ChubbyJerk

Firehawk was the first unit that convinced me a single multi-fx pedal could satisfy my needs, both in terms of selection of effects and quality. Helix (the basis of Pod Go) was the first one where I thought a professional gigging/recording artist could be satisfied with that and nothing else.

 

Note that there are still some holes in the lineup of models, weak points so to speak, where I could see a need for an extra pedal added on - particularly octaves and extra-especially synth pedals. But that's about it.

 

That's a convoluted way of saying that Firehawk is awesome, and a lot of people could probably make do with that, but the Helix family, including Pod Go, is a big step up.

 

Distortions in particular have come a long way in recent years. They used to be the weakest point in any digital effect, hands down (imo). In recent years, they're incredibly good, in my opinion. Realistic and dynamic and just really good. Note that this applies across the board, not just to line 6 - Aftershock, for example, is a fantastic digital dirt. The Helix lineup of distortions - and dirty amps - is about as good as you can get, in my opinion.

 

Additional note: my Pod Go arrived today. I haven't even opened it yet. However, I've owned both a full Helix and an HXFX previously. The Helix I sold because it was expensive and overkill for me, so I couldn't justify it. The HXFX I sold because I wanted an all in one, and the FX lacked the amp models, so I wasn't satisfied with it *for that specific purpose*. I have since the used a B3n, and I love it! However, I was excited enough about what the Pod Go offers that I ordered one to presumably replace it. I also have a G3n I use on guitar, so this should replace both.

 

So...I might be one of the few that's owned all 3 effects you mentioned (Firehawk, G3n (not x), and Pod Go). I don't doubt you would be happy with the Pod Go, it's just a question of whether or not the upgrades are worth the extra cash. The sound on the G3n/B3n honestly isn't that much of a downgrade, in my opinion. It's insanely good for the money, and definitely adequate for the majority of hobby players. But also keep in mind that the Pod Go has other features that are great, like a USB audio interface, better screen/UI, and so on.

 

In case I didn't say it enough, this is all just my personal opinion.

phil_m with the reasonable middle ground. Thank you once again for linking a good solution!

 

Yes, that wart is bad, but no, it won't doom the pedal. Yes, it's annoying, but no, it's not an insurmountable issue. Yes, I hate the wart, but no, I'm not returning mine because of it.

 

On the flip side, keep in mind that just because there's a customer work-around, that doesn't mean it isn't a real issue. It really is a terrible power supply for a pedal that is designed and marketed as something for a pedal board. The "sky is falling this pedal is doomed" attitude isn't helpful, but neither is being completely dismissive of people who raise a valid concern.

What you're probably looking for in 6/8 might be easiest to achieve by tapping on 1,2,3,4,5,6 and then selecting the "quarter note" subdivision for the delay.

I'm not a master of tempo or timing by any stretch.

 

For 4/4 timing i've always tapped in the 1 and 3...which could be wrong?   For 6/8 i know I need to tap in 1/3/5 but I always find myself wanting to tap in 1 and 4.

 

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

For tap tempo to work correctly, you have to tap the tempo. The actual tempo. The whole tempo. The beats per minute (BPM). It sounds like you're treating it like the beat of a drum, differentiating between upbeat and downbeat. I can understand why you would tap like that, but the note divisions won't be accurate if you do it like that. Give it a tap for every beat. For basic 4/4 time, tap on 1, 2, 3, and 4. That's the only way the 1/8 note subdivision of a delay will really give you 1/8 notes.

 

Your desire to tap on 1 and 4 in 6/8 actually makes sense! And it's more right than you think. It gets weird though. Typically, but certainly not always, you'll play 6/8 time as 2 beats of dotted quarter notes. That's why you're struggling to not hit on 1 and 4...because you (probably) should be hitting on 1 and 4! (If your goal is matching the sheet-music-specified BPM.) If you're looking at actual sheet music, like all official and everything, the notation at the top will tell you what the division is. For example, it will say "quarter note = 120" (except the words quarter note will probably be an actual note, not the words). That tells you that the quarter note is the beat, 88 beats per minute. Take "Can't Help Falling in Love", by Elvis. It's 6/8 time, BPM = 68, dotted quarter note gets the beat...so to tap out the BPM, you tap on 1 and 4, just like you're doing.

 

BUUUUUUUUUUT...like jb said above, or at least alluded to, tapping the 68 bpm dotted quarter note from Can't Help Falling in Love, you don't want to set it to 1/8 note after that. Because the 1/8 note division isn't actually saying "this will be an 1/8 note", it's really saying "this will be half the length of the bpm" (or "twice as fast" or however you want to think about it); it's based on the premise of the quarter note getting the beat. So an 1/8 note subdivision of a dotted quarter note does not give you what you're probably looking for, which would be the triplet division at that point.

 

I probably totally botched that explanation. Even if I got everything right, it probably wasn't clear. Sorry.

I mean, it's longer than other wall warts out there, for sure, but it's also not as deep. I had my HD500 mounted on a Pedaltrain board for awhile, and I had no trouble fitting the power supply under there. It actually even fits under the Pedaltrain Metro boards pretty easily. You just have to get a little creative with connecting everything underneath. I've been building pedalboards for over 15 years now, and I've used all sorts of splitters and whatnot so I could do what I needed to do. I actually kind of prefer the DC-3g to the old Line 6 PX-2 power supplies.

 

One thing I've found indispensable for my pedalboards are splitters like this: https://www.amazon.com/Cable-Leader-Power-Splitter-inches/dp/B01B8OG51E/ref=sr_1_29?ie=UTF8&qid=1518829672&sr=8-29&keywords=power+splitter+2+prong

Cool. That actually looks like it would help a lot. That might be the perfect solution for me. Appreciated!

Apologies to Line 6, the tone of my post was overly harsh. But man...I think that power supply is a poor fit for something marketed as an addition to your board.

It’s the same power supply the HD series uses... They were probably thinking, “hey, we have an existing power supply that’s gone through all the international testing and listing hurdles, and it will work with this, so let’s just use this one...â€

The HD series that is huge and intended as a standalone unit? Do you not see the key difference?

What were they thinking? How could this thing make it through every stage of development and people said, "oh, yeah, that's cool." I'm assuming the testers were either given a different power supply or told that's just temporary while they finalize the design.

 

ESPECIALLY since this is supposed to be "pedal board friendly". They design the HX so that it can't (easily) be run off of something like a Voodoo Labs PP2. OK, I get that. I can understand that. Most multis and big digital effects don't work well with that type of shared (even if isolated) power supply.

 

But...space is a huge issue with pedal boards. As is placement of everything, and their orientation (to the point where some people make a huge deal over top vs side jacks). And Line 6, on a multi that's designed to be pedal board friendly, gives us this monstrosity? I opened it up and just kinda stared at it for a minute. I'd be curious to see a pedalboard that this thing power supply could easily fit into. The Voodoo Labs PP2+ gives you that extra outlet, but if you mount it under your Pedal Train I'm pretty sure it's recessed and only works with a 3-prong style adapter? Been a while, I could be wrong. Maybe it will work fine there.

 

This thing is scary bad. The outlet situation at my weekly gig is tight. I may end up having to bring a power strip, not for extra spots, but just for this oblong box of doom to fit in.

 

This is all IMO, YMMV, etc, and I'm probably overreacting, but I find this power supply to be rather absurd.

I sold mine to fund my Helix purchase. It made me very sad. The SY300 is my all-time favorite single-use/non-multi pedal.

We have synth / oscillators / tone generators. The Helix has midi in.

 

What are the chances that we get a version of the synth models that can be set up to listen to midi in for notes? It seems like the next logical step.

 

As is, the synths are cool to play with, but very burdensome both to set up in a patch and to use in a live setting. Allow it to be played via a midi keyboard and HOLY CRAP.

 

If there's already a way to do this, then I totally missed it and you may mock me thoroughly and without mercy.

Yea but that's not what he meant and you know it...  ;)

I meant exactly what I said, which was that the algorithms will generate the same output if given the same input. If you take the whole quote from my post, I'm quite clear what I meant. I say "algorithms" 3 times, "code" twice, and "software" once. That's what I'm talking about. The internals...not the entire signal chain. If you use a different interface, different A/D conversion, pump it through different speakers, add other VSTs in front, etc etc, that's not exactly the same input, now is it?

 

I don't understand your point. Are you saying that if you use a different interface you might not get the exact same sound? That's like saying, hey, I'm listening to the Native plugin through my computer speakers and it doesn't sound as good as my Helix Floor board through these $1000 FRFR monitors!

 

Yes, well...duh. You're obviously injecting other differences into the signal flow. The difference there isn't Helix Native vs the Helix board.

 

Now, will it be a noticeable difference? Probably not, assuming you're using a reasonably decent interface.

It's called good business. It's also fairly standard. Zoom's B1on and B1xon and MS60b and I think B3 all share the same software, rehoused and shipped off as a separate product. Same with many of their others (G3n & G5n, and on and on). Line 6 has the various M pedals (M9, M13, whatever). Several of the Boss multi-effects have the same core rehoused in various form factors.

 

They spent...what, hundreds of thousands or more on R&D for this, right? Several years of development. I have no clue how big their teams are, but both hardware and software engineers plus test engineers, all dedicated to this product line for years...that's a lot of money. It would be absolutely insane if they didn't leverage that for everything they could.

 

For the record (just to brag), I called this back in January. (I was expecting something a little lighter, but still pretty close.)

https://www.talkbass.com/threads/new-zoom-b3n-multi-effects.1262394/page-18#post-19650214

 

I'm a bit disappointed, because the Helix is overkill for me (particularly in the IO department), and the LT looks like a pretty good middle ground. I definitely would have picked the LT if it was out when I got mine. I don't hold it against them at all, though. Being angry over this is just silly. Of course they're trying to make money. And it's good for us if they do. I'd like them to make lots of money. That's what will lead to continued support for the Helix.

completely disagree. It's more an "economies of scale" thing.

His post had nothing to do with economies of scale.

 

He said others were being selfish for requesting what they wanted. Then he went on to request things. That is literally exactly what he did.

 

Whatever, I'm not looking to get in a fight over this. I just found it amusing.

Why don´t we encourage the guys modeling at Line 6 to deal with those very expensive or discontinued things that regular Joes like us can`t afford?

Asking for a POG or a Whammy DT is really selfish when you can save a couple bucks and just buy it, when compared with the 5 grand you need in order to buy a Diezel VH4 or a Herbie... Other thing with phasing... Just Two phasers (the Deluxe Phaser is the worst effect by far in the Helix with that tweety bird inside singing wee-wee with every cycle) vs. 4 Flangers vs 3 Filters vs 4 Choruses (taking into account the new Arion Stereo Chorus model, hope they nail it because it sounds awesome)...

Maybe the Boss HM-2 can apply because it´s not easy to get a hold of right now... old but classic pedal...

Come on guys... you just can`t have everything in a U$S 1500 multi-fx processor and expect to be updated with products you can go buy at your favourite music shop for 300 bucks or less in ebay...

Summing up... more expensive guitar and bass amps with top notch quality modeling. More discontinued pedals. And that`s it.

In other words, "Requesting what you want is selfish! Now listen to what I want..."  :P

Forum world and real world are different places... As far as bass players, there's only been a couple I've played with over the years who've used an any effects at all, and those that did mainly stuck to compression and chorus. I mean, obviously, there's some demand for these effects, because they are still being made by some companies. It's interesting, though, isn't it, that hardly anyone makes a dedicated bass multi-fx pedal anymore.

Of course forums and real world are different. And your real life experience is just anecdotal evidence. And it doesn't match up with mine, but so what? That's just anecdotal evidence too. /shrug. Like I said, it's just my opinion.

 

I mean, there's a pretty big variety of octave pedals out there, and people keep making new ones, so It has to be a reasonably substantial market.

 

As far as bass mutli-fx go, it's not terribly surprising. Guitarists are the much bigger market. Frustrating as a bass player, but not surprising.

Yeah, I've never thought it was for a lack of processing that Line 6 hasn't developed these sorts of things. Nor do I buy the somewhat-conspiracy type thinking that it's because they want people to buy a Variax. I just think that it's low on their list of priorities, and overall the number of people asking for it is relatively small. I think it's kind of a niche effect. Really, how many popular guitar songs are there that use pitch shifting? As a percentage basic, it has to be tiny. I'm actually surprised EHX has done as much with it as it has, in a way.

Octavers, at least in my (online) circle, are huge. Over at TalkBass, threads asking about the best octave pedal are one of the most common repeats. Best octave up? Best polyphonic octaver? Best analog octave? Best octave for blah blah etc.

 

There have been a lot asking about synth pedals lately too. I think the only effect asked about more than those two is dirt.

 

Granted, that's only on that one forum, and it's specific to bass, but I don't think octavers are niche at all. Just my opinion.

 

 

 

No, it is not the same kind of thing at all, I'm certain.

 

 

And you know this because...???

 

Don't get me wrong, I want a POG or (even better) a HOG in here if they can do it. But even if it is only SLIGHTLY more CPU intensive than other FX, I will probably not use it very much, preferring my external device for this task.

 

Well, at this point we have tiny Chinese knockoff pedals that track as well as the Helix. I don't know what they've got in those pedals, but I'm gonna take a big risk and go out on a limb here and say the Helix probably has slightly more processing power available than those.

 

Sorry to snark, but the idea that the Helix might not have superb tracking due to a lack of processing power is ridiculous. There are plenty of smaller and less powerful pedals out there that do it wonderfully. EHX (HOG, POG [POG2, Micro, Nano]), obviously, but others like Earthquaker (Arpanoid, Organizer) and Digitech (Drop, Whammy [several], Ricochet) all kick the Helix's lollipop with polyphonic tracking. And then there are the Chinese knockoffs like Mooer who are doing it too, and when that happens you should probably up your game a bit. :)

I'm with Spikey — I'll need to take it for a demo spin before I'm assured it will sound "close enough" to the hardware by the time I get it settled into a DAW track. I'm not worried about latency or the response or A/D in my Apogee Duet (114 dB, same as the the Helix chip's spec'd A/D dynamic range). But I've yet to use a software amp sim that I like. That's the main reason I bought the Helix.

 

If the native plug is up to snuff, my wallet will flop out.

Here's the thing people don't seem to be understanding. You bought a Helix because you can't find a software amp sim you like? Helix IS a software amp sim! It's just software that's hosted inside of a specialized computer. The algorithms that do all the fancy stuff to your sound (amp models, fx, cab sims, etc) are individual chunks of code that receive input and generate output. These algorithms do the same exact thing to the input no matter where you run them or what you run them on. They've encapsulated the algorithms such that they can be ported and run inside of a VST, but it's still the same algorithm. It's the same code. Given the exact same input it will generate the exact same output.

I failed philosophy because if Immanuel Kant, then why bother listening to him...

Because those who Kant do, teach.

Doesn't matter. If our lawyers say we can't talk about future plans, we don't talk about future plans.

 

Here's a Wikipedia article on revenue recognition. Otherwise, hit up your local corporate attorney for more information.

I understand that your hands are tied.

I'm not a lawyer, but our counsel would disagree with you.

 

An unnamed high end audio interface company once made their development roadmap public—and missed every deadline. Some users were extremely upset and IIRC, a couple threatened to sue. The public should never know a company's deadlines because those deadlines have great tendency to slip.

 

Besides, everyone should buy a product based on what it does today, not what they think it might do in the future.

Bah. There are ways to share plans and give glimpses of what's in development without risking legal ramifications. Entire commercials are built out of pure beta footage. Just put a disclaimer in your sig and start spilling details. :) 

 

Anyway, the flip side of your last bit is that some companies have built up enough trust with customers that they can sell products based off of what customers think they will do. Think, for example, Playstation 4, where preorders would sell out months in advance and get eBayed for more than double the cost. That's actually a pretty good parallel, because it lacked some things on launch (dvd playback, iirc?) that people were like, dude, wtf? And over time things like that got added in.

 

Have you never pre-ordered a pedal, because the little demo sounded cool and you trusted the company? Or pre-ordered a whole album because you like the band and that one single is good? Or a book because it's by one of your favorite authors? All of these are cases where I, or you, or other people, routinely buy things that might not even exist yet or are only partially complete or prototyped, based off of little demos, 1 song out of 10, or past experiences, and so on because we have trust in the creator to deliver something we'll enjoy when it does finally come.

 

That's not to say, if you want, for example, a Darkglass B7K, you should ever assume that will be added in. But Line 6, to me, is a company that I trust to consistently keep updating and improving their existing products. So, in general, if I looked at the effects list of Helix and said, "hmm, the list of effects is a little light for my tastes," that wouldn't stop me from buying it, because I would trust that Line6 would, over time, improve the overall selection of effects.

 

Doesn't that make sense? Isn't that an attitude you should appreciate in your customers?

 

I used, way too many, commas in that post, sorry,,,

You are not alone!  If I want clean.. Helix can do clean.. if I want crunch... Helix can do crunch, If I want hi gain.. Helix can do hi gain.

If I want a freeze sound?  I'm out of luck 

 

More varied effects please!

I agree. I've got amps I'm happy with. There are a lot of effects / categories that are sub-par (imo), even compared to other (cheaper) mutli-fx. Filters, for example. Octavers. Synths. Bass players in general don't get as much love as guitarists. Many effects are guitar-centric and don't work as well with bass. (Parallel paths helps alleviate the problems that can cause though!) Some bass-specific additions would be welcome.

 

And there are effects that would be great to have that aren't on there. Some that other multi-fx have, others that Line 6 could be the first to incorporate into a multi-fx unit (as far as I know), which could be a big selling point. Stutter (like Hexe Revolver or Malekko Charlie Foxtrot), Freeze, and so on. The problem is, I think those are kinda niche, so I'm not sure if the payoff is worth it.

 

I'm pretty sure we'll never see most of the things on my list in the Helix. I'm ok with that. I've always known they were long-shots. I just want to see new things put in there, whether it's something I care about or not. Features, effects, amps, whatever man.

I love your use of syllogisms here! I understand Inerzia's point despite the discussion of semantic accuracy. Just for fun and to play devil's advocate I am not sure the first syllogism is always true, particularly when it comes to art. The Venus de Milo may not have arms making it incomplete but many would argue it is perfect. Many artists and musicians never feel like their best works are totally complete but at some point you have to put down the brush or leave the recording studio. Others look upon those works as perfect.  Lastly, I would posit that the ideal of perfection is generally projected from the status quo, as soon as we reach perfection that becomes the new status quo and from our new, higher vantage point, we perceive a new higher level as "perfection".  For this reason, like the infinite, perfection may well be unattainable.  I would admit however that this definition of "perfection" may not have a whole lot to do with your syllogism. It might however help explain why no matter what Line6 delivers there will always be more requests for the next level of "perfection". That and the fact that a lot of people including me clearly have too much free time on their hands.  :D

 

"To an engineer, good enough means perfect. With an artist, there's no such thing as perfect."

 - Alexander Calder, probably

Well, that's your point of view, isn't it? 

I love it when somebody says "this is the truth, and if you say otherwise, you're just wrong". well... Earth is not flat but, is it really round?

 

Anyway, I'm not having this conversation. This is linguistics, bordering on philosophy. What you call imperfect, with your share of reasons, I have my reasons to call incomplete. You may try harder to see my point and understand why I think this way, or not. I won't give you any argument because, with all due respect, I don't really need you (or anybody) to share my point of view. That, and I'm too tired right now.

You may further try to convince me that the concept of incompleteness is way out of place in this matter, if you feel like it. I will read what you say, but don't hold your breath waiting for an answer. I mean, if you convince me, I'll tell you so, if not, I'm dropping it.

 

Just one question, as English is not my native language... would you say the tone of this post (or the previous one) is rude? I welcome your input.

This is silly. Your stance just doesn't jive with reality. If that's how you want to think of it, however, I obviously can't stop you. Think what you want.

 

Windows XP is, in general, a highly regarded operating system. It was great. Solid, reliable, dependable, secure (all relatively speaking, obviously). From release to death (basically), even after its full support life cycle, it still has bugs. Is it not complete? Applying your standard of "if a product has bugs then it is incomplete" to Windows XP makes it seem kind of silly, doesn't it?

 

Try applying that standard to other things. Have you ever turned in a test where you didn't get 100% of the answers correct? Does that mean you didn't complete the test? No, of course not. It makes no sense to say that. So why would you apply that standard to software, products in general, or the Helix specifically? It's nonsensical.

 

Your claim is that one trait (imperfection) precludes another (completeness). This is false. I am not stating an opinion. I am stating fact. Something can be complete, yet imperfect. This is particularly true of software.

 

If something is incomplete, then it is imperfect. This premise is true. Incompleteness entails imperfection.

If something is imperfect, then it is incomplete. This premise is false. Imperfection does not entail incompleteness.

 

Man, what a waste of time...

And the bugs? are we entitled to bugs or are they a bonus we should thank for?  :P 

(not that I've run into any of those that I've read about though) 

Bugs at launch can be considered as incompleteness, can't they?

...

No. "Imperfect" does not mean "incomplete". They are two completely separate words with disparate meanings. A finished product can have flaws. Complete software can have bugs. To say otherwise is to deny reality and redefine words.

 

Helix was released as a complete product. It's great! But it's not perfect.