bsd512

That was superb!

Agreed. And I'd describe it not as "fix" but more a cycle of continuous improvement. Line 6 improved the precision of the tuner which was desired by many. With that out of the way, that exposed jumpiness now that one can see the signal more clearly. The next step in the continuous improvement cycle is to smooth the jumpiness. Nothing wrong with continuous improvement - a highly desirable thing, in fact. :)

Yeah - and the million dollar question - there are certainly a few folks asking for less jumpy tuner display. But are they the vocal minority and everyone else is happy with it? I suppose that will be the deciding factor for how much effort they put in. L6 already addressed the "precision" issue (avoiding the word accuracy :)). That kind of confirms the old adage in software development - for every fix, two new problems are introduced - precision was fixed, but now folks want it more smooth. Helps keep software developers employed I guess, since it results in a never ending request stream. :) Personally, I do find the more precise tuner too jumpy. But I also have another issue, which I'm really hesitant to even mention. I use a Peterson strobe tuner between my guitar and Helix. The Peterson has "sweetened" tunings for guitar which try to account for the guitar being an imperfect instrument and will inherently not be in tune all over the neck even though each string is 100% in tune according to the standard frequencies for the open string notes they represent. I really like that sweetened setting since they make the guitar "more in tune" for the majority of the neck that is commonly played. When Helix went to the more precise display, I did a little research on the Peterson sweetened tunings and learned what they were applying. Most (all) of them were to a fraction of a percent. But Helix only accepts whole number offsets when tuning. I shudder to ask for them to be fractional - e.g., low E be tuned to -2.3 cents from standard. With Helix you can do -2, but not -2.3. So I still use the Peterson. I've seen those crazy fret systems that account for this by having squiggly frets to account for the guitar's imperfect nature. That's very clever.

Double post - sorry. Phone acting up.

Understood. PID is about control, and achieving the target result that requires actuating a control mechanism to actuate a physical system to home in on the proper setting to achieve it. Another good analogy is that of driving a car. If you find yourself veering off the road very rapidly, you'll apply and fast and strong counter steer on the steering wheel. That's the P in PID - correction force is proportional to the error from where you are now to where you want to be. As you quickly approach the getting back in lane, the D portion of the algorithm (rate at which you are approaching the correct state) becomes more dominant and subtracts from the P portion. This has the effect of reducing your steering correction and you backing off on the hard steering maneuver so that as you approach the proper lane, you don't overshoot and head into the next lane. Tha "I" portion (integral) is often not used, but that's more for systemic issues - for example if one of your front tires has low pressure, that may constantly want to pull the car to the left or right. The "I" portion addresses that by applying a long term correction to counterbalance that force. And this is really used for control. The helix tuner doesn't control anything. It only displays the current state. A G-Force tuner mechanism probably uses a PID algorithm since it is actually making tuner key adjustments. Same thing you do manually. But for the display, all you want is to filter the variability of the signal a bit more so that the display is smooth. And it's not uncommon to feed a PID algorithm with smoothed data so that it operates better. PID for control (actuators). Data smoothing for display to smooth out the noise so you see a more stable response. Running average is a simple, effective, and tunable technique to do this. Analog meters have this smoothing inherently built-in due to the weight of the needle being deflected and it ends up looking smooth. The downside of smoothing is that the actual response you see is delayed a little bit. It can be a bit of an art to tune the smoothing parameters for each application, based on the data rate feeding it, and how jumpy is acceptable. I use these techniques routiney for control applications in factory automation, autonomous vehicle control, etc. they are also commonly used is HVAC systems for temperature control. I don't think PID is appropriate for display of data, but rather it is useful for applying actuator strength to auomate corrections that actually affect the system. In this case, that would mean changing the tuning of the guitar (g-force). But serves no purpose in the display of the current state of tune. Use a running average or other data smoothing algorithm for that.

Understood. PID is about control, and achieving the target result that requires actuating a control mechanism to actuate a physical system to home in on the proper setting to achieve it. Another good analogy is that of driving a car. If you find yourself veering off the road very rapidly, you'll apply and fast and strong counter steer on the steering wheel. That's the P in PID - correction force is proportional to the error from where you are now to where you want to be. As you quickly approach the getting back in lane, the D portion of the algorithm (rate at which you are approaching the correct state) becomes more dominant and subtracts from the P portion. This has the effect of reducing your steering correction and you backing off on the hard steering maneuver so that as you approach the proper lane, you don't overshoot and head into the next lane. Tha "I" portion (integral) is often not used, but that's more for systemic issues - for example if one of your front tires has low pressure, that may constantly want to pull the car to the left or right. The "I" portion addresses that by applying a long term correction to counterbalance that force. And this is really used for control. The helix tuner doesn't control anything. It only displays the current state. A G-Force tuner mechanism probably uses a PID algorithm since it is actually making tuner key adjustments. Same thing you do manually. But for the display, all you want is to filter the variability of the signal a bit more so that the display is smooth. And it's not uncommon to feed a PID algorithm with smoothed data so that it operates better. PID for control (actuators). Data smoothing for display to smooth out the noise so you see a more stable response. Running average is a simple, effective, and tunable technique to do this. Analog meters have this smoothing inherently built-in due to the weight of the needle being deflected and it ends up looking smooth. The downside of smoothing is that the actual response you see is delayed a little bit. It can be a bit of an art to tune the smoothing parameters for each application, based on the data rate feeding it, and how jumpy is acceptable. I use these techniques routiney for control applications in factory automation, autonomous vehicle control, etc. they are also commonly used is HVAC systems for temperature control. I don't think PID is appropriate for display of data, but rather it is useful for applying actuator strength to auomate corrections that actually affect the system. In this case, that would mean changing the tuning of the guitar (g-force). But serves no purpose in the display of the current state of tune. Use a running average or other data smoothing algorithm for that.

You could use either. I use the L6 link cable to the back panel. I believe the caveat of that is that global EQ is not applied to the L6 link audio, but I find no need to use the global EQ when using the L3's in my situation.

He mentions a PID algorithm there - I disagree. PID is used for control and is used to keep from overshooting the target point and and then oscillating around it. In this case, that of a tuner, YOU are the controller and inherently in your brain you are applying a PID type algorithm when you tune, you just may not realize it. For example, if you are way out of tune, you turn your tuning keys quickly, and as you close in on the proper tuning, you naturally slow down so you don't overshoot the correct tuning position and have to go back and retry. He's right about the parameters, though, but PID is for a different application. EDIT: and I suspect L6 is already using some type of running average on the data feeding the tuner display, so it's probably more a matter of tuning those parameters to get what folks are asking for, than writing new code.

I don't think it needs to be that complicated - a simple running average calculation should do it. That's approximately 1 line of C code. :)

Angl Meteor w/OwnHammer Orange 2x12 cab (V30 speaker + OH1 mic mix) Brit 2204 w/OwnHammer Marshall 4x12 cab (H75+M75 speakers + OH1 mic mix) And Archetype Clean ... are generally my favorites. I could fall deeply in love with a bunch of them though, but there are only so many hours in the day. :) I can't wait for my variax to get here and try out some acoustic stuff. I assume no amp model needed for the variax acoustic simulation.

An SW rep called me today and confirmed delivery to them tomorrow (Friday) and it should ship from them Saturday. Made me feel like a VIP. So unless there's a mixup, I think it's a go. I should have it early next week.

Thanks! Guitar Center is a little more convenient since there is a store in my area - makes it easy to drive to the store and return if needed. I do prefer Sweetwater - ordered my L3t's from them. I was a little concerned with ordering a guitar I've never played before, but Sweetwater does have nice and easy return policies, just at the slight inconvenience in that they are not nearby to me to return in person if that becomes necessary. Thanks for the suggestion! I checked Sweetwater's web site and they say they'll have it in stock this Saturday, so I cancelled the GC order and placed a new order with Sweetwater, so hopefully I will have it by Monday or Tuesday. :)

I'm going nuts waiting on my JTV 89F. Ordered from Guitar Center on 12/21. First estimated ship date was Jan 11. Ugh. Went ahead and ordered. Now it looks like they won't be in stock until Feb 20. Argh. What's up with Variax production? I called GC and they said Line 6 has slipped the delivery date to them. I got my Helix faster than that around this time last year and the JTV's have been out for years. Anyone know what's up?

Nice! I approve. :) Of course, you might want to save that dry track if you recorded it since you'll never be able to quite get that sound again since it was based on a pickup malfunction which may not be reproducible. :-)

Sounds great!

Thanks!! I'll take it. :) I really just discovered the electronic drum kits in Logic and was playing around. The more I messed around, the more the groove grew on me, and, well, I ended up with was 3 overlaid drum tracks (two electronic and one regular kit) and my guitar w/Helix of course. Apparently I have trouble following even "guidelines". :-) Hey, I had fun, that's what matters. :D Those other clips and samples folks followed up with sound like real pros - unlike me. Those sound really great! The original post was largely made in jest - just a bad pun on all the videos going around "Does Helix do X" - replace X with whatever. In this case, Techno. :)

I definitely agree with the first part - I absolutely love the tactile feel of the helix interface. When you engage or click or select something, you know it through feedback from your fingers. I noticed several times in the video above where selections were attempted and re-attempted on the touch display before actually working. And with no tactile feedback, it just slows things down and really is not a great user experience. And that was my experience with the iPad interface to the Amplifi 150 I had before the Helix. I didn't like it. And what's also why I'd be ambivalent about an iPad or mobile interface for Helix. With the Amplifi 150 I had before the Helix and thought the iPad interface was slow and cumbersome, and disconnected (bluetooth) often. Maybe that'd be better with a wired connection, but you still have the lack of button-feel and frequent adjustment attempts that didn't work the first time through the touch screen. Just my personal opinion and use-case. I can see where it'd be handy maybe for live work with an iPad on a stand to tweak something that you didn't already have programmed with the footswitches, expression pedal, snapshots, etc.

Update went smooth for me. Note this looks like a firmware-only change - bug fixes. No change in Editor version. Bug Fixes - In rare cases, engaging one particular footswitch on one particular factory preset could result in full scale noise - FIXED - In rare cases within certain presets, when Variax parameters are set per preset, the Variax Volume parameter could be inadvertently recalled at 0.0 - FIXED - General stability improvements - Other minor bug fixes and optimizations

Oh, there are rules? Even better reason to break them. :)

Just messing around ... but it appears so. So we can now add that to the list of Metal, twang, and everything else. :) Sorry no fancy video :( https://soundcloud.com/user-22828532/x-58-100

Well, they say imitation is the greatest form of flattery :)

Poor tuner resolution. Can't comment on accuracy. Will not buy.

Yes, a key and mouse click combination does it, can't remember off the top of my head which one. Command or option + right or left mouse. One of them should work, sorry don't have the Helix in front of me to confirm.

That should be very easy to measure. As zooy suggested a while back, record a dry track. Then re-amp it on 2.10. Update and then re-amp it on 2.11. Then zoom in on the two tracks in your DAW and note whether the track from 2.11 is offset from that of 2.10 - that should clearly identify any additional latency in 2.11. If they line-up, no new latency.

Great video!