Make Bypass Assign behavior via MIDI CC in-line with Helix footswitches

[zappazapper]

https://line6.ideascale.com/a/dtd/Incoming-MIDI-CC-Bypass-Assign/1001069-23508

[phil_m]

If I’m understanding correctly, you’re saying you want to be able to have multiple blocks assigned to the same CC but not necessarily have the bypass state tied to the CC value range. I get it, but I think it’s a bit esoteric. The way Line 6 has implemented it is pretty standard.

 

Is there a reason you can’t just assign the blocks to a footswitch and then use the CC associated with that footswitch? It seems the other option would be to use a MIDI controller that lets you assign multiple CCs to one footswitch so you don’t have to share the same CC across multiple blocks.

[zappazapper]

13 minutes ago, phil_m said:

If I’m understanding correctly, you’re saying you want to be able to have multiple blocks assigned to the same CC but not necessarily have the bypass state tied to the CC value range. I get it, but I think it’s a bit esoteric. The way Line 6 has implemented it is pretty standard.

Esoteric XD fair enough, but it made enough sense that L6 thought to do their own footswitches that way, and I think that it's an incredibly powerful way of doing it. I'm just asking that the behavior of the switches on an external controller be consistent with the internal switches. 

 

16 minutes ago, phil_m said:

Is there a reason you can’t just assign the blocks to a footswitch and then use the CC associated with that footswitch? It seems the other option would be to use a MIDI controller that lets you assign multiple CCs to one footswitch so you don’t have to share the same CC across multiple blocks.

Admittedly I have a pretty specific situation going on here. My LT doesn't switch my amp's EQ properly (not the LT's fault), so I had to go looking for a product that would (AMT FS-2 MIDI), a 2-channel footswitch that transmits and receives MIDI. It's surprisingly flexible but not so flexible that I could assign multiple CCs to the same switch. I also have a Roland FC-300, which theoretically would allow me to do exactly what you're saying, but it doesn't switch my amp's EQ properly either, not to mention it's another huge piece of gear to lug around.

[rd2rk]

Not really so esoteric. While using an external controller to control Helix Bypass states is not very standard, many (some?) people automate performances tied to a DAW MIDI track playback. This would be a big surprise if, in the midst of a performance, you turned on two drives instead of one OFF and the other ON.

 

Nice catch zappazapper! I up-voted it!

[zappazapper]

Thanks for the upvote, rd2rk, although...

 

I don't know if your situation really makes the case for my idea. With full-featured MIDI controllers and DAWs we have the ability to define exactly what messages are sent. Phil's suggestion of sending multiple CC messages is valid in that case. But there are a number of smaller, less flexible devices out there that send MIDI, and in that case the Helix would be the only device you could configure to interpret those messages.

 

The more I think about it, the more I think Phil has a point. "Esoteric" might not be the word I would use (seeing as the Helix treats its own footswitches exactly how I'm suggesting), but he is right that no other device treats external MIDI messages that way. Does that mean it can't be done? Does that mean it would be prohibitively complicated for the average user? I don't think so, but what isn't esoteric, what isn't out of the ordinary is devices that allow some measure of control over what incoming MIDI messages do with either Min and Max Values (just like the Helix does with Controller Assign controlled by MIDI) or some sort of control over polarity. So that might be a better way to go, and so I think I might modify or delete/resubmit my idea.

 

Thanks for offering your thoughts, guys.

[rd2rk]

4 hours ago, zappazapper said:

Thanks for the upvote, rd2rk, although...

 

I don't know if your situation really makes the case for my idea. With full-featured MIDI controllers and DAWs we have the ability to define exactly what messages are sent. Phil's suggestion of sending multiple CC messages is valid in that case. But there are a number of smaller, less flexible devices out there that send MIDI, and in that case the Helix would be the only device you could configure to interpret those messages.

 

The more I think about it, the more I think Phil has a point. "Esoteric" might not be the word I would use (seeing as the Helix treats its own footswitches exactly how I'm suggesting), but he is right that no other device treats external MIDI messages that way. Does that mean it can't be done? Does that mean it would be prohibitively complicated for the average user? I don't think so, but what isn't esoteric, what isn't out of the ordinary is devices that allow some measure of control over what incoming MIDI messages do with either Min and Max Values (just like the Helix does with Controller Assign controlled by MIDI) or some sort of control over polarity. So that might be a better way to go, and so I think I might modify or delete/resubmit my idea.

 

Thanks for offering your thoughts, guys.

 

Phil's comments apply when you are creating the MIDI track manually in the DAW. If you record the MIDI track as a performance, you want the MIDI messages to do the same thing on playback as when it was recorded, which won't currently happen. That's why I up-voted the idea.

 

[zappazapper]

1 minute ago, rd2rk said:

 

Phil's comments apply when you are creating the MIDI track manually in the DAW. If you record the MIDI track as a performance, you want the MIDI messages to do the same thing on playback as when it was recorded, which won't currently happen. That's why I up-voted the idea.

 

Fair enough... and just so we're clear, I would rather that the incoming MIDI just be treated the same way the built-in switches are... but to Phil's point, you could easily manipulate the recorded MIDI data after the fact to get the behavior on the Helix that you need... so I understand his hesitation to get behind this one, and as he is quite the influential person around here, anything that I can do to make it more palatable for him could go a long way XD