That POD Sound

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 6 Oct 2005 4:17 pm

When I was working for mesa/Boogie, I became very aware of the "Boogie sound". After a while it became second nature to be able to hear Boogie amps on record an, most of all, on TV soundtracks and commercials.

The other day I heard something odd, though. A guitar track on TV had a sound that I instantly recognized as a Line6 POD. I've been playing through a POD XT lately and there's something unique about the attack envelope that I've never really heard from any amp, tube or transistor.

If I hear another one I'll post the details. My point is this: isn't it odd that something marketed as an "amp emulator" actually has a unique quality of its own? The POD XT models capture the tone of the amps, but not the dynamics.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b2005.gif" width="78 height="78">Bobby Lee (a.k.a. b0b) - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6) My Blog

Jim Phelps · Post by **Jim Phelps** » 6 Oct 2005 5:02 pm

A perfect example of how a strictly electronic device still cannot exactly duplicate the sound of an amp or instrument. As incredibly versatile as the Variax is, I believe it is the same as your Pod/real amp comparison. Amps have speakers that move air, a chip does not, guitars have a body, a neck and vibrations moving all through them, chips don't.

That's my theory and I'm sticking to it....

[This message was edited by Jim Phelps on 06 October 2005 at 06:03 PM.]

Steinar Gregertsen · Post by **Steinar Gregertsen** » 6 Oct 2005 5:19 pm

I definitely think the POD has a sound of its own, and frankly it's not so important to me whether it truly replicates the various amps/cabs or not.
While I absolutely prefer the sound of a real tube amp and speaker moving some air, the POD must be one of the best things to come along for us home recordists.
My problem with the "POD sound" is in the high frequencies, there is a certain harsh quality to the top freq's that can be hard to deal with sometimes....

------------------
www.gregertsen.com

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 6 Oct 2005 10:03 pm

...there is a certain harsh quality to the top freq's that can be hard to deal with sometimes...

Yes, I've been using a Pod extensively for 3-1/2 years for both guitar and steel, and straight into a board, I agree. I have always assumed it's some kind of digital artifact, perhaps from aliasing or other reconstruction errors of the analog signal from the digital samples. That's why, when playing live, I run mine through a very clean but warm-sounding solid-state bass amp with everything set flat. I find it helps cut that harsh sound quite a bit. I pretty much use it as I would use an 'anti-aliasing' filter.

On the original thesis, certainly the Pod is not an exact clone. But I don't find most reissue amps to be exact clones either. I like the Pod's clean Fender emulations for most applications, but not jazz guitar - to me, there's no substitute for an old Twin or Dual Showman Reverb into a nice fat-sounding speaker like a JBL. To me, the Pod distorted-amp emulations are less convincing and more "unique", which is not to say bad.

Tony Prior · Post by **Tony Prior** » 7 Oct 2005 1:30 am

Bob, working for Mesa. pretty cool...

DO you have any thoughts pertaining to the original PODS vs the new XT's or whatever they are termed now ?

I have been considering the acqusition of a POD..but not sure which one to get and if there is a difference in models.

thanks
t

Jack Stoner · Post by **Jack Stoner** » 7 Oct 2005 2:09 am

I'm currently working on a CD project for a singer. I tried the POD XT directly to the board - with several different preamp models and didn't like it as well as an SM57 miking my Nashville 112 (and the 112 sounds better than the Nashville 1000 miked).

Actually, direct from either the 112 or 1000, using the XLR output is better than the POD XT, to me. I'm using the POD XT, as an effects processor only on live jobs since I got it about year ago.

Scott Denniston · Post by **Scott Denniston** » 7 Oct 2005 6:30 am

Bob, I had the same experience the other day. I wonder if it was the same commercial or whatever. The second I heard the guitar my brain said "POD!". Might have something to do with the setting he used. I really can't put my finger on it but the thing definitly has it's own inflection. I've heard it on my own recordings. I don't hear it as a particularly negative thing but you can hear it.

David Mason · Post by **David Mason** » 7 Oct 2005 10:34 am

Latency is the difference in time between when you strike a string, and when you hear the sound. Computers and recording interfaces contain various buffers, where information is temporarily stored for various reasons while processing is taking place, and this is what delays audio playback.

I just ran across this explanation in Guitar Player magazine, and it sounds as likely as any for a "tone" induced by modeling circuitry.

Dave Grafe · Post by **Dave Grafe** » 7 Oct 2005 8:12 pm

Tony --

The XT unit is capable of much cleaner tone than the earlier units could produce. It's the one to get.

Rainer Hackstaette · Post by **Rainer Hackstaette** » 8 Oct 2005 3:02 am

David, I think the latency induced by buffers in digital equipment is negligible compared to the latency/delay induced by the speed of sound, i.e. the time a sound wave from your speaker takes to reach your ear. If you're playing your guitar 10 feet away from your speaker, the sound wave takes about 10 milliseconds to reach you (1,000 feet per second). You would hear that as "immidiate response". At a 100 feet distance with 100 milliseconds delay it would be hard to play in sync with the rest of the band on stage.

With gigahertz processors in modern equipment, the latency in buffers would be in the range of microseconds or even nanoseconds (1/1,000,000 or 1/1,000,000,000 of a second). I doubt that any human ear can hear such a short delay. I know that I can't.

Rainer

Jay Ganz · Post by **Jay Ganz** » 8 Oct 2005 5:58 am

I've definitely had the best results running the PODxt directly into a power amp rather than into the front end of another guitar/steel amp. Even
when messing around with the "what are you
connected to" function and adjusting the "vibe"
settings etc. It just ain't the same as going
from the PODxt into a plain power amp.
Expecially using the low impedance output from
the PODxt (with a TRS on one end of the cord
and XLR on the other).

------------------
<center>
<img src=http://home.hvc.rr.com/jsganz/Emmons&Bassman.jpg>

<a href=http://jsganz.tripod.com/Horizon.html>
</a>

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 10 Oct 2005 10:23 am

Tony, I had a POD 2.0 and sold it because I couldn't get the sounds I wanted out of it. I'm very pleased with the POD XT, though.

Back to topic, I think that what I'm hearing is the comp/gate setting. I've noticed that many settings have the compressor set at a threshhold of 0db and gain of 15db. That's a lot of compression especially if you have a good input level to start with. I think that people are using the compressor as a level booster without understanding it.

Last week I lucked into an old 1960's Fender Princeton amp that had been idle in someone's garage for 30 years. It's a really sweet sounding little thing. I set up some "no amp" patches on the POD XT and ran it in front of the Princeton to add some delay and reverb. I think I could record some really nice sounding parts with this setup!

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b2005.gif" width="78 height="78">Bobby Lee (a.k.a. b0b) - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6) My Blog

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 10 Oct 2005 1:10 pm

b0b, you may have something regarding the comp/gate setting and a delayed response. Bob Hoffnar and others have complained about a delayed response. I've never noticed it. But I never use the amp models, and when I have tried them, the first thing I did was eliminate the comp/gate. I have since learned that the comp/gate can be useful with the noisy stompbox models, such as the Tube Screamer, but you have to just barely raise the gate threshold to get rid of the background noise. Any higher than that makes the volume pedal work crazy.

I don't know if I would recognize the distinctive POD sound in a blind test. But I do associate a certain solid state/digitial overlay with all its simulations. None of the simulations are perfect. So I would imagine your favorite amp with a mic would always beat the POD simulation. In addition, none of the POD amp and speaker models are specificially voiced for steel the way Peavey steel amps and speakers are. But to get a lot of effects in a single package, the POD XT is hard to beat, although it's now getting a lot of competition.

Dean Parks · Post by **Dean Parks** » 10 Oct 2005 6:52 pm

FWIW, I hardly ever use the cabinet that comes with the amp model.

Try using the Treadplate "cabinet" with 57 mic off-axis, or the Class A 2x12 cabinet with 67 mic. These are less crappy sounding to me.

Too bad you can't just leave the cabinet "there" and bring in each "amp" for audition, but no... you have to bring in the "amp", THEN change "cabinet/mic".

-d-

Rick Garrett · Post by **Rick Garrett** » 11 Oct 2005 1:40 am

I'm using a Pod XT with my MSA Super Slide (12 string) and running it into a Peavey Session 500. Great tone.

What I like about the Pod best is you can either make your guitar sing or scream. Smooth sweet tone or blues sounds to die for.

Rick

BobG · Post by **BobG** » 20 Oct 2005 4:29 am

I've recently played a hurricane relief benefit where I went direct from the PODXT
to the board.. The engineer recorded it and gave us a copy. It gave me a chance to hear how the steel sounded "out front" running through the POD..
Here are two samples ... one with a clean sound ..the other with distortion.
Overall... i'm pretty happy with the tone on each..
Please excuse the mix .. it's for a live gig
which never comes out right while taping.
http://www.afterthereign.net/uploads/what%20was%20I%20thinking.mp3
http://www.afterthereign.net/uploads/Brokenheartsvle.mp3

------------------
Bob Grado, Williams D10 (lefty), Peavey 1000,
Profex ll.

[This message was edited by BobG on 20 October 2005 at 09:05 AM.]

Steve Hinson · Post by **Steve Hinson** » 20 Oct 2005 7:11 am

The first two songs up on my website are thru a Pod Pro...it seems to sound better going out of the SPDIF out than the analog out...

------------------
http://home.comcast.net/~steves_garage

Larry R · Post by **Larry R** » 26 Oct 2005 7:57 pm

Bob G, nice licks on Brokenheartsville.

Larry R

BobG · Post by **BobG** » 27 Oct 2005 3:38 pm

Thanks Larry,
What I really got out of listening to that playback was I have to get better at learning when not to play.. I never stopped playing.. The lead and steel where stepping over each other throughout the song.. I should have sat out of the whole second verse.. in my opinion..
Hey..."live and learn".
But thanks anyway

Also,. my apologies for the topic drift.
I just figured other players can learn from our mistakes.

------------------
Bob Grado, Williams D10 (lefty), Peavey 1000,
Profex ll.

[This message was edited by BobG on 28 October 2005 at 07:17 AM.]

Paul Honeycutt · Post by **Paul Honeycutt** » 28 Oct 2005 6:20 am

Don't discount the latency issue. It's a big factor in high end live sound and digital recording. There is a delay when digital processors process a signal that the ear can detect. I took a live audio workshop with Robert Scovill (Prince, Rush, Tom Petty) last year and latency was a major topic. There's also the opposite factor when the sound from the PA hits your ear before the sound coming off the stage. There are a lot of little phase shifts and comb filtering affects that create problems with the sound. That's why live concert rigs have banks of delays and a lap top computer running SMARRT Pro to bring things into alighnment.

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 30 Oct 2005 1:24 pm

Is the POD XT really a "digital processor"? I mean, does the original signal go thru AtoD and DtoA conversion?

I don't feel any latency when i'm playing. Wouldn't that be the real test? The notes come out as soon as I pick them. I'd notice if they didn't.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b2005.gif" width="78 height="78">Bobby Lee (a.k.a. b0b) - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6) My Blog

Jack Stoner · Post by **Jack Stoner** » 30 Oct 2005 2:22 pm

This is from the Line 6 site and it suggests there is D/A and A/D conversions.

"POD® XT is equipped to handle today’s guitar recording needs. Our 24-bit converters and 32-bit floating point processing create a killer tone, delivered through +4dBu balanced or -10dBV unbalanced 1/4 inch connectors. Or go digital with PODXT’s USB digital audio in and out for the most incredible tone available. MIDI lets you automate every move and our optional FBV generation foot controllers let you do it all with your feet. PODXT also comes with a high-power headphone output for silent jamming.?[This message was edited by Jack Stoner on 30 October 2005 at 02:23 PM.]

Steve Hinson · Post by **Steve Hinson** » 30 Oct 2005 2:43 pm

When I first played thru the original model POD,it seemed to me that there was a latency issue...I have the rack model now,and I monitor thru my console...never noticed any latency(when Low Latency Mode is on)...

------------------
http://home.comcast.net/~steves_garage