Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About mainecracker

  • Rank
    Just Startin'

Profile Information

  • Registered Products
  1. Do you know if you can control the L6 Link output with the volume control, while leaving the XLR output alone? So, if I use the L2t has a stage monitor via L6 Link, I want to control my stage volume with the knob on my Helix, and leave the level of the XLR alone for the Front of House. Thanks, Scott
  2. I would love to know there is a better way to kill the gap when changing patches, but the fact is, a DSP has to be Loaded and Unloaded to change a patch (as far as I know). If there is a better way, with Dynamic DSP, or Rolling DSP's, or something else, I am all for it, but this solution addresses the issue, and will work for many. Oh yeah, it also is not super challenging to pull off. And if your worried about where the Dev time will go at Line 6, just check out IdeaScale. Everyone on there just wants their favorite amp or stomp box added... Yawn....
  3. WOW, with thinking like that, we'll be back to doing things the way we did 10 years ago fast... oh wait, that IS what we are doing. Yes, i certainly have tried and use what you have suggested, and it still only allows for A/B switch changes, and dancing around your foot board there after. Did you every wonder why they call them 'Set List' when no one can actually use them as such? 'Set List' may as well be called 'Folder x' because it is only a container for your patches. Take a look out there, this exact issue has been on message boards since modelling has been around. Here's is the point... it can be solved, and with not a lot of effort. I will ask you, have you ever set up 8 patches in a row, with 1 amp, and just the right effects per patch, all set to go from change to change for each song, and in turn, each set with no annoying interruption in your tone? Not if you have used 90% of modelers past and present. For full disclosure, having the ability for a few scenes per patch suites me the best, but I am so tired of hearing the lame excuses for not addressing this issue by adding CHOICE.
  4. So.... You would have an issue with the this option being available, and not using it???? Really???
  5. OK, I may be understating the effort because I have obviously not seen the code schematics etc. However, I can confidently say, this would not require a lot of effort. Also, there is no reason this would have needed to be a day one feature as all the elements to perform this function are there, they just need to be leveraged. I have added the idea to ideascale: http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Seamless-Patch-Change-Option/812943-23508
  6. It would only require minor software changes, not architectural changes. Shadow the current tone on DSP 2, and keep 'playing' that tone until a new patch change is loaded and running on the 'primary' DSP. Once again... MINOR CODE change. Also, I would only suggest adding this feature as an option. It addresses the issue, and provides choice. So, lets all disregard your cost comment, because it has no merit. Many of us already purchased Helix with out this ability, so I don't think adding it will send us all back to the store seeking a refund. I find more and more excuses, dated arguments, and a total lack of consideration for REAL innovation.
  7. your comments only show your myopia. Are you suggesting that the amount of attention that has been spent on this topic is for not and this has all just been in everyone's imagination? It clearly is a problem and if you plan to measure your success as being as limited as everyone else, you will never be an industry leader and certainly have no capacity to innovate. There are EASY fixes to the issue and those fixes would add bundles of flexibility to the platform. If you have nothing NEW to say, just stay planted in your A/B patching and think you did something....
  8. "Make one patch in path A, one patch in path B, and switch between them using a footswitch to switch a "first in the chain" volume pedal from 0 - 100 and vice versa. Zero latency, trails remain... simple... basic..." Yes VERY basic and still just simple A/B switching. I am talking about real solutions, not workarounds. I can improve my tones by making them less complex, and remove the switching issue with split DSP. Now, (instead of like the majority of players, myself included) I can switch from using Stomp Mode to Preset Mode, and have 8 completely independent patches to choose from all with zero latency. Let's be honest, the original intent in all these devices is to change an entire patch when you want to change tones, so one can capture exactly that tone, and then hit a button to get to the next exact tone. Beyond this, with the Patch Gap removed, I don't need to cram everything I use in to one patch, so each patch can have only what it needs and PRESTO, I am making patch changes the way the digital processing gods intended. THEN, let's say I am just jamming around and want to set up a huge stomp patch because I don't know what's coming next, well, we already have that.... So now we have a device that can easily fit an enormous amount of scenarios and it's dealers choice on how to leverage them. As far as the Scene idea, this is easily executed, and I have posted/voted on IdeaScale. I appreciate your comments, but If anyone has a comment to this topic, how about making it a solution and not the same old obvious work arounds that have been balled up or rearranged and spit back out at us for the last 8 years. #1 it's a problem #2 it's a problem #3 it's a problem #4 there are some pretty easy ways to address the problem if they really want to listen to their long time, loyal customers.
  9. This is and has been a big complaint of many users for a very long time (many with long Line 6 history, me included). Dismissing it with the very limiting workaround suggested and because everyone else does this as poorly as we do is negligent. If Helix is about options, than provide the option to split the DSP use. Allow half the number of Blocks per patch and loose the patch changing delay by dedicating one DSP to maintaining sound through patch changes. I would certainly use this setting a bundle (perhaps all the time) and I think many others would too. I would gladly give up 1/2 the processing power to have seamless patch changes. Anyone? Further, if Line 6 wants to keep us in a single patch, then make it REALLY work. Open up all blocks for MIDI control; not just Toggle (Toggle-On, and Toggle-Off or Set-On and Set-Off), and not just IF we assign a Block to a Helix Foot Switch. This simple fix would enable scene creation with on board Helix switching AND, if we choose to augment the Helix with another programmable MIDI controller (sequencer - whatever), then we can truly access everything in a single patch to create REAL scenes and not just simple A/B switching. This is a simple fix and one I have posted on IdeaScale, Copy and Paste this link in your browser. I have not posted the idea to split DSP, but if it has not been suggested, I will. http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Individual-Block-Enable-Bypass-via-MIDI/811400-23508 There is no excuse for not addressing this issue with some pretty simple options. I am in technology, I know what would be involved here, and it's not a big effort, if it were a priority. IdeaScale gets lots of attention for adding more stuff, but does not get enough attention in making the stuff that is already in there, work better/correctly. Hey line 6; if other devices have this same problem, be the leader.
  10. Any Update here? Did the editor make an appearance at NAMM? Is there any preview materials at all?
  11. Will there be an edit applcation for Helix? Hopefully something that can be used in real time similar to FireHawk only more like a touch version of the LCD display? I understand the idea is to program with your feet; it would be great to use your hands and not have to reach the floor. I also understand there will be a rack/control version. Foor model with GOOD control application that supports IOS, Android, and WIn 8/10 (touch enabled for surface) would be the best of both/all worlds. Thanks, Scott
  • Create New...