anyone use a pod?

  • Thread starter Thread starter blackbuck
  • Start date Start date
mixmkr said:
I think there is a lot to be said about plugging in and playing in seconds, VS mic'ing an amp, running cables, and all that other BS to get a *better* sound. I have to agree that *most* PROJECT studio owners will not get a better mic'd sound than what you could get with these units.
Click to expand...
My question then is, why is that the case??? Is it too much trouble? Why aren't people making the effort to "get it right"??

Are their projects just not worth it? Hard to beleive, 'cos they got into music and they're willing to spend money on their tone/gear!

Is the learning curve of recording technique too steep? Or have they decided in their minds that "it's good enough", or worse - "those techniques don't *really* make that much of a difference"??!!

I'm not coming down on ya mixmkr, just your comment got me wondering...

End of rant - christ, I sound like Ed!!! :D

Bruce
 
Well GT, your world of recording is the POD. I have not found even ONE client who thought the POD sounded better then a properly mic'ed cabinet. Sure, the POD had a decent "ready made" sound, but it is always a far cry in depth and potential coloration.

Hey, if cookie cutter sounds are what you are after, the POD is great.

Funny how POD users have to "layer" a bunch of tracks to get the depth and meat in sound as two tracks of mic'ed cabinets get. I just went through this with some artists who did a lot of POD tracking on their last CD. We are re-mixing a bunch of it, and are finding now that the drums and bass are being improved that the POD tracks sound very silly against them. No depth and meat, and no amount of layered tracks are going to get that mic'ed cabinet sound. Bummer because I am having to have them retrack guitar tracks to make this work. The client is blown away with the new guitar tones. JCM 900 to a 1960 cabinet (my fave Marshall cabinet!), SM 57, ART, XT 20. Speaker mic'ed at the edge of the cone with the angle of the mic slightly in towards center. Backed off the preamp gain and added a little bass from the Marshalls rather passive eq's and the "big" sound happened. Didn't take long to find it, and set up time was extremely short.

GT, if the POD is working for your demo's, great. But I will lose all respect for anyone who claims that the POD sounds as good as a well mic'ed amp. But you are sure welcomed to that opinion that few professional engineers are going to share.

Ed
 
Bruce..I understand your questions...and lemme see if I can address them in order.

1. I think people are trying harder to make their stuff sound good...and hence, products like the POD come out, in an effort to be part of the attempt to make things sound better.

2. The projects warrent *working* extra for the sound...and people are spending the $$ so they can do it at home and spend more time to taylor it like they want.

3. The learning curve of recording is steep...especially if you step into not know the difference between mics, why you need phantom power, why you need a mixer, why good speakers are better than stereo speakers...etc, etc. Some people are better suited to learning faster, but as you and I know, the tools available today makes for some super clean sounding demos that sound like pure amatuer trash. ...sometimes hard to look past the production.

My comment was really not so obviously stated...in which I meant to imply that the *creative juices* sometimes are lost during equipment setup. My studio is basically always "on", and it really only takes seconds to get sounds happening. Hence, maybe just a 10 min session of lead takes may occur. Not to say you couldn't have the guitar amped and levels already set from the last session, but items like these stomp boxes makes for quick takes...and imo do really sound great. I would make the comparision between the real McCoy and the POD as the difference between a quality MP3 file and the original .wav. Yes, something you can hear..especially side by side in an A/B comparison...but in a mix...hhhhhmmmm. No doubt, your clean guitar setup you get sounds killer...but I bet that involved plenty of experimentation, until you got what you wanted. As a solo intro instrument, with the mix spot lighting that track, yeah...I'd go for your amp/guitar/mic combo. ...but as a rhythm track *buried* in a mix. And I'm not being lazy...sometimes I think that spinning wheels for that last 1% and spending another 100% of time doesn't always show.
Hence, how does the POD VS real guitar amp debate compare to the Mackie(or Soundcraft)VS a channel strip? Your Mackie preamps, I'm sure serve you well, and even though you'd probably like a Neve, it is not holding you back from making good sounding stuff with the stuff you have by not owning the Neve...does that make sense?? ;-S
 
Hey Ed,

I concede, I will take you at your word.

Your out in the feild, I'm not. I'm a hobiest, but my pasion runs high.

Can't fight an A/B comparison.

I think I've gotton some pretty fair electric guitar sounds on tape with my Pod, but have never taped a decent cab with the right mic. So I can't argue with you.

GT
 
one major element that I think is being left out in this discussion is the player who is using the POD. Probably being redundant, that is something everyone will probably agree on, and I think the player is almost always the deciding factor on tone. I admit, I have had people who love the sound that I get going "direct" when they are in my studio, and say..."hey, lemme try that POD." They then plug in, have no finesse in using it, and usually sound like rubbish. Kinda like a kid in Mars Music plugging away at a fav Jimi Hendrix lick. A guitar player with good ears will know what to do to compensate for tonal problems that happen, just like playing thru an amp. I don't layer my POD tracks out of necessity...only if the song/production warrants it. I also don't feel I am getting "cookie cutter" sounds anymore than I am getting a "Nashville sound"...or whatever. I try to get a sound that sounds good, rather than emulate something anyway. Just because the preset says "Black Panel" , doesn't mean I am trying to copy a Deluxe Reverb sound...even though those Fender emulations are damn good. I think I have had over a half dozen people go out and buy a POD after hearing recorded results with it...just in the last half year. Final statement.....no, the POD isn't a replacement, but it IS NOT inferior to a mic'd amp either.
 
this will all be interesting 35 years from now, when the kid in the recording studio whips out his new purchase that is a stringless guitar that is pressure sensative on the fretboard, and has attachments that attach to a wall section to produce sound waves....and everyone will be saying..."man, that just doesn't sound as good as a Epiphone Korina V thru a POD." "You gotta have the real thing, to sound fat...speakers, real guitar strings...." ha!
 
I too have fallen into the PODhole and find myself using it quite often these days. However, I find that a little goes a long way. If there is more than one POD track in a song it becomes really obvious. But, if there is just one or two tracks of POD in the middle or on top of other "organic" guitars they all seam to sit better.

To my ears there is a distinctive overtone structure that is in all of the POD's models and it stacks up really fast when there is more than one.

What I have been digging is cutting rythm tracks with nice mid-sized/small amps in the same room as the drums were tracked. Adding bigger amp sounds for solos/melodies/fills and then adding in some "ear-candy" stuff with the POD. Sometimes a sound pops out that leads to better solo/melody ideas.

Trying to put POD tracks on top of other POD tracks never seams to work for me.

Charles Rieser
Southwind Studio
Austin, Tx.
 
For what it's worth, I'm not a guitarist nor do I have a POD myself, but I've never let little things like that stop me from forcing my $00.02 down someone's throat. :D

I think that PODS sound like a great tool for desktop recording artists of the weekend warrior variety. If I were going to lay down guitar tracks myself (which will probably happen eventually), I'd opt for a POD. I'm not ready to invest in an arsenal of expensive mics for all occasions, nor will I buy extry amps for every new inspiration I might get in the middle of the night. Did I wander onto the wrong URL? Isn't this "HOMErecording.com?

As it happens a very good friend of mine (and the best guitarist I know) owns and loves his POD. Would he opt for it over one of his Mesa Boogies? Hell no! Still, he gives it a huge thumbs up.:p

I guess what I'm saying is that if your recording for yourself on a budget, anything that even comes close to expensive mic and cabinet combos on the cheap is a good thing.

:)
 
I havent but has anyone tried this:

Running a pod to a good monitor speaker and micing that?

Just wonderin...cause my problem with the pod is what sonus is talking about, no depth. I love the pod, but for great heavy thick rhythm parts I just cant get them, unless I lay four solid tight tracks down.

I do disagree on the cookie cutter comment, I can get a wide assortment of sounds with the cab-amp options!

john
 
Krakit....

This IS HomeRecording.com... and yes, many pieces of gear may be out of reach (or don't even make sense for a hobbyist!)... and a POD is great for (as you said), weekend warriors... BUT......... isn't it nice to have some pros on site to help people become aware of better techniques/gear/methods???

No - there's no point buying a Manley pre to run to a Fostex x-15.... but if you incorporate even some of the more professional techniques into a modest setup, your recordings will be all the better for it! And eventually, you may outgrow the PortaStudios and want to upgrade!

Bruce
 
not to ruffle feathers

I'm all for professional input (hell, I was a pro once myself:p ), but I'd hesitate to advise expensive gear as opposed to cheap alternatives or tips and tricks to accomplish almost as good results in the living room.

I'm not knocking the proffesional opinion that the "real deal" is the "way to feel", but I'm guessing that the original poster already knows that a close mic'd amp is probably better than a POD, but he wants to know about the POD.

As an inexpensive, easy to travel with unit that, (from what I've heard) can actually yeild a performance you can be proud of, a POD is a wonderful thing.:)

Not to mention that even the big time superstars will often opt for synth pads over hiring a string section.;)
 
This IS HomeRecording.com... and yes, many pieces of gear may be out of reach (or don't even make sense for a hobbyist!)... and a POD is great for (as you said), weekend warriors... BUT......... isn't it nice to have some pros on site to help people become aware of better techniques/gear/methods??? >>>>>>>>>b bear


yes it is...but, not to ruffle your feathers, Bruce....it seems the "rules" are you "have to" use this method VS something that came out in a kidney shaped package. I sense a tone that the POD is execeptional for people who are only serious enough to be a "weekend warior", but the *go up* to the next level requires a whole 'nother set of rules/methods/equipment. I couldn't disagree stronger. Not that I am into hiphop or that kinda rubbish, but look at the resurgence of vintage pieces of equipment like the Roland TB303, Arp Synths, Moog parametrics, and stuff like that. I see the POD as what has been said earlier, "another pallete to choose from"...BUT NOT to be dismissed because it is not the "real deal". IT IS the real deal...just depends on what you want your sound to be like. It seems that the idea of using it for a sound source RATHER than an amp emulator (which granted, it is sold to be) is being grossly overlooked. Who says a Roland XP80 has to sound like the real thing??.....but look how good it sounds just being a Roland XP80. See my point??
 
I didn't dismiss the POD at all -- *I* was the one who said it was another tool in the palette... My only comment in that regard is that it is never *better* than the real thing - which by definition, is an absolute (ie, how can a "simulation", no matter how good, be better than the original!)

And you totally missed the point of my last comment which was wholy directed at Krakit's "homerec" post, nothing to do with the specifics of the POD being viable.

You are taking my last comments completely out of context.......

Bruce
 
opps...sorry and apologies where needed....

however, I sense that many feel that; POD=amatuers and *real deal*= pros....at least I get that feeling....maybe from sonusman and the others that preffice their statements by saying something to the effect of.."well, it sounds good, but I'm sure not as good as the real amp."

Yes, the POD is an emulator...but get past that point, and you'll understand that it is just as much *pro* as Jimi's wall of Marshalls....I think that I have gotten sounds that are better than real amps....(not Jimi's now!!!)..but then we both know *better* is a term easily thrown around. I believe too many plug the sucker in, expect to hear a Deluxe Reverb without the associated recording technical finesse, and make a quick judgement. Kinda like the dissing Mesa Boogies and rectified amps got when they first came out....hey or even the silver faced Fenders. I think everyone is missing the boat who use the POD as an emulator only. To me, that shows a lack of creativity and narrow thinking. BTW, I have run a POD thru a Marshall, as an example....some f*cki*g unbelievble "new" amp I was hearing. Made all standing in front of the speakers wanna whimper :-D
 
buck25

Interesting discusion here....

I expected an emulator to not get much respect.... I'm right with some people! Anyway, in my opinion it's like most other amp equipment- everyone has their own opinion and every piece of equipment can have their place depending on the sound you are after.

Someone mentioned the superior tone of a miked jcm 900, and don't get me wrong, I have one, but alot of guys I know would just as soon throw it into the pacific as play through this unit. Alot of people think it's a rather harsh tone. I'm not saying anything bad about it, just that some people think that this is not a great amp.

Anyway, I won't argue your point: I have gotton a great sound out of cabs using just an sm57 placed right, adjusting the amp/pre correctly, which is fine for the weekend sometimes. Then again, working 60hrs a week leaves me doing alot at night after 10pm, and my neighbors would have my balls in a sling.

I agree that an "emulator" won't sound as good as the real thing. But it can sound pretty good, and can definately get you to different places.

Keep in mind I'm still having to use a drum machine, and hiding that behind some mild loops or real drums and recording a borrowed cym. or snare over it. ugh. The pod sound a shiznit load better.
 
Emulator

Hmmm. For educational purposes, the POD isn't really an "emulator." The POD is a modeler.

In computer terminology, modeling involves "the process of providing to a computer, usually in the form of mathematical equations, a precise and unambiguous description of the system under study, including the relationships between system inputs and outputs, and using this description to simulate or model the described system."

Most devices like the POD use mathematical equations in software and hardware to approximate another device.

Emulation, loosley defined, involves making one computer act like another to receive data in the other's format. This emulation has also been interpreted to include using one piece of hardware to act like another. For example, using a FET to act like a tube.

Thus, generally speaking:
POD=modeler
SansAmp=emulator
COSM=modeler


Me
 
For people like me...who are broke and have kinda shoddy gear, the POD is a very viable option.

I have never used a POD but plan on checking one out in the near future.

I have this Randall Head and Cab. It sucks. For some reason it rumbles with these sub bass tones that are real gay. I cant figure it out, there is just an astonishing amount of low frequency bass that obviously should NOT be there. And it sounds horrible.

Any new amp purchase at the current moment is slightly out of range, since I have decided that I must buy a Mesa Boogie or JCM800. So Im saving pennys for one of those.

For poor people like me the POD is good. That is my take.

Get a Mesa or something bad ass (insert favorite amp here) if you have the bones. Otherwise, the POD will suffice and bridge the gap until you are approved for your next credit card.

Im off....to steal me some wood for the sound wall project. Go me.
 
Pod Rocks and It does sound "PRO!!!! Why, do I say that.. Cause I use one on my album, and a few clients albums, and the guitar sounds stand up to any AC/DC, or metallica album, I put on... so What can I say?... I am a "pro" and I love'em.......If you can't get a rockin' sound out of one, and are reverting to miking amps, You are doing something wrong, cause It works for me, and for other people I have heard.... Just cause it's not considered a "Pro" piece of equipment, doesn't mean it's not good.... It is how you use it and length of experience. Nirvana "Nevermind" was recorded with No-name pieced together guitars, and it sounds awesome... So don't be such Gear whores..!!!!

Joe:D
 
69th post: Wheeee!

I might be off on the $180 for the V-amp . Just noticed it for $240 and thought I heard of it going for $175... Eh.


Matt
:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top