pod xt

Mike Bowles · From: Princeton, West Virginia, USA

Is anyone using a pod xt for telecaster I have a zoom 606 but am not satisfied with it how easy is it to download country sounds for it I AM PLAYING a 52 tele through a fender 112 plus or a fender stage 100 any input would be appreciated I play older country
_________________
Mike Bowles

Jim Sliff · From: Lawndale California, USA

A multi-effect system isn't going to magically improve the sound much. Are you looking for effects, or a change in amp tone? If it's a change/improvement in your overall sound, I'd save my money on the PodXt and buy a better amp. Even one of the reissue tube amps will get you closer to a solid, 50's/60's Tele "spank" sound. Take a Deluxe Reverb reissue, crank it up, and use your guitar's volume and tone control to control how clean it's playing and how well it sustains.

A PodXt will give you a lot of effects to choose from, but you're still going to have the same fundamental, fairly flat (IMO) tone from either amp.
_________________
No chops, but great tone
1930's/40's Rickenbacher/Rickenbacker 6&8 string lap steels
1921 Weissenborn Style 2; Hilo&Schireson hollownecks
Appalachian, Regal & Dobro squarenecks
1959 Fender 400 9+2 B6;1960's Fender 800 3+3+2; 1948 Fender Dual-8 Professional

Mike Bowles · From: Princeton, West Virginia, USA

thanks jim i thought i might be throwing money away i owned a 65 super reverb once i should have kept it thanks again everybody says they really like the sound of my tele maybe im just looking for that magical sound and it might already be there
_________________
Mike Bowles

Kevin Mincke · From: Farmington, MN (Twin Cities-South Metro) USA

"I AM PLAYING a 52 tele"

That above is the problem! Sell it to me Laughing

Tony Dingus · From: Kingsport, Tennessee, USA

Some guitar players I know like the Pod 2.0 over the XT. It seems the XT is liked better for steel and the 2.0 for guitar.

Tony

Jim Sliff · From: Lawndale California, USA

I've had both and found the XT far more versatile - longer learning curve but the 2 didn't have any sounds I couldn't get with the XT.

However, it sounds like he's looking for amp tone...and that's real elusive with any multi-effects box. Mike, like you said - the '65 Super Reverb may have been you magic bullet!
_________________
No chops, but great tone
1930's/40's Rickenbacher/Rickenbacker 6&8 string lap steels
1921 Weissenborn Style 2; Hilo&Schireson hollownecks
Appalachian, Regal & Dobro squarenecks
1959 Fender 400 9+2 B6;1960's Fender 800 3+3+2; 1948 Fender Dual-8 Professional

Don Sulesky · From: Citrus County, FL, Orig. from MA & NH

I have a Pod XT and use it only for recording.
I don't care for the live sound I get from mine.
I much prefer my Boss DD-5 live with a small amount of reverb from my NV112.

Loren Claypool · From: Mequon, WI

I upgraded to the POD X3 from the XT when it came it. The X3 is essentially two XTs in one case, allowing for dual paths - pretty powerful stuff. The X3 also includes the optional add-on packs that were available for the XT, providing a huge amount of amps, cabs, effects, and the bass amps and cabs.

I used the X3 on my new album "One Feather Shy" and was very pleased with the results. BTW, the CD goes on presale July 1st through my website.
_________________
Loren Claypool
genre-indifferent instrumental guitar music
www.lorenclaypool.com
MySpace
Facebook
Twitter
Flickr

Mike Bowles · From: Princeton, West Virginia, USA

Thanks guys I play steel too although i dont play it out much i have a nv1000 and a nv 112 a mullen rp sd10 profex I kind of like the sound of my steel straight through my amps with just a little delay I like my tele with some effects thats why i was asking about the pod xt Ive read some players use it for both thanks to all
_________________
Mike Bowles

Forum Index > Electronics		Next oldest topic :: Next newest topic

All times are GMT - 8 Hours	Jump to: