Hd Pro X

[m-epifani]

only one question: do I have any chance to upgrade my HD PRO (less than one year old) in a PRO X?

[sbeattie7]

Speaking of the HD Pro X...  what is the real advantage to this device?  Yes, it's a rack mount, but then you need to buy a foot switch board to control it live.  Seems like more expense for no extra return. 

[TheRealZap]

looks like its out now!

http://line6.com/podhdprox/

[RipperShred]

Maybe we'll finally see a firmware update now. :D

[TheRealZap]

that theory didn't work for the 500x..... but i like it! :D

 

Maybe we'll finally see a firmware update now. :D

[arislaf]

that theory didn't work for the 500x..... but i like it! :D

Rofl!! HAHAHAHHAAAA

[RipperShred]

Rofl!! HAHAHAHHAAAA

 

Better laughter than tears, I suppose. :P I could have missed the mark entirely, and perhaps line6's product refresh with the new X line IS their idea of a firmware update, new hardware and its launch has been what they've been working on all this time, and we're not likely to see a new firmware update for a long time yet. I mean, they're not directly making money with a firmware update, and people are buying new Xs, flipping their old models, or keeping them as backups. They're moving new hardware, making money, and it's gravy for them.

Maybe their plan is to release new firmware months from now when all the new X buyers are bored with their new toy. Who knows? lol

[Seabeast]

So basically, it has only more powerful processor and that's it? Any other big improvements? Where is more detailed comparsion why to switch from POD HD Pro to POD HD Pro X? Where is mic models list? It seems that new X version is nothing special and maybe I am blind because I can't see any strong reason to replace my old POD HD Pro. What do you think guys?

[DeanDinosaur]

Switching to HD PRO X all you get is 20-25% increase in DSP power.  Why is that important for a studio tool that is mainly intended to be used as AMP Modeler first and then inconsequentially effect processor?. Let's be realistic here, no one is buying HD series for the reverbs or modulations to use in the studio.  Form factor in a Rack has to be the main attraction to HD PRO verses all other pods HD .  SPDIF in and AES are the only things missing from other PODs as far as I know (the Word "Pro" is also missing from other pods). Is anyone really using the SPDIF in of the HD PRO? And for what? To polish other tracks with the Studio Compressors and Fully parametric EQs precision and capabilities of the HD PRO?

[TheRealZap]

the internal processor is the only difference...  none of the x models were created to get existing owners to upgrade... they are just to make it more attractive to potential new owners.

 

So basically, it has only more powerful processor and that's it? Any other big improvements? Where is more detailed comparsion why to switch from POD HD Pro to POD HD Pro X? Where is mic models list? It seems that new X version is nothing special and maybe I am blind because I can't see any strong reason to replace my old POD HD Pro. What do you think guys?

 

I use spdif to daisy chain digitally... i can go from my 500 to my pro to my other interface and control the whole thing via midi.

more because i can than because i have an actual need... 

but you can also use it for re-amping later.

 

Is anyone really using the SPDIF in of the HD PRO? And for what? To polish other tracks with the Studio Compressors and Fully parametric EQs precision and capabilities of the HD PRO?

[toasterdude]

I use a POD HD pro to feed my Axe II via AES. It saves me a DA/AD step and is a simple set up. I don't use amp models on the POD so extra DSP will not do much for me. If they do a FW update that allows adding two more effects or effects loop not using up a slot etc, it may make more sense. Also I prefer rack because I use it along with other processors.

 

Heck I may pick up a second one used if price drops enough. I am buying a 500x this week though.

 

Any word on a x version of bean?

[toasterdude]

Any word on if effects loop is true stereo or sums to mono?

[spikey]

Sold my Pod HD Pro about 2 weeks ago. Talk about good timing ; )...

 

I bought an Axe FX II, and may never look back.

 

God that thing sounds good with my Steve Morse MM Y2D...

 

It however also sounds good with a JTV series Variax too... ;)

[silverhead]

@ spikey: glad to hear you've found something that suits you better. Keep us posted about how you feel about the Axe longer term. I know it's more $$, especially with the footboard, so I'm interested in your opinions about value-for-dollar.

[spikey]

@ spikey: glad to hear you've found something that suits you better. Keep us posted about how you feel about the Axe longer term. I know it's more $$, especially with the footboard, so I'm interested in your opinions about value-for-dollar.

 

Will do... Value for dollar to me means not saving a buck to kinda sound good after much tweaking. What I will pay for, and what is worth the cost to me in value for dollar is a no nonsense good sounding tone from the factory presets in a box before I ever start having to tweak them. Ive never had this before now. The FX II has this in spades. It makes sense in a guitar players mind as to what happens knob wise, and even in using the editor. Will I tweak and add to them? Sure, but they sound pretty much right in the direction of good tones, right out of the box too. Did I mention "Scenes" ? The ability to use the same patch 8 times using buttons programmed on the midi board to call up different stomps within the same patch! No stomp dancing to get there now, and programmed right in the editor... None of the "secret world"  there either, as the maker of the box is very active about discussing and helping out others on the forums. He posts most every day and is very smart but able to come down to your level where needed to explain. We are all experts and students in one form or another there too,  as the box is so awesome it allows such an atmosphere... No Stereo to mono what ya gotta know to do things with unity gain space shuttle magic to sound good, the chain just works... Ive also got a FCB1010 midi foot controller set to adjust the wah with full heal down, turning the wah off within a second or so, and with the tones adjusted you can go toe down direction without any pitch shift bump, and sounds like the wah just "magically appears and disappears in the patch!!!  Amazing. The "Just plug into the house AND the stage at the same time stuff" works right in the editor and out of the box, and sounds killer here. No "one or the other" stuff. And Ive just "barely" scratched the surface... More later if needed... Im really impressed with the amount of player forethought that went into this box, as you might be able to tell.... Yes, Its an expensive box,  and cost about 3 times what a new HDX does. And It was worth every penny so far to me. As always YMMV. Take care Silver and Ill bop in from time to time. Tell Zap to get a day job will ya?!? ..  :D

[TheRealZap]

if you only knew, the work i do all day long.... in addition to what i do here for FUN....

I'll spare you the resume... but trust me.. i have a day job.

:)

 

Tell Zap to get a day job will ya?!? ..  :D

[spikey]

Just wanted you get you to post...  ;)

[TheRealZap]

great... now take your axe fx.... and.....

 

 

haha... just kidding :D

 

Just wanted you get you to post...  ;)

[spikey]

play it? Why, I will, I will  :P

[m-epifani]

"the internal processor is the only difference"

When I started this post I really imagined that, considering what has been done on 500X, only the processor can be the difference between PRO and PRO X. So, the meaning of my question is: is there any chance to replace this processor in PRO and to evolve it in a PRO X? Of course, I can imagine that it's not easy, but I wish to know it.

[TheRealZap]

I've not opened one, but i'm pretty confident that they are machine/pressed/soldered to the board without any sort of interchangeable socket.

be easier to replace the main board in it's entirety...

probably cost nearly as much as the whole unit....

if it means that much to you... sell the pro and put the bucks towards the pro x... then you'll do a little better and end up with a warranty.

 

"the internal processor is the only difference"

When I started this post I really imagined that, considering what has been done on 500X, only the processor can be the difference between PRO and PRO X. So, the meaning of my question is: is there any chance to replace this processor in PRO and to evolve it in a PRO X? Of course, I can imagine that it's not easy, but I wish to know it.

[spikey]

And more than likely the board itself is "multi-layered" in its design, meaning that there are runs underneath runs within the board the processor sits on. So resoldering the updated processor even if you could get one (which i think would be near impossible), it would be a trick to get it all soldered back to every layer correctly if there are holes, and if its surface mount then thats a whole nother challenge to resolder. Not impossible, but very tedious to do even in good conditions with the right equipment ...

[dspellman]

Speaking of the HD Pro X...  what is the real advantage to this device?  Yes, it's a rack mount, but then you need to buy a foot switch board to control it live.  Seems like more expense for no extra return. 

 

Same deal with the Bean version (though the bean version is much cheaper).  I've mostly used the bean versions because I can toss them on the desk and use them at eye level, stuff them into one of the three old Atomic Reactor amps I have and use the whole mess as a very convenient combo amp, or run them as practice (headphone/recording monitor output) tools that fit in a gig bag pocket. With both the rack and bean versions, I like having the electronic guts in the backline with just a foot controller out front. There's no AC line/brick running to an HD500, no expensive guitar cables running across the stage. If I'm running wired, the receiver is also in the backline and the only thing running across the stage is what amounts to an ethernet cable. I can walk to the backline and see where I'm set (don't have to kneel down or bend over to squint at a tiny screen).

 

At the moment, I've got beans (HD, XT and XT bass) and one XTLive (for the older Variax guitars). I've now got a JTV 89 and so I'm looking at the rack version for Variax connectivity and some recording connectivity. The good news is that the same Shortboard has been good for all three beans and will be fine for the rack mount version.

[m-epifani]

Ok, no chance to modify hardware.

I hope that I can consider my HD PRO a "still alive" product, waiting for a 3.0 upgrade. Let me say: I spend my time trying to play better and to obtain the best (in my taste) sound from my stuff BUT one of the reasen for which I've chosen HD PRO is the chance to have upgrade. Not free update, but upgrade and I bought it not in seventies, but last year.

[joel_brown]

From what I've read, the new and faster DSP doesn't do much more.  Maybe it can run one additional effect.  You still run out of DSP real fast when dual amping.  This was done because they couldn't get the old DSP chips anymore. 

 

Then the marketing department got involved.  You can't expect Line6 to just say "Hey we ran out of chips and had to put this one in now".

[TheRealZap]

any upgrades to the "x" models will also happen to the non "x" models... the refreshed models make it more likely that we'll have updates not less likely... being the new/current release.

[Astaroth_CY]

Most companies would not even have mentioned the product refresh, would not even have given it the X designation. They would have just started producing the new version under the same model number and gradually replaced the older one with it. It's so insubstantial. This is not a new product no matter how much you try to wring it out that way, Line6.

[TheRealZap]

Exactly. it's more like the same thing with revision 2 hardware.

it does serve the purpose of making it "new" again...

as in resets the timer for the end of life...

I think we'll see a few more years of updates before it's retired.

 

Most companies would not even have mentioned the product refresh, would not even have given it the X designation. They would have just started producing the new version under the same model number and gradually replaced the older one with it. It's so insubstantial. This is not a new product no matter how much you try to wring it out that way, Line6.

[Astaroth_CY]

Exactly. it's more like the same thing with revision 2 hardware.

it does serve the purpose of making it "new" again...

as in resets the timer for the end of life...

I think we'll see a few more years of updates before it's retired.

I think the refresh is a good thing. What I'm criticizing is the way Line6 decided to market it - they shouldn't have marketed it at all. It just makes it look like they've put in substantial research and development into this when in fact I'd estimate it took about a couple of hours to just change the production order to include the new processor instead of the old one. Most of the work would presumably have gone into the package design and marketing around it, which is absurd. You could even say the same about the HD500X. SLightly more substantial changes there but in the grand scheme of things it probably took very little time and effort to develop.

[TheRealZap]

pretty much agree... should have been a "revision 2" sticker slapped on the box or something else simple like.

[m-epifani]

Please let me add one thing: marketing actions must (of course) help business, but, in the same time, have to avoid "damage" to existing customers. Our HD Pro, after PRO X launch, has all another value on second hand market. 

[StealthPro]

I really agree with you guys bout Line6s upgrade/revision politics and i'm quite a bit disappointed about the extremely careful taken count on improvements (only DSP i guess).

Theres much left to improve: Reamping: e.g. USB Dry-Out (hey my old XT Pro already had this feature), better quality display and higher quality knobs/potis around it - still really cheap plastic used here.

But at the same time i'm much more happy with my new Pro X than i was with the Non-X cause to me the dual amp feature now is much more useable.

For example, take the factory-patch 15B Metaphors and disable the flanger. You can now add Pitch-Shifting and Reverb if you like without hitting the DSP Limit.

[Guitarmaniac64]

Same deal with the Bean version (though the bean version is much cheaper).  I've mostly used the bean versions because I can toss them on the desk and use them at eye level, stuff them into one of the three old Atomic Reactor amps I have and use the whole mess as a very convenient combo amp, or run them as practice (headphone/recording monitor output) tools that fit in a gig bag pocket. With both the rack and bean versions, I like having the electronic guts in the backline with just a foot controller out front. There's no AC line/brick running to an HD500, no expensive guitar cables running across the stage. If I'm running wired, the receiver is also in the backline and the only thing running across the stage is what amounts to an ethernet cable. I can walk to the backline and see where I'm set (don't have to kneel down or bend over to squint at a tiny screen).

 

At the moment, I've got beans (HD, XT and XT bass) and one XTLive (for the older Variax guitars). I've now got a JTV 89 and so I'm looking at the rack version for Variax connectivity and some recording connectivity. The good news is that the same Shortboard has been good for all three beans and will be fine for the rack mount version.

How does the POD HD sound when it is used with the Atomic Reactor amp?

 

Is it worth to get one of those or should i go for a DT 25 amp

[ur2funky]

How does the POD HD sound when it is used with the Atomic Reactor amp?

 

Is it worth to get one of those or should i go for a DT 25 amp

The Atomic would be worth it if you're using a Variax acoustic tones. If not, in my opinion, any good tube amp will work well.

[Guitarmaniac64]

The Atomic would be worth it if you're using a Variax acoustic tones. If not, in my opinion, any good tube amp will work well.

But the atomic is suppose to not colour the sound of the POD like other tube amps does thats why i asked..

 

On the other hand a DT25 and a POD HD 500 would be nice but then i have to exchange my bean to a 500 the atomic i have in mind is also much cheaper than the DT 

[ur2funky]

But the atomic is suppose to not colour the sound of the POD like other tube amps does thats why i asked..

 

On the other hand a DT25 and a POD HD 500 would be nice but then i have to exchange my bean to a 500 the atomic i have in mind is also much cheaper than the DT 

 

The Atomic not coloring the sound is why is it great for an acoustic guitar sound, as the DT25 is not.    A tube amp (DT25 included) adds a great color to any electric guitar tone IMO.  Either way, you'll tune your sounds/tones to the whichever amp setup you go with. 

[dspellman]

How does the POD HD sound when it is used with the Atomic Reactor amp?

 

Is it worth to get one of those or should i go for a DT 25 amp

The idea of the Atomics was to reproduce the Pod bean (and two or three other similarly sized modelers) as agnostically and in as uncolored a manner as possible while using a tube power amp and a 12" speaker while still looking pretty much like a standard combo amp. Thus the 18W version sports a 200W fairly-flat-response speaker in a large closed-back cabinet (larger than my 2x12 Carvin Belair). The 50W 1x12 is ported, and the 2x12 is closed-back, ported, and only about 4" shorter than a 4x12.

 

What the Atomics are not (leastways these versions) is an FRFR unit. I've actually added a piezo-based tweeter to one of them to stretch the top end a bit, and I don't know that I'd call them completely flat. They DO do a nice job of presenting the Pods as they are, and I like the idea of having a hot-swappable bay so that you can exchange the various Pods. At first, I thought it was pretty much a waste; I figured it was highly unlikely that I'd be purchasing and using an M-Audio, Behringer or Vox modeler because of something special they offered. Since then, however, I've found myself owning a Pod XT, a Pod X3, a Pod HD and a Bass Pod XT (works really well with the 2x12 for practice), and there are reasons for all four of those to go in at one time or another, and I don't have to bother re-wiring everything to do so. In terms of an FRFR unit, a pair of Rokit 8's works better for nearfield practicing and a pair of fEARless F115s works better for noisy gigs (I run them with a 1500W power amp).

 

The DT25/50 series have an entirely different mission. They *add* guitar-based amp sounds to what you get with the Pod.

 

BTW, the Atomic isn't something you'd choose first for the acoustic models; the one thing missing from these is the high end. Add the tweeter and it does work for those. But honestly an FRFR speaker works far better. I dunno about the DT25.

[Guitarmaniac64]

I never ask for any acoustic sounds or if it was good for variax (i dont own a variax) i simply saw someone saying he have an Atomic he had for the POD XT and use that Atomic with the POD HD bean.

 

So my question was if it make the HD bean sounding any better??

 

Still havent heard an answer yet.

 

I know what the DT sounds like and it is maybe an option but if Atomic can make my HD bean sounding way better that it sounds without the Atomic i might buy a used Atomic instead as it is much cheaper than a used DT