software

I'm thinking of moving some gear around to buy a rackmounted POD PRO XT.

To anyone who's used the beanshaped POD, bean XT, rack POD Pro and POD Pro XT, is the natural choice the best one...the POD Pro XT w/2.0 update?

If I can get a POD Pro for $300, while the Pro XT is almost double that, is it worth the extra money? I'd be using it for recording, not a gigging rig.

I hear the new Boss GT-8 Pro(?)....the new rack mount version....SMOKES the POD Pro............Mincer has one I think.

from : localhost/www.zzounds.com/item--BOSGTPRO

Yeah, I wouldn't rule out the Boss either. The bottom line is that I can't use tube amps in my apartment recording studio. When it was at a commercial space it was no problem, but I'd drive my neighbors crazy playing guitar parts for a solid 8 hours if it's in open air.

I'm trying to get my studio completely wired up, so it's a silent cokkpit with the Boss DR-770, top of the line modeler for both guitar and bass, and maybe a keyboard, all dialed into my mixer, so all I have to do is sit down and make music. Playing producer slows me down. I need it all streamlined so there's no fudging with cables, mics, barking dogs next door, street noise, and irrate neighbors.

The new Boss is called the GT-PRO... basically just a rack mount edition of the GT8. I've heard great stuff about it, and it has some very interesting features, line dual channel picking control, etc.

the pod xt pro is way better than the original pod pro
more user freindly and a lot ...I mean a lot more features...
check out the line 6 website and you will see ...
I would highly recommend it chris

PODxt Pro with the update and all the packs. In your case, I'd actually go with the XTLive it comes with the effects pack, and only costs 400 brand new.

Plus, the Classic pack has an XTC model .

One vote for the GT-Pro- you get digital spdif outs and USB out, a computer editor, a lot more flexibilty with location and tweakability of effects, 2 preamps at once, switchable or pannable, or switched with how hard you pick (!).
Effects in any order, a good pitch shifter (the XT doesn't have one)- sync up phaser time (or any other effect) with your recording (enter in the BPM or tap it in).
The only reason I would stay away from the floor processors, is because you either want digital or balanced outs for recording.
I had the XT (not the pro, but with all the updates and packs) and the effects were just not flexible and varied a lot- only 2 or 3 parameters per effect, and only a few at a time in a fixed order. Also the way they imlemented the USB audio out was bad...the POD became your soundcard, so you had to connect your speakers to it. You couldn't use the USB for digital audio and your normal recording card for monitoring. The GTPro's converters are also a lot cleaner and quieter.

Have you considered an Iso enclosure? There was a guy at the sneap forum who posted results with one that to my ears sounded damn good. from : localhost/a waste to have so many nice amps and then record with a modeller. If you are set on a modeller though I'm a fan of line6 stuff- cosm distortion always sounded a bit thin and harsh to my ears. I've heard a couple recordings with the xt metal packs that were damn near indistinguishable from a real amp.

I'm using a Mackie HDR 24/96 24 track digital recorder and 24/8 board, so it's basically analog into digital, so USB and spidf connections won't be used, just the XLR outs. My original idea was to get the POD Pro XT and maybe just use that for bass tracks as well. If not, maybe I'll snag a POD Bass Pro as cheap as possible.....maybe the bass bean even cheaper.

I can use my tube amps for recording in commercial studios, and mostly for rehearsal and gigging. I'll never use a modeler for that, but I spend my evenings playing guitar and laying demo tracks, so the modelers are the right tool for that. I like my Valvetronix head, but it's only got one mono rec. out.
I may sell it, and use the XT with a power amp.......I'm still in the decision process. I really wish I knew what Vox, L6, and Boss have planned for 2006 NAMM, because if there's something even better, I'd probably spring for that.

i've sang the praises of pods for years now but since i got the v-stack, things have changed. if you need all the different amps, effects, etc, the pod is definitely the way to go. but if you just want the sound of a marshall stack cranked, v-stack is the way to go. no effects, no digital modelling, just great sound. not noisy either.


Originally Posted by Gearjoneser

I like my Valvetronix head, but it's only got one mono rec. out.
I may sell it, and use the XT with a power amp.......I'm still in the decision process. I really wish I knew what Vox, L6, and Boss have planned for 2006 NAMM, because if there's something even better, I'd probably spring for that.

If Boss or Line6 have anything plans, it will most likely be in the form of software updates- I don't think they are planning a next-gen POD, and Boss just came out with the GT Pro this summer.

You also might want an all software solution like Amplitube or Guitar Rig, and skip the hardware altogether- for practicing and recording, it is wonderful. In fact, John McLaughlin is using an all software solution live on his current tour, and he sounds fantastic. Of course, being that crazy-good on guitar helps.


Originally Posted by Death's AcreHave you considered an Iso enclosure? There was a guy at the sneap forum who posted results with one that to my ears sounded damn good.

Seems a waste to have so many nice amps and then record with a modeller.

1

Get a Demeter silent speaker or the Randall box, you'll be MUCH happier in the long run. None of the modelers sound that great to me...passable for demos or backing stuff, but not for big chunks of songs. It seems like the ADA thing all over again, just 15 years later and slightly better.

YMMV.

Now for my question...can you bypass the modeling stage on the XT or Pod Pro (preferably the rackmounts) and use just the effects? I'm toying with the idea of buying one to use as an effects box for studio use but if I can't bypass the preamp section it's no good to me.

the xts effects arent that great- it is silly to spend the $ on a pod for just the effects...

and the modeling in any device these days is a lot better than the ADA stuff from 20 years ago. many major releases use either PODs or pod-like devices as well as pure software plug-ins.

I've got plenty of high-end Lex, TC, Roland etc. to use when needed, but I'd like something that can cover the oddball stuff that does boxes won't do. Things like a Leslie with stereo delay or maybe those times when I want to run a vocal or drums through a Uni-Vibe...I like the Dimension D program a lot too...the folks at Line 6 got that one right! So yeah...FWIW it would connected to a mixing console and not a guitar rig.

As far as the distortion and modern records, yah...lots of people are using them but that doesn't mean they sound great. They can't simulate the one thing that really matters to me, moving air. Music is a positive vibration that moves people and influences feelings and many other things, to capture it well you need to capture moving air. As a player I hate 'em because they feel like poo and as an mixer I hate 'em because they don't sit in a track like a well recorded amp.

YMMV but mine hasn't. That's not to say they don't have a use...but everytime someone brings one of those in and compares it to a real amp the bean always loses. Just like the SansAmp I like 'em on everything BUT guitars!

for the sessions i had done in bigger studios, it was almost all software, followed by pods. the engineers loved the software idea because it was very flexible- you can change it all around after it is recorded. i was suprised at this, because some of these guys had been at it for 35 years..I mean, they were there when the great sounds were being recorded with multiple amps. but really, they were just gearheads too- they loved any new shiny pice of hardware or software, and were open and creative enough to use it. it seems more engineers are able to make it sit in a mix just fine, and the really good ones can not just recreate classic guitar sounds, but come up with wild new ones. It may depend on the studio, and who is running the board, the budget, the giant G5 Macs too. As a player, I don't really care, I just do my job and play- as you said, YMMV!

Yeah, I guess we're really varying here and maybe it's a method of working.

My s.o.p. is to go for sounds and commit to things from the start rather then leaving options to muck around with later on. That goes for everything from drum sounds to the last percussion overdubs and stacking layers of backing vocals. When the recording sounds like a record from the beginning of the tracking it pumps everyone up, they play better and the tracking amp; overdub stages move faster...it also takes less time to mix because we're not creating or recreating anything. If all goes according to plan I can carve the mix and balance levels pretty quickly, getting 2-3 songs off the desk each day isn't uncommon and remixes are rarely needed unless I screwed the pooch the first time around. It doesn't matter if the budget is $5K or $500K, the approach is the always the same.

It's cool that the Pod/software thing is working for you...for the records I work on and those that my friends amp; peers are making, well...we aren't using that stuff. It's still real amps pushing real air and it's not for a lack of trying to make the Pod sound good. The last time I went down that road we spent about 45 minutes trying to get something that didn't have a mushy bottom end that fell apart amp; stomped all over the bass amp; kick drum on chuggy palm muted riffs...5 minutes after plugging into a real amp everyone in the room proclaimed it quot;rwakedquot; and we got on with tracking some kick-ass dirt geetar.

Besides...as a guitar player, doesn't the tone influence what amp; how you play to a certain degree? It totally does for me, and I'd hate to dramatically change it after the fact. So yeah...I have an inherent problem with that approach from either side of the glass.

yeah, i think there are many ways of working- for heavier music, i certainly see many people sticking with what works- a band playing loud rock. For the heavy stuff I record though (my own), I really try to get away from those stock power chord thumpy things, since there are so many people doing it...usually a lot better than I ever could.
Actually, it wasn't me in the studios that picked the sounds, it was the producer. I can basically play with any sound I get- I mean, if I am playing my own music, belive me, I tweak every facet of my sound (45 minutes is nothing- I will work for days getting a guitar sound right, but im insane that way- plus, it is my own personal studio so i can afford it!). I know everyone has different methods of working- go ahead, let these guitarists who disagree get in a room with engineers! they are honestly the works- arguing about years certian mic capsules were made- its really insane..
Whatever you like, and are comfortable with, you tend to re-use over and over. The tendancy is to go with predictable results.
I get calls for a lot of styles, from jazzy stuff, to folk, to straight rock to weird ambient progressive soundscapes (my fav)...in my case, there really is no 'band' to capture the chemistry of- it is a producer, a songwriter, maybe a performer, and I am there to give em what they want- they can screw around with it later- thats what I am paid for.
Personally, I like to commit to things first too. But I will also use anything I can get my hands on to get there- sometimes it takes lots of tweaking- hardware or software, since I am not very satisfied with stock heavy guitar sounds. Or most 'classic' sounds for that matter.

You can buy the expansion packs for the XT too, but not the normal one...