# POD HD500x?



## kchay (Jul 10, 2013)

Overview | POD HD500X | Line 6

Found this on the Line6 website.
What do you guys reckon? Worth waiting for, or not?


----------



## GunpointMetal (Jul 10, 2013)

really though...why line 6? If they felt the need to repackage the HD500 at least add IR loading, or fix the EQ's, or separate the pre-amps from the cabs, or make the looper more useable, or etc. etc. ETC!

seems like a waste of extra DSP if all it can do is allow for use of any of all 8 effects and that's really the only difference between the new and old.


----------



## GreatWhiteYeti (Jul 10, 2013)

I wish they would just make a Vetta III


----------



## Runander (Jul 10, 2013)

I could see myself getting that solely based on the fact that the 500X has a proper usb port, which the regular 500 does not.


----------



## spawnofthesith (Jul 10, 2013)

Runander said:


> I could see myself getting that solely based on the fact that the 500X has a proper usb port, which the regular 500 does not.



How so?


----------



## Spinedriver (Jul 10, 2013)

It looks like it's the same as what happened with the XT/X3. If you already have one, it probably wouldn't be worth it to buy the new one. I'm thinking that this new version is to try and lure the 'fence sitters' who haven't quite managed to pull the trigger yet.


----------



## shanejohnson02 (Jul 10, 2013)

Runander said:


> I could see myself getting that solely based on the fact that the 500X has a proper usb port, which the regular 500 does not.



Actually, it does. I recorded with mine via USB all the time. It's the exact same type of USB plug, too.








I won't be getting one. Just ditched my 500 for a Pro, since the MIDI wasn't up to par. Sure, you could change patches on the POD itself, but the ability to send PC/CC and FULLY control my whole setup was totally lacking. In fact, it would only turn on/off the first 4 loops of my GCX. The last 4 would have been controlled by the patch change footswitches, which doesn't really work, since the footswitch had to be programmed "on". Well, when the patch change switch is "on", it changed patches. Imagine that!!

I guess what I'm saying is, if they could find a way to decouple the MIDI output from the footswitches, and have all PC/CC messages sent via software regardless of footswitch on/off state....that would be a huge improvement.


----------



## deathbyguitar (Jul 10, 2013)

Still no Mesa Mark IIc+ or IV models so I don't care.


----------



## Runander (Jul 10, 2013)

shanejohnson02 said:


> Actually, it does. I recorded with mine via USB all the time. It's the exact same type of USB plug, too.



Hmm, that's weird. Mine doesn't look like that at all. On my POD the four pins are visible and gets bended every now and then. 

Found a picture of what mine looks like.






That's why I may consider the new one.


----------



## Mordacain (Jul 10, 2013)

deathbyguitar said:


> Still no Mesa Mark IIc+ or IV models so I don't care.



That's kind of where I am with it. Since picking up my Quad I've not even touched the HD500 anymore.


----------



## shanejohnson02 (Jul 10, 2013)

Runander said:


> Hmm, that's weird. Mine doesn't look like that at all. On my POD the four pins are visible and gets bended every now and then.
> 
> Found a picture of what mine looks like.
> 
> ...



Wow...that one looks broken. Did you buy it used or dent/scratch? I know it's probably way too late to return it, but you may be able to get it repaired pretty easily / cheaply.


----------



## Runander (Jul 10, 2013)

shanejohnson02 said:


> Wow...that one looks broken. Did you buy it used or dent/scratch? I know it's probably way too late to return it, but you may be able to get it repaired pretty easily / cheaply.



Well, it was a display unit in the store so it has probably been through a lot. And I got it when they had kinda a supersale, I got it with a 40% discount. Don't think there is much warranty to talk about


----------



## SkullCrusher (Jul 11, 2013)

Looks a lot better than the last one. The one had felt really low quality


----------



## matisq (Jul 11, 2013)




----------



## noUser01 (Jul 11, 2013)

Just let it load IR's and be done with it. If you're not going to do that then I really don't care about the "upgrade". If you want to compete, listen to your customers. Scratch that, if you want to _succeed_, listen to your customers.


----------



## SjPedro (Jul 11, 2013)

what "worries" me is firmware upgrades....the POD HD500 is going to be ignored I guess from now on


----------



## Kroaton (Jul 11, 2013)

No IR's, no interface upgrade, no killer new features. Line 6 is really falling behind the game.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jul 11, 2013)

GunpointMetal said:


> really though...why line 6? If they felt the need to repackage the HD500 at least add IR loading, or fix the EQ's, or separate the pre-amps from the cabs, or make the looper more useable, or etc. etc. ETC!
> 
> seems like a waste of extra DSP if all it can do is allow for use of any of all 8 effects and that's really the only difference between the new and old.


 
Yup...


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jul 11, 2013)

Spinedriver said:


> It looks like it's the same as what happened with the XT/X3. If you already have one, it probably wouldn't be worth it to buy the new one. I'm thinking that this new version is to try and lure the 'fence sitters' who haven't quite managed to pull the trigger yet.


 
And what about this upgrade would lead them to want this over a Fractal, Kemper or any other unit? If they didn't want the HD500 before, I don't see how this helps...


----------



## kchay (Jul 11, 2013)

Runander said:


> Hmm, that's weird. Mine doesn't look like that at all. On my POD the four pins are visible and gets bended every now and then.
> 
> Found a picture of what mine looks like.
> 
> ...



I had that on my POD (X3 Live), and it's bent out of shape totally.
Need decent tweezers to get at them. But for now, I'm using a mixer and the direct out from the POD.

Why can't they use a normal USB port on it?


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jul 11, 2013)

Quick question... Those complaining about the USB. I'm just a bit curious how ppl keep damaging that port. Mine sits beneath my desk and stays plugged in via USB for convenience and I turn it on/off via a power strip.


----------



## slayest (Jul 11, 2013)

kchay said:


> Why can't they use a normal USB port on it?


 
In a product that simulates amps, stimulate stomp boxs, ... how can you expect the real thing here?


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jul 11, 2013)




----------



## MWC262 (Jul 11, 2013)

Come on guys the HD500X has a bunch of sweet upgrades compared to the boring plain HD500!

-Those red lights around the footswitches
-Cool looking font and numbers
-Jet Black!
-"rugged design" (its made out of Superman's skin)
-And it has an X in the name! It's way more "BR00TAL" than the HD500


----------



## Poltergeist (Jul 11, 2013)

No IR loading capabilities is a huge drag... That seriously would have probably helped hype this new version to sell way more than what they probably will... The only advantage I see here is creating dual amp patches, and not having to worry about running into the DSP thresh hold. Really, who at Line 6 thought this was a good idea?


----------



## meambobbo (Jul 11, 2013)

first, the USB thing - 4 pins without a block is not how the HD500 ships - that's a BROKEN port. The HD500's USB ports were notoriously fragile. Mine hasn't broken, but I've heard way too many stories of broken ones without admitted abuse (such as stepping on the cable while plugged in. We have yet to see how the 500X fares, but hopefully they improved that with the other "ruggedizations".

lacking features - yes, definitely a sore point, but on a positive note, when (if) we see new features, they will likely be deployed to the entire line, not just the 500X.

better footswitches were also an improvement - heard numerous stories of dead footswitches that need to be replaced or repaired.

more DSP - this is actually a very frequent complaint, and the solution of a more powerful cheap is the simple and easy way to fix it. it's a shame this wasn't the feature from the get-go, but for some it's definitely usable. I use dual amps on almost all my patches (which is actually to use dual cabs to make up for the lack of IR support...), so I get the error on at least half my patches. But that extra EQ or a mild reverb/delay isn't enough to make me switch devices.

so like most L6 announcements, I'm all like STOOPID!!!! then like WELL I GUESS then like OK I GUESS THAT'S A GOOD IMPROVEMENT BUT WHERE THE .... IS THE MIND-BLOWING SHIT I WANT OUT OF THE CAPABLE UNIT I ALREADY OWN


----------



## kchay (Jul 11, 2013)

Konfyouzd said:


> Quick question... Those complaining about the USB. I'm just a bit curious how ppl keep damaging that port. Mine sits beneath my desk and stays plugged in via USB for convenience and I turn it on/off via a power strip.



I'm retarded, and pretty sure I just stuck the cable in wrong every time I put it in.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 11, 2013)

It's a small incremental "upgrade", I doubt it's meant to be Earth shattering. It seems to be the same price as the HD500, so it's not like they're charging big bucks here for the new one. 

If anything, look on the bright side, used HD500s will probably be a little cheaper now.


----------



## mongey (Jul 11, 2013)

Runander said:


> Well, it was a display unit in the store so it has probably been through a lot. And I got it when they had kinda a supersale, I got it with a 40% discount. Don't think there is much warranty to talk about


 

that is broken . the middle connector has broken off 

happened to a cheap midi keybord I had


extra DSP is nice and all but not a reason to updgrade from a currnet HD500 . unless they have features they will update via firmware that will need it . Ie IR loading


----------



## GreatWhiteYeti (Jul 11, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> If anything, look on the bright side, used HD500s will probably be a little cheaper now.





sold mine in the Nick-O-Time!


----------



## SjPedro (Jul 11, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> It's a small incremental "upgrade", I doubt it's meant to be Earth shattering. It seems to be the same price as the HD500, so it's not like they're charging big bucks here for the new one.
> 
> If anything, look on the bright side, used HD500s will probably be a little cheaper now.



So I guess the general opinion here is: just get the normal HD500 used for cheaper...hmm guess I have to renegotiate a few things then


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 11, 2013)

SjPedro said:


> \just get the normal HD500 used for cheaper if you're not into serious effects stacking



That would be a bit more accurate.


----------



## noUser01 (Jul 11, 2013)

This is just disappointing purely because I love Line 6 and what it to do well. An HD500 with IR loading? I would buy that in an instant, despite the fact that I have an AxeFX II. I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way. It would be a cheap and KILLER mobile/backup that's incredible for metal. I don't know any product on the market that checks off the boxes of cheap, mobile, has presets, has MIDI, has this many outputs, is great sounding, and does metal. But without IR loading it's just not as appealing to the tweakers, or just the metal and home studio guys in general.


----------



## SjPedro (Jul 12, 2013)

the thing is i am still worried about the so called "more processing" power. maybe the firmware updates that will come for the 500X will probably include our white whale in modelling. the Mesa Boogie Mark IV or II C+


----------



## Shask (Jul 12, 2013)

meambobbo said:


> so like most L6 announcements, I'm all like STOOPID!!!! then like WELL I GUESS then like OK I GUESS THAT'S A GOOD IMPROVEMENT BUT WHERE THE .... IS THE MIND-BLOWING SHIT I WANT OUT OF THE CAPABLE UNIT I ALREADY OWN



That is kind of how I felt. I got sick of waiting for something amazing to happen so I recently sold my HD500 and Axe-FX Standard and committed to a Axe-FX II.

The HD500 is a GREAT unit. What is annoying is there are some very minor things they could do to make it an AMAZING unit. Simple things that should be WAY easier than some of the "far fetched" stuff people request. Things like fixing the internal levels/clipping, fixing the weird input/dual rig weirdness, one good parametric EQ instead of all of the weird half-ass EQs that can be clipped, etc.... The HD500 is a great unit, but there are just many weird things that you have to get used to... and you have to "tweak around them" to reach its potential.

The HD500X is just kind of a let down knowing that they have so far ignored the top 10 things their customers have been complaining about for 3 years. They could have done so much more with a "relaunch"....


----------



## leechmasterargentina (Jul 12, 2013)

Yesterday in the Line 6 facebook page, they posted pics of the HD500X. Many people said the same things we're saying here: "That's not real upgrade" "Thanks Line 6, I bought my HD500 a week ago" and occasionally a "I'll buy it!".

Sometimes, someone at Line 6 answered a few questions. As for firmware upgrades, they said that the HD500X is part of the HD family, so any firmware upgrades will go for all HD units. I don't know if I should believe them or not, cause they've stuck in that department for almost a year, or maybe that's how firmware upgrades are. Still, I believe that is possible because for what've seen, they haven't changed the programming structure or firmware of the HD500X, just added more DSP which is hardware. Pretty much like upgrading your computer processor without changing OS.

Overall, I guess that this has been a bad step for Line 6, unless sales say otherwise, but as many say here, there's nothing new on this, rather than processor and footswitches. I only have one or 2 patches using dual amps, and I can see how limiting is, but the fact is that when I play with my band at rehearsals or live, I use the Power Amp section of my amp, and the POD has a single amp emulation accompanied with whatever effect I use. Sounds great and never reached to DSP limit this way.

When I record at home using the Direct/Studio mode, I also use only one amp because I double my tracks. I won't have any problems there.

As for the footswitches, it's been 10 - 11 months since I have it. So far they've worked fine. I press them VERY gently because the microswitches inside are like the ones inside a mouse (tiny plastic things), which can't be compared to a good rough single pedal. Before the HD500 I had a Korg AX3000G, which many users also complained about footswitches not working and such. I had that unit for about 4 years, used it at home, rehearsals, studio and live, and never had problems. Again, I always stepped it very gently. That's the key for them to last I guess.

In case you break one, I don't think it's different than the AX3000G I had. They could easily be fixed by disassembling the unit with patience, unsolder the microswitch and soldering a new one.

For the guy who complained about the USB port...lol, man, don't you have a printer at home? Those USB ports are the ones that bring printers...and PODs. Still, you can fix that as easy (or even easier) as the microswitches. You would have to disassemble your unit, unsolder the port with a thin ceramic tip solder, buy a printer USB port, and solder the new one. If you know more or less how to solder with stain, it shouldn't be a problem. By doing this, you'll be able to load, change and save presets, record via the POD's ASIO drivers without losing quality on reconversion, etc.


----------



## flaik (Jul 12, 2013)

If this does not result in a mark IV model I will be thoroughly dissapointed.


----------



## SjPedro (Jul 13, 2013)

Even though Line 6 claiming that the firmware upgrades will come to the whole HD family , let's not forget that, same thing happens with for example Apple phones. They get the same updates,but some of the features don't really cross over to the older devices. 

What I am really afraid is that Line 6 announces a 3.0 update or something like that with 20 new models and 5 new effects in which only half of them go to the standard HD500 and only the HD500X gets the entire package. 

Just a theory really but this "more processing power" thing , is something that is scratching the back of my mind and which is why I'll probably wait to get more funds to get the HD500X


----------



## drenz (Jul 14, 2013)

The buttons do look cool. I would have liked it if they had a crack at reducing the size of the overall unit and increasing the size of the screen. Removing the expression pedal entirely and releasing a Line6 expression pedal to be used with it (for people like me who dont use expression pedals) could have been a worthy idea. I think the developers at Line6 dropped the ball on this one.


----------



## leechmasterargentina (Jul 16, 2013)

drenz said:


> The buttons do look cool. I would have liked it if they had a crack at reducing the size of the overall unit and increasing the size of the screen. Removing the expression pedal entirely and releasing a Line6 expression pedal to be used with it (for people like me who dont use expression pedals) could have been a worthy idea. I think the developers at Line6 dropped the ball on this one.



I don't mean to sound like an asshole...but seriously, "buttons do look cool" is not enough reason to sell the current HD500 to purchase an HD500X. The only thing I care is that they work well, and I don't mind if they look like a monolith or whatever; besides good sound, durability is another aspect that makes gear stage-worthy.

Man...you're asking for a floor processor without an expression pedal...you might as well wait for an HD Desktop X. I wouldn't think of a floor processor if it didn't have an expression pedal. That's one of the many reasons I bought it.

As regards as the overall size, I see it hard to make it smaller because it'd probably cause problems with the footswitches. They are too many already and since they all look the same, sometimes is confusing on stage to know which one to press. It doesn't have anything to do with lights (although I wouldn't complain about the new footswitches with more light; the more the better in this case).

The only think I can agree with you is the need for a bigger screen.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Jul 16, 2013)

I sold my Hd500 nearly 2 years ago because they wouldn't implement an IR loader despite it being one of the most requested features on their forum. 

Seeing stuff like this just reminds me how bad a company Line6 is. Either way they sell thousands of units wether they listen to their customers or not.


----------



## Veldar (Jul 17, 2013)

When will it come out, because my birthday is coming up soon.......


----------



## UncurableZero (Jul 17, 2013)

The cool thing about the HD500X is that now the regular one dropped a 100 Euros in price on thomann, making it cheaper than the 400 
Line6 Pod HD500 - Thomann UK


----------



## kchay (Jul 18, 2013)

leechmasterargentina said:


> Yesterday in the Line 6 facebook page, they posted pics of the HD500X. Many people said the same things we're saying here: "That's not real upgrade" "Thanks Line 6, I bought my HD500 a week ago" and occasionally a "I'll buy it!".
> 
> Sometimes, someone at Line 6 answered a few questions. As for firmware upgrades, they said that the HD500X is part of the HD family, so any firmware upgrades will go for all HD units. I don't know if I should believe them or not, cause they've stuck in that department for almost a year, or maybe that's how firmware upgrades are. Still, I believe that is possible because for what've seen, they haven't changed the programming structure or firmware of the HD500X, just added more DSP which is hardware. Pretty much like upgrading your computer processor without changing OS.
> 
> ...



Funnily enough, no, I don't have a printer at home. Funny, isn't it?
I just think that nowadays, where people are used to USB ports as standard, this could be a more useful port. And it wouldn't be as fragile, as I've found the pins.
Just my opinion on the matter. It's annoying, as I had to get a separate interface to link the computer to the POD.


----------



## DropTheSun (Jul 18, 2013)

Well this was just a bad "new" product. Line 6 doesn't seem to know what their customers want or they don't care or they don't know how to do it. HD500 was/is a great product and cheap for what it offers. After years Line 6 decide to release almost exact the same product called HD500X. What are these guys doing at the Line 6 pod line? It looks to me that they are not doing their jobs! 

I haven't seen any fw updates for my hd500 in many months. I also have Axe FX II that have had new fw updates offering new amps and features. My axe is only a two months old and i've updated it three or four times already. Fractal audio really offers a great customer service, also in their forum. Just saying, that Line 6 should improve their game, because atm they are far behind the others in products and service.


----------



## SjPedro (Jul 18, 2013)

well whoever tries to sell their current HD500's now will have to sell them for really cheap. 

Since the old HD500 can be bought new for 400 euros, the HD500X is worth 495...

Guess the guys that try to sell them now, have to sell them for like 250-300

EDIT: BTW, I don't think we can compare Axe FX with the Line 6 POD line. Where as the Axe FXII is a unit that costs a whole lot more than the POD. 
Sure, Line 6 could do a better job when it comes to software updates and the bottom line is that it should be their number 1 concern at this point


----------



## DropTheSun (Jul 18, 2013)

^Yes!
I'm only comparing the customer service between these two companys. Axe FX is in a different league with it's modeling technology and the price is five times more than HD500X, so it should be.


----------



## leechmasterargentina (Jul 18, 2013)

kchay said:


> Funnily enough, no, I don't have a printer at home. Funny, isn't it?
> I just think that nowadays, where people are used to USB ports as standard, this could be a more useful port. And it wouldn't be as fragile, as I've found the pins.
> Just my opinion on the matter. It's annoying, as I had to get a separate interface to link the computer to the POD.



Don't take it personal, but I just tried to simplify a solution for you that doesn't involve buying an interface.

If you have basic knowledge on soldering, it shouldn't be that hard as long as you do everything with patience and take care of things. Getting a replacement USB (printer-like) port shouldn't be that hard. Any electronic shops/computer stores should have them, and they wouldn't cost as much as an interface. If you feel you're not up to the task, any electronics repair shop can do that and still, this job would probably cost less than buying an interface.

In my oppinion, you're losing too much by overlooking this matter because you can't update firmware in your unit nor modify patches with POD HD500 Edit. I know you can do that with the knobs in the interface, but I've owned a board without USB support like this and believe me, you'll have to think on a new spine for your back after a while. Besides, working with POD HD500 Edit is way faster and comfortable.

I always suggest people to record over an interface that has S/PDIF inputs on the sole reason that with an internal PCI or PCIe interface, you can go as low as 64 samples (around 1,2 ms) of latency. Other than that, recording over the USB interface of your POD and using Line 6's ASIO drivers is still great because you don't generate reconversion, latency at it's lowest is 128 samples (around 2 ms) which is still great and unnoticeable unless you have bionic ears, and recording quality is 24-bit/ 96k which is the highest you can go with S/PDIF too.

Fix that USB port please, you'll thank me later.


----------



## slaws (Jul 18, 2013)

I have the original POD Pro. I just think it's funny how they keep rehousing the same software. I lost track of how many variations you can get an original POD, same with the X3, HD, UX, M series, etc, etc. 

This is like record labels releasing live albums and "Best of" albums to pass time and grab some cash before a new studio album comes out.


----------



## celticelk (Jul 18, 2013)

kake said:


> Well this was just a bad "new" product. Line 6 doesn't seem to know what their customers want or they don't care or they don't know how to do it. HD500 was/is a great product and cheap for what it offers. After years Line 6 decide to release almost exact the same product called HD500X. What are these guys doing at the Line 6 pod line? It looks to me that they are not doing their jobs!
> 
> I haven't seen any fw updates for my hd500 in many months. I also have Axe FX II that have had new fw updates offering new amps and features. My axe is only a two months old and i've updated it three or four times already. Fractal audio really offers a great customer service, also in their forum. Just saying, that Line 6 should improve their game, because atm they are far behind the others in products and service.



Maybe the lesson here is that you shouldn't expect the same update schedule for a $500 piece of gear that you get for a $2000+ piece of gear?


----------



## AlexeyKo (Jul 18, 2013)

Only increased level of DSP? No, i need new amps there and increasing of clean tones quality.


----------



## DropTheSun (Jul 18, 2013)

celticelk said:


> Maybe the lesson here is that you shouldn't expect the same update schedule for a $500 piece of gear that you get for a $2000+ piece of gear?



Well, a company that cares about it customers, offers a great customer service. Latest fw update for hd500 was 10/16/12. It's been wayyyy too quiet in there (even for 500$ unit, if the price matters here) and now that we see what Line 6 has been doing (HD500X) and there are no signs of custom IR's or fixing those damn EQ's etc. Makes me just wonder, do they care only about the money? I don't see anything happening at the pod line. Only a three years old unit getting a facelift.


----------



## celticelk (Jul 18, 2013)

kake said:


> Well, a company that cares about it customers, offers a great customer service. Latest fw update for hd500 was 10/16/12. It's been wayyyy too quiet in there (even for 500$ unit, if the price matters here) and now that we see what Line 6 has been doing (HD500X) and there are no signs of custom IR's or fixing those damn EQ's etc. Makes me just wonder, do they care only about the money? I don't see anything happening at the pod line. Only a three years old unit getting a facelift.



Personally, I think anyone who's expecting custom IR loading in a $500 modeler is smoking something. You'd have to do a whole lot more interface work just to load and manage the damn things, without even considering whether Line 6's current algorithms operate in such a way that you could just drop an IR into the chain and have it work properly - and if they don't, I highly doubt that they're going to rework their entire modeling architecture to let you use someone else's models.


----------



## Shask (Jul 18, 2013)

celticelk said:


> Personally, I think anyone who's expecting custom IR loading in a $500 modeler is smoking something. You'd have to do a whole lot more interface work just to load and manage the damn things, without even considering whether Line 6's current algorithms operate in such a way that you could just drop an IR into the chain and have it work properly - and if they don't, I highly doubt that they're going to rework their entire modeling architecture to let you use someone else's models.



Digitech GSP1101 does IR loading at this price....


----------



## celticelk (Jul 18, 2013)

Shask said:


> Digitech GSP1101 does IR loading at this price....



It's not DigiTech's work, though - it's a third-party update. Using it to claim that L6 is therefore not "keeping up" as far as firmware updates go is therefore invalid, as DigiTech isn't doing this work either. It also doesn't guarantee that the feature will continue to be available, as it essentially infringes on DigiTech's IP (the core software for the unit). And the fact that the GSP1101's architecture happens to make IR loading possible is no guarantee that the HD500's architecture will as well. (And don't forget that the price for the DigiTech unit only includes the rackmount processor, whereas for the HD500 it's the processor and floorboard; a GSP1101-and-floorboard bundle would run you about $750.)

tl;dr: Apples-and-oranges comparison.


----------



## Shask (Jul 18, 2013)

celticelk said:


> It's not DigiTech's work, though - it's a third-party update. Using it to claim that L6 is therefore not "keeping up" as far as firmware updates go is therefore invalid, as DigiTech isn't doing this work either. It also doesn't guarantee that the feature will continue to be available, as it essentially infringes on DigiTech's IP (the core software for the unit). And the fact that the GSP1101's architecture happens to make IR loading possible is no guarantee that the HD500's architecture will as well. (And don't forget that the price for the DigiTech unit only includes the rackmount processor, whereas for the HD500 it's the processor and floorboard; a GSP1101-and-floorboard bundle would run you about $750.)
> 
> tl;dr: Apples-and-oranges comparison.



I wouldn't say it wasn't Digitech's work. A Digitech employee did it. They were just too lazy to officialize it.

Not that I have one anyways, I just thought it brought up a good point that it CAN be done.


----------



## kchay (Jul 18, 2013)

leechmasterargentina said:


> Don't take it personal, but I just tried to simplify a solution for you that doesn't involve buying an interface.
> 
> If you have basic knowledge on soldering, it shouldn't be that hard as long as you do everything with patience and take care of things. Getting a replacement USB (printer-like) port shouldn't be that hard. Any electronic shops/computer stores should have them, and they wouldn't cost as much as an interface. If you feel you're not up to the task, any electronics repair shop can do that and still, this job would probably cost less than buying an interface.
> 
> ...



Yeah, I'm aware of that. I probably should.


----------



## bob123 (Jul 18, 2013)

SjPedro said:


> what "worries" me is firmware upgrades....the POD HD500 is going to be ignored I guess from now on




they use the same firmware.... the same upgrades will be applicable to the 500, 500x, and HD models dude.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Jul 18, 2013)

celticelk said:


> Personally, I think anyone who's expecting custom IR loading in a $500 modeler is smoking something.



What annoys me is the fact Line6 flat out avoid responding to this request. They have no interest in pleasing a small portion of their customer base by implementing this feature. It took me nearly 2 years of bugging them to drop the Line6 Device Dongle before they finally did so maybe there is hope yet.


----------



## celticelk (Jul 18, 2013)

drawnacrol said:


> What annoys me is the fact Line6 flat out avoid responding to this request. They have no interest in pleasing a small portion of their customer base by implementing this feature. It took me nearly 2 years of bugging them to drop the Line6 Device Dongle before they finally did so maybe there is hope yet.



Or possibly they don't feel it's worth rewriting their entire modeling architecture in order to make that feature possible. The people complaining about L6's failure to respond to customer demands for IR loading seem to be making an awful lot of assumptions about the ease of implementation here.


----------



## jimwratt (Jul 18, 2013)

Line 6 could probably save us a bunch of belly aching by just releasing a stand-alone IR pedal that could be run in the loop like an effect, especially if it was stereo. I'm willing to bet they'd make a bunch of money off of that. Celticelk makes a great point, it may not be as easy to implement as we'd assume, but I'm pretty sure they can make a product for it.


----------



## celticelk (Jul 18, 2013)

jimwratt said:


> Line 6 could probably save us a bunch of belly aching by just releasing a stand-alone IR pedal that could be run in the loop like an effect, especially if it was stereo. I'm willing to bet they'd make a bunch of money off of that. Celticelk makes a great point, it may not be as easy to implement as we'd assume, but I'm pretty sure they can make a product for it.



Which begs the question: why is it that *no one* has done this yet? If it's a (relatively) easily solved problem for a (somewhat) strongly desired product, you'd think that one of the major manufacturers would have put two and two together and cranked one out. Their failure to do so suggests that the potential market isn't judged to be big enough to merit the R&D costs.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 18, 2013)

Uhhh...

Someone has. 

But it's expensive as hell at $550 for a stompbox.


----------



## Veldar (Jul 18, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Uhhh...
> 
> Someone has.
> 
> But it's expensive as hell at $550 for a stompbox.


 
Why so much? Is it really worth it?


----------



## celticelk (Jul 18, 2013)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Uhhh...
> 
> Someone has.
> 
> But it's expensive as hell at $550 for a stompbox.



Seems it's not such an easily solved problem, given the price.


----------



## DeadWeight (Jul 18, 2013)

Spewin, just bought a normal HD500 less than a month ago haha. The only thing that really bothers me about this is that I probably could have gotten the HD500 for cheaper if I'd waited a little longer, and that it won't be worth as much if I resell it. The 500X really doesn't seem worth the extra money, in my opinion.


----------



## Nemonic (Jul 19, 2013)

Celticelk, why I am now angry with what Line 6 did recently, I see you got a point here.
However, when you say that you need to compare GSP 1101 WITH a controller, it is fair in my opinion to compare the most similar product from Line 6, called HD Pro. In the end, it would cost a lot more.
I now realise that IR loading might not be possible for the HD. Problem is that we as users do not see the guts, but we see the exterior of its body. In this situation, it seems that Line 6 can see the guts, but not the body. User reviews and tips are very important for their progress. 
Let's say that the cabinet modeling does not work on IR technology (I would not be surprised a lot). This does not mean that it is hopeless, because they could get inspired by IRs and recreate them to work on their device. The problem is that probably no one ever has praised the HD cabinet modeling, in fact it is the most crucial part of software sound modeling. I would be quite happy if I saw that they released updates containing new cabinets, even amp models, but they do not do that. They do other things, like their "Dream rig", which is, in this state, not my dream.


----------



## Shask (Jul 19, 2013)

DeadWeight said:


> Spewin, just bought a normal HD500 less than a month ago haha. The only thing that really bothers me about this is that I probably could have gotten the HD500 for cheaper if I'd waited a little longer, and that it won't be worth as much if I resell it. The 500X really doesn't seem worth the extra money, in my opinion.



All the early reviews I have read of the HD500X make it sound like people arent getting any more DSP out of it. They are still hitting the wall around the same place.

If that is true, I doubt the HD500X will end up being worth more than the standard HD500....


----------



## jimwratt (Jul 19, 2013)

celticelk said:


> Which begs the question: why is it that *no one* has done this yet? If it's a (relatively) easily solved problem for a (somewhat) strongly desired product, you'd think that one of the major manufacturers would have put two and two together and cranked one out. Their failure to do so suggests that the potential market isn't judged to be big enough to merit the R&D costs.



True. As appreciable as the improvement an IR can make in a sound, it's still not as widely known as a technology and it's kind of difficult to demo in a guitar center. I'd also think that the company that did make that kind of a product isn't as capable as Line 6 at delivering the technology at a more affordable price point. I don't know that the demand is high enough at present, but I would imagine that for most people, it's one of those things they don't know that they need yet. A lot seems to go into it. It's truly a software driven effect, so making it portable in an affordable package would seem to entail a lot of product-specific development. I wouldn't be surprised if Line 6 is working on it in some form though.


----------



## SjPedro (Jul 20, 2013)

bob123 said:


> they use the same firmware.... the same upgrades will be applicable to the 500, 500x, and HD models dude.



indeed. and so does the iPhone. 
I am not the one doing the comparison here. Line 6 themselves said on their facebook page on a post somewhere (if you search you can find it) claiming that we should think of this HD500 to HD500X , like iPhone 4 to iPhone 4s. 

And as some of you may know, the same firmware update that can come out for the iPhone 3, 4 ,4s and 5; does have differences: The newer models get more new features than the previous models.
This leads me to believe two things: 

1- Line 6 has something else up it's sleeve (new generation of HD POD's maybe)
2- The firmware upgrades (if they finally come after almost 9+ months) will be for all the POD's agreed. but the HD500X might just have more stuff due to the extra DSP.


----------



## bandemic (Jul 20, 2013)

i just picked an regular old 500 for 3 bills flat on ebay.... good deal??


----------



## SjPedro (Jul 23, 2013)

I thought you guys might like to see this that came up on youtube today: 


HD500 vs HD500X - YouTube


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jul 23, 2013)

If you can load IRs in your DAW, I'm not seeing the problem aside from live work...

But wait wait wait... Lemme do some math here...

POD HD500 ~$500...
That pedal ~$550...

Total ~$1050

Used AxeFX Standard ~$1000 - 1200...

Hmm...


----------



## meambobbo (Jul 23, 2013)

retail price is the not the issue - so what if the axe ii costs 4x the pod hd...guess how many more pod hd's are sold than the axe ii? it's not as though algorithms need to be coded per unit - it's a fixed, not variable cost. compare L6 total revenue to fractal...

i think the issue is more of a risk and support costs one. allowing your device to load any kind of 3rd party data entails the risk that some data set might break it or lead to unwanted behavior. then you have tens of thousands of people demanding support - your advantage of shipping lower cost units to more customers becomes your disadvantage. fractal on the other hand has a smaller customer base and can address bugs quickly rather than needing official communication between the developers and customer service team.

regardless, I don't think the reason is valid - i think the hardware is capable, and line 6 is being lazy or scared to implement it. on the other hand, they have no real reason to - as mentioned, no one else is doing it either and forcing their hand.

i don't buy the DSP cost reason. More costly than Particle Verb or Smart Harmony, maybe... but even so, DSP errors were obviously built into the user experience, and L6 deemed that acceptable. why shy away for that reason when this feature is so popular?

as for the price of the torpedo, any standalone unit is gonna cost significant money. try finding a simple EQ that's programmable by midi. that's why all-in-one units make the most sense, cost-wise. also why a stand-alone IR loader is unlikely to be a hit.

anyway, i think everyone should settle down. don't like the hd500x? don't buy it. if L6 doesn't sell them, they don't make money. maybe they change their ways. maybe their competitors seize such oppurtunities.

in any case, the game is patience. if you can't wait, find your own solution, whether it be a digitech gsp off ebay, an old laptop with a cheap interface, a torpedo, or upgrading to an axe, kemper, or axe ii. or start a business and make the device for all of us. i've always wanted to make a platform with an open-source framework, so ppl like lepou or other developers could create plug-ins, or even redesign the entire UI or flow of it.


----------



## meambobbo (Jul 23, 2013)

one more thought - if the 500x is getting DSP error at the same spot as the 500, this likely means that the 500x isn't running a branched firmware, and the software, not the hardware, is what is causing the DSP error to appear...as I previously suspected. People have questioned whether overclocking the cpu or upgrading RAM would give them more headroom before getting the error, but I doubted it, because I believe each effect has a hard-coded % of DSP it consumes, and the software simply doesn't let you go > 100%. If the software allowed you to do so, you'd lose real-time performance and get the audio equivalent of lag - hiccups, distortion, screetches, cracks, etc.


----------



## Eclipse (Jul 23, 2013)

Ugh. Line 6, I still have a Spider IV sitting in my room I need to sell.  I have an Axe-Fx II now so..


----------



## spectrrrrrre (Jul 23, 2013)

I had the HD500 for around 2 Months. I'm on good terms with the local GC manager so he let me return it and swap for the 500X. I still hit DSP caps occasionally, but not nearly as fast as I did on the 500. I can use my old dual cab patches from the 500, but I can jam in reverbs and Pitch Glides even on the High Gain DC patches. Most of my high gain dc patches now have no free FX blocks, I definitely noticed the extra DSP they put in.


----------



## paulyrhythm (Jul 23, 2013)

tristanroyster said:


> Ugh. Line 6, I still have a Spider IV sitting in my room I need to sell.  I have an Axe-Fx II now so..



You didn't finish your sentence.

So you like to brag? 
Make your wee wee look bigger?
I have both and actually simply typlng thatmade my coc grow 2"s
Different strokes different folks close minded fools, a ya chowderhead


----------



## DeadWeight (Jul 24, 2013)

Just had a thought, any news on a HD Pro X? I was originally looking at a Pro with a floorboard when I bought my HD500, but it was a little out of my budget. If a Pro X is brought out, it'd drop the price of the standard Pro...


----------



## thedonal (Oct 16, 2013)

I was considering an HD500 a while back- I may well go with this. Liked the sounds on a recent SonicState review. And it does look a touch more durable now...

I just want fairly decent sounds that I can use without having to crank my amp to get (for the neighbours' sakes!).


----------



## Elric (Oct 16, 2013)

tristanroyster said:


> Ugh. Line 6, I still have a Spider IV sitting in my room I need to sell.  I have an Axe-Fx II now so..



I have an Axe 2, Axe Ultra, and a POD HD Desktop (among other stuff). The POD is _quite_ good, actually, and it seems to leave peacefully with my Fractal products. 

Please don't act like a cork sniffing douche, it gives Fractal owners a bad rep... I can totally understand liking the $2000 box better but if you think you NEED one to get good tone, you must really suck. IMHO. And posting condescending stuff is just lame.


----------

