sb77

That's a shame - I will need to re-edit a bunch of presets to facilitate but it's a reasonable work-round for the future. Appreciate the reply tho - thanks.

Hi. I can readily see how to assign MIDI CC's to remotely control specific footswitches on a per preset basis but is there some way to do this globally such that all presets have the same footswitches mapped to the same MIDI CC ? I suppose alternatively I could perhaps map specific block types (eg drive, delay etc) directly if again that could be done globally....? TIA

Belew01 - thanks - looks like I was wrong on that and I see what you mean from the back panel - there are FLAT and HF OFF modes. I am interested to hear the presets but will likely rely on my modeller for IR's so that works for me. Appreciate the assistance here.

Page 10 of the Line 6 manual says otherwise? Says its cant be adjusted or update either...

If I understand correctly the basic non-plus version of Powercab 112 with 6 speaker profile presets also has a FRFR mode that when activated switches OFF the HF driver? Why does it do that? Use of FRFR mode would more often be associated with use with any remote modeller including using IR's for speaker sim within any given preset so why would we want to kill off HF? And is there anyway of turning the HF on in FRFR mode? (I really have no need for the Plus version)

https://www.google.com/search?q=forthcoming+meaning&oq=forthcoming&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0l7.5175j1j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

What's going on here ? - Forthcoming bug fixes ?

Yeah, but I have seen worse. LB specs out well but just doesnt yet work intuitively to be a serious live device. I like to be able to retain my loops (so not happening on a Boomerang) but also need it to not totally wipe out the creative process. The LB has had one firmware upgrade plus a beta that adds a great deal but it still feels unfinished and somehow clunky. I guess if I really worked at it I might get some satisfaction but its a fight I cant yet be bothered with. If however HeadRush put some serious work into it it could be fantastic - concern is that the reviews have already buried it. Consequently I am not rushing into an Aeros - need to see some consistency but as agreed there is nothing like (trial) ownership to really know if its right. A looper seems to be such a simple thing but botched more often than not.

Yep this ^. I have tried many & considered all. The HeadRush might if revised thru firmware get there but there are timing anomalies and something unintuitive about it as it stands. The hardware is good (if you are OK with big) but its not there yet. I am not sure I am yet ready to gamble again but am watching this Aeros closely.

Some very mixed reviews by actual owners (Thomann) but room for some optimism that this may yet develop into a decent product. The now ancient RC-300 still is in many ways best all-rounder IMO. ckbcowboy - I am VERY interested to hear how you get on with the Aeros - any pros & cons as you get familiar with it?

I got the distinct impression that if MIDI tempo sync wasn't designed in at the outset it was a lollipop (female dog) to add it retrospectively - this from another similar product... I put this in as a feature request as soon as the Helix was released. No joy. But I could still really use it. Headrush has MIDI sync in and out but its more of a Headache than a Headrush. Boomerang sounds best option but its a little limited to live performance with no ability to save & recall. One day the perfect Looper will appear but it doesn't seem to have shown up just yet.

I have tried a G10 and G10S and I cant get a reliable connection over 20m. The TX and RX have line of sight but through a double glazed (non-metalized) sealed unit. I have tried re-positioning the base and different fixed channels and killed off any other nearby wireless but the signal quality with constant breaks is unusable. Realistically is, for example, a G75 likely to be up to the job?

Yeah sure cruisinon2 , the results would not hold up in a court of law but that really wasn't the naive idea you critique. And true, not everybody wants to say they screwed-up and rushed at the upgrade in maniacal excitement for a change in revision number without reading the instructions properly - personally if I screw up I take responsibility for it.... but maybe that's not for everyone. But hey, we are all different there will be a few with science degrees and a few that cant read so well and that's how it is. A good upgrade should address a spread of capability. We all understand that on a forum such as this, and pretty much every other on the www, its natural we expect to see the complaints more so than the quiet successes. I was simply wondering how many successes (define how you like BTW but for me its a post upgrade functionally effective Helix) there have been. I reckon its probably quite a few but who knows? Lets just stay with the moaning & groaning and some constructive solutions.

this could make an interesting poll? Try and quantify how many had a problem with a shift to 2.80 / 2.81 and how many of them maintain they carefully followed the instructions and maybe on what platform ( Win / Mac). Try and get a measure of success as well as the more (quite reasonably) well publicised disaster areas.

You're welcome - it's an odd one that I still can't figure out why it would stop an update but it happens. Glad I mentioned it.