Price engine
Classified Ads
Forums
amleth 05/05/2004

Line 6 POD 2 : amleth's user review

3

  • Like
  • Tweet
  • Partager
  • Submit
  • Email
Value For Money : Poor
Digital preamp amp models (god it's in fashion), a small section effects
MIDI IN / OUT for saving patches
Mono input jack 6.35
Output Left / Right Jack 6.35
Headphone
Software Publisher: Sound Diver (there is also something Studioware for Cakewalk and a great free VSTi to control the beans in your sequencer)
Funny shaped red bean (it's nice to see and use)
Pots of good quality and practical
Screen ridiculous (2 LEDs), but in fact, that's enough
Tuner

There are thirty amps "legend", plus a few basic effects, even if they make good service to flesh out a sound, no substitute for a true multi-effects. In fact (!), The simplicity of the settings and the inability to use multiple effects at the same time makes the experiment impossible. Knobs freak, go your way.
The number of amps is itself very attractive.
Hence my note on average for this section.
The POD XT is clearly more comprehensive (but more expensive).

UTILIZATION

Hmm ...
The Line6 pedal is expensive (2000 balls) (you can also use a Behringer 1010 instead).
The small Line6 pedals (with 4 buttons) on the other hand seems to me unnecessary.
Gone are the days when we tinker with switches for som amp with a switch plastoc purchased from Leroy-Merlin.
The systematic use of the key 'TAP' to access functions not directly usable in my opinion, makes the use of POD-very tedious.
Unable to tinker on stage, you have to work all presets previously.
Software Sound Diver is itself complete.

I also have a Digitech RP2000, and editing presets seems much better bloody (even if the POD is not specifically designed for the same purpose).
This applies to much of the digital machines in the category of POD.
I much prefer the interface of the Sansamp Original (Classic now).

In short, the POD does not allow me to rave as with analog pedals by turning the knobs all over the place "to see how it feels."
It's a different philosophy, more home-oriented studio, I was very fascinated at first, but ultimately deprive myself of feelings that I really wanted with analog gear.

Special mention for the manual, clear, informative, well written, good quality (at a constant Line6).

SOUND QUALITY

Tastes and colors, I think it's the only thing that can be discussed. Let's go then.

The effects are effective, responsive and realistic enough, but it's annoying not being able to use 2-3 at a time. The number parameter is either too small or too difficult to access in the interface to allow such extreme outcomes qu'avaec my old analog pedals or RP2000.

I use the POD with a Vigier anniversary (silver sparkle, but the details have little impact on the sound). I do not really find the nuances of the instrument as clearly with my amp (a Marshall JTM30, very precise and not fat). And I'm just swell. Besides the gain is not always easy to differentiate between two microphones on distorted sounds.

Sounds "very" difficult to obtain clear, there is always a bit of crunch, which is annoying in some situations. Crunches are fine. The quality of saturation varies greatly depending on the amp model emulated. Overall, they lack serious potato, and one may say, the lamp seems to me the most absent. It has a warmth and a complimentary grain pattern on some clean (I like the Blackface I), but we are not at the Sansamp for saturations.
I find the digital grain loadings just disgusting. It does not react as a single-lamp, but it renders services to the recording. Finally, a Sansamp of 10 years ago has better sound, is more direct in its use, can be simply integrated into a stage rig, and is not outdated because of its successor.
And yes, I do not find the disgust of the development computer in the world of guitar. Since the POD XT came out, I find my POD 2 a little weakling. To break this spiral, I will make a return to safe values. The digital allows especially to lower costs, which is fine, but the overall quality of saturation has been improved in any way. That's my opinion, nothing more.

Finally, I came back to record with the XLR output from my Marsahll JTM30 ...

I cons by many simulations of HP, very convenient. I wonder also if I will not keep my POD for that. It's funny to put a big distortion in and set up a 12-inch single. This kind of experiments can be done with the analog gear (unless you have time and money to set all existing models of HP), and this is that digital offers more: get quick lots of sound situations.

OVERALL OPINION

We will do this more square:

- How long have you use it?
Approximately 2 years

- What is so special that you love
most: the simulator HP, really effective and practical appeal of the original 30 amplirs have on hand, sounds very nice crunch, form, aesthetics
the least: the sound too digital on some gum and overruns the nuances of my super Vigier, the interface makes me regret the separate pedals, effects too small can not be pushed to their limits because they do not

- Have you tried many other models before buying it?
I listened to its competitors at the time, J-Station, V-amp ... bcp sounds so good on bright / crunch, maybe a little more on the Satus couillus ... but hey, the pod is in my opinion the best by far of the lot.

- How would you rate the quality / price?
Very nice for so cheap to have as many amp tones ... a real good history lesson

- With experience, you do again this choice? ...
NO, I would buy a Sansamp and Electro-Harmonix pedals.

I understand being a little harsh, I admit that my tastes have changed. I no longer wish marvel devan the last digital machine that can simulate everything from the early history of the guitar ...
I like when digital offers other things, that the analog can never give. Here, the effects are too conventional, and quality of Satus changes from model to model ... of asymptotically to the stuff that I now want to acquire.