the HD500. I love the switches, and the brighter wording next to switches. I love my HD500 so I'll take any little upgrade to it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just bought the HD500x today and havent played it yet. If it's not even that much more power, I still find it a decent upgrade for me personally, even though I am upgrading from the HD500. I love the switches, and the brighter wording next to switches. I love my HD500 so I'll take any little upgrade to it. 

That is a fair enough attitude.

What is this "leaked" advertisement? 

I must admit I was under the impression it was twice the processing/memory power which I got from this forum on a couple of the first "photoshopped" HD500X and a few subsequent posts and links to the gear page.

 

Edit: Relooking at the Andertons HD500X video it infers this impression and didn't dispel it.

With "we've increased  processing power"... "should hit it (DSP) 'a lot' later on" at just before  2mims43secs. in retrospect it covers itself and doesn't claim anything.

If it is a 20% only increase, I'd call it "we"ve increased the DSP a little" "should hit it a little later on".

Sure enough later he says "which you could always do with the HD500 but now you have a little more" at 3:00

I think there was plenty of time to dispel any false impressions gotten from translations. 

But the benefit of the doubt has to be given in cases of plausable indeniabliity.

 

Thanks dennisrford for the link and data-cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, the HD500x market is NOT current HD500 owners. There's no reason for existing HD500 owners to be disappointed because they were not targeted for a vast improvement. Also, as you say, you are not having any problems with DSP. Why are you disappointed that a problem you are not having may not be fully resolved?

I suppose my post was not exactly clear, I should have been more thorough. I don't particularly care who they were targeting or who this product is geared towards, I am a happy HD500 owner to be sure but I guess my post is more a reaction to the thought that there was/is or could have ever been something more sinister involved in the early marketing of this new unit. I would tend to agree that it is unlikely that L6 was ever be involved or even knew of this false claim; it simply wouldn't be representitive of their history.

 

In response to who it is marketed for I feel that is somewhat ridiculous for anyone to think of when looking at a product. I mean let's face it there isn't one of us that doesn't come here and look around with restrained excitement hoping there is some fresh new update, firmware or product. If there was more to the 500X I would certainly buy one; I would probably have already made the order before it came out. I get what you are saying about people that are happy shouldn't be dissapointed because this is not and never was targeted for current hd500 folks, I get it, I just don't see it as you do, I mean everyone here on the forum is a potential customer, probably the best and most loyal ones.

 

Lastly, I really think, even though it is not a normal thing for L6 to do, they should offer up a disclaimer or an acknowledgement of this erroneous claim and distance themselves from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 500 is an X3 with new firmware, but the same processing power...

Not really... The X3 is a completely different platform, so it's not really fair to compare the two products. On the X3, for instance, you're limited to one instance of each effect in a tone, and the way you can arrange effects in a tone is much more limited. So there are some relatively simple things that you can't do on an X3. You can't, for instance, have a tone with two different distortions.

 

Really, most of the limitations that people run into with the HD500 come when people start doing dual tones. It's my understanding that during the beta testing period, it came down to either getting rid of the dual tone option altogether or adding the DSP limit. The designers understood that some people would be frustrated with the DSP limit, but they left it in just for some extra flexibility.

 

But the DSP wars have already been fought, and the dead buried... I have no desire to fight them anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember another Line6Expert verifying that the 500 shared its under-the-hood hardware with the X3, for production reasons.

 

Well, that's simply incorrect... All PODs since the XT are using Sharc chips, but they've gotten more powerful for each generation. The X3 did have dual processors, though. That's the main reason the dual tones work differently on the X3 than on the HD. On the X3, the two tone paths are always completely separate.

 

Here's a rundown of the processors used in the last few generations of PODs.

 

POD HD DSP: SHARC ADSP-21369 at 333 MHz (KSZ-2A), 2.4 GFLOPS

 

POD X3 DSP: SHARC ADSP-21369 at 266 MHz (KSZ-1A), 1.6 GFLOPS

 

POD XT DSP: at 60 MHz, 180 MFLOPS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When would anyone possibly ever use 4 '63 Spring Reverbs, and a harmonizer strung together in practical or live use.  I have an HD500 and the only time the DSP limit is reached is whenever I'm simply goofing around with out of this world sounds.  In a live situation, or when you're playing in a band situation, much of this is simply not practical usage.  When you can string a compressor, overdrive, fuzz, 2 amps, a delay, and reverb and not reach the DSP limit, how much is actually to much.  I can see the want for unlimited ability, but I can't justify the expense of a new unit to try and obtain it.  The footswitches are nice however.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes "more is more" so, for the price of the hd500x minus selling my hd500,

I could buy an hd bean and keep my hd500 getting double dsp power and more complex routing capabilities! ..now THAT is more!

 

 

what pisses me off (and all hd500 owners I think) is that I now own a discontinued product, replaced by something that isn't worth the difference in price...

 

AT LEAST I hope, since the architecture is the same, that new updates of the firmware will be valid for the hd500 too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 500 was sold with (at least) half the processing power that it requires.

...and with "non-professional grade footswitches" as Line6 clearly admits now!

 

As I wrote in the old forum (http://line6.com/support/message/353044#353044 ; btw why in the hell did they close the old forum?!? too full of criticism, maybe?)

and to Line6 through a feature request,

I would pay twice (1000€) for a "POD HD1000" with double processing power and various flaws solved

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conversely, Line 6 made a gamble and won on selling the same engineering failure, twice. That's because it was a strong product, even with its flaws.

 

You can disagree with their design decisions all you want, but there's no reason to call it an "engineering failure" simply because you don't like the way it works. Engineering is all about designing within a budget, and it often comes down to making these types of decisions.

 

The fact is that the HD500X (and 500) are $500 modelers, and for that price they give you quite a bit to work with. If you want more than what they are providing at that price, you have two options. Buy another product that does what you want, or augment the HD500 in some way. It's really not that difficult.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

is it 2010 again? wtf... why we having the same tired argument....

the updated 500 (500x) does a small bit more for the same money...

you'll sell a million burgers at 1$, or you can sell 1 burger for a million dollars... which is going to sell faster?

line6 is a business.

you don't go to mcdonalds and ask for a lobster dinner...

if you want a specific product... go to whoever sells that specific product.... 

if the specific product you want hasn't been made...

make the suggestion and move along... maybe one day it will... maybe not...

maybe when it is finally made, they'll be something better anyway....

and you'd only be kidding yourself if you don't think that line6 has plans beyond the HD series...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree that the DSP power of the HD500 AND of the HD500x is less than needed, but

sorry marcwormjim, I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this:

If they had chosen to meet those hardware demands, you could put eight '63 Spring Reverbs in a row

 

follow me on this:

I can say with a good level of confidence that the Pod HD was the first affordable device to use freely assignable fx blocks;
 

any rack or pedalboard multifx I tried before, limited you to use only some kind of effects on each of the block

this means that you could not put three distortion pedals or 3 delay pedals or even an octaver and a wha in some cases

that was for the manufacturer to be shure that anything you loaded wouldn't overload the CPU
 

now, the ability to use for example many delays in series and parallel was one of the reasons I bought the HD500

and you CAN do that,

but, to be able to give you freely assignable fx blocks, the DSP MUST be "dynamic"
 

I think 8 reverbs is too much.
 

but two parallel chains with distortion, amp, modulation (or pitch), delay and reverb on each should be possible

and the HD500 AND the HD500x CANNOT do that!

in this sense I agree with you when you say that the HD500 and HD500x have an inadequate DSP power (and other hardware flaws)
 

so to summarise I don't think the DSP should provide the power to load ANY effect configuration,

but at least it should give us double the DSP power of the HD500

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So? it's still what it is... only slightly better for the same money....

if the product was "tired" it would have been "retired" and something new...

it obviously sells well, because of the value for the price and the capabilities it DOES have...

 

 

"is it 2010 again? wtf... why we having the same tired argument...."

 

They're selling the same tired product again. Capiche?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...