jonny4rd

grdGo33, I obviously don't have any real numbers to support interest and could in no way predict what it would cost to write such a program. My point is I think there is just as much of a case for writing the program as there is for not writing a program. If a nominal fee is enough to increase the odds above 50/50 in favor of writing, then I want that to be known. Someone took the time to build a converter for the HD series and managed to make that work even with DSP and dual signal chain differences for free. bishopsuniverse has as already laid quite a bit of the groundwork for such a program, again for free. Moreover, you took an albeit small amount of time, without compensation, to write some problem statements that would need to be overcome in order for the program to work with the helix family. In some way the crowdsourcing work has already begun. See what I did there. ;) It also strikes me as interesting that you were such a fan of bishopuniverse's initial post yet seem more critical of my comment; which was my attempt to reinforce your comment. I'm curious what changed? To further my point, you might also want to check out the opensource Neural Amp Modeler project. Lots of "free" work being done over there to bring profiling to the masses. Crowdsourcing works, people solve hard problems and do stuff for "free" all the time. I

Someone made on of these for the HD series. FWIW, I'd be willing to pay a nominal fee to developer or crowdsourced solution for similar utility; I'm sure many others would too.

I look at IRs (and profiles) like keyboard samples. They are one snapshot of a specific output with a specific mic on a specific cab at a specifc point on a speaker at a specific impedance etc. In contrast, amp/cab modeling (like physical keyboard modeling, where it probably gets its name) appears to be more of an attempt to create a virtual representation of an amp or cab in a myriad of the aforementioned conditions. It’s been said many times that an IR is a essentially photograph. As such, today’s modeling is probably more like a VR representation of the amp that you can interact with in real time at different angles in different rooms etc. Like multiple IRs (or perhaps parts thereof) being used at once. This might be why modeling puts so much more demand on system memory than static IR's. I suspect early cab “modeling” was little more than IRs but might be wrong there. I also suspect machine learning has been used to add realism to models for a long time. And now that AI technology is more affordable and companies have all these reference data points on amp/cab behavior machine learning is blurring the lines between static IR capabilities and dynamic modeling. Sansamp proved long ago that simple eq could get us a 90% solution to the problem of replicating a guitar cab. It’s always that last 10% that keeps us up at night. Or in my case why none of the Celestion blue models or IRs seem to have the magic mids that a real one does.

Regarding Sag. It’s my understanding this is intended to simulate the use of a tube rectifier at high settings and a solid state rectifier at low settings. As noted on Robinette’s website, Resistors are also used to simulate rectifier sag (see also Fender’s Excelsior for a modern example of this). When Line 6 introduced this feature on the HD series I was excited to try it but found it subtle and not really an “effect” unto itself. The most noticeable quality is perhaps best described as a “loss of efficiency” manifesting in a bit of a volume drop, fidelity and less immediate attack, very similar to that of a compressor. Maxing out the drive and bias and master volume setting of an amp model makes sag more noticeable but it’s still subtle, as it probably should be since it’s likely intended to address complaints about the “feel” of an amp model, especially those models typically used for blues like a 5E3 Deluxe where sag is really part of the amp’s character. Line 6 notes that these deep editing parameters are “highly interactive” with other controls. I wish there was a “dependency” toggle that would adjust other parameters in concert based on the way the real amp would behave under such conditions. For example, if one adjusts the master to full, the sag bias, and bias X, could adjust along with it at a predetermined ratio appropriate to the model. The user could of course disable this interactivity if desired. Might submit an idea scale suggestion on that.

Did you get this resolved? Having a similar issue.

Just curious. What is the origin of the "HD" effects on the Firehawk? I don't appear to have these mystery models on my other Line 6 "HD" products including my HD PRO (with upgrade model packs). Were these built for the Firehawk or were they part of an unpublished update for the "HD" line?