pod vs. v-amp

  • Thread starter Thread starter seanr
  • Start date Start date
Nickelback's tone on their new album is entirely Line6 GuitarPort multitoned and multitracked. To me, this destroys the argument that the VAMPSHIT would be better for high-gain tones hehehe...
 
TheDewd said:
Nickelback's tone on their new album is entirely Line6 GuitarPort multitoned and multitracked. To me, this destroys the argument that the VAMPSHIT would be better for high-gain tones hehehe...
Click to expand...
Works quite well for the power chords they play. I wonder what would happen if they actually tried playing something resembling a real solo...
 
sile2001 said:
Works quite well for the power chords they play. I wonder what would happen if they actually tried playing something resembling a real solo...
Click to expand...
I play things that resemble "real solos" and I get a pretty good tone out of my POD 2.0.

Roger Sullivan (http://www.monumentweb.com/roger/) he uses a POD (original I think) and gets convincing lead/rhythm guitar tones. He shreds good, but not on all the songs featured on his site. I suggest you take a listen at a song called "I'm Awake" by clicking on "more songs". The lead part is very good and it's all POD. Indeed, the POD high-gain lead sounds are very good for shred tones.

Nonetheless, I get better lead tones out of my POD 2.0.
 
You guys act like there is a night and day difference between a Pod and a V-amp. They both produce very similar tones. The main difference is the Pod has better FX which is moot as you don't record with the FX on anyway.
 
No offense man, but if your idea of high gain, heavy tone is nickelback, then you should be able to go straight out of a digitech metal master pedal into your DAW and be happy. This discussion is a waste of time for you.


TheDewd said:
Nickelback's tone on their new album is entirely Line6 GuitarPort multitoned and multitracked. To me, this destroys the argument that the VAMPSHIT would be better for high-gain tones hehehe...
Click to expand...
 
amra said:
No offense man, but if your idea of high gain, heavy tone is nickelback, then you should be able to go straight out of a digitech metal master pedal into your DAW and be happy. This discussion is a waste of time for you.
Click to expand...
Well, what is that you don't like about Nickelback's tone?
Maybe you just dislike Nickelback ?
Even then, you SHOULD be able to discern that NickelBack has had GREAT rhythm guitar tones since "Silver side up".
Their tone on the new album is SOO THICK, that I can't believe my ears!
Popular bands are hated on forums here, I dunno why...
Name a band that has a thicked rhythm tone and I'll be glad to hear...
 
Actually, I kinda like nickelback. The first song of theirs I heard was called "Leader of Men" back in 2000, and I have pretty much liked most of their stuff, at least for radio tunes. It's just that their guitar tone is not memorable, and definitely not heavy. I guess that's not a bad thing, since they have had pretty good commercial success. But it is just kind of a fizzy tone that is not very heavy.

Ok, these are just some examples of what I consider heavy guitar tone. I am sure other people can give some other examples. Try to get your hands on these and listen:
Black Label Society - Forever Down
Corrosion of Conformity - In the Arms of God
Pantera - Makes them Disappear
 
I personally do not like Nickelback at all, really; however, I must say that their new tones are rather in your face and strong. This, of course does have alot to do with the mixing and mastering, etc. but it is still potent. It really was a guitarport they used?

It Makes Them Disappear? Those guitars sit back in the mix quite a bit (spread wide doesn't help). But, how can you say those aren't fizzy?
 
aaroncomp said:
It Makes Them Disappear? Those guitars sit back in the mix quite a bit (spread wide doesn't help). But, how can you say those aren't fizzy?
Click to expand...

I am listening to it right now, (45 seconds in) I don't hear fizz. I hear heavy rhythm guitar, off-axis sounding mic placement, a bit hollow, scooped mids, slightly boosted on the high end, to compensate for the off slightly hollow off axis sound. If you want to hear fizz, listen to Nickelback "Leader of Men" around 2:15 in. That's what I consider to be fizz.
 
amra said:
Actually, I kinda like nickelback. The first song of theirs I heard was called "Leader of Men" back in 2000, and I have pretty much liked most of their stuff, at least for radio tunes. It's just that their guitar tone is not memorable, and definitely not heavy. I guess that's not a bad thing, since they have had pretty good commercial success. But it is just kind of a fizzy tone that is not very heavy.

Ok, these are just some examples of what I consider heavy guitar tone. I am sure other people can give some other examples. Try to get your hands on these and listen:
Black Label Society - Forever Down
Corrosion of Conformity - In the Arms of God
Pantera - Makes them Disappear
Click to expand...

I don't like the early Nickelback tone at all. It was fizzy, I agree. But on the new album, there is a fatness to the tone that I couldn't find while listening to Zaak with Ozzy or with BLS. While I agree that Zaak has great tone, but on the new Nickelback album it gets smoked by a small margin.

About the late Dimeshit Darrell, his tone always reminded me of a scooped out Randall solid-state amplifier. I sometimes find myself imagining HOW GOOD Pantera would have sounded if he had good tone.

Corrosion of conformity has typical metal tone a la Slayer, but with a lot more mush factor on the muting.

Do yourself a favor and liste to a song called "Fight for all the wrong reasons". Of course, there IS a little "fizz" but just enough to get some presence, not too much. There is some in Zaak's tone too (mainly due to the EMG-81).

Another thing that is overlooked is the tone of the bass guitar when talking about rhythm guitar tone. The bass offers all the bottom end and the tightness sometimes...

The examples you refered me to all had one single quality, that I call the sponginess or mush-factor to them. They all sounded quite fat but when muted it sounds mushy, not tight (to my ears at least).
 
aaroncomp said:
I personally do not like Nickelback at all, really; however, I must say that their new tones are rather in your face and strong. This, of course does have alot to do with the mixing and mastering, etc. but it is still potent. It really was a guitarport they used?
Click to expand...

In your face and strong is exactly what I'm looking for, as my band strives for a contemporary rock sound like Theory of a Deadman and Nickelback.

About the guitarport, I read somewhere on the net that they did A LOT of overdubbing with different tones/guitars/amp models to get that type of fatness. I guess the guy that's called JOEY MOI is one heck of a sound engineer to make a guitar port sound so good.

I must however conclude by saying that during certain "passages" you can hear that it's actually a line6 simulator, because there is a digital sound to it.
 
To me, Zakks BLS tone is pretty tight and crunchy, and I don't know how you can't think it isn't heavy. The COC stuff , heavy but not so tight (it is all mesa recto, so a little sizzly). All this stuff is too subjective. Everyone hears and interpets things different. I have been hearing a lot about "theory of a dead man", what is a good song to listen to by them to get a feel for their sound?

Anyway, the bottom line here, if what you say is true, is that amp modelers are being used on prefessional studio recordings which is a pretty big deal. (BTW, do you have a link to back that up?) Which modeler will have to be decided by the person who is going to buy it, using his or her own ear.
 
Last edited:
wow I feel special. I actually guessed right. I thought it was the Vamp on the left when I heard it. Oh course I own a Vamp and play the distorted sounds all the time. But still. The vamp has a slightly more muddy sound than the guitarport. I don't really think that's a bad thing though. At least for the music I play.
 
Behringer V-Amp is definitly value for money.It does everything I need. The pod is way over priced here in sa.
 
If I had to spend on any digital stuff, I'd go with the cheapest one... who cares, the are both digital crap.... get a tube amp and forget about trying a thousand different settings for getting a useless sound... enjoy and rock 'n roll!!! :cool:
 
nicolaad30 said:
If I had to spend on any digital stuff, I'd go with the cheapest one... who cares, the are both digital crap.... get a tube amp and forget about trying a thousand different settings for getting a useless sound... enjoy and rock 'n roll!!! :cool:
Click to expand...
While I agree with you, the idea of recording a cranked up Marshall (or whatever) at 3 AM might make the "digital crap" sound interesting.
 
Well. yeeeeeah... I think you have a point there... then I would be getting a Mesa Recording pre instead of any digital thing out there. Question solved...ejejejej your neighbors will love it!! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top