Zoom G9.2tt V G5 ?

Discussion in 'Digital & Modeling Gear' started by lenster, Apr 4, 2015.

  1. lenster

    lenster Member

    Messages:
    705
    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Location:
    Newcastle Australia
    Looking to grab another G9.
    I've owned this twice in the past and really liked it.
    It's only for rehearsals and recording and possible small gigs.
    Back in the day i used it in the loop of a peavey classic and it sounded great, better than the pOD XT live that was out at the same time.
    Any way my question is how does it compare to the G5?
    I have used the G3 but thought it lacked in comparison to the G9.
    Is the G5 similar, would i be disappointed?
    or should I just grab another G9?
     
  2. colonoscopotamus

    colonoscopotamus Member

    Messages:
    589
    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    It would help if you described how you thought the g3 lacked in comparison to the g9. Was it an issue with features? Sound quality? Effect choice?
     
  3. lenster

    lenster Member

    Messages:
    705
    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Location:
    Newcastle Australia
    FX wise , no issue, modelling yes. Maybe it was because i new my way around the G9 having spent a long time with it. To me the G3 just didn't sound as good, but i only had it a short while and never really gave it a chance. I know it has the ZFX IV chip and processing should be better , but my ears told me otherwise.
    In saying that I haven't played a G9 for over 4 years.
     
  4. colonoscopotamus

    colonoscopotamus Member

    Messages:
    589
    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    Wellx as far as I know, the modeling on the g3 is the same as on the g5. It was the weak point for me when I had a g5, but I found it to be a fantastic all-in-one effects box running into a clean tube amp, or in the return of a channel switcher. I've not played the g9, so I can't comment on the differences between the two units' modeling capabilities.
     
  5. +NRG

    +NRG Member

    Messages:
    460
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Location:
    NY
    I went through this recently. Got rid of my old G7.1ut and picked up a G3 thinking it's got to have better modeling... I spent a lot of time with the G3 and couldn't get close to to my old G7.1ut. The cab sims are really nasally and sound exaggerated (comb filter...). Picked up a used G7.1ut and it was just like I remembered. It doesn't have the chain/FX flexibility of the newer versions but the sound quality is superior to me.
     
  6. Peter Leth

    Peter Leth Member

    Messages:
    24
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2015
    Location:
    Brazil
    In my opinion, if you liked the G9 better than the G3, you should not bother with the G5, since they use essentialy the same technology. I never played the older generation from zoom, but I was reading the G9.2tt manual yesterday, and found that most of the effects on the G5/G3 seems to be the same from the last gen. It seems that only the amp models have been changed and very few new effects has been added.. I can't say anything about the processing power, but I'll guess that the ZFX IV being more powerfull is what makes it possible to use the effects in any order you want, and probably because the new amp models have more complex algorithms, what doesn't necessarily make them better.
     
  7. MONSTER ZERO

    MONSTER ZERO Member

    Messages:
    1,864
    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2008
    Location:
    Anywhere but Here
    I can only echo just about everything here but I will add that I use a G2 and not a G7 or G9 but I like even the G2 better than the G3 or 5. I had the G3 twice and the G5 once and felt the same way as the OP.
     
  8. jerryratpack

    jerryratpack Gold Supporting Member

    Messages:
    1,684
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2011
    I don't own a G9, but Going from a full all in one like the G9, to a G5 , I would give a nod to the G9 as well.

    Just the form , fit and, function , so to speak , with the dual pedals, foot switches and the ease of use, (from your years of experience with it ) i would stay with the zoom G9.

    I have a G5 , but I can't get used to the limited foot switches and having to double footswitch to scroll, etc, has made it sit in the corner unused for the most part.

    I understand the amp modeling is supposedly better, but if you didn't hear it on the G3 , most likely you won't hear it on the G5.
     
  9. johnnymegabyte

    johnnymegabyte Member

    Messages:
    610
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2011
    Location:
    Scarberia
    I went from a G7 (2008) to a G5 (Summer 2012). I play roughly 100 gigs a year, studio work, demos etc
    I pulled out the G7 a few times in the last few years, and sure a few patches I was using still sound great, but G5 has a few advantages. That being the setting up of multiple FX in a patch, and using them like stomps, not limited to just 1 FX. G5 has a better PC software editor.
    I made the G5 sound the way I wanted. Mostly Classic Rock. And surprising the "Marshall" tones I was hoping for I got out of other Amp Models. Shocked me, but it works
     
  10. roachone

    roachone Member

    Messages:
    596
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2010
    Location:
    north carolina
    I have had 2 zoom g3's and the G5. Have owned a G9 since 2007. The only one I have now is the G9. Still think (with lots of tweaking) it is one of the best floor processors I have ever had. I really wish Zoom would make an Updated version Of it. Just love the layout on the G9.
     
    yanakosk likes this.
  11. lenster

    lenster Member

    Messages:
    705
    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Location:
    Newcastle Australia
    Thats interesting to read the majority of responses regarding the modelling not being any better.
    Just makes my decision much easier.
    G9 is a fun unit with heaps of tones.
     
  12. Technica

    Technica Member

    Messages:
    599
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    I have a G3 and a G5 and love them as FRFR setups. The G5 especially.
    I actually have G7.1ut that is still new in the box that I never touched. I bought it years ago and ended up not even using it because I was already using my RP1000 at the time and was happy with it. If the G7 is that good, I'm tempted to try it LOL.
     
  13. Doode

    Doode Member

    Messages:
    919
    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    I had a G7 before the G5. I still have a G2 - which sounds the same as the G7, provided you replicate the same settings.

    My opinions:

    Modeling... let's put it this way: The best amps in the G3/5 are better than the best amps in the G2/7/9, and the the worst amps are also better than the G2/7/9's worst ones. In between, there's some overlap.
    The G3/5's overall voicing might be a bit top heavy compared to the 2/7/9, but that can be dealt with.
    The cabsims in the G3/5 might not be the very best, but I think they're usable. Try different combinations. You might be surprised. Cabsims in the G2/7/9 .... c'mon... :-S

    FX. About the same quality in both generations. However, there are quite a few more in the G3/G5, and they're more tweakable... and freely placeable.

    Tweaking. Setting up a patch and tweaking settings with the G3/G5 is a breeze... and a PITA with the G7/9 (G2 is easy, too). I remember that in order to get an 8th-note delay with the G7, I had to turn the knob endlessly to get over 5000ms, as it would advance in a linear way... like 50ms per turn or not even. With the G3/G5 it jumps depending on how fast you turn the knob. Also, I've never quite understood why the G7/9 had a mix of endless encoders and POD 1 knobs.

    Live operation. Once the patch is created, the G7/9 is pretty convenient... separate footswitches for banks, direct access to patches within these, assignable function switch, stompbox-mode. The G3, on the other hand, is near the knuckle, but yeah, it's a small unit. The G5, however, uuuuhhhhh.... don't get me started. You might consider the ashbass hardware-mod, that should set it on par with the G7/9.

    Last thing that might or might not be worth a thought: The G2/7/9 were obviously designed to be primarily used into the front of an amp. The G3/G5 seem to be designed primarily for FRFR-use.

    Personally, I wouldn't go back to the G7. Although it felt kind of more "honest" (maybe because of the higher conversion resolution), it also felt dated.
     
  14. Doode

    Doode Member

    Messages:
    919
    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    And by the way...

    I'm interested. Please elaborate.
     
  15. Mrmeatball

    Mrmeatball Member

    Messages:
    245
    Joined:
    May 3, 2013
    The trick with the G5 is to not push the signal too hard, default amp settings have the master volumes and gain set way too high and make it sound digital, once you dial those back and be more conservative than you would normally you can get some really organic sounds out of it, you don't sacrifice the distortion you're looking for its just that 100% drive on the Marshall for example would be like being able to set the real thing at about 15 on the drive knob
     
  16. Peter Leth

    Peter Leth Member

    Messages:
    24
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2015
    Location:
    Brazil
    One thing i've learned recently with the G5, is that when you want to use a booster in front of the amp, the only way I found to be acceptable is to set the gain to 0. It will thicken the sound nicely while not adding a lot of ugly distorted frequencies to the tone.
     
  17. MONSTER ZERO

    MONSTER ZERO Member

    Messages:
    1,864
    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2008
    Location:
    Anywhere but Here
    This one thing that kind of irks me about modelers. I wish they all reacted just like the amps they are modeling. I find sinilar stuff with the Mustang amp. if I dial it the way I would the real thing I do not get similar results. I can however get great results experimenting with what I would consider "strange" settings so I guess in the end it works out.
     
    yanakosk likes this.
  18. +NRG

    +NRG Member

    Messages:
    460
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Location:
    NY
    Yes, experimenting is key and trying things that might not make sense in the real world...

    The G7.1ut works better for me. You've got to use what ever works for your ears / needs...
     
  19. mattball826

    mattball826 Member

    Messages:
    20,214
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    g9.2tt is a very good pedal. it really takes some tweaking though. a combination of using the right tools and not destroying presets by slamming the gain.

    models like most amp modelers from other companies way exaggerated the gain compared to actual units.

    the thing that killed the 9.2tt wasn't really the sound, it was the usage. copy and paste clipboard crap for a very bad editor really did it in. lack of a good interface option when other similar priced units had that option also knocked it down.

    former band mate ran his 9.2tt with a pair of power engines. it sounded great.

    he said the same. watch when using the peq and other eq functions. iirc 24db gain just in eq, so a little went a long way. kill the gain of the amp model quite a bit and use the tube energ and accel.

    fun unit. not very intuitive, had issues with footswitches and the editor usage was a major pitfall. tube accel and energizer gizmos were cool but worked globally. a lot of people wanted that to be per patch.

    sound wise? in the right hands can be very very good.
     
  20. lenster

    lenster Member

    Messages:
    705
    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Location:
    Newcastle Australia
    I agree here.
    Though i personally never used the editor, never needed too.
    I have a G9 lined up hoping to grab it as soon as some gear is moved on.
    Looking forward to having some fun with it again.
     

Share This Page