Jump to content

Why does Pod Go not offer 5 or even 6 user slots for FX?


Recommended Posts

Because of DSP limitations I hear you say? Not so:


Pod Go uses dynamic DSP, which is supposed to give more choice and flexibility to use available DSP to the best advantage. If users select effects that use higher DSP, we accept that there will only be sufficient processing power to run 4 blocks or perhaps even 3. But this seems to be a one way street. If users are prudent and select lower DSP hungry models, there may be sufficient DSP to run an additional block or maybe even 2 eg where a distortion, reverb, delay & modulation have been selected, there may be sufficient DSP to run a 5th block eg a compressor and a filter or a second delay or modulation based on the Benvesco chart. So my idea is that Line 6 allows 2 possible additional blocks to be available so that users have greater choice and flexibility to make the best use of their DSP allowance. To demonstrate the point, consider the following as a possible selection:


  • Amp: brit 2204 - 35.30%
  • Delay: Simple - 7.66%
  • Reverb: plate/chamber/hall etc all at 13.61%
  • Distortion: Teemah - 9.36%
  • Modulation: Script phaser - 5.1%
  • Dynamic: Vetta Comp - 5.95%
  • Filter: Voice box - 5.95%


By my arithmetic that's a total of 82.93% - which still leaves 17.07% so there's even greater scope to use higher DSP models in the above before reaching the 100% limit. I understand that Pod Go has DSP processing limitations as compared to Helix - but if Pod Go has ample DSP processing power to give users greater flexibility, surely users should be allowed the choice to make maximum use of the DSP available - and isn't that the whole point of dynamic DSP?


I've posted this idea on Idea Scale so if you support this, please vote. 


If Line 6 is looking in - guys can you please explain why Pod Go only offers 4 user blocks when there would appear to be lots of scope available for 5 or even 6 blocks where total DSP still falls below 100%? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that would be very feasible, I mean you can't be that much "dynamic" to have some kind of chance to have one more block, but maybe not, for each preset, depending on what you have used in terms of dsp. You also want to be conservative to avoid to reach 100% or to hang the machine, like in the middle of a gig.

And I guess is not only a "dsp thing" but it's also an engineer decision to keep the price low, and a marketing decision. Probably with 6 spare blocks the pod go would be too much near other line 6 products that cost more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

POD Go uses kind of a revised version of dynamic DSP (btw, that phrase isn't actually in the POD Go manual anywhere, and I've not really seen it used as a selling point) where you have a semi-fixed chain along with some things that aren't fixed. It's not really any different than what many other manufacturers do. You could argue that they could have added another wild card block, I guess, but there's a good chance it wouldn't be usable in many chains. I guess they were trying to make the user experience as simple as possible where people would rarely hit a DSP limit, and it's not something they spend a whole lot of time thinking about.


I actually don't think it would necessarily be a quick and easy change adding another block as it would mean rescaling all the block on the screen so they fit. Certainly not impossible, and maybe not that hard, but I don't know, I don't expect it to change. This is like a pretty fundamental design decision that I'm sure was talked about a lot in the development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I guess they were trying to make the user experience as simple as possible


Not that it applies here, but "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity".  For programming, you could say that you should never attribute the intent of simplicity to what can be attributed to the simplest/cheapest way to do something.  There's also the KISS acronym, and figuring what is the minimum required features and doing the least possible to achieve them...


Of course, they could have had dynamic blocks, and some status bars on top of each effect to indicate the % of resources they'll consume, and honestly that would have confused nobody.  But that would have meant more work for them, it would have been more complicated, so I'm pretty damn sure that's why they opted for the simplest solution to implement.  KISS.



By my arithmetic that's a total of 82.93%


Not quite sure it's as simple as attributing a percentage for each block...  General computing, it's at least CPU & RAM.  In the Go,  they need to crunch the data within a certain timeframe, so as to the user not noticing any latency.  So yeah if it's only CPU, % could work, but maybe memory is also an issue, and loading multiple blocks could max memory... Who knows...


But IMHO, other than any technical/programming reason, it could have well been decided in a meeting room with the L6 non-technical teams (sales, marketing, etc) teams.  The more the Go can do, the more it will cannibalize the sales of the more expensive L6 products.


Hell, take car manufacturers.  They'll sell a $300 option so that your side mirrors can be moved electrically, but the motors are in all the cars, the cars without the option are just missing the electrical wires required for the mirror to work.  Why?  Because it's cheaper to manufacture all cars with those super cheap motors, than manufacturing ars with/without motors...   So don't be surprised if L6 could have done a bunch of stuff, but decided not to do it, not because it wouldn't have made the product better, but because making it better would have been worse for their endgame financial profits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I completely agree with you @grdGo33...I think Line 6 realised that if they made Pod Go 'too good', and there was less differentiation with its other product lines, it would detrimentally impact on other product sales e.g. Hx Stomp and even Helix LT.   


So whilst I'm looking at this from a 'purist' and Pod Go owner perspective, I do appreciate the commerciality balance. 

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.

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.


  • Create New...