PODxt 2.0x

microdmitry · #1 08-18-2004, 02:51 AM

Man, after a brief encounter with the previous version of PODxt firmware (which quite frankly sounded like ass unless run through a tube power amp and real guitar speaker) I thought I would never buy a POD again.

But after reading mucho good stuff on harmony-central about the new firmware I went out and bought PODxt again tonight. I can say one thing - I can FINALLY play the damn thing in headphones. They're not quite there yet, but it's time for amp manufacturers to really start getting worried IMNSHO. SLO 100 is finally playable. They've nailed the "Eruption" tone in a stock preset, Eddie would be happy.

Best of all, I can now start practicing again despite my 6 months old son sleeping in the adjacent room.

Just when I was about to sell all my gear and throw in the towel...

SuperJemBoy · #2 08-18-2004, 03:38 AM

Yeehaa! A POD XT convert! These things rule!
Check out the Spinal Puppet model on the 2.0, its my personal fave.
Suprisingly though, in my opinion, the Dual Rec models suck. POD 2.0 original is the best for that!

Joe

microdmitry · #3 08-18-2004, 04:04 AM

Hold on there, Sparky!

I'm not a convert yet. As I said they still have ways to go. I'd still be playing my hand-built tube amps if it wasn't for the baby.

Having said that, I can also say that modelling technology has finally reached the point where it can really be enjoyed when playing through headphones. And this in and of itself is a huge milestone.

microdmitry · #4 08-18-2004, 05:16 AM

BTW, additional model packs make it even better. Bogner Ecstacy is pretty darn good with almost ZERO tweaking, in headphones.

Polaris20 · #5 08-18-2004, 07:15 AM

I sold my POD 1.0, and got the XT Saturday. I have have nothing to compare 2.0 to, because I did all the updates right away, and didn't even bother trying 1.05.

BUt I am extremely happy, and the ASIO driver works nicely. That way I maintain only one digital conversion on its way to the computer.

track7 · #6 08-18-2004, 08:53 AM

Yea the podxt 2.01 is litteraly mind blowing. I mean it still feels wrong to play but the point of a pod is direct recording and when its to tape/disk very very few people can tell it it not the real thing.

I did a quick demo of the new model pack amps in a full mix take a listen to this...

Thornley Cover Demo of XT2.01

I second the XTC, minimal tweaks bad ass tone!

David

Polaris20 · #7 08-18-2004, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by track7

Yea the podxt 2.01 is litteraly mind blowing. I mean it still feels wrong to play but the point of a pod is direct recording and when its to tape/disk very very few people can tell it it not the real thing.

I did a quick demo of the new model pack amps in a full mix take a listen to this...

Thornley Cover Demo of XT2.01

I second the XTC, minimal tweaks bad ass tone!

David

Even when I only had the POD 1, I barely ever brought my amp (Flextone XL, later a Spider II) to jams.

Now I probably never will. I'll get the Shortboard, and call it a day. The only time I'll ever use my Spider is at home or at a jam session that doesn't have a PA.

I still love my SPider II though, and won't be selling it any time soon.

The L6 Edit software is a must with the XT. The same flexibility as Native Instruments' Guitar Rig, but of course the XT sounds 10x better.

Plus since it's hardware, there's no load on the CPU. Which means I can use it with my 1.3Ghz laptop with no problems.

ibzbr · #8 08-18-2004, 02:21 PM

may I ask you how much you guys paid for XT ?? I'll be buying one on the following weeks, but I wanna check the best prices

LGMT · #9 08-18-2004, 06:14 PM

Yeah..... how much for the Xt with new firmware ????

Gilberto, quanta tá um áí ?
Aqui em BHsai por uns 2700, muito caro.

microdmitry · #10 08-18-2004, 06:51 PM

They're $299 in the US. Model packs are $50 each, or $100 for all three. Basically you'll need at least two packs (amps), so it makes sense to buy all three and get the FX pack "for free". The reason why you need two is because Line 6 is a bunch of sly bastards and instead of putting all the good amps into one model pack they've spread them accross the two, so you HAVE to have both. You do want that Bogner Extacy, don't you?

The model packs basically turn your PODxt into a "mini Vetta" model-wise.

Two hands31 · #11 08-18-2004, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by track7

Yea the podxt 2.01 is litteraly mind blowing. I mean it still feels wrong to play but the point of a pod is direct recording and when its to tape/disk very very few people can tell it it not the real thing.

I did a quick demo of the new model pack amps in a full mix take a listen to this...

Thornley Cover Demo of XT2.01

I second the XTC, minimal tweaks bad ass tone!

David

Very cool, but the chorus isn't quite right

The tones are amazing though

Carlo · #12 08-19-2004, 12:33 AM

cool, maybe it's time to ditch my old POD

davester1234 · #13 08-19-2004, 03:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by track7

w model pack amps in a full mix take a listen to this...

Thornley Cover Demo of XT2.01

I

Dude, that demo's off the hook.

So, the Pod 2.0 and the podxt 2.0/01 are two different beasts right? I think I need to buy one, because I'm going off to a dorm in September.

Podxt seems like a good idea.

microdmitry · #14 08-19-2004, 03:21 AM

PODxt 2.01 is the "regular" PODxt with v2.01 firmware. They've completely re-done cabinet simulators (and a few models it seems). They've also added a 4 band parametric EQ that works and ability to upload more models, including high-end stuff like Bogner, Cornford and Diezel. Now I don't know if their Diezel sounds like a real one (I've decided that $4K heads are out of my reach until I learn to play like Himself), but it's pretty good on its own, too, and so is Extacy.

I wish they'd release a "DIY kit" for amp builders like myself so that one could experiment and create their own models, or even build models based on existing circuitry (that's freely available on the 'net). I understand that their models don't emulate individual components of an amp of course (that would require a lot more processing power), but still in the back of my mind I think this is possible. I'd happily shell out another 200-300 bucks for something like this.

RSVampire · #15 08-19-2004, 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by microdmitry

I understand that their models don't emulate individual components of an amp of course (that would require a lot more processing power), but still in the back of my mind I think this is possible. I'd happily shell out another 200-300 bucks for something like this.

I greatly approve of that idea. If "tone" is something we are all chasing why not make it a little easier by letting US decide what to use and how to use it. right on microdmitry!