HX Stomp FAQ

[Andresayala]

Hi! I just bought my HX Stomp yesterday. Such a great pedal. My question is: can I use my Strymon Ojai R30 with the Stomp?. I read in the first page that could work fine with the Strymon Zuma. I don't know if it's the same with the Ojai. It has 500mah per output.

 

Thank you so much!

[rainweaver]

On 10/14/2018 at 11:19 PM, tzd0 said:

Hi, I have a question which I don't think have been directly addressed yet.  My objective of asking is to understand if there is any difference in INPUT and OUTPUT levels between HX Stomp and HX Effects:

 

Question: If I configured HX Stomp with say 3-6 pedal effects in a chain (no amp or cab) and plug it into front of a real amp, can I expect it to sound exactly the same as HX Effects with the same 3-6 pedal effects (at the same settings) in a chain plugged into the same amp, or will it sound different because the INPUT/OUTPUT levels/impedance may be different between the two boxes?
 

Hi,

I signed up to ask pretty much the same question. I don’t need or want to use amp/cab modeling at all, but the Stomp’s compact form is too enticing to pass up.

Should I go for the HX Effects instead? Or can I go for a Stomp and simply forget about the modeling part?

Thank you.

[phil_m]

56 minutes ago, rainweaver said:

Hi,

I signed up to ask pretty much the same question. I don’t need or want to use amp/cab modeling at all, but the Stomp’s compact form is too enticing to pass up.

Should I go for the HX Effects instead? Or can I go for a Stomp and simply forget about the modeling part?

Thank you.

 

The Stomp works great as an FX only platform. It really just depends on what level of control you want within a preset. On the HX Effects, you have six footswitches to work with, and you can switch between all footswitch modes via the footswitches. With the Stomp, there’s only three footswitches, and there are limitations as far as switching between modes.

[rainweaver]

5 minutes ago, phil_m said:

 

The Stomp works great as an FX only platform. It really just depends on what level of control you want within a preset. On the HX Effects, you have six footswitches to work with, and you can switch between all footswitch modes via the footswitches. With the Stomp, there’s only three footswitches, and there are limitations as far as switching between modes.

Thank you for your reply, appreciated.

 

I plan on using it via a BOSS ES-8 along with other pedals. As long as I can control it via midi in pretty much every way I’m good.

[emswally]

I recently purchased HX effects and then this comes out.  Lol  WTH.  Will

HX effects ever get the Cabs etc...

 

Thanks 

Great products by the way

[SteveFrance]

14 hours ago, emswally said:

I recently purchased HX effects and then this comes out.  Lol  WTH.  Will

HX effects ever get the Cabs etc...

 

Thanks 

Great products by the way

 

I don't  really think so, they are two distinct familly products. One to be integrated in a pedal board and the other one to be a baby limited helix to bring everywhere or play in your bedroom...

[Andy_Snow]

Dear Line6ers,

 

I have a Keth McMillen Softstep 2. Will I be able to get it going on the HX Stomp using MIDI over USB?

Can the HX Stomp provide power for the Softstep over the USB-Port?

[phil_m]

3 hours ago, Andy_Snow said:

Dear Line6ers,

 

I have a Keth McMillen Softstep 2. Will I be able to get it going on the HX Stomp using MIDI over USB?

Can the HX Stomp provide power for the Softstep over the USB-Port?

 

No, it would work if both were connected to the same computer, but the Stomp isn’t a USB host.

[Digital_Igloo]

On 10/16/2018 at 6:19 AM, SteveFrance said:

I think it's a huge strategical mistake from L6.

Maybe if you're not privy to Line 6's strategy. I happen to neck deep in it, so let's bite:

• VDI is really expensive. Adding VDI to Stomp would instantly force us to charge $50 more. (Not that VDI is automatically a $50 proposition, but the way price points work with regard to margin, you're typically targeting a specific COGS that ensures you don't tip over the edge to the next price point, which in this case, would be $649). So this one's important: The number of Variax users who would be willing to spend an extra $50 for VDI is tiny compared the number of non-Variax users who would AVOID buying HX Stomp because it's $50 more. We have the metrics to back this up, so don't think I'm pulling this out of thin air
• VDI (both the ethercon jack and related circuitry) is really large. Adding VDI to Stomp would totally blow up its footprint. The entire product is no longer a stompbox—it's a smaller modeler. That flies in the face of its number two design pillar: Must be no larger than the average large-ish stompbox on a pedalboard. And similar to above, the number of Variax users who would be willing to deal with the extra footprint is tiny compared to the number of non-Variax users who would avoid buying HX Stomp because it wasn't quite stompbox-sized
• VDI is power-hungry. Adding VDI would preclude the ability to power HX Stomp from third-party external DC power supplies
• HX Stomp is a stompbox. "Micro Helix" is but one of its many use cases

VDI was never in the cards for HX Stomp.

 

[Kilrahi]

3 minutes ago, Digital_Igloo said:

Maybe if you're not privy to Line 6's strategy. I happen to neck deep in it, so let's bite:

• VDI is really expensive. Adding VDI to Stomp would instantly force us to charge $50 more. (Not that VDI is automatically a $50 proposition, but the way price points work with regard to margin, you're typically targeting a specific COGS that ensures you don't tip over the edge to the next price point, which in this case, would be $649). So this one's important: The number of Variax users who would be willing to spend an extra $50 for VDI is tiny compared the number of non-Variax users who would AVOID buying HX Stomp because it's $50 more. We have the metrics to back this up, so don't think I'm pulling this out of thin air
• VDI (both the ethercon jack and related circuitry) is really large. Adding VDI to Stomp would totally blow up its footprint. The entire product is no longer a stompbox—it's a smaller modeler. That flies in the face of its number two design pillar: Must be no larger than the average large-ish stompbox on a pedalboard. And similar to above, the number of Variax users who would be willing to deal with the extra footprint is tiny compared to the number of non-Variax users who would avoid buying HX Stomp because it wasn't quite stompbox-sized
• VDI is power-hungry. Adding VDI would preclude the ability to power HX Stomp from third-party external DC power supplies

VDI was never in the cards for HX Stomp. Because HX Stomp is a stompbox.

 

 

Thank you for confirming what a lot of us had theorized. It makes sense.

 

I do think there is a possibility for some sort of device that would give Variax owners more instant control of their right - something that connects to an app that lets you change models or tuning on the fly, etc. that we'd just eat up . . . BUT like anything else, I have no idea how successful Variax products are in general to you let alone how financially successful a modification product would be.

 

If nothing else, including some sort of Bluetooth/other connection to an app in future Variax models might be something to keep on the drawing board if it isn't already.

 

FYI loving the Stomp so fare . . .

Edited October 25, 2018 by Kilrahi
Clarification

[ElPapo]

Why not ONE of the line 6 modelers have a chorus model that you have control on parameters such low cut and cut on the actual chorus algorithm ? 

[Kilrahi]

1 hour ago, Tsachou said:

Why not ONE of the line 6 modelers have a chorus model that you you have control on parameters such low cut and cut on the actual chorus algorithm ? 

 

I'm curious, what is the advantage to doing this at the pedal level rather than at the master EQ level?

[ElPapo]

1 hour ago, Kilrahi said:

 

I'm curious, what is the advantage to doing this at the pedal level rather than at the master EQ level?

The best way  for me to explain this would have to be a short video clip , I'm new here not sure if I'm  allowed to . One thing though if you have a chance to check out either an MXR analog chorus or the BOSS CE-5 they both have  low and high cut on them you could really see it's not the same . On the pedal doing so affect the actual sound of the chorus effect and any separate EQ  affects the patch . Hope you get what  I'm trying to explain . 

[scallybert]

9 hours ago, Kilrahi said:

 

I'm curious, what is the advantage to doing this at the pedal level rather than at the master EQ level?

 

You have a chain of various 'processors' [FX, amp, cab, etc] between your guitar and your ears.

 

Into this chain, you're inserting 'EQ'. [EQ is basically 'gain' that is dependent on frequency, plus some overall gain.]

 

If all the processors were 'linear', *where* you put the EQ wouldn't matter; nor would the order of the processors.

 

However, they are definitely not all linear. [Distortion effects are an obvious case, and you can see this in that pre & post gain behave quite differently - roughly 'drive' vs 'volume'] 

 

So, being able to insert EQ at various points in the chain is a massively powerful tool. [eg the ability to put EQ after the amp & cab - which you could only otherwise do in a physical recording studio.]

[SteveFrance]

13 hours ago, Digital_Igloo said:

Maybe if you're not privy to Line 6's strategy.

 

Of course, i'm not and i ain't gonna say that i know things better than others

I'm just talking about my own humble customer route and the way i've followed to buy so many L6's devices ;

Two years ago, i've bought a firehawk FX to change my pedal.

I've discovered the "Variax" input (this device is cheaper) and it was a revelation.

Whaou, i could change per preset my guitar, passing by an electric one to a banjo or acoustic....It's a killing for gigging ! I've taken a step in the modeling world so let's go entirely !

So i bought a standard and a Yamaha DBR10 for FRFR.

Then, i wanted to upgrade and buy a Helix LT.

i was always missing that feeling of amp in the room so i've just received my new powercab plus....

 

All that to say that this simple Variax input made me buy a lot of stuffs, made me love the brand and, i have to say, linked to it somewhere .....

I can't say the stomp enters in that magical rig, it's surely a good modeler (with its limitations) and it opens the field of competitors.....

It's not L6 bashing, i only express my astonishment and disapointment about this product which could have been a really really good backup solution.

I believe that who can do more can do less, and some could have followed the same way as i did.

i imagine it would have changed the stomp size and this factor was probably one of the main specifications .....

[alitz]

The VDI input on my Firehawk 1500 was one of the main reasons that I decided to purchase (for the second time) a Variax guitar. My first foray into Variax was before having any other Line 6 products and I decided to purchase one because if it was good enough for Steve Howe, it was good enough for me. But after coming to the realization that to have full control of the features, I really needed to get one of the Line 6 processors with VDI, I sold the guitar. Now, several years later, I come across the Firehawk 1500, after first going to the Amplifi 150. I decided that it would be nice again to have my entire guitar and amp collection in one, albeit big and heavy, rig. 

The 1500 gave me much more control on the amp of the parameters than the Amplifi and with the FBV3 controller, I could control it without lifting my hands from playing.

I had read about also adding a Helix to the equation to get those extra HD sounds but It seemed a little crazy to pay $1500 for an effects processor that costs almost as much as the guitar and amp combined.

Enter the Stomp, which at first, seemed a perfect addition until I noticed the lack of VDI. However, after a little more poking around, and several posts on these forums, I found that I could connect the Stomp into the FX loop of the Firehawk 1500 and not have to sacrifice the VDI input, the FBV3 footcontroller or the original Firehawk effects included on the amp. In addition, I could run amps and cabs from either processor, have many more options for running accoustic and bass, and also adds all the blocks available on the Firehawk beyond the 6 block limitation on the Stomp. It seems that the only sounds not available through this connection method are the 4cm setups on the Stomp that take advantage of chains that use that method specifically.

So yes, the VDI connection does lead to more business for Line 6 for those of us affected by GAS regularly.

Now I am just waiting for my Stomp to arrive after missing out on the first wave and I am also waiting for my Variax to be repaired since I bought it used (with swapped out Mags) and found out that the 5 way switch would not cycle through the models.(no Sitar(:!

[Kilrahi]

Yeah, I'm in the same boat as both of you (Steve/Alitz) and I don't think that Line 6 blames us for being disappointed. You'd have to be naïve to do that. All products take compromises and their belief (based on some research - which is far more than I've done) not including a VDI port was the best bet for the device. They'd argue it serves more customers needs, but I doubt they'd argue it serves every customer perfectly, and some completely fall through the cracks.

 

The good news is it interacts with devices like the Firehawk, Firehawk 1500, POD HD 500x, and Helix really well and I've found I'm able to retain Variax control through those (not without SOME compromises though, as Alitz pointed out - I still haven't been able to figure out a way to get a four cable to work while retaining Variax control - but I haven't quite given up yet as I have a new idea for tonight).

 

As a nice room unit the HX Stomp is incredible and part of that is its small size. Last night I attached my Variax to the PC and reprogrammed it with my favorite custom tunings, and then used the Stomp. The battery wasn't so bad (I literally hadn't touched it in forever but once it was charged up, worked great). Switching tunings with the knobs isn't so bad once you get the hang of it. I still despise creating an alternate tuning from the Variax itself and will continue to wish on stars for a better method, but hey, first world problems I guess.

[phil_m]

7 minutes ago, Kilrahi said:

The good news is it interacts with devices like the Firehawk, Firehawk 1500, POD HD 500x, and Helix really well and I've found I'm able to retain Variax control through those (not without SOME compromises though, as Alitz pointed out - I still haven't been able to figure out a way to get a four cable to work while retaining Variax control - but I haven't quite given up yet as I have a new idea for tonight).

 

In order to get 4CM to work, you just have to make it so the device with the VDI is the first thing you plug into. So, using the 500X as an example (the Firehawk setup would be identical), you'd go:

 

--> = cable

 

Variax --> 500X VDI input -> 500X FX Send --> HXS Input -> HXS FX Send --> 500X FX Return -> 500X Output --> HXS FX Return -> HXS Output to PA

 

Where you put the FX Loop blocks in the various devices depends on which device you want to use for amp modeling.

[RickyW84]

Hey Guys!

Just registered and really excited to get my hands on a Helix Stomp! 

Just wondering if it's possible to say have the helix stomp in snapshot mode then use an external footswitch to go up and down presets? say a boss FS6? 

 

Likewise in Stomp mode? 

 

Thanks in advance! 

[kdwight]

Has anyone tried using a Tech 21 Midi Moose to get more presets at one button? Or any other midi controller? If so, how was it to setup? Thanks

[edupellejero]

Does the USB interface works at the same time recording your guitar and playing a backing track through the phones?

[tgangso]

Can the stomp be used as an interface for native?

[phil_m]

22 minutes ago, tgangso said:

Can the stomp be used as an interface for native?

 

Most definitely.

[Josephang264]

Able to check any dual foot switches to recommend for the hx stomp for fs4 and fs5?

[pott24]

14 hours ago, Josephang264 said:

Able to check any dual foot switches to recommend for the hx stomp for fs4 and fs5?

 

Boss FS6 (battery) and FS7 (wall-wart) work a charm.

[royp]

Sorry for the repetition if this question is already answered somewhere:

 

If I use the hx stomp fx loop blocks, do they count against the 6 block maximum within a given patch.  -   i.e. - if I connect outboard devices using OUT-L+R and IN L+R, and I want to use those loops fully within a patch, how many blocks will I have to use from the 6 available.

[elycartwright]

Hi there!

 

I just got the HX Stomp this week, and I'm hoping to be able to set it up as a kind of hybrid rig for electric & acoustic guitar.

I know there are patches and algorithms that will work well for both, but a key factor for me is output routing.

 

Would it be possible (either now or in a future firmware update) to assign outputs on a patch by patch basis?

 

Basically, I'd like to be able to route all of my electric guitar patches as a mono output to the Left output and my acoustic patches as a mono output to the Right output.

 

That way I can have two lines run to the FOH independently for gain/mix purposes on their end and switch guitars pretty seamlessly.

 

Any thoughts would be much appreciated. 

 

Thanks!

-ElyC

[Kilrahi]

1 hour ago, royp said:

Sorry for the repetition if this question is already answered somewhere:

 

If I use the hx stomp fx loop blocks, do they count against the 6 block maximum within a given patch.  -   i.e. - if I connect outboard devices using OUT-L+R and IN L+R, and I want to use those loops fully within a patch, how many blocks will I have to use from the 6 available.

I mean, it all depends on the complexity so I can't immediately say. Depends on the positions of all your gear. Could be zero blocks or one or more.

[phil_m]

2 hours ago, elycartwright said:

Hi there!

 

I just got the HX Stomp this week, and I'm hoping to be able to set it up as a kind of hybrid rig for electric & acoustic guitar.

I know there are patches and algorithms that will work well for both, but a key factor for me is output routing.

 

Would it be possible (either now or in a future firmware update) to assign outputs on a patch by patch basis?

 

Basically, I'd like to be able to route all of my electric guitar patches as a mono output to the Left output and my acoustic patches as a mono output to the Right output.

 

That way I can have two lines run to the FOH independently for gain/mix purposes on their end and switch guitars pretty seamlessly.

 

Any thoughts would be much appreciated. 

 

Thanks!

-ElyC

 

You can have different output routing on a preset per preset basis right now. If you’re not using one of the effects loops, it would probably be a little easier to use one of the FX Sends for the output for your acoustic patches, although you could do the panning thing if you want.

[stekrae]

On ‎10‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 6:55 AM, pott24 said:

 

Thanks; that's indeed exactly what's in the manual and options. Guess there's no override then. Shame; here's hoping future updates allow us to do that! It'd be great to have FS3 always be Stomp 3 (or whichever) + Tuner on long press... or have the Tuner on any footswitches!

 

One of the great advantages of the HX Stomp is its compact size. Although the FS3 can be configured differently, for me this is not quite mature. In stomp mode the FS3 would only really make sense for me if it could be assigned as follows:

 

press once = Preset Up
Press twice = Preset Down
long press = Tuner

 

The references to expansion with FS4 + 5 rob the HX Stomp of its compactness. Bending down during the performance is not an option. So Line6: please improve!

 

I have added this to the line6 ideascale. Feel free to vote.

 

https://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/HX-Stomp-Make-FS3-more-versatile-Preset-Up-Pr-Down-Tuner/943038-23508?submitted=1#idea-tab-comments

 

[royp]

On 11/10/2018 at 2:25 PM, Kilrahi said:

I mean, it all depends on the complexity so I can't immediately say. Depends on the positions of all your gear. Could be zero blocks or one or more.

Does anyone have a concrete answer?

 

Do send/return blocks count towards the 6 maximum simultaneous blocks allowed on HX Stomp? (if yes, it's unfortunate since that means one has to sacrifice available simultaneous internal effect block(s) to use outboard one(s)).

[phil_m]

5 minutes ago, royp said:

Does anyone have a concrete answer?

 

Do in/out blocks count towards the 6 maximum simultaneous blocks allowed on HX Stomp?

 

No, they don’t. 

[royp]

10 minutes ago, phil_m said:

 

No, they don’t. 

Excellent - that's the answer I was hoping for.  I'm sold on this one - hope to get it soon.

[zachdrummond]

So the HX Stomp has two paths? Two stereo or mono paths? 

 

I'm trying to decide how I would use it with my board. I would like to use it as pitch, dynamics and drive processing in front of my board, AND as my stereo amp after my stereo effects on the board. 

[Kilrahi]

1 hour ago, zachdrummond said:

So the HX Stomp has two paths? Two stereo or mono paths? 

 

I'm trying to decide how I would use it with my board. I would like to use it as pitch, dynamics and drive processing in front of my board, AND as my stereo amp after my stereo effects on the board. 

 

Mostly. It has one origin path that can be split into two stereo or mono paths (Path A and Path B) and then either reconnected within the Stomp or set out to two separate outputs.

 

What you describe should be doable. I believe Path A would be your pitch, dynamics, and drive processing which would then exit out the main outputs.

 

Path B would start with a FX return block which would be fed by your stereo effects from your board, and then the output would be sent out of the effects send on the Stomp.

 

That's how I'd do it. 

 

[Kilrahi]

On ‎11‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 7:52 PM, phil_m said:

 

No, they don’t. 

 

Are you just referring to the in/outs at the front and end of the chains? Because the send/return blocks do take up one of your six blocks if you end up having to use them. 

[Latam]

Hi, is there a chance how to use "hybrid" set-up (amp+direct) without loosing the fx loop? Like mentioned in the manual, I can set a stereo path and choose a different output. But can I get two completly independent paths for stereo? Like guitar->hx stomp L in->fx loop with my pedals->hx stomp L out-> amp in->line out->hx stomp R in-> only IR->hx stomp R out (with no fx or fx loop asigned). Thanks in advance!

[phil_m]

7 hours ago, Kilrahi said:

 

Are you just referring to the in/outs at the front and end of the chains? Because the send/return blocks do take up one of your six blocks if you end up having to use them. 

 

Yes, I assumed he's talking about the input and output blocks. The send/return/FX loop block take up a block if used in the middle of a chain (you can assign the returns and sends as ins and out in the input and output blocks, though).

[zachdrummond]

18 hours ago, Kilrahi said:

 

Mostly. It has one origin path that can be split into two stereo or mono paths (Path A and Path B) and then either reconnected within the Stomp or set out to two separate outputs.

 

What you describe should be doable. I believe Path A would be your pitch, dynamics, and drive processing which would then exit out the main outputs.

 

Path B would start with a FX return block which would be fed by your stereo effects from your board, and then the output would be sent out of the effects send on the Stomp.

 

That's how I'd do it. 

 

I don't want the front end effects blocks (pitch, dynamics, drives) to be stereo. Can I go in through the HX Stomp's L input, and out the L output for this signal chain? I imagine leaving this routing always connected to my board. I won't always run a stereo amp. I normally play my AC30/6 in mono. I don't currently have a second amp to complete my stereo rig.

 

My pedalboard is routed in stereo with a Goodwood Audio Interfacer at the end that sums my L and R signals to mono. I cancel this summing when I want to send stereo signals to two amps. I would like to be able to send the R channel out of the Interfacer to the R input of the HX Stomp. Then process that signal with amp modeling blocks and IR's. Then send that signal to FOH out the R output of the HX Stomp.

 

Is this routing possible? Would I still have 2 more pathways of processing? I would like to use the effects send/return IO on the side of HX Stomp for delay processing if possible. 

 

Am I asking too much of this device? 

[zachdrummond]

Another question: do the delays in Helix family products offer stereo ping pong for every algorithm? I currently use a Strymon TImeline as my main delay. I find it mildly infuriating that the only delay algorithm on that device that offers ping pong is the dual delay. I want that on EVERY kind of delay if I'm running a stereo signal. 

 

This goes kind of with my question posted above. I see the HX Stomp useful for processing my signal before the current pedalboard, and as a stereo amp. If it could take over delay duties from the Timeline though, oh man I would buy that!