are PODs really that good?

[EmptinesOf Youth]

ive yet to return to my studio, at my friends house, to record, hopefully tomorrow, but after all the trouble ive been having with my recording of distortion problems, ive been reading and a lot of people say screw the amp miking and use a POD, i tried my GT6 direct and wasnt very satisfied...so what are you opinions?

thanks

ryan

[Lee Flier]

Are POD's really that good?

 

No.

[Phait]

I'm interested in a Pod XT Pro rack, but I'm more anxious to get into mic'ing an amp. I just don't live alone so it's not easy, that and I no longer use my shitty 15w amp anyway, which is all I have, and no mic(s) yet.

[Guitarzan]

i liked the pod 2.0 for headphone play but never had any luck in other applications. some people like them for recording. i know what you mean about the gt6. thats what my friend and i use to track on his pc. i am not crazy about it at all.

[zeronyne]

Despite any preconceived notions anyone might have, I have had great success recording with a Pod XT. Does it sound like a tube amp? Depends on what you think a tube amp sounds like when it's recorded.

 

So as a friendly counterpoint to Lee, I would say "Yes".

[Big Red 67]

They are easier to carry then the stuff that they model. They lack the "real thing" effect of the real thing.

[BlueZet]

just an idea...want the best of both worlds? split your signal, one side to the pod (or any other modeller)- one side direct to "tape"

you can record the modeller on another track, or just have it in your headphones for "listening pleasure", then later on (when you won't be waking anyone up) you send the direct recorded signal to an amp of your choice and record that on a separate track...

[Tedster]

I'm picking one up for my solo deal. Bear in mind I'm going to be playing mostly at coffeehouse/small brewpub volume.

 

It makes for a TSL-122 I don't have to lug around.

[g.]

If I was really a guitarist instead of a bassist I'd be playing a Roland VG-88 maybe. I haven't liked the Pods and XTs so much, and I'm really hoping someone does something better. They serve a purpose, but I've compared their bass products to the Roland V-Bass and it's sounds just seem more complex and full of nuance at various levels.

 

A few years from now I think the differences are going to be a lot harder to detect. Then the hot rig might be a modeling preamp with a tube or tube modeling power stage, going into a cabinet that's closer to sonically transparent so that it won't color the models or act against certain ones. Some of the sterility of current modeling is that there's nothing like having that cab/combo/in physical air near the guitar, interacting.

[musicalhair]

Originally posted by Lee Flier:

Are POD's really that good?

 

No.

That about sums it up.

 

I gues if you don't have access to a great amp and can't use it as it needs to be used (loud) for recording or whatever then it may serve a purpose. But I don't see many guys raving about blow-up dolls.

[g.]

Gee. I don't particularly think they've nailed it, but I sure detect a lot of bile whenever modeling... comes up.

[musicalhair]

I also think the word "modeling" is a marketing trick. They could have called it "imitating" or "mocking", in this context they mean the same things but "modeling" adds an air of legitimacy to it that the choice of any other word might not. I'm just saying here that we should be aware that the word modeling was chosen but may not be the best word for us to use.

 

I guess we should ask some one that has used both to say which is better: the pod or the blowup doll.

[doc taz]

Eoy, forget what everyone else says here. Only your ears and gut can determine what you really want. If that means saving up for that all tube Marshall, fine, but if you feel good about using a POD live, then why not?

 

I don't understand the blow-up doll analogy. Besides... most humans don't date and/or marry blow up dolls!

[EmptinesOf Youth]

Thanks to all, and Taz, i see where your coming from. The amp im lookin at (Fender Pro Junior) is about the same price as the POD. But, i already have all the mics and whatnot i need to mic the amp. And i have little local bands that want us to record them so i spose i should get good at everything right? Then again they as well could just play through the POD....desicions desicions....

[fantasticsound]

I love playing and recording through my Korg Pandora, but does it sound as good as a mic'd amp? Hell, no. Can I get a multitude of sounds from it that are acceptable for most of my own, personal recordings? Hell, yeah!

 

The Pod, Pandora, and other modellers sound best when immitating heavily distorted tones. It's on more dynamic timbres where they tend to start showing their ass.

 

On clean tones, the really chunky sounds one can get with a real amp pushing air tend to be lost to the Pod, et. al. But you can get some pretty decent clean tones out of the modeller, as well.

 

Like Taz said, you need to use your ears. But I implore you to find some decent recordings made with a Pod before you settle on one. To me, modellers are kind of like my fashion sense. I don't shop much. On those occasions when I do buy clothes, I tend to find really cool shirts. Unfortunately, I can never find the pants to go along with them. (We're assuming the need is for something other than jeans, which anyone can find. ) Modellers sound pretty good (although without the "snap" Big Red alluded to) on their own, but in a mix they tend to just lie there.

 

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it. YMMV.

[James-Italy]

Yes, I think they are very good. I'm a big fan of the PodXT. I'm a big fan of tube amps. Different tools, both good.

 

I've got a few decent amps and also the PodXT Pro. The PodXT is very light, versatile, easy to record, and sounds pretty good. I think it performs quite well. It's not going to give you a perfect sound, but neither will a poorly recorded tube amp. The ease of use and possibility to record 24 hours a day makes it "that good".

 

My real amps sound much better than the Pod to my ears. Well, let's say they sound better after I've spent minutes/hours/days setting them up correctly.

 

Give an honest listen and decide for yourself. I think you'll be impressed.

[s mel gibson1642606968]

My band rehearses direct into the board and we monitor with headphones. My drummer has the Roland ($2,000.) set of electronic drums and my bassist and I both plug into Pods. I also have a tray of gadgets which includes a tuner, ZOOM 707II, MXR Phase 90 and a distortion pedal. It kind of sounds like a lot of gizmo sh*t but, I'm looking for warmth in a cold and sterile digital world. Where all your mistakes are in your face. And we're a 3 piece yet. As long as my bassist gets the notes right, I have enough of a foundation to work with. We don't bother anybody when we practice, we've been doing this for about a year and we're getting used to it. I guess those pods are working for us although it's still a bit strange.

Nothing beats the real thing cranked full blast, and then the cops show up!

[Sean Eldon]

I don't have the patience for the PODs. Sitting there and trying to set EQs and levels on a tiny screen can take quite a while, and I personally would much rather do it for real with the dials on my Bassman and not get a processed sound

[Dave da Dude]

Interesting thread

 

I'm thinkin' of using' a DigiTech RP300/400 for practicin' ('cause I like the "Learn-A-Lick", *tape* slow down feature. Is it actually any good?) with headphones. I've got a tube amp, but it annoys (understatement) my wife by the time its to '3'; a more immediate, and much more serious problem than the police

 

Keeping in mind its limitations, would that work out okay for that? I can take this to a separate thread if 'ya all think it's appropriate.

[JimK]

I try to avoid the modelling threads on this forum, because as someone already pointed out, they seem to be very partisan. But I'm jumping in this time....

 

I'm a modeller guy. Sure I love a great tube amp, but I value my hearing and don't have a room where I can crank one. So I've gone the modeller route and have no regrets. I currently use a Digitech GNX3. I have played with a POD and even a Line6 Vetta. Here's my humble opinion:

 

95% of the people will never know you used a modeller. What's more, modellers can give you some flexibility when recording (especially when you don't have a lot of $$ or a good place to record). But keep in mind, they are not all created equally. Line6 uses the approach of trying to mimic an amp as it sounds in a room (a room that is approximately 20x20 feet). Some people think this is great for recording because it "warms" the sound up a bit. Others have complained that for live use, this room effect is a problem because you don't want that there if your playing something bigger then a 20x20 space, but your stuck with it.

 

Digitech's approach to modelling does not take the room into effect. They (actually Johnson amplifiers, the people who built the J-Station, because Digitech bought that technology) try to construct math models of what the amp and speakers are doing. The don't include the room characteristics in those models. I think this is a better way to go because you're not fighting the 20x20 room thing and have more control over the final sound.

 

Like I said, I really like my modeller. I like having 16 amps and 11 speaker cabs to experiment with. Whatever tone I can dream up I can get out of that box. And contrary to some opinions on this board, the modellers are getting sophisticated enough to provide that organic amp feel (it's not 100% as good as the real thing, but it's not bad either).

 

I suggest you skip the "bile" on this forum and let your ears be the judge. Get your hands on Pod or Digitech unit and try them out (I know you tried the GT6 out, but that always seems to be one of the worst reviewed and rated of the modellers).

 

Jim

[doc taz]

Originally posted by JimK:

Digitech's approach to modelling does not take the room into effect. They (actually Johnson amplifiers, the people who built the J-Station, because Digitech bought that technology) try to construct math models of what the amp and speakers are doing. The don't include the room characteristics in those models. I think this is a better way to go because you're not fighting the 20x20 room thing and have more control over the final sound.

The Zoom GFX units seem to employ both this and the room approach. It's mostly in the cab modeling, so if you choose to use the GFX's as preamps, you can do so while preserving most of your guitar's tone. The other cool thing about the Zoom's models is that they're done using analog circuitry.

 

I have a lot of patches in my zoom gfx-5 that are set with just the amp sound, and a little reverb or delay. These are great for running through a power amp and your choice of speakers. I've tried this through several combos, including a Tech 21 Power Engine, and a Fender Deluxe 85 combo's power section. Great setup, and more than enough volume, though I'd much prefer a good 4x12, and a clean power amp that runs at least 300w at 8 ohms for good headroom.

 

Don't forget... other units that use analog circuitry for amp simulation are Tech 21's amps, pedals, and PSA-1 preamp. Also, there's Frank Gambale\'s Carvin Tone Navigator preamp. I'd love to test drive that one.

[Guitar Geezer]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v333/geezer123/yodadoobie.jpg

 

Embrace the technology, young Skywalker

Originally posted by greenboy:

A few years from now I think the differences are going to be a lot harder to detect. Then the hot rig might be a modeling preamp with a tube or tube modeling power stage, going into a cabinet that's closer to sonically transparent so that it won't color the models or act against certain ones. Some of the sterility of current modeling is that there's nothing like having that cab/combo/in physical air near the guitar, interacting.

Well put, I don't even think that it will take "years". First was Fenders "Cybers", Line 6's generations, then Vox's "Valvestates" and I expect a really bang up Roland Cube in the near future.

 

Last year when all of my "vintage/tubey stuff was stolen, I decided to do a 180 and went with a Roland Cube and some "inexpensive" guitars. So do I want another tube amp and an old well worn guitar? OF COURSE. But for now this suits an old geezer just messing around doing cover songs!

 

...... My 2¢

[tchipman]

I like this thread. Whoever said they were not patient enough for the Pod hit on something. It does take some serious time to find exactly what you're looking for and I think that if you're standing right in front of the studio monitors when you're playing, you'll get very close to what you're looking for with the XTPro. Somehow you get the guitar interacting with the speakers and it does sound more realistic. Someone said that most people won't know the difference. So true, and I think there was a thread here a while back that proved even most of us on here weren't sure which was the Marshall, and which was the pod. But again the Pod will take a little patience. I'm a singer,songwriter, guitarplayer, and most of my work gets sent to Taxi for consideration and critiques. On all of those I've used either a Johnson J-Station, or a Podxt Pro. No one has ever complained about the sound of the guitars, in fact I usually get high marks in that area, even if they don't like the rest of it. My recording is done in a very cramped area and a large loud amp does not sound very good mic'd up. Everything rattles! But I'm still trying things. I'd like to try out the Carvin Vintage 16. The Brian May Special is OK but not really mic'd up. In my case "moddelling"is a great thing. You just need time to tweak things until you get it right. But without a good room, the big amps are not even an option. Just another opinion.

Tim

[g.]

Hey, where'd all the tube nazis go? ... they find someone in a dark alley to stomp on? ; }

[Big Red 67]

On clean tones, the really chunky sounds one can get with a real amp pushing air tend to be lost to the Pod

Maybe they need to model the "air"? Line6 listening?

[chap_dup1]

I have the Pod and about 20 vintage/custom/classic amps.

I've found that the Pod is fine for broadcast work

(especially 'sports guitar') and secondary guitar parts that won't be too exposed.

For actual CDs and recorded music that's meant to be listened to, the Pod usually doesn't quite stand up against the real deal. It sure makes sessions easier but when it comes to a feature part, it doesn't usually cut it.

That said, a recent XTC album has killer guitar sounds, all done with a Pod, but then into a real amp.

Bo figure,

chap

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by Big Red 67:

Maybe they need to model the "air"? Line6 listening?

They've tried that already. Their cabinet models supposedly do model the "air" but they, errhh, really don't sound like it.

 

POD's do have their uses, but the problem is they can also promote laziness. They do NOT sound like a tube amp, although they might sound better than a bad job of recording a bad tube amp. Thus, somebody like EoY might get one, think "Oh, this sounds better than what I've done so far" and keep on using it, never learning to get a good sound from miking a tube amp, nor getting to hear what a nice tube amp sounds like.

 

There are several small tube amps around these days that are not much more $$ than a POD and are great for recording. EoY is getting himself a Fender Pro Junior, and I think that's a very wise choice!

[musicalhair]

I think most have given up. I guess the POD anti-POD thing comes down to "good enough" versus "ain't nothing like the real thing, baby"

 

The Blow-up doll analogy, not that I think anyone didn't get it, is that the POD isn't the real thing of what ever it is modeling and the real thing must always be better by my definition. Heavyier, tougher on your back and your neighbors but better. Perhaps even more limited but still better, by virture of it being the real thing.

 

I mean, if the pod does what you want it to do then it is the right tool for the job. But it is sort of like the Behringer arguments in that what is good enough and where should we be spending our money. I'd rather have one of my Riveras than a pod, but then it costs like an order of magnatude more. I'd rather have a floor full of stompboxes and that costs a lot more money and takes up more room and wiring and tweaking than a pod. Still, for me I think it is the way to go and I'd feel hollow if I took the pod short cut. Maybe noone else feels that way but I'd rather the real thing than the model.

 

I use paint brushes by Purdee and not the sponges or various new toys out there that are supposed to be "easier" than a paint brush. It is the same logic to me.

[Lee Flier]

Yeah, what you said. If the POD really does sound just like you want, then great. And they're fine for practicing or working up arrangements or scratch tracks without bugging your neighbors/spouse/roommates/kids. But if you're just using it cuz you're too lazy to lug an amp or mic one properly... well, you're just not giving your music the effort it deserves, plain and simple.

[g.]

Methinks the lady doth protest too much ; }