Delay trails not working

[veus55]

I am trying to have my delays and reverb continuing when I switch presets, but this is not working even though I have trails on on my delay.

 

I am missing something?

[silverhead]

Yes - you are missing the fact that delay trails do not carry over when switching presets. The Delay Trails setting applies only within a given preset, specifying whether or not the trails continue when you switch the FX off while remaining in the preset.

[veus55]

ok thanks

[Roberttheprole]

Just a terrible let down huh!?!

Was so excited till I found that out there's no spill over between presets. Perhaps my biggest issue with helix so far, and what needs attention the most.

[kensington]

Nah, not really. Cause I hardly switch pathces anymore. I got all I need in 1 patch.

Same with my axe-fx. Just using scenes.
Can't even say if my axe-fx has spill over. Definitively a gap in amps, but maybe the delay spill over. Don't remember.

[benevans1986]

It’s the biggest disappointment for me, so much that I’m returning mine (call me dramatic). Even when putting everything I use within one preset, I can’t switch between things how I want, which makes it unworkable live for me.

 

If Line 6 were to reintroduce scenes to the Helix that allowed effects states to be switched by one button, then I would definitely re-purchase.

[bryanblackburn]

adding an eventide h9 is something I plan to do so that I can add in some more FX and that would solve the problem right?

[veus55]

Adding the H9 would defeat the purpose for me. I want as compact a rig as possible.

[radatats]

is there ANY unit that has spillover between patch changes?  WTF?

[lrschmid]

is there ANY unit that has spillover between patch changes?  WTF?

 

Boss GT-10 did. It was removed in the GT-100.

[radatats]

Boss GT-10 did. It was removed in the GT-100.

 

not removed, no longer supportable as the DSP demands of improved effects and better modeling keep increasing...

[lrschmid]

not removed, no longer supportable as the DSP demands of improved effects and better modeling keep increasing...

 

How does that not equate to removed? It was the single-most complained about change between the 10 and the 100.

[HonestOpinion]

Yes - you are missing the fact that delay trails do not carry over when switching presets. The Delay Trails setting applies only within a given preset, specifying whether or not the trails continue when you switch the FX off while remaining in the preset.

 

I love the Helix it is awesome! But... as has been pointed out many times(I suspect L6 is quite sick of hearing about it), the Helix does not have the ability to maintain delay trails from preset to preset. Line6 would be well served by providing scene functionality to compensate for this shortcoming.  Although the Helix's ability to assign up to eight blocks per footswitch is great it is missing the functionality to assign a single block to more than one footswitch. It is the ability to assign the same effect or parameter to multiple footswitches that is essentially the "scene" functionality. Scene functionality would allow much more flexibility within one preset which is what you need if you want to have delay trails and have to remain within one preset to get them.

 

Scene functionality would allow you to for instance easily change between multiple(more than two) cabs/IRs within a preset with only one footswitch and never have more than one cab or IR in operation at the same time. It would allow you to change the same amp or effect parameters with multiple footswitches; for example, stomping on footswitch1 would turn off the distortion and increase the mids parameter on the amp, stomping on footswitch2 would turn on the distortion and decrease the mids and also turn on the phaser. In summation, if you don't have delay trails between presets and can only have them within a preset, the most obvious alternative is to have scene functionality within presets. Scene functionality is a must have for more complex switching scenarios anyway, even if you are not concerned about delay trails!

[gunpointmetal]

The Boss delay trails only worked if you had the same delay in the next preset if I remember correctly. I'm more concerned with the patch change lag than delay trails. If whats been reported is accurate, you'll need to have everything on one patch and only change presets between songs or something.

[Gawwuf]

is there ANY unit that has spillover between patch changes?  WTF?

I had a Digitech multi effect unit that would do this, you had to have the same delay on the next patch but it worked great! 

 

perhaps we should ideascale this one too

[HonestOpinion]

I had a Digitech multi effect unit that would do this, you had to have the same delay on the next patch but it worked great! 

 

perhaps we should ideascale this one too

 

This seems like a great IdeaScale suggestion. I wonder if this was what Digital_Igloo was referring to a while ago when he hinted that L6 had some ideas on how to implement some form of delay trails without requiring additional DSP.

[radatats]

two IdeaScale posts on this idea already, vote them up...

 

http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Optional-Global-signal-path-Spillover/741927-23508

 

http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Delay-Reverb-Preset-spillover-on-Helix/727853-23508

[HonestOpinion]

two IdeaScale posts on this idea already, vote them up...

 

http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Optional-Global-signal-path-Spillover/741927-23508

 

http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Delay-Reverb-Preset-spillover-on-Helix/727853-23508

 

Voted!

[benevans1986]

The TC Nova System has spill over between presets.

[phil_m]

The TC Nova System has spill over between presets.

 

It uses a scheme similar to the Boss GT-10 mentioned above - it maintains a reverb and/or delay tail buffer when going from preset to preset. Yet, if you read the forums, there are still people complaining about the switching time between presets. That's the thing - they're two different things. Even in there is spillover, it still takes some time for a new preset to load. So if you're counting on coming in on the downbeat of the 1 with a new sound, you still would have to take some amount of delay into account when changing presets, even if there was some sort of spillover. I think something like scenes functionality would be nice. I don't, however, expect Line 6 to simply copy Fractal's implementation.

 

I think the thing that makes spillover between presets much more complicated on the Helix compared to some other units is the fact that there aren't dedicated delay and reverb slots in the Helix presets. A delay or reverb block can be anywhere in the signal chain, and there can be multiple instances. From a programming perspective, I can see why that would be more complicated. Perhaps there would be a way to tag certain blocks with a spillover parameter or something. But then you have the problem of what happens if you try to load a new preset where there isn't enough DSP capacity for the block to continue running... It's an interesting issue to solve.

[HonestOpinion]

It uses a scheme similar to the Boss GT-10 mentioned above - it maintains a reverb and/or delay tail buffer when going from preset to preset. Yet, if you read the forums, there are still people complaining about the switching time between presets. That's the thing - they're two different things. Even in there is spillover, it still takes some time for a new preset to load. So if you're counting on coming in on the downbeat of the 1 with a new sound, you still would have to take some amount of delay into account when changing presets, even if there was some sort of spillover. I think something like scenes functionality would be nice. I don't, however, expect Line 6 to simply copy Fractal's implementation.

 

I think the thing that makes spillover between presets much more complicated on the Helix compared to some other units is the fact that there aren't dedicated delay and reverb slots in the Helix presets. A delay or reverb block can be anywhere in the signal chain, and there can be multiple instances. From a programming perspective, I can see why that would be more complicated. Perhaps there would be a way to tag certain blocks with a spillover parameter or something. But then you have the problem of what happens if you try to load a new preset where there isn't enough DSP capacity for the block to continue running... It's an interesting issue to solve.

Ultimately I guess I don't understand why both the latency between presets issue and the delay trails/spillover issue can't be solved relatively inexpensively by throwing some additional hardware at it. As has been discussed elsewhere the DSP chips on the Helix are about $15 apiece in bulk. I could be way off here but it seems as if you added a couple of DSP chips and some memory you could knock out both problems. The additional DSP would handle the delay trails. The additional memory would allow you to cache at least an entire bank or two of presets such that at least all of the presets available for any two banks (8 footswitches) would be instantly available. That way at least the presets you have visible at any one time could be switched to instantly. That would primarily leave the physics of the footswitch as the main culprit for delays between preset switches; the software would not be an issue as it would be cached (preloaded). Caching is a strategy that is used all over the software world to dramatically increase response times and it is probably in use to some extent on the Helix but maybe it could be increased. Anyway, I know there are some really smart programmers over at L6 and they have marketing telling them what price point they have to hit. However, IMHO people would be willing to pay a bit more to get a device that is not hampered by inadequate hardware, even if that hardware is considered an industry standard or even cutting edge.

 

It is very frustrating to see the software out ahead of the hardware, like a tantalizing mirage of water and a beautiful girl that are just ahead but still not quite attainable. When are these units going to have enough hardware on board to truly get the job done? Seems like we are still one or two generations away. In the meantime, I still love the Helix, there is nothing else out there like it, and I prefer it to anything else out on the market right now. However it still has a ways to go before it resolves the issues of switching latency and spillover. The same two issues challenging most other manufacturers. No matter how they resolve it, it still requires compromises. I am sure even with the current hardware both issues can at least be improved with clever workarounds and code optimization. One would think if it was just an inexpensive hardware issue all the high end manufacturers would have solved it by now. I sure hope the reason isn't to save a few dollars and increase the profit margin because marketing knows people will buy these MFX units despite the issues. I don't understand why these issues have not been resolved by additional hardware, I am sure there are good reasons but nobody from the industry has stepped forward to explain the challenges or perhaps give us a slightly more expensive option that addresses them. Maybe the math just does not make good business sense and there would not be enough people willing to pay the extra to resolve these issues. Perhaps we just have to wait until the hardware gets so cheap and powerful that the manufacturers don't have to worry about it impacting the price point of the "Helix III". Until that day, the Helix rocks and I think it is the best "all in one" MFX unit on the market (but please don't stop improving it)!

[robbieb61]

I've been using my Helix for a few weeks now including on live gigs. I'm not noticing any discernible delay between patches.

[duncann]

Ultimately I guess I don't understand why both the latency between presets issue and the delay trails/spillover issue can't be solved relatively inexpensively by throwing some additional hardware at it. As has been discussed elsewhere the DSP chips on the Helix are about $15 apiece in bulk. I could be way off here but it seems as if you added a couple of DSP chips and some memory you could knock out both problems.

 

It is very frustrating to see the software out ahead of the hardware, like a mirage of water and a beautiful girl that are just ahead but still not quite attainable. When are these units going to have enough hardware on board to truly get the job done? Seems like we are still one or two generations away. In the meantime, I still love the Helix, there is nothing else out there like it, and I prefer it to anything else out on the market right now. However it still has a ways to go before it resolves the issues of switching latency and spillover. The same two issues challenging most other manufacturers. No matter how they resolve it, it still requires compromises. I am sure even with the current hardware both issues can at least be improved with clever workarounds and code optimization. One would think if it was just an inexpensive hardware issue all the high end manufacturers would have solved it by now. I sure hope the reason isn't to save a few dollars and increase the profit margin because marketing knows people will buy these MFX units despite the issues. I don't understand why these issues have not been resolved by additional hardware, I am sure there are good reasons but nobody from the industry has stepped forward to explain the challenges or perhaps give us a slightly more expensive option that addresses them. Maybe the math just does not make good business sense and there would not be enough people willing to pay the extra to resolve these issues. Perhaps we just have to wait until the hardware gets so cheap and powerful that the manufacturers don't have to worry about it impacting the price point of the "Helix III". Until that day, the Helix rocks and I think it is the best MFX unit on the market (but please don't stop improving it)!

 

 

I would suspect that it's simply not as easy as plopping down more processors and memory on the mainboard. There would be quite a bit more cost involved besides just the processors and memory, such as circuit layout, power requirements, heat dissipation, writing the firmware, and the man hours all of this would take, just to name a few. Suddenly it's not cheap at all.

 

Maybe a device like Helix with seamless preset switching is still one or two generations away (10-15 years?), but then what? What will that product be one or two generations away from achieving?

 

I myself have no real need for instantaneous preset switching, and the delay and reverb trails can be done within a preset. But, even when I do switch presets, from a distorted preset to a clean and vice versa, it is really quick and I can't even hear it; it's really smooth.

[HonestOpinion]

I would suspect that it's simply not as easy as plopping down more processors and memory on the mainboard. There would be quite a bit more cost involved besides just the processors and memory, such as circuit layout, power requirements, heat dissipation, writing the firmware, and the man hours all of this would take, just to name a few. Suddenly it's not cheap at all.

...

 

All good points and probably accurate. I don't know what the actual cost would be to get this done and that is the data point I am missing to truly understand the decisions to limit the hardware. Your points may be self evident given the direction various manufacturers have taken.  Again, perhaps we just have to wait until the hardware components run so cool, cost so little, and are so abundant that the hardware is no longer bottle-necking the software. The perplexing thing is that in the rest of the software world (non audio software), the hardware usually runs ahead of the software. It takes programmers a while to write software that takes advantage of the new processors and hardware innovations. With MFX units the reverse seems to be true; the hardware is constantly struggling to keep up.

[bazilica20]

It’s the biggest disappointment for me, so much that I’m returning mine (call me dramatic). Even when putting everything I use within one preset, I can’t switch between things how I want, which makes it unworkable live for me.

 

If Line 6 were to reintroduce scenes to the Helix that allowed effects states to be switched by one button, then I would definitely re-purchase.

A buddy of mine and me have just received these units today after 3 months...and the biggest disappointment is this dropout between patch changes so much so we are thinking of returning them....unacceptable for a live situation on a product of this price.

[PeterHamm]

A buddy of mine and me have just received these units today after 3 months...and the biggest disappointment is this dropout between patch changes so much so we are thinking of returning them....unacceptable for a live situation on a product of this price.

 

you need to be sure you can't do everything you need within a song by switching FX on and off within the patch. I know, for me, that things I used to need 3 patches to accomplish on HD 500 (which didn't have trails or instantaneous switching either, btw, I don't think any current solution does) I can do on only one now with Helix.

[chohman]

The way I get around this problem is to add my Reverb from the 1/4" outs to the Verb and then into a DI.. Not perfection but, its good enough to get me through.. just beware of clipping the Reverb unit.. Hope this helps..

Clark

[velvetscalpel]

I have to say that I'm utterly stunned to find that, having spent time checking out my new HELIX Rack (with Floor Control), that it won't spill delays over between patches. In the styles of music I play, I often need to switch between 2 very different sounds, and the ability to have delay trails as I start to play the next part is a deal-breaker for me. At this price point, it never even occurred to me that there WOULDN'T be this option, and I have a much cheaper rack modelling unit which DOES have this (and you don't have to jump through hoops, like having the same delay in both blocks, to get it, you just enable it in the global menu). I actually spent a couple of hours today looking through options, checking manuals, because I couldn't believe this is missing.

I would GLADLY lose a couple of effect blocks, if that would allow enough DSP to let delay trails happen. Maybe as a global option?

It looks like I may be joining the ranks of people sending their HELIX back, because I can see that the AX-8 scene function will allow me to do this.

All it would have taken to do this right, is to have a dedicated section of code+DSP for delay and reverb, which runs separately with an A/B to allow trails.

Sorry guys, but this to me seems like a colossal inexcusable error which spoils an otherwise gorgeous product.

[PeterHamm]

I have to say that I'm utterly stunned to find that, having spent time checking out my new HELIX Rack (with Floor Control), that it won't spill delays over between patches. In the styles of music I play, I often need to switch between 2 very different sounds, and the ability to have delay trails as I start to play the next part is a deal-breaker for me. At this price point, it never even occurred to me that there WOULDN'T be this option, and I have a much cheaper rack modelling unit which DOES have this (and you don't have to jump through hoops, like having the same delay in both blocks, to get it, you just enable it in the global menu). I actually spent a couple of hours today looking through options, checking manuals, because I couldn't believe this is missing.

I would GLADLY lose a couple of effect blocks, if that would allow enough DSP to let delay trails happen. Maybe as a global option?

It looks like I may be joining the ranks of people sending their HELIX back, because I can see that the AX-8 scene function will allow me to do this.

All it would have taken to do this right, is to have a dedicated section of code+DSP for delay and reverb, which runs separately with an A/B to allow trails.

Sorry guys, but this to me seems like a colossal inexcusable error which spoils an otherwise gorgeous product.

 

Not an error, merely a feature that isn't in there yet.

 

It's been requested by EVERYBODY, so you know it's probably going to come eventually, but if you can't wait for it, I think Line 6 understands. The AX8 is pretty sweet, so you're likely to not be disappointed.

[Digital_Igloo]

Sorry guys, but this to me seems like a colossal inexcusable error which spoils an otherwise gorgeous product.

If you're expecting gapless preset switching, only the DigiTech GSP1101 does that, so what you're saying is that every single processor ever made except for one has a colossal inexcusable error. AX8 allows for gapless scene switching, which is very different from gapless preset switching and can be approximated to some extent in Helix today.

[PeterHamm]

If you're expecting gapless preset switching, only the DigiTech GSP1101 does that, so what you're saying is that every single processor ever made except for one has a colossal inexcusable error. AX8 allows for gapless scene switching, which is very different from gapless preset switching and can be approximated to some extent in Helix today.

 

Actually, now that I've seen AX8 up close, most single "scene"-style specialness can really be approximated with Helix as it stands today.

 

X/Y states for an amp? Yup. Easy. Just set up two amps and switch between them.

 

X/Y states for an FX block? ditto.

 

multiple on/off commands with one footswitch? Easy.

 

I hope that something like scenes is coming, but actually, I don't need it to make 1, 2, 3, or even maybe 4 very different sounds in one patch.

 

The only processors that can do gapless preset switching are far inferior, technologically, to the stuff that's available now.

[robbieb61]

 

The only processors that can do gapless preset switching are far inferior, technologically, to the stuff that's available now.

 

You have to admit though...to us guys playing guitar, it seems very odd that my old Boss GT5 could do it ("it" being delay trails between presets) with no problem. :(

Seems like one of those kinds of things that would be at the very top of any effects processing unit for a guitarist. 

And yeah, I was able to "solve" it by having a "rhythm" and "lead" sound on the same preset for all my tones. But it's still a head-scratcher that older less powerful boxes can do it and the newer boxes with so much more processing power can't...at least to all of us guys who are just musicians and not computer wizards. :)

[velvetscalpel]

Okay, here's what I'm saying (and before I go on, I used to be International Distributor Support Manager for Steinberg some years ago, so I know a bit about coding, processor use, etc. :O) I already have a GSP1101, with the beta 63 firmware that allows for Impulse Responses to be loaded. It sounds very good, even when compared to some more modern units, and it does delay trails pretty much exactly as you would like: The delay fades out while you are already playing the first notes of a COMPLETELY different Amp+Cab+Effects setup. This unit was made, what, 2006/7? Computing power doubles every 18 months at the same price, so being kind, I'll say you can buy SIX times the processing power at the same cost today. In order to achieve delay tails (and probably reverb too) you only need a pair of processors dedicated to this function so you can A/B between them (how you handle the rest of the modelling is up to you). The real cost of new products is R&D, Software Engineering, custom manufacturing of displays, hardware, circuit boards, advertising, marketing, etc. To include this from the design stage would cost maybe $50 in chips.

So, ten years later, with processing power costing 1/6th the price, and it still hasn't occurred to anyone that this is one of the most desirable features guitarists want?

 

Yes, I could jump through hoops with a lot of editing and programming to achieve this result using patches with 2 chains of amps/effects (wasting all that processing power in another way) that are designed ahead of time for a particular performance, but that destroys any spontaneous creativity, and means I'll spend probably tens of hours programming to achieve something essentially simple.

 

Finally, at this price point, I'm just not prepared to accept it, as I can get great modelling from (e.g.) an Atomic Amplifire, and use a GSP1101 for delay/rev effects, with a lot of spare change left in my pocket.

 

My HELIX has just been collected by the courier for return/refund. Maybe the future will bring one unit that can do it all.

[PeterHamm]

Okay, here's what I'm saying (and before I go on, I used to be International Distributor Support Manager for Steinberg some years ago, so I know a bit about coding, processor use, etc. :o) I already have a GSP1101, with the beta 63 firmware that allows for Impulse Responses to be loaded. It sounds very good, even when compared to some more modern units, and it does delay trails pretty much exactly as you would like: The delay fades out while you are already playing the first notes of a COMPLETELY different Amp+Cab+Effects setup. This unit was made, what, 2006/7? Computing power doubles every 18 months at the same price, so being kind, I'll say you can buy SIX times the processing power at the same cost today. In order to achieve delay tails (and probably reverb too) you only need a pair of processors dedicated to this function so you can A/B between them (how you handle the rest of the modelling is up to you). The real cost of new products is R&D, Software Engineering, custom manufacturing of displays, hardware, circuit boards, advertising, marketing, etc. To include this from the design stage would cost maybe $50 in chips.

So, ten years later, with processing power costing 1/6th the price, and it still hasn't occurred to anyone that this is one of the most desirable features guitarists want?

 

Yes, I could jump through hoops with a lot of editing and programming to achieve this result using patches with 2 chains of amps/effects (wasting all that processing power in another way) that are designed ahead of time for a particular performance, but that destroys any spontaneous creativity, and means I'll spend probably tens of hours programming to achieve something essentially simple.

 

Finally, at this price point, I'm just not prepared to accept it, as I can get great modelling from (e.g.) an Atomic Amplifire, and use a GSP1101 for delay/rev effects, with a lot of spare change left in my pocket.

 

My HELIX has just been collected by the courier for return/refund. Maybe the future will bring one unit that can do it all.

 

I think that Fractal and LIne 6 have, separately, come to the same conclusion about this.

 

If you put a bunch of horsepower into the unit, you can either have it over-achieve in terms of number of blocks and flexibility, or you can hold back a bunch of that power so that you can have smooth trails. They probably ran the numbers and figured out that more people will buy the unit if you do the former than the latter, and designed accordingly.

 

Also, the amazing flexibility of Scenes on the Fractal products... do you REALLY think that Line 6 won't answer that since it's the most often requested feature as far as I can tell? I wonder if, when they do, a lot of folks won't be re-ordering Helices to replace the ones they sold or returned...

 

That said... choose what works for you. After comparing Helix to AX8 the other night, both are such awesome solutions you just can't go wrong.

[BigRalphN]

Nah, not really. Cause I hardly switch pathces anymore. I got all I need in 1 patch.

Same with my axe-fx. Just using scenes.

Can't even say if my axe-fx has spill over. Definitively a gap in amps, but maybe the delay spill over. Don't remember.

I believe there is spillover between scenes but not patches. I could be wrong since I am still learning the AX8.

[Digital_Igloo]

Okay, here's what I'm saying (and before I go on, I used to be International Distributor Support Manager for Steinberg some years ago, so I know a bit about coding, processor use, etc. :o) I already have a GSP1101, with the beta 63 firmware that allows for Impulse Responses to be loaded. It sounds very good, even when compared to some more modern units, and it does delay trails pretty much exactly as you would like: The delay fades out while you are already playing the first notes of a COMPLETELY different Amp+Cab+Effects setup. This unit was made, what, 2006/7?

I must've discussed this over 100 times already, but since you already know about coding and processor use, I'll be able to keep it short this time. ;)

 

Full disclosure—yes, we could've done preset spillover!

 

Introducing...

 

The all new Line 6 Helix—only $1499! With the XT models you know and love from such classics as POD XT, POD XT Live, and POD XT Rack, Helix now supports low-resolution 128/256-sample IR loading and a second SHARC DSP dedicated to nothing but preset spillover!

 

 

FWIW, Fractal's AxeFX II XL+ with dual 600MHz TigerSHARCs can't come close to doing preset spillover either. Know why? Because like every company on the planet (except for DigiTech, who presumably didn't have the time, resources, or desire to make a new modeling engine in 2006/7), they know that sacrificing at least half your performance for one feature would be incredibly foolish.

[BigRalphN]

All good points and probably accurate. I don't know what the actual cost would be to get this done and that is the data point I am missing to truly understand the decisions to limit the hardware. Your points may be self evident given the direction various manufacturers have taken. Again, perhaps we just have to wait until the hardware components run so cool, cost so little, and are so abundant that the hardware is no longer bottle-necking the software. The perplexing thing is that in the rest of the software world (non audio software), the hardware usually runs ahead of the software. It takes programmers a while to write software that takes advantage of the new processors and hardware innovations. With MFX units the reverse seems to be true; the hardware is constantly struggling to keep up.

He hit it on the head. If it were that easy everyone would be doing it all ready. I know the PC world tried dual processors in some high end computers. They had to have large power supplies and multiple fans. They still overheated easily.

 

It kills me when people always bring up the Nova System and that it has spillover. The Nova System is just a multi effect board. There are no amp or cab models. It is a totally different animal. There is no way to add effects by firmware update. It can dedicate 100%bof it's available processing power to the effects. It also can not string as many effects together. And it only has two drives and they suck. I had one. It sounded great at home but sucked live. It was just a pain (could have been the amp we used it in). It actually led to the no amp rule at church. We can't compare apples to oranges when wanting things in the Helix. This all ties in with DI's post where he mentioned how people cherry pick their favorite features from other devices and demand they are needed in Helix.

 

I think the bottom line is that to accomplish the current high quality modeling of amps and effects spillover isn't going to happen between patches. None of the top dogs do it. Your older units on some brands may have it in some form but they do not compare in tone or flexibility of the units we are comparing. I am sure in time this will change. Look how quick the technology has advanced to do what it does now. I am also sure Line 6 will eventually come up with some sort of workaround that will appease people on the Helix. It won't be exactly what you want but it will work. As for scenes, I love that feature on my AX8 and it would work, I am just not certain it is something that can just be added by firmware.

[PeterHamm]

...As for scenes, I love that feature on my AX8 and it would work, I am just not certain it is something that can just be added by firmware.

 

I got to see how scenes works the other night on AX8. Extraordinary!

[zooey]

I got to see how scenes works the other night on AX8. Extraordinary!

Cool. Is it easy to describe? I'm curious what exactly that means.

[PeterHamm]

Cool. Is it easy to describe? I'm curious what exactly that means.

 

Sure... you have X/Y states for all your pedals and X/Y states for your amp (it can be two totally different amps, btw, but only one at a time in AX8).

 

Scenes turns any or all pedals on/off in X or Y, changes between amp states, and if you set it up so that the bottom row is scenes and the top row is pedals, you can also turn pedals on or off separate from changing scenes or in addition. It's very well-thought out.

 

But...

 

...right now, WITHOUT scenes functionality, I can do probably 90% or more of that functionality in Helix as it stands today, to be honest. I've created patches with 2 different amps, and a footswitch to go between two different states of those amps, and switch between them, then I have the ability to turn on and off a bunch of different pedals and can vary those states with a footswitch or expression, too...

 

for me, I can already do WAY more than I need most times with just one patch now.

 

"Scenes" would be a different way to do it, and as it is implemented on AX8 is a very very cool feature. How Line 6 does it if they do it could be totally different, though, since they seem to like to go their own way.