Multi effects processor help

[gorkblok]

I like to vary my style every now and again, So I've finally decided to get a multi-effect pedal. The problem is which one? :thwap

Right now I'm in more of a heavy metal hard rock band, And I'm stuck around the 200-300 bucks price range. I was thinking a line 6 floor pod, But might also consider a boss me-70. I need one that has good amp modeling features so I can plug and play from a mixer if I needed to.

Any ideals?

 

[DeanEVO_Dude]

I don't know, but from what I have seen around the Fret, you will probably get recomendations on the Line 6 M13 and M9. You might also want to check out the DigiTech RP500, or the RP1000. Both can be modelers, or simple multi-effects. If I had the money, I would get the RP1000, but it costs more than most of my guitars! LOL
Another advantage to the RP1000 is that it has an effects loop (just like an amp) - really cool!

 

[Tig]

In that price range, check out the Line 6 M9 for just effects, or the new Line 6 POD HD300 if you want some excellent amp modeling in addition to what the M9 offers.

I bought the POD HD500 today (traded in my Digitech RP-255) but won't open the box until this killer headache goes away...

 

[Spudman]

You can pick up a used POD XT Live within your price range. Lots of good sounds come from those units. Takes a bit of tweaking, but what unit doesn't?

 

[FusedGrooves]

ME-50 or the latest model (I think there is now an ME75?)

 

[Katastrophe]

I'm a long time Digitech fan, having had a rack mount as my first processor back in 1992, and an RP 80. The RP 80 fried on me, but it was a lower end unit, cheaply made.

One of my friends had a nicer RP (forget which model) that was more tweakable with the effect parameters. It sounded better to my ears. He still has his, 7 years later, still going strong.

I've played with a couple of floor POD units and like 'em. I've also played with a Vox Tonelab, and those sounded great, too.

The Zoom effects units look good as well.

This is one of those times where you're gonna have to go to a music store and try a couple out. Bring your guitar. "Metal" tones mean different things to different metal players, and your ears may not like what someone else raves about.

 

[wingsdad]

I replaced a gaggle of fx pedals with a Boss ME50 for 6 years and love it. Boss replaced it this past year with the ME70, sacrificing some of the OD/Dist and a few other fx for some amp modeling and preamp control that the ME50 lacks. A used ME50 thus won't meet your need for amp modeling but the ME70, which you've cited as a candidate, might.

But like Kat-man says, best you toss the hypothetical, 'looks good on paper' or 'the reviews are great' stuff aside and go practical - tote your main guitar to a store you can try it out with and other units.

 

[markb]

Think very hard what you need it for. Do you want amp and cabinet simulations or just effects? The Boss units have great fx with lame modelling, the Pods are the opposite (except the HD).

Personally I think the Digitech RP500 and 1000 with their "either/or" approach are very good indeed. They can be a pedalboard (or a whole load of pedalboards, 1 per patch) or a complete tone source with amp models. Program with clean amp models and you can toggle the amps on and off to use the same patch in front of a clean guitar amp or straight to the PA. Darn! I think I just sold myself one :thwap

I think US$300 should get you quite a choice of units. I'd avoid the cheaper models with just up and down buttons for stage use unless you're a "one sound per song" type.

 

[MAXIFUNK]

Boss Me-25 $199.00 Usd I Like It I Own It.

 

[Duffy]

Amp

Gorkblok, you asked for suggestions on a new amp.

I'd suggest at least waiting for the Egnater Tweaker 40 and another Tweaker smaller all tube amp that are about to come out. These are some excellent amps and would be great for metal. They have several switches to change the amp sound around incredibly and go from relatively clean to ultra overdrive Marshall sounds, without pedals, but hte heads have effects loops anyway plus you can hit it harder with an overdrive pedal in front of the input or a boost.

You can try out the excellent Tweaker 15 at a music store and see how awesome this little amp is.

There is a LOT of anticipation regarding the release of the new bigger version heads. If they proove to be like the Tweaker 15 in terms of quality, you may really like it. In this case you "may" not desire to get an expensive multieffects modeling pedal, when the Tweaker amps have so many sounds stock. Plus these are known to be affordable very well built amps.

Hope this idea helps you out with you amp choice, as well as your pedal ideas.

 

[deeaa]

You really need to test them yourself to know...I have had several units from several manufacturers and all have their own sounds and pros and cons. Many swear by digitech, I never played any digitech product I liked. It's very much what you like. But all are, IMO, compromises...If you get a great reverb for instance in one device, then most likely something else on it sucks big time...so for getting exactly what you want, get separate pedals...

 

[Tig]

I bought the POD HD500 today (traded in my Digitech RP-255) but won't open the box until this killer headache goes away...

My very brief review of the POD HD500 for GC:

This is one multi-effects unit that actually lives up to all the hype. With the exception of the Fractal Axe FX (which costs 3 times more), the new HD series has changed how good amp modeling and effects can sound. Think of the difference you saw going from your old CRT TV to HD, and you'll understand why Line 6 chose "HD" as the name. The tone quality, accuracy, and warmth simply can't be described.

All the limitations of the past are now gone. You can finally get the touch sensitivity of a tube amp, as well as the same real world response of tone pot changes that were missing in amp modeling before. Every one of the amps sound just like it should, no exception, no "weak" models! With other amp modeling/multi-FX systems, every guitar you use tends to sound about the same. I've used my P-90, Strat, Tele, and Washburn (2-humbucker) guitars into the 500, and they retain their character.

So, take the M13's many FX boxes and add incredible amps, but WITHOUT adding to it's price, and you get the HD500. Skip the HD300 and try the 400 or 500. You won't be disappointed. You can place the effects, amps (you can put them in parallel) and FX loop in any order. The flexibility is endless.

Using the computer interface makes patch management and editing much easier than just the box. If you don't plan on using the computer, then you'll like the HD400 better, as it is easier to manage directly. POD X3 owners have been happy with their move to the HD's. If you already have a multi-FX, I suggest using GC's trade-in/upgrade promotion to knock a quick $50 off the $500 price.

 

[Eric]

My very brief review of the POD HD500 for GC:

This is one multi-effects unit that actually lives up to all the hype. With the exception of the Fractal Axe FX (which costs 3 times more), the new HD series has changed how good amp modeling and effects can sound. Think of the difference you saw going from your old CRT TV to HD, and you'll understand why Line 6 chose "HD" as the name. The tone quality, accuracy, and warmth simply can't be described.

All the limitations of the past are now gone. You can finally get the touch sensitivity of a tube amp, as well as the same real world response of tone pot changes that were missing in amp modeling before. Every one of the amps sound just like it should, no exception, no "weak" models! With other amp modeling/multi-FX systems, every guitar you use tends to sound about the same. I've used my P-90, Strat, Tele, and Washburn (2-humbucker) guitars into the 500, and they retain their character.

So, take the M13's many FX boxes and add incredible amps, but WITHOUT adding to it's price, and you get the HD500. Skip the HD300 and try the 400 or 500. You won't be disappointed. You can place the effects, amps (you can put them in parallel) and FX loop in any order. The flexibility is endless.

Using the computer interface makes patch management and editing much easier than just the box. If you don't plan on using the computer, then you'll like the HD400 better, as it is easier to manage directly. POD X3 owners have been happy with their move to the HD's. If you already have a multi-FX, I suggest using GC's trade-in/upgrade promotion to knock a quick $50 off the $500 price.

Thanks for the review -- makes me want one for real now!

I do have a couple of questions about this:
1) Why do you say to skip the HD300? It's downright reasonable in cost, and it has all of the amp models, so I thought it looked like a decent option. I'm sure you have an opinion on it, so I was just curious what your experience has been that made you say that.
2) I run Linux, and Line 6 hates Linux, so I probably wouldn't be using the computer connection. What is it about the HD400 that makes it better for managing directly through the unit? I thought it was just the HD500 with fewer options. Can you expand on your statement?

Maybe we should start a new thread for this stuff, but I feel kind of dumb starting a thread for a piece of equipment I don't own...

 

[deeaa]

Hehe, of late it seems to me every conversation converges to computer OS discussion...but this intrigues me: I can dig it if Apple OS is sufficient for some users, and that Linux can work in some machines well, BUT my question is: Whether you run Apple or Linux, why not _also_ run some version of Windows along with it?

I've often run Xp/Linux and back in the day I had like 98, NT and Linux all on the same machine, and latest I had both Vista and Win7 on my machine...currently I have Win7 and Linux but I can't find any use for Linux. I also use a separate program to run certain programs or browser in a closed separate space within Windows, so even if I open a virus-filled file therein, it won't affect the actual OS.

Since there's a zillion programs and devices that only work in Windows, why not also run it along with whatever you like for daily use? Or even run it thru Wine or whatever is the current best win-emulator.

I haven't tried but it seems also Macs work fine with Windows and can also dualboot no problem, as Macs are exactly the same as PC's hardware-wise, only limited to bit older hardware and not supporting everything, so as to first assure everything works 100% before supporting new technology.

So why not? I've been entertaining the idea of running the Mac OS along with Win7 on my PC for a change, I'd like to see how well Cubase works in a Mac & my hardware.

 

[Eric]

Hehe, of late it seems to me every conversation converges to computer OS discussion...but this intrigues me: I can dig it if Apple OS is sufficient for some users, and that Linux can work in some machines well, BUT my question is: Whether you run Apple or Linux, why not _also_ run some version of Windows along with it?

I've often run Xp/Linux and back in the day I had like 98, NT and Linux all on the same machine, and latest I had both Vista and Win7 on my machine...currently I have Win7 and Linux but I can't find any use for Linux. I also use a separate program to run certain programs or browser in a closed separate space within Windows, so even if I open a virus-filled file therein, it won't affect the actual OS.

Since there's a zillion programs and devices that only work in Windows, why not also run it along with whatever you like for daily use? Or even run it thru Wine or whatever is the current best win-emulator.

I haven't tried but it seems also Macs work fine with Windows and can also dualboot no problem, as Macs are exactly the same as PC's hardware-wise, only limited to bit older hardware and not supporting everything, so as to first assure everything works 100% before supporting new technology.

So why not? I've been entertaining the idea of running the Mac OS along with Win7 on my PC for a change, I'd like to see how well Cubase works in a Mac & my hardware.

It makes sense, and in fact I do have a Win XP partition on my computer that I use for recording stuff.

What it comes down to for me is that if something only works in Windows, I have found empirically that I just won't use that thing very much. It's not me being stubborn or anything, just lazy and unwilling to always reboot and flip-flop between Windows and Linux just to use a particular piece of equipment. I had a Line 6 interface and had downloaded Pod Farm for free, but I sold it off because I just wasn't willing to always boot into Windows to futz around with some amp models.

I know the whole thing seems ridiculous, but it's a discovery I've come to terms with in my life. I don't make a habit of flipping between Windows and Linux because there's not that much reason to use Windows, so it makes it that much more annoying when I have to use Windows just to interface with a particular piece of hardware.

And....I'm done.

 

[Tig]

I do have a couple of questions about this:
1) Why do you say to skip the HD300? It's downright reasonable in cost, and it has all of the amp models, so I thought it looked like a decent option. I'm sure you have an opinion on it, so I was just curious what your experience has been that made you say that.
2) I run Linux, and Line 6 hates Linux, so I probably wouldn't be using the computer connection. What is it about the HD400 that makes it better for managing directly through the unit? I thought it was just the HD500 with fewer options. Can you expand on your statement?

Good questions.
The only reason I don't like the 300 as much is that it is harder to control on the fly with your feet because they left off some of the switches. This means you have to use your hands more, which isn't always an option on stage, for instance. Not a deal breaker, I guess. You can create a "set list" with your favorite patches in any order for ease of navigation.

For your needs (no PC/MAC), I'd say that both the 300 and 400 will be easier to manage than the 500. Why? The 300/400's have a few more control knobs that the 500 doesn't, like FX1 thru FX4 controls, FX On/Off, and amp gain styles.

The 500 is more menu driven. It is also a bit more complicated with double the simultaneous effects and the parallel amps (which is what makes it so special). It also has a much greater preset library space, which is a bit harder/slower to navigate using the on-board screen.

So, why would anyone need 8 simultaneous effects? Why not just 4? Well, if you use the wah, it takes up a spot, so does the reverb, delay, looper, and distortion/OD. OK, take 1 or 2 out to free up a spot for a modulation box. Certainly this doesn't limit your pallet for most of the time, but occasionally, you are left with too few options. The 500 allows you to route your signal chain in any way you want, just as if you have an unlimited collection of actual stomp boxes worth thousands.

No matter what, each of the models offers some excellent real world tones that are very useful. Sure, like always there are some goofy factory presets that are useless, but you can modify them and save to your personal patches.

 

[Tig]

Maybe a cheap laptop would do the trick.

 

[Eric]

The only reason I don't like the 300 as much is that it is harder to control on the fly with your feet because they left off some of the switches. This means you have to use your hands more, which isn't always an option on stage, for instance. Not a deal breaker, I guess. You can create a "set list" with your favorite patches in any order for ease of navigation.

It looks like the only buttons missing are those up and down switches, which I'm assuming go from one preset or FX grouping to another. Is that right? Looks like they're replaced by hitting a couple of pedals simultaneously. Other than that, I think the only differences are less FX for the 300 and no effects loop.

Just trying to wrap my head around the different models and features, I guess. I feel like the 500 might actually be a bit too powerful for my brain, and I'd get lost in the menus.

Not that I'm going to get one or anything....:notme