Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by ozbadman

  1. I deal with NDA's for a living.  Breaking one is NOT illegal; it is breach of contract and opens one up to liability from termination to litigation.  Nobody goes to jail for breaking an NDA unless they are under contract with a governmental entity and subject to criminal prosecution (ie treason or espionage).  HOWEVER, if one is licensed by the government and said liscensee breaks a fiduciary commitment (ie insider trading, violation of code of conduct, etc) then they can face punitive damages and possible criminal prosecution.

    The term legal/illegal does not apply exclusively to criminal law. Breaching a contract is illegal. Like all things in law, it is up for debate.

  2. I'm not a lawyer. All I know is that I and others were given clear guidance by lawyers. We could not disclose many things that we knew to be true until after the company had made a clear public disclosure, via official news release, about the intended product direction. These are the public disclosure requirements that you mention.


    But before those requirements are met, knowledge can't be disclosed.


    To put it in this context:

    - a user makes a post here requesting information about product direction. Typically he/she is considering purchasing an existing product and is asking whether it is about to be rendered 'old' by a pending new product release.

    - a Line 6 employee (or even 'Expert' under a non-disclosure agreement) knows that a new product is pending but it has not been officially announced. The public disclosure requirements have not yet been met (for legitimate marketing and other reasons).

    - that employee/Expert would be breaking the law/agreement by answering the post with this inside information. And that's exactly what it's called in terms of insider trading rules and laws. It's illegal to disclose insider information and individuals are subject to prosecution.



    ... and it always seems to be overly cautious behaviour. Until you're charged with insider trading, or being an accessory to it.

    Ahh, I see. Well that makes sense to me now, yes.


    Just to clarify though,


    on point 2), yes, it is illegal for someone under an NDA to make a disclosure. It's not necessarily illegal for an employee to do so per se, but sometimes it may be, and they may get fired.

    on point 3), It's not so much that it is illegal to disclose inside information, apart from that mentioned in point 2. But, the problem with inside information is really twofold. 1) you, or anyone else, cannot trade on material, non-public information that you have. That is, private information that would affect the stock price if it were known. Nor can you pass it on to others so they can trade on it. 2) the company has to make efforts to publicly disclose private, material information in an efficient manner. That is, in a manner that the information becomes available to everyone at the same time, to the extent that they can. The forums here would be regarded as public, but probably not efficient.


    None of this stops companies from disclosing information. In fact, active disclosure is encouraged by the regulators as it means that the investors have the best information on which to base their decisions. But, the efficient disclosure of information could definitely explain why lawyers throw down the "thou shalt not" hammer here. And of course, there are very good business reasons not to disclose your product plan to your competitors.


    Thanks for the insight and the discussion. It helps to explain why people regard this as illegal.



  3. I think the analog to digital converters in the effects loops are the culprits....

    it's extremely unlikely that it is the A/Ds themselves. I think what is probably happening is that the sound you like/are used to is your guitar plugged straight into the front of your amp. This means the passive pickups and cable form a circuit with the preamp directly. Your passive pickups and cable become the load on the preamp, and that is the tone you are used to. Even changing the cable in these conditions can have quite an effect.


    As soon as you plug your guitar into some powered box first, whether it's a multi-effect or just a stompbox, that interaction between your amp and your guitar has changed since the effects unit is no longer acting as a passive load.


    So, in my mind, you have some choices:

    1) Plug the guitar into the Helix, but choose an input impedance setting on the Helix that gives you the sound you are looking for, or a close approximation.

    2) Plug the guitar into the Helix, and use EQ to try to compensate the sound to make it sound like the preamp sound, since you are no longer plugged directly into your preamp.

    3) Plug the guitar into your amp as you normally do, then only use effects in your amps effects loop. This is the one most likely to get your sound back, but may limit your flexibility too much.


    Plus there are options I'm sure I haven't thought of here that others can chime in with.


    So the short answer is, I don't believe it's the Helix unit exactly that is the problem. It's going from a pure passive load on your preamp, to a powered device. It will change the tone, no matter what the device is.

  4. Well then something I'm not aware of must have changed in the last several years. When I was an Officer in a publicly traded company several years ago I was certainly limited in the sort of information about product directions that I could talk about publicly. What we could and couldn't talk about was made very clear to us by the company's lawyers. And some of the information that users repeatedly request from Line 6 is exactly the sort of thing we could not disclose.

    Nothing has changed legally in this area as far as I am aware. The only people who I have seen talking about these limitations is the previous thread here, about Line 6, and now you here. There are many public disclosure requirements, but the notion that one can't legally talk truthfully about intended product direction is one I have never heard anywhere before. Can you quote a law or precedent so I can have a look? Corporate lawyers of course usually err well and truly on the side of caution.

  5. Well, they've already found out that their previous plenty-of-disclosure policy affected their legal liability (as a publicly traded company)

    Without wanting to reignite the debate, I feel I have to try so squash this rumor. This legal liability for public companies part is not true with regard to too much disclosure about product direction. It seems to be a misunderstanding of something that was communicated within Line 6.


    There are extremely good marketing reasons as to why one does not necessarily discuss product direction.



    as well as customer (dis)satisfaction and lost sales when reality even slightly deviated from forecast release dates. I don't expect them to revert back any time soon.

    There were certainly a lot of annoyed customers every time Line 6 announced a release date and it slipped. I think the current approach to expectation management is a direct result of that learning experience, but I'm guessing. It could just be the Yamaha buyout, or the different PM. In any case, it seems to work better this way as I feel like I see a lot less annoyed customers than I used to on these forums.

  6. Now......... with the fully charged battery IN the guitar........... NO 1/4" cable.......... VDI to POD500X.   It powers on and works.   


    Is it running off the battery like this?


    I think you probably just had the one problem: the classic "knob too far down the shaft won't allow me to turn models on" issue. Now that you have fixed that, I think that if you run off VDI without the battery, everything will now be working correctly again.

  7. I told him i think it will cost a lot.

    I noticed you are loosing your aplomb.

    Do you want to bet that soon or later you will do a cab or similar to amp Helix properly?

    Not something like an esoteric amp system $$$, something pratical compact and that looks like standard old style cab because guitarist are very very conservative.

    The best cab ever created? No but something decent.

    The majority who bought Helix aren't professional they use to play in pubs with no P.A. or with a bad P.A. with microscopic stage and they rehearse  in cellars or basement.

    I'm one of them.

    So don't think big (and expensive) but practical and effective (and possibly cheap).

    The disquisition about what is a real FRFR, is nice but it's academic.


    Honestly, I am still trying to work out what it is you think you want. Maybe you don't understand what an FRFR system is? The proper way to amp HELIX is with an FRFR system, end of story. That's the point of the FRFR system, and the HELIX amp models. If you just want effects, then use any amp you want, but if you're going to use the amp models, the intended way to use them is with the best FRFR system you can. Now, you may get some great sounds from other amps, but they won't be modeled sounds of the originals, they'll be their own thing. So your idea of "a modelling amp that matches the HELIX" makes no sense. The best amp that makes the HELIX sound the way it is intended to, is a perfect FRFR system, not a "matched amp". So, as I say, I really don't understand what you are trying to ask for. The modelling is already in the HELIX, we just need a flat response amp to reproduce the models the way they are intended to sound.

    • Upvote 1
  8. Well, I GIVE UP..... UNCLE... I returned my first helix due to things wrong on it, gave it a second chance. Bought my second. Everything seemed great or pretty good at home.. Then.... I took it out live, what a sonic night mare. Every patch to bassy or something. it was like the bass player was cranked and he wasn't even playing. Tried different guitars. Xlr out vs 1/4 out with direct boxes etc. I had to turn the bass down on everything to the point the patch sounded bad.. Low cuts didn't help either at helix or board. I had bought patches my own patches and different ir's but still the same outcome. Plus I had this weird latency problem between the monitor I was running via 1/4 outs and what came out the mains. Tried three times to get this to work live and no way Jose! I'm not bashing just letting you know that it might be great in your house and thru your headset, but a possible sonic nightmare out on stage, IMO. CAN YOU SAY FIREHAWK 1500.. Well need less to say no more helix, I'm :-(


    Did you try the global EQ? If it sounded good at home, you should be able to get it to sound good at the gig using global EQ. Different rooms require different EQing, plus the band is playing so you may need to tweak the midrange, plus Fletcher-Munson comes into play, plus you're standing in a different position relative to the speaker at the gig. All global-equable (except maybe the last one).

  9. Lol...very true.


    I don't get the dilemma, honestly. Why go FRFR if you're just gonna turn around and undo what it's designed for, and make it sound like the rig you just ditched? Want the "amp in a room" sound? Amps and rooms are readily available. Pick one of each, and season to taste.


    Yes, except rooms are a bit hard to carry. And come to think of it, so are amps. Thank goodness for modelling and FOH.

  10. My opnion is the same of the article.

    In the existing systems there are pros and cons because they are made before the modelling amp technology you have to adapt something already made for other purposes to the new technology.

    Now the market needs a product made specially for modelling.

    it's not only me.

    I'm pointing the moon and you're watching my index finger.

    It's a general discussion.


    That's not what the article said at all.


    It did not say the market needs something specific for modelling, it said even a perfect FRFR system cannot produce an "amp in the room" feeling, because the signal going into the amp cannot yet produce the complexities of an amp in the room. They are not saying they need a better amp, they are saying they need better modelling before an FRFR system can make guitarists totally happy.


    I don't know where you're pointing. That's why I asked.

  11. It needs a specific product modelling technology, the right one is not a traditional cab and not a P.A. cab or FRFR (call it as you please). All these products don't fit perfectly with the new modelling technology, They were created for other uses.

    They are palliatives.

    I'm talking also about money.

    Professionals have a lot of money to spend but normal people cannot spend a fortune for esoteric amp systems. :)


    OK, so I guess I don't understand what it is that you are asking for?? An amp that doesn't reproduce what you put into it?

  12. This is a nice article about amp modelling and FRFR.

    And the conclusion it's what i've try to say to Digital Igloo.

    There's no specific product, there is a gap in the production somebody has to fill it.


    Well, I don't agree that that was the conclusion.


    The conclusion was that at the moment, even if you make the perfect FRFR system, the things plugged into the front of the FRFR system cannot yet completely replicate the "amp in a room" feel that guitarists want.


    L6 already has FRFR products, and DI explained why they cannot make them much cheaper at the moment, without making them not FRFR. I'm sure they will continue to refine their products in this space, but a HELIX specific FRFR doesn't make a lot of sense to me. A good FRFR for any modeller makes a lot more sense, and L6 already has their products in that space.


    Thank you for the link though, it was an interesting article.

  13. - as a power user of x3 I would expect a high end successer unit to deliver downwards compatibility as Priority 1, while

      1a is, NOT to deliver less/worse, 1b is to deliver more/better than the predessessor.


    While I am sure it's disappointing, newer products are often not backwards compatible with previous products. That includes product features, not just patches etc. This includes Windows no longer running some old DOS and XP stuff, my PC no longer having a DVD player, my new Roland mid-range V-drums not having all the features of the TD-12, my new girlfriend not... wait. I digress.


    In the case of the X3, when the HD was released, the X3 had probably about 10 years of development behind it (it was XT based). Useful I'm sure, but old algorithms. L6 wanted to start from scratch, with a low-cost system. L6 specifically said a number of times when they released the HD series that it was not a direct replacement for the X3. Many features and amps, and some effects that were available on the X3 are still not available on the HD. But, the amps and effects that are on the HD sound much, much better.


    If you're happy with your X3, keep it. The HD is not a direct replacement for a lot of X3 features. Just buy an HD or HELIX as well if you want it to sound good. :)

  14. For example the team behind Revalver IV (  a highly respected amp-sim VST/AU plugin ) say in their promo blurb that in the LATEST version - IV - they moved to using an open-source commonly used electronic circuit emulation-design program called SPICE  ( which has been around for a long time - and used to model circuitry - originally not in real-time ) because NOW CPU power allows them to use SPICE to model everything in the circuit.... which means prior to this--- not everything WAS being emulated at component level. Presumably certain circuit groups ( tone-stack for example ) were implemented through some other way.. 



    Just curious !

    Well, if you are implying this gives a more accurate model, that assumes that (1) the spice model is correct and (2) the spice models, and all their interactions are identical to the interactions that are happening in the particular amp you are modeling, including the exact impedances (since resistors in any 1 specific amp have an exact value, not a value +- tolerance) and component interactions.

  15. Well the models sound better (more natural, more guitar like) through cable and the guitar input, too, try it!

    I can't think of any real reason why that would be the case but then, I don't have a HELIX yet. I guess, you may lose a tiny bit of high-end using a 1/4in cable so you could try turning down the high-end a tweak in the global EQ and see if that gets you what you want.

  16. Hello,

    I come to share here my disappointment about the Line 6 support.

    On January 6, 2016, I opened a ticket, to report problems of artifacts and distortion with my Helix.

    The last response of support Line 6 (Mr.wvolkmann) dated January 8/16.(Attach Files)

    I tried 3 times (8, 13 and 20 January) to re-contact the Support Line 6, but in vain nobody answered me.

    If a manager of Line 6, conscious brand reputation, could prove to me that customers Line 6 are not cash cows, I will be grateful.

    Thank you.

    To be honest, Line 6 support generally has an excellent reputation. Far better than most modern companies. And because L6 QA has not always been so great, L6 support has to step in to fix some strange problems sometimes. I don't know why you're having a bad experience, but hopefully now the Service Manager is stepping in, you should be sorted out. But, as I say, Line 6 support has generally been very responsive, and flexible about doing whatever is necessary to try to make the customers happy. Personally, I have only ever had really good experiences with L6 support.

  17. psarkissian, on 15 Jan 2016 - 12:11 AM, said:

    "Who said it was illegal? As long as you don't sell it or give it to anyone else, you can do what you like. The posting of the modified software, not that would be illegal due to copyright restrictions"---


    That may be so,... but there may also be "industrial espionage" aspects to consider. In 2003, the industrial espionage act here in America was overhauled, as a "strategic imperative", in response to the "war on terrorism".


    Breaking into someone's software might be considered an act of industrial espionage, and may be subject to prosecution and especially some very hefty monetary damages. These are criminal penalties as well that goes way beyond the civil penalties of Copyright infringement.


    People in Holland, Germany and the UK have gotten into trouble over this sort of thing, so being outside the USA doesn't leave them immune,.... especially in those countries that are signatories of IP (copyrights and patents) treaties.

    If I broke into the Variax software and installed a virus, that then made all Variaxes do something like, oh I don't know, have a plinky low-E string then sure, that would be Industrial Espionage. Or used the IP to start my own company. Or even modded it and on-sold it. But, just modding the code at home to make different music, no problem. Unless it's metal music. Now THAT would be subversion. :)


    When I buy a book, I do have the right to read that book. I just can't on-sell copies of it, modded (defaced, summarised, etc.) or otherwise, nor substantially use the content for my own book. I can sell my one copy however (akin to selling your variax).


    Personally, I have no desire to spend the next 10 years with a bunch of friends re-writing the DSP algorithms that L6 has been working on all this time, just so I, and only I, can have a modded variax.

  • Create New...