Using A Line 6 Pod 2.0 For Home Recording

[Farview]

I've yet to hear anything ever done with a Pod that I didn't know right away it was a Pod.

Alrighty then, go here and tell us all which guitar sounds are the Pod.

http://www.farviewrecording.com/html/sound_clips.html

There are a few.

 

[CoolCat]

I liked the Living for Nothing and Oddseye the best....thats alot of music and different types.
farview if those two tunes are POD thats really impressive.

damn nice speakers in your walls too...but thats another thread.

IMO, almost everyone can get the clean tones, especially when using chorus and flange, these days, so the "simulated sound" thats most difficult is usually the overdriven tones that show up as the weakest link in the pedals and boxes trying to simulate the tone of overdriven tubes.

other than DI recording, then it'd make sense. some can't crank up a Marshall in the apartments

 

[Mish]

I always figured it would be more of an issue of laency as long as you aren't clipping the converters (which granted, it might be easy to do). How much distortion do you use when you're recording? Just out of interest? And when you say 'a seismograph's scale in the eruption zone' what do you mean? That it looks loud?

http://members.shaw.ca/science1/earth/model/seismogram-17-dec-1980.jpg

Yeah, loud would sum that up

I play August Burns Red/FATA type of stuff, so basically drop-C with loads of palm mutes.

 

[Farview]

I liked the Living for Nothing and Oddseye the best....thats alot of music and different types.
farview if those two tunes are POD thats really impressive.

Thank you. I will wait until Toker41 posts his findings before I reveal which are Pod guitar sounds.

 

[warble2]

I haven't had first hand experience with a POD, but am curious which ones are POD and which are not. I'll await Toker41's scientific results.

Enjoyed the tunes, Farview - nice mixes to my ears.

I'm curious what the OP is trying to get out of it too. Hope he/she comes back in. I've used NI GuitarRig, but spent time tweaking and building on the presets to get close the results I was looking for. I say close because I know getting that perfect sound isn't going to happen magically AND the guitar player's ability plays a big part.

 

[Toker41]

So far I've listened to number 1, 2, 5, and number 6. Number 5 sounds like a Pod to me. 2 sounds great. Number 1 I'm gonna give another listen to, because I'm leaning toward Pod, but I have to say that it's good work for a Pod, so I'm not going to call it that just yet. I'm going with a Pod on 6, also.

 

[legionserial]

http://members.shaw.ca/science1/earth/model/seismogram-17-dec-1980.jpg

Yeah, loud would sum that up

I play August Burns Red/FATA type of stuff, so basically drop-C with loads of palm mutes.

Perhaps try recording quieter? It being drop C with loads of palm mutes is completely irrelevant. I can't see how the sound deivce is at fault just because your input volume is too loud. Unless you're recording through the mic-in. In which case you should use the correct input.

 

[Farview]

So far I've listened to number 1, 2, 5, and number 6. Number 5 sounds like a Pod to me. 2 sounds great. Number 1 I'm gonna give another listen to, because I'm leaning toward Pod, but I have to say that it's good work for a Pod, so I'm not going to call it that just yet. I'm going with a Pod on 6, also.

OK here are the results:

1. Two different guitar amps. One was a mesa, the other was some old 60's off brand tube amp.

2. Pod, recorded direct.

3. Sansamp PSA1 through a solid state poweramp and 4x12 cabinet

4. Pod, recorded direct

5. Boss gt8 through the power section of my Laney

6. Ampeg tube amp

7. real amps, same as #1

8. real amp, can't remember what model

9. Marshall valvestate

10. Roctron voodoo valve through solid state power amp and 4x12 cabinet

11. Mesa tripple rectifier

12. I can't remember, but the recording pre-dates the Pod (1998)

 

[kojdogg]

awesome! props to farview for issuing the challenge and to toker41 for actually taking it (and missing on 3 1/2 out of 4 guesses (partial credit for #5)

to the op, i'd agree with one of farview's earlier posts-- the presets are only a starting point. when i still had my pod (and used it), i would start with a patch that i had some reference for (like 4d-- iirc a jcm 800 model?) then take off the reverb and other effects (set it to bypass), set the eq's to 12 o'clock, back off the input level and gain a little bit, and then re-adjust all of those settings to taste.

 

[Toker41]

I have to say I'm totally taken by surprise with #2. Also, (kinda pointless to say this now, but it is God's honest truth) I made a mistake in my listing. I never listened to 6, it was 4, and was the first one I listened to, so I was right about that one, also. So I listened to 1, 2, 4, and 5 (listed 6, when it was actually 4).

I gotta ask how you did #2?

 

[Farview]

I gotta ask how you did #2?

I started with "spinal puppet", backed off the gain and added a compressor/sustainer (pedal sim, I think the line 6 version, but I can't remember). I'm sure i played with the tone controls. I can't remember which cabinet sim I used off the top of my head. I just plugged the pod right into my Motu and recorded.

The guitar had EMG 81s.

The real trick seemed to be the compressor/sustainer. It allowed me to back off the gain without losing the drive when the picking got lighter.

#4 was the Pod insane setting on the original pod. That was done in 2001

 

[Toker41]

I like to admit when I'm wrong, and I have to say that the tone on #2 is pretty killer, and totally threw me. I actually listened to that one a few times because I kept thinking it kinda sounded like a Dual Rec, but the bottom end wasn't right, and the clarity wasn't there. However, it sounded clearer, and fuller than a Marshall. Nice job. A first for me to like something done with a Pod. I'm a big fan of those 81s. Been my main pick-ups since the '80's. Nice and thick. Good job. I am humbled.
Number 4, however, is crap. (the tone, not the tune). It was actually the first one I listened to, and picked that up right away. Had a little trouble loading, so I jumped around in the order a little. Number 3 never did load.
Number one had some nice tone. My first impression was that it was direct, because it sounded a little closed in, but hearing a bit more I was thinking it wasn't, because it was simply really nice tube tone, and ended up working really well in the mix. How did you mike the amps on that one?

 

[Farview]

Number one had some nice tone. My first impression was that it was direct, because it sounded a little closed in, but hearing a bit more I was thinking it wasn't, because it was simply really nice tube tone, and ended up working really well in the mix. How did you mike the amps on that one?

There was a combo mic'd with a 57 and a 4x12 mic'd with a 421. The one going through the 4x12 was a 30 watt mesa combo from forever ago. The combo with a 57 was some off-brand old tube thing that looked like it was from the 60's.