Help me decide: Variax, GR55 or both?

[evenfell]

Ok guys I need some advice as I am having a hard time deciding what to buy.

First a little bit about my gear and intensions.

COMPUTER:
Macbook pro with native instruments session soundcard (I am going to buy a second one soon)

SOFTWARE:
Riffworks + Reason and record

STYLE:
Rock, progrock, metal, power pop, ambient

INTENTION:
I would like 1 guitar to "do it all". Guitar to play the above styles normal style, be able to use the guitar to control the sounds in reason as midi controller, tunings, capo. I do want a real guitar to do all of this.

I have read alot of forum treads and watched a lot of videos but cant really make up my mind for what suits me the best, so here are my choices:
1. Get a GR55 with a guitar with internal GK3 and that would to the trick? Depart from that I do not want a strat type this could be a problem, as not many guitars come with internal GK3.
2. Get a Variax jtv89 with external GK3 and a GR55, do get the best from to worlds?
3. Get a roland guitar and a GR55 with rackvax?
4. Get a variax guitar with gk3 eksternal, a podhd500, a gr55 to get everything?
5. The GR55 and a guitar with built in piezo ghost (I am aware of the tracking issues)

Could the GR55 to the stuff that a Variax does in choosing guitars and tunings?

[thegreatoz]

I voted for choice 4, literally. I have a JTV-69 and a Pod HD500 and they are a stunning combo with an inspiring range of tones but I too wanted 'everything', my GR-55 was shipped today so I'll know soon if my palette is complete.

[polaris20]

I would do the Variax+ext. GK3+GR-55+HD500.

Reasons:

The Rackvax is still based upon the original Variax, no? If it still is, the sounds aren't very convincing, IMO.
The Ghost system sucks with the GR-55, IMO. I just was extremely frustrated with it personally, though some have had an okay experience.
I'd still get the HD500, because while the amp tones in the 55 are okay, they're still significantly behind the HD series POD.

[germanicus]

I have found for my own needs, the best all around is the combination of a JTV, Pod HD500, and gr55. With this setup you get Line 6's guitar and amp modelling. You would also have rolands best (to date) midi converter, as well as roland COSM amp/effects/guitar modellings.  Its an expensive setup, but its extremely versatile and the sky is the limit in building really cool sounds.

You basically have 3 different independent guitar signals (Variax Digital, Variax Mags, COSM modelled) you can play with, through up to 4 different amp emulations.

-2 Amp/effects chains from the HD500, either of which can be fed by the Variax digital modelling signal or the regular mag pickups in the JTV.
-1 COSM modelled guitar signal which can be funneled through a COSM amp.
-1 additional 'regular guitar' signal (fed by the JTV's 1/4 inch output jack) that can be funneled through the gr55 (either through the above mentioned COSM amp, seperately via a Bypass route, or a different amp model by using the MFX block to load an amp emulation).

Oh yeah plus the 2 independent PCM internal synths.

You could even route the COSM modelled signal from the gr55 into the Pod HD500 if you desire (using the GR55's Guitar our jack). Theres several possible permutations.

On its own, the gr55 DOES have guitar modelling and alternate tuning (although its more limited than the JTV, as the GR55 can not do simultaneous alternate tuning on 12 string models - which the new JTV's can).

In my experience (and please take this with a grain of salt as this can be such a subjective assessment), Rolands guitar modelling isnt nearly as good as that in the current Variax. Ive found theres alot more variability and even customization in the JTV's (workbench software is extremely versatile). I just prefer Line 6's take. Im sure there are folks who feel the inverse.

I havent used a rackvax, but am hesistant about it as its the 'old' generation Variax tech, and the improvements in the new gen were very worthwhile to my needs. I have a few 'old' variax (a 300 and 600) which I dont really ever play now due to the improvements in the JTV.

One option if you dont want to get all 3 would be to try getting the JTV and GR55 on their own first. This would give you both 'brands' of guitar modelling, plus the midi conversion you seek. Give them a good working over and see if you are pleased with the gr55 pulling the entire load itself from an amp modelling capacity. You would be covering most of your bases, and could later add the hd500 for better amp modelling and JTV VDI integration if you so need.

When I got my gr55 I had hoped that it could replace my hd500 as it would mean one less thing to schlepp to a gig, but its more limited in terms of available signal routing/simultaneous effects/ and overall amp tonal quality compared to the HD 500.

Heres a vid my band just did playing live. Im using a jtv+pod hd500 for the main guitar sounds, and a gr55 to augment the sounds with a COSM based sitar + PCM based Flutes and Strings (at very low volumes).



Hope this helps.

Good luck!

[thegreatoz]

Theres several possible permutations.

germanicus, could I convince you to share your your cable routing from the guitar and through/between the Pod and the GR-55 to your amplification and also, are you using MIDI program change messages to control one unit via the other? 

[germanicus]

germanicus, could I convince you to share your your cable routing from the guitar and through/between the Pod and the GR-55 to your amplification and also, are you using MIDI program change messages to control one unit via the other?

From the JTV I have a VDI cable connected to the POD HD500's VDI input.
On the JTV I have a GK3 pickup, which is connected via 13 pin cable to the GR55.
When using both the Pod and Gr55 I dont bother connecting the JTV's quarter inch output to the GK3. This may (?) mean im not properly grounding the GK pickup, but im not sure.

I dont use any MIDI program change info between the Pod and GR55, as I actually prefer seperately controlling each unit as changes are needed. I have about 8 different main patches on my Pod I use frequently, and dont want to tie them to specific gr55 patches (or vice versa). I also like having seperate volume Pedal control over each unit.

I have also spent time creating patches for just the JTV and GR55, in which case i DO use a patch cable to route the 1/4 inch JTV output into the GK3. I set up the gr55 patches in this case so that the COSM modelling volume is controlled via the gr55 volume pedal, and the PCM synths are controlled via the GK3 volume knob, and I just use the JTV's volume to mix in the variax signal.

For amplification I take the Stereo outputs from both the gr55 and pod hd500 and go into seperate stereo channels on my traynor k4.

[evenfell]

I have found for my own needs, the best all around is the combination of a JTV, Pod HD500, and gr55. With this setup you get Line 6's guitar and amp modelling. You would also have rolands best (to date) midi converter, as well as roland COSM amp/effects/guitar modellings.  Its an expensive setup, but its extremely versatile and the sky is the limit in building really cool sounds.

You basically have 3 different independent guitar signals (Variax Digital, Variax Mags, COSM modelled) you can play with, through up to 4 different amp emulations.

-2 Amp/effects chains from the HD500, either of which can be fed by the Variax digital modelling signal or the regular mag pickups in the JTV.
-1 COSM modelled guitar signal which can be funneled through a COSM amp.
-1 additional 'regular guitar' signal (fed by the JTV's 1/4 inch output jack) that can be funneled through the gr55 (either through the above mentioned COSM amp, seperately via a Bypass route, or a different amp model by using the MFX block to load an amp emulation).

Oh yeah plus the 2 independent PCM internal synths.

You could even route the COSM modelled signal from the gr55 into the Pod HD500 if you desire (using the GR55's Guitar our jack). Theres several possible permutations.

On its own, the gr55 DOES have guitar modelling and alternate tuning (although its more limited than the JTV, as the GR55 can not do simultaneous alternate tuning on 12 string models - which the new JTV's can).

In my experience (and please take this with a grain of salt as this can be such a subjective assessment), Rolands guitar modelling isnt nearly as good as that in the current Variax. Ive found theres alot more variability and even customization in the JTV's (workbench software is extremely versatile). I just prefer Line 6's take. Im sure there are folks who feel the inverse.

I havent used a rackvax, but am hesistant about it as its the 'old' generation Variax tech, and the improvements in the new gen were very worthwhile to my needs. I have a few 'old' variax (a 300 and 600) which I dont really ever play now due to the improvements in the JTV.

One option if you dont want to get all 3 would be to try getting the JTV and GR55 on their own first. This would give you both 'brands' of guitar modelling, plus the midi conversion you seek. Give them a good working over and see if you are pleased with the gr55 pulling the entire load itself from an amp modelling capacity. You would be covering most of your bases, and could later add the hd500 for better amp modelling and JTV VDI integration if you so need.

When I got my gr55 I had hoped that it could replace my hd500 as it would mean one less thing to schlepp to a gig, but its more limited in terms of available signal routing/simultaneous effects/ and overall amp tonal quality compared to the HD 500.

Heres a vid my band just did playing live. Im using a jtv+pod hd500 for the main guitar sounds, and a gr55 to augment the sounds with a COSM based sitar + PCM based Flutes and Strings (at very low volumes).



Hope this helps.

Good luck!

This is very helpful, thanks.

Just out of curiosity (this might be off topic, but are still connected to my questions), have you tried to use the PODHD500 as a midi foot controller for computer programs, such as start/stop/loop in a daw or to use it as a stompbox in podfarm? The reason I am asking is simply that reason record can not load vst/AU but can use podfarm standalone mode for guitar sounds. I know the line6 shortboard mkll works perfect this way, but if I could get the hd500 to act as a soundcard, midi foot controller and great amps in one that would just make my day.

[germanicus]

Sorry I have not tried using the Pod HD in this capacity.

There is an ASIO driver for the pod hd to have it work as an interface, and you can customize its midi control, but with respect to how in depth that control is, I cant speak confidently.

Its possible that if you get the pod hd500, you may want to use its own internal amps, not pod farm, for recording. I like the amps in the hd significantly more than those in the xt/x3 generation (even though the HD has fewer number of amps modelled).

[evenfell]

I voted for choice 4, literally. I have a JTV-69 and a Pod HD500 and they are a stunning combo with an inspiring range of tones but I too wanted 'everything', my GR-55 was shipped today so I'll know soon if my palette is complete.

When you get your GR55 please post your experiences here. 

[mbenigni]

Not a lot of minimalists in the house, I take it. 

I don't know, it obviously goes without saying that the most powerful rig will be the one comprised of every single piece of gear you're considering.  Personally, I'd have to consider my budget, and my tolerance for load-in/ load-out/ setup headaches, etc.  It's a very personal thing.  I agree that the POD HD sounds worlds better than the amp modeling in the GR55, but as for the rest, there is a lot of redundancy in buying a GK'd JTV, a GR 55, and a POD HD.

I wanted a JTV but they just weren't available early enough.  Now that I have a GR55 I find myself satisfied with the alt tunings and guitar modeling (and I have magnetic pickups whenever I'm not) and the GR/GK provide MIDI, whereas the JTV does not.  Now that the JTVs are finally out, turns out I wouldn't change my mind if I could do it over. 

I do think it's reasonable to add a better amp/effects modeler, or just a better amp and effects depending on your preference.  The first thing to consider here is, how do you plan to amplify your rig?  FRFR or guitar amp or some combination of both?  You can coax decent tones out of the GR55 if you put the work in, but the routing throws a lot of curve balls at you if you're not FRFR across the board.

[mbenigni]

P.S.  If you're not adverse to additional gear or techie stuff, you could substitute a laptop for that HD500 (i.e. using the GR55 as soundcard/foot controller as you propose using a PODHD above) and get access to Guitar Rig, Amplitube, etc. and a whole world of additional synth/sampler sounds.  All of this in theory, of course... I haven't had much success in using the GR55 with a PC, but neither have I worked that hard at it.

[polaris20]

Not a lot of minimalists in the house, I take it. 

I don't know, it obviously goes without saying that the most powerful rig will be the one comprised of every single piece of gear you're considering.  Personally, I'd have to consider my budget, and my tolerance for load-in/ load-out/ setup headaches, etc.  It's a very personal thing.  I agree that the POD HD sounds worlds better than the amp modeling in the GR55, but as for the rest, there is a lot of redundancy in buying a GK'd JTV, a GR 55, and a POD HD.

I wanted a JTV but they just weren't available early enough.  Now that I have a GR55 I find myself satisfied with the alt tunings and guitar modeling (and I have magnetic pickups whenever I'm not) and the GR/GK provide MIDI, whereas the JTV does not.  Now that the JTVs are finally out, turns out I wouldn't change my mind if I could do it over. 

I do think it's reasonable to add a better amp/effects modeler, or just a better amp and effects depending on your preference.  The first thing to consider here is, how do you plan to amplify your rig?  FRFR or guitar amp or some combination of both?  You can coax decent tones out of the GR55 if you put the work in, but the routing throws a lot of curve balls at you if you're not FRFR across the board.

That's kinda where I'm going. I am happy enough with the 55's VG tones to not really want to spring for the Variax, as cool as it is. So I'll have a GR-55, HD400 or 500, and my Ibanez with GK-KIT.

[evenfell]

Not a lot of minimalists in the house, I take it. 

I don't know, it obviously goes without saying that the most powerful rig will be the one comprised of every single piece of gear you're considering.  Personally, I'd have to consider my budget, and my tolerance for load-in/ load-out/ setup headaches, etc.  It's a very personal thing.  I agree that the POD HD sounds worlds better than the amp modeling in the GR55, but as for the rest, there is a lot of redundancy in buying a GK'd JTV, a GR 55, and a POD HD.

I wanted a JTV but they just weren't available early enough.  Now that I have a GR55 I find myself satisfied with the alt tunings and guitar modeling (and I have magnetic pickups whenever I'm not) and the GR/GK provide MIDI, whereas the JTV does not.  Now that the JTVs are finally out, turns out I wouldn't change my mind if I could do it over. 

I do think it's reasonable to add a better amp/effects modeler, or just a better amp and effects depending on your preference.  The first thing to consider here is, how do you plan to amplify your rig?  FRFR or guitar amp or some combination of both?  You can coax decent tones out of the GR55 if you put the work in, but the routing throws a lot of curve balls at you if you're not FRFR across the board.

I am planning to use headphones (quality ones that is) only. Maybe eventually use studio monitors. I am not into amps, as I am more than happy with software amps.

[evenfell]

P.S.  If you're not adverse to additional gear or techie stuff, you could substitute a laptop for that HD500 (i.e. using the GR55 as soundcard/foot controller as you propose using a PODHD above) and get access to Guitar Rig, Amplitube, etc. and a whole world of additional synth/sampler sounds.  All of this in theory, of course... I haven't had much success in using the GR55 with a PC, but neither have I worked that hard at it.

I am into techie stuff.    I already have a mackbook pro and a soundcard. I also have guitar rig4 and amplitube3, and they are both awesome, tweaked the right way. Since I cant find a real answer to this question: "is it possible to use the hd500 as midi foot controller to control either podfarm, or any other midi compatible software amp sims", I am willing to buy it just to figure this out, as I was planning to buy a midi foot controller anyways.

[evenfell]

I would do the Variax+ext. GK3+GR-55+HD500.

Reasons:

The Rackvax is still based upon the original Variax, no? If it still is, the sounds aren't very convincing, IMO.
The Ghost system sucks with the GR-55, IMO. I just was extremely frustrated with it personally, though some have had an okay experience.
I'd still get the HD500, because while the amp tones in the 55 are okay, they're still significantly behind the HD series POD.

I agree. I found out that rackvax was 1st edition, which means no tunings. Thats one of the main reasons for to seriously consider a variax guitar.

[thegreatoz]

I agree. I found out that rackvax was 1st edition, which means no tunings. Thats one of the main reasons for to seriously consider a variax guitar.

To be clear 1st generation Variax guitars (and therefore RackVax units) CAN do alt tunings, they just can't do alt tunings AND 12 string models at the same time.

[Elantric]

is it possible to use the hd500 as midi foot controller to control either podfarm, or any other midi compatible software amp sims", I am willing to buy it just to figure this out, as I was planning to buy a midi foot controller anyways.

HD500 questions are best answered on the Line 6 Forums and other sites that focus on the Line6 gear:

http://www.instituteofnoise.com/forum/

http://www.vettaville.nl/page.php?id=145#top

http://line6.com/support/community/support/pod_support/pod_hd?view=all

http://line6.com/software/index.html
The HD500 MIDI implementation is very good

Read the POD HD Advanced Handbook to learn all the details about using the HD500 as a MIDI controller in Appendix B

http://l6c.scdn.line6.net/data/l/0a06434dc7704ca4b3b26b924/application/pdf/POD%20HD500%20Advanced%20Guide%20(Rev%20F)%20-%20English.pdf

The workflow goes like this:

1) On the HD500, Set up a range of specific MIDI CC# that you want the HD500 to send,  mapped one MIDI CC# to each of the HD-500 pedals.
 
2) On the GR-55, Set up a range of specific MIDI CC# that you want to map to GR-55 controls. Use the same range of specific MIDI CC# events as defined in Step#1

The HD500 works as a MIDI footcontroller, but its not perfect.

By contrast - a modern dedicated MIDI footcontroller will allow you to send more than one type of MIDI event type: Sysex, RPN, NRPN, MIDI Note on/off, etc.

The HD500 provides a more restricted capability.
==================================

Using POD HD500 as a MIDI Controller Device
You can configure any number of your POD HD500 Presets to include customized MIDI Control assignments for most footswitches and Pedal controls. This allows you to use POD HD500 to remotely control other hardware or software, such as Line 6 M13, M9, POD® Farm 2 Plug-In, or any other Line 6 or 3rd party products that respond to external MIDI control!
The MIDI ASSIGN Screen
The MIDI ASSIGN screen is where you configure custom MIDI commands. To access the MIDI ASSIGN screen, start on the Home View page and press and hold the MOVE button. All settings in this screen are saved per Preset.
ENTERDBL PRESS TO ASSIGN CTLMOVEAMP & FX ON / OFF
Press and hold the MOVE button to display the MIDI ASSIGN screen
Use the and Nav. Disc buttons to select the desired footswitch or Exp Pedal control. The selected control is indicated by the down arrow (such as FS2 in the above screen). Once selected, the control's MIDI options can be edited using the Multi-function Knobs 1-4. Each respective control in the screen indicates if it has an active MIDI assignment:
FS1 with MIDI AssignmentFS1 with no MIDI Assignment
• MIDI Channel (Knob 1): Select the MIDI Channel on which the selected control will transmit its MIDI command.
• None: Send no MIDI data. (Note that you won't see Knob 2 - 4 options appear until you select an option other than "None.")
• 01 - 16: Choose the MIDI Channel on which to transmit the selected control's messages.
• Base: Sets the control to follow the current "system" MIDI Channel, as set in the device Setup (see "Page 6, MIDI/Tempo Options" on page 2•8). This is a handy feature to have any Presets' MIDI Controls set to "Base" to dynamically follow the common Setup -MIDI Channel value.
• Message Type (Knob 2): Select the type of MIDI message sent by the selected control.
• FS1 - FS8, LOOPER and TAP footswitches can each be assigned to send MIDI CC, CC Toggle, Program Change (fixed), Bank Change (fixed) or Note On messages.
• The EXP TOE SWITCH can be assigned to send two separate MIDI CC Toggle commands, which allows it to alternately toggle between two functions on your target device.
• The EXP1 and EXP2 pedal controls can be assigned to each send one MIDI CC with a definable Value Range, which allows you to sweep a variable parameter on your target device.
• CC/Program/Bank # (Knob 3): Selects further options, depending on the Message Type selected (Knob 2).
• CC #: When the Message Type is "CC" or "CC Toggle," this allows the choice of any MIDI CC number from 000 to 127. If editing EXP1 or EXP2 controls, this knob sets the Minimum CC value for the pedal. (Also see the Knob 4 Value description.)
• Program #: When the Message Type is "Program Change," this allows the choice of a fixed Program Value of 000 to 127.
• Bank #: When the Message Type is "Bank Change," this allows the choice of fixed Bank Value of 000 to 127.
• Note: When the Message Type is "Note On," this allows the choice of the specific musical note value (C0 to G9)
Value/Velocity (Knob 4): Selects further options, depending on the Knob 2 and Knob 3 settings.
• Value (CC): When the Message Type is "CC," this sets the value for the CC that is sent on every press of the switch control (000 - 127). When editing the EXP1 or EXP2 controls, this sets the Maximum Value for the pedal.
• Value (CC Toggle):When the Message Type is "CC Toggle," you can select 000 or 127 to choose an "On" or "Off." The control sends alternating messages per click - Perfect got "MIDI Mute" messages!
• Note that no Knob 4 option is displayed if the Message Type is "Program Change" or "Bank Change."
• Velocity: Sets the Velocity value for the Note message (000 - 127).

[polaris20]

I have found for my own needs, the best all around is the combination of a JTV, Pod HD500, and gr55. With this setup you get Line 6's guitar and amp modelling. You would also have rolands best (to date) midi converter, as well as roland COSM amp/effects/guitar modellings.  Its an expensive setup, but its extremely versatile and the sky is the limit in building really cool sounds.

You basically have 3 different independent guitar signals (Variax Digital, Variax Mags, COSM modelled) you can play with, through up to 4 different amp emulations.

-2 Amp/effects chains from the HD500, either of which can be fed by the Variax digital modelling signal or the regular mag pickups in the JTV.
-1 COSM modelled guitar signal which can be funneled through a COSM amp.
-1 additional 'regular guitar' signal (fed by the JTV's 1/4 inch output jack) that can be funneled through the gr55 (either through the above mentioned COSM amp, seperately via a Bypass route, or a different amp model by using the MFX block to load an amp emulation).

Oh yeah plus the 2 independent PCM internal synths.

You could even route the COSM modelled signal from the gr55 into the Pod HD500 if you desire (using the GR55's Guitar our jack). Theres several possible permutations.

On its own, the gr55 DOES have guitar modelling and alternate tuning (although its more limited than the JTV, as the GR55 can not do simultaneous alternate tuning on 12 string models - which the new JTV's can).

In my experience (and please take this with a grain of salt as this can be such a subjective assessment), Rolands guitar modelling isnt nearly as good as that in the current Variax. Ive found theres alot more variability and even customization in the JTV's (workbench software is extremely versatile). I just prefer Line 6's take. Im sure there are folks who feel the inverse.

I havent used a rackvax, but am hesistant about it as its the 'old' generation Variax tech, and the improvements in the new gen were very worthwhile to my needs. I have a few 'old' variax (a 300 and 600) which I dont really ever play now due to the improvements in the JTV.

One option if you dont want to get all 3 would be to try getting the JTV and GR55 on their own first. This would give you both 'brands' of guitar modelling, plus the midi conversion you seek. Give them a good working over and see if you are pleased with the gr55 pulling the entire load itself from an amp modelling capacity. You would be covering most of your bases, and could later add the hd500 for better amp modelling and JTV VDI integration if you so need.

When I got my gr55 I had hoped that it could replace my hd500 as it would mean one less thing to schlepp to a gig, but its more limited in terms of available signal routing/simultaneous effects/ and overall amp tonal quality compared to the HD 500.

Heres a vid my band just did playing live. Im using a jtv+pod hd500 for the main guitar sounds, and a gr55 to augment the sounds with a COSM based sitar + PCM based Flutes and Strings (at very low volumes).



Hope this helps.

Good luck!

Really nice work on that tune!! I like it.

[myksara]

I m planning to get a jtv variax 69 or 89 but not sure which one to get. . The tremelo may be a deciding
factor. .buti have never seen people talking about it on the jtv69...how is the stability? Can one dive bomb blackmore style? I m aware jtv89f is out now with a Floyd rose but it will take some time to be
available in India. .
I have a gr55 n gc1 combo but jtv variax looks very interesting..
So jtv69 or 89??

[Deus02]

I m planning to get a jtv variax 69 or 89 but not sure which one to get. . The tremelo may be a deciding
factor. .buti have never seen people talking about it on the jtv69...how is the stability? Can one dive bomb blackmore style? I m aware jtv89f is out now with a Floyd rose but it will take some time to be
available in India. .
I have a gr55 n gc1 combo but jtv variax looks very interesting..
So jtv69 or 89??

Keep in mind, whether it is the 69 or 89, when it comes to the guitar modelling and variable tuning options, except for some minor differences in switching capabilities, they will be soundwise, pretty much identical in those capacities.  It is basically just a matter of personal choice with the "look" of the instrument itself and, perhaps, some differences in the sound when using the magnetic pickups.  No doubt you noticed already that the 89 has two humbuckers whereas the 69 has three pickups(one humbucker and two single coils, much along the line of the "HSS Strat"). 

Along with both the GR55 and HD500, I have the "69" and although I don't use it alot, the tremolo bar works quite well and the guitar stays in tune without any problems.  I almost always mix the sound of everything together in my playing and it gives me a wealth of unique tones that would be impossible with either just on its own.  In my opinion, the guitar modelling on the GR55 comes well short of the Variax in its quality of sound so you will have a lot of options here.  It is also a matter of making sure you have the proper volume balance between the two as well.  The only real limitation with this set-up comes with any alternate tunings.  If I wish to change any tunings on the Variax and I want to play both at the same time, I will have to make the same tuning adjustments to match with the GR55 tones usually done with just creating an alternate patch.   

[Litesnsirens]

Here is another minimalist.  I started out with the JTV69 and HD500.  I added the GR-55 and stuck the pickup on to the JTV69 and used both the GR-55 and the HD500 for a few gigs and messed around with blending different tones.  I never really tried the guitar and amp modelling at first but then dug in and messed around with it.  I was pleasantly surprised!!  The more I messed with it, the better tones I was getting.  Within a few weeks maybe a month I decided not to bother with the Line 6 stuff at all, I had created enough useable guitar tones and over time dialled them in to the point where I was liking the GR tones better than any of the tones I had gotten with the Line 6 stuff.

I bought a Roland GC-1 guitar and haven't looked back since.  Now none of this means that the GR-55 has better guitar tones than the HD500, it just means that despite the dedicated controls of the HD500 vs the menu based control of the GR55, my brain was able to coax out better tones on the GR.  mbenigni makes great points about load in and out and set up.  There's a lot to be said for a single out direct to mixer from the GR and then just my GC-1 13 pinned to the GR.  I don't bother with the real pickups of the GC.

The only thing I am missing since the total switch is 12 string on alt tunings.  I can live without it.

[pedwards2932]

Litesnsirens,  I think we are both on the same page... I have a James Tyler 59 which I really like but I was not convinced that in a live situation there was going to be a significant difference.  I play mostly classic rock and I have been able to get the GR 55 to reproduce pretty much any type of guitar sound I want. I only use the guitar models and synths...don't use my Godins pickups at all.  I have had a little more difficulty getting the synth stuff where I want it,  I own a GR 30 and it has some sounds that I really liked and it is taking a while to reproduce them.  The best thing I can say about the GR 55 is it is one floor unit that does everything.  It has cut down on my setup time and on how much I have to bring to a gig.  Once you get it all dialed in it is just plug in turn it up and you are ready to go.

[mockchoi]

Litesnsirens and pedwards2932, have you by chance shared your guitar mode patches?  I'd love to try them out.

[pedwards2932]

Most of my patches are pretty generic.....just modifying available patches a bit.  I usually try to use the guitar/amp that was most likely used in the original recording and go from there.  There are a lot of patches available on this forum that are great and I have used them as well.  I gave some specifics on a "growl" saxophone that was one of the sounds I was having a hard time with.  I think this is the link https://www.vguitarforums.com/smf/index.php?topic=7704.msg54083#msg54083 I am still using the patch I outlined there for my "go to" sax sound.

[Litesnsirens]

pedwards2932, it sounds like we are on the same page for sure.  One of the big things for me was that I would spend a bunch of time with amp settings on my tube amps my individual effects only to get to the gig and the soundman sticks a mic in front of my amp, and out front it sounds nothing like what I was going for.

So in contrast, I now own my own PA (the new line 6 dream stage) I craft my tones through it and I know what I'm going to sound like out front and through my monitor.  My point is you can spend a lot of time being really picky about your guitar tone but unless you have the right approach, by the time you're playing live, it could be a lot of wasted time.  I've read countless threads of guys crafting tones in headphones and on computer speakers only to be disappointed when they plug into a big PA or go to a jam. 

I'm never shocked or disappointed with my guitar tone, still my patches are ever evolving via slight little nips and tucks, as I continue to dial them in.  But that's only because I play in 3 bands and have a different patch for each song.  So I'm over 100 patches that I am using.  A lot of them started out generic but over time I'm dialling them in for the particular song I use them for.

That's probably why I haven't shared a bunch of my patches to date, although I have out a few up on the dedicated section.  The other thing is they sound great through my rig, but could sound very different through another setup. Still I will get more up as time permits.