Jump to content

Kilrahi

Members
  • Content Count

    1,427
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    27

Everything posted by Kilrahi

  1. Kilrahi

    Solo

    Do you mean as one of the presets? None of us here would know since we're just users of the device, but why not just create your own or download one from the cloud?
  2. Thank you for the link. The more and more I use the Stomp the more I just think this makes sense. If something about Helix 3.0 blows the barn door of my brains wide open and I'm like, "Oh, that's why it has to be six" then cool, but until that day it just seems like Line 6 is forcing its toddler to stay in size 6 diapers even though it is ready to #?#@ or get off the pot like its older brothers.
  3. My Boss footswitch has the ability to switch back and forth, but it's default was "normally open" and it worked just fine if that helps. Honestly, with the Stomp I don't think it will matter because it's a pretty complex device with tons of global settings - and one of the global settings is the ability to reverse the polarity on the footswitch and I believe it's the exact same control on the Boss footswitch. I haven't tested it though, but I'm pretty sure it can do the exact same thing. You just have to remember to go into the global guts and change them.
  4. I don't have the full Helix/LT, but I have the Stomp and I think it works great. Your spine will love it. The only potential downside - does the full Helix tell you when you're tapping into the DSP power of the second processor? There are times the Stomp can't hit the full 6 blocks because the DSP taps out. It's not frequent, but it does happen sometimes. Something to think about.
  5. As mentioned above, it's based on the body of a Yamaha Pacifica, which generally gets pretty positive reviews. You should think of the JTV line as the more premium version - there's more frills and you pay for it. So how would they compare? I'd expect the JTV-89 to look nicer and feel more premium - but the guitar's modeling will be identical. Personally, I bought a Korean JTV-59 and it's my favorite guitar. I almost went for the standard to save money, but I'm a sucker for the Les Paul design, and I wanted that little jump in visual panache. Guitar players are a pretty finicky bunch. One will adore a build for a guitar - another will hate it. You should basically imagine you're buying a $450 guitar with $400 modeling guts. Some people can never see themselves loving a $450 guitar. One of my fave guitars of all time is a $450 Epi Les Paul, and I'd have no problem buying a Yamaha Pacifica. Most of the time if I talk to someone on a budget that is borderline for the Variax I suggest the standard, and so far everyone who has taken me up on it has been very happy. In fact, even I've been tempted from time to time to buy the Standard for the smaller/lighter profile and the whammy bar as an option since I don't have any guitars with a whammy. However, I keep stopping myself because: 1. I need to stop throwing money after my hobby - at least for a while. 2. It will largely sound identical to my existing JTV. 3. I keep hoping Line 6 will release an updated Variax soon. I don't know that they can improve the modeling all that much, BUT they could make some great feature tweaks to the line. I just know the day I buy a Standard is the day the Gods above will decide it's time to release the next Variax line.
  6. Yeah, I hear you. Obviously money is a very personal thing and everyone has to do what feels right to them. In my case though, I knew I was jumping on the bandwagon of a brand new and complicated piece of tech. It's a scary thought, but the 2 year warranty put me at ease. Don't get me wrong, device failures will make me pissy for a while, but I'm in it for the long haul. I assume if they send it back to me five times each time they'll be bulking it up with the new and improved version, and I'll have my beloved little Stomp back better than ever.
  7. I really didn't expect to add another reply here. It's too bad I wasn't around when the long time debate on connecting the Helix to the Firehawk 1500 was raging because as said above, there seemed to be such concern about it and I've found it to just be a big freaking nothing burger. Nevertheless, people were perplexed and maybe this stuff would have helped. However, I assume there must be SOME additional Firehawk 1500 owners attempting to attach a Stomp or Helix to it and if any of my experiences helps, saves time, or sparks ideas, that's awesome. My youngest brother came to visit over the weekend and we tried a bunch of different stuff doing dual instruments through the HX Stomp and the Firehawk and we really had some wonderful sounds going. For the first time, I experimented with the monitor ins as well so I can comment on them making this update relevant. So here's some interesting takeaways: * The Firehawk itself seems to support dual guitars IF one of them is a Variax. I tried to search if there were any complaints or problems with this - but I mean, I couldn't find any. Something to think about. I own a Variax and my brother does not so if we wanted exactly (or nearly, depending on the Stomp/Helix settings) identical signal processing we could go this route. Something to think about. Most of the time we didn't go this route, but it was kind of cool to think about it. 1. My Variax went into the VDI setup on the Firehawk. 2. Firehawk's distortion, amp, and cab models were set for my Varaix. I also had modulation and delay ready to go for the Variax if desired. 3. Firehawk FX loop was the final block JUST before the reverb block, and set to active. 4. Signal from my Variax came out of Firehawk FX send into HX Stomp left mono input. 5. Bro's guitar went into HX stomp right input. 6. Y branch was panned far left with right signal panned 100% right and left signal panned 100 left. 7. Path A went out the left/right HX Stomp standard output. 8. Path B was my bro's guitar, set with his amp of choice. He had access to a dual footswitch connected to the HX Stomp. Path B had a TRS Y cable going from HX Stomp send to Firehawk's left and right monitor ins. 9. Dual footswitch connected to HX Stomp. 10. Path A had two blocks reserved for me. Because I had access to the Firehawk's DSP, we left most of the HX Stomp firepower for him. I could only use blocks if they didn't destroy what he was trying to do (but I still had a lot of choices most of the time). My usual go to was a phaser, flanger, distortion, or compressor. 11. Bro had four blocks on path B. His go to was a single amp/cab block, delay, chorus, and reverb. 12. Most of the time we were using simple reverbs, and we were fine using the same ones, so usually him and I just shared the reverb block on the Firehawk. This left him with more choices on his B path for the Stomp. 13. I controlled my two blocks via FS1 and FS2 on the HX Stomp. 14. He set up complex snapshot parameters with his four blocks (volume, drive, blocks on and off, etc.) and controlled them by cycling up and down via the dual footswitch. Honestly, this setup was nothing short of nuckin' futs, but it was also a freaking blast and we played a ton of cool songs together. The Firehawk sounded great at all times. We had to keep it from getting too loud honestly because the thing can bring the house down, so volume was never a problem. It brought lots of hours of great play time and good fun. My biggest take aways, similar to the thoughts from before, were: 1. Firehawk is a very versatile flat response system, and the added DSP for Stomp users is nothing short of helpful. YES, HX effects are probably superior to Firehawk's, but especially with the tuning integration between its inbuilt effects and its speaker system, the difference isn't EXTREMELY vast. Certainly not as mind boggling as the difference between VHS and DVD, or DVD and BluRay. A closer comparison might be the difference between 1080p and 4k video. Point being, your tone won't suffer in a measurable way if you lean mostly on HX quality sounds and fill in with the Firehawk's when needed. 2. The biggest shortcoming of the Stomp continues to be once you buy the damn thing you're so impressed with it you wonder if you should have just got the Helix LT. If I had an LT, I'd never have to touch the Firehawk's effects (which again, no slight on the Firehawk, but why do it if you have massive amounts of untapped DSP in your Helix?). 3. The artificial limit of six blocks within the HX Stomp still feels unnecessary and almost like a push to keep the full Helix more viable (I get that at least one Line 6 rep said that wasn't the point, and I fully understand there are other considerations too, but I also have worked for corporations for years and years - there's usually more nuance here than anyone likes to admit, even to themselves). Especially with our crazy setup above, you run out of DSP pretty fast even if there was no six block limit (if you try dual amps, for example, you zap the life out of that single chip almost immediately), but at the very least we would have liked to have seen what type of creativity could have come out with a few more blocks at our disposal (particularly FX blocks). 4. Even with point three above, the HX Stomp is such a powerful little box . . . wow. Most useful guitar tool ever and one of my favorite purchases in my life. Even if I one day cave and get a full Helix, it would have never happened if I hadn't first sat in awe at the massive power of the HX Stomp.
  8. It hasn't happened to me, thankfully. Bummer man. I'm sure they'll get it taken care of. New tech. Hopefully over all it's reliable. You do worry when you start to think about how much stuff was crammed in that little box.
  9. Your losing the ability for the passive traditional pickups to have that, yes. However, at the bridge are the piezo pickups. These are the pickups used by the software to model other guitars, alter tunings, and alter pickups. With those, you can still model bridge, middle, AND neck pick ups, and it works quite well.
  10. To clarify, there were firmware updates since release to attempt to improve the palm muting. I feel it did ... your mileage may vary. It's true though that the guts haven't been modified since the JTV release.
  11. I personally am not bothered by the palm muting concerns people have. I can hear the differences in videos too ... to me though the Variax palm mute still sounds good, and in fact, all my guitars sound a little bit different palm muted so to me just goes with the territory of a different guitar. Now, does the Variax emulate the palm mutes of a epiphone casino as well as the rest of the epiphone casino? ... no. Is it performable and audiences are fine? Yes. One caveat .... I don't do high gain metal core stuff. Nor have I experimented really. If that's your gig I could see an argument, but then again, the Shuriken was designed by a metal player and he loves and uses it.
  12. You could, but if possible I'd just run post Stomp to save blocks, unless he's wanting to have a stomp effect both before and after it.
  13. Honestly, the pitch shift on the Helix is one area they still need mega improvement on, and to top it off, the Stomp has far fewer blocks than a full Helix. Because of that, I'd still do everything recommending above EXCEPT I'd still keep the actual EHX POG in your chain. I think you'll find it just works better, and saves DSP for your Stomp to excel at other things.
  14. Honestly, this sounds like a perfect time to contact Line 6.
  15. How much do you like the Plus Pedal? I keep debating getting it. I have a freeze but the Plus SEEMS like a big step up. It's also pricey though. You glad you snagged it?
  16. FYI something that I think really helps is to use the PC program HX Edit. You can save various collection of presets there, so if you save your favorite factory presets there it's always pretty easy to pull them back without wiping out all the work you've done since.
  17. That will forever be the downside of the Variax. I adore mine - but even after a good long time of using it I still occasionally get borked and start fiddling with all the settings because the natural true tuning of the guitar is overpowering my brain. On the plus side, what amazes me is that most of the time, even in intimate room settings playing for people, I seem to be the only one who notices. The other people seem to all focus on what the amp is outputting. Obviously part of that is proximity, but I do think another part is that as a guitar player, without even realizing it, we've always focused a great deal of our attention on the natural resonance of the guitar in our hands.
  18. Have you heard them both in person? To me the Variax steamrolls the Digitech Drop - and I love the drop. I hope the Helix mimics one at some point, but the Variax eats it for breakfast. My first position is that people who use a Drop or Variax have to decide they care far more about what their audience hears than what they hear, and as long as that's the case, here's the difference: 1. The Variax can have far more variations of tunings than the Digitech Drop, which can only go in even across the board reductions (so for the Variax, you could have one string tuned up a half step, another down two steps, another up three steps . . . simply not possible with the DD). Now, maybe as a player that's not something you have ever had a desire to deal with - but it's still a distinct advantage. 2. The Variax sounds far closer to real, particularly the lower dropped the tuning. The Variax will play a very convincing baritone guitar - the digitech drop does not. 3. You mentioned this, but it's a BIG deal - the Variax will mimic tons of different guitars, including acoustic. The digitech drop will not do a good job of drop tuning acoustic guitars, nor can it sound like anything other than the guitar you're already using. 4. The variax will integrate with the Helix to the point that you can have the tunings shift on the fly with simple button presses. That type of interaction is not possible with the drop tuner. 5. Speed. You are correct that the DD has the advantage of cost and in some cases simplicity. Those are its only real advantages. If a guitar player is only wanting simplicity, yeah, I'd steer them the Digitech route, but if they truly want to mess with alternate tunings both at home or in a live setting, there is no substitute for the Variax (well, except maybe being above average wealthy and having 30+ guitars shuffled out by paid roadies like John Rzeznik of the Goo Goo Dolls does).
  19. Good question. There should be a way to highlight the far right branch and change it from a Y to a complete break with different outputs. If you want same outputs leave on the Y (merge) setting.
  20. Do you see the branching point on the lower left? The part where it splits into two signal chains? You should be able to select that itself and pan the L to 100 and the R to 100. This means all of the right input is going to the right path, and all of the left input is going to the left, which splits the instrument paths.
  21. I actually own a Firehawk 1500 which is what I usually do with the Stomp, but friends/family have gone the Powercab route and I fiddle around with it. Honestly, I really like the Powercab (keep being tempted to buy one - but I just bought the bloody Firehawk), and I prefer to save on DSP with the Stomp, so I like the cab modeling. It works as well as any FRFR out there if you want it in flat response mode. However, while you're audience won't care, I just felt like the cab emulation gives it an extra "oomph" when playing on it. Setup is: 1. Stereo TRS out to Input 1 and 2. 2. Cab modeling of choice active. 3. Sometimes IR of choice (Plus has an IR loader and it works well - but I dunno I just prefer the cabs. I'm that guy. If you like IRs tons though it's a great choice). Then I sculpt the EQ to taste.
  22. Hmmm . . . maybe you are in to far more complex wet/dry/wet setups than I am. My understanding of a wet/dry/wet is a three channel system where the main channel is the dry consisting of only the guitar and amp, and then a stereo channel of effects (delay, reverb, chorus, etc.). To do a setup like that you only need two wet channels and one dry, which the stomp and HX effects can do. You're top channel would be guitar and amp, bottom channel effects, and you would run the bottom channel in stereo. Both the Stomp and HX effects can split that naturally without the need of a splitter. They would then feed into the stereo speakers. I suppose technically the Stomp is harder to do that with because it's effects loop has a blended send, so if you wanted to use that for the wet channel you would need a TRS to Y TS 1/4 cable. However, you don't have to do it that way. You could have channel A be the wet effects only in stereo, and send them out the Stomp's main output into the HX effects inputs then have the B channel on the Stomp be the guitar/amp/dry signal going straight into its speaker output.
  23. Yes, you can create a wet/dry/wet setup. For realsies though, not faux. I'm confused on the Y cable though. The stomp has a total of three 1/4 line outs and the HX effects has a total of four line ins so there's no need for a special Y or aby/splitter.
  24. Based on all of the ice cream talk, I'm confident he meant to say, "Big meal."
  25. You'd think if it was a known issue that many expression pedals wouldn't work that they'd specify in the manual ones they know that work. Do you happen to know if there is a running list of functional Helix pedals? It should be a safe assumption that if they work in the Helix, which has been out longer, they'll work in the Stomp.
×
×
  • Create New...