kartikg3
Roadie
- Messages
- 498
Yes, which would be quite an acceptable compromiseIf I remember correctly, there is indeed a very tiny gap. Would have to check to verify tho.
Yes, which would be quite an acceptable compromiseIf I remember correctly, there is indeed a very tiny gap. Would have to check to verify tho.
A dream. +1. If this was on idea scale let me know and I ll vote upHi Eric,
Whilst I get that Line 6 don't like to straight up copy features from other manufacturers units, is there a technical reason why Line 6 couldn't come up with something akin to Fractal's channels, if only for a block or two per preset?
Consider a dual amp block, where only one amp is active at any one time.
You select two amp models to go into the block and the DSP allocation for the block would be set to the model with the highest DSP requirement. Each models parameters would be separate and distinct and the block would still have a single bypass state, but also have an "active" state for the one of the models.
The reason I ask is because you can select a new amp model via HX Edit, or by turning the model selection knob, whilst playing and the model change is essentially seamless, so it does seem to be that the Helix could switch at least one block model seamlessly.
Obviously if this worked for two amps in a single block, it should work for more than two, but I think keeping it at two would be sufficient and make a lot of people extremely happy, especially those with the HX Stomp.
I could also see some potential for dual effect blocks too (e.g. dual distortion, dual reverb etc), but I'd imagine you would eventually start experiencing audio gaps the more "dual" blocks you add to a preset.
I did this with my Helix at the time had 5 Separate snapshots in which I switched based on parts of the song, Never heard any gaps
Yeah, but using Snapshots, all the selected models remain loaded, of course. That's the huge difference.
There's nothing stopping us from implementing something like Fractal's channels, but yes, there'd be a small gap. The first step would be to understand the point of friction and then solve it in a way that makes the most sense within our UI/UX framework.Hi Eric,
Whilst I get that Line 6 don't like to straight up copy features from other manufacturers units, is there a technical reason why Line 6 couldn't come up with something akin to Fractal's channels, if only for a block or two per preset?
Consider a dual amp block, where only one amp is active at any one time.
You select two amp models to go into the block and the DSP allocation for the block would be set to the model with the highest DSP requirement. Each models parameters would be separate and distinct and the block would still have a single bypass state, but also have an "active" state for the one of the models.
The reason I ask is because you can select a new amp model via HX Edit, or by turning the model selection knob, whilst playing and the model change is essentially seamless, so it does seem to be that the Helix could switch at least one block model seamlessly.
Obviously if this worked for two amps in a single block, it should work for more than two, but I think keeping it at two would be sufficient and make a lot of people extremely happy, especially those with the HX Stomp.
I could also see some potential for dual effect blocks too (e.g. dual distortion, dual reverb etc), but I'd imagine you would eventually start experiencing audio gaps the more "dual" blocks you add to a preset.
Hi Eric,
Whilst I get that Line 6 don't like to straight up copy features from other manufacturers units, is there a technical reason why Line 6 couldn't come up with something akin to Fractal's channels, if only for a block or two per preset?
Consider a dual amp block, where only one amp is active at any one time.
You select two amp models to go into the block and the DSP allocation for the block would be set to the model with the highest DSP requirement. Each models parameters would be separate and distinct and the block would still have a single bypass state, but also have an "active" state for the one of the models.
The reason I ask is because you can select a new amp model via HX Edit, or by turning the model selection knob, whilst playing and the model change is essentially seamless, so it does seem to be that the Helix could switch at least one block model seamlessly.
Obviously if this worked for two amps in a single block, it should work for more than two, but I think keeping it at two would be sufficient and make a lot of people extremely happy, especially those with the HX Stomp.
I could also see some potential for dual effect blocks too (e.g. dual distortion, dual reverb etc), but I'd imagine you would eventually start experiencing audio gaps the more "dual" blocks you add to a preset.
Yeah. My reasoning (for both ideas) is that with kitchen sinks presets or 4cm presets you can have more blocks (or way more blocks) than switches available (with helix floor/lt/rack at least)
You might have some blocks you use a couple of times in a setlist, like a compressor, a pitch shift, an alternative modulation or delay.
Or you might simply need to turn on a nosie gate only in few songs and just want to turn it on/off without using a dedicated FS .
Or, because you're anal about levels, you need two different solo boosts levels depending on the song and like to have the solo FS always in the same position.
There are tons of practical applications with a simple a/b "channels" implementation
Are you suggesting a global amp block (with channels) could let someone swap any preset in which it's used with a different amp? Not sure that would work, as our amp models have a wide disparity in their DSP usage. For example, if your preset had a Roland JC-120 in it, and you wanted to switch channels into, say, Peavey Invective (3x bigger), we'd need to dedicate enough DSP to accommodate the Invective at all times, even if you never plan on using it. There's also the notion of only ever supporting amps that are the same or smaller, but if you start with the JC-120, you're pretty much then limited to it or the Fender Champ. That'd suck.Fwiw, global blocks would potentially solve quite some of these issues (depending on how they're implemented).
I can't imagine we'd ever dedicate an entire DSP to amps, and that's the primary way I see it working. I imagine we'd rather dig into the underlying problems and figure out a different solution.I understand if it's too much to do in this iteration, but I hope whatever comes next will have it. I'm grateful you guys implemented block favorites. To me, Fractal's "Block Library" and channels are its two biggest assets, for usability. But I love Helix too.
I'm not saying it's not an elegant solution—it absolutely is.I just have found it to be an extremely elegant way of organizing a patch, for a given situation. I can easily have 4 amp channels, with a cab IR, phaser, OD, delay and reverb, and it's only 6 blocks. And then with patch-specific switching, I do the four channels of the amp, and then footswitches for each effect. It's basically like using an amp+pedalboard at that point. I'd kill for that on a Stomp.
If that's not what you're suggesting, let me know.
I'm not against global blocks in the slightest and can totally see the advantage. Channels, however—whether global or not—aren't nearly as simple in Helix-land where there's a huge disparity in DSP usage within the same category. For 99.9999% of presets people would make, implementing per-block channels would result in a *massive* amount of DSP just sitting there, wasted, just in case someone wants to load the absolute largest model into a channel. Hell, that DSP could go toward making every model sound better.I'm actually not suggesting anything literal as there's plenty of ways to skin this cat. And global blocks should be available for everything, not just amps (as there's different use cases).
Yes.Can one of the 100 lb brain guys tell me if they envision some solution in the future that will go past snapshots, scenes, channels?
This is what I think people think when they ask for channels. If it fits, it sits. If not, not. Want to add another amp to second channel of the block, add it, as long as there's enough DSP overall. Not reserving it for the heaviest amp. If not, what can't fit is greyed out. Pretty much the same as is now except in one block instead of two blocks.like if there isn't enough DSP to accommodate the biggest model in a particular category, the channel feature is disabled for that block... or amps that won't fit as alternate channels are grayed out...
@Digital Igloo Pretty sure that's what everyone is asking for, yes! Right @paisleywookiee @Foxmeister ?This is what I think people think when they ask for channels. If it fits, it sits. If not, not. Want to add another amp to second channel of the block, add it, as long as there's enough DSP overall. Not reserving it for the heaviest amp. If not, what can't fit is greyed out. Pretty much the same as is now except in one block instead of two blocks.
Wouldn't this be pretty much impossible? I mean any block means it would have to be able to handle the highest DSP block 8 times over. That would mean they'd need to be able to do like 8 Vitriol amps at once which would take the power of like 2 full size Helices wouldn't it?That’d probably work.
I know Line 6 said no new generation any time soon, but I wish they do a Helix 1.5 with a better proc, so I could have any 8 blocks on the Stomp, without running out of power.
I know as happy as I’d be, there’d probably be 4x as many bitching that it’s a cash grab, but whatever.