ricstudioc

And here's exactly what I'm watching - the reviews of the sound quality and ease of getting those basic sounds have me primed to buy - but I play out a LOT, charging our clients a lot of money. This thing has to be rock solid and road ready, failure on these gigs is not an option. So I'm checking this thread daily, keeping an eye on what's being reported. Best guess, sometime after the turn of the year - after several more "point" updates - I may see enough stabilty to plunk down my cash. I like what I hear - but currently less so what I'm reading. I'm patient. And thanks to all the beta testers - someone's got to be the first one in…

Ahh, gotcha - still won't (sfaik) be able to send note info, but a quick read through of the manual indicates that there are plenty of CC's available to map to various buttons and such. I use Ableton live (or... Ableton Live, live...?) in my keyboard rig, and mapping doesn't get any easier, as I'm sure you know. Good luck - have fun!

Thanks for the heads up - fortunately I keep Update off on all my stuff, precisely because of this lollipop (I used that word, save the filter some work....)

(My emphasis...) Unless there's a whole level of functionality that hasn't been discussed, I wouldn't expect you would see any note data. There's been no discussion of any pitch-to-midi conversion on the Helix - not that it wouldn't be uber-cool. As a practical matter that sort of capability would require a hex pickup on the guitar. (though I've been playing around with the Guitar-Midi vst - kinda promising...) If I'm wrong somebody speak up - pitch-to-midi would close the deal so far as I'm concerned!

EXACTLY the kind of review I'm looking for - and pleased to note that there are others in this vein out there. After the major letdown of the 500x (ymmv) my critera for my next purchase is singular - does it sound good without the need for incessant fiddling/tweaking/eq'ing ad naseum? Can I just call up an amp and BE THERE, before adding all the candy or customizations? Happy to say the early reviews on this front are looking promising - and a few firmware revs down the road I may be giving L6 one more shot. On paper this thing looks like what I've been waiting for - but of course the only paper that really matters is that in the speaker cone. So - congrats on your finding nirvana, save me a seat by the salad bar. And keep these "bare bones sound" reviews coming, folks. The thing has FOUR loops fer crissake - I'm not concerned about fx at this point. Stripped down, is it a good sounding AMP(s)? That's the gist… .

And thanks again - exactly the kind of first hand review I'm looking for. Much appreciated.....

Ok - so do we know that these are amp/cab only? The text says "no other processing", but then he obviously kicks in a few (gotta say, the U-vibe is MILES beyond the rather sorry one on the HD. Just gorgeous....). If these are the amp/cab sounds with no other EQing and the like, I'm wa-a-a-y closer to this. (Alright, I'll give ya ONE eq - just one....)

Ditto here - if you simply pull up an amp and it's related cabinet, and twiddle a few tone knobs, does it sound good? (Probably start some crap here....) I've basically given up on the HD, way too much screwing around to get it to sound good. Never had the issue with earlier PODs, or any of the other simulators I own. Yeah, over on the HD page people will cheerfully tell you "Well, I just put this EQ in front, and this one after, oh and throw the Mid Focus at the very end....". Which is all well and good - but I've owned or used most of the actual amps involved, and have never had to do that. Just plug in, tweak the gain and tone, and off we go. That's WHY I go to those particular amps. So for me, that's gonna be the deciding factor. When I can get my hands on one I'm gonna shut all FX down and start pulling up amps/cabs only. If they sound good without having to throw EQ's and such in on top of them, then I'll probably buy in. If I gotta starting tweaking stuff just to make it sound like that amp... well, I've already got rooms fulla stuff, may as well stick with them. I WANT the Helix to be the end-all be-all - as noted above it certainly has the flexibilty and connectivity to be my flagship. But it I have to lollipop around just to get the basic sound right.... naw.

And there ya go - doesn't get any better than that. These boards - understandably - tend to have the problems and negatives front and center, nice to have an unabashed testimonial from the bright side. It's working for ya - keep on pickin'!

Points to consider - do you work with your own sound system and sound man, and does that system provide multiple monitor mixes? Go direct and you're relying on a third party to provide you with your most basic need - hearing yourself. And if there's only one monitor mix, how's the rest of the band gonna feel about having you blazing away from every monitor on stage while they're trying to hear the vocals?

...and there IS a validity to the question - at the end of the day, there's just a processor in there (a few? not familiar w/the architecture) dealing with 1's and 0's. Regardless of the model invoked, it's still just those 1's and 0's - what the OP seems to be missing is the specificity with which those switches are set on a model-by-model basis. So he's right to a degree - everything IS already "in there", those switches are just waiting for the code to define their function. He just seems to be underestimating the (hopefully) extreme precision with which each discrete model is analyzed. The thought occurs - can anyone (other than the L6 coders) actually say that, in modeling amplifier "Y", they didn't notice "Hey, these numbers are exactly like Amp "X" except for this, this, and this?" Somewhere there must be a database of the parameter values of the various models - would be interesting to see them laid out for comparison...

Arislaf - many thanks. I was thinking there was a written list of the offsets, but I should be able to glean the needed info (into the ballpark, at least) from those sets. ...I always do, young fella - I always do. :rolleyes: I appreciate your point of view, but in my application consistency trumps accuracy. I want to be able to try new things on the fly - the musical environment I'm working in moves fast - and the current volume discrepancies make that all but impossible. If I knew exactly what I was going to be doing before the fact in every application, sure I'd set up different patches and such. But I don't, so....

Hey all - Just what it says - I seem to recall someone posting up a file of tweaks to bring the various models in line volume-wise. Been searching the forum but can't seem to find it - was I wrong? If so - sucks gettin' old. But if not, couldja link to it, please.... Thanks! Ric ps - sucks gettin' old, anyway....

69 hum/sing/sing - certainly a decent build, overall attention to detail pretty good. It was obviously well thought out in design. But - I've swapped the neck for a real Strat one, frets on the original were too large for my tastes, and I'll be replacing the mags soon with Duncans, stocks are just too bright across the board for me. So would I have bought it without the modeling? Nope. Not that it's a bad instrument, just wouldn't interest me off the shelf as a stand alone. But it certainly holds its own as such against lots of the competition.

I've been using a std xlr from day one-about 25ft - and have had no problems. I also used an AES cable and noted no improvements, so.....

( I seem to get into these conversations a little late...) Sure I "worry" about it- but no moreso than my keyboard system laptop failing, or the built in class D amps on the FOH, or - or - or.... Fact is, if you're doing anything more than playing an acoustic to a small room of people, you're relying on technology to get your performance out there - and praying it doesn't take a dive on you. I work with a "business" band, and at the money we charge failure is not an option, so to such an extent as possible we have backup strategies/equipment ready - a spare FOH mains cab, a Korg Microstation in the keyboard rig. When it comes to the JTV, my philosphy is simple - it's used for "candy" only, no piece of music is dependant upon any of it's tricks. If it fails (which it sorta did last summer on a very big public gig - see my post on battery behavior vs temperature), oh well - no acoustic sound on this tune, or banjo on that one. But not a single tune comes off the list because of a JTV fault - we just soldier on without the ear candy. It's the same principle I've used over the years in writing/producing, particularly as regards synths and effects - it's not a viable piece of music if it depends on a trick of technology simply to be - if the core of the tune can't be played on a piano, or acoustic guitar... It may be a neat sounding thingie, but it's not music first. And for me - always music first.

i just grabbed one of the many cases I have in the closet, and put a piece of foam in between the lower bout and the case wall. Works a treat.....

Question - if one rolls back to 1.9, and accordingly to the original workbench, what functionality is lost compared to workbenchHD? What does WBHD offer that the original does not? Any comparison chart or such available?

Apparently Billy Gibbons can see 7's, according to his gtr tech. How he gets such high cholesteral swamp gristle outta those spider webs is beyond me.

Well, I've run both on my 69, once I swapped out to a fender neck I settled on 10's - that neck just feels right with'em. Didn't notice any particular issues with the 9's on the original neck. Played slide on both gauges, no real issues other than expected - higher gauges certainly are a better choice, obviously. Oh, and Ernie Ball guy here for the most part, tho I don't really care that much. A piece of wire.....

Hoping here that Zap's incorrect, and will be waiting to see before springing for the new packs. C'mon - wouldn't be all that much of an "update", only change would be adding the new models. Not saying it's a deal breaker - and I'm really interested in the JC and acoustic amp models - but I'll think a bit more about it before plunking down my schekels.....

Fender neck here - made the guitar my #2 go to, from "need to play it" to "want to play it". By all means, explore your options....

it was noted in a post some time back - and recently confirmed by me as I changed board layouts - there are 2 raised metal ridges that run the width of the 500x. Perfect for a velcro mount without having to mess with the feet or some such. Recently I stumbled across a 3M "hard" velcro, which only has one "side", which interlocks quite securely. Reminiscent of the old ProCo pedal mounting feet of the 70's/80's. Found it at Home Depot with the other velcros. So far, so good with it - but note that I do not transport the board with the pod attached. Everything else is permanently attached, but the pod gets placed (and locked in) upon setup.

I'll be interested in seeing what info others can provide about CC messages coming out of the DT, but just in case - http://www.midisolutions.com/prodevp.htm Among other functions this gadget can filter various classes of MIDI info - might be a solution for you. FWIW ,,, also occurs to me - maybe hook the DT midi out to the input of a DAW with midi monitoring, catch the data stream so you can see what's being sent?

Well, you'll have to diagnose your specific situation - but I swear by the Ebtech stuff, this thing solved every problem I was having in a rather complex amp/vg8/gr system I had configured... http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Hum Don't know how it manages it, some kind of Dark Arcane sorcery - but plug yer stuff thru it and only the music comes out. Keep it in mind if all the usual stuff fails to resolve the issue....