Very disappointed.

[mjorden]

I am totally onboard with gunpointmetal.  I have always set my modelers up to have a clean, dirty, saturated, and solo patch.  Worked great in previous Line 6 modelers, my Fractal, and my Kemper.  Everyone keeps talking about workarounds (just hit the button a half beat ahead) or ways to do it within a patch, but that is not the issue.  The issue is I have a $1500 processor that can't execute what I would consider a basic operation. My buddy has an AX8 coming today.  I am curious to see how it operates and the latency.  I have zero complaints about the sound quality of the Helix.  Just wish I didn't have to tap dance to play a song.

[capdoogie]

Unfortunately it's the nature of the cyber world game. My 500x, amplifi150 and helix all were lagging in the instant preset switching.

[TheDaveDaveDave]

To be fair, Fractal and Kemper users have been complaining gaps between preset changes for a long time - a quick Google search will show you.  Only recently have the new "scenes" feature where you can flip or pan between two sets of settings for all the effects in your patch, and it sounds like it's a feature that the Line 6 crew is looking to deliver as well.   I really don't find it hard at all to build a patch that has 4 great one-tap tones to walk through, with various amps, levels of gain and combinations of wet/dry.   It's definitely easier than I had it with my Pod G-System, Pod XT Pro,  Lexicon or Digitech 2120.  

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd love instantaneous patch changes as well, it's just that I haven't seen it yet!

 

Cheers!

 

I am totally onboard with gunpointmetal.  I have always set my modelers up to have a clean, dirty, saturated, and solo patch.  Worked great in previous Line 6 modelers, my Fractal, and my Kemper.  Everyone keeps talking about workarounds (just hit the button a half beat ahead) or ways to do it within a patch, but that is not the issue.  The issue is I have a $1500 processor that can't execute what I would consider a basic operation. My buddy has an AX8 coming today.  I am curious to see how it operates and the latency.  I have zero complaints about the sound quality of the Helix.  Just wish I didn't have to tap dance to play a song.

[phil_m]

I am totally onboard with gunpointmetal.  I have always set my modelers up to have a clean, dirty, saturated, and solo patch.  Worked great in previous Line 6 modelers, my Fractal, and my Kemper.  Everyone keeps talking about workarounds (just hit the button a half beat ahead) or ways to do it within a patch, but that is not the issue.  The issue is I have a $1500 processor that can't execute what I would consider a basic operation. My buddy has an AX8 coming today.  I am curious to see how it operates and the latency.  I have zero complaints about the sound quality of the Helix.  Just wish I didn't have to tap dance to play a song.

 

The AX8 has a similar gap between presets, but it does offer scenes, which may or may not help, depending on how drastically different your tones are from one another. With the scenes on the AX8, you can switch effects and the amp model from the X to Y state, which is nice. Switching the amp model state isn't seamless, though. If you wanted to use a different amp model for each of those four sounds you mentioned, you couldn't do that seamlessly with the AX8.

[HonestOpinion]

To be fair, Fractal and Kemper users have been complaining gaps between preset changes for a long time - a quick Google search will show you. Only recently have the new "scenes" feature where you can flip or pan between two sets of settings for all the effects in your patch, and it sounds like it's a feature that the Line 6 crew is looking to deliver as well. I really don't find it hard at all to build a patch that has 4 great one-tap tones to walk through, with various amps, levels of gain and combinations of wet/dry. It's definitely easier than I had it with my Pod G-System, Pod XT Pro, Lexicon or Digitech 2120.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd love instantaneous patch changes as well, it's just that I haven't seen it yet!

 

Cheers!

I have to agree with you

I am totally onboard with gunpointmetal. I have always set my modelers up to have a clean, dirty, saturated, and solo patch. ... I have zero complaints about the sound quality of the Helix. Just wish I didn't have to tap dance to play a song.

I have to agree, despite all its numerous attributes and superior physical interface, the fact that the Helix does not have scenes and does have latency between presets really needs to be addressed in the short run with scene functionality. I am also somewhat frustrated with current state of the art DSP still limiting how many amps, cabs, and effects I can have within a preset although this applies to all MFX currently on the market. Granted I like a lot of flexibility within a preset but I am not trying to stuff the kitchen sink in. I found myself juggling a preset like crazy yesterday trying to get everything I wanted within it set up. I finally managed to get all three of the Matchless amps going through one cab with a few effects but I really had to pick and choose and leave one or two FX out I would liked to have included. And of course, ultimately the preset still requires some small degree of tap dancing, also switch LED rings states don't clearly reflect which channel of the Matchless is on due to the lack of scene functionality. The Helix is amazing but it needs scenes! I know Line6 can't tell us what is coming because it would commit them to something that perhaps can't be delivered but any bread crumb leading us to believe scenes are in the Helix's near future would be enormously appreciated!

[PeterHamm]

...I am also somewhat frustrated with current state of the art DSP still limiting how many amps, cabs, and effects I can have within a preset although this applies to all MFX currently on the market...

 

Easy problem to solve, though, the old fashioned way... the way we used to do it back in the day...

 

more gear... duplicates of stuff... not very economical though.

[HonestOpinion]

Easy problem to solve, though, the old fashioned way... the way we used to do it back in the day...

 

more gear... duplicates of stuff... not very economical though.

 

I still love the idea of optional daughterboards with additional memory and DSP that could be purchased for added functionality.  As has been discussed before however, they would require additional software development, and I am not sure if they would be profitable for companies that depend on customers periodically purchasing the latest and greatest new version of the hardware.

[fukuri]

Here's some pictures I found:

http://www.giampaolonoto.it/david-gilmour-effects/

 

Later he's using this for effect switching

http://www.petecornish.co.uk/fxboards.html

In answer to the question it's because he's building patches out of 20 grands worth of physical gear designed by specialists and looked after by technicians

[Dshow]

In answer to the question it's because he's building patches out of 20 grands worth of physical gear designed by specialists and looked after by technicians

Yeah, I've got that - Just liked to show him how it looks like :-)

[Perfect]

I am also concerned about the lag switching between patches. I currently use a dozen different patches live and don't want to have to find different methods of tap dancing for getting the sounds I need during songs - I would rather concentrate on playing. As yet I haven't used the Helix at a gig, but at rehearsal the lag/drop out is really noticeable and annoying on certain songs.

 

The place I bought the Helix has a one month return policy and I was very close to taking it back because of this. However, I do like it otherwise and hope Line 6 can improve the situation with future upgrades/work arounds so it looks as though I'm staying onboard. 

[JTSC777]

When I play in a trio the patch change gaps are not acceptable.In those situations I typically do not use any of these modelers.

 

My little Boss GP10 being the exception as it changes patches stupid fast.

 

Instead I use a modest pedalboard or my M13. I may not be able to change between 3 modeled amps with reverse reverbs and 2 chorused delays but at least I can turn stuff on and off whilst singing and keep the guitar droning away. In a larger band the lag between patches is not a problem.In a smaller ensemble context it can be a real distraction especially if you are expected to deliver a vocal tune and play the guitar.

 

My HD500 is pretty quick between patches too but more and more I just use it with one of my amps and the 4 cable method.

 

I find that sometimes even with all these guitar " supercomputers " we have available finding work arounds a is a very important skill.

 

I agree though $1500 dollars is a lot of money. I am sure L6 engineers will eventually shore this up somewhat with firmware updates but

I will wait until the Helix has been around a while longer before I jump into the Helix. It looks and sounds like one hell of an amazing unit.

Something I could never have imagined in 1972 when I started playing.

[PeterHamm]

Instead I use a modest pedalboard or my M13. I may not be able to change between 3 modeled amps with reverse reverbs and 2 chorused delays but at least I can turn stuff on and off whilst singing and keep the guitar droning away...

 

It should be mentioned that the HD 500 could effectively switch between two or three different scenarios similar to that on the M13 without leaving the patch, and that the M13 is also a unit with no spillover, essentially, if you switch between two delays on one of the 4 processors for instance...

[tungrocker]

even Zoom G3X has no gap between changing patchs.
And my old Eleven Rack 's perfect in changing presets.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh57ekzoGYk
Just had a gig tonight in 1st time with Helix, and the delay changing presets is unacceptable

[spikey]

To be fair, Fractal and Kemper users have been complaining gaps between preset changes for a long time - a quick Google search will show you.  

 

 

True, that used to be an issue with Fractals AXE FX II  >  XL+, but if you close the editor window and used scenes to switch in and out, it stopped being an issue. And that was over a year ago back when I had that unit. 

[TheDaveDaveDave]

even Zoom G3X has no gap between changing patchs.

And my old Eleven Rack 's perfect in changing presets.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh57ekzoGYk

Just had a gig tonight in 1st time with Helix, and the delay changing presets is unacceptable

Several months back, after this thread died, Helix implemented the snapshot feature which solves this problem. Check it out, and I bet you'll be MUCH happier!

[hideout]

even Zoom G3X has no gap between changing patchs.

And my old Eleven Rack 's perfect in changing presets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh57ekzoGYk

Just had a gig tonight in 1st time with Helix, and the delay changing presets is unacceptable

 

 

Neither of those two devices, especially the Zoom, is doing as much detailed computational work as the Helix is.  If you want more instantaneous patch switching, you'll have to live with crappy modeling.  We may be waiting a couple of years before chip speeds will allow for gapless patch switching while maintaining the quality of the modeling.  That's just the reality we live in.

[zooey]

Yes, but snapshots.

[hideout]

Yes, but snapshots.

Indeed! Thank Line6 for Snapshots!!

[hefonthefjords]

Snapshots can basically do anything. They made Helix for me. Sometimes it requires some time and fiddly programming to get it to do what you want but it will do what you want once you figure out the workflow.

[spikey]

Snapshots added to Helix was great. I'm just glad Fractal implemented "Scenes" a year or 2 beforehand to see its worth.  ;)

[Rewolf48]

Just as well that the Line 6 M20d Mixer doesn't have scenes the store a predefined set of mixer and effects setting that can be instantly recalled.

 

No wait - yes it does, and has had since it was launched in 2012 - which is a month before Fractal implemented it on Axe FX in FW9:

 

http://line6.com/support/page/kb/_/live-sound/stagescape-m20d-mixer/video-scenes-and-setups-r137

 

Of course neither of them were first with the concept

 

Just saying...  :P

[tungrocker]

Several months back, after this thread died, Helix implemented the snapshot feature which solves this problem. Check it out, and I bet you'll be MUCH happier!

Tks Dave, i'm happy now with Snapshot, just used Helix 3 days :)

 

Neither of those two devices, especially the Zoom, is doing as much detailed computational work as the Helix is.  If you want more instantaneous patch switching, you'll have to live with crappy modeling.  We may be waiting a couple of years before chip speeds will allow for gapless patch switching while maintaining the quality of the modeling.  That's just the reality we live in.

Right, and im happy with Snapshot now \m/

[katerlouis]

Snapshots are great.

But putting a clean, crunchy, metal and acoustic part in one preset is just impossible. 

Are there any news on this one? Is there the slightest chance that the hardware of the Helix could handle lag-free patch-switching at some point in the future? (Please forgive if this question has been answered already; this thread is freaky-long)

 

And does anybody know how Stevic MacKay from Twelve Foot Ninja handles this issue? If you listen to their music or see him perform live.. this is highly likely also impossible with one patch per song.

[amsdenj]

Snapshots are great.

But putting a clean, crunchy, metal and acoustic part in one preset is just impossible. 

 

This is exactly what I do. I tend to play most of the night on one patch that's configured to do what I need. I use amp drive, and two distortion blocks to setup clean, drive, overdrive and distortion tones, just like you would with a pedalboard got gain stage into a clean amp. I use four snapshots in the patch, one for standard guitar, another for Open-G tuning (slide), another for acoustic guitar, and the last for a Leslie in a parallel path. The acoustic snapshot turns off the amp and IR blocks, and changes the EQ setting in the block at the end of my signal chain. Works great with a Variax JTV-69S.

 

I have another built for purpose acoustic patch, and use this for songs that focus on acoustic or use a different open tuning. However, my normal guitar patch works great with my Variax for switching between acoustic and electric within a song.

[HonestOpinion]

Snapshots are great.

But putting a clean, crunchy, metal and acoustic part in one preset is just impossible. 

Are there any news on this one? Is there the slightest chance that the hardware of the Helix could handle lag-free patch-switching at some point in the future? (Please forgive if this question has been answered already; this thread is freaky-long)

 

And does anybody know how Stevic MacKay from Twelve Foot Ninja handles this issue? If you listen to their music or see him perform live.. this is highly likely also impossible with one patch per song.

 

I think you could pull off your electric path with "clean, crunchy, and metal" using snapshots depending on what blocks you want to use in addition and how many amps/IRs. Take a look at this template. It essentially gives you access to up to 100% of the processing for both DSP chips and up to 24 blocks for your electric guitar but you will want to leave a bit of resources for your acoustic path which, for most users, requires way less DSP.  This template was designed for people who wanted to actually switch guitars from an acoustic to electric within the same preset but it could probably be adapted by changing or removing one of the inputs if you are trying to get the electric and acoustic sounds from one guitar. There is always the Variax which could pull this off easily.

http://line6.com/customtone/tone/1460280/

[specracer986]

I agree it's possible. I have a patch with both a clean JC120 and an Uber amp. I can go from mild to wild in that patch and I use it often.

[katerlouis]

Okay, let me rephrase this. 

Although it is possible, it is a limitation. There are amps / blocks that require a lot of processing power. If you want 3 different amps in 1 song, the one-patch approach becomes really tricky. Is that limitation a bad thing? Not necessarily; but once you got used to the sheer freedom of the Helix, I'm not surprised people are disappointed. 

 

Do you guys think the hardware is generally capable of lag-free patch switching?

If yes: Can we expect a software update making this possible in the near future? (this year)

[zooey]

Not sure about Kemper, but Fractal stuff doesn't do lag-free patch changes either. That's why they have an equivalent to snapshots, where all modules in the patch are loaded when you load the preset, but the can still switch individual blocks on and off.

[PeterHamm]

Do you guys think the hardware is generally capable of lag-free patch switching?

If yes: Can we expect a software update making this possible in the near future? (this year)

 

 

My prediction is that it will not happen. People generally don't buy a high end unit like this (or Kemper or Axe FX) if that unit castrates itself to provide this feature, and that's the only way it would happen.

 

that said, nearly all my patches have acoustic and electric at the same time, and the electric has two or three or four levels of gain. all in one patch. Easy.

[silverhead]

Here's some info from another thread.......elaborating on PeterHamm's castration reference......

http://line6.com/support/topic/27530-rapid-muted-sound-when-changing-patch/

 

 

POST A: This subject has been discussed forever in these forums, even before Helix line and it's still not 'fixed'. It's always a compromise between low latency/spillover in patch changes, or use the available processing power toward having more variety of amps and effects for the same unit cost. The latter always wins out.

 

POST B: Yes, it's been discussed forever but the 'fix' is still misunderstood. What's required to resolve this issue is to have two independent processors in the device and only use one at a time for any preset. The other processor remains idle, waiting for the user to change presets. At that time the idle processor is loaded with the new preset while the active processor keeps producing sound. A few milliseconds later, when loading is complete, the previously idle processor becomes active with the new preset, and the previously active processor becomes idle, awaiting another preset change.

 

It's not a simple choice of amps/effects vs. processing power. It's a choice of the number of internal processors and their use. You can't eliminate the gap on a POD HD device by reducing the number of amp/fx selections. It is a single processor device and the gap is unavoidable while a new preset is being loaded.

 

Helix, being a dual processor device, could be turned into a no-delay-between-presets device. The cost would be that it would effectively become a single processor device. The current ability to use two independent processors simultaneously would be removed. Each preset would be constrained to use only one processor while the second processor would be used for the instantaneous preset switching as described above.

 

To me that's much too high a cost to save a few mIlliseconds latency.

[jbuhajla]

If I ever have the need to switch presets mid song (very rare), I always find a 500ms gap musically to make it happen. I know the hardware can't be instantaneous, so I will make it work on my end. 

[katerlouis]

Here's some info from another thread.......elaborating on PeterHamm's castration reference......

http://line6.com/support/topic/27530-rapid-muted-sound-when-changing-patch/

 

 

POST A: This subject has been discussed forever in these forums, even before Helix line and it's still not 'fixed'. It's always a compromise between low latency/spillover in patch changes, or use the available processing power toward having more variety of amps and effects for the same unit cost. The latter always wins out.

 

POST B: Yes, it's been discussed forever but the 'fix' is still misunderstood. What's required to resolve this issue is to have two independent processors in the device and only use one at a time for any preset. The other processor remains idle, waiting for the user to change presets. At that time the idle processor is loaded with the new preset while the active processor keeps producing sound. A few milliseconds later, when loading is complete, the previously idle processor becomes active with the new preset, and the previously active processor becomes idle, awaiting another preset change.

 

It's not a simple choice of amps/effects vs. processing power. It's a choice of the number of internal processors and their use. You can't eliminate the gap on a POD HD device by reducing the number of amp/fx selections. It is a single processor device and the gap is unavoidable while a new preset is being loaded.

 

Helix, being a dual processor device, could be turned into a no-delay-between-presets device. The cost would be that it would effectively become a single processor device. The current ability to use two independent processors simultaneously would be removed. Each preset would be constrained to use only one processor while the second processor would be used for the instantaneous preset switching as described above.

 

To me that's much too high a cost to save a few mIlliseconds latency.

 

Well, if I am forced to make 4 playstyles possible in 1 patch, you could argue that this is only a quarter of Helixes processing power per style (if the styles differ that much, which can be the case!); So I'd really prefer the one whole processor on 1 playstyle.

 

Is it technically possible to make dual-processing OR single-processing+no-lag optional in the settings?

And maybe even switchable per bank? (Not asking for it, curious if it would be possible)

 

What bothers me is, that this issue is new to me; I don't remember having latency in patch switching on my SpiderV 120 + FBV3; please correct me if I'm wrong here.

[silverhead]

....

 

Is it technically possible to make dual-processing OR single-processing+no-lag optional in the settings?

And maybe even switchable per bank? (Not asking for it, curious if it would be possible)

 

...

That's a good question and I have no idea about the answer. I think only Line 6 designers/developers could answer that. I expect it may be technically possible but practically not worth the cost/effort. With Snapshots able to meet almost all needs for lag-free switching the ROI probably just isn't there. The business question is: how many ADDITIONAL Helix units would be sold if this specific option were available? Probably very few imho - far less than cost recovery.

[BigRalphN]

I get to show my age and sort of go back to an earlier comment. First let me say snapshots are great. They are possibly better implemented than scenes on my AX8, though that is a discussion for another topic. The complaints have to be players that want to switch to huge complex patches within songs. The P&W scene that I am mostly involved in these days are using huge amounts of effects but with snapshots I have never had an issue accomplishing what I wanted within a song. If you talking between songs that should not ever be an issue. That is what a frontman is for. A little quick chatter while changes are  made.  What I see here are people wanting the unit to do things not currently possible with any technology. At least at quality levels Helix, or AX8 provide. I have not researched so this is a guess  but I imagine bands like Brit Floyd that use AXFX for huge shows most likely use multiple units with  midi switching similar to how we switched things in the huge racks  back in the day. I would think the Helix rack would do the same but I have not had need to investigate. But how many of us can afford a pair of rack units and a controller (three if you want a backup).  All of that would still be cheaper, or at least easier, than the huge racks of gear used in tube 70s and 80s.. I remember when I did the Beach Boys back  in 88 that I thought we would have an easier setup, but it wasn't. They had multiple amps and fairly large delay and reverb racks .  We could easily do what they did with one patch and scenes  on the Helix. 

[HonestOpinion]

...

Is it technically possible to make dual-processing OR single-processing+no-lag optional in the settings?

And maybe even switchable per bank? (Not asking for it, curious if it would be possible)

 

...

This is an intriguing and ingenious idea although I suspect Silverhead is correct about the lack of ROI for what would probably be an enormously intensive piece of development. I would love to see one of the modeling companies do this in the future. This would provide spectacular flexibility for the user allowing them a choice between more complex and DSP intensive patches with snapshots and spillover, or the alternative to use simpler less DSP intensive patches with seamless preset switching and spillover. You should write this idea up in IdeaScale!

 

That's a good question and I have no idea about the answer. I think only Line 6 designers/developers could answer that. I expect it may be technically possible but practically not worth the cost/effort. With Snapshots able to meet almost all needs for lag-free switching the ROI probably just isn't there. The business question is: how many ADDITIONAL Helix units would be sold if this specific option were available? Probably very few imho - far less than cost recovery.

I agree with most of this comment and I would characterize snapshots as a great option to, but not a replacement for, seamless preset switching until (if ever) the hardware gets fast and cheap enough to provide both sufficient flexibility and sound quality in a preset and also allow seamless preset switching and spillover. I don't believe snapshots "meet almost all needs for lag-free switching" although I vastly prefer snapshots for fast switching and spillover to the current alternative. An alternative which, as others have pointed out including Line6 staff, hamstrings a device and forces much simpler presets with less DSP available for everything including amps, effects, cabs, and IRs. You can see the impact of this decision with the new Headrush device. This is why I think katerlouis's has a fantastic idea which would allow the user to pick the solution preferred for a given song, complex snapshots or simpler presets that dedicate half the DSP to lagless preset switching and spillover. Sounds like it would require a hella job of coding though.

[zooey]

Is it technically possible to make dual-processing OR single-processing+no-lag optional in the settings?

And maybe even switchable per bank? (Not asking for it, curious if it would be possible)

You can do this today, in a limited sense. For single processing no lag, build patches with different sounds on path 1 and path 2. You can then use a footswitch, a pedal, or snapshots to such our date between them.

 

The "real" version of that, where every patch is single-path and there's no lag switching between any two patches, isn't possible with any current modeler, afaik, and i think I probably would.

 

You could partly fake that with two noodlers [EDIT: modelers!] and a way to switch between them, but that'd be a pain.

[HonestOpinion]

You can do this today, in a limited sense. For single processing no lag, build patches with different sounds on path 1 and path 2. You can then use a footswitch, a pedal, or snapshots to such our date between them.

 

The "real" version of that, where every patch is single-path and there's no lag switching between any two patches, isn't possible with any current modeler, afaik, and i think I probably would.

 

You could partly fake that with two noodlers and a way to switch between them, but that's be a pain.

 

How do you get gapless preset switching with the Helix? Snapshots is the only way I know and that is not necessarily substantively the same as a preset switch. The Headrush claims to have gapless preset switching with spillover but that feature came at the cost of a much simpler signal path that allows fewer blocks and amp, effect, IR options (and perhaps inferior sound quality?) so that they could dedicate half of the DSP to seamless switching and spillover between presets. For now manufacturers seems to be taking either the Digitech RP-1 or Headrush approach - sacrifice flexibility for gapless preset switching, or the Helix or Axe approach of max processing power for flexibility and superior sound at the expense of gapless preset switching. I still prefer the Helix's approach but a hybrid architecture that allowed either approach seems like it would be a great thing.

[PeterHamm]

How do you get gapless preset switching with the Helix? 

 

 

Not available. Just like Axe II. Not gonna change...

[HonestOpinion]

Not available. Just like Axe II. Not gonna change...

 

Agree and that was kind of my point. Optimizations may reduce the gap a bit along the way.  Overall given the compromises required I prefer the Helix approach of max flexibility and sound quality with snapshots providing a great if not always optimal option for gapless switching.

[HonestOpinion]

You can do this today, in a limited sense. For single processing no lag, build patches with different sounds on path 1 and path 2. You can then use a footswitch, a pedal, or snapshots to such our date between them.

...

 

Ah, on further examination I see what you are getting at. That in effect, using half the DSP for gapless preset switching and spillover is pretty much the same as using two separate paths and just switching between the two paths, due to the fact that the Helix uses one DSP chip for each path. I guess once again we are back at waiting until the hardware is so fast and powerful that you can't wring any more discernible sound quality out of it, you can use more blocks than you would ever hope to need, and you have enough processing power left over to also get gapless switches and spillover between presets. Until that happens Helix chose the right approach.