HonestOpinion

Good points regarding the joystick. Definiely hope L6 retains some version of a joystick which works very well although I would prefer one of those flat designs like you see on the Roland GR-55. There doesn't seem to be a good analog pointer control on the Cortex or anything that could be dual use unless the volume knob becomes a joystick. Why not just add one at that point? Users will just have to commit to the touchscreen approach and some won't like it. Better hope the touchscreen works well. If it does it could make several operations easier, particularly moving and adding blocks.

I grant you that it is not SPDIF and if that's what you want/need it doesn't look like it will be on this device. Just speculating on one of the only ways, other than USB, that they could deliver a digital signal with the hardware that they are currently showing in their literature. If by convoluted you mean that it will cost you the use of your XLR connectors for other purposes, as you point out, then I agree. Technically it is not convoluted as XLR connectors are used to deliver an AES/EBU digital output signal all the time. Just saying they could potentially leverage those XLR outputs for an additional digital output method with only the currently spec'd hardware. Agree that additional digital outputs like SPDIF would be nice to have for some users. When it comes to connections, price and footprint allowing, the more the merrier.

I wonder if they will be able to provide AES/EBU through the XLR outputs or if digital output will be strictly limited to USB?

Sorry to hear that, it would be way more exciting than any light show we ever put on and lighting guitars on fire has already been done.

Agree, announcing this early with some specifics regarding the device does gives a lot of lead time to competitors. They must need to raise more up-front capital. Yup, might not be quite ready for a crash-free demo in the wild. They are still many months away from delivery.

Your post inspired me to go back and read the whole thread and it is amazing how little the conversation has changed and mostly between the same parties with which it started. Getting off my hamster wheel now :-)

There are trails between snapshots, just not between presets.

You may be correct but I have to say that if the Editor broke things more than incredibly rarely when I used it I would be on to the next device. That just has not been my experience. Like other users here have reported the particular combination of backup/saving, computer hardware, preset design, attached devices, firmware upgrade process, etc. that I use has left me pretty much problem free for the duration of my Helix ownership. With that said after years of reading through the forum, I would observe that Line6 needs to do a better job of bulletproofing the editor software and maybe their driver as well as their firmware upgrade process. I mention the upgrade process, driver, and editor in the same breath as problems with one may well be affecting the other. And then there is the problem of accommodating the incredible range of computer hardware out there which is partly out of L6's control...

All good points but seeing as how they provided knobs and touchscreen, depending on the implementation, there is at least the potential to accommodate most users regardless of their level of skin conductivity :-)

Definitely agree that snapshots is a fantastic feature and I would not want to replace it with gapless preset switching. Having both would be optimal. Being limited to only one or the other is the compromise I was referring to.

Have to disagree. It is both a feature and also a compromise driven by the current state of hardware and programming and the price point and time-frame they need to be delivered at. I know that "compromise" seems pejorative but I don't mean it that way. Matter fact, isn't that part of the problem these days in our larger discourse, that compromise is viewed as a negative? It is one choice right now, some would say the best one, selected by some fairly heavyweight and inspired programmers for top of the line modelers. There will be better options coming down the pike, and there's no shame in acknowledging that and working towards it. I can't see any reason to submit to the tyranny of low expectations that there will never be a time where users can't effortlessly slide between switching presets or snapshots/scenes with minimal latency and more than adequate sound quality and number of available blocks. In the meantime the Helix is a fantastic piece of kit

It seems to come down right now in the modeling world to two primary choices made by modeling companies. Devote all DSP resources to amp/cab, effects, and miscellaneous processing, provide scenes within a preset for spillover and gapless switching. This solution dictates that only the same blocks can be used when switching. Devote half the DSP resources to amp/cab, effects and miscellaneous processing and the other half to gapless preset switching. This allows different blocks to be used when switching but allows less DSP resources to be used for either more blocks in a path or potentially limits the use of more complex algorithms for amp/cabs, effects, etc.. A third option that seems to be either too difficult to program or much more likely is not perceived as worth the effort(at least right now) would be to add the flexibility to provide the user with a device that that has the option to select between the two methods above depending on their requirements for a given song. There is probably no inherent reason you could not program a single device to allow both approaches. As an example use both cores on a two core machine for your entire path, or have the option to design two presets using half the DSP resources each and use one core for your first preset and the second one for a preset you load up in tandem with the first preset. Obviously this gapless two-preset option would limit each of the presets to approximately half the DSP resources that could be used in the single preset option. I would think it is just a matter of the level of programming effort required and whether there is enough of a perceived demand to justify it. Sooner or later I think this ability to choose between the two options will probably be out there in a device. In the meantime most manufacturers appear to opt for either option #1 or option #2 but not allow both/either on the same device. My guess is the industry will eventually slog through the programming and hardware setup required for both options and that will become the new standard offering in most devices. We have definitely seen times in the computer world when new CPUs, GPUs, or faster RAM drops where the hardware outstrips the software and it takes a while for programmers to catch up and write apps that fully exploit the new hardware. There may also be windows of time where the DSP hardware gets so cheap and powerful that until the firmware/software catches up it is easy to provide both options, gapless presets and maximal block processing without having to make a choice of number and quality of blocks vs. gapless preset switching. The average power user simply won't be able to throw enough at the device to overtax it. If they do the device throws them a "DSP limit reached" message with confidence that almost none of the users will ever reach that limit. So, if you purchase a unit like a Digitech DSP1101 or the Headrush, be prepared to have gapless switching but fewer resources allocated to the number of blocks you can use and possibly the quality or complexity of those blocks. If you select a device like the Helix that allocates all resources to allowing maximal blocks and maximal complexity of those blocks be prepared to have to use scenes(one set of blocks) for gapless switching. If you are perfectly satisfied with the sound and operation of a device that uses gapless preset switching, pick that one. If not, select something like the Helix where the focus is on devoting all the DSP to your signal path(s) and their blocks. Limiting factors in technology are constantly being overcome. Why should this one be any different. Maybe it can be addressed on the Helix by offering both options, unlikely, or maybe by some newer device that hits the market. My only gripe is when people insist that the status quo is the only choice that will ever exist. Lastly if you have the Helix and are not exploiting snapshots(scenes) you are missing out on the compromise that companies like Line6 and Fractal determined would be the best and most preferred way to leverage DSP and existing hardware when their devices were manufactured.

I will be most interested to see what gets delivered here. The combined footswitch/knob appears to be sheer genius if they hold up. What a novel way to provide more adjustable knobs without increasing the chassis size. The spread out switches/knobs will require wider hand travel across the modeler for parameter adjustment and some users may not like this. I would be sorry to lose scribble strips and a built-in expression pedal is always a plus to me but by no means a deal-breaker. I love the touchscreen and the fact that it looks like this device may be able to use at least Neural proprietary plugins. Combining a touchscreen with physical knobs and incorporating plugins on a pedalboard are two features I have wished for that have met with a lot of pushback or disinterest on the forum. I am happy to see other companies embrace these ideas and hope that Line6 follows suit at some point. The ability to load and save presets via Wi-Fi on the Cortex is fantastic and really a no-brainer, USB flash memory would be another excellent option(not present on the Cortex). Firmware upgrades and preset sharing will also be available using Wi-Fi. Would I accuse Line6 of intellectual property theft if they implemented Wi-Fi saving/importing in the Helix II? Of course not! Those kinds of ideas belong to everyone and they may well be working on them already. The chassis and the signal flow and icon representation appears admittedly very similar to the Helix though I personally wish they had not followed Line6's lead on the icons. The icons on the Helix are so broad, represented by category, that I don't know if I am looking at a flanger or a phaser, a Fender or a Marshall, an overdrive or a fuzz pedal. I would have preferred a text option along with the icons. Another fine addition would be customizable icons. The ability to import a low-res picture or graphic for icons, or in lieu of that a large library of icons,would be mighty handy and sooner or later I won't be surprised if we see a device that features it. I am not a fan of intellectual property theft but there is sometimes a gray area or fine line between theft and best practice. There are times when everyone can clearly see the same better mousetrap. Not everything should be protected by patent or copyright. Case in point certain pharmaceutical corporations who have patented sequences in the human genome so they can be assured to profit off any future cures developed, even by other companies. A well-known corporation's patenting of "one-click" purchasing also comes to mind. A patent that only ran out relatively recently. Certain things/ideas should belong to the user community and any company that wants to provide them, not a single company. When does a device stop being just a clone? How many innovations, improvements, or fixes are required before it becomes significantly different enough from the original to withstand a lawsuit? That is for the courts to decide. There is always a tension between protecting and encouraging R&D investments by a company and not granting or extending a copyright or patent to the point where it cripples innovation or becomes an unsustainable or unjustifiable cost to the end user. Line6 has been steadfast in their support of other companies like Fractal and Kemper that created high-end modelers before them. I hope they offer similar latitude to companies that come after the Helix with products like the Headrush or "Quad Cortex". Some of them will not be as good and some may be better, some more derivative and some less. Competition spurs innovation and I see no reason for them not to continue to pursue the high road. If this device turns out to be great, too early to tell as it is essentially vaporware until delivery, and even if any one of these companies gets leap-frogged by another, probably only temporarily, all of us musicians ultimately benefit from the bar being raised.

Numbering would be no help to me. I need electronic trackers on my socks as they constantly disappear into the void. My friends report the same. Somewhere there is an alternate universe that reeks of bromhidrosis ("I ain't lyin'" - Zappa).

Yep, you can assign footswitches to switch in a return or a send. As phil_m stated you don't necessarily need a send to use the return though. Also keep in mind that you can have up to four input blocks and each one of these can have a different input assigned, e.g. Guitar, Aux as well as any of the return inputs.

Interesting that Microsoft does not mention an unsigned driver as a possible cause for this error. And btw, what's up with this, why isn't the driver signed? Driver signing helps to ensure Windows compliance.

Could be a 1 or a zero until you actually observe it, or alive or dead if you're Schrodinger's cat. Leaving it unplugged is just fine as long as you don't live under a power line or attempt to keep the end hydrated in a cup of water.

Well done, no one can say it is for lack of trying! A rather morbid analogy but that explains why they call it "troubleshooting" rather than "troublekilling".

Possibly related to this I have noticed that copying and pasting from one location to another sometimes results in the copied presets being rebuilt the next time the Helix is restarted. In my opinion this should not be happening! If a preset is being copied from a location on a Helix that has been started with no rebuild messages, why is it rebuilding after being copied? In other words, what is the Helix seeing in a copied preset upon restart that makes it think that it needs to run the import/upgrade process on it a second time? The same process it would use after you import new presets or do a firmware upgrade and reload setlists. Additionally it does not seem to happen consistently. Perhaps it is only happening on certain presets that have been built originally on a prior firmware version. If that is the case why weren't they already rebuilt to be indistinguishable from presets built on the current firmware on your last restart? The Helix does NOT immediately run the rebuild process when you modify and save a blank preset on the current firmware, or at least doesn't display a rebuild message. So what is different when you copy and paste that is sometimes initiating a rebuild upon your next restart? It makes me think that you should not start editing presets that have been copied and pasted until you restart the Helix. If that is the case that is a massive inconvenience and a "feature" that should be fixed. Ultimately what I am getting at here is I wonder if corruption can be introduced into a preset by editing after it has been copied and pasted without restarting first and allowing the preset(s) to rebuild. If this is the case then first off you shouldn't be able to edit a preset until it has been rebuilt. Better than that would be to rebuild a copied preset immediately upon paste. All of this though begs the question of why a second rebuild of a copied preset is required of a preset that has already been rebuilt upon a previous start. This should not be occurring at all.

I would definitely try swapping out the USB cable. Also try moving it around to other USB ports. The USB port on the back of your computer is usually the most reliable connection as it not in a hub configuration as the ports on the front of your PC frequently are.

Probably already tried this but since I didn't see it stated here anywhere make sure 'Global Settings --> Ins/Outs --> 'Digitial Output' = 'AES/EBU' and start with the 'Digital Out Level' parameter at zero.

No doubt these issues get really difficult to track down as the issue may lie with Windows, the motherboard drivers, one of the other peripherals or drivers, or even perhaps Line6. Although I don't see this much these days as compared to some years ago, sometimes it is caused by a driver grabbing an interrupt that is reserved by Windows either for, or by, some other device/driver. In essence making an unauthorized call/demand to the OS, hardware, or kernel. That means the permutations of hardware/software are almost infinite for what could be the root cause. It would also explain why it works on most every setup except for a select few. A good start is swapping USB cables and updating MB drivers. From there troubleshooting by disabling or even removing device drivers one by one can be a next step. Disconnect any peripherals you can. I would remove and reinstall all of the Helix software/drivers before that making sure to check all the boxes in HX Edit upon reinstall. The problem when you are in a small minority of users hitting this issue is that there is a lot less incentive for Line6 to invest the resources to track the issue down. Particularly given the possibility that it is not their device causing the issue. For the user this means going through the troubleshooting steps(not necessarily helpful particularly if your graphics card is the source of a conflict) or just picking another computer to use with the Helix.

Possible causes for this error according to Microsoft: This issue can be caused if any of the following situations exist: The currently loaded USB driver has become unstable or corrupt Your PC requires an update for issues that may conflict with a USB external hard drive and Windows Windows may be missing other important updates hardware or software issues Your USB controllers may have become unstable or corrupt Your external drive may be entering selective suspend Your PC motherboard may need updated drivers I would start with making sure I was not plugged into a USB hub. Plug into the back of your PC instead of the front which is often a hub. Next try unplugging(not resetting or stopping and starting) your computer as this is probably the easiest fix if it works. You can also try using the device manager to adjust the "selective suspend" setting on the USB device such that Windows will not power it down when idle. Another solution worth noting is looking for unused hidden USB devices and deleting them, details on how to do this as well as several other troubleshooting methods are in the link below: https://www.online-tech-tips.com/computer-tips/usb-device-not-recognized/ Microsoft's link for resolving this: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/2654149/error-usb-device-not-recognized-when-you-try-to-access-a-usb-external

Was delighted to see the new HX mono reverbs added a few firmware revisions ago but I would like to see Line6 provide new HX mono versions of at least a plate, room, and hall reverb. Other new mono reverbs would be welcome too but these would be a good start. Mono HX reverbs use less DSP and after four years of being out in the wild the Helix is primed to finally receive these meat and potato reverbs.

This is a very accurate representation of how a turkey views its annual nightmare, Thanksgiving :-)