latency when i'm changing patches

[trinitypc]

It drives me crazy that Line 6 does not believe this is an issue. It is disheartening as a long time customer. Yes, there are in patch solutions, but I prefer to switch patches like I have with every modeler I have owned. I hope it will be addressed instead of giving work around or reasons why it isn't an issue. I'm a loyal customer and it's an issue to me.

 

Just curious... What modelers have you owned that have NOT had a dropout when switching patches?    The only one I'm aware of is the GSP1101.

[trinitypc]

I would think by now it's fairly clear that the only way to implement seamless patch switching is to add a redundant DSP.  In the case of something like the Helix, which uses two DSPs, that would mean adding two additional processors to handle the switch-over.  One might assume that this should only add a $100 or so to the overall cost, but in addition to the hardware there is an immense amount of code needed as well.   Perhaps adding another $200 or $400 to the price just for this one feature is worth it to some.  I'd wager that most customers wouldn't be willing to dish out that much more $$$ for it however.

[mjorden]

I am not saying other modelers do not have latency between patches.  I'm saying the Helix is noticeable to the point that it is challenging to use in a live situation unless you want to "time" your changes.  I have not had this issue with other modelers I have used including:  Fractal II, Kemper Rack, POD Flextone 1x12, POD HD 500, HD 500x, POD X3, POD, POD 2.0, POD XT, POD XT Live, AXSys 212, Spider, DT25, an old Digitech model, a Zoom, and probably several others I can't remember.

 

I understand this is the nature of the beast, so I'll wait to see if things improve.  As you can see, I am a long time, dedicated Line 6 customer.   In the meantime, tell me this is normal and acceptable for a $1500 product...yes, these are fully loaded patches, and yes, some of this could be accomplished within one patch...but that's not how I prefer to set things up.  Never have had to before...maybe I just expected too much from Helix.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om67KGQn600

[Dshow]

I am not saying other modelers do not have latency between patches.  I'm saying the Helix is noticeable to the point that it is challenging to use in a live situation unless you want to "time" your changes.  I have not had this issue with other modelers I have used including:  Fractal II, Kemper Rack, POD Flextone 1x12, POD HD 500, HD 500x, POD X3, POD, POD 2.0, POD XT, POD XT Live, AXSys 212, Spider, DT25, an old Digitech model, a Zoom, and probably several others I can't remember.

 

I understand this is the nature of the beast, so I'll wait to see if things improve.  As you can see, I am a long time, dedicated Line 6 customer.   In the meantime, tell me this is normal and acceptable for a $1500 product...yes, these are fully loaded patches, and yes, some of this could be accomplished within one patch...but that's not how I prefer to set things up.  Never have had to before...maybe I just expected too much from Helix.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om67KGQn600

 

So did you try the mentioned ways to in patch switching? I'm just curious because you never mentioned you tried them:

 

Helix makes it easy to create multiple tones within the same preset. Try starting with 8 TEMPLATES > 02C TwoTones A-B or 8 TEMPLATES > 02D TwoTones Blend, both of which support two completely different tones with spillover delay and reverb.

[trinitypc]

I've never owned a Kemper, but I just located this video on YT.   It looks like the Kemper solution appears to be that it buffers the signal somehow as it switches over to the new patch.  Notice that while there's no audible dropout when switching patches, the switch seems to lag a half second or so behind pressing the footswitch...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VHzDTri_Gc

[phil_m]

I am not saying other modelers do not have latency between patches.  I'm saying the Helix is noticeable to the point that it is challenging to use in a live situation unless you want to "time" your changes.  I have not had this issue with other modelers I have used including:  Fractal II, Kemper Rack, POD Flextone 1x12, POD HD 500, HD 500x, POD X3, POD, POD 2.0, POD XT, POD XT Live, AXSys 212, Spider, DT25, an old Digitech model, a Zoom, and probably several others I can't remember.

 

I understand this is the nature of the beast, so I'll wait to see if things improve.  As you can see, I am a long time, dedicated Line 6 customer.   In the meantime, tell me this is normal and acceptable for a $1500 product...yes, these are fully loaded patches, and yes, some of this could be accomplished within one patch...but that's not how I prefer to set things up.  Never have had to before...maybe I just expected too much from Helix.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om67KGQn600

 

Not trying to minimize your concern, but responding to your statement, "tell me this is normal and acceptable for a $1500 product", I guess what I'd say is that the gaps in your video would not be an issue for me. I can't imagine a situation where I'd ever be changing patches while a chord was ringing out like that.

[gunpointmetal]

I complained about this issues when the 500 first came out, because I was coming from Boss, whose limited signal chain allowed near-instantaneous patch switching, and by the time I upgraded to the 500X, they had optimized the code to the point that, though still audible, it wasn't jarring enough to be performance hindering. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I get AWESOME TONES live using the A/B channel switching and patch changing between songs. But...

BUT!!!

 

BUTTTS!!!

 

I get AWESOMER TONES being able to use both DSPs on a single type of tone, and being able to use multiple clean or distorted amp models and more/different DSP-hungry effects. I can't use my awesomer tones live because I'm one of those weirdos that needs to switch from clean with filters/chorus/delay/'verb/EQ to UBER heavy distortion (preferably with a couple of amp models layered, front/back EQ, couple of gates, OD, and some times delay/reverb/modulation) on a, at times, note-to-note, measure-to-measure basis, which I can't do as the hardware functions now.

 

So, they workarounds do work, they just don't satiate my flavors the way would want them to. I understand some of the limitations of the hardware, and I suspect that over the next year or so L6 will add optimizations as they did with the 500/X to get it within MY PERSONAL TOLERANCES. Until then, I'll be using the workarounds, because the tone I'm sending out to the sound guy kills...it could just kill more, is all.

[HonestOpinion]

I am not saying other modelers do not have latency between patches. I'm saying the Helix is noticeable to the point that it is challenging to use in a live situation unless you want to "time" your changes. I have not had this issue with other modelers I have used including: Fractal II, Kemper Rack, POD Flextone 1x12, POD HD 500, HD 500x, POD X3, POD, POD 2.0, POD XT, POD XT Live, AXSys 212, Spider, DT25, an old Digitech model, a Zoom, and probably several others I can't remember.

 

I understand this is the nature of the beast, so I'll wait to see if things improve. As you can see, I am a long time, dedicated Line 6 customer. In the meantime, tell me this is normal and acceptable for a $1500 product...yes, these are fully loaded patches, and yes, some of this could be accomplished within one patch...but that's not how I prefer to set things up. Never have had to before...maybe I just expected too much from Helix.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om67KGQn600

I would be interested to see you add an example or two to the video from other MFX devices running exactly the same test as a source of comparison. It might be that the compromise for right now given the available hardware at this price point is that you get higher quality models with higher latency. I grant you, not an ideal scenario, and if the latency is substantially higher than other MFX (I have no idea if this is the case) it is an issue that should be addressed by L6 with a minimum of hemming, hawing, and fruitless and frustrating debate. As I stated before, I hope it can be improved somewhat with code optimization. I would think the amount of DSP used by a preset might play into the degree of latency. I am also curious if you get the same amount of latency with pretty much any preset that is fairly DSP intensive or are some presets much worse than others? In other words, does the degree of latency always correspond to how much DSP is used, is it worse with certain effects, or is it the same regardless of what blocks are used in the preset?

[spikey]

Only when I'm the "guitarist with folded arms in the back"  :D

 

 

LOL +1

[mjorden]

 

 

So, they workarounds do work, they just don't satiate my flavors the way would want them to. I understand some of the limitations of the hardware, and I suspect that over the next year or so L6 will add optimizations as they did with the 500/X to get it within MY PERSONAL TOLERANCES. Until then, I'll be using the workarounds, because the tone I'm sending out to the sound guy kills...it could just kill more, is all.

 

+1

 

Gunpointmetal said it better than me...all I'm trying to say is I love the Helix but it could be better for my personal preferences.  I'm officially done talking about latency.  Thanks for listening.

[sinistralx]

I am getting by with A/B tone template and one or two patch changes to trigger Variax models but I am used to the little gap for the 500x days so plan accordingly. The one thing i would love to see included is some kind of Variax effects block that will allow me to trigger a variax model within a patch. Would save having to switch patches at all mid song.

[Digital_Igloo]

I am getting by with A/B tone template and one or two patch changes to trigger Variax models but I am used to the little gap for the 500x days so plan accordingly. The one thing i would love to see included is some kind of Variax effects block that will allow me to trigger a variax model within a patch. Would save having to switch patches at all mid song.

 

It wouldn't have to be a dedicated Variax block—the easiest implementation would be to allow for controller assignments to Variax parameters already found in the Input > Multi and Input > Variax blocks. Unfortunately, as Variax parameters can be both global and per preset, and controller assignments only work with per-preset Home screen parameters, it doesn't work right now. I agree that it'd be very cool, although an even crazier thing would be to assign a single momentary footswitch to completely retune each string independently. Instant B-Bender, Drop-D, or DADGAD for only a few notes!

[sinistralx]

It wouldn't have to be a dedicated Variax block—the easiest implementation would be to allow for controller assignments to Variax parameters already found in the Input > Multi and Input > Variax blocks. Unfortunately, as Variax parameters can be both global and per preset, and controller assignments only work with per-preset Home screen parameters, it doesn't work right now. I agree that it'd be very cool, although an even crazier thing would be to assign a single momentary footswitch to completely retune each string independently. Instant B-Bender, Drop-D, or DADGAD for only a few notes!

 

I can barely cope with dealing with amp and guitar switching let alone thinking about momentary tuning switches!!!!!! LOL

but do you think we could potential see this kind of functionality in the future? Seems like a logical option for Variax owners.

 

cheers!

[Digital_Igloo]

I can barely cope with dealing with amp and guitar switching let alone thinking about momentary tuning switches!!!!!! LOL

but do you think we could potential see this kind of functionality in the future? Seems like a logical option for Variax owners.

 

It was something we wanted for 1.0, but it just wasn't in the cards. It's toward the top of my personal wish list, as the flexibility it would afford Variax owners is pretty mind-boggling...

 

Plus, the fact that controllers can be assigned to all Home page parameters except Variax parameters is something that totally gives me facial tics.

[sinistralx]

It was something we wanted for 1.0, but it just wasn't in the cards. It's toward the top of my personal wish list, as the flexibility it would afford Variax owners is pretty mind-boggling...

 

Plus, the fact that controllers can be assigned to all Home page parameters except Variax parameters is something that totally gives me facial tics.

Sounds promising! Cheers

[kts222555111000]

It was something we wanted for 1.0, but it just wasn't in the cards. It's toward the top of my personal wish list, as the flexibility it would afford Variax owners is pretty mind-boggling...

 

Plus, the fact that controllers can be assigned to all Home page parameters except Variax parameters is something that totally gives me facial tics.

As an aforementioned Variax owner this is probably the best thing I have read on this forum. Please keep it up towards the top of your list ;)

[JTSC777]

LOL +1

I recently told the non-gigging arms folded guitarist in front of me that he is not one of the " music police".

 

After that I then told him to get " bent".

[spikey]

I recently told the non-gigging arms folded guitarist in front of me that he is not one of the " music police".

 

After that I then told him to get " bent"

yawn... Im sure you told him...

[njglover]

So I just wanted to add my two cents to this whole debate about patch switches taking time. Is it annoying? Sure! But you know what? My Mesa Boogie Roadster also has a slight dropout when switching channels, and that's a $2200 tube amp, no weird DSP switching or anything! My point is that life ain't perfect, and the more complicated your setup, the more likely you are to run into these problems. If you can't work around them, then this isn't the product for you. Hit the switch a beat earlier, run multiple settings in a single patch, whatever you have to do to make it work for you, that's just the way it is. If even my $2200 Mesa Boogie requires these workarounds, then you can deal with it on a $1500 modeler.

 

Which I am very hopeful will sound just as good so I can stop lugging that monstrosity to gigs...

[cruisinon2]

So I just wanted to add my two cents to this whole debate about patch switches taking time. Is it annoying? Sure! But you know what? My Mesa Boogie Roadster also has a slight dropout when switching channels, and that's a $2200 tube amp, no weird DSP switching or anything! My point is that life ain't perfect, and the more complicated your setup, the more likely you are to run into these problems. If you can't work around them, then this isn't the product for you. Hit the switch a beat earlier, run multiple settings in a single patch, whatever you have to do to make it work for you, that's just the way it is. If even my $2200 Mesa Boogie requires these workarounds, then you can deal with it on a $1500 modeler.

 

Which I am very hopeful will sound just as good so I can stop lugging that monstrosity to gigs...

Amen.

[spikey]

I haven't read the whole thing so plz forgive, but the Axe FX II had something called "scenes" that had 5 or 6 different settings/stomps/FX's you could use in the same patch, and IIRC it switched between them pretty fast.

[BigRalphN]

It drives me crazy that Line 6 does not believe this is an issue. It is disheartening as a long time customer. Yes, there are in patch solutions, but I prefer to switch patches like I have with every modeler I have owned. I hope it will be addressed instead of giving work around or reasons why it isn't an issue. I'm a loyal customer and it's an issue to me.

An issue for one person is not an issue for others. Line 6 clearly acknowledges that this exists . And no one has ever said that research is not ongoing to improve things. What they do say is that with the current chips on the market that ALL high end modeling products have it. I have heard it in AxeFx and Kemper (which is a totally different process). I am sure they will eventually improve dsp optimization and also new chips will evolve or new ways to achieve it will come about. They offer workarounds to help people. So if people want the quality and level of technology then they have to accept what is there for now. Again, they never once said they are not trying to,improve things.

 

Everyone does have different uses. If we ever go back to,large sets I will set up a seperate patch for each song. With the level of store and the set lists is ideal for anything I would do. I can create anything in one patch.i can't imagine having to change so many times within one song that it would ever be an issue for me. But that is just me. Others have different needs.

 

I think people need to chill out. The problem is that every new person who comes to the forum asks the same quest ion. It has been explained so many times that people are getting intense. Line 6 guys....I would create a sticky or something with DIs explanation and maybe a few other comments on this. Since no one will search when they come'to,the board just refer them to the posts or stickies on the topic and do not reply beyond that. That was it will stop.spme of these. People ar always going to insist there is a need even if the technology does not exist . Heck we all do it at times. People,that feel entitled because they spend $1400 are not going to be reasoned with (honestly guys that isn't pointed at people in this thread but I,have seen that many times in other threads).

[BigRalphN]

I do think Line 6 needs another moderator or two assigned to the Helix forum. Or maybe since I am retire I am here to,often..lol. Anyway I think a lot of topics could be merged and it might help in some of the repeated questions. Hopefully this forum software I foms a person if a topic he started has been merged.

[amsdenj]

Some, maybe most, of the best guitarists on the planet use one or two amps live and a pedalboard. Helix can do that easily in one patch. So it should be possible to in most cases make all changes within a song, and that need to be done instantaneously, while maintain effect tails,  within a single patch. 

 

I know a lot of us are playing covers, and we'd like to reproduce the performance and tone of the original. But I don't worry about that so much anymore. I'm more interested in my own tonal identity, and feel free to play my own solos with my own tones on cover songs. I try to keep the original intent of the song, but don't worry about the exact tone or every note. I think that makes it more interesting for the audience and for me. Plus I rarely play the same solo twice (mostly because I can't memorize them anymore). 

 

So I don't do a lot of patch switching at all. Rather I want to present an identity and consistency to the audience that reflects my relationship with them. This feels more musical than a lot of patch switching in a song and worrying about effect tails and patch switch time. But I can see why that's important to some people too.

[jaminjimlp]

OK Get your mouse ready to mark "problem solved" or is it "best answer"....

 

Here is what you need to do: buy 2 Helix's and an A - B Switch box connect them accordingly,

set up your patches so that when you need to change from one to the other all you do is hit the A B Switch

then wile you are still playing change the preset on the Helix your not currently playing through

and then hit the A B Switch when its time for the next "Tone"

if the changes are really fast between tones in a particular song well those "tap dancing" lessons your mama made you go to when you were a kind just paid off big time!!!

and if that's not complicated enough for you. DI can make a MIDI controlled A B Switch and you can link the 2 Helix's together with the A B Switch and you can use a Midi controller with a computer attached to already have the programmed preset list send a signal to the Helix you are about to use with the preset your about to go to. (this is where a well trained roadie would come in handy and could do all this back stage for you as long as he doesn't get to drunk before or during the show)

 

There now that wasn't so hard was it. I mean really, wasn't it obvious where I was going with this?!? (try to envision me patting myself on the back) WOW I'm like some kind of Einstein of MFX units I just know Line 6 is trying to contact me and give me a job right now as you are reading this....  

 

Yeah I know it would REALLY work but the point is lighten up guys... I hope you got a laugh out of this as I did wile writing it.

 

The weird thing is I had thought of this scenario back in 1992 when I had bought an ART SGX 2000 and a friend used it for a gig and said to me "there's to much time between presets for me to get one" who knew 25 years later we would still face the same issue. 

 

I do all I need to for each song in 1 preset and find it is sufficient for me.

[PeterHamm]

I haven't read the whole thing so plz forgive, but the Axe FX II had something called "scenes" that had 5 or 6 different settings/stomps/FX's you could use in the same patch, and IIRC it switched between them pretty fast.

 

Been asked for a lot. I hope that we get something like this in Helix. You can already ALMOST do that kind of thing with footswitches.

[fukuri]

To me the obvious way round is to have the delay spillover

If the looper can persist from patch to patch with no break then why not a delay?

Its 90% of the time not an issue for me unless I'm using the variax

I need to be able to switch between my acoustic patch and my electric patch quickly for a couple of songs and that's where it punishes me

[PeterHamm]

To me the obvious way round is to have the delay spillover

If the looper can persist from patch to patch with no break then why not a delay?

Its 90% of the time not an issue for me unless I'm using the variax

I need to be able to switch between my acoustic patch and my electric patch quickly for a couple of songs and that's where it punishes me

 

I'll bet money delay spillover is coming to Helix about the same time it comes to Axe FX. It requires an entirely new architecture.

[silverhead]

....

If the looper can persist from patch to patch with no break then why not a delay?

.....

Because they occupy different, dedicated areas of RAM. The looper can continue to play back during a preset change because it is stored separately from the preset. But the delay settings are in the preset, and that area of RAM gets completely reloaded, wiping out the previous settings and replacing them with the new preset settings.

[phil_m]

I'll bet money delay spillover is coming to Helix about the same time it comes to Axe FX. It requires an entirely new architecture.

 

I believe that the Axe FX can do spillover by using blocks that are fixed from one preset to another. It's not automatic, though. It has to programmed in. So in that sense, I think the Helix could maybe do something similar. As mentioned above, the looper block kind of works like that now, so it seems to me that might at be a possibility. I'll say it again, though, spillover isn't going necessarily make the preset load time faster. If you are changing presets and expecting to hear the new tone immediately, spillover won't change that. It will just make the transition a little smoother.

[spikey]

 

 

"I'll bet money delay spillover is coming to Helix about the same time it comes to Axe FX. It requires an entirely new architecture."

 

 

OK so since I don't have my Helix yet (they are still building and packaging it) let me ask some of you to do a simple test. 

 

Take 2 patches. Make them identical except for naming. Then switch between them while playing. Is there enough lag in general to cause concern?

 

Then add a delay to "one" of the patches. Did the switching lag increase enough to hear the difference between the 1st test,  and this one?

 

I ask this just to give us and Line 6 more information to work with, rather than just scream "its broke"...  ;)

[jaminjimlp]

To me the obvious way round is to have the delay spillover

If the looper can persist from patch to patch with no break then why not a delay?

Its 90% of the time not an issue for me unless I'm using the variax

I need to be able to switch between my acoustic patch and my electric patch quickly for a couple of songs and that's where it punishes me

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/a6ja1ccg9opnsvu/AAANth50j9N_AJMVN2ykjfJua?dl=0

 

Try this, it is an acoustic preset I made that has the 2 paths separate with just moving the EXP 2 (if you don't have an EXP just re-assign it to EXP1) the other sound is kinda well ... metal I am sure you will need to tweak it to your liking as this was saved when I first made the preset and have tweaked it a lot more for myself. the Taylor ir needs to be at the 5th position in you ir list (I think) my guitar sounds better or more like an acoustic using both pick ups or the neck pick up. I have EMG 81 and 85. I have found this preset to be all I need when I play at church.

[fukuri]

I appreciate the path but I specifically need to go from the variax 12 string model to the les paul model and then change a bunch of presets

It's for 'wanted dead or alive'

[silverhead]

I appreciate the path but I specifically need to go from the variax 12 string model to the les paul model and then change a bunch of presets

It's for 'wanted dead or alive'

I don't know who wrote and recorded that song but I wonder if they play it live. If so might be interesting to know if they manage it with a single guitar player and no latency during all those tone changes. And then, if so, what equipment are they using and at what cost? In other words, are our expectations aligned with reality?

[fukuri]

I don't know who wrote and recorded that song but I wonder if they play it live. If so might be interesting to know if they manage it with a single guitar player and no latency during all those tone changes. And then, if so, what equipment are they using and at what cost? In other words, are our expectations aligned with reality?

What in the world are you talking about? That's typical of the zero empathy smart arse answers that don't actually move anything along here.

 

I'd also love to have the bands lighting rig, road crew and stage setup but I don't so we are talking about what I have now and how that can be improved

 

The band in question is Bon Jovi (you may have heard of them)

Yes they do it live with two guitarists and a keyboard player

I'm able to do a passable version live with the advent of the great new technology available to me

I'd be able to do it live without a jarring gap when I switch from the acoustic model to the electric model for the solo, if either

There was some kind of delay spillover or

Some way of switching the variax models without having to go to another patch (which I know can be done.. It just hasn't been)

 

In summary I'm glad I can do the track but with a few tweaks it would be even better

 

I doubt Ritchie Sambora is a Helix user ..

[PeterHamm]

I'm able to do a passable version live with the advent of the great new technology available to me

I'd be able to do it live without a jarring gap when I switch from the acoustic model to the electric model for the solo, if either

There was some kind of delay spillover or

Some way of switching the variax models without having to go to another patch (which I know can be done.. It just hasn't been)

 

I hope and expect that that functionality will be given you at some point. A LOT of guys want better Variax control.

I was tempted to say that you are asking too much from one box, but... technically... I think it will be possible with Helix all by itself. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

[fukuri]

Iron Maiden have 3 guitarist

I still am able to use the Helix to do a more than passable version of the trooper

Kiss have 2 guitarist but I use the Harmoniser and the momentary switches to switch keys and allow me to do the harmonies to Detroit rock city

 

If Line6 had the attitude of not stretching expectations we wouldn't even have had a pod much less a Helix

 

I seem to be misaligned as someone who things patch switching silence is a deal break that needs fixed

It's not I have plenty of workarounds. There is just that one scenario which could be fixed that would really help me out

 

Am I expecting too much? I don't think so but I'm pushing the technology ... That's how progress is made

[silverhead]

What in the world are you talking about? That's typical of the zero empathy smart arse answers that don't actually move anything along here.

 

..

 And I suppose that is the type of response that 'moves things along here'? Congratulations on further alienating folks here.

 

There is nothing 'smart arse' about my post. Just observing (again) that there are limitations to any Helix-like device, and your efforts to push the envelope is fine. It's the language you are using while going about it, and the denigration you feel free to throw around to anyone who points out that you have high expectations within the current limitations.

[fukuri]

I'm clearly aware there are limitations. I'm not sure why you feel the need to point it out especially in such a patronising manner

That's what provokes a reaction from me

I've been pushing the limits of technology for the last 30 years. There are always limitations. Am I not allowed to talk about them?

[fukuri]

I don't know who wrote and recorded that song but I wonder if they play it live. If so might be interesting to know if they manage it with a single guitar player and no latency during all those tone changes. And then, if so, what equipment are they using and at what cost? In other words, are our expectations aligned with reality?

Read it again with the knowledge I'm covering a Bon Jovi song

Is it really what you meant?