grdGo33

nope

are you using the latest firmware?  There was no sound issues that were fixed, so if not up to date, update!

Seems like I'm always posting the same preset video lol    imho they're really not terrible, hell, listen to the above, they mostly sound pretty good; not something you'd be shocked at hearing on a record or radio.  It's really a combination using a fitting guitar and style for the preset, using it for what it does, etc.   They can sound a bit 'bland' or generic, anyway, they're just presets.  IMHO, they're not even really intended to be actively used.  Don't think anyone at L6 believes anyone will buy PGO and will try to use the unit with its presets...   PGO is really made for you to configure your own sounds.  

Easy way to 'fix':  Try each preset.  Just save the dozen of so presets you like or find decent to your user patch list, customize for your taste/guitar/style or for starting point of new patches, then never visit the presets ever again.

Quote

Re the part of your statement above that I've put in bold - utter and complete nonsense.

Oh snap!  The gauntlet has been thrown!!!   :p

Yeah the presets are ... lackluster.  It would have been nice if they were categorized; jazz, metal, rock, lead, ambient, etc., but yeah it's all mixed up.  It's worth it going through each preset though, noting what you like and dislike, check what effects they're using, etc. 

Also, you can download patches from the L6 free share thing, so maybe you'll have better luck finding the type of sound you like.  But anyway, even if you had the perfect patch, you'll likely need to adjust it for your own guitar, amp, etc.

Yeah fast startup didn't fix it...

To describe the issue; it gets to the login screen, but once you login, then the screen becomes black and/or starts flashing for a bit, then the CPU apparently sky rockets because the fans of the laptop are running at max speed, then a few minutes later BSOD.  I just unplugged the Go from the hub and it booted without issue, so it is 100% caused by the Go and its drivers...

Maybe!  Although I did use a hub with my PC and it worked without issue...  But I do also have the fast startup disabled on my PC...   But yeah I'll try it!  If the fast boot does not work, I'll try going without the hub see if it fixes the issue!  Thanks!

Recently changed the computer I'm using with the Pod Go, went from a PC to a Dell XPS 9570 laptop. And ever since, the laptop has been having booting issues.  But if I remove the USB hub with the Go and keyboard+mouse, does not seem to have any booting issue.  Something about driver power on state or something like that... 

Looking online different errors from the event viewer, it might be caused by the fast startup options in the power settings...  So maybe that'll fix it...  Anyhow, maybe this could help someone someone else, or has anyone else had such issues and found a fix?

There might be some streaming software that does it, which is pretty much what you seem to be trying to achieve.

https://www.thetechlounge.com/best-streaming-software/

Anyway, with distinct tools;

1) download and play your YT video

2) record your guitar using a DAW

3) record your webcam video / sound using some other software

4) merge everything using video editor

Of course this wouldn't be 'live'.  If you output the sound via Go, there will be no delay, probably need a decent pc to pull it off!

Quote

I spent some 15 hours to produce a preset list for Pod GO bank by bank

Wow... Crazy!

On 6/28/2020 at 7:37 PM, silverhead said:

To be able to restore individual presets you need to back them up as individual presets. You can also save individual setlists, but you can’t restore individual presets from a saved setlist. There three levels of save/backup capabilities: presets, setlists, and system (including global settings). You can’t mix and match presets and setlist but I believe you can choose which setlists you want to restore from a system backup (at least you can in Helix; not sure about POD Go).

 

As described earlier, you can save multiple, or all, presets in a setlist in a single operation and then you’ll have them as individual presets.

Btw, for exporting/importing single, the format for exporting all the presets vs single is very likely the same, so by opening the file in a text editor, you'd be able to find the preset you're interested and simply copy the block to a single file. 

Yeah, a patch (.pgp) is in JSON format, so 99% sure the full export also is, so if you take a single patch export, replace its content with the patch you're interested in, you could likely import a single patch from the complete setlist.  **To Be Confirmed!**  If it's the 1% and they chose to use a different format for the 'setlist', then it would not work; but highly unlikely as it would have doubled the programming work by creating 2 import types..  JSON format is simple, plus there are guides & json validators online.

hopefully..

Quote

what sound does a tree make when it falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it? Using a microphone to capture the sound is artificial!! I want the ‘real’ sound as if I were standing there at the time. How can you ever know what that sounds like without recording it? And then, of course, what you get is the sound coloured by the actual mic used to record it.

The sound (sound waves) is exactly the same whether someone is there to hear it.  

And that is exactly the premise of the entire music and recording industry;  an event occurs which causes sound vibrations, those vibration are captured and stored on a device (ex; mic & CD), then, the data is read, and converted back to sound waves (tranducers; speakers).   That's how you can hear someone playing example violin in your room via speakers even if there is nobody in your room playing violin.

What is artificial in my original comment is that you can ONLY hear a cab via a microphone, and the actual sound you would hear from say a 4x12 Marshall in a living room does not exist in Helix/Go.  Nobody listens to a 4x12 two or five inches away ...  And I'm pretty sure that a well recorded 4x12 in a room (using mic blends or whatever; just recording the cab so that it sounds as close as possible as to what you would hear in room) would not sound like with the Helix/Go set at 12 feet or whatever...

But yeah, maybe it's just a bad idea... I mean; setting up a pair of speakers to get optimal sound in a room is a PITA, and then you need to be seated at a precise location in the room; as if you move around, the sound goes to hell.   But yeah, if you had a room and a cab, and walked around in the room to the best spot to listen to the cab, that could well be a good capture point for an in-room IR.

But maybe also the sound you get via the current cab+mic Go/Helix system is just way better than my 'in room' concept... It might very well end up sounding poorly vs any other 'standard' Helix mic+cab setting, as there is no 'accurate' in room 'sound', it would be the sound at one spot in a particular room; and given the FR effects of the room, reverberation, etc., might just sound 'poor' vs a cleanly recorded cab...  Still, my old Digitech RP5 had reverbs like stadium, hall, church, bathroom, garage, etc., which made it sound like you were playing in one of those environments, it was pretty cool.

But yeah the entire microphone thing seems to be a big can of worms also...  Although the maybe the 'new' laser microphones could do the job!  :D

https://germanmasterworks.com/publish/articles/Advice/The-Myth-of-the-Accurate-Microphone.html

https://www.engadget.com/2009-09-21-laser-accurate-microphone-proves-once-and-for-all-that-everythin.html

30 minutes ago, silverhead said:

A ‘perfect’ mic?    Hmmmm..... interesting. Perfect according to whom or to what standard? We can get really metaphysical here.

Absolutely zero metaphysical!  Just meaning; captures the sound waves perfectly.  IF we had a perfect transducer and a perfect mic, we could simply compare the original signal and the recorded signal; what is commonly called a null test.  So; it would be 'what comes closest'. 

Now there's no perfect transducer (which is what we want to capture with 'cabs' emulation; distortion of the signal).  With microphones, there are correction curves to alleviate the mic's FR aberrations, so already that ?should? give us fairly close representation of the sound of the cab?

Quick search results in results such as these, but I'm not entirely sure how it would end up sounding say if we put a cab in a room or anechoic chamber and recorded them using one of these, then using as IR or emulation reference...

https://www.bksv.com/en/transducers/acoustic/microphones

https://earthworksaudio.com/measurement-microphones/

http://www.josephson.com/pdf/srs5.pdf

http://www.josephson.com/pdf/c617setds05.pdf

Going on a tangent; for headphone use, it would be, I think, fairly simple to generate a binaural IR, and that would put us in the room with the cab.  That would be cool.  But that wouldn't work for speakers; for speakers, you'd be better off with a pair of the most accurate mics & creating an IR...   And yeah... IR...

Actually, that entire topic could in fact be summed up as an in-room IR; taken with a very accurate (realistic sounding) microphone...

Quote

how (without using a mic) do you capture and emulate/model the sound of the ‘real’ cab?

It would be fairly simple; 'perfect mic'.  Well maybe it's not that simple...!  lol   But yeah, you do need a mic at one point I'm guessing, maybe there is a multi-million dollar experimental/scientific near-perfect mic that could be used, if you want to go kind of the IR way?  Maybe using mic blends & source signal to get from the original signal to what you would hear in a room?

https://moneyinc.com/most-expensive-microphones-in-the-world/

https://mynewmicrophone.com/top-20-most-expensive-microphones-on-the-market-today/

But we have a source signal before going in cab.  The cab (with an IR or other) will have an effect on the signal; that likely already built in Helix; the helix does appear to have 'cab' emulation, and 'mic' emulation...  Unless the Helix basically uses an IR of every possible cab + mic + distance?  (I don't think so, think it's mic emulation + cab emulation?)

But anyway, likely, it could be similar to what Helix uses; just using the 'cab' algorithm, plus some room reverb, and yeah 'distance' probably isn't even really relevant, just having cab + room without variable distance parameter would be great!

I was just thinking, a great feature to have in the cab section would be a head or human instead of a mic.  Let me explain; in the cab block; you mainly select a cab, a mic and a distance.  But why not also have the ability to select a person?   Meaning; say you had a 4x12 in a room, and you were 8 meters away from the cab; how would it sound if you were in the room?  (aka; if it was recorded with a perfect mic?)

I think that actually this should have been the default setting for all cabs.  How would the amp sound if you were in the room?  When you have to select a mic, you're basically removing cab simulation from unit; and you're basically saying, this is how it would sound if it was recorded.  I mean it's fine/great to have as a feature, getting the recorded mic+cab tone from albums is great.  But, the Go lacks the most basic ability to emulate a guitar cab.  It cannot emulate the sound of a cab; of how a plain cab would sound to a human in a room.  It can only emulate the sound of a cab if it were recorded with a microphone...  And that is to me quite an artificial way to treat cabs. 

The most basic way to use an amp and a cab is playing them directly, and hearing the sound.  The Go lacks this most basic feature.  This would simplify tremendously the cab block, and I think might help get some great tones also...  Of course room becomes a parameter; are you playing in a garage, bedroom, church, etc., (reverb characteristics) but many reverbs aren't super expensive DSP wise, and if my my old 1994 Digitech RP5 could do such reverbs; don't think the PGO couldn't...

Thoughts?  Any idea why there isn't such implementation?

Nice!  Yeah most of your tone is going to come from your cab, and it's not the simplest thing to wrap your head around.  Reading a few threads on other forums about them, here's a few notes, mostly collection of user quotes, could help out at least as a starting point!  Going IRs can also simplify this quite a bit.

Quote

===Mics===

57 Dynamic    Shure® SM57
409 Dynamic    Sennheiser® MD 409
421 Dynamic    Sennheiser® MD 421-U
30 Dynamic    Heil Sound® PR 30
20 Dynamic    Electro-Voice® RE20
121 Ribbon    Royer® R-121
160 Ribbon    Beyerdynamic® M 160
4038 Ribbon    Coles® 4038
414 Cond    AKG® C414 TLII
84 Cond        Neumann® KM84
67 Cond        Neumann® U67
87 Cond        Neumann® U87
47 Cond        Neumann® U47
112 Dynamic    AKG® D112
12 Dynamic    AKG® D12
7 Dynamic    Shure® SM7

 

moving mic 6 inch ~ 1 foot away is a very common practice, it's almost required for many non-dynamic mic, when mic-ing guitar cabs.

7 Dynamic  great on cabs that are darker and should be at cover ranges.
20 Dynamic great on cabs that are darker and should be at cover ranges.
121 Ribbon great on harsher cabs and almost always want to be 5+ inches.
160 Ribbon great on harsher cabs and almost always want to be 5+ inches.
 
409 at 2.5 inch away, very nice and warm dynamic mic, actually one of the most balanced

120 6-8” away  
160 1-2”.

57, one needs to be careful of its low mid hump, by moving it at least 3 inches away.
30 is the brightest mic, use with care though it could work real well for certain application.
160 sounds warm and balanced when moving 5.5 or more inch away.
160 ribbon -only single stock cab use, nice balance from lows to high
121 is alway too boomy unless put 6 or more inches away.
I can’t stand 4038.....
U47 is more balanced than 67 and 87, where 67 provides some extra mid and 87 has an obvious mid hump.
7 is could sound nice and balanced by itself as well.

 

=== mic + amp combos ===
67 3" Tweed Preset with 1x12 US Deluxe and

Deluxe Rev Dual Cab (both 1x12 US Deluxe) with 121 and SM7 (a common real life pair for me)

Twin Reverb with 2x12 C12N, I am using the 414 as it isn't spikey

Plexi Jump, Uber V30, 160 1.5" (with Litigator I settled on 1")

Voltage Queen, Dual Cab Supro 1x12 Lead 80, 421 2.5", 160 4"

Champ, Dual Cab 1x8 Small Tweed 414 4", 1x12 Lead 80 409 4"

AC30, Dual Blue and Silver Bell with 121 2"

AC15, Blue Bell 160 2.5", Lead 80 SM7 2.5"

These days for direct I am in love with the Silver Belle and a 121 set at 2.5" and about 12% early reflections. Been using the double norm with pedals in front.

 

I like the Cali V30 with the 20 Dynamic 2.5" away on the Badonk,

Make sure you try the Uber V30 with the Litigator and Badonk, with the 160.

 

===Cabs===

The Lead 80 112 is an easy neutral cab that I have ignored because I kept wanting to choose the 'real cabs' that I would use.

Über v30 really dig the for rock
H30 really dig the for rock
whowatt complete whowatt package really dig the for rock

Uber 4x12 and 160 ribbon at 4”. Sounds really good. clarity and highs that the 121 just cant do
Uber 4x12 V30 is one of the cabs in the Helix that has a fairly balanced response out of the box.
Uber V30 with Litigator is NICE

1x12 Celestion 12H (with high cuts) single cabs that may be helpful
2x12 BlueBell  single cabs that may be helpful

Silver Bell. 421 0" and 160 4"

US Deluxe, SM7, 1” with Telecaster

I've been stuck on the Litigator and
Greenback 25 4x12, M160 Ribbon 5" back for quite a while now.

 

Ah yeah many class D amps, if they don't have large enough heatsinks to dissipate heat caused by using more watts, can overheat if they are played at max/high power for too long, so likely that's what you're experiencing...    Built-in amps in the monitors are probably overheating...

I was also thinking of mentioning FRFR, but they're just different beasts;

anyway, some of his points might be argued (ex; can elevate FRFR), but, design-wise, a FRFR with a 2000 watt amp (made to play loud, live; like a PA speakers) vs studio monitors; which are designed more to be tonally accurate, maximize sound quality over quantity, etc., it's more about what you want/need.

Not saying studio monitors are better, many here seem to absolutely love the headrush FRFR 108 and say they sound absolutely fantastic.  (haven't heard the FRFR 108 myself) 

https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/headrush-frfr-108-vs-studio-monitors-please-help-me-choose.152476/

Quote

Studio monitors are a must-have for recording and are good for home practice. Out of the monitors you listed, I've heard people recommend the HS80M.

If you gig then eventually you'll need a good FRFR for a monitor or backline speaker (if you don't have a PA). Some people like the FRFR-108 but I found it lacking volume/clarity when used with a loud rock band. If you get one, I think eventually you'll probably want something better.

Quote

Studio monitors are far more useful at home. I use mine for listening to and learning songs. I only use my FRFR (CLR) at band practice and gigs.

Quote

In my opinion frfr108 not so good for me, so I prefer a studio monitor like KRK, but I have r6g3. So you can try with KRK, in other hand you can sell it if it worth for you.

Quote

For me personally, I don’t find playing through studio monitors as inspiring as something that moves air more and can fill the room. I know others disagree. I just prefer something more amp in the room like for playing at my house or rehearsals. The 108 isn’t pro quality by any means, but for the price I’m not sure how anyone can complain. Wait to find a blemished or used one AND then apply those saving to a set of studio monitors and then you have the best of both worlds!

So just depends what you're after.  I remember a long time ago while researching music & HT speakers, many were recommending studio monitors as opposed to audiophile speakers for music:  Save $ on 'overpriced' amps & get 'pro' gear which suffers less from audiofoolery & snakeoil BS like audiophile gear tends to have; no audiophile 'pricing'.  So go the pro route by going studio monitors for sound quality imho good idea.

Anyway, imho, for a more music or sound quality investment; studio monitors likely the way to go.  For a guitar only with possible gigging, playing with band, etc., then yeah definitely go FRFR. 

20 hours ago, milet22 said:

3) last one: how do you all configure your patches? Are you hunched over tweaks things on the floor unit? Like I mentioned, I have liked having the podxt on my amp because bending down is difficult for me so I’ve hesitant to upgrade.

While you can control the unit via the unit itself, you can connect it to USB to a computer and use Pod Go Edit; which makes it much less 'painful' than using the knobs and the small screen of the Go.  It's way more practical to use that way. 

Some also use it on a table and use their hands to control it, well then you can't get to use the PGO as a floor unit; so lose the usage of the volume/expression pedal, and can't really use the looper very well...

Quote

2) I’ve read about the stomp vs podgo and some of the difference in available blocks. My takeaway is that the go has the expression pedal and the stomp is better for use with external pedals—is that fair assessment? I try to keep my setup small so I like the smaller stomp and am not sure how much I would use the EP. 

Stomp can have more effects on at the same time, dual paths (ex; 2 amps at the same time), but it costs more than double I think, less buttons, smaller, smaller/worse screen, etc.  I think the Stomp is yeah more for gigging musicians with already pedal rigs, vs Go probably better unit just to jam at home; or maybe even gigging, if you'd want everything included in 1 unit, and don't really need/want the dual path or

https://www.thegearpage.net/board/index.php?threads/pod-go-vs-the-stomp-is-the-pod-go-a-stomp-killer.2113675/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8GX3TeTvts

On 2/26/2021 at 7:30 AM, silverhead said:

I suggest you go with minimum 6” speakers. Bigger is better so if 8” fits in your budget I’d go with those. You don’t need 10” for your purposes.

The size of the mid driver in a 2 channel speaker mostly depends on SPL; to play louder you need to move more air, and moving more air means means either having a larger driver (moving the same amount as a smaller driver will move more air with bigger driver) or, the woofer will move further back and forth.  Also; bass is what what requires the woofer to move most air; while treble (high frequencies) require very little movement.  So the deeper the bass, the larger the woofer you generally require.  So at one point; it gets easier to move more air with a bigger woofer, so you're never going to see 4 inch driver playing incredibly loud and having amazing low end response.  

BUT, the bigger the woofer, the more mass it has, and it becomes more and more difficult to move it back and forth.  And the higher the frequency, the faster it needs to move back and forth.  So that is why you have a extremely small and light tweeter, and a mid woofer (plays mid frequencies) in 2ch speakers and, you have 3 channel speakers (or more, MTM, etc.) with tweeter, mid woofer and bass woofer; each getting larger.

So for 2 channel speakers; the typical size is 5 to 6.5 inch.  These can typically play VERY loud in a small to medium room.  Larger drivers become more relevant if you want to play very loud or if you have a larger room...   Sounds get less loud the further you are, so the bigger the room, generally the further you are, so generally need to compensate with either much higher quality drivers or just get larger drivers...

ANYHOW.  LOL.  I was also looking to maybe get a set of studio monitors to upgrade my computer speakers, and use with the Go.  KRK seemed to pop up a lot; but sadly; with speakers; it can be really subjective.  Someone can love the sound of a speaker, while another might totally hate it... We all hear differently, have different tastes, expectations, etc.,  lots of recommendations for 'best';

https://www.musictech.net/guides/buyers-guide/best-budget-studio-monitors/

https://www.musicradar.com/news/best-budget-studio-monitors

https://musiccritic.com/equipment/speakers/best-budget-studio-monitors/

https://www.4soundengineers.com/budget-studio-monitors/

So your best bet might be try to identify a few which fits the budget and seem interesting to you, and try to go listen to them somewhere.  None of them should 'crackle' at 'normal' listening levels; (often can be caused by the amp not being able to drive the speakers correctly)  plus guitar doesn't have massive bass so it shouldn't be super taxing for speakers...  So yeah, might not be super hard to want more volume than the  25w/side + smaller drivers can handle...

Quote

I am having with my speakers crackling after playing higher gain/ reverb tones would be caused by having 4.5" speakers?

Quote

Posted January 29 by grdGo33

Just to be sure, did you record with a mic the sound of the studio monitors?  If not, if just recorded through DAW and Go, then has little to do with the studio monitors...

 

Also I couldn't hear any crackling.  Are you talking about a sort of 'wobble' in the sound?  To me it sounds almost like a tremolo or like you have some sort of phase issue.  I can also hear some background noise, like some hiss in the background, is that what you're referring to?

 

Also, either the issue is with the Go, with the speakers, or just with a special combination of both... If it's from the Go, you'd likely get the same issue with headphones or through USB.  Are you?  If it's the speakers, well, should do the same with just music.  Does it also occur on both speakers or just one of them?  All patches, or just that one patch?  If when you're getting the issue, you edit your patch to remove some of the effects, does it have any effect on the crackle?  If you switch patch, does the issue go away and come back 5m later?  If you turn the Go on and off the issues goes away and come back 5m later?

Quote

Hmm, a Line 6 rep? Well kind of. You really must be new. Lol

 

Digital Igloo is Eric Klein. He is THE man behind the modelling at Line 6 - he is the Chief Product Design Architect.  If Eric says there's an update coming, you can bet your house on it as he's the guy ( supported by the excellent Line 6 team of course) designing it. 

Thanks!   Yeah I just bought the Pod Go, I didn't go through the entire Line6 employee list to find out who exactly worked on it!  Is this something people typically do?  Like you purchase a freezer, and you have to do the research to find out who designed it, and what their forum nickname(s) is/are?  LOL  ;)  :D

Quote

Quote

Where was this announcement made for the Pod Go firmware updates and features?  I don't see it in his/her posting activity.

 

Good enough for you? See the link:  https://blog.line6.com/2020/11/27/eric-klein-talks-helix-3-0-with-joe-gore/

I breezed through the article But didn't see the Pod Go announcement for the firmware updates and features...

1 hour ago, voxman55 said:

Yes there is, @Digital_Iglooat Line 6 confirmed an upgrade is on the way 'soonish'. We don't know content but cryptically he indicated 'no real surprises' which suggests some of the less DSP hungry upgrades in Helix/Helix Stomp from v3.0.  We have been told that snap shot naming and muti-footswitch naming won't be included in this upgrade, but is 'high up' on Line 6's 'to do' list, so possibly next time round. 

Is he/she a L6 rep, employee, insider, etc.?  Is this official in any sort of way?   [edit] ah yes "rank: L6 staff".  Where was this announcement made for the Pod Go firmware updates and features?  I don't see it in his/her posting activity.

For the 3.0, https://line6.com/support/page/kb/effects-controllers/helix/helix-30-release-notes-r934/  I've crossed what from other discussions I think we would not be getting, but it's very possible that any/all of these don't make it either...
 

17 hours ago, Clsc said:

when will it have an update With more Effects and Features?

When?  There's not even an ([edit] official, from my knowledge) word that there ever will be such an update for the Go.  We might never get new effects.  Last year I think some in the forum mentioned start of the year, but almost 2 months in 2021 and still not a word about an update.

Not just yours, typical with Pod Go...  :\

Quote

So what happening right now is:

1) with none of the SBS's foot switches activated, I have my dry signal from the Pod.

2) When I click any foot switch on the SBS I still have my dry signal from the Pod.

3) When I click on any foot switch on the SBS AND click on the Pod's MONO FX LOOP foot switch, that's when the sound from the SBS and the Pod just fades in and the volume is also quieter compared to just the dry signal.

Think you need to map it out as X + Y = Z.  Ex:  PGO Loop on + SBS off = just PGO, works normally, good.

But I think I know what your issue might be, see manual page 32, Global Settings > Ins/Outs #5 (see below)

With this option set to always-on, it engages some sort of ...  Wait...  Can't even recall the twisted logic...  Ok see the last post here:

Quote

when the FX Loop is on, it gives me absolutely no processed signal, like the FX return goes straight to the PGO out... Exactly like this:

 

 

And yeah my Looper (in) is connected to Pod Go FX send, and my looper (out) is connecter to the Go's FX return, so I expected it to go through all the chain like you said, but it's really not what it does...

 

Ok I just figured it out...! 

 

Global settings, in/out

 

 

That was why as I said in this and the other thread I linked earlier, that the looper kept playing even if the block was off...  So it's actually an interesting option if you have a mono looper and are outputting sound from Go to Monitors/PA/whatever!

 

But yeah not sure why that option was set the way it was...  When I changed the option, the Go started behaving as you would expect... The more you know LOL   (optimally, there could have been some indicator that the option is on/off, since it really screws up the FX loop behavior, but I guess that when you know the option exist...)

 

Thanks!

What does "click on the big sky" mean?  You mean you press on the footswitch to activate the FX loop?  Ah no ok you click on one of the Big Sky (SBS) buttons to activate...  ok.

If you put the SBS before or after the go, does the problem still occurs?  If you put a patch cable or just a regular cable to FX loop in/out (so that the fx out returns without any pedal, directly out -> in), does your issue still arise? 

Sounds to me like it's 'an issue' with the SBS; does it have an autoswell which is what is generating the cut sound then fade in?

26 minutes ago, AidenBanks said:

Once I get over the learning aspect, it should be just as simple to dial in as the katana, right?

Once you get your PhD?  :D   I think 99% don't have it.  I've had my unit for months now, and as a hobbyist, can't say I understand even a fourth of the options very well; I mean, ex; say out of the dozen reverbs and delays, sure, I can setup a Spring reverb easily, add a distortion, setup a amp + IR fairly efficiently and quickly, and get some tone going, but as per my last post; can't say I've learned what all the amps & their settings sound like, can't say I've mastered ex; the Ganimede and other fancy reverbs; I have a superficial understanding of them all, but say the Plateau, some youtube demo of the reverb will sound great; and I'm struggling to make heads or tails of how exactly each reverbs can/should sound; and how to tweak them all efficiently; it's all quite a blur which always results in an hour long session of trial and error, dialing something & playing around with it with the guitar, than 2-3 weeks later, rinse & repeat.   It's really not like a simple tool, well ok maybe it is, it's like toolbox of hundreds of 'simple' tools you have to learn and becoming proficient.  IRs, amps, cabs, compressors, distortion pedals, mics & their setup distance, etc...  Lots of stuff!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gCWBiMRrsI

Anyway, we all have a sort of approach to proficiency and knowledge; before saying I understand something, I like to really understand it.  Most people using the Go likely don't really understand 80% of all the options;  (ex; ask them what a Mesa 4x8 cab sounds with X mic at X dist, likely won't know exactly.  On my Spider, I knew exactly what every amp sounded like ... !) but they're fine because they don't need to understand everything to use it. Which is perfectly fine, but being sorta OCD, if I see a setting, I like to know exactly what it does, and if there's 100 amps, I'd like to have a good idea of what they all sound like, what they're capable of, etc., but it's not really realistic with so many; possible 'option paralysis'.

For digital sound...  Not sure if it'll sound less digital, probably...  For me Go is perfect, for a pro guitarist with real amp experience, some say they can tell there's some digitalness to the sound...  Not sure many could identify a Go vs BK if they setup a similar sound using similar amps, reverb, EQ, etc.