Zoom G3 vs Pod HD .... Anyone gone head to head with these?

toneseek

Senior Member
Messages
719
I don't get this at all, and I use my HD500 exclusively with Sennheiser HD201 headphones. Sounds awesome. No fizz. No boom. They have a nominal impendance of 24 "measly" ohms. Not 150-600.

Some of the best, most even-sounding headphones I've ever had. I think the most important "EQ" to dial in on the HD series is the cab and mic choice. I've found the Greenback 25 to be useful across models and you just adjust the mic to taste. I like the 409, personally.
100-600 ohms is very high, a lot of great headphones with lower ohms and most common ones 24-32-64, a few 99/100 ohms, so I think they are just trying to excuse themselves if anyone finds the tone lacking via headphones - in other words, blame the customer's headphones not the Line 6 gear - just my guess and too bad
 

daacrusher2001

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
5,976
So, a week into the G3...only played it a couple of hours - compared to my HD500 it's waaayyyyyyyy simpler! Just super easy to select some usable sounds.

HD500 sounded better tho' - but was so freakin complicated I lost interest.

Not sure about the G3 amps...they sound too digital, more than the HD amp models. I have to spend some time to see how to get usable sounds. I'm sure I need to read some suggestions on parameters and order of fx.

Honestly, for what I need it for, it is so much easier to use that it makes the HD obsolete for me.

When you don't select an amp on the G3 - what is it emulating?

Haven't stuck it in front of an amp yet - just ran it through a powered 12" monitor.
 

Gtrman100

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
1,843
So, a week into the G3...only played it a couple of hours - compared to my HD500 it's waaayyyyyyyy simpler! Just super easy to select some usable sounds.

HD500 sounded better tho' - but was so freakin complicated I lost interest.

Not sure about the G3 amps...they sound too digital, more than the HD amp models. I have to spend some time to see how to get usable sounds. I'm sure I need to read some suggestions on parameters and order of fx.

Honestly, for what I need it for, it is so much easier to use that it makes the HD obsolete for me.

When you don't select an amp on the G3 - what is it emulating?

Haven't stuck it in front of an amp yet - just ran it through a powered 12" monitor.
If a complicated signal chain isn't for you, why did you get the 500? A 300 or 400 was engineered for people like you that don't want to dive deep. The 500 has many "traps" that can get you into trouble if you're not willing to spend a good bit of time learning about the box.

I'd swap the 500 if I were you for one of those.
 

Souper

Member
Messages
650
If a complicated signal chain isn't for you, why did you get the 500? A 300 or 400 was engineered for people like you that don't want to dive deep. The 500 has many "traps" that can get you into trouble if you're not willing to spend a good bit of time learning about the box.

I'd swap the 500 if I were you for one of those.
I had a HD300, and by comparison to the g5 its very hard to edit; menus and far too many parameters. Its all down to the requirement to model old technology. In the g5 at least you have a knob to twiddle.

Im afraid valve emulation is holding us back, but its probably financial suicide to not do it. For me there are a few very fundamental tones, and most tones are made up from some superposition of them. If I were to design a device Id allow exactly that. I can imagine a principle component analysis successfully identifying the main differences between tone types, and allowing us to quickly add them in appropriate portions. I think thats what the Boss GT does to some extent with its EZ tone.

Emulating valves with modern technology is like emulating the old 8-bit computers with a 64 bit machine; its OK for nostalgia, but its not what the new machine should mostly be used for. But while we are so stuck in the past, at least lets make it simple to be stuck there!
 

virtuzoso

Member
Messages
17
I've owned a G3 for ever a year and a HD500 for about two weeks now. The G3 is awesome for its size and price and is a huge amount of bang for your buck. It is very easy to use and It has some really unique amp models and some really great effects. I think it works best as a pedal board for an existing rig or as a really nice practice tool or for home demos. I would not base a rig around it since its very limited in switching capabilities.

The PodHD however, while being more expensive and more complicated, I am much happier with. I have more control over things, more diversity in the overall setup and you definitely can base an entire rig around it. It is not as easy or as portable as the G3 but imo, after investing some time into it and getting to know it, I think its worth the payoff.

It's really a win/win situation- modelers are better than ever now and anyone that is looking into can't really lose- you just have to find the one thats right for you
 

Gtrman100

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
1,843
I had a HD300, and by comparison to the g5 its very hard to edit; menus and far too many parameters. Its all down to the requirement to model old technology. In the g5 at least you have a knob to twiddle.

Im afraid valve emulation is holding us back, but its probably financial suicide to not do it. For me there are a few very fundamental tones, and most tones are made up from some superposition of them. If I were to design a device Id allow exactly that. I can imagine a principle component analysis successfully identifying the main differences between tone types, and allowing us to quickly add them in appropriate portions. I think thats what the Boss GT does to some extent with its EZ tone.

Emulating valves with modern technology is like emulating the old 8-bit computers with a 64 bit machine; its OK for nostalgia, but its not what the new machine should mostly be used for. But while we are so stuck in the past, at least lets make it simple to be stuck there!
I think you're right that there are a few fundamental tones, but that's like saying there are only a few primary colors- red, yellow and blue. It's the combination and modification of those colors that give you the whole palette, and that's what creates our individual tonal identity. I'm not sure where you're going with the nostalgia riff: guitar amps are basically analog devices- increasing the amplitude of a waveform. They're not synthesizers, but there are many way's to do that with a guitar too.

The fact that most of us like the sound of tube amps is a cultural thing, but if you can come up with something out of the box that's the next big leap forward in guitar tones, I'm all for it!
 

Souper

Member
Messages
650
I think you're right that there are a few fundamental tones, but that's like saying there are only a few primary colors- red, yellow and blue. It's the combination and modification of those colors that give you the whole palette, and that's what creates our individual tonal identity. I'm not sure where you're going with the nostalgia riff: guitar amps are basically analog devices- increasing the amplitude of a waveform. They're not synthesizers, but there are many way's to do that with a guitar too.

The fact that most of us like the sound of tube amps is a cultural thing, but if you can come up with something out of the box that's the next big leap forward in guitar tones, I'm all for it!
Bang on with the primary colour example. The problem at the moment is that we are anchored to parameters that relate to old fashioned technology. Those parameters are highly interactive, and the number of them make tweaking the tones more difficult than they need to be. The parameters we adjust with modern technology should relate directly to a tone quality, and should be independent. This is exactly like adding the primary colours to make a colour. They are entirely independent, so adjusting one does not effect the other. That, I think, is the way to go with digital fx. A complete set of orthogonal sound qualities; a bit mathematical, but I am a fizzycist.

Edit: Sorry, I are a fizzycist.
 
Last edited:

rayman147

Member
Messages
44
Hi Jim, first off - you are an incredibly gifted player! LOVE your music. With that said, I thought I'd chime in with a solution that worked for me as I was similarly tempted by the simplicity and quality of the recent Zoom stuff. I have a Zoom multistomp (MS-100BT - $150, but you could also use the $99 MS50G) in the FX loop of the HD. They use the same chipset/software as the G3/5. It's transparent, sounds great and offers many effects not present on the HD/M series. In my opinion I prefer the cab sims on the HD but the Zoom amps are interesting and you can use them as preamps into the HD cabs. It also only takes up the space of a single stompbox which is nice.

For the money (considering you already have mastered using the POD) it's not a bad way to feed the G.A.S. ;)
 

alp

Member
Messages
519
In my opinion I prefer the cab sims on the HD but the Zoom amps are interesting and you can use them as preamps into the HD cabs.
I also wished it was possible but it is not. On Pod HD, if you want the cab, you have to chose an amp... same as the Zoom.
 

rayman147

Member
Messages
44
Thanks alp... you're right. You know what they say about assuming things... wow. Sorry for the inaccurate info! That's a bummer...
 

alp

Member
Messages
519
Thanks alp... you're right. You know what they say about assuming things... wow. Sorry for the inaccurate info! That's a bummer...
It's ok my friend :beer.. I also thought i could use external preamps with pod hd's cabs, then i a was surprised it was not possible. Even the old POD Farm has a "power amp" model in the amp models list, that lets you use cab models alone. I made a lot of recordings that way; sending my real amps preamps through Pod Farm for just using cab, mic and reverb with very good results.
 

rayman147

Member
Messages
44
:beer right back at'cha. Thanks... hopefully that's something that will make an appearance in a future firmware update (to both Zoom and Line6 devices). The way things are progressing, with more and more modeling options crammed into smaller form factors, it would be nice to have that as an option to accommodate these new toys. I play a JTV connected via VDI so I'm not likely to move away from a Line6 device as my primary floorboard. The flexibility to mix & match internal and outboard cabs or preamps would be awesome.

All things considered, I'm blown away by all the options on the table with the current gen. tech... I took the Zoom MultiStomp alone the other night to jam with friends (at our church) and was able to plug in Variax>Zoom>DI>Front of House and it sounded great. Everything fit into the Line6 gig bag. Crazy.
 

Soundhound

Member
Messages
2,276
I'm interesting in the G3 purely as part of a pedalboard. My one question is that since you can have 6 effects live, and three screens to edit them on, it would be great if the scroll function (if I'm understanding correctly how that works) were avaiable by footswitch(es). That way you could have six effects reachable by foot. The way it is now, it seems like you'd be having to kneel all the time to scroll in order to access some of the effects in the chain.

If so, maybe zoom will be bringing this out in a newer model?
 

RLD

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
7,846
My one question is that since you can have 6 effects live, and three screens to edit them on, it would be great if the scroll function (if I'm understanding correctly how that works) were avaiable by footswitch(es). That way you could have six effects reachable by foot. The way it is now, it seems like you'd be having to kneel all the time to scroll in order to access some of the effects in the chain.

If so, maybe zoom will be bringing this out in a newer model?
You can scroll with the foot switches.
 

Will Chen

Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
6,594
I'm interesting in the G3 purely as part of a pedalboard. My one question is that since you can have 6 effects live, and three screens to edit them on, it would be great if the scroll function (if I'm understanding correctly how that works) were avaiable by footswitch(es). That way you could have six effects reachable by foot. The way it is now, it seems like you'd be having to kneel all the time to scroll in order to access some of the effects in the chain.

If so, maybe zoom will be bringing this out in a newer model?
Scroll is available by footswitch.
 

Chrisk-K

Member
Messages
191
I had a G3 and sold it. With my GT-100 & POD HD300, I don't need any stomp pedal or modeling gear for the time being.
 

Soundhound

Member
Messages
2,276
Thanks. I took a look at the manual for rev 2 and it says you scroll by hitting two of the footswitches simultaneously. Has anyone tried that/does it work ok, or is it easy to turn an effect on or off by mistake when you're trying to scroll?


Scroll is available by footswitch.
 

RLD

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
7,846
Yes, we've done it.
I get around tap dancing on the unit by putting the fx I don't mess with in the last 3 slots.
For instance I leave reverb, delay and the amp block on all the time so those can be hidden.
I put a compressor, dirt box and say chorus in the visible 3 so I can turn them on or off as need be.
If you are a person who needs to turn on and off more than 3 fx constantly, look for another unit...like the G5.
 

Soundhound

Member
Messages
2,276
I don't know what kind of person I am, but I know I don't want something as big as the g5. I may give a g3 a whirl though.
 
Last edited:




Trending Topics

Top