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

Firmware changes that would offer MAXIMUM benefit ? My tuppenneth


d0stenning
 Share

Recommended Posts

Threads that discuss "whats coming next" and wish lists are legion.

 

 But here are some things that I consider generally true for most HELIX owners who've spent some time with this unit. 

 

MORE or IMPROVED AMPS or EFFECTS  will add **little** really benefit to how we use HELIX -  PRACTICALLY.  I argue its now Icing On The Cake. 

 

1)  We **already** have quite enough Amp models to work with.  If any guitarist worth their salt cannot get good sounds - **regardless** of style out to the models we already have - then the problems probably lie elsewhere - or the guitarist should consider selling it and going back to the "real thing" 

 

2) Although there **are** effects galore that could be added - and arguably the largest use for HELIX is for its non-amp-sim effects - not so much the amps - due to the convenience of this versus a huge pedal-board and **although** it appears the reverb models could be improved. Even so - fact is we really DO have quite enough to be getting on with.  

 

So again - more  or improved effects or amp models will not significantly improve the daily life, workflow and musical ways in which the HELIX gets used. THIS OUGHT NOT TO BE THE PRIORITY FOR the next firmware release.

 

So what would offer MORE and SIGNIFICANTLY MORE value to how we use the HELIX ? 

 

Its all the other stuff. 

 

So now we have SNAPSHOTSHere are some examples - n- which was the last major improvement - effecting ALL users irrespective of the sounds they use:  

 

We need the ability to set a wider range of parameters for which they operate across ALL presets - namely GLOBAL. 

 

Examples of this are: 

 

1)  Easier means of adjusting the USB 1/2 input volume ( rather than in Globals ) - since for people who use this - this volume will most likely be tweaked constantly a LOT  for example for each backing track 

 

2)  MIDI Controller settings for pedals - used for example to control external loopers, effects like H9 or Strymon, or DAW transport .

     Currently these are set up PER PRESET  which is a pain if one needs to use a whole range of presents with the same MIDE settings. 

   So - an option as to whether to use GLOBAL or PER-PRESET  MIDI CONTROLLER  settings needs adding.  

   Alternate solutions for this problem or "need'  can of course be figured out by L6 themselves but the main point is that  a solution is found.

 

3)  In similar fashion - the Global EQ option is great.   But we need more of them.  Presets For this would allow Separate Global EQs for amp cabinets,  studio monitors , Live PA or FRFR - or even different venues commonly used.

 

4)  Currently All of the SEND and RETURN  assignments are LOCAL to each preset.    Ideal for a lot of uses, but   there are many cases where one might want to use a particular stereo set of returns GLOBALLY across the board.  

 

For example - to play stereo backing tracks via an external device like the DIGITECH JamMan Solo XT or analog outputs form A PC or Laptop or MP3 Player into the HELIX. 

 

5)  Many users have requested some easy GLOBAL  means by which ANY preset that has a cabinet model in it - can easily either ACROSS THE BOARD - have the cabinets bypassed for those users who are using real external cabinets when gigging. but the cab-sims when recording or practicing.

 

  In addition to this - some have suggested that - for example a separate set of outputs, XLR/LINE or one of the SEND pairs - could be assigned GLOBALLY to output MINUS cabinets, while another pair output the entire chain.   In a way this is similar to 4 Wire - except we're not talking "wet/dry" here but  "Cab/No cab" -  but again - at heart what the need here is - is to make life easy for those who are likely to use and set up many patches where the requirement for routing - just like MIDI Control mapping - is likely to be required identically for ALL presets. 

 

6)  There has been some discussion suggesting that adding another layer to provide EQ curves for different volume levels would be greatly beneficial.  A forum user supplied some EQ curves which audiology has established can compensate for different playing-playing-back levels.

 

If none of the above were implemented - another stop-gap solution - would be to at least allow us in the HELIX Editor  to copy **parts** of one preset and paste to another preset.  So a workaround solution for 1-5  might be to. 

 

IN THE HELIX EDITOR: 

 

1) Allow the COMMAND CENTER  settings to be copied and pasted into a different patch. 

 

2) Allow ALL of a single BRANCH in a patch to be copied and pasted into another patch. 

 

3)  Allow TWO patches to be displayed AT ONCE in the HELIX EDITOR - to facilitate easier copying and pasting from one patch to another. 

 

To sum up -  I think   all of the above add far more value and would radically improve the ease of using HELIX in situations where we use a lot of patches. Particularly if prone to buying or trying out 3rd party presets or CustomTone  presets. 

 

Now - for those who happen to or advocated that the solution to this - is to just use ONE SINGLE PATCH FOR EVERYTHING.........  fine.

 

Maybe that works for you - but not everyone  - and in fact the above might be needed simply to get to the point where one feels ready to settle down to the ONE_PATCH_FOR_ALL  solution.  Which I think might be nice - but hard to get to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to disagree about the effects. The biggest chasms that really need to be addressed are the lack of filters and no auto-volume (or the equivalent, like adding a controller to make a volume block - or any block - into an auto-whatever - with pick dynamics!). HX reverbs would be nice, but not essential.

 

Other than that, your list looks interesting.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, I haven't found anything in your list that has been an impediment or encumbrance to me.  I could maybe see the value of being able to store and recall some different global settings, but I'm not sure I'd want that to be stored using the onboard Helix memory and potentially affect/limit memory that could be used for something else more productive.  Depends on how much it would take from the unit.  Recallable globals stored externally via the editor might be useful.  But I'm only guessing whether I would actually end up making use of such a thing.

 

Most of what you've pointed out might make more sense as Editor capabilities rather than onboard capabilities and not constrain the limited amount of onboard memory.

 

I might agree that we don't need a whole bunch of amps, but I do think there's room for improvement on some of the effects.  Not so much quantity but quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to agree on principle with the OP.   

  1. I would add the idea of better IR Management to the list along with more robust MIDI implementation as well.
     
  2. I would like to see SOMETHING for setting gain structure.   Even if it's just a few LED bars somewhere on the screen somewhere or just a very thin vertical line of LEDS on the the side of the screen.  Not sure if there is enough pixel resolution, there doesn't need to be much... but I doubt there is any argument against being able to accurately setup gain.
     
  3. I'd like to see a graphic RTA display for all EQ's.  A trick that Behringer (and I assume others) do is that as example on their XR18 mixer, when you select EQ, you get the sliders, but the bottom of the screen, and actually the background, is an RTA display.   This brilliant design allowis the user in the case of graphic eq, to put the centerpoint directly on a peak or valley and precisely adjust the Q and gain.   Gone are the high, upper-mid w/sweep, mid, lower-mid w/sweep, bass w/sweep type limited controls.. At the very least this should be on the Global EQ screen but any other multi-band eq as well.
     
  4. Finally from my list, is essentially to have the equivalent of an "insert" point on every amp/cab model.  A way to get a signal to the AMP section of a block, without going through the pre-amp much like the purpose of an effects insert point.   This would open up sound possibilities so exponentially.  The real world example happens every day where someone is using a preamp and feeding it directly to the return of a Marshall (or other) head avoiding or bybassing the preamp completely.  The ability to just bypass the preamp of any preamp/amp combo block would accomplish creating this signal path.

I know these are all tall orders but after seeing what's possible with snapshots...  It's beginning to look like the sky is the limit.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd want that to be stored using the onboard Helix memory and potentially affect/limit memory

 

 

The kinds and sizes of the data required for settings, preferences and the like  is minimal  in comparison to the storage required to hold the actual code for the software and  impulse responses.   This storage is all in FLASH (SSD)- not RAM - which only gets used for the software running - and for the audio storage requirements for the looper, delays and such.  

 

It would be nice to know exactly how much FLASH memory space there is on the HELIX. Given that  FLASH memory is very cheap ( think how much a couple of Gig's of memory-stick costs ).    There ** is ** another form of flash memory that behaves like RAM namely parallel access EPROMS ( or EEPROM ) but where the storage is persistent - but is much more expensive than normal SSD's   but I am doubtful that this is being used in the HELIX,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we need to focus on effective ways to use the capabilities we have rather than constantly adding new capabilities. There are many tips and tricks, best practices and usage patterns that need to be explored and documented. 

 

Functions tend to sell, but usability tends to determine overall outcomes. Line6 with Helix has done a great job balancing the two. Where to go next - possibly focusing  on

  1. Developing new amp models in the digital domain instead of just modeling/duplicating existing analog amps. Digital is a new world, lets explore using it.
  2. Same with effects - what can we do in the digital domain that would be impossible in the analog for a new generation of tones and effects? Time to start thinking out of the box.
  3. Providing more flexible control of individual amp models instead of using separate models - we shouldn't need a new model to turn on a bright switch or change a preamp tube's distortion voicing. This should be done with new controls in the amp models, not separate models. Then snapshots can do typical amp switching without having to switch patches. This means the parameters for an amp model should not necessarily be essentially the same.
  4. Expanding cab models to include mic position - cap, cap-edge and cone make a huge difference in tone. Mic choice and placement are a significant part of guitar tone.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think we need to focus on effective ways to use the capabilities we have rather than constantly adding new capabilities. There are many tips and tricks, best practices and usage patterns that need to be explored and documented. 

 

Functions tend to sell, but usability tends to determine overall outcomes. Line6 with Helix has done a great job balancing the two. Where to go next - possibly focusing  on

  1. Developing new amp models in the digital domain instead of just modeling/duplicating existing analog amps. Digital is a new world, lets explore using it.
  2. Same with effects - what can we do in the digital domain that would be impossible in the analog for a new generation of tones and effects? Time to start thinking out of the box.
  3. Providing more flexible control of individual amp models instead of using separate models - we shouldn't need a new model to turn on a bright switch or change a preamp tube's distortion voicing. This should be done with new controls in the amp models, not separate models. Then snapshots can do typical amp switching without having to switch patches. This means the parameters for an amp model should not necessarily be essentially the same.
  4. Expanding cab models to include mic position - cap, cap-edge and cone make a huge difference in tone. Mic choice and placement are a significant part of guitar tone.

 

Interesting.  I can get behind these.

I've been wanting to see new FX, AMPS that aren't just models of existing ones. I wanted to see the digital aspect explored.  More Line 6 originals using the flexibility of the digital world.

 

I can definitely see how #4 will be liked by a lot of people. 

 

That said, I still think stability is my number one, I think some nice new drivers would be good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The kinds and sizes of the data required for settings, preferences and the like  is minimal  in comparison to the storage required to hold the actual code for the software and  impulse responses.   This storage is all in FLASH (SSD)- not RAM - which only gets used for the software running - and for the audio storage requirements for the looper, delays and such.  

 

It would be nice to know exactly how much FLASH memory space there is on the HELIX. Given that  FLASH memory is very cheap ( think how much a couple of Gig's of memory-stick costs ).    There ** is ** another form of flash memory that behaves like RAM namely parallel access EPROMS ( or EEPROM ) but where the storage is persistent - but is much more expensive than normal SSD's   but I am doubtful that this is being used in the HELIX,

 

Yeah I'm not sure how or what the memory and operating system scheme is on the Helix, and I doubt L6 would be very forthcoming.

 

However, I'm not so sure a whole lot of convenient memory constructs like those available in PC's and smartphones really applies.  I would suspect things like memory management and and general operating environment functions are far more austere and probably more similar to real-time environments (like avionics, medical equipment, manufacturing automation, and such) than the generalized computing environments that most people are familiar with.  Just a guess on my part simply due to the need to minimize latency.  If so, it's not as much about the amount data, but the operating system code for storing, managing, accessing it and using it that also has to be built and take up memory space as well.

 

It's not like they can send out a software release that increases the hardware memory in the unit.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think we need to focus on effective ways to use the capabilities we have rather than constantly adding new capabilities. There are many tips and tricks, best practices and usage patterns that need to be explored and documented. 

 

 

Well in a way that is what I am asking  for - more effective - more workflow-enhancing ways of using capabilities - like MIDI Controller mapping - in a much more time-efficient manner. 

 

For example it is very time-consuming to set up MIDI Controller mappings for EXTERNAL devices such as loopers, delays , DAWs and advanced effects such as the H9.  To then have to repeat this laborious process manually for EVERY  preset one needs to use.  Its - frankly - a drag. 

 

And what happens when one needs to change the mappings ?    You have to go through EVERY preset making the same changes. This could quickly become very impractical.   We have a very useful feature - being able to send out MIDI messages via pedal - but a feature currently not implemented in the best way possible. 

 

<Functions tend to sell, but usability tends to determine overall outcomes. > 

 

That merely makes my point for me.  The MIDI output feature is great to have - but a pain to actually set up  if one needs exactly the same MIDI mappings for - say 10 or more presets - and might need to make minor changes to the mappings as time goes on.. 

 

The GLOBAL vs PRESET  thing I am emphasising in the OP  very much addresses the need for usability. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Besides some better reverb models, by biggest wish would be for a global blocks. For those like myself who use a preset for each song with consistent settings in between, the ability to connect blocks across presets so tweaking in one preset affects all the others would be invaluable and a massive time saver. The lack of it is why I only use external analog drives.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd most like to see.  HX reverbs. MIDI clock in and out, saving of "blocks" of effect settings,  improved IR management, and stability when hooked up via usb.  The Helix is pretty awesome, but these would make it even more awsome-er.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • I would add the idea of better IR Management to the list along with more robust MIDI implementation as well.

I believe IR management would be #1 on my list. I think it would help a lot of folks, and greatly help folks share Presets that include IR's. As-is, anyone that shares a preset that relies on one or worse - a collection of IR's (like the great Fremen big pack), one has to either recode all their existing patches that reference IR's in that range, or recode the Fremen pack to install his IR's into other slots.

 

And more IR space ...

 

This would also solve the problem of backing and restoring your IR's without without all the cumbersome work-arounds people use to make the IR slot numbers match up with their computer's file-system order.

 

It will kill 3 or 4 birds with one stone.

 

IdealScale for it: http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Improve-Impulse-Response-IR-Management/836099-23508

 

Several other IdeaScale's for increased IR space:

http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/More-space-for-IRs/809273-23508

http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Expansion-IR-cabs-User/830991-23508

http://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/256-IR-slot-memory/824324-23508

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OP has done a great job of kick starting the "what is coming next" conversation.  I would say that improved functionality is good, auto-volume would be GREAT, and maybe clarity for several items (reverb and delay blocks).  But if Line 6 takes a collective look at this thread with the "what if" as well as the "yes we can" then good things will be coming our way.  And I have a feeling when the next upgrade is "almost ready" DI may appear as if by magic to gently guide us.

 

Dennis

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...