What goes well with POD ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TomK
  • Start date Start date
for tone?class a tube amp

Pod and the like are ok if it is really late at night and you can't make any noise for fear of angering the neighbors.But not for everyday tracking.Only glowing glass will produce the sweet,rounded distortion heard on 90% + of ALL recorded guitar tones.Its simple physics.The "clipping " distortion produced by ICs and transistors on a scope doesn't even look like tube distortion and sure doesn't sound like it.Also the harmonics are wrong.Tubes generate even harmonics and solid state units emphasize the odd overtones.The real secret of guitar recording is how many famous "monster" guitar sounds were generated by small tube amps (example of Page using a tele and Vox AC30 top boost on Zep I).
Look at your tone-heros.Is it Clapton?Stevie Ray?Hendrix?Read Mix mag and see what the studio guys track with.A small Champ,Princeton can be had for less than the price of the pod.But maybe you like chainsaw fuzz ala Dimebag Daryl.Go for it.I an tracking mainly with a '58 Gibson GA6 18 watt amp rebuilt with milspec components to the scematic of a mid-50s Deluxe.SWEET!It all depends on what your ears are hearing cause you have to satisfy yourself in the final analysis.But the standard is there.
regards
Tom
 
In the last six months alone I have read a bunch of articles where folks have raved about the POD and have used it on their latest recordings -- Andy Partdige of XTC, Ty Tabor of King's X, Pete Anderson, among others...

While I agree that the best tone will definitely be the "real" thing, the POD gets so close that the ease of use becomes extremely attractive. With one POD I have almost the sonic equivalent of a Marshall, a Boogie, a Dumble Overdrive Special, an old 65 Deluxe Reverb, a 50's tweed Champ, etc., not to mention a choice of open- or closed-back cabinets with 4 tens or 2 twelves or whatever... and I don't have to fiddle with mics and worry about all the ambient sounds in my house bleeding in and all the stuff associated with that.

Oh, Tom, you said:

Its simple physics.The "clipping " distortion produced by ICs and transistors on a scope doesn't even look like tube distortion and sure doesn't sound like it.Also the harmonics are wrong.Tubes generate even harmonics and solid state units emphasize the odd overtones.
Click to expand...

But the POD and its ilk are different. They are not solid-state amps in the old sense that you are describing. They digitize the incoming guitar signal, then they apply mathematical calculations to the digitized data so that the signal going out approximates the signal of a guitar played through a beautiful amp and miked perfectly. They start with the recorded pure tones, digitize them, and figure out how to make what comes in from the guitar go out like the signal they're trying to copy. Like you say, it's simple physics -- given any arbitrary waveform, you can duplicate it by summing a series of simple sine waves. If you have enough processing power you can theoretically make the modeled signal virtually indistiguishable from the real signal. Granted, it's an approximation, but to my ears it's a pretty good one, and it's bound to get better as the years pass and processing power at this price point continues to increase and as the modeling algorithms get better and better.

-AlChuck

[Edited by AlChuck on 09-22-2000 at 09:03]
 
I used to have a Fender Princeton, and it was nice.

I still much prefer the Pod, no mics necesary, nice stereo effects, don't have to blow out your ears to get distortion, compact!!

I still think maybe it's your speakers, so called Hi Fi speakers, are usually anything but. I have said it before, there are so many things inherently wrong with trying to get a woofer and a tweeter to blend, that Hi Fi doesn't even come into play. You've got crossover problems, phasing problems, and the like.

Don't forget that most great guitar amps run through one way speakers, with no tweeters.

No kidding, try some cheap computer speakers, I got a set of Labtec, powered subwoofer, and satellites, the satellites have no tweeters. I got them on sale for $42.00, after taxes.

A subwoofer, and a one way satellite, blend better than a woofer and tweeter.

Bottom line; ditch the tweeter, and pod, and just about any thing else will sound much better, naturally!!
 
good points-rebuttal

GT and AlChuck
Yes its easier and that can be a big factor for many guys.But it depends on whether "almost the sonic equivalent" is good enough.Let me illustrate my point about digitally modeled tones by stressing two related points,dynamic responsiveness as well as the broad variety of tones available from any analog source.
Like the digital cymbals on my old HR16 drum machine.Beautiful digital 16 bit samples but limited to only that tone recorded at that location.Any live drummer doesn't hit exactly the same spot consecutively and the tone would vary in real life (like your guitar string being picked in different locations varies in tone).But the sample doesn't vary and keen ears detect a "roboto" feel especially on high hat.Specific to guitars and tube amps is "dynamic responsiveness" where the actual amp tone varies from clean to break-up depending on how hard the pick strikes the string.
Samples are static and analog sources are unbelievably dynamic in variety.The digital stuff is REAL good compared to attempts of just a few years ago.But careful listening will hear the difference.What's your bottom line?Convenience or tone?
regards
Tom
 
Tom, your "sample" analogy is kinda off-base I'm afraid. Digital processing is not the same as digital sampling.

The POD does not play a "sample" when you pluck a string, it, in basic terms, modifies the input wave to produce a given output wave. Analog equipment does the same thing, just in a different fashion. Analog is less pure, more human sounding than digital in almost all cases of course....but that doesn't mean that it will never be possible for a digital processor to mimic an analog processor to the point where the two are indistinguishable to human ears. The POD is one of the very first real attempts...and it is very simple. If you ask me it's so close that the average listener wouldn't *know* that a POD was used, even though they might be able to pick the POD out of a side by side comparison.

The only bad thing about digital processors is that they'll always sound exactly the same over time....and that's not really a *problem* so to speak....but it does take some of the nature out of music.

You statement, "Specific to guitars and tube amps is 'dynamic responsiveness' where the actual amp tone varies from clean to break-up depending on how hard the pick strikes the string" makes me wonder if you've ever played through a POD? If things were as static as you say, nobody would play through a POD, no matter HOW conveinent.

Slackmaster 2000


Slackmaster 2000
 
Something that maybe cool to try...Is to use headphones as your speakers.Mic the headphones ,if DIing comes off as too sterile sounding.Some cheap ones [closed ear]wraped around something as simple as a 57 or 58.
 
pod,j-station and the roland sound the best...

of the new stuff but I can hear the difference between modeled tones and analog.They are very good sounds and many guys will be happy with them.It may be that I don't fully understand the technology (I'm not a KEYBOARD player,i.e. more tech than feel oriented)but its like the old joke about art "I know what I like".
To throw more oil on the fire is tube reliability.My tech waxes poetic about the resurgance of the vacuum tube this past decade.One issue is operating temperature.The vacuum tube heats up to a constant temp. regardless of room temp. and is remarkably performance stable in varying conditions.
Ruggedness in another issue.A famous Fender ad of the 50s told the story of two twins falling out the back of the Bob Wills bus at highway speeds.All the glass broke but when replacement tubes were popped in,both amps cut the gig.
And lastly,since just about everybody seeks to emulate the vacuum tube sound,there must be something everybody is hearing they like,right?
regards
Tom
 
Haha!!!!!! Boiled bass strings......haven't heard that one in a while.
I am borrowing a POD right now......sat up last night with a set of phones and listened....intently.Over the past 33 years I have played through,owned,or heard just about every rig there is.Right now I play through 4 different '50's tweed amps (including a '59 Bassman)and a Carvin X-100.Not too easy to impress,my ears!Yet although I heard some noise,I must say that the unit responded very nicely to subtle dynamic ranges and touch....you know how most guitar preamps gag and cut off when you back the volume on your guitar,or play softer.This is because of the noise gate.I also heard that elusive "cabinet punch" that preamps are often missing.
I guess I am the newcomer here...I hear that there is an upgrade to the one I am borrowing.I will purchase one of these,but first I have another friend that is going to loan me the Johnson preamo for comparison...any comments on this piece of gear?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top