Summary of my favorite suggestions so far along with a few new ones that haven't been brought up yet:
-2 expressions pedals would simply be the best. The old Vox, higher end Zoom and Behringers MIDI board has two pedals, and I would love to see more people make this standard (Line 6, Boss, DigiTech, etc.).
-Effects loop (at least one) and the ability to assign it any where.
-TRUE by pass for FX only
-Complete seperate FX path for both vocal and guitar, and then be able to use the 2 expression pedals with this in mind. Allowing us to assign one to each input. Now I would LOVE that. The new Live X3 from Line 6 will allow this, but doesn't have the 2 expression pedals.
-Make the looper STANDARD (no recorder needed). They already have a stand alone looper pedal, just add that without the recorder that is in the GNX4 to the new or next upcoming unit.
-Incorperate the New Vocalist 2 into the next model. I'd take that over a built in recorder any day.
-Sounds dumb, but I really like the idea of some kind of handle. That would be great.
-Seperate boost pedal would be great.
-Although I like the USB it would be really nice to have SPIF out so that it would be easier to record at other peoples studios. A lot of people seem to be using their SPIF inputs for recording, and would rather not deal with USB, drivers, and latency issues. They just want to plug and play.
-Build in ALL of the tones from the Hendrix pedal. That pedal is simply the BEST sounding unit that DigiTech has ever come out with!!!
*Add a SUCK knob so that I could turn it WAY down, and a Talent knob that I could turn up to \"11\"
I'm sure that there are more, but that would be my list.
Summary of my favorite suggestions so far along with a few new ones that haven't been brought up yet:
-2 expressions pedals would simply be the best. The old Vox, higher end Zoom and Behringers MIDI board has two pedals, and I would love to see more people make this standard (Line 6, Boss, DigiTech, etc.).
-Effects loop (at least one) and the ability to assign it any where.
-TRUE by pass for FX only
-Complete seperate FX path for both vocal and guitar, and then be able to use the 2 expression pedals with this in mind. Allowing us to assign one to each input. Now I would LOVE that. The new Live X3 from Line 6 will allow this, but doesn't have the 2 expression pedals.
-Make the looper STANDARD (no recorder needed). They already have a stand alone looper pedal, just add that without the recorder that is in the GNX4 to the new or next upcoming unit.
-Incorperate the New Vocalist 2 into the next model. I'd take that over a built in recorder any day.
-Sounds dumb, but I really like the idea of some kind of handle. That would be great.
-Seperate boost pedal would be great.
-Although I like the USB it would be really nice to have SPIF out so that it would be easier to record at other peoples studios. A lot of people seem to be using their SPIF inputs for recording, and would rather not deal with USB, drivers, and latency issues. They just want to plug and play.
-Build in ALL of the tones from the Hendrix pedal. That pedal is simply the BEST sounding unit that DigiTech has ever come out with!!!
*Add a SUCK knob so that I could turn it WAY down, and a Talent knob that I could turn up to \"11\"
I'm sure that there are more, but that would be my list.
Sounds like you're adding at least another $500 worth of features to the GNX4 (and taking away perhaps $50). Think people would go for that?
Well, I could be wrong, but I have a feeling that the next model will increase by $50 to $150, and with the new LIVE X3 from Line 6 coming out with much of what I mentioned (outside of the looper), and it is coming in at $500...I just have a feeling that $450-$550 is going to be our next \"standard\" price range, and with all that the GT-8 and new and up coming X3 has...it just seems that the next generation will be something a bit SPECIAL.
I could be wrong, but I think the new X# is going to be the new standard in FEATURES. I know that we will most likely never see the 2 pedals, but it would be nice to at least have an output for an external pedal.
***And in ALL reality, I really didn't think that any of us thought that we were putting a list together that was suppossed to all get into the next model. I actually thought we were putting a list together of things that we would like to see, and that we would only get to see SOME of them. NOT ALL OF THEM.
So yes, I posted my favorite things that I would like to see, but believe me, for the $278 I paid for a BRAND NEW in the box GNX3000, I have NO complaints with what I currently have. This list was just meant to be my WISH list for the future.
I hope that explains where I was coming from and how I feel about my current unit. I have owned the GNX4 twice and am now using a GNX3000, and couldn't be happier.
Well I used to be a digitech fan. But it has been such a damn long time since they have done anything about the GNX4 that I am considering Line 6 as my choice for a multi effects pedal.
If Digitech wants to stay in the game they should listen to the comments and reasonable suggestions in this forum or thread.
I personaly would pay 500-700 for a pedal that was good and had features and tone rather than a budgeted pedal for 400 that was made to keep the cost down which resulted in less features and sacrificed tone.
If Digitech wants to stay in the game possibilties are a tube in the pedal, similar to what Zoom has done and or make the pedal to where sound updates and firmware updates can be easily done through usb similar to what line 6 does. Even a built in hard drive and/ or SD card slot capacity of 4+GBs would be awesome. If Digitech creates the sounds and charges for them like Line 6 does with model packs that would be better than how it is now. Tone updates are great ideas and give the user something to look forward to. Also it seems difficult to obtain a real bluesy tone with the GNX4 and there are many inquires and suggestions about this.Authentic Artist patches definately should be included with the new pedal.
Also Digitech needs to communicate to its users more frequently much like line 6 does.
Also with the new pedal they should most definately make a hard case for it- a digitech case made especially for the new pedal. I would pay 100 for a good case. Also the software x edit is just plain ridiculous. I just don't understand how a billion dollar corporation makes such idiotic mistakes and misjudgements. I suggest that they hire some of the people in this forum and perhaps maybe they will see some profit rather than having it all go to line 6.
Thats my take on it. You may not like it but I really don't care.
I personaly would pay 500-700 for a pedal that was good and had features and tone rather than a budgeted pedal for 400 that was made to keep the cost down which resulted in less features and sacrificed tone.
Its alright for you people who live in the USA, but as it is the GNX4 (and most other musical equipment) is very, very expensive outside of the USA (eg here in Aus) and I could only just afford it as is.
How about bringing back more of the features of the older IPS from the SDisk series. There used to be alot more scale options than there are now. I know that if you know your scales and modes then all you need is a major scale setting for any diatonic scale, but melodic minor and others would be great. This should be very simple for them to bring back the stuff from the earlier models. I would think that they should be able to add back in a few blocks of code. How about going a step further and allowing user customizable scales- so we can just program in our own interval structures? That should be relativly easy
2. Reduction in the delay/lag that occurs when switching up and down between patches
3. Ability to easily reorder patches through X-Edit (i.e. you could drag a patch up and down in the list instead of having to save it over a new spot)
4. Feedback simulation--ability to have \"on-the-fly\" feedback when in a direct recording situation (I currently simulate this with delay and a number of other effects, but it's not quite right)
A lot of great ideas suggested by you all. The reason I bought my 3k was to have amp choices in a live situation, not so much for recording. So my ideas are for a live context only - no offence to you recording gurus!!
Here's a few modest suggestions:
1. More Amp Models - for me its all about tone flexibility. I seriously think to be considered a true accurate 'amp modeller' a unit needs to duplicate all of a guitar amp's channels, not just a snapshot of one. Some way of selecting these would be awsome. Amp Warping is a great tool and I wouldn't change it at all but the novelty has certainly worn off for me. I think its completely stupid that I have to warp amps then warp them again to get a basic tone I'm looking for. Especially when I can switch on a good valve amp and find a great tone immediately. I'd rather play my ax than press buttons. Don't get me wrong, the current amp models are terrific, but its just too much stuffing about. Especially during a gig when you'd like to set up a quick preset for a particular situation. Shouldn't have to be complex.
2. A true amp/cab bypass switch thats easy to use and won't colour the sound of my rig/amp. People (like me) pay a lot of money for a guitar head/combo and I'm sure they don't want its sound to be altered. I want an amp modeller to give flexibility and be the icing on the cake to whats already a great tone from my valve heads - not be a detriment! This would attract a lot of people to DT.
3. Overall volume control on top of the unit - not have to fiddle on the back.
4. A better idea for the tuner - not hitting the 2 pedals at once in a live situation with the guitar volume up has caused some embarrassing moments.
5. Longer and heavier duty power cord - getting tired of replacing them!
6. Some sort of a case or padded gig bag at least. Even though the GNX has a metal case there are still plenty of bits on them to bump and destroy while in transit.
7. And finally - the rubber tabs underneath the GNX. For gods sakes put screw on items please, please!! Nothing worse than sliding my 3k with my foot on stage only to have one of these rubber jiggers rip off, esp on carpet! You never realise you've done it until the next time you use the GNX and you find its not sitting on the floor properly and all wonky. Its supposed to be a 'floor unit' so make it so that it bloody sits on the floor - not have to chock one corner with drink coasters!!
Most of these are just practical ideas for live gigs.
Hope I didn't offend.
Oh, and one more thats ultra important - latency between presets - fix it please! 8)
Interesting - GSP1101, if it were offered as a floor unit (or once the pedalboard becomes available, if at all) meets just about every requirement for improvement that you listed, down to rubber stoppers - except it takes out the Warp feature and all other kind of amp/cab customization entirely, disregarding the global eq.
How do you feel about that? I'm kinda bummed, to be honest - would you rather have your GNX4/3000 have more amp models, but none that you can alter in ways besides basic EQ and pre/post gain control? I personally prefer the way GNX3000 is configured, all things considered.
I do agree that an amp modeler needs to mimic an actual amp it's modeling. The trouble is, it's a lot more difficult building a model of analog circuitry for all ways in which it responds to a tiny electrical signal as it amplifies it, than taking a snapshot of its behavior and extrapolating the rest of the big picture. Nonetheless, I think most people have their presets set up in this fashion, anyway - in the example of G3456's supermodels, a good portion of his patches and certainly most .acm folders contain both clean and distorted versions of his representations of the amps they model. So, two of my personal favorites from his collection, the XXX and the Triamp, with minor modifications - two presets, one channel clean and one channel high-gain distortion, with the stompbox model to both boost the clean channel to kinda-high-gain, and add fullness to the lead on the high-gain channel. Same cab for all presets. It's consistent, reliable, and something I'm used to. For most situations, any my other patch uses one of thse two as a template, and rarely do I step out of those boundaries - when I do, it's usually something I start from scratch because I need something incredibly specific.
Why do I say all this? Because the GSP1101 does not have a second channel - each preset only carries one amp setting, and you can't \"Warp\" it (need two amp channels for that, remember) or otherwise customize it. Instead, it relies on another patch to contain a corresponding \"clean\" setting, to which you switch should you require a clean channel, or vice versa. It does offer seamless switching (even crossfading of delays between presets) but you still need to have multiple presets, unless your guitar's volume pickups/volume/tone controls suffice for when you need to clean things up.
How do you feel about that? I'm kinda bummed, to be honest - would you rather have your GNX4/3000 have more amp models, but none that you can alter in ways besides basic EQ and pre/post gain control? I personally prefer the way GNX3000 is configured, all things considered.
Good question. I totally agree that its much harder to duplicate the full tonal characteristics of an amp, but perhaps DT is now at a standard or experienced enough to achieve this.... maybe I'm asking too much. A possible question could be: are the amp models actually useable representations?? I know that many are, but take the JCM2000 model for example. Now this is just a scooped out snapshot (single channel) of an amp I know is much more flexible. My point therefore is - yep great, include this JCM example but also include the other tones it is great at also. The same principle applies to a lot of channel switching amps out there. Provide a snapshot of each channel of a XXX, 5150, Mesa Stilleto, Roadking etc etc. The ability to be able to use all these amps (and channels) live in a fuss free manner would be superb. I'd certainly be happy to sacrafice some of the bells and whistles out of a unit if I had an amp modeller which could do this.
Having said that, warping is still needed on a GNX because lets face it, its a great feature and no matter how many amp models get stuffed into a GNX, there will still be people who'll want mix these amps around and create something of their own. Thats fair enough. Marketability comes into that quite a bit too.
I do like the idea of the GSP1101 but not having warping or amp/cab customisation is a flaw. Actually its dumb. Amp and cab customisation is still needed because we still have to 'climatise' our GNX to our personal guitar rigs. For example, the way I have my GNX set up tonally for my JSX sounds pretty average though a Marshall head - it needs to be customised. But that'll depend on the owner - I don't use a lot of cab sims so my needs will be different to others. Why is this unit a rackmount??? I know it has a footswitch but why not have it on the floor? Then I wouldn't have to buy a rack case to house it in etc, etc. Then if I have a few favourite stomp boxes I'd like to keep using, how do I stick them in the loop if the GSP is stuck in a rack hidden behing me?? Just stupid... it shouldn't have to be this complex.
So Iliace - nup, just give me more amp models, keep the warping et al tonal flexibility, the configuration of the GNX3000 and fix some of the physical features (ala what I suggested last post) and that would make the GNX3k much better for the live situation. I'm not putting my GNX3000 down at all, in fact I love it, but I've had to live with it on many, many nights and the novelty of complex features sure wears off. Obviously its different in a studio. It gets to a point that once you have dealt with all the sound variables on stage, you sometimes embrace the simpler things that make your playing more enjoyable.
So I guess after all that - I prefer the GNX3000 configuration!
You shouldn't have to be a Rocket scientist or a computer programer to
get a few usable sounds. While I love the technology, It's been made way, way way to difficult for the average Joe. Kiss or keep it simple stupid.
Besides the fact that for everything they put out they seem to take a step backwards to probably fit a price point. How about putting out something that doe's one hundred percent of what it say's it will do with no glitches and I'm not reffering to latency, although that would be nice also.
Do these guys really listen to real working musicians? So now we have the RP500 which is really what, A stripped down 3k? I have tried the GT8 pro and the Tonelab. The software loads and works first time everytime
and you can work off line of the effects. I bought the 3k because I've been a Digitech user for alot of years and can deal with the computer issues and get great sounds for my style of playing. But if it breaks and I need something else, It will probably be something else because I'm not willing to go through the hoops again to make it work. The 3k could have been so much more by adding so little to the functions and cost that I would have gladly paid abit more for.
One thought of my own (small brain) and my thoughts on the thoughts of others.
I'd like to see the ability to change tempos and have the loops follow it. If it did that, plus MIDI sync, the live loop possibilities would be amazing.
it would be good if you could have two amps at the same time, one on the LEFT or RIGHT or mixed.
That's not a bad idea at all as it allows one guitarist to simulate two guitars, especially with some slight delay and/or detuning. Not critical, but I can see it being valuable.
Global BPM setting to have time synched modulation effects and delay.
Yes. It's annoying it doesn't do that already, and simple to implement. Like you say you should be able to have a given effect either tempo locked or not.
Bring back the ability to use the Pitch shifter in the MOD section to be completely wet. In the GNX4, a setting of 99 still mixes the unshifted signal in. This way we can have polyphonic pitch shifting if needed.
Not sure how your polyphonic pitch shifting will work when all the tones are already mixed together...?
For the drum machine add more alternate timing drum loops, yes the metronome has some additional timings but include 3/4, 6/8, 7/8, 5/8 for example for the regular drum sounds.
You can add these yourself. I'd like them too, but given limited memory space the chances that those they would put in would be suit a given person would be slim. Better to program your own once you get mast simple stuff methinks.
Ability to have more than one modulation effect at a time.
Fair enough. There is a limit to what will fit. I see your point, but you are very much risking sacrificing simplicity. I know it's not simple already. That's my point. ;o)
REMOVE the Speaker compensation switch. Bring back the target system instead.
Whatever. Confusion will reign either way on usage. Best bet is simply disable the speaker comp switch and if you play through an amp turn of the cabinet emulators. You've got one already. ;o)
Make the footswitches and expression pedal able to send MIDI CC commands.
Wouldn't hurt on some patches only. Then an amp switch could also select external affects, but then if they put your wishlist in what on earth do you need outside the GNX?!? ;o)
The EQ section should be allowed to be parametric or graphic.
Err, paramtric IS graphic. Just don't touch the frequency adjustment. Done! ;o) Or you expect the graphic will have more bands? That takes more processor grunt you realise?
I believe it is, but getting it smooth is near impossible. Just convert the MP3 to a wav and waste a track, though they COULD make wavs optional in the MP3 player section. That sounds easy, and MP3's have timing issues which wav's don't hence making them more suitable for looping.
Sure, but as I said, the unit really needs an FCB-1010 to control the patches alongside it, so that give you a total of three already. I don't need this one, but I can see why many would. Maybe an optional extra which clips on the side (for stability).
Increase sampling resolution to 48Khz or even better to 96Khz
Guitars really don't do much about about 10k, and a LOT of people with good ears can't tell the difference anyhow. I wouldn't want to waste all that memory, or money.
Or have indented grooves on the side of the unit instead of handles that way you dnt have metal things sticking out, but can just put your hands in the grooves to carry it.
I've never even thought about this and couldn't care.
Not sure if you said it above AA but the ability to have separate effects for the Mic input such as compressors, EQ’s, reverbs etc.
Well I'm a keyboard player. I'd like seperate effects for the keyboard. Oh, and if we could put a keyboard on it as well so I don't have to carry one around separately...
The GNX4 is great to a point and does a more than decent job of simulating some great tube amps. The recording and drum machine features make it worth the price. The downside is even really well built models, like the SuperModels will compress the signal and you loose punch in a live situation. Said another way, you really need to play at much higher volume to cut through the mix using the GNX as opposed to playing straight into the same tube amp. I'm probably going to get some flak about that, but that really seems to be the way it is, imho. I do use the supermodels by the way.
That said here is my wish list.
True bypass/stompbox only mode - then you could use the GNX when you actually do have the chance to play into a nice tube amp - nothing beats the real deal, but it would be nice to be able to use the delay and wah, etc. I know there are workarounds on the current GNX - use bypass, disable the eq's. For me that doesn't work very well at all.
This next one could be done via operating system update on the Current GNX4 - how about improving the tuner? Mine works OK relative to itself (means I match my own recordings if I use the GNX tuner), but I use cheapo handheld when playing with other people, seems to be more accurate. I've seen a lot of complaints about this on here. Come 'on guys, you should be embarrassed about this one. Seems like it should be an easy software fix.
Finally, put some little ridges on the little output knobs on the back of the unit- those suckers are almost impossible to turn if your hands are little bit sweaty. Think - guitar strapped on, dark stage, trying to grab that little sucker - damn!
Comments
FIXED. Again, is there is any news about an upcoming GNX5 release?
-2 expressions pedals would simply be the best. The old Vox, higher end Zoom and Behringers MIDI board has two pedals, and I would love to see more people make this standard (Line 6, Boss, DigiTech, etc.).
-Effects loop (at least one) and the ability to assign it any where.
-TRUE by pass for FX only
-Complete seperate FX path for both vocal and guitar, and then be able to use the 2 expression pedals with this in mind. Allowing us to assign one to each input. Now I would LOVE that. The new Live X3 from Line 6 will allow this, but doesn't have the 2 expression pedals.
-Make the looper STANDARD (no recorder needed). They already have a stand alone looper pedal, just add that without the recorder that is in the GNX4 to the new or next upcoming unit.
-Incorperate the New Vocalist 2 into the next model. I'd take that over a built in recorder any day.
-Sounds dumb, but I really like the idea of some kind of handle. That would be great.
-Seperate boost pedal would be great.
-Although I like the USB it would be really nice to have SPIF out so that it would be easier to record at other peoples studios. A lot of people seem to be using their SPIF inputs for recording, and would rather not deal with USB, drivers, and latency issues. They just want to plug and play.
-Build in ALL of the tones from the Hendrix pedal. That pedal is simply the BEST sounding unit that DigiTech has ever come out with!!!
*Add a SUCK knob so that I could turn it WAY down, and a Talent knob that I could turn up to \"11\"
I'm sure that there are more, but that would be my list.
Sounds like you're adding at least another $500 worth of features to the GNX4 (and taking away perhaps $50). Think people would go for that?
I could be wrong, but I think the new X# is going to be the new standard in FEATURES. I know that we will most likely never see the 2 pedals, but it would be nice to at least have an output for an external pedal.
***And in ALL reality, I really didn't think that any of us thought that we were putting a list together that was suppossed to all get into the next model. I actually thought we were putting a list together of things that we would like to see, and that we would only get to see SOME of them. NOT ALL OF THEM.
So yes, I posted my favorite things that I would like to see, but believe me, for the $278 I paid for a BRAND NEW in the box GNX3000, I have NO complaints with what I currently have. This list was just meant to be my WISH list for the future.
I hope that explains where I was coming from and how I feel about my current unit. I have owned the GNX4 twice and am now using a GNX3000, and couldn't be happier.
If Digitech wants to stay in the game they should listen to the comments and reasonable suggestions in this forum or thread.
I personaly would pay 500-700 for a pedal that was good and had features and tone rather than a budgeted pedal for 400 that was made to keep the cost down which resulted in less features and sacrificed tone.
If Digitech wants to stay in the game possibilties are a tube in the pedal, similar to what Zoom has done and or make the pedal to where sound updates and firmware updates can be easily done through usb similar to what line 6 does. Even a built in hard drive and/ or SD card slot capacity of 4+GBs would be awesome. If Digitech creates the sounds and charges for them like Line 6 does with model packs that would be better than how it is now. Tone updates are great ideas and give the user something to look forward to. Also it seems difficult to obtain a real bluesy tone with the GNX4 and there are many inquires and suggestions about this.Authentic Artist patches definately should be included with the new pedal.
Also Digitech needs to communicate to its users more frequently much like line 6 does.
Also with the new pedal they should most definately make a hard case for it- a digitech case made especially for the new pedal. I would pay 100 for a good case. Also the software x edit is just plain ridiculous. I just don't understand how a billion dollar corporation makes such idiotic mistakes and misjudgements. I suggest that they hire some of the people in this forum and perhaps maybe they will see some profit rather than having it all go to line 6.
Thats my take on it. You may not like it but I really don't care.
I would like a really good tuner
I would like more drum patches...and a preset that was ajustable so that it wasnt set at 40 every time i turned it on
I would like a more robust power cord socket. mine has broken 3-4 times now. And when it turns off when playing, it makes a real crack
I would like bug free drivers
cheers dean
Its alright for you people who live in the USA, but as it is the GNX4 (and most other musical equipment) is very, very expensive outside of the USA (eg here in Aus) and I could only just afford it as is.
2. Reduction in the delay/lag that occurs when switching up and down between patches
3. Ability to easily reorder patches through X-Edit (i.e. you could drag a patch up and down in the list instead of having to save it over a new spot)
4. Feedback simulation--ability to have \"on-the-fly\" feedback when in a direct recording situation (I currently simulate this with delay and a number of other effects, but it's not quite right)
5. A hot chicks room
Here's a few modest suggestions:
1. More Amp Models - for me its all about tone flexibility. I seriously think to be considered a true accurate 'amp modeller' a unit needs to duplicate all of a guitar amp's channels, not just a snapshot of one. Some way of selecting these would be awsome. Amp Warping is a great tool and I wouldn't change it at all but the novelty has certainly worn off for me. I think its completely stupid that I have to warp amps then warp them again to get a basic tone I'm looking for. Especially when I can switch on a good valve amp and find a great tone immediately. I'd rather play my ax than press buttons. Don't get me wrong, the current amp models are terrific, but its just too much stuffing about. Especially during a gig when you'd like to set up a quick preset for a particular situation. Shouldn't have to be complex.
2. A true amp/cab bypass switch thats easy to use and won't colour the sound of my rig/amp. People (like me) pay a lot of money for a guitar head/combo and I'm sure they don't want its sound to be altered. I want an amp modeller to give flexibility and be the icing on the cake to whats already a great tone from my valve heads - not be a detriment! This would attract a lot of people to DT.
3. Overall volume control on top of the unit - not have to fiddle on the back.
4. A better idea for the tuner - not hitting the 2 pedals at once in a live situation with the guitar volume up has caused some embarrassing moments.
5. Longer and heavier duty power cord - getting tired of replacing them!
6. Some sort of a case or padded gig bag at least. Even though the GNX has a metal case there are still plenty of bits on them to bump and destroy while in transit.
7. And finally - the rubber tabs underneath the GNX. For gods sakes put screw on items please, please!! Nothing worse than sliding my 3k with my foot on stage only to have one of these rubber jiggers rip off, esp on carpet! You never realise you've done it until the next time you use the GNX and you find its not sitting on the floor properly and all wonky. Its supposed to be a 'floor unit' so make it so that it bloody sits on the floor - not have to chock one corner with drink coasters!!
Most of these are just practical ideas for live gigs.
Hope I didn't offend.
Oh, and one more thats ultra important - latency between presets - fix it please! 8)
How do you feel about that? I'm kinda bummed, to be honest - would you rather have your GNX4/3000 have more amp models, but none that you can alter in ways besides basic EQ and pre/post gain control? I personally prefer the way GNX3000 is configured, all things considered.
I do agree that an amp modeler needs to mimic an actual amp it's modeling. The trouble is, it's a lot more difficult building a model of analog circuitry for all ways in which it responds to a tiny electrical signal as it amplifies it, than taking a snapshot of its behavior and extrapolating the rest of the big picture. Nonetheless, I think most people have their presets set up in this fashion, anyway - in the example of G3456's supermodels, a good portion of his patches and certainly most .acm folders contain both clean and distorted versions of his representations of the amps they model. So, two of my personal favorites from his collection, the XXX and the Triamp, with minor modifications - two presets, one channel clean and one channel high-gain distortion, with the stompbox model to both boost the clean channel to kinda-high-gain, and add fullness to the lead on the high-gain channel. Same cab for all presets. It's consistent, reliable, and something I'm used to. For most situations, any my other patch uses one of thse two as a template, and rarely do I step out of those boundaries - when I do, it's usually something I start from scratch because I need something incredibly specific.
Why do I say all this? Because the GSP1101 does not have a second channel - each preset only carries one amp setting, and you can't \"Warp\" it (need two amp channels for that, remember) or otherwise customize it. Instead, it relies on another patch to contain a corresponding \"clean\" setting, to which you switch should you require a clean channel, or vice versa. It does offer seamless switching (even crossfading of delays between presets) but you still need to have multiple presets, unless your guitar's volume pickups/volume/tone controls suffice for when you need to clean things up.
Which would you rather have?
Good question. I totally agree that its much harder to duplicate the full tonal characteristics of an amp, but perhaps DT is now at a standard or experienced enough to achieve this.... maybe I'm asking too much. A possible question could be: are the amp models actually useable representations?? I know that many are, but take the JCM2000 model for example. Now this is just a scooped out snapshot (single channel) of an amp I know is much more flexible. My point therefore is - yep great, include this JCM example but also include the other tones it is great at also. The same principle applies to a lot of channel switching amps out there. Provide a snapshot of each channel of a XXX, 5150, Mesa Stilleto, Roadking etc etc. The ability to be able to use all these amps (and channels) live in a fuss free manner would be superb. I'd certainly be happy to sacrafice some of the bells and whistles out of a unit if I had an amp modeller which could do this.
Having said that, warping is still needed on a GNX because lets face it, its a great feature and no matter how many amp models get stuffed into a GNX, there will still be people who'll want mix these amps around and create something of their own. Thats fair enough. Marketability comes into that quite a bit too.
I do like the idea of the GSP1101 but not having warping or amp/cab customisation is a flaw. Actually its dumb. Amp and cab customisation is still needed because we still have to 'climatise' our GNX to our personal guitar rigs. For example, the way I have my GNX set up tonally for my JSX sounds pretty average though a Marshall head - it needs to be customised. But that'll depend on the owner - I don't use a lot of cab sims so my needs will be different to others. Why is this unit a rackmount??? I know it has a footswitch but why not have it on the floor? Then I wouldn't have to buy a rack case to house it in etc, etc. Then if I have a few favourite stomp boxes I'd like to keep using, how do I stick them in the loop if the GSP is stuck in a rack hidden behing me?? Just stupid... it shouldn't have to be this complex.
So Iliace - nup, just give me more amp models, keep the warping et al tonal flexibility, the configuration of the GNX3000 and fix some of the physical features (ala what I suggested last post) and that would make the GNX3k much better for the live situation. I'm not putting my GNX3000 down at all, in fact I love it, but I've had to live with it on many, many nights and the novelty of complex features sure wears off. Obviously its different in a studio. It gets to a point that once you have dealt with all the sound variables on stage, you sometimes embrace the simpler things that make your playing more enjoyable.
So I guess after all that - I prefer the GNX3000 configuration!
get a few usable sounds. While I love the technology, It's been made way, way way to difficult for the average Joe. Kiss or keep it simple stupid.
Besides the fact that for everything they put out they seem to take a step backwards to probably fit a price point. How about putting out something that doe's one hundred percent of what it say's it will do with no glitches and I'm not reffering to latency, although that would be nice also.
Do these guys really listen to real working musicians? So now we have the RP500 which is really what, A stripped down 3k? I have tried the GT8 pro and the Tonelab. The software loads and works first time everytime
and you can work off line of the effects. I bought the 3k because I've been a Digitech user for alot of years and can deal with the computer issues and get great sounds for my style of playing. But if it breaks and I need something else, It will probably be something else because I'm not willing to go through the hoops again to make it work. The 3k could have been so much more by adding so little to the functions and cost that I would have gladly paid abit more for.
I'd like to see the ability to change tempos and have the loops follow it. If it did that, plus MIDI sync, the live loop possibilities would be amazing.
Other thoughts...
That's not a bad idea at all as it allows one guitarist to simulate two guitars, especially with some slight delay and/or detuning. Not critical, but I can see it being valuable.
Yes. It's annoying it doesn't do that already, and simple to implement. Like you say you should be able to have a given effect either tempo locked or not.
Probably. I mean if they put it in you don't have to use it. Tap tempo is not required in a lot of situations so...
Yes. Why restrict it? And everything should be controllable via MIDI.
I can live without this, but see your point.
Can live without this too, but wouldn't hurt.
Not sure how your polyphonic pitch shifting will work when all the tones are already mixed together...?
Never noticed this. Not that I use it a lot. Pitch shifting by nature is an imperfect science though.
You can add these yourself. I'd like them too, but given limited memory space the chances that those they would put in would be suit a given person would be slim. Better to program your own once you get mast simple stuff methinks.
You mean tap tempo?
Definately. And MIDI syncable.
Fair enough. There is a limit to what will fit. I see your point, but you are very much risking sacrificing simplicity. I know it's not simple already. That's my point. ;o)
You can gain control the individual amps which you are warping, hence ahceiving same already. It's no biggie.
Whatever. Confusion will reign either way on usage. Best bet is simply disable the speaker comp switch and if you play through an amp turn of the cabinet emulators. You've got one already. ;o)
Use the one on your PA. I put this on the definately not list.
I don't know what that is and hecne I'm not missing it. ;o)
Wouldn't hurt on some patches only. Then an amp switch could also select external affects, but then if they put your wishlist in what on earth do you need outside the GNX?!? ;o)
I don't want it too big, and use an FCB-1010 as well. That way the GNX lives in Stompbox mode, which is where it belongs IMHO.
The display has a limitation. They could add one more digit though and multiply everything by ten.
Err, paramtric IS graphic. Just don't touch the frequency adjustment. Done! ;o) Or you expect the graphic will have more bands? That takes more processor grunt you realise?
Can't hurt. This list is too long to be practical though IMHO.
I believe it is, but getting it smooth is near impossible. Just convert the MP3 to a wav and waste a track, though they COULD make wavs optional in the MP3 player section. That sounds easy, and MP3's have timing issues which wav's don't hence making them more suitable for looping.
Sure, but as I said, the unit really needs an FCB-1010 to control the patches alongside it, so that give you a total of three already. I don't need this one, but I can see why many would. Maybe an optional extra which clips on the side (for stability).
Guitars really don't do much about about 10k, and a LOT of people with good ears can't tell the difference anyhow. I wouldn't want to waste all that memory, or money.
Maybe.
Maybe.
That wouldn't hurt.
Interesting. Not used by 98% of people though.
Your feature list has some issues with that. ;o)
Well half the frequencies are gone. What did you expect? You need a gain control though, yes.
If you could control the Q as you suggested you pretty much have that already.
I don't want it that fragile, or getting hot, etc. Emulations are better now than when the 4 came out. You won't even know.
Whatever.
You people use a lot of sounds. What do you play?
Fair point. Needs to be very quick.
You're asking for features you don't even know the point of? Sheez. How big/expensive do you want it?
Fair enough.
Who cares? You always need an extension lead anyhow. Buy a 2m one and glue it on if it bothers you.
So my unit is 4 inches longer just so I can carry it from BOTH ends? No thanks.
I've never even thought about this and couldn't care.
Well I'm a keyboard player. I'd like seperate effects for the keyboard. Oh, and if we could put a keyboard on it as well so I don't have to carry one around separately...
I do think the display could be improved.
Just a light would be better. Backlit perhaps.
Getting to tuner can be a pain. I hear you.
Enough for now. Sorry about any good ideas I missed in other people's posts...
Cheers,
Kim.
That said here is my wish list.
True bypass/stompbox only mode - then you could use the GNX when you actually do have the chance to play into a nice tube amp - nothing beats the real deal, but it would be nice to be able to use the delay and wah, etc. I know there are workarounds on the current GNX - use bypass, disable the eq's. For me that doesn't work very well at all.
This next one could be done via operating system update on the Current GNX4 - how about improving the tuner? Mine works OK relative to itself (means I match my own recordings if I use the GNX tuner), but I use cheapo handheld when playing with other people, seems to be more accurate. I've seen a lot of complaints about this on here. Come 'on guys, you should be embarrassed about this one. Seems like it should be an easy software fix.
Finally, put some little ridges on the little output knobs on the back of the unit- those suckers are almost impossible to turn if your hands are little bit sweaty. Think - guitar strapped on, dark stage, trying to grab that little sucker - damn!
Thanks
sunnydaze