player opinions

Line 6 PODxt

Line 6 PODxt

  1. Name: Alan

  2. Band: -----

  3. Model Year: 2004

  4. Price Paid: £399

  5. Performance

  6. After owning and being rather frustrated by the previous POD 2.0, I decided to give the new PODxt a try after hearing all the wonders about it. The new POD surpasses its predecessor in terms of options and user friendliness by miles. The LCD screen is a major improvement (some guitarists without computers felt rather cheated with 2.0 and rightly so), and the range of stompboxes and effects can't be faulted, there is everything here and the ability to some pre or post in a chain is rather nifty. The Ability to upgrade the whole PODxt by USB is quite a remarkable concept and might be worth doing even just for the post 4-band EQ option but some of the amp/cab/mic 'improvements' seem a little worse to my ear!

  7. Performance Rating: 9

  8. Sound Quality

  9. Being an avid Metal and Classical fan I primarily bought the POD so I could record at home without the need of cables, mics or heavy amps. Being greatly let down by POD2.0, I decided to try the new boy. Unfortunately Line 6 does a good sales pitch but ultimately fails to deliver the goods. First off let me say that the PODxt is about the best you're going to get in amp simulation terms and it is scarily accurate, but as a metal fan I am still disappointed. While recording direct with my Gibson SG with Seymour Duncan Bridge Custom Custom Humbucker into Cubase SX, the distortion tones, although a vast improvement on 2.0 are still way too fizzy and flat and lacks the oomph of a proper crunchy metallic distortion no matter how much tweaking with amp settings or cabs or with post recording EQs or compressors. The A.I.R. Technology still isn't quite right in capturing a room tone! Set to 0% it is what you would expect at that distance but for roomier tones it doesn't seem to vary greatly as the distance increases. Two virtual microphones to play about with simultaneously would have been nice! All clean sounds are really good though. Live there are no real complaints, everything sounds great through a PA or a power amp. The lack of a 12 or 6 string acoustic guitar simulator is a huge disappointment, but besides that and the suspect direct ability, it is all and all rather good!

  10. Sound Quality Rating: 5

  11. Construction

  12. Apart from Line 6 over-hyping their product, this is a bargain piece of gear! It may have its faults but for the price you pay and the options available it really is worth buying, but try before you buy as it seems to be geared more toward blues, jazz and indie players rather than rock or metal. If you are a live player this is a must, but for direct home recording maybe try before you buy!

  13. Construction Rating: 9

  1. Name: Eric Deibler

  2. Band: -----

  3. Model Year: 2003

  4. Price Paid: $399

  5. Performance

  6. Having already owned a POD w/the 2.0 upgrade I was familiar with the basic operations of the POD. Reading through the XT handbook once was all I really needed to figure out the new format. The POD XT presents a whole slew of modeled amplifiers some of them a little hyped, some of them very good, some of them very frustrating. (see below)

  7. Performance Rating: 6

  8. Sound Quality

  9. Some of the models sound amazing. But some of them present a point of frustration with the POD XT and Line6. One of the phenomena I noticed is that some models (JTM45, Matchless, Vox) produce a “ghost note“; a note/harmonic above the original pitch. This becomes more apparent with the gain turned up. This is not something that everyone hears, although if you go to the Line6 discussion boards and do a search for “ghost note(s)“ you will discover that I am not the only one to notice this phenomenon. Line6 has even gone so far as to acknowledge it, saying that some amps that were modeled displayed certain “resonances“ within the circuitry. Whether these “resonances“ are authentic and present in the specific amps that were modeled is, for me, beside the point. It was a poor design decision. In the end what matters most is the sound/tone of the models, and this is something which for me makes the XT practically unusable, given that something like seven of the models are affected. If I had noticed it while trying the XT out in the music store, I would never have bought it. I would have kept my POD 2.0. Line6 obviously feels that this is not something that needs to be addressed. It's a shame.

    HOWEVER! I have discovered that the XT shines as an effects modeler. I was this close to selling my XT, hoping to recoup at least some of my expenses. However I recently purchased a Boogie Mark I reissue, which has an effects loop. Bypassing the amp modeling completely and using only the effects has been a positive experience. The POD Benefits from the Boogie's amazing tone, and the Boogie benefits in that some of its prodigious volume can be contained by the POD. The POD XT costs as much as 4 standard consumer-type effects pedals, or as much as some boutique pedals. For that price you get a huge selection of effects that can be used in a wide variety of configurations. I was seriously considering buying a TC Electronics G-Major. I will not be doing that now. Instead I will be keeping the XT.

    I give the POD XT a “2“ on amp sound quality because of the “ghosting“ phenomenon and Line 6's acknowledgement of the phenomenon and their lack of willingness to do anything about it. Because of the quality of the effects however, I give it a “5“, for an average of 3.5.

  10. Sound Quality Rating: 7

  11. Construction

  12. Seems very solid.

  13. Construction Rating: 10

links

  1. Average Ratings
  2. Performance: 7.5
  3. Sound Quality: 6
  4. Construction: 9.5
  5. Ratings Key
  6. 10: Excellent
  7. 0: Useless
  8. Available At Guitar Center
  9. Line 6 POD XT Guitar Multi Effects Processor Standard
  10. Company
  11. Line6

Site Information

Info Links