Mainly because they came from Catalyst amps, which have their own Master volume knob.What is the reason for the HX Originals not having Master volumes? Checked the 3.7 release notes, but there isn't any info.
Again. I like it this way. One less thing to care about.
This question has been debated on the Fractal Forum multiple times. In Fractal Audio's world the aim is to also be as accurate as possible to Fractal's reference amps. One of the reasons given was that "good tone" is subjective. What one person thinks sounds good may sound like a$$ to someone else. So aiming for a "good" sounding amp model ends up being futile because some will like the result of "good" but others will think "good" sounds "bad". Accuracy becomes the path to avoid getting into this never ending debate.Seems like accuracy is an important principal atm…why is that? I’m guessing it’s mostly marketing related…it proves “digital can do this”.
Assuming there comes a point where “the customers” are convinced digital can do it…could that be a tilting point where the focus shifts from accurate sounds….to good sounds?
Yep, which is where our Line 6 Original amps come into play—designed to sound and play great, right out of the box. My only sticking point is when someone calls our other HX amps "inaccurate." It's like... Dude, if anything they're often accurate to a fault. Certain other companies sacrifice accuracy for a hyped and/or dumbed-down sound (superfluous filtering, audio compression, smoothed-out dynamic response, severely limited tonestack ranges [WTF?!], removal of virtual componentry, etc.). Sure, they might be easier to dial in for beginners who may not really care about tube amps, but IMO, a $1500+ multieffect designed for professionals shouldn't be welding unremovable training wheels onto its Marshalls, MESAs, Voxes, and Fenders.Seems like accuracy is an important principal atm…why is that? I’m guessing it’s mostly marketing related…it proves “digital can do this”.
Assuming there comes a point where “the customers” are convinced digital can do it…could that be a tilting point where the focus shifts from accurate sounds….to good sounds?
I've been getting tones I was happy using for so many years and generations of digital modelers already. I've been happy with the tones even when some amp model I used was found to have a bug that made it behave in an inaccurate manner. So at least for me, the accuracy or lack of it wasn't much of a real issue if I liked the end result. I was still convinced that the modeler sounded like a tube amp, because I felt I was getting all the things I love about tube amps.This question has been debated on the Fractal Forum multiple times. In Fractal Audio's world the aim is to also be as accurate as possible to Fractal's reference amps. One of the reasons given was that "good tone" is subjective. What one person thinks sounds good may sound like a$$ to someone else. So aiming for a "good" sounding amp model ends up being futile because some will like the result of "good" but others will think "good" sounds "bad". Accuracy becomes the path to avoid getting into this never ending debate.
This is why I love capturing, as it`so much fun starting and 5 minutes later I have the same sound as my reference source ( Cabs, Drives, Boost, Amps, EQ ) and that I can stack these in a single presetEvery single person who's been in our studio to do the A/B/X thing (engineers, session musicians, dealers, distributors, artists, influencers, and users coming in for Open Houses, etc.) is blown away by how they can't tell when switching between the real amp and model. In one case, we set up dummy switches and asked "which switch is actually switching between the real amp and model?" just so no one could feign hearing/feeling differences they couldn't.
Ha! That's very... specific. Nope; I joined Roland US in 2005 as Product Support (synths, groove products, recording). Not sure who that might've been. Igor Len is their A&R now and we have the same haircut but he was Audio Projects Manager during my interim there. Great guy.did you happen to be a boss artist rep between 2001 and 2004 and be on a cruise that left out of texas and play radiohead one night on a kid's red hohner acoustic on the front deck of the boat??
Ha! That's very... specific. Nope; I joined Roland US in 2005 as Product Support (synths, groove products, recording). Not sure who that might've been. Igor Len is their A&R now and we have the same haircut but he was Audio Projects Manager during my interim there. Great guy.
Agree, a nice mixture of tech talk and history tidbits (those are the most interesting imo) about the development and random stuff. It’s hard not to like Eric, just a straight up awesome dude.Nothing to ask. Just as @Stone said the podcast with Steve was extremly entertaining. In depth talk without boring everyone out with too much tech babble.
Here’s a PodGo feature request if it doesn’t add too much cost: a quieter switch for the Tap/Tempo. I just heard my BPMs bounce off the back wall of the church this morning.
We're definitely not finished with PowerCab.Hello Eric, great podcast with Steve,
I am curious and asking what is the future of the Powercabs, without of course not crossing your NDA
are there new models, revamped platforms in the works?
Steve's always easy to talk to. Great guy, great player.Nothing to ask. Just as @Stone said the podcast with Steve was extremly entertaining. In depth talk without boring everyone out with too much tech babble.
IIRC, yeah, we did mock up a version with the screen on the left, but traditionally, our TAP/TUNER and MODE/EDIT/EXIT switches have always been on the right because most right-handed players edit with their right hand and tap tempo with their right foot. In this case, the functional precedent won over aesthetics.In the video with Steve you mentioned throwing together mockups of the XL. Did you ever “draw” a version with screen oriented to the left? Would be cool to se a mockup like that. In my mind that would’ve looked better somehow. I guess I/O and stuff might have steered the design to what it is now?
Makes more sense to me like it is, with bank switches on the left and tap and on the right.IIRC, yeah, we did mock up a version with the screen on the left, but traditionally, our TAP/TUNER and MODE/EDIT/EXIT switches have always been on the right, so the functional precedent won over aesthetics.
Here's what it might've looked like:
View attachment 24710
I feel so weird, but I have to say that the left oriented screen version appeals to me more. Even though I am right handed/footed, I’ve always tapped with my left foot and also always placed the stomp top left on pedalboards. Well, that’s me haha. I totally understand though, why it is what it is now.IIRC, yeah, we did mock up a version with the screen on the left, but traditionally, our TAP/TUNER and MODE/EDIT/EXIT switches have always been on the right because most right-handed players edit with their right hand and tap tempo with their right foot. In this case, the functional precedent won over aesthetics.
Here's what it might've looked like:
View attachment 24710
The thought crossed my mind, but it’s way low on the priority list. I just brought it up because I’m pretty sure a lot of people are using the PG in churches and a lot of those spaces are designed to project every little creak. Not an issue with the Helix switches, but the PG enclosure is more hollow and the switches are traditional clicky ones.Possibly not a big deal to replace it yourself.