Which Pod to buy?

[Tig***]

I know the HD500 is easily the most flexible, but I am wondering about the wisdom of using a menu-heavy modeling unit for live use.

Regardless of which POD, you can dedicate a 10 patch bank with each effects/amp configuration you need and simply scroll up and down within that bank. No need to adjust anything if you previously configured each per your needs. The key to all of the POD's is to configure each patch via the computer edit interface, and perhaps fine tune from the unit as needed, with the option to save the change or not save. I like to set each effect to toggle on/off with a dedicated foot switch for flexibility.

Also, they just released a new firmware update that allows you to set the input impedance, depending on the output of various guitars, or set it to automatic impedance detection. This allows the POD to adjust to your different guitars, which I think is smart. The firmware update does other stuff, like a new "hard gate" noise gate. http://line6.com/news/general/1146

[Eric***]

Regardless of which POD, you can dedicate a 10 patch bank with each effects/amp configuration you need and simply scroll up and down within that bank. No need to adjust anything if you previously configured each per your needs. The key to all of the POD's is to configure each patch via the computer edit interface, and perhaps fine tune from the unit as needed, with the option to save the change or not save. I like to set each effect to toggle on/off with a dedicated foot switch for flexibility.

I think I'd have to see that to really understand what you're talking about, but it sounds good. It would mainly be about tweaking the actual amp model EQ on the fly (i.e. in a band situation) and maybe the mix or delay time on an effect. If it's kind of clunky to edit that stuff on the fly, I think that's there something like a 300 or 400 might have merit.

I wish I knew someone who could loan me an HD500 so that I could give it a test run. It seems like that might be the easiest way to test all of this.

[Eric***]

I think in the short-term, I'm going to see if my little Mustang I amp can be run into the house using the headphone out -- mostly a matter of getting the right cables and adapters for it. While thinking about this, I realized that the HD400 I used on Tuesday was the first modern-day full modeler I've used at a church. When you use those digital models, it's a bit different from using 'quasi-modelers' like the GT2 or Tech21 TM60, in that each of the digital models seems to behave very differently from each other.

[deeaa*]

I think in the short-term, I'm going to see if my little Mustang I amp can be run into the house using the headphone out -- mostly a matter of getting the right cables and adapters for it. While thinking about this, I realized that the HD400 I used on Tuesday was the first modern-day full modeler I've used at a church. When you use those digital models, it's a bit different from using 'quasi-modelers' like the GT2 or Tech21 TM60, in that each of the digital models seems to behave very differently from each other.

The Mustang's phones output will work very well...in fact I don't think I'd even consider getting another modeler if you can use the Mustang like that. Much better to use the same familiar amp in various uses.

That last bit you said - each of the digital models seems to behave very differently from each other - that's a very good notion. That is, IMO, the biggest plus but also the biggest nuisance to any digital modelers.

These days the modelers, hell, even VST plugins handle the revered 'picking dynamics' very well, that isn't the problem...the problem is that the models themselves are rather rigid. You _can_ change the sound by playing and such, and whatnot, but nevertheles...you always need a different patch for each song almost.

With a real amp...even a single-channel one...the entire sound can be totally different so easily, by playing differently, just a slight turn of a knob. Just this weekend I played a session of a few hours thru an old Marshall and also a Behringer amp, and both worked really easily - just a basic sound, but such a sound that it fit any song I played quite easily.

With modelers, I think I can get even a better sound than 'real' at least on recordings, but still, it's always just for that song I'm working on. Almost always when I bring up the saved patch for another song, it just won't work no more. I always end up browsing thru the amp models for that particular need.

So in a way that is a blessing; in studio environment you can always get a perfect sound on that song, dial up an AC30 when need be etc..but in real life, very soon I always notice that I want to change the sound for each song. If I don't, it always seems it doesn't after all work so well, and soon I have saved a patch for each song instead of using just one.

Once you start tweaking each tone for each song, there may be no end to it...soon you have a full rack of gear.

Right now, I have a multiFX box in my JV loop, but it's there only for some noisegating basically...I'm a bit tempted to just plug in MIDI control, and then when I change the channel on the amp, I could also assign each channel with any FX I'd like, such as delay for lead etc...

BUT I don't want to, simply because I know that's the path to neverending tweakorama ad nauseam...I rather make do with no effects whatsoever, and use 'em only when recording.

[Eric***]

The Mustang's phones output will work very well...in fact I don't think I'd even consider getting another modeler if you can use the Mustang like that. Much better to use the same familiar amp in various uses.

Yeah, that's my thinking too. I've grown to like the new Fender modeling stuff quite a bit. It's very good at that in-between grit when compared to a lot of the other modeling stuff I've tried in the past. It was certainly a good deal for the $60 I spent on it.

That last bit you said - each of the digital models seems to behave very differently from each other - that's a very good notion. That is, IMO, the biggest plus but also the biggest nuisance to any digital modelers.

These days the modelers, hell, even VST plugins handle the revered 'picking dynamics' very well, that isn't the problem...the problem is that the models themselves are rather rigid. You _can_ change the sound by playing and such, and whatnot, but nevertheles...you always need a different patch for each song almost.

...

With modelers, I think I can get even a better sound than 'real' at least on recordings, but still, it's always just for that song I'm working on. Almost always when I bring up the saved patch for another song, it just won't work no more. I always end up browsing thru the amp models for that particular need.

I suppose this could be true, though many of the models I've tried recently seem like they could be quite versatile. It's part of the reason I'm rather eager to try some of this stuff live and with a band -- to see whether I can just park it on one model and keep it there, as well as to see how it behaves in a mix.

I ordered a slew of adapters for headphone playing (my cans only have a 1/4" plug) and lining out to the mixer from the headphone out on the amp, so I'll see how this whole thing shakes out.