silverhead

I suggest you open a support ticket.

As of HX Edit v3.01 you should always begin the update process from HX Edit. It will detect that updates are available and manage the entire process for you. The only reason you should use Line 6 Updater now is if something unexpected happens and the automatic update procedure fails. This is especially important now that v3.10 has been released. If you haven’t already downloaded and installed HX Edit v3.01 start there.

Also try increasing the Bias level in the power amp section.

I presume your Helix audio outputs are connected to the Scarlett audio inputs? If that’s the only connection from Helix then, no. The digital midi data from Helix is not carried over the analog outputs. It might be possible to do that if you use Helix as the audio interface to Cubase but I’m not sure. Can you give us more info about what exactly you are trying to achieve by using Helix midi data? Perhaps there’s a better way to do it using only Cubase features. For instance, latency issues are generally addressed by adjusting buffer sizes - not by midi.

Right. Thanks for clarifying.

My uneducated guess is DSP considerations. Providing a single model with the 3 switch option would probably require so much DSP that the user would have much less flexibility in using other FX blocks in the preset.

There is a potentially helpful tool in this context (credit to forum member dbagchee): https://dbagchee.github.io/helix-preset-viewer/ Load the Helix preset into this viewer and manually recreate it on POD Go as closely as possible.

Yes, that’s a problem in Windows because it violates the ASIO protocol which requires that the same audio device is used for both input and output. I don’t know whether there is a similar issue on Mac OS.

Yes, that's normal. Pressing the Up/Down Bank switch is the first part of a new preset selection process. That offers one of 4 new preset options, which is indicated by the flashing. The process isn't complete until you select one of the flashing ones.

WOW! They still produce manuals? .... jk ;-)

When you say ‘they are there to use’ I assume you mean they appear in the model list but are greyed out and can’t be selected. That’s the indicator that there is insufficient DSP remaining in the preset to use them. To test, try selecting a New Preset and then select the Poly FX as the only block in the preset. If you are still unable to select it/them then there is a problem. Otherwise, this is normal behaviour and common to all DSP intensive FX blocks when the preset is nearing its DSP capacity. Also, make sure you have the compatible v3.x version of the HX Edit program.

.... moved ...

No, there is no Variax kit. You can buy certain replacement parts but the main circuit board(s) are not sold separately. To obtain these parts you’ll need to buy a used Variax guitar and transplant the parts into your custom guitar.

@voxman55 Thanks for the info. Good catch!

Interesting. I’m not aware that v1.21 requires an earlier installation. The official info you provided in the link doesn’t mention that. Did you have some experience with that?

Surely you mean the FX Send out to the Return of your amp? Check your cabling.

No, that’s not possible when switching presets. However it can be done using snapshots within a preset. If you’re not familiar with snapshots I suggest reading the relevant chapter in the manual.

Yes, that can be normal. One of the most common uses of snapshots is to toggle FX blocks on/off as you switch snapshots. This is independent of any parameter changes being assigned to the Snapshot controller. If you want the block to be ON in all snapshots, one way to do it is to visit each snapshot individually, turn the block on manually, and Save the preset before visiting the next snapshot.

I’m not going to engage in any debate about this. I don’t really care whether you buy it or not. You asked for my reasoning and I provided it. My mistake.

No inside information. I think you are much more interested, motivated, and self-educated than most in terms of understanding the POD Go’s DSP management design. You have gone to the extent of doing extensive pre-purchase market research, post -purchase reading about DSP management, and pursuit of informative and helpful tools like the DSP utilization chart. And you actually take the time to use those things in your preset design. You are among the very few (I think) who have gone to the extent of calculating that it may actually be possible to increase the number of flex blocks and still be able (with your hard-earned knowledge as well as DSP analysis) to identify and maximize the available DSP during preset construction. If I thought the average user was like you I would have a different opinion. But you do not represent the average POD Go user. I think the average user builds presets by filling their flex blocks with a desired FX model with little or no consideration of DSP utilization. They make no effort to use a lesser rather than more DSP intensive model of, say, a Delay or Reverb block. They can usually, but not always, manage to utilize all 4 FX flex blocks without encountering the DSP limitations of the POD Go. More importantly they get quite frustrated and vocal about the ‘underpowered’ nature of the device when they find they can’t use all 4 blocks, and still give no consideration to DSP management. Providing an available block that can’t be used has the effect of pi$$ing off many users. Unlike you, they don’t revisit their preset design to squeeze more DSP out of the device by consulting the DSP utilization chart to replace a specific block with a similar but less DSP intensive FX model. They still need the training wheels. They still just run to the forums to complain about poor device design. Understandably this just drives Line 6 to minimize those situations through design constraints. I believe Line 6 has imposed the 4-block restriction (rather than 5 or 6) for a reason. I believe that reason is to minimize the instances of apparent DSP limitations for the average user. Someday Line 6 may come to believe that the average user is as knowledgeable and committed as you are to make efforts to maximize the DSP during preset construction, and is ready to take DSP management fully into their own hands without blaming Line 6 when they hit the limitation. If and when that day comes I will be happy to see the extra blocks. Meantime, my opinion is that adding extra flex blocks will pi$$ off more average users than it will appease ambitious users like you. Btw.... thank you for your inquisitive interest in this topic, and for educating all users with your findings and preset-building tactics. If Line 6 does reach the point where they believe the average user is ready for an extra flex block or two the user community will have people like you to thank. Again, all of this is just my opinion. No inside information. I could be wrong and we will see extra flex blocks in the next firmware update. I would be happy to see that, but at this time I don’t think it’s likely.

No inconsistency. In the above I said they are good suggestions and that the way to lobby Line 6 is via Ideascale. That is true. I would like to see these things be implemented. You asked a different and specific question, namely "Is this going to happen or should I get rid of my device?" In response I said another thing that I believe is true. It ain't going to happen. You asked others whether they thought it was going to happen, not whether they wanted it to happen. I hold both beliefs simultaneously and without contradiction. Would I like to see these things? Yes. Do I think extra flex blocks will be added? No

Nobody’s done that.

Yes, the update replaces your custom Global Settings with their default values. Other than that nothing is lost or replaced. Fortunately part of the update process involves creating a system backup. You can use that later to restore all your settings.

I think your question has been answered, though I understand that you don’t like the answer. Nonetheless, if the POD Go is not currently meeting your needs it is unlikely to do so in the future. I believe that’s what you were asking. Of course you can do what you want with that information but wishing it were different is not going to change anything.

The fixed vs. flex blocks in the POD Go is part of the fundamental design of the device and is well documented in the product description pages. The POD Go, like every multi-FX device, has a limit to its DSP processing capacity. The fixed blocks are low-DSP intensive FX while the flex blocks are reserved for heavier DSP-intensive FX. The result is that a certain portion of the overall DSP capacity is reserved by the system for fixed blocks while the rest is dynamically managed by the user with the flex blocks. The total DSP capacity of the device is not going to change, and nor is the overall strategy of a certain number of fixed blocks and a certain number of flex blocks. The actual number of fixed vs. flex blocks could change but would have to be accommodated within the existing DSP capacity. Unfortunately the DSP requirements of a typical flex block are much greater than a typical fixed block. Hence you can’t simply get rid of the fixed EQ or Wah blocks and somehow be able to add a Delay or Chorus block instead. As it is, it’s quite easy to design a preset that can only use 3, not 4, flex blocks due to DSP capacity limitations. Having the theoretical ability to add more flex blocks without a corresponding hardware upgrade (not going to happen) is an empty promise. I suppose there could be an update that increases the number of available flex blocks to 6 or whatever, but you still would not be able to use more than 3 or 4. This is not likely to be addressed to your satisfaction in future updates. If the POD Go does not currently meet your needs it is not likely to ever do so.