Kilrahi

25 minutes ago, gunpointmetal said:

Apples haven't been worth the price since they went to Intel chips. The OS isn't as special as a lot of people like to act like it is, its just locked down so you can't screw it up as easily as you can with Windows and because it only runs on their hardware it does come "cleaner" out of the box. As of now they are little more than a lifestyle brand like Bose, or Lexus. The title is mostly what people are buying, and the ability to say "Well, MY Mac..."

 

I don't see that being L6's MO, otherwise we'd see separate peices for the processing, for the outputs, and everything would require proprietary dongles to connect, lol.

Well, no analogy is ever perfect.

5 minutes ago, Lachdanan0121 said:

Let's hope that L6 doesn't take the Apple edge in pricing: Charging upwards of 3 times for a product that has similar specs/function/quality as it's competitors while constantly losing the stability edge that it is overwhelmingly praised for. ;)

Agreed. As a android and windows user, they've never quite convinced me to make the jump . . .

2 hours ago, bsd512 said:

My experience was similar to yours, @njglover. For a long time I've been a die-hard IR guy. This was way back in early 2016 since I got my Helix. I thought Helix sounded great, of course, then were all these folks saying IRs really make it sound better and more natural, so of course, I tried some and liked them. Never looked back and fine tuned my IR usage down to a science - and in the meantime, learned a lot about mics, cabinets, speakers, mixing mics, and so on. I could dive into a 700+ OwnHammer IR pack and pull out the 3 or 4 IRs I wanted because of the mics, mixes, and speakers they used. All knowledge I didn't have a lot of when I first got my Helix.

 

Then the Stomp came out and I got one, but it was released without an editor so you couldn't load IRs and I wasn't looking forward to having to use the stock cabs. But in doing so, after the 2+ years of experience I gained with using IRs, I was pleasantly surprised when I applied that to the stock cabs - this time with more education, and thought they sounded great!

 

So ... long story  short, I'm now a stock cab guy. Convert from the IR hassle, and don't plan to look back, with maybe a few exceptions (like acoustic sim IRs).

 

Helix stock cabs are great! I wish they had a way to mix mics without using a split path and two cabinet blocks (dual-cab doesn't do it since the cabinets are panned hard-left and hard-right with no option to change that - which is not the same thing). That's about the only thing lacking with the stock cabs, but I can find the right sound I want with the parameters available - mics, distance, cuts, and early reflections.

 

Part of it is also what you're ears get used to. Occasionally I'll go back and pull up one of my IR presets. It just doesn't sound right. :-)

 

Note, however, based on a few pretty full presets, stock cabs take up more DSP than a 1024 IR slot. I've had presets where I could put in an IR but not a cab because of DSP usage.

One thing that made me feel old was I'm just uninterested (though the real reason might be terrified) of messing around with IRs. Conceptually I get their power, but because it's so foreign to the traditional approach of guitar - amp - effects that I learned on, I never touched it. The modeling approach was easy peasy to me because it just mimicked the traditional approach better than the traditional approach.

Fear of an IR is still not a good reason to avoid them, but it's good to hear that there's nothing necessarily weak about going with the traditional approach.

1 hour ago, phil_m said:

 

I've actually not seen any specs on the GT-1000's processor other than it's using a DSP chip developed by Roland. I doubt it's significantly faster than the SHARC chips used in the Helix, though.

Eh, it's hard to know. Truthfully, you know more about the guts of the Helix than I do, and if there are detailed stats on the Boss GT 1000 I haven't seen them. Plus, as far as I know you can't exactly hook both of them up to a benchmark site and stress test them. However, there are some perceptual things to think of:

1. Generally speaking, processors get both cheaper and more powerful by significant amounts over time. The GT 1000 came out over two years after the Helix.

2. I believe the Helix Processor is a dual core and the GT 1000 is a quad core. As a general rule, with exceptions, quad core is more powerful.

3. The GT 1000 brags that it's the first processor with "32-bit AD/DA and 32-bit/96 kHz internal processing." Advertisement after advertisement focuses on how powerful their little engine is. While all companies suffer from hyperbole, generally there are granules of truth to them and so I suspect that Boss made sure they could brag about their processor compared to their rivals.

Still, you're right, we just don't really know. I'm just working on a hunch.

However, as Apple has consistently demonstrated over the years, programming prowess is far superior to processing power as long as the disparity between the two processors is not light years apart. I believe Line 6 has the Apple edge in this case.

24 minutes ago, zachdrummond said:

Another question: do the delays in Helix family products offer stereo ping pong for every algorithm? I currently use a Strymon TImeline as my main delay. I find it mildly infuriating that the only delay algorithm on that device that offers ping pong is the dual delay. I want that on EVERY kind of delay if I'm running a stereo signal. 

 

This goes kind of with my question posted above. I see the HX Stomp useful for processing my signal before the current pedalboard, and as a stereo amp. If it could take over delay duties from the Timeline though, oh man I would buy that!

The entire Line 6 modeling thinking is largely to mimic real world amps and effects. Consequently, because not all real world delays have a ping pong ability the Helix Effects don't always have that either.  Line 6's thinking is probably, "If you love a delay with ping pong effects, we certainly have a solid version of that here."

I've never personally been a huge fan of ping pong effects so off memory I can't say how many have a ping pong effect, but in my personal opinion its assortment of delays can more than handle what the Strymon TimeLine (which is a respectable pedal, no doubt) brings to the delay table.

8 minutes ago, zachdrummond said:

I don't want the front end effects blocks (pitch, dynamics, drives) to be stereo. Can I go in through the HX Stomp's L input, and out the L output for this signal chain? I imagine leaving this routing always connected to my board. I won't always run a stereo amp. I normally play my AC30/6 in mono. I don't currently have a second amp to complete my stereo rig.

The stereo is simply an option for some (not all) effects. The effects that do have it you don't have to use it (which saves on DSP). Yes, you can go in through the left mono input and out the left mono output for this chain. Simply set the pitch, dynamics, drives to be mono blocks, not stereo.

8 minutes ago, zachdrummond said:

My pedalboard is routed in stereo with a Goodwood Audio Interfacer at the end that sums my L and R signals to mono. I cancel this summing when I want to send stereo signals to two amps. I would like to be able to send the R channel out of the Interfacer to the R input of the HX Stomp. Then process that signal with amp modeling blocks and IR's. Then send that signal to FOH out the R output of the HX Stomp.

Here's where you start to hit a few speed bumps. Assuming you did the first thing above (used left mono input in to out left mono output) you would have to have this second path go in the HX Stomp's left mono return/aux in, hit whatever amp modeling/IRs you want, then out the Send Stereo jack (but even though it has a stereo option it can still be mono, it's one jack) on the HX Stomp to the front of the house.

We're talking about sticking things in different holes here, but up to this point I think the holes available will cause you to hit the same musical high points you're looking for.

8 minutes ago, zachdrummond said:

 

Is this routing possible? Would I still have 2 more pathways of processing? I would like to use the effects send/return IO on the side of HX Stomp for delay processing if possible. 

Beyond that, no, you don't have 2 more pathways of processing power since the Stomp, currently as far as I can tell, can only do two pathways at any one time probably as a result of it having only two signal chains possible. This means you run out of the ability to do delay processing on the FX loops.

8 minutes ago, zachdrummond said:

Am I asking too much of this device? 

Perhaps.  It depends on how vital each function you describe is. You should also consider the 6 block limitation of the Stomp. I have no idea how much you're hoping to do in path A or B, but if it gets too crazy you run out of blocks pretty quick. If it's just amps, then that's not a big deal at all. .  It certainly does some of it, but it breaks down at external delay loops. You may be able to think of another way to accomplish essentially the same thing with a little ingenuity (i.e. is there any way you could use the Stomp's delay abilities instead?), but if you get too complex with you're routing then you're starting to get into the territory of the HX Stomp's older brothers.

11 minutes ago, bsd512 said:

You can copy blocks, with certain limitations. You can't copy presets.

 

The limitations with blocks is that if you are copying a preset that uses snapshots, the block copies over using the settings of the snapshot you happen to be on when you copied it. After that, you have to go in and manually adjust the snapshot settings for any other snapshots, and also reassign the controller to all the snapshot parameters to "snapshots".

 

If you're copying a preset block-by-block that doesn't use snapshots (or any other controllers), it works easily and is quick. If you intent is to keep presets in sync between a Stomp and a Helix (or Native), this will get old very very quickly - especially if the devices are rarely in the same room since they have to both be connected to the same computer to do this. If you were able to transfer presets between them, you only need access to the preset files - like dropbox or similar. Save preset from Helix to dropbox. Load from dropbox to stomp. Modify that preset in the Stomp and save it back to dropbox. Load it back into Helix to get the updates. That would be the workflow I'd want, and is what you can do between Helix->Helix, Helix->Helix LT, and Helix->Native, and all combinations. The Stomp is the left all on it's own and can't participate in that party.

This is the one area that also annoyed me recently. For me, it's useful to have several variations of the same preset and switch between them, especially as a way to handle the Stomp's smaller number of footswitches.

Unfortunately while you can copy blocks, there is no "copy whole frickin' preset" which seems like a strange oversight. Unlike some Stomp wishes, this one could easily be done with an update and shouldn't be a hardware limitation. Recreating whole presets by memory is certainly possible and it's definitely a first world problem - but it's still annoying after a bit.

17 minutes ago, zsprankle said:

I want the stomp to go to solely DI. Not have to mess with lugging an amp around and miking it up, so on so forth... also for the simple fact that $600 can get me an awesome sounding Matchless, Deluxe, plexi, you name it. Also it allows me to practice very quietly and it's an interface to record as well. All I really see are pros for me.

 

The only thing that has me worried is that I want my wet effects to be after the amp and I'm unsure if I'll be able to add what I use with the 6 block restriction. 

That sounds like a pretty cool idea. I don't personally think you'll run into problems with your goal to have the wet effects after the amp. Especially with the multiple ins and outs on both the HX Stomp and the HX Effects.

Heck, especially where the majority of what you need for the Stomp are the amp/cab effects and your HX effects can handle the heavy lifting with all of the wet effects blocks. Like a hypothetical chain might be:

Guitar in >>>> HX Stomp >>>>> Distortion choice >>>> Amp Choice >>>> FX loop block >>>> Out Stereo FX send In to HX Effects input of some type >>>> adding multiple wet effects >>>> out an HX effects output choice >>>> in to HX Stomp stereo FX return >>>> out HX Stomp to DI.

Assuming I understood what you wanted, that's not very complicated. If you needed multiple distortion choices that might be a little messier, but even with the above path you still have 3 blocks remaining in the Stomp since your HX Effects can take a lot of the burden off of the Stomp.

4 hours ago, codamedia said:

 

Well... I'll say this again. "Processors are only part of the equation so that is meaningless on it's own... "

 

The difference in processing power between an AXFX2 and a Helix would not be enough of a factor, at least not to me. The units are compatible, but the U/I and features of a Helix set it apart for me. 

A perfect example, to me, is the Boss GT 1000. I believe it's processor eats the Helix processor for breakfast, but I just haven't been very impressed (both in its sound quality and in its functionality).

59 minutes ago, zsprankle said:

My local GC has a used LT for 799.99. I was thinking about trying to go for that. But yes then I would have no need for the HX Effects.

I'm just going to jump in here and say that I don't actually think you're crazy for thinking of an HX Stomp where you already have an HX Effects. That's EXACTLY the type of market Stomp was designed for. People who already had an existing pedalboard and were looking to expand it.

Granted, MOST people don't have a Helix powered effects board that already has a smorgasbord of effects like you do. Realistically though, that is the primary reason why the bloody thing was invented. The bigger question is are you thinking carefully about your needs before you buy the gear. For example, what was the thought process behind getting the HX Effects vs. the Helix LT in the first place?

This is important because it would be crazy to keep spending a lot of money (because these all cost a lot of money) for something that doesn't satisfy so that you end up spending money on something even more amped up. If you buy the Helix LT, will you suddenly find yourself pining for the full Helix?

There's a very specific reason I bought an HX Stomp over a Helix LT. I had already invested in a Firehawk 1500 and I wanted to incorporate Helix sounds without rendering the expensive Firehawk investment useless. The Stomp did exactly that. Is that story true for you?  Or is it more likely you just want to start all over?

Now, the other downside to me is I love new toys. So someday I'll probably buy a Helix LT anyway because I'm a moron.

9 hours ago, andyyano said:

I used helix edit to try and split the signal to path a & b. But i come across the problem that i cannot send path a to left and path b to right. It makes my path b go to send.

I'm confused as to what you're saying here.  Are you referring to panning one signal to stereo right and one to stereo left, because you can absolutely do that. If that's not what you mean, what do you mean? What exactly are you trying to do?

20 hours ago, chief_wigam said:

Ok yeah got that.

But if you have made all your patch levels right at home with headphones, then when go to a rehearsal room with the band, you should expect the levels to still be right, as long as the white level is at the same position it was when you saved the patches. Right?

I would expect it to be closer, BUT headphones is never a very good approximation for a band setting so I bet you'd have to do some tweaking. It's a starting point though.

Thanks for the input folks.

Attaching it to the Firehawk and then trying to link up with the HX Stomp is an interesting idea. It does make me wonder. Would the FBV controller cable power the FBV - solving problem three. My first thought was then you'd have the FBV sending signals to both the Firehawk and Stomp which would cause problems, but I think once the USB is plugged into the FBV it turns off signal sending through the FBV controller so that might not be an issue. Then I'd just need to solve problem two . . .linking up the two devices.

Another idea I saw a youtube user do was connecting the FBV to a Rasberry Pi PC (which is nice and small) and THEN another device. That MIGHT do it - but then I'm getting too crazy for it to really be practical. I'd rather drop the $250 for a small Midi controller and another $130 for a solid expression pedal.

So it's probably an idea that forever was just one step too far away. 

If they ever make an FBV4 though that would be a big way to upgrade it. Give it Midi output and input ability. It would increase costs but might also significantly improve its marketability.

On ‎11‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 7:52 PM, phil_m said:

 

No, they don’t. 

Are you just referring to the in/outs at the front and end of the chains? Because the send/return blocks do take up one of your six blocks if you end up having to use them. 

This is a question intended for some sort of guru on this site, of which I've noticed there are plenty.

So here's the deal. I was sitting here with all my stuff, with my newest additions being the FBV 3 to control the Firehawk 1500, and my HX Stomp. I was asking myself if I wanted to buy an expression pedal or Midi controller for the HX Stomp to further broaden what it could do. 

Suddenly it dawned on me that the FBV 3 is a type of midi controller and would it be POSSIBLE to control the HX Stomp?  I know it can be used to control intended Line 6 gear through the Cat 5 cable OR it is cable of controlling PC Software through the USB cable. 

Well, the Stomp is simply software in a box, but I immediately see a number of obvious issues:

1. The HX Stomp does not have a Cat 5 cable port, so the easiest testing method is toast. 

2. Both the HX Stomp and the FBV 3 have a USB port, but they are both printer USB ports (why do products do that?! - not saying there isn't a reason but it baffles me). I've never seen a USB cable with both printer ends. 

3. The Firehawk 1500 and a PC will power the FBV 3 - but the HX Stomp is a pretty dinky box - it seems unlikely it will power a device.

Still, if 3 did happen - which I won't know unless I figure out a way to solve problem 2, it would be pretty awesome actually.

Any thoughts?  Even if it's just taking a shotgun to the question (which, hey, killing grandiose ideas is still progress). 

I'm thinking problem #2 and #3 are what is going to kill the idea, which is too bad. Not saying it's bad design or anything, just that it would be one of those things that would be cool and yet is so close, but so far away. 

1 hour ago, zachdrummond said:

So the HX Stomp has two paths? Two stereo or mono paths? 

 

I'm trying to decide how I would use it with my board. I would like to use it as pitch, dynamics and drive processing in front of my board, AND as my stereo amp after my stereo effects on the board. 

Mostly. It has one origin path that can be split into two stereo or mono paths (Path A and Path B) and then either reconnected within the Stomp or set out to two separate outputs.

What you describe should be doable. I believe Path A would be your pitch, dynamics, and drive processing which would then exit out the main outputs.

Path B would start with a FX return block which would be fed by your stereo effects from your board, and then the output would be sent out of the effects send on the Stomp.

That's how I'd do it. 

5 hours ago, codamedia said:

 

I'm an "old school" player... not much need for any wild, but I sure would like a reliable... sure fire solution to drop tuning. The Whammy is OK for dropping the guitar a semi-tone, but even then it doesn't feel quite right. There is no way I can drop it a tone if needed. 

 

Aside from that my only wish is a Hiwatt Normal Channel and Hiwatt Jump channel to compliment the Bright channel already there. I'm a simple man :) 

If I read you right, this is the same boat I'm in.  I'm in awe when people lay out 13 effects and make some sort of strange cosmic sound that's beautiful and appealing - but it's nothing I would do. Most of the time it's a distortion pedal and reverb, delay, chorus, or phaser on a crazy day  . . . throw in one or two boutique pedals occasionally. That's why the HX Stomp largely fills my needs.

BUT the one thing I still really wish it had because I know it's possible is a polyphonic drop tune pedal similar to Digitech's. I keep almost breaking down and buying the bloody thing but then I stop and hold out hope a little longer that Line 6 has one in the works.

6 hours ago, zsprankle said:

I've had my silvertone on fbook marketplace for a few weeks now and no hits at all. Lots of views though. Private sale IMO is a lot of hassle to get a decent price and my silvertone is nice

I've had similar problems on Facebook.  It seems like the Facebook marketplace only caters to certain groups (cars, crafts, clothes).

To buy my stomp, I tried to sell my Pod HD 500x through Facebook marketplace where I've successfully sold a car and other items before. I had absolutely ZERO hits and I had it listed at about $150 which is low. My Pod was in near mint condition too because I just take care of my stuff.

I listed it on Ebay and it sold at the end of 7 days for $250 (including shipping). Considering I bought it on sale for $400 and got great use out of it I felt pretty good about that. Ebay and Reverb actually cater to musicians a bit more than Facebook so I think you can do better there.

Another idea would be to see what the items are going for on those groups and compare it to what your music store offered. If it's close enough or even higher, so much the better.

1 hour ago, macnevine said:

Hi There - I just received my stomp.  The manual is confusing me for using 2 expression pedals.  I want to purchase 2x Line 6 EX-1 Expression Pedal  to control volume with one pedal (but "not" to waste the volume pedal block- so to control the min/max levels on the mixer at the end of the chain)  and I would mainly use the 2nd pedal to control the MIX on my delay.

 

My question is:

 

1.  What specific Y adapter should I purchase?  Can you please attach an amazon link (that would be very helpful)  I am confused about TRS vs TS etc...

2.  Will the Line 6 EX-1 Expression Pedal work to control the HX Stomp parameters without issue?  I have a Roland EV-5 and it seems glitchy.  I also purchased a cheaper pro audio pedal and it seems to also be glitchy- noting that both those of these  pedals I own are TRS and not TS.  

3.  The Global parameter directions are confusing to me to set up 2 expressions.  Something about a Tip/Ring.  So can someone be specific how I would set the 2 pedals up in the settings.

4.  Once this is hooked up with the correct Y adapter can both pedals be used at the same time sending their perspective commands or do I need to somehow do a step prior to select Exp. pedal 1 or 2.

 

Thanks so much for you help.  Hoping someone with this exact set up can clarify so I can use 2 pedals.

In response to your questions:

1. The cord linked below will work perfectly:

https://www.amazon.com/Hosa-STP-203-inch-Insert-Cable/dp/B000068O1P/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542141815&sr=8-1&keywords=Hosa+STP202

2. Most expression pedals (and I assume one designed by Line 6) should work as a regular expression pedal for the Stomp. I can't say that I KNOW this though. You would hope Line 6's own pedal would work, but at the same time the one you listed is a pretty old model. It might be time to upgrade first, BUT before you do buy the TRS cable and test it out.  

However, for maximum use of the expression pedal options (i.e. in order to have dual control of both the wah and volume/block toggle) you want to use the more expensive one given in the manual:

https://www.amazon.com/Mission-Engineering-Helix-Expression-Switch/dp/B019WJ0BS0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542141924&sr=8-1&keywords=mission+engineering+helix+expression+pedal

3. I wish I could be more explanatory than the directions. Have you tried a youtube video?

4. See the video above. You can set it up to use two pedals at once.  It's just a question of what you're really after.

3 hours ago, gunpointmetal said:

 

I get it, but the argument is semantics and not real world application. If you can load 16 blocks on one path in the Floor, logic would imply that a single processor version could handle an equal number of blocks, but that would require a larger (or at least more thought-out-to-accommodate UI), which was obviously not the idea of the product. It's a shame for my use case, because I gotta spend more money for something this product could theoretically do (if the software allowed for it). 

 

I understand what you're saying (and I've had a moment or two where I've been like, "Blast, if I only had ONE more block . . .). However, I likewise don't think that the number of blocks was arbitrary.  Even with dynamic DSP in the Helix, there's a reason they didn't give you 60 blocks and let you just deal with it when you max out at 21 blocks.

So it is with the Stomp. If I remember right, Line 6 states in the FAQ pinned at the top that six blocks was carefully chosen to do many things, including not back themselves in a corner for future updates.

Considering I've already had moments where the DSP told me that I didn't have enough left to use a specific block, I get the feeling it couldn't handle too much beyond six. Nevertheless, as a user of the Stomp I get where you're coming from.

2 hours ago, zsprankle said:

Well I think my mind is made up. Gonna start planning to get the stomp. Just for fun, what do yall think of trade in at GC or Sam Ash? I know they don't give retail but it's a lot less hassle than private sales...

That's not a horrible idea. In fact, if you are offering to buy the Stomp on the same trip it may get you an even better deal. You should also consider Ebay or Reverb.

I usually use Ebay. I get more than from a music store or a local sale, and it's faster. This is even after fees. I've heard Reverb lands more than Ebay, but I don't know if it's as fast.

Enjoy the Stomp ...

23 hours ago, chief_wigam said:

I have read somewhere that as the white level (guitar volume) is an input, it does affect tone and will also affect relative levels between patches. So when you save the patches at the volume you want with the white knob in a certain position, you should leave it there. The only time you change the white level is when you have to - which is only when you are listening to midi music etc with headphones. But I guess if you've originally set your patches with a white level setting using the same headphones, then even then you wouldn't need to change the white level. Is this right?

The white level is a subset of the Master volume and as such it is not a tone control and does not impact tone (with the caveat that all sounds will sound different with volume, but it isn't because the guitar runs out of headroom and begins to clip).

You are correct that it's wise to save a preset at a level you like, but you should think of it as more of a mixing control rather than a tone control.

Pretty much what everyone else said, I'm pretty dang biased. To me most guitarists are stuck in the stone ages. 

The sounds will never be EXACTLY what you had for any number of variables I won't bore you with. The same is true for two identical tube amps though. So knowing that fact, if you can live with amazing sound, even if not identical sound, but with even MORE sound options . . . 

Well then yeah.  I'm loving my stomp, and it's an amazing bedroom rig. Plug it in, plug guitar in, plug headphones in, and drowned in sound. 

I'm not arguing that that type of product wouldn't be good for you, but I still think you fundamentally have the majority of the market backwards. 

Boutique effects are really the only way these non multi effects groups can possibly survive in the long term. Each of them has to come up with some new "bizarre" and "out there" sound to maintain relevance because more and more consumers are going to realize, "Hey, I can spend $1500 for one amazing tube amp, and five pedals, OR I can spend about that for one Helix LT and a solid FRFR speaker and have over 100 times the abilities I'd have the traditional route."

Line 6 does occasionally come up with their own sounds, but what has been their bread and butter for well over two decades now is providing the tools for the "everyman" musician to create amazing sounds at an affordable price. Creating 100 wacky pedals that only a very niche market will use isn't what causes things like the HX Stomp to sell like hotcakes.

Electro Harmonix though - that's the only way they survive. They keep churning out unusual variations on a theme because it's all they've got. Occasionally a Line 6 guy like me bites because I know I can't get it on a Line 6 setup, but it's a very rare deal. 

To be honest, I kind of like it that way.  It's fun to buy an unusual pedal - it really is - it's nice not to have to drop $100 on a "boring" M90.

11 hours ago, chief_wigam said:

I understood that the Master Volume on HD (blue) amps is the output level of the preamp to the power amp. This affects tone.

 

The volume (pink level) is the output of the entire amp. This doesn't affect tone.

 

Where is the "sweet spot" for the white level? I have read somewhere that it is around 12 O'clock. The white level apparently also affects tone as it is guitar level output which is an input to the chain.

 

Wait, what?  Are you sure?  Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but the white level is the guitar level, so that you can mix the balance between your guitar input and any midi music/other instruments you input into the Firehawk.  Neither effect tone at all.