zappazapper

I used to have a Parker Nightfly with a piezo bridge and I used to do this with 2 amps. I don't see any reason why you couldn't do this with the Stomp, although I own an LT, not a Stomp. As long as you can select different inputs for the two paths you should be able to do it.

I just tested your preset on my LT and it seems to work fine. When I engage the loop block, turning the blocks after the loop block changes the sound.

https://amtelectronics.com/new/amt-fs-2midi/ I just got this little box a few weeks ago. 2 channel footswitch with MIDI in and out. You can use Command Center to send CC messages to it to switch your 6505. I use the Instant commands to control my amp with Snapshots without having to take up a footswitch on the Helix. It also sends CC messages to the Helix but Bypass Assign doesn't work the same way with MIDI as it does with the built-in footswitches on the Helix - meaning that you can't have some blocks turn on and others turn off for a given switch state... so you can't, for example, turn ON an effect when you switch to your clean channel. With Controller Assign you can define a Min and Max value so for blocks that have a Mix parameter there is a workaround, but not for anything like an amp model or a distortion. I have a thread and an IdeaScale idea that seeks to add the ability to define block bypass behavior with incoming MIDI. If you think this little switch would be useful to you and the ability to control blocks as you switch channels would also be useful, maybe you'll consider upvoting my idea. https://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Incoming-MIDI-CC-Bypass-Assign/1001069-23508

https://c3.zzounds.com/media/English-56d23172d2f4f614d378952e9d534c5b.pdf There are a number of effects that are on the X3L that don't seem to be part of the M-series/HD/Legacy effects. Square wave choruses and flangers. Random wave choruses and flangers. "Lumpy Phase". "Tape Eater". Boss MT-2 "Metal Zone" as opposed to HM-2 "Heavy Metal". "Lux Spring", "Standard Spring", "King Spring". A bunch of different stuff. Like I said, it's possible, like the current legacy lineup, that these are "inferior" models but I used a lot of this stuff and it's just more tools in the toolbox.

Was there ever any appetite for including POD XT/X3/HD effects with the Legacy Effects? They seem to all come from the M-series pedals. My X3L had some different stuff that was kinda cool and useful. What about Legacy amps? Whether the old models were accurate enough is one thing but I never had a problem making the thing sound "good". Maybe a bad model is still a good sound *shrugs*

That's what I'm saying. They make them separate models. So in the case of Fender reverb, they've just make the reverb a separate model, so if you're not using it, it doesn't eat up DSP.

A similar question that gets asked is "can we have a Mark IV model that has all the channels, instead of a separate model for every channel?" https://benvesco.com/store/helix-dsp-allocations/ If you look at this DSP allocation chart, you'll see, if we use the Mark IV example, that each of the three channels takes up about a third of a DSP chip's processing power, so a Mark IV model with all three channels would take up 100% of the chip's processing power, because even though you're only playing through one channel at a time, the Helix would have to load all three into memory in order to switch between channels without an audible gap. Since most people are going to be using only one Mark IV channel at a time, it wouldn't make sense to make a single Mark IV model that has all three channels and eats up all your processing power. Instead they made a separate model for each channel, and for the odd person that wants to use all three channels simultaneously, all it takes is some creative signal routing. So in the case of the reverb on a Fender amp, they separated those elements for the same reason - not everybody is going to use the reverb just because they're using a Fender amp model, and reverbs are generally quite expensive in terms of DSP, so they keep the reverb out of the amp model to reduce DSP load, but offer it, or at least something similar, in the actual reverb block for those that do want to use it. It took me a while myself to accept why things are the way they are. I come from VST land where Amplitube has a Mark IV model that looks just like a Mark IV and I get to play with all the knobs and push-pulls and EQ sliders and it makes me feel like I'm playing with a real Mark IV. At the end of the day, however, it's become clear to me that the Helix's models are far superior in terms of sonics, and to achieve that level of sonic accuracy required a sacrifice to everything else that fools us into thinking we're playing the real thing, like all the knobs and push-pulls on a Mark IV model, or a reverb included on a Fender amp model because a real Fender amp would have a reverb knob. You can have a Fender amp model with a reverb - add a reverb block.

I don't have a Stomp, I have an LT... but... AFAIK footswitches 4&5 on the Stomp work the same as the built-in footswitches so you should be able to call Snapshots using the Command Center.

I helical wrap and tape all my unbalanced cables to any power cable I can find, because 60 cycle hum is my jam, bro...

You guys are all cancelled...

I don't own a Powercab but I've been curious enough about them to do a little research. Maybe I can help. I know the Powercab has a few different modes as far as the speaker models are concerned and that they can be controlled by the Helix. Is it possible that when you are using the 1/4", the Powercab is no longer functioning in the same mode as the Link because maybe the Powercab's settings are no longer being controlled by the Helix? Maybe try relinquishing control of the Powercab by the Helix and set the Powercab to be in flat/FRFR mode and see what the result is.

Is the firmware on the Powercab updated?

Fair enough... and just so we're clear, I would rather that the incoming MIDI just be treated the same way the built-in switches are... but to Phil's point, you could easily manipulate the recorded MIDI data after the fact to get the behavior on the Helix that you need... so I understand his hesitation to get behind this one, and as he is quite the influential person around here, anything that I can do to make it more palatable for him could go a long way XD

No reason why you couldn't, but you might want to consider plugging into the input of the Helix, and then using a send with a send block to the input of your amp (send level set to instrument) . That way you can put effects before of your amp in the signal chain as well as after.

It sounds like the FX loop on your amp comes after the volume controls. In that case the Helix Volume control would control the overall level of your amp. It's just the way some amps are designed vs. others. I have a Mesa Boogie .50 Caliber+ and my master volume still functions when the FX Loop block is off on my Helix, so I have my Helix Volume at full and use the master volume on my amp to set the overall level.

Thanks for the upvote, rd2rk, although... I don't know if your situation really makes the case for my idea. With full-featured MIDI controllers and DAWs we have the ability to define exactly what messages are sent. Phil's suggestion of sending multiple CC messages is valid in that case. But there are a number of smaller, less flexible devices out there that send MIDI, and in that case the Helix would be the only device you could configure to interpret those messages. The more I think about it, the more I think Phil has a point. "Esoteric" might not be the word I would use (seeing as the Helix treats its own footswitches exactly how I'm suggesting), but he is right that no other device treats external MIDI messages that way. Does that mean it can't be done? Does that mean it would be prohibitively complicated for the average user? I don't think so, but what isn't esoteric, what isn't out of the ordinary is devices that allow some measure of control over what incoming MIDI messages do with either Min and Max Values (just like the Helix does with Controller Assign controlled by MIDI) or some sort of control over polarity. So that might be a better way to go, and so I think I might modify or delete/resubmit my idea. Thanks for offering your thoughts, guys.

STOP THE PRESSES!! https://www.guitarworld.com/news/jimmy-page-reveals-the-amp-he-really-used-to-record-whole-lotta-love

The closest you're going to come is to call an authorized service tech and get their bench rate. You'll never know how much a repair costs until it's done, it's just the nature of the beast. But you have to consider that if you don't get the repair done, you're throwing the money you originally spent on the unit out the window. So your options are to repair the unit and eat the cost no matter what it is, or sell it as an in-need-of-repair item and recoup some of your investment.

Oh, it's just a rumor I heard about Kirk Hammet breaking away to do his own project. Nothing's official until 3.0 gets released, though.

ah, i see... the polytune seemed a logical conclusion given all the talk of polyphonica...

Esoteric XD fair enough, but it made enough sense that L6 thought to do their own footswitches that way, and I think that it's an incredibly powerful way of doing it. I'm just asking that the behavior of the switches on an external controller be consistent with the internal switches. Admittedly I have a pretty specific situation going on here. My LT doesn't switch my amp's EQ properly (not the LT's fault), so I had to go looking for a product that would (AMT FS-2 MIDI), a 2-channel footswitch that transmits and receives MIDI. It's surprisingly flexible but not so flexible that I could assign multiple CCs to the same switch. I also have a Roland FC-300, which theoretically would allow me to do exactly what you're saying, but it doesn't switch my amp's EQ properly either, not to mention it's another huge piece of gear to lug around.

https://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Incoming-MIDI-CC-Bypass-Assign/1001069-23508

polytune?

So I just received the pedal in the mail and I'm testing it out. First test - does it switch modes on my amp and FULLY switch out the EQ? Yes it does. Rhythm/Lead modes switch as desired, and EQ settings do not change sound when switch is dimmed. Awesome. Check. Second test - does it respond to MIDI CC messages? Yes it does. In Command Center I assigned FS10 to CC Toggle CC#14 and FS 11 to CC Toggle CC#15 and the FS-2 responds and switches modes and the EQ on my amp when I press the Helix footswitches. Awesome. Check. Third test - can I integrate it with Snapshots, without taking up a Helix footswitch? Yes I can. In Comman Center I assigned Instant #1 to MIDI CC#14, Value 0 and Instant #2 to MIDI CC#15, Value 0. Then I switched to Snapshot #2, went back into Command Center and changed the Values of both Instants to 127. Amp mode and EQ did not engage until I switched to Snapshot #1 and then back to Snapshot #2. But yes, once it is set up, I can use Snapshots to switch modes and engage the EQ on my amp without having to take up a Helix footswitch. This is particularly useful as the Ext Amp function does not let us do this - the Ext Amp function does not let you specify whether the connection is made or broken, so if you assigned it to an Instant, it would make the connection (switch to lead mode on my amp) when loading the preset, but there was no parameter there to change to have it break the connection on another Snapshot. The only workaround I could figure out was to change the Select value to "2 (Ring)" on the desired Snapshots, but as I would theoretically be using the ring to engage/disengage my EQ (if it actually worked), this would have not provided me with the desired operation either. So this is a HUGE improvement for me. Awesome. Check. Fourth test - can I use the FS-2 MIDI to simultaneously bypass and/or modify parameters of blocks as I switch modes on my amp or engage/disengage the EQ on my amp from the FS-2, again leaving Helix footswitches available for other functions? Yes and no. Modifying parameters works fine as the Helix allows you to specify Min and Max Values, by bypass does not function as desired. The Helix does not treat MIDI the same way it treats its own footswitches, and also doesn't allow you to specify Min and Max values in Bypass Assign to manually define block behavior. With Helix footswitches, you simply engage or disengage the blocks that are assigned to that footswitch to the desired configuration for that state (say, when the switch is dim, you have a distortion off and a chorus on), and it will simply toggle all the assigned blocks when you hit the switch (switch goes lit, distortion turns on and chorus turns off). With an incoming MIDI CC, a value of 0 switches the block off and 127 switches it on, period. So in the aforementioned example, if I had the FS-2 switch dim, set the distortion off and the chorus on (both blocks being assigned to bypass on incoming MIDI), when I hit the switch on the FS-2 to lit, both blocks would now be on, and hitting the switch on the FS-2 again to dim would then turn both blocks off. And again, there are no Min and Max Values in Bypass Assign to manually define the behavior of the blocks. This is disappointing. Well, 3 out of 4 ain't bad. It's a vast improvement over my amp's EQ not switching out completely, and even if it did work properly before, I think the improvements to Snapshot use are worth the $180 Canadian I spent. My issue wasn't going to be fixed with any software update so I didn't particularly care how insufficient the Ext Amp function on the Helix was. But now the insufficient incoming MIDI implementation is an issue for me, so now I'm hoping that someone can direct me to an IdeaScale idea that is already seeking to address this issue. If there isn't one I will gladly submit one myself.

Can't do a 1.8 ms delay time. So I did 2 delay blocks, one with a 1 ms delay time, one with a 0.8 ms delay time. Inverted polarity on merge block. Sounds awesome.