64 Bit?

[yer2kool]

As Technology advances, I'm seeing a new Helix in the near future,  64 bit at 288Khz sampling rate, 14 buttons footswitch, and a larger screen..

With Yamaha Japan as their Parent owner, I see great investment of technology and funds going to line6..

 

.

 

what do you guys think?

 

 

I'm a proud owner and gig with the helix floor and LT..

[lou-kash]

35 minutes ago, yer2kool said:

288Khz sampling rate

 

?

To run a submarine sonar through your Helix…? :)

[DunedinDragon]

Not very likely any time soon.  As has been stated many times, Line 6 is owned by Yamaha, but is independent in terms of direction and management.  And they prefer it that way.

And it depends on what your definition is of "near future".  Their development resources are all fully used on the current Helix, and there's nothing in the area of DSP chips that's anything close to game changing at present so adding additional chips won't alleviate unacceptable latency which would be introduced with more chips.

I'm sure that day will come, but everyone that speaks out publicly from Line 6 tells us they're not running out of horsepower yet.  But even if they diverted all their resources to a new Helix starting today, you have to remember the Helix was about 5 years in development...and that was just for 2 initial offerings of the floor and the rack units.  It's a MUCH bigger family now.

[phil_m]

There is literally no reason for 64-bit audio to exist. Even 24 bit converters allow for greater dynamic range than analog equipment is able to provide. Having 32-bit floating point internally increases the headroom so that clipping “in the box” is basically not possible (clipping and overloading a certain function are different things, btw). As far as sampling rate, again, there’s not anything to be gained by having converters at super high sampling rates. Oversampling internally is something that basically all the top players do already.

[SaschaFranck]

64bit processing is something pretty different from using 24bit audio files or running 24bit converters. Most sequencers now process with 64bit accuracy, even when you're using 24 or 16 bit files. It's a matter of processing accuracy, not dynamic headroom.

And as far as using higher samplerates goes, that would reduce latency but likely not as much anymore (the Helix is actually doing quite great at that already, in case we leave the interface functionality out of the equation, but that's quite a different thing). Given that an empty path 1 of the Helix comes in at around 2ms, roughly 1ms being converter latency, there's not all that much to gain apart from lowering down the latency of certain blocks (such as the PolyPitch, which, as is, is adding quite a lot in stable mode). But that'd as well require *much* more processing power in case the sample rate would be substantially raised.

[lou-kash]

3 hours ago, phil_m said:

There is literally no reason for 64-bit audio to exist.

9 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

64bit processing is something pretty different from using 24bit audio files or running 24bit converters.

 

At first I was fooled as well until I duckducked it: audiorecording.me/advantages-of-64-bit-daw-over-32-bit-float-digital-audio-workstation.html

 

11 minutes ago, SaschaFranck said:

as far as using higher samplerates goes, that would reduce latency

 

Thanks, I haven't realized that. Just quickly checked in Logic, and indeed.

[SaschaFranck]

29 minutes ago, lou-kash said:

At first I was fooled as well until I duckducked it: audiorecording.me/advantages-of-64-bit-daw-over-32-bit-float-digital-audio-workstation.html

 

Yeah, that explains things nicely.

[SaschaFranck]

And fwiw, working at higher sample rates could also reduce aliasing, in case the used device (or plugin) is suffering from it, which, at least as far as I (or my ears) can tell, isn't an issue with the Helix. Most modern processing devices/plugins use internal oversampling in case aliasing needs to be adressed/avoided, raising the sample rate internally for those processes where it's making sense. But I've never seen people complain about it when it comes to all of the top tier modelers - and most of them work at 48kHz internally (IIRC, only the GT-1000 and Headrush work at higher sample rates). So it's unlikely we'd gain much apart from reducing latency, which only would be useful when it comes to certain blocks, most of them seem to work fine within the set processing buffer range (hence not adding any latency).

[MusicLaw]

It is fair to say that at some point in the future there will be a successor to the current flagship full Helix Floor and Rack Units. It is also fair to say that it will not likely be anytime soon. My personal blind guess is not for a few more years. Line6 has indicated, in essence, on several occasions that plenty of product life remains in the current Helix family product line with future software firmware enhancements and revisions forthcoming to the existing product family. To be clear, I have zero inside information and do not speak for nor have any representative capacity on behalf of Line 6 nor Yamaha Guitar Group.

[cruisinon2]

I think we can all guess until we turn blue, and in the end most of those guesses will be way off base as to what the next box will have in it on day one, and comically wrong with regard to an ETA... hell, the release date of the next firmware update for the device we already own is a complete mystery. Trying to predict the arrival of "Helix 2" is like trying to put a date stamp on The Rapture.

 

[yer2kool]

SaschaFranck, I owned  the GT1000(Boss) for a year and gig with it, it was 32Bit floater, definitely had the amp like feel but NOT as versatile as the Helix.

And if one is an IR freak, well its very very limited..

by the way you can get an amp like feel by messing with the input impedance value on the Helix input, so its find..

[SaschaFranck]

32 minutes ago, yer2kool said:

I owned  the GT1000(Boss) for a year and gig with it, it was 32Bit floater,

 

It's using a sample rate of 96kHz, though.

[malhavok]

More bits, more samples, all great for increasing accuracy at the end of a very long chain of many separate processing blocks. However, they aren't free. You also drastically increase the CPU cycles necessary to process that signal. I'm sure we'll get there some day since eventually the available DSP chips will advance to the point where they are very powerful compared to today's standards and will natively process 64-bit audio. But we probably won't hear any appreciable difference and people will still be saying their tube amp sounds better anyway.

[SaschaFranck]

The CPU power is there already. Look at Apples new M1 processors. They easily outperform anything you find in hardware modelers. Heck, my 2010 Mac Pro (2x2.66GHz CPUs) manages to run the most demanding Helix patches (in HX Native) at 32 samples buffersize. Compared to any modern computer, the horsepower of pretty much all modelers (maybe apart from the Axe FX III) is almost stoneage technology.

[malhavok]

Yep. Now how much does Helix cost with an M1 in it?

[SaschaFranck]

30 minutes ago, malhavok said:

Yep. Now how much does Helix cost with an M1 in it?

 

Let's see. Mac Mini baseline model is around 700 bucks, an adequate low latency capable interface can be had for around 400-500 (maybe somewhat less), a Behringer FCB 1010 (floor controller) comes for something between 100-150, a suitable case (with proper padding for the Mini) would come at around 100-200 and you'd likely need an iPad as a controller unit (a used 2-3y old one would be sufficient), let's say that's another 400. With 2k you'd be all set. Alternatively, you might want to use a Macbook Air instead of the Mini/iPad combo, wouldn't change much with the overall cost. Personally, I'd prefer a computer not having to be exposed on stage.

Yeah, that's more than a Helix. But you also get access to *much* more. No need to ask for any better reverbs anymore, just use your favourite plugin. Or whatever plugin you feel like. Or just use what's your favourite looper application. You could even feed a MIDI pickup straight into the computer. Or use Jamorigins Guitar to MIDI plugin. Or feed the multiple outs of a hex pickup into the Adat input of the used interface (there's hex PU to Adat converters around somewhere). Or simply use another modeling plugin along with the Helix. And all the wicked, crazy FX the plugin world has on offer. The possibilities are countless. And with apps such as Mainstage or Gig Performer, controlling the entire shebang is easier than ever before.

 

Seriously, I am actually considering such a setup one day. I'll likely get me an M1 Macbook somewhen (post-Covid, need to raise the funds) to replace my Mac Pro - and one of the things I will certainly check out is all the options for live useability. In case it's working nicely, I may as well just sell the Helix in favour of the setup mentioned above.

[cruisinon2]

5 hours ago, malhavok said:

But we probably won't hear any appreciable difference and people will still be saying their tube amp sounds better anyway.

 

Truer words have never been spoken...;)