Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. I'd be suspicious myself. I'd kinda doubt that the rod was replaced, though. That's major surgery...can that even be done without removing the fretboard?
  3. Generally, no... There’s a few Line 6 guys that comment now and then. Support tickets are the way to get in contact with Line 6.
  4. If the Stomp Select parameter was set to Press or Touch+Press, what you’re describing is the expected behavior. Pressing the footswitch would take you to the edit page for the effect or controller assigned to that footswitch.
  5. Today
  6. No it isn't a new discussion... there's virtually no topic that hasn't already been discussed ad nauseum around here, lol. But 99.97% of it boils down to personal preference. Perception is fickle, weird, mostly without a concrete explanation, and nearly impossible to duplicate from one person to the next. Nobody's "right", and there's no universal truth to be found. You'll either like an individual pair of headphones (or monitors, whatever), or you won't...and that's fine. But don't bother fixating on any one individual spec as a magic bullet...none of this stuff works that way. You could go out and spend $2K on some boutique mahogany shell 300 ohm headphones, hand crafted for the Sultan of Brunei, and end up hating them. My AKG 701's are all of 55 ohms, and I love the way they sound. All you can do is try stuff and see what you like. Plus, if the same cans sound good through an interface but lousy directly from the Helix (or vice versa), or they sound great for 11 minutes every other Tuesday, then it's hard to blame the headphones and something else is going on.
  7. I have a FRFR-108 arriving later this week so thread is worrying :D but I have a TRS-XLR cable and the pod go sounds pretty good through both monitor speakers and even my hi-fi so I don't see how it can sound worse through a proper frfr setup.
  8. I am very interested in any of the Line 6 / Yamaha staff reading this forum?
  9. Initially I wasn’t going to reply to your tedious inanity because life is too short to engage in a pi$$ing contest with you. I could spend all day pointing out all your contradictions and assumptions that you make about the looper and the internal policy decisions of Line 6 finance and R&D. If this stuff didn’t make me laugh so much it would be pitiful, and if you think that I am being sarcastic, you should try posting this nonsense over on TGP and see how they react over there. FYI The Helix looper has been discussed at length, starting way back in 2016, and since then that particular thread has been resurrected twice. Therefore, instead of ploughing over old ground, I would suggest that you read it - especially the comments made by Digital Igloo (head of product development) which may provide some genuine insight about the Helix looper. As, “soundog” pointed out in one of his posts:- “... this thread is destined to loop over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over”
  10. **** Update - workaround found - see below. but still can't figure out why this happened *** Hi everyone, Hope someone can help me out here. I have the Helix Floor, v2.92. I'm doing the following (can be easily replicated with any preset): 1. Go to any preset. 2. Using HX Edit, assign a footswitch controller to the "level" parameter of the output block (Type=Latching, min level=0db, max level=3db - the idea was to create a "Vol Boost" footswitch). 3. This works, but has an annoying side effect - whenever I press the assigned footswitch with my foot, besides raising the output level as expected, for some reason the Helix enters the "Controller Assign" page (with the "Pan" parameter). The problem is that once the "Controller Assign" page is visible, there's no way to use my feet to go back to the home page and I have no way to know I'm on the right preset (the preset name is no longer visible). So once I hit the "Vol boost" footswitch while gigging, I no longer can be sure I'm on the right preset. Anyone else seen this? Any ideas how to make the footswitch work without switching to the Controller assign page? Thanks! Uri P.S. just to clarify, I am wearing shoes and this is *not* the touch-sensitive behavior kicking in. **** Update - this was "fixed" by changing the "Stomp Select" Global setting to "Touch". However, when you think about it, there was no reason for the Helix to switch to the "Controller Assign" page - it should have just changed the level and stayed in the default display, so this still might be a bug of some kind.
  11.  I am trying to get the SPIDER VALVE MKll EDIT app. I have followed the installation guide to a T but it doesn’t appear in my apps area in line 6 monkey. 
    all cables are good. Monkey sees both the amp and SHORTBOARD fine. Using the cat 5 cable from the pedalboard to the amp 

  12. Some time ago, I found that if you reduce "RIPPLE", hum noise disappears.
  13. And, for the Line6 guys here: why not PUBLISH the truss rod type in the ads and manuals? It's not something that should have to be asked, and I am still convinced this one is one-way.
  14. I bought it used. It was NOT a factory refret. And, please keep in mind it is a US model, so it tightens from the body end (you have to take the neck off.) But, here's the deal: if you have a two-way rod, it tightens to the right (stiffens back) and then as you go clockwise, it loosens, THEN starts tightening to impose forward bow. This rod does NOT do that. Go lefty-loosey, and it keeps getting more loose, then glides until the nut starts spinning off. That is not how a two-way rod works. So, either the US model does NOT have a two-way rod, or it makes me wonder if they replaced the rod? Why would they do THAT? That's rhetorical. As for the re-fret: the job is excellent. This wouldn't be the first time I've had a quarter-sawn neck that didn't do the limbo and go backward. That "stability" of quarter-sawn sometimes imposes it's grain memory and becomes too stiff to reverse a backbow.
  15. Heads up. There is a new 1.93 version of Native out with bugfixes. Btw, the title of this topic should probably be changed to reflect the latest versions of HX Edit and Native.
  16. Sorry I have not confirmed your bug. If this is confirmed you should open up a ticket with Line6 so it can get resolved. Just wanted to comment that I am grateful for the title of your post. Call me oblivious but I had not been aware that there was a 1.93 version of Native. I thought that 1.92 was the latest(due to the out of synch naming correlation between HX Edit 2.92 and Native 1.92) . Appears there is a new 1.93 version for bugfixes so I downloaded and installed it. Thanks!
  17. I would love to see an Echo Park model. I really miss the way you can choose from 3 different modulation types (tape, digital and analog) on all delay models.
  18. I've made some progress. Firstly, this conversation is not new: Secondly, the headphone output is 63ohm so according to this, the headphones need to be 200-600 ohms to sound good. All of my headphones are low impedance. If I send the sound through my audio interface (scarlett solo) and plug the headphones into that, the sound is much better, despite the extra D/A A/D conversion. With my POD 2.0 the opposite was true (sound was good with headphones in the POD, less good via the audio interface). The scarlett solo headphone impedance is 10ohm, which is a better match for my 32ohm headphones.
  19. Do you recommends a POD Go on Marshall AVT100X using 4CM? Thanks in advance.
  20. Great reference, thanks! Looks like he has updated his webpage to also include the PodGo allocations. One very important note for anyone using this dynamic spreadsheet. The DSP percentages listed on this webpage are for a single DSP. The Helix for example has two so you can fill up both paths(1&2) to 100%. In other words double what the percentages would indicate when you take both paths into account, the limit becomes 200%. I did a quick test to confirm this and for example on the Helix you can put five stereo Ganymede reverb blocks(5 x Ganymede[17.67%] = 88.35% of total for a single DSP) on Path1 and another five on Path2 for a total according to this spreadsheet of 176.7%. That is due to the fact that it is calculating only for a single DSP. You could of course continue to fill up both paths until they are at or close to 200%. Another thing worth noting is that although his video mentions that "there are no mono reverbs on the Helix" that situation has been remedied in firmware versions subsequent to when he released his video. There are now mono HX reverbs. His updated web page reflects that fact. His latest update to the DSP allocations is for the 2.91 firmware but if you scroll down all the way to the bottom of the page he has some links for allocations for some earlier firmware revisions(hopefully people are on the latest firmware revision though). This is actually worthy of comment because different firmware versions mean that the allocations can change due to more efficient code or other changes that affect DSP usage. I would think any future changes to DSP allocation in upcoming firmware releases would be to decrease the DSP used as increasing it would mean that presets from previous firmware revisions that were close to or at the 100% total path usage limit could go over the limit and no longer work or load properly. Btw, for anyone wanting to check out the DSP web page directly it can be found here: http://benvesco.com/store/helix-dsp-allocations/
  21. If you are part of the massive crowd of people that's never found the need for a looper, why on earth are you posting in a thread who's sole topic is to discuss the limitations of the current looper in the product? That's like someone going into a thread complaining about the limitations in Fender basses because they are pretty much all bolt-on models instead of neck through, and you post that you're not the least bit concerned about Fender basses being bolt on. This is because you are part of the massive crowd of people who've never found a need for a neck through bass. You started your post by pointing out that this has nothing to do with you, and you don't care at all about it, but you went through with posting opinions about it anyhow. If you think the price of the helix would be significantly higher by them improving a feature, then I guess it must have skyrocketed with every amazing firmware release where they add HUNDREDS of new features and improve existing features by leaps and bounds. Just because you don't care about a feature doesn't make the feature less important to those who are creating, and participating in, a thread about that feature. And your logic about costs doesn't follow with how line6 does business.
  22. What firmware version are you running?
  23. Yesterday
  24. Any fix for your tap tempo issue? Mine is doing the very same thing (jumping to 240, especially when holding for the tuner)...it will not consistently or correctly match the tempo I’m trying to tap, no matter if I tap it twice or twenty times.
  25. So.... I took the following statement to be disparaging about my intelligence: I have no idea” Now, there’s a statement you made that could well be true. Hmmm... well there seems to be room for interpretation, I guess, but among my family that's something folks say when they're being general about the person, not specific to the topic. If you meant that I have no idea about the helix looper, well, that's sort of a strange point to make, imho. I clearly have used loopers, I know how the helix looper works, I have a strong idea of the feature set I'm looking for in any looper, I pointed out another looper that has superior features, etc. So, to me, for you to state a general statement about me having no idea, well that seems like something you really should have expected a defensive reaction to. Why else would you provoke me like that? "Dangerous" - we're talking about loopers here. If you actually have used loopers for live work, you know how dangerous they can be, and how important it is to have a few fundamental features to save you when something goes wrong. The word "dangerous" absolutely applies here. I googled it: - able or likely to cause harm or injury. - likely to cause problems or to have adverse consequences. - Similar: hazardous, perilous, risky, high-risk, ,raught with danger, unsafe So, maybe you assumed I meant that missing features could somehow harm you, although that seems very highly unlikely. Surprisingly enough, I actually meant danger in how the looper works in relation to live performance, which is what I was discussing in my post. Sarcasm - what came across in most of your responses. If they weren't intended to sound sarcastic, you have to understand that the way you reply to things, finding fault repeatedly in minutia that was apparently taken out of context or without granting that maybe I know something about the industry that you might not..... it comes across as sarcastic. "get over it"... get over it? You didn't disagree with my statements, which you claim is what I need to "Get over" - you disagreed with my opinions of the line6 helix looper because, what, you think it's impossible for someone to make rational, possibly accurate conclusions about the product without actually working for line6? Is that it? I couldn't possibly be correct since I don't have proof of my educated guesses about how things work at line6, which I guess couldn't possibly be similar in general to how it works at all other companies inventing firmware for their own hardware design in a competitive world with short deadlines and constant feature requests, marketing teams, QA stages, and follows the development lifecycle. I made guesses about it based on having a lot of experience in the industry, something that I most musicians don't have. It's a helpful set of knowledge that gives me some insight into some of the common things that happen in these companies, and I wouldn't be surprised, therefore, to find that the looper was going to go further than it currently does, but there hasn't been the money to do so (money which pays for human resources that do the work, not to mention the time it takes until that gets to customers). There's nothing wrong with saying what I said - I'm perfectly fine with being wrong about it. What I'm not ok with is being told I need to prove and defend my ideas. Why do I need to prove anything? I feel it's likely I'm right, but I could be wrong about why the looper is like this. Maybe it's exactly how Line6 wanted it, or maybe even more than they hoped for, and they are enjoying it's success. That's great -- I'd be surprised, but it's perfectly fine. We will likely never know, either way. It's not up to you to tell me I'm wrong - nor is it up to me to prove I'm correct. I just strongly feel that the looper is lacking in a few ways, and I'm not the only one. If this thread isn't about finding fault in the looper - then what the heck is it about? "The looper could easily be more useful" is the thread title. I agree completely - and I even explained how I feel it wouldn't be that challenging. I am very aware of how hardware restricts things versus firmware, and I'm sorry that maybe you think I must prove that. But you really are replying with strongly antagonistic posts.... which seems odd, to me. You assume I couldn't come to rational, or accurate conclusions about the looper and why it's like this. I thought my conclusions make a lot of sense, and I stand by my assumptions that line6 follows the development lifecycle, has a marketing team and financial team and deals with thousands of feature requests and weights pros/cons and dev costs for each, and eventually had to not go as far with the included looper as they may have originally intended. Have a great day! Cheers
  26. Volume Block idea is kinda what I was thinking as well; a virtual device toggling opposite the delay with output set to zero- a "null" device BTW the audio signal is coming line level post power section of a tube amp ( many use an attenuator such as THD Hoplate to get a line level signal to feed effects) I'm using something else, but same principal. thanks for your help and attention Mike update, works a treat- using one of the gates as a mute. I still have alot of work to do!
  27. Absolutely, yes, I am making a broad set of assumptions - although they're hardly WAGs or anything. That wasn't the point of what I said, though. I have strong feelings about the looper - there are open source loopers for pcs that are far more powerful than the looper in the helix - of course pc resources aren't limited, so it's an unfair comparison. My point of mentioning that, though, is that the state of loopers has gotten to the point where anyone can grab a useful, live targetted looper, for the price of a nice dinner out you and your date. So, that being said, it still seems to me like it is incomplete - for all the reasons I pointed out already. No sense in rehashing it - folks here seem pretty defensive that the helix looper is exactly as it should be, and that disagreeing with that must mean I'm asking for something unusual, or making assumptions about the R&D that couldn't possibly be accurate since I don't work for Line6. So it's ok - I made my claims about how I feel the looper appears incomplete to me, as though there were big plans for it but it looked like it would cost too much so further feature dev was stopped, and I'd bet real money that there is a developer or two at Line6 who would say that too, behind closed doors. I also pointed out good reasoning for my assumptions that it's a desired feature from a quick google finding a lot of youtubes dedicated to it specifically. Seems like a pretty rational post, all in all :-) I appreciate your reply - it makes a lot of sense, and doesn't disagree with what I was saying, actually. Just points out the reasons why I might be wrong, which I totally don't dispute. Cheers :-)
  1. Load more activity
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
×
×
  • Create New...