Boss GT-1000 (and possibly other things Boss...)

[paisleywookiee]

Of course you're not missing anything. Any editing, regardless whether it's on the device, through the Mac/PC editor or through the mobile editors (which are an offense towards human intelligence, no less) is as bad as it possibly gets.

I didn't want to assume that there was no revelatory thing I was missing, because I don't have a ton of time on the device. But yeah, it's pretty aggravating. "I want this amp block in this patch, with this amp block from that other patch, etc....." Uh, WTF? No block libraries/favorites, which sucks.

- When done with these decisions, create just 2-3 basic patches that you will from now on use as a reference for any further patches. Creating new patches from an "empty" default preset is defenitely the most time consuming thing you can run into, simply because editing is so horrible.

That's what I've done for him. He's got basically this: four "base" patches that can cover most anything, then a 24 song setlist that he can go through as well. It's been working quite well for him. I SERIOUSLY don't get why he won't let me show him how to use it, and/or mess with it more on his own time, so he doesn't have to pay me. But hey, it is what it is.

We can all debate sound quality and breadth of effects, but while I do feel that there are some great sounds to be had with BOSS, they just don't measure up in the features/flexibility/QoL stuff that Fractal and Helix have. Hoping to snag either a QC or NC this year, to make caps for the shop. Will be interesting to see how that compares.

I'll always be a BOSS cheerleader, because I love so much of their stuff. But damn, guys. Hire some new programmers!

 

[Jarick]

Boss IR-2 has me curious about the GT-1000 again lol

 

[ian_dissonance]

Hey @Sascha you spent a lot of time with the GT, I’m assuming the GX works similarly. Can a send block be setup as a global block and then assign the output level to always be on knob 4 under the display? Also, is it possible to have both L/R main outs sending the same mono signal? Getting sick of waiting for L6 to add the input level controllers and wave pedal type stuff and I want to be able to have a set IEM/FOH level and use the the Branch out of the send for stage monitoring.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Hey @Sascha you spent a lot of time with the GT, I’m assuming the GX works similarly. Can a send block be setup as a global block and then assign the output level to always be on knob 4 under the display?

First off: The GX has no global blocks at all (otherwise I'd likely bought that instead of the GT). And also, send/return blocks are excluded from the function anyway (which is pretty bad as I really wish I could control the send/return levels globally).

Also, is it possible to have both L/R main outs sending the same mono signal?

Yes. In fact, once you "activate" the availability of FX 4, the entire unit becomes mono. No idea whether that's the same with the GX.

and I want to be able to have a set IEM/FOH level and use the the Branch out of the send for stage monitoring.

All that is covered pretty well with the GT. I'm using a fixed level for the XLR out and use the TS out for my monitoring, controlled by the master volume knob (that's possible on the Helix, too). Then there's dedicated global EQs for either output, which might become useful one day (so far I only used it for my monitoring path), a major pitfall however being that there's no on/off switch for them and hence no visible indication of their status. That's in fact pretty bad because you may simply forget you EQed something and create new patches with the EQ still on.
Fwiw, in addition there's various kinds of ground lifts, possibly taking care of every possible issue.
Needless to say that the XLR out doesn't mind in case there's phantom power running (unlike the uber cheap stuff L6 is using for the Helix).

 

[ian_dissonance]

First off: The GX has no global blocks at all (otherwise I'd likely bought that instead of the GT). And also, send/return blocks are excluded from the function anyway (which is pretty bad as I really wish I could control the send/return levels globally).



Yes. In fact, once you "activate" the availability of FX 4, the entire unit becomes mono. No idea whether that's the same with the GX.



All that is covered pretty well with the GT. I'm using a fixed level for the XLR out and use the TS out for my monitoring, controlled by the master volume knob (that's possible on the Helix, too). Then there's dedicated global EQs for either output, which might become useful one day (so far I only used it for my monitoring path), a major pitfall however being that there's no on/off switch for them and hence no visible indication of their status. That's in fact pretty bad because you may simply forget you EQed something and create new patches with the EQ still on.
Fwiw, in addition there's various kinds of ground lifts, possibly taking care of every possible issue.
Needless to say that the XLR out doesn't mind in case there's phantom power running (unlike the uber cheap stuff L6 is using for the Helix).

Thank you for all the information! Looks like not matter what I’m looking at the “flagship” to fit my bands’ rigs. Might keep my fingers crossed there’s one more new product announcement soon-ish.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Thank you for all the information! Looks like not matter what I’m looking at the “flagship” to fit my bands’ rigs. Might keep my fingers crossed there’s one more new product announcement soon-ish.

I was exactly like that for a whole number of years already. Only to (quite unfortunately) realize that things likely won't ever happen. So I decided to take matters into my own hands.

I really, really wanted a global block functionality without going back to a huge, expensive and possibly prone to errors larger semi-analog setup. That already limited my choices drastically, in fact it all boiled down to just two units, the Axe FX and the GT. Yes, I still could've expanded my old hybrid setup, but it'd be larger and would've required some serious money and tinkering investment (new loopswitcher, possibly a kind of line mixer, maybe one more FX unit, a new case, etc.).

And as I absolutely don't want a rack setup, I decided to just buy a GT and give it a testrun. Which wasn't a great thing, as you can see from my first reports in this thread. I was almost about to sell the thing again when I thought I could just try the Stomp in a loop and see what I'd be getting. Fortunately, I should say. Because, well, for now, this is by far the best setup I ever used, at least from a usability POV.

---

Fwiw, another alternative might've been a completely laptop based setup. And TBH, should I ever really build an entirely new setup again (which might even happen when I don't exactly need it), that'd be my preferred choice. It's not even all that expensive anymore. The smallest Macbook Air would be way more than sufficient, no moving parts inside, no heat issues, would even continue to work in case there were power issues, etc.
Start the thing, load your project (in, say, Mainstage or Gig Performer), close the lid and slide it into a rack (yes, a rack would be needed, but it could be very small). Any parameters could easily be controlled through TouchOSC or a hardware MIDI knob box. As an interface, even a 200 bucks Motu M2 would be doing just great. Add any kind of MIDI controller (could really be anything as any messages could be converted into whatever you'd like them to become) and 1-2 expression pedals, done.
If you need more complexed audio routings, no problem, get a somewhat larger interface.
Global EQs whereever you want them.
A mix of global and non-global blocks in whatever fashion you desire.
Also, regarding tonal flexibility, not one single hardware modeler could even get remotely close
Run any plugin you like. Including IR reverbs and what not. Including NAM profiles. Including MFM2 (the yummiest delay to ever exist). Generally including all the great and weird stuff you might be able to think of.
Obviously, it could also be turned be turned into the most luxurious loop station there ever was, should that be your thing.
Etc.

 

[kartikg3]

Can a send block be setup as a global block and then assign the output level to always be on knob 4 under the display?

I can give you inputs regd. the GX-100. The GX-100 does not have global blocks, so that's out of the question. But you can map any block's any parameter to any of the 4 knobs that will always show in the main display ready for you to tweak on stage.

 

[ian_dissonance]

I can give you inputs regd. the GX-100. The GX-100 does not have global blocks, so that's out of the question. But you can map any block's any parameter to any of the 4 knobs that will always show in the main display ready for you to tweak on stage.

Yeah, I’d need it to be the same on every preset.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Yeah, I’d need it to be the same on every preset.

I can *perfectly* understand that. And it's been one of my "WTF?" moments with the GT.
I mean, you may want to use the return of a loop to mix in a reverb signal. A perfect example for a globally controlled parameter (and fwiw, in best Boss tradition, the internal reverb has a global "offset", which I think is really neat). In my case, when checking things out I noticed that the Stomp sounds a little better with the send level being at -10 (no idea on which scale, it's not dB) whereas the Amplifirebox would be fine with the level at 0. As a result, I can't use the same patches for the Stomp and Amplifirebox.
A "globalized" S/R block would solve all these issues easily.

 

[AFKAEjay(retired)]

I can *perfectly* understand that. And it's been one of my "WTF?" moments with the GT.
I mean, you may want to use the return of a loop to mix in a reverb signal. A perfect example for a globally controlled parameter (and fwiw, in best Boss tradition, the internal reverb has a global "offset", which I think is really neat). In my case, when checking things out I noticed that the Stomp sounds a little better with the send level being at -10 (no idea on which scale, it's not dB) whereas the Amplifirebox would be fine with the level at 0. As a result, I can't use the same patches for the Stomp and Amplifirebox.
A "globalized" S/R block would solve all these issues easily.

Kitchen sink preset in the QC

 

[Sascha Franck]

Kitchen sink preset in the QC

That's what I did with the Helix Floor. But there's some reasons why it didn't work out well (running out of DSP juice wasn't one of them), the main one being me running out of switches pretty much all the time. Could've added an external MIDI controller but really didn't feel like, especially as the Floor had to go for some other reasons as well (mainly the incredibly bad visibility on daylight outdoor gigs and other critical stages).
I actually still considered a QC, but then, I need bigger Crocs than you. In other words, my EU size 46 feet wouldn't be too happy.
Also, I think this kinda modular setup suits my way of doing things quite well (defenitely wouldn't mind the QC touchscreen, though).

 

[paisleywookiee]

That's what I did with the Helix Floor. But there's some reasons why it didn't work out well (running out of DSP juice wasn't one of them), the main one being me running out of switches pretty much all the time. Could've added an external MIDI controller but really didn't feel like, especially as the Floor had to go for some other reasons as well (mainly the incredibly bad visibility on daylight outdoor gigs and other critical stages).
I actually still considered a QC, but then, I need bigger Crocs than you. In other words, my EU size 46 feet wouldn't be too happy.
Also, I think this kinda modular setup suits my way of doing things quite well (defenitely wouldn't mind the QC touchscreen, though).

The thing about modularity: the guy I’m helping with the GT1000 Core would likely be SO much happier with an IR200 and some pedals. For people that aren’t super techie, the IR-2/200 are such a great solution.

 

[Sascha Franck]

The thing about modularity: the guy I’m helping with the GT1000 Core would likely be SO much happier with an IR200 and some pedals. For people that aren’t super techie, the IR-2/200 are such a great solution.

If I wasn't rather tech-familiar, a GT would possibly be the last modeler I wanted to deal with. There's just so many things that don't explain themselves, are even labeled in a most awkward fashion (such as the Stompbox feature), so that in the end it's one of the least intuitive devices around.
If I were to recommend something in that league today, it'd likely be one of the Ampero offerings.

 

[paisleywookiee]

If I wasn't rather tech-familiar, a GT would possibly be the last modeler I wanted to deal with. There's just so many things that don't explain themselves, are even labeled in a most awkward fashion (such as the Stompbox feature), so that in the end it's one of the least intuitive devices around.
If I were to recommend something in that league today, it'd likely be one of the Ampero offerings.

Yup. But he had not only already bought one, but after the first gig that went well, bought another as a backup. And not from our shop, so I had zilch to gain.

 

[AFKAEjay(retired)]

That's what I did with the Helix Floor. But there's some reasons why it didn't work out well (running out of DSP juice wasn't one of them), the main one being me running out of switches pretty much all the time. Could've added an external MIDI controller but really didn't feel like, especially as the Floor had to go for some other reasons as well (mainly the incredibly bad visibility on daylight outdoor gigs and other critical stages).
I actually still considered a QC, but then, I need bigger Crocs than you. In other words, my EU size 46 feet wouldn't be too happy.
Also, I think this kinda modular setup suits my way of doing things quite well (defenitely wouldn't mind the QC touchscreen, though).

If it works…it works! I used the Core for a couple of years on a board with analog preamps/few pedals/boss es5..it’s great for that…with all its assign options, amp switching, etc. Was a great board…but I retired it cause I kept taking the Core off it when I wanted something small…and I couldn’t be bothered with replugging cables..and most importantly..switching setups all the time. (Confuses me )

I got the QC cause it works in all scenarios for me….especially with the 3 optional satellites I can choose to add…2 exp pedals, a small board with pedals, a midi controller. Probably to finicky if you do a couple of shows a week…but for my agenda..works great.

I have no trouble with the foot switches btw…maybe if I was a rockgod doing arena gigs jumping of drum stages I’d think different

 

[Jarick]

The thing about modularity: the guy I’m helping with the GT1000 Core would likely be SO much happier with an IR200 and some pedals. For people that aren’t super techie, the IR-2/200 are such a great solution.

Yeah to avoid tweaking the IR-2 is great. I think the key for me is, how much flexibility do I need? If it's two channels with a drive pedal and a few effects, maybe the full pedalboard makes sense. That's what I'm trying to sort out.

IR-2 feels great honestly and it sounds pretty good. I'm messing with an HX Stomp after for time based effects, but have analog pedals as an option too.

 

[Jarick]

Also, another neat mini rig based around Boss: IR-2 into my UAD Apollo, with chorus / delay / reverb on the insert.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Fwiw, one good thing with the GT-1000 would be that you just don't tweak for fun. And as weird as that may seem, yes, I'm in fact absolutely serious.

Sure, as said, I am by now revisiting my baseline patches because I've got some ideas about how to organize things more efficiently, but others than that, once I was done with my initial setup, I didn't do much tweaking. Mainly it's the FX 3 and 4 blocks that I reserve for "creative endeavours" and that was it. The rest is just correctional things and all required parameters are mapped to be controlled via TouchOSC.
In a nutshell: The GT itself, apart from being the controller/utility brain of my setup, is pretty much outta the way. Which is great.

I still have enough options to do interesting things via the Stomp and partially the MS-50 (to be replaced but serving its "let's do some weirdo things" role quite well for now), both of which are way easier to deal with. And there's still 4 analog pedal slots on my board.

 

[BuleriaChk]

I don't know if this is the place to request this, but maybe someone can forward it to someone intelligent at Boss or Roland.

I'm sure that this has been requested by others, but I got kicked off the Gear Page .(a badge of honor IMO).. :)
That said, this relates to the GT-1000/Core editor.

1. In all platforms, allow us to delete/insert blocks in the chain so we don't have a long line of unused blocs cluttering up our patches.
2. Also, in iOS platform, allow for landscape mode - most of my chains are relatively short, and unnecessary scrolling is a PITA.

C'mon, Boss, it is 2025, and these are your flagship models. I can accept no LCD screen, but these are trivial programming sollutions that would be easy for a moderately skilled programmer to accomplish... And would save lots of users time and effort (and frustration). I can see why it would be more difficult on the GX-10 but even then.....





















c'

 

[Sascha Franck]

I don't know if this is the place to request this, but maybe someone can forward it to someone intelligent at Boss or Roland.

Given my past experience, I don't think anyone outside of their longtime testers will ever be able to suggest things to them. I did that plenty of times already and only ever got answers kinda like "thank you, we will forward your mail to the responsible people".

1. In all platforms, allow us to delete/insert blocks in the chain so we don't have a long line of unused blocs cluttering up our patches.

Yeah, it's horrible having to scroll through everything all the time, even if you don't use most blocks at all. But I think that request wouldn't match their "anything you see can be used simultaneously" approach.
There'd be other means to improve maneuvering through patches, though. For instance, if blocks could be assigned to encoder clicks, that'd be *quite* something to me. As is, encoder clicks in patch and plain editing mode do nothing else but allow for faster value in/decrements. Quite a huge waste as those could as well be had with proper knob acceleration.

2. Also, in iOS platform, allow for landscape mode - most of my chains are relatively short, and unnecessary scrolling is a PITA.

That is just *SOOOOO* uberlame. Add to this it's not only the scrolling but also that once you select something, a new window opens that you explicitely have to close each time. Select on top, edit on the bottom in landscape mode (just as on the computer editors) would be the way to go. Add to this that I find parameter editing to be extremely bad. You're easily altering too much, finetunings are absolutely tough to do.

C'mon, Boss, it is 2025, and these are your flagship models. I can accept no LCD screen, but these are trivial programming sollutions that would be easy for a moderately skilled programmer to accomplish...

Absolutely!