Marshall vs. POD? ...THE ANSWERS

Posted: Sun Mar 10, 2002 9:38 pm

No fancy test here, just me noodling around with a split signal out of my Les Paul. One line into a POD, and the other to a miked Marshall JCM-DSL2000 with a 1960A 4x12 cabinet.

Take a listen below and see if you can tell which is which?

[URL=http:///[/URL]

Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2002 1:27 am

Hey Bassmac, it's Crowdog from the DUC, How's it going? ........ I'll take a stab at it. I think sample #1 is the POD, #2 is the real Marshall - only because I think I hear real room on that one, but who knows - I think they both sound pretty cool. My preference is #1 no matter which one it is.

Tony

Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2002 5:48 am

ok, here's my guess:

1) POD
2) marshall

I didn't like the 2nd take at all - the mids sound pretty messed up - probably out of phase. it quite sounds like the mic isn't on the sweet spot of the cabinet. perhaps too far away from the cone and off-axis?
anyway, that's why I'm pretty sure take 2 is the marshall. looking foward to hearing the result.

all the best.

mike

Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2002 6:29 am

Hey... the link is not working for me Sad

Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2002 11:32 am

Yeah,
I would say the first is the POD and the second is the Marshall. I would prefer the sound of the POD.

Ian

Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2002 12:12 pm

I would say 1 is pod and 2 is marshall... very nice sound the first one

which pod did you use for the test??

Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2002 5:21 pm

sample #2 sounds like a bad miked cab, plus I used to have a DSL JCM2000 and they are very harsh. so I sold it and bought 2 JCM800s with the money, and it's just a different world, in terms of sound. Also 57s sound harsh to me too, an M88 made a whole difference too.
Sample #1 is nice, I would use a POD if I didn't know how to find the sweet spot, or I didn't have the right mic or the right amp. But having the right elements is even better than a POD.

Joz

Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2002 7:02 pm

1 sounds best to me! But then I just lost a Neve vs PT shoot out on some 'classical music' recordings, so WHAT DO I KNOW!

Very Happy

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2002 12:11 am

I too would say #1 POD and #2 Marshall. And the fact that #1 sounds less offending than #2 doen't prove anything beside the fact that it sounded better in this case with this particular combination of gtr/amp/room/mic(s)+positioning/pre/recorder of which we know nothing. Wink

)

So what your test maybe points to is that for somebody without the aformentioned quality ressources, the POD might very well be the best path to useable e/gtr recording but it is a far cry from the quality you can achieved under the best of circumstances!

It is still a useful tool to create different tones than what you have available with your given equipment. And it can definitely help to educate its users to the different characters they can expect from the real different amps, in short: great for preprod! Wink

:w:

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2002 10:50 am

I posted this on the DUC as well, but I know many of you have a lot of experience miking amps, so I wanted to get your opinions as well. Below is a copy of the follow-up I posted on the DUC for those interested.

===============================

The answer is...

1) POD

2) Marshall

In all fairness, I've only been messing around with this amp for a few days now, (on loan from a friend) so I'm sure I've got a ways to go in terms of miking, tone, etc. To tell you the truth, so far, I really don't like this amp very much. These Celestion 75's and modern Marshall heads are very harsh sounding, and are a far cry from the tone I remember my band mates had back in the 70's. I'm sure some Greenbacks would help, but I probably need a old head as well if I want to go the Marshall route.

As far as signal chain goes, I just did the basic slightly off axis 57 half way between the cone and edge, into an API 312 pre amp, RME A/D, computer. I am in the same room as the cabinet, but I was sitting about 12' away from the loud muther. I'm know getting closer will increase the interaction between the cabinet, strings and pick-ups, but that's for another day.

I tend to perfer the POD's Boggie and Fender patches the best, but since I was comparing a Marshall, I used a JCM-800 patch.

I'm a one room studio, so I'm really not looking forward to recording a blaring amp, but I'm a little down on my (mostly POD) mixes lately, so I'm starting to check out some other stuff.

There's something very one dimensional about my mixes, and since there's usually a lot of guitar tracks, I think the POD may have a lot to do with it. There's always a lot of discussion about the lack of depth in mixes, and I'm sure too many direct recording sources plays a big roll in that, esp. combined with digital recording. There's also something about the POD's distortion that tends to get very washed out in a mix, where as a miked amp has a certain "bite" that cuts through much better. Oh well, back to the drawing board...

Thanks to everyone who took my Pepsi challenge. :w:

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2002 4:42 pm

Thanks!

You got to "mix it up" all the same gizmo is a no-no for gtrs I reckon, here's my modest selection..

1) Marshall JMP 1 - pre w cab simulation
2) Digitec Valve FX - pre w cab simulation
3) Amp farm TDM
4) Micro - joke - plastic fender twin
5) "whatever the band brings in"
6) rental stuff (Ampeg B15 on bass)

Often the JMP 1 patched into the bands Marshall head 'return' sound better that the pre in their head..(??)

But I ALLWAYS mix it up.

The Valve FX (chrome finish) is a secret weapon, 3 friends of mine have bought them since I discovered em.. They are great - not for basic's but 'iceing on the cake' or last melodic motifs etc and haunting hooks..

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2002 8:14 pm

Jules, didn't you buy a Dual Rectifier a few months ago? Guitar players love mine. The next thing on my list is a cool Marshall.

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2002 12:45 am

What!

not spend on outboard?! Mad

Hmmm yarz,,,,

I need to divert SOME spend to backline I know... Surprised

So much gear, so little time...

Actually a recent development means I now have storage that I didn't before so.. (gulp!) perhaps it's "time". <img border="0" alt="[retard]" title="" src="graemlins/retard.gif" />

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2002 1:10 am

I find the JMP1's direct much nicer and closer to a JCM-800 than the POD's Marshall's! Also true that it's better as a pre than the pre's in the JCM-900 and later models. However a nice Superlead or early JCM-800 (If you can check out the white ones!) in a good cab (Greenbacks are good but a little harsh, old Alnico black dots are amazing! however modern 75's are just Yeurk! :tu: :w:

Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2002 7:50 am

"Mix it up" is good advise Jules. I was getting some pretty good tones from the POD, so I just got sort of lazy and put my amps away. Naturally, the bottom line is how things work in the mix, and a lot of POD tracks summed (there's that word again) together isn't very flattering. Time to break out the old amps again, new technology isn't always the best technology...

===================

groundcontrol,

Mixing speakers sounds interesting.

I've got an old blond 2x12 Fender Bandmaster cabinet that needs new speakers. When you mix the two different speakers, are you close miking each speaker along with a distant mic to capture the overall cabinet?

I don't know if I've heard an Alinco or not, I trust you've found it to be a good compliment to the Celestions?

This topic sponsored by: