ShoreProductions

Page 60 in the HX Stomp 3.0 manual, lists CC71, values 0-5. Footswitch Mode (0=Stomp, 1=Scroll, 2=Preset, 3=Snapshot, 4=Next footswitch mode, 5=Previous footswitch mode).

The information I was referencing is on page 49 in the HX Stomp 2.65 manual or Page 60 in the HX Stomp 3.0 manual. It lists CC71, values 0-5. Footswitch Mode (0=Stomp, 1=Scroll, 2=Preset, 3=Snapshot, 4=Next footswitch mode, 5=Previous footswitch mode).

It's confusing to me that Line 6 has implemented functionality for MIDI CC 71 on HX Stomp and HX Stomp XL, but they haven't implemented the same functionality on Helix Floor.

Hopefully, this information isn't redundant and posted elsewhere. I wasn't able to locate this information in either the Helix manual or the HX Stomp manual. To the contrary, both manuals list CC71 as "reserved for future use". However, I have found that these commands do work on Helix Floor and I assume they may work on Helix Rack, and HX Stomp. Footswitch Mode - Stomp - CC71 - Value 0 Footswitch Mode - Preset - CC71 - Value 1 Footswitch Mode - Stomp Edit - CC71 - Value 3 Footswitch Mode - Toggle (Stomp/Preset) - CC71 - Value 127

It's surprising that the last update to Powercab Edit was three years ago. Has Line 6 discontinued software support for PowerCab+?

Installing Gearbox for POD X3 on OS X 10.12.6 Sierra This process works with the POD X3, I cannot confirm that it will work with any other POD of any other operating system other than OS X 10.12.6, Sierra, although it may. Download: Gearbox 3.72 for OS X from Line 6 Downloads: Select: All Hardware | GearBox | All OS - 1. Run the Line Monkey 1.78 App and insure that your software is up to date, particularly “Flash Memory 2.00” 2. Perform a typical install of Gearbox 3.7.2 3. Navigate to /System/Library/Extensions and remove, rename or relocate the “Line6Audio.kext” file. 4. Replace it with the "Line6AudioSigned.kext" file (Linked Below), or extract the file yourself from the Drivers 7.6.8 download. Select: POD X3 | All Software | All OS - Line6AudioSigned.kext.zip Please share your results, so others might benefit from your experience.

That's interesting AD, I'd watched that video previously prior to purchasing a PC+ and it didn't register with me that Line 6 had made an official statement regarding the future implementation of L6 Link control @ 6:09 The one advantage of MIDI is that it can be used with other external MIDI controllers including most DAWs provided the user has some form of a USB to MIDI converter.

Did you install the Line 6 Helix Driver2, Version 1.0.5?

Good point, if you're outputting mono, no need to expend additional processing.

Close but no Cohiba, I would be willing to give you a tiparillo, as a consolation prize. Actually, I think that's the way I initially spelled it, but spell checker gave me a thumbs down. :rolleyes:

You're right, the valve driver seems a little pink to me.........Maybe it's fuchsia.

You're quite correct, my bad. My previous comment has been edited.

To answer your question directly, I don't hear a difference, but then again my hearing is subpar due to way too many years of abuse. However, the dialog is digressing. My initial comment, was in regard to Phlim's statement regarding DSP consumption relating to "stock cabinets" and third party IRs. No mention was initially made regarding the usage of either 1024 or 2048 duration samples.

I'm simply relaying what was said in his video:

It's seems that Scott would take issue with the conversion issue as well. He seems to believe that there is a perceptible difference in using the 96K versions as opposed to the 48K versions, irrespective of transcoding: https://youtu.be/nAGCWFA380Q?t=209

If that's the case, then Scott Minchk, intentionally mislead everyone in his video. I'm not quite sure how he would have accomplished that, considering that there don't seem to be any edits in his video. He clearly demonstrates that IRs consume less DSP, than stock cabinets. He also is known to use 96K wav samples for his IRs.

I agree with you wholeheartedly, I wouldn't unscrupulously download Helix code or any other code, for that matter. From my limited research, it's my understanding that the DSP chips in the Helix are SHARC processors from Analog Devices and run on the .NET based IDE. That having been said, it's likely that SigmaStudio is the GUI development tool used my Line 6 for these processors. SigmaStudio is a freely available for download at: http://www.analog.com/en/design-center/processors-and-dsp/evaluation-and-development-software/ss_sigst_02.html#dsp-overview Although I'm not familiar with Enterprise Resource Planning or their software, I assume we could agree that no one or any small collaborative group, regardless of their level of expertise ( IE. the Helix development team), possess all the answers to every potential option available for this hardware. Some would argue, that once someone is mired in a particular paradigm, they inevitably have difficulty thinking outside the box. Even if one were understandably suspicious of another's code, the option for an individual to develop their own code, would ultimately prove to be of benefit to the Helix community. since concepts could still be exchanged.

That's certainly your prerogative, however others may feel differently. We all fear, what we don't understand. I would agree with you. I wouldn't be inclined to install a effect from an individual that wasn't knowledgeable with the source code, but to my knowledge we don't even know what language was used to produce the code.

OpenTX is just one example of Open Source software. I'm certainly not saying that it's a panacea, but it's certainly been a workable model for other companies. It shouldn't be a support nightmare for Line 6, that's the sole purpose of a hold harmless provision. No one would be forcing anyone to install those user supplied updates, that would be the discretion of the individual. Currently patches are being exchanged freely and I'm not aware of anyone attempting to hold Line 6 accountable should one of those go awry. From a cursory review of the .hlx file code, it would be seem that the potential for problems could exist even at that level. Consequently, I fail to see how providing the source code would expose Line 6 to additional liability.

I'm new here, but I can't help but wonder if the concept of "Open Source", might not resolve most, if not all of the complaints and wish list requests, many are making. Allow the Helix users to define and design their own add-ons. Release the source code and establish an open source forum with a "hold harmless" provision. That model has certainly been viable for other companies.

I'd be inclined to agree with you Bob. I can't help but wonder if part of the OS X issue isn't related to specific DAWs. Without complete information and a good sample group of users providing all their specifics, it's essentially speculation. That having been said, considering the significant market share for Windblows, it would make sense that there would be more software optimization of the MicroSloth platform.