These forums are read only, please use our new forums here.

Main :: POD HD


Support forums for all POD HD products


Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by casparello on 2011-02-14 09:48:03

Any of you already worked and created with the amp modeling user interface on Logic 9?
It´s self explanatory and fun to work with!

screen-capture-2.png

I really recommend the ease of use of Logic 9 to any Line 6 UI software developer around.

screen-capture-3.png

To the contrary "HD500 Edit" for Mac and Windows is so confusing, so damn ugly and so not easy and fun to use. Wow!

screen-capture-4.png


But what do you think?

How can the "HDxxx Edit"- software be improved?

Will bigger pictures of effects and amps do the job and help to see what you are programming??

What´s on your wishlist?


Oh, by the way: As of today (February/2011) there is no Mac driver for the 64 bit kernel of Mac OSX ( > Snow Leopard / > 10.6.) and all other software (Line 6 Monkey, Line 6 HD500 Edit, ...) is also 32 bit. C´mon! It´s about time, I´d say.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by phil_m on 2011-02-14 09:52:00

There are few things in HD500 that I find kind of awkward and clunky, but overall it does its job.  The design of the software editor is way, way down the list of priorities for me, honestly.  Making it look nicer doesn't really add anything in the way of real functionality to the unit.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by maqaf1 on 2011-02-14 10:02:14

Great idea!

Let's have a dedicated place to list constructive suggestions and hopefully avoid the "this _______ sucks" rants.

1. I would like to see the FX Pane have a smoother workflow:

Clicking on an Effect/amp/mixer should automatically open its editor (instead of having to click on its tab)

2. Cabs and mics should respond to mouse scroll wheel.

This would facilitate comparing models, eliminating the need to open the drop menu and reselect.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by casparello on 2011-02-14 10:06:14

Thanks! That´s alright. But is "does the job" enough for somebody like you?

I mean: Why not have/ create a really good looking, intuitive, fun and easy to use software to explore and manage your POD with?


All we have to do is to list what has to be programmed as a great software.





Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by mdmayfield on 2011-02-14 10:08:37

I agree that Logic 9's Amp Designer has a good interface, and that HD500 Edit's is clunky and too modal. I would like to see something much more like Gearbox or even the old Line 6 Edit. And definitely EQs and other effects showing actual Hz and dB, not percent!

However, I think I disagree that 64-bit Snow Leopard drivers are a pressing need so far; I see them as just something to get around to eventually, out of completeness. I haven't yet seen a good reason to boot into 64-bit mode, since the 32-bit kernel runs applications in 64-bit mode just fine.

Out of curiosity, is there someplace you're finding a benefit with 64-bit mode? Maybe something has changed that I didn't know about.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by phil_m on 2011-02-14 10:10:32

I'm not against making it better.  All I'm saying is that if the choice is spending manhours on improving the editor versus improving other things, I'd probably vote for the other things at the moment.  In all actuality I usually still make my tones the old-fashioned way by turning knobs on the unit itself.  I usually just use the editor for arranging the tones in a way that I like and giving them names.  Entering in text on the HD500 itself is something that I really hate.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by TheRealZap on 2011-02-14 10:17:39

i totally agree with your point about 32bit vs 64bit

but i would jump the driver in front of giving the editor some cartoon like interface...

not because of any real benefit in the drivers operation....

just because it will be easier for everyone now that it seems all the macbook pros are coming pre-setup for 64bit.

i'm really not all that impressed with the logic interface...

i think that record has a better interface, being able to see the front and back of the rack based gear etc....

having said that... the current interface is fine by me, would like to see the window resizeable both directions... larger for large screens and smaller for netbook use.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by casparello on 2011-02-14 10:40:22

Shure, the benefits of a 64-bit operating system are twofold. The first is that you can more effectively deal with large files, such as images, movies or soundfiles, since the 4GB RAM limitation of earlier 32-bit operating system components is no longer a concern !!!

The second is that, if an application takes advantage of 64-bit registers in the latest processors, you can realize a significant gain in performance:

And it is swift. I can confirm this since I changed and work with Logic 9 / 64-bit in the studio. I updated all other software to 64-bit and with the same hardware life has changed to the better.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by TheRealZap on 2011-02-14 11:13:02

your first point on having additional RAM is valid for some things... but we aren't talking about editing raw images or video... so it will have little impact on the audio stuff we are talking about...

the second point is incomplete... since only native 64bit programs can possibly get to those benefits, and many of the current programs are still 32bit...

basically 64bit is like widening a highway... if you have 32 cars on 64 lanes... the speed limit does not change... you actually have an inefficient system... because of the unused lanes which still need resources to monitor and control...

64bit can actually degrade performance (mildly)

i know for a fact that pod farm plugin for instance is only 32bit coded, so you run into this issue even if the host program (logic) is running 64bit.

in a perfect 64bit world with everything 64bit... 64bit would clearly be better.

regardless though... i don't think anyone was arguing about the fact that 64bit will be better...

the real argument is that the state of computing right now... does not have any real net benefits...



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by rdgonzales on 2011-02-14 12:00:11

I also would like to see the window resizeable. As far as does the interface do it's job, yes.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by casparello on 2011-02-14 12:30:16

Yes, a broad topic for a new thread.

But we can agree on "the sooner every software is 64 bit on a 64 bit system – the better"

and it´s clearly heading to 64 bit as color displays replaced greenscreen or blackandwhite and iPv4 will move to iPv6 soon.


Let´s get back to the brainpicking and list what we like to have changed in the "HDxxx Edit"-Software:

I hope the folks at Line 6 scan this websites from time to time for market research ...



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by desso on 2011-02-14 16:33:13

I just set up a monitor above my music equipment in my studio and with my wireless mouse, HD500 Edit works great!  I can now edit tones on the fly without having to bend over to the floor to look at the little lcd display.  I'm using an older 4x3 LCD panel and with the shape of the HD500 Edit window it's perfect.  I just wish I could resize/full size the window. 

When it comes to software, I'd MUCH rather have functionality than eye candy and HD500 Edit is doing fine. Just a tweak or two (window size) away from 5 stars.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by FrozenOzone on 2011-02-14 19:24:14

desso,  I agree with you.  I like the HD500 Edit program.  Could they improve it, yes with a few tweaks (like the window resizing). But it does what it's suppose to do and that's good enough for me.  I have to admit that the Logic 9 interface looks cool but I highly doubt Line 6 will change their interface at this point.  But you never know.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by Studioratasshole on 2011-02-14 21:23:40

Lol... How about start with fixxing the HD500?  I just joined the "LOGO LOOP OF DEATH"  club.   And this is where me and the HD500 part ways!

If you havent read a post about it....dont worry im sure you will get to experiance it first hand.... only a matter of time.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by phil_m on 2011-02-15 06:46:24

Why don't you just get a replacement unit?  That specific issue has happened on some units, but it doesn't appear to be that widespread.  It seems like the sort of thing that probably shows pretty quickly in a unit rather than something that would develop down the line.  It sounds like it's probably some sort of sporadic issue with some hardware component.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by casparello on 2011-02-15 07:46:10

Sorry, "Studioratasshole" but this seems off topic to me.
Why don´t you call Line 6 or your local dealer to get a replacement?
I really hope you have a good HD500 soon! 



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by mdmayfield on 2011-02-15 08:31:56

TheRealZap wrote:

...instead of giving the editor some cartoon like interface...


The graphics are not the point, at least not my point. The changes I envision have to do with changing the fundamental hierarchical organization of the program, the layout of the controls, and the units used to display the parameters.

I don't care about the graphic "skin" at all, and would rather have a bare-bones graphic-less default UI window with regular OS sliders and widgets, if it could be organized more optimally than the current HD Edit.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by Studioratasshole on 2011-02-15 08:40:32



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by Studioratasshole on 2011-02-15 08:41:27

lol ya I BET its off topic.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by casparello on 2011-02-15 09:14:07

well, maybe Line6 started the HD project in order to get on your nerves and get a lot of bad reputation worldwide?
who knows? and as they don´t talk to us directly in this community we can only guess...



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by HansOlthof on 2011-02-16 00:34:33

1. I'd like to see a tuner in edit when I activate it on the unit.

2. When I click on the picture of the item (eg amp, mixer etc) I'd like the edit panel to come up. Currently the pictures don't contribute to the UI. you have to push a text button.

3. Click and drag items in the signal train. the movement arrows are clumsy.

4. Put a master volume control.

5. I miss the metronome

I'ts pretty easy to spot that what I *really* wanted to buy was an HD Bean - lol

regards,

Hans



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by lowyaw on 2011-02-16 02:25:06

i support the idea of having a tuner window

other that that, i believe they have done good work with the layout

it's pretty difficult to have all the FX visible, for example, and editabla, all at the same time. the soultion they came up with is the most logical to me.

but there are bugs in the software, i lose presets on the hd500 regularly while starting Edit, etc.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by pheyer on 2011-02-16 02:58:13

I'm agree but it's really a pitty to see that Pod Farm and Gear Box have a awesome graphic interface which has not been reused into the software HD500 edit.

Why did they create this poor new graphic interface whereas they have a very good one ? It's a bit mysterious!



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by Brandon on 2011-02-16 18:34:54

I vote for Line 6 throwing the whole interface out and starting from scratch.  I've always suspected it was rushed out the door so the HD series could be in the stores in time for the holidays. Don't hold your breath for any real improvements.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by merdenoms74 on 2011-03-02 23:46:04

I'm sorry if I've missed this in the manual, but is there an 'undo' or at least a 'compare' function in HD Edit so you can undo changes you have made to a patch without having to reload it again? Is there a shortcut to restoring a patch while working in HD Edit? It's pretty frustrating not being able to do this.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by hansvaneven on 2011-03-03 00:29:04

Yes, please improve or completely change the editor, it's so user un-friendly ....

Most things are already mentioned, I'd like to see undo feature as well and drag and drop, but I really prefered earlier editors from line 6.

Ah, and could we also make the FX blocks accept more then just 6 parameters/effect like in X3 or Pod Farm 2 ? Comon, how can you do a good parametric 4 band EQ pr some advanced effects with so few parameters, we're in 2011!!! I really can't believe Line 6 made such a limited editor with such an advanced device

Cheers,

Hans



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by casparello on 2011-05-11 03:07:28

I think we now have collected sufficient information that is valuable enough
for Line 6 to
improve the software for the HD series in order to be to be a useful tool.

Other suggestions than the ones we already collected are of course welcome
but I would like to encourage the responsible @ Line 6

to start programming the update

and use this information.

I hope this forum is a part of the Line 6 research and customer satisfaction program ...


This call was started by me me only because

I fell over in shock after buying the HD 500.
This time it was me reaching out but it quite possibly

could have been anybody else:


This software seriously needs to be improved.




Line 6: Please start this project and let us know



what we can expect to work with in the near future.






Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by guitarzan_josh on 2011-05-11 07:53:35

I hate that I have to turn ON an effect before editing the parameters.  Small.. but irritating.  I also wish that the effects would move based on the signal chain.  Its a P.I.T.A. to try to find the effect.  Again, trivial, but it still is not ergonomic!



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by maqaf1 on 2011-05-11 10:13:44

guitarzan_josh wrote:

I hate that I have to turn ON an effect before editing the parameters.  Small.. but irritating.  I also wish that the effects would move based on the signal chain.  Its a P.I.T.A. to try to find the effect.  Again, trivial, but it still is not ergonomic!

Agreed!



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by meambobbo on 2011-05-11 13:42:07

Here's another suggestion - keep the effects in the order they occur in the chain.  I know it's slightly improper because at places the chain splits and merges, but just keeping one side of the chain in front of the other is a decent compromise, and this beats the crap out of having the FX page's effects in a random order compared to the actual chain.

It's a PITA when I have 3 parametric EQ's and I have to scroll over the image of each one to figure out which is which on the FX page.

I actually make a patch, then I start a new patch from scratch to copy the other patch, but keep the effects in the chain in the same order they appear on the FX page.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by silverhead on 2011-05-11 14:37:23

I presume you've made your official feature request for this? (otherwise it won't reach the attention of the Line 6 product designers).

You'll find a Product Feedback link under the Contact Us button at the foot of this page. Use the official channel - your request is just spinning in the dust here.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by mdme_sadie on 2011-05-11 18:58:12

Logic amp designer is pretty, but that's all.  Pretty does not mean the same thing as good interface design.

For a start, lets say you wanted to move that amp around in the chain.  Not possible, why?  because Amp designer is designed to be a single insert on an audio track, you've not included that in the design proposal.  Dual amps?  Again not really feasible from within that interface without sending to a second track, i.e. you have to include the butt ugly logic track insert design as well in order to match functionality, and it's just not designed for the same purpose as this.  It's sub-optimal design being shoehorned into the wrong thing.

I'll be honest, I don't care nor want to see a naff CG render of an amp to make me feel all warm inside and that i'm playing with a real amp.  It's a crock.

All I want from a gui is simplicity and speedy workflow so I can focus on the sound and not on paging through a heap of bad renders of amps.

I'm happy with the Line 6 chain system, it's analogous to a pedal board.

I'm not happy that I can't just drag & drop units around but have to use little arrows at the corner of the screen though, and that changing their order doesn't change the order of their GUI's in the list below the chain.

I'm happy that I can see multiple units settings at once to copmare and quickly change values without having to select them first or try to peer at silly tiny "virtual knobs".

I'm not happy that the GUI's are all squashed in to try and fit a single "slot" when clearly they shouldn't be.

I'm happy that the way to select amps isn't a horrible cover flow system that would take forever to get to what I want as soon as you get more than 4 amps.

I'm not happy that when I want to pick an Amp the dropdown automatically jumps to the bottom end of hte list rather than where I was before and there's no other way of scrolling through the entries in a better/grouped fashion (grid based popup would be better, or logical grouping by style).

There's all sorts of positives and negatives to the HD edit GUI, however I don't think that Logics amp designer is any better or even as good, it just doesn't have anywhere near the number of positives GUI wise to make me want such a simplified and limiting design, nor such a painful way to set up patches.  Utilitarian may not always be pretty, but it is functional and people aren't going to be looking at how pretty my patches are laid out.  They and I only care about how I sound.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by paulsteinway on 2011-05-11 19:19:00

I'd like to see the cotroller assignment reworked. If I open up an patch and want to know what a pedal is controlling, I have to check every parameter on every model in the patch to see which ones are controlled by the pedal. Also, if I assign a pedal to a parameter, tweak it and then try moving the pedal to check the result, all the selections get cleared. So when I want to re-tweak it I have to select the model and select the parameter again. This really slows things down.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by casparello on 2011-05-12 02:01:38

No, I did not. If you or someone else feels like this is something necessary to do – don´t hesitate to post it directly to Line 6.

I feel more like: Line 6 should "listen"/ read and make use of what users have to say about product improvements here in the forum.


So I just wanted all our ideas and thoughts to be collected and give this software update "a voice in the forum".

That´s all. Feel free to post it to our friends at Line 6



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by Octo777 on 2011-05-12 03:13:22

casparello wrote:

No, I did not. If you or someone else feels like this is something necessary to do – don´t hesitate to post it directly to Line 6.

I feel more like: Line 6 should "listen"/ read and make use of what users have to say about product improvements here in the forum.


So I just wanted all our ideas and thoughts to be collected and give this software update "a voice in the forum".

That´s all. Feel free to post it to our friends at Line 6

.

Silverheads point was that if you want to see it go directly to Line 6 YOU should send the information in a customer feedback request otherwise this thread is just a discussion, not any kind of serious information gathering excercise on Line 6's part.....

Line 6 DO listen to/read what users have to say about their products: When you send your views in a customer feedback form.

YOU started this discussion about making the the HD Edit better, so it's YOUR responsibillity to make sure it gets to them, not someone elses.

http://line6.com/company/contact/customer_feedback/



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by casparello on 2011-05-12 03:41:29

Got it. I just wanted to let the forum know that I did not sent it to Line 6 till date, nor do I plan to sum it all up and post it to Line 6 (in addition to what has been said in the forum). Yes, I feel to have spent enough time on this and strongly believe that Line 6 does read the forums in addition to single user feedback. They´re clever enough to know that this is the second best way to get very constructive support and feedback from the userbase for free.


If anyone feels like it: Go ahead.

Besides: The more individual people write to Line 6 about what we collected so far the better chances are they use this feedback.


All good.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by Octo777 on 2011-05-12 03:47:47

casparello wrote:

Got it. I just wanted to let the forum know that I did not sent it to Line 6 till date, nor do I plan to sum it all up and post it to Line 6 (in addition to what has been said in the forum). Yes, I feel to have spent enough time on this and strongly believe that Line 6 does read the forums in addition to single user feedback. They´re clever enough to know that this is the second best way to get very constructive support and feedback from the userbase for free.


If anyone feels like it: Go ahead.

Besides: The more individual people write to Line 6 about what we collected so far the better chances are they use this feedback.


All good.

They might read it, but it's doubtful they will pick it up in any official capacity without a feedback request. It's just the way things are done.

You don't even need to sum the whole thread up in the feedback form, just send a link to the thread with a breif explanation of what its about.

It's highly unlikely anyone is going to submit a feedback form for you, so you may as well do it yourself.

Then if others feel strongly enough about it, they can submit more feedback to Line 6 to and in the grand scale of things, there is a much bigger chance your viewpoints get taken on board and changes get made!

But it would be a bit silly if Line 6 got all these feedback froms relating to stuff said in this thread but they didn't even get one from the thread starter! lol

There are definitely some good ideas brought up in here, so don't let them go to waste!



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by casparello on 2011-05-12 04:24:20

Octo777 schrieb:

They might read it, but it's doubtful they will pick it up in any official capacity without a feedback request. It's just the way things are done.


Strong argument I did not realize in my answer to you. This hit back home.

It really is in some companies like you just pointed out:

As an employee you can´t work with valuable customer feedback when there is no complaint or "issue" reported.
We don´t know if Line 6 is a company like this but ... Thanks Octo777. I will reconsider.


Have a nice day



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by silverhead on 2011-05-12 05:45:12

casparello wrote:

...

I feel more like: Line 6 should "listen"/ read and make use of what users have to say about product improvements here in the forum.....

They do listen. The Product Feedback feature is part of this forum - it's the part where Line 6 has specifically said: "Please tell us what you'd like to see".

When you go into an establishment with a sign above a service counter that says: "Please place your order here."  - do you then stand in the back corner of the room, whisper your order to other visitors who may be standing around, and expect it to be received by the people whose job it is to receive the orders - while complaining that they should be listening to you?

You started this thread and have collected some good ideas. It's nobody else's job to walk up to the service counter for you.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by talwilkins on 2011-05-12 06:29:19

I agree if it's about making it look better but if it's about functionality or ease of use I hope you have a different additude.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by Tarekith on 2011-05-12 08:53:08

I just want the order of the effects parameters panels to follow the actual order of the signal chain.  I was really surprised when I first started using the software that this wasn't the case.  I'd also like to see a better way to do the footswitch and pedal assignments.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by talwilkins on 2011-05-12 11:24:28

Yeah, the switch assignment could do with a rework.

It does the job, but it's not very handy and it's impossible to get a good overview.

Especially when there are mulit assignments present.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by lowyaw on 2011-05-13 00:50:04

i agree with the sugeestion on FX order; while I believe that the concept of Edit is very, very good - like, being able to see all params at once on the fx page - the chaotic way things appear in the chain is sometimes confusing. also, there some parameters, like mix, that can be adjusted by turning the knob only - i'd rather have a possibility of typing in the exact value instead.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by mcolquitt on 2011-09-07 18:15:52

1. I would like to see the FX Pane have a smoother workflow:

Clicking on an Effect/amp/mixer should automatically open its editor (instead of having to click on its tab)

If you are talking about clicking on the image of the amp or the effect or the mixer and have it open the corresponding editor window, It absolutely does.

I may be misunderstanding what you are referring too because my HD 500 edit has always done this.



Re: Software HD500 Edit / Let´s improve it!
by maqaf1 on 2011-09-07 18:46:08

mcolquitt wrote:

1. I would like to see the FX Pane have a smoother workflow:

Clicking on an Effect/amp/mixer should automatically open its editor (instead of having to click on its tab)

If you are talking about clicking on the image of the amp or the effect or the mixer and have it open the corresponding editor window, It absolutely does.

I may be misunderstanding what you are referring too because my HD 500 edit has always done this.

Yes this was instituted after I made the suggestion, back in February. You're welcome




The information above may not be current, and you should direct questions to the current forum or review the manual.